PNW":k0f4s6gu said:
So you believe players can be evaluated based on practice only
Of course they can't, but game time is a very precious resource. It would be a terrible strategy to cycle a bunch of players through game snaps for evaluation purposes and then use those tiny sample sizes to make sweeping roster decisions. The coaching staff has been working with BBK and Barton for a year and a half now, and that involves a ton of meetings, film sessions, and practices. Surely it makes sense to incorporate that mountain of information into the decision of who should be getting gameday snaps?
PNW":k0f4s6gu said:
I know WT3 was good but he wasn’t Sherman level, yet they still started him over Sherman.
This isn't a good analogy. Sherman was a late WR convert in college and a raw prospect in the draft. His work ethic and the Seahawks coaching staff enabled him to develop into an All Pro but it was a process. It's entirely reasonable that they thought he was less gameday ready as a rookie than WT3, and it's entirely
unreasonable to suggest we would have left Sherman on the bench indefinitely despite his development. Sherman was the next man up because of what he was doing
in practice, and without WT3's injury he still would have demonstrated that he was ready for a starting job.
PNW":k0f4s6gu said:
I don’t think anyone can say just yet what BBK can bring because he hasn’t gotten a chance but we all know what Barton brings by now, hopefully the coaches give BBK a shot now.
It can always get worse. Barton didn't play well yesterday, but he did make some plays in a game that we won. You have no way of knowing that BBK would have played as well, let alone better, and making a change just for change's sake is completely irrational. Fans latch onto a backup half a dozen times every season and in hindsight they are nearly always wrong. Why can't a player demonstrate that they deserve gameday snaps in practice?