View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently August 1st, 2014, 7:50 am



Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
 Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Lions 
Author Message
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11945
Post Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Lions
ESPN wrote:
Ndamukong Suh should be there
Absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Lions, who don't seem to care

Originally Published: April 18, 2014
By Jeffri Chadiha | ESPN.com

The most disturbing aspect of Ndamukong Suh's absence from the Detroit Lions' voluntary offseason program isn't that he isn't there. It's that his team doesn't have the courage to forcefully question that choice. This essentially is one more example of why this franchise has enjoyed only two winning seasons in the past 16 years. It's also the first indication that Lions fans probably should brace themselves for more disappointment this coming fall.

The predictable defense of Suh -- who hasn't joined his team since voluntary workouts began last week -- is that these sessions indeed are not required. The three-time Pro Bowl defensive tackle hasn't participated in such events for the past couple of years, so it shouldn't be a big deal now -- or so the thinking goes. When asked about it, quarterback Matthew Stafford said he expects Suh to be "in great shape" whenever the team starts mandatory workouts and minicamps. Lions president Tom Lewand and new head coach Jim Caldwell went a step further, saying that Suh could benefit from being around his teammates, but nothing they uttered be should confused with outright frustration.

What nobody was willing to say is what is plainly obvious to anybody watching this situation: It says plenty that Suh chose to not attend these workouts. Even if he's getting into phenomenal shape on his own, this was the first opportunity that Caldwell and his assistants had to educate their players on the team's new offensive and defensive schemes. If Suh wasn't crazy about the team's philosophies on strength and conditioning, he could've seen the upside in that. These are the types of gestures that leaders make in order to foster a winning atmosphere.

The lack of irritation around the Lions suggests this is a team that has grown far too accustomed to dancing around their biggest defensive star. They surely understand that Suh's current negotiations for a contract extension might factor into his absence, which is fair. But they also need to realize that changing the team's losing culture won't happen solely by taking a passive approach to what should be a more annoying situation. They don't need Suh to just make Pro Bowls. They need him to help build a sustainable foundation for success.

It's not as if the Lions have reached a point where they can operate like teams that actually do contend for championships. For example, it wasn't a major issue when former Chicago Bears linebacker Brian Urlacher missed some voluntary workouts in 2008 while fighting for a contract extension and former Bears head coach Lovie Smith pointedly said that he needed all his players available for those sessions. But Urlacher also had led that franchise to several postseason games and a Super Bowl by that point. He had earned the right to vanish and the Bears had established a standard that younger players knew to follow. They could handle a couple weeks without their leader in the locker room.

The Lions don't have that luxury. They've made one postseason appearance since Suh's arrival as the second overall pick in the 2010 draft (a wild-card playoff loss to the New Orleans Saints during the 2011 season). Suh's image around the league also has been a problem for most of the past three years. He has been suspended once, fined nearly $217,000 and also accused by Fox analyst Heath Evans of being "uncontrollable" in the Lions' locker room (Evans said three unnamed Detroit players gave him that news).

The team's decision to vote Suh as a captain should have been a huge turning point in his career. He clearly coveted the role, a desire that suggested he was prepared for the added responsibility. These are the kinds of things the Lions should be bringing up when they talk about his absence from these workouts. He desperately wanted to lead this team last fall, and now he's sending an entirely different message with his actions.

If voluntary workouts weren't such a big deal, then Stafford might as well be training elsewhere. Pro Bowl wide receiver Calvin Johnson also could have taken a pass, along with any other player who had enough juice to do as he pleased. Along with Suh, Stafford and Johnson are the most important players on the Lions' roster. They showed up because they know this was about more than getting into shape for the season.

Those players came because they realize this is yet another opportunity for the Lions to change their culture. Former head coach Jim Schwartz lost his job after last season once it became apparent that he couldn't sustain the momentum that blossomed during the 2011 success. The team hired Caldwell with the hope he could provide the same calming presence that aided him as the Indianapolis Colts' quarterbacks coach and head coach and the Baltimore Ravens' offensive coordinator. The faster the Lions buy into Caldwell's message, the better their chances are of ascending to new heights.

Instead, Caldwell spent last week telling local reporters that he wasn't "blindsided" by Suh's absence. He added that he had talked several times with Suh and indicated that there was only so much a coach could do with a voluntary workout program. In fact, Caldwell could do a little more. He could talk about how critical it is to take advantage of this time and how most players in Indianapolis and Baltimore -- where Caldwell was part of Super Bowl-winning teams -- understood that.

Maybe Caldwell isn't ready to start a public beef with a star player yet. His personality suggests that he prefers to work behind the scenes and keep any issues in-house. But it's also hard to believe he isn't more upset about Suh's decision to skip these workouts. If the Fox report about Suh undermining Schwartz is true, it's only a matter of time before Caldwell encounters similar problems during his reign.

It's also worth noting that players in today's game aren't forced to spend unreasonable amounts of time with their teams during the offseason. The last collective bargaining agreement mandated that coaches could ask only so much of players at this time of year. The benefit was that players had more time to themselves and more freedom to work with their own trainers. They ultimately would have more than enough moments to do what they wanted to do throughout the spring and summer.

Apparently, Ndamukong Suh plans on doing whatever he wants until he absolutely has to be with his teammates. That's an acceptable stance for a player who has enjoyed postseason success or is able to show off at least one Super Bowl ring. For a young star such as Suh, it sounds very much like a player who still doesn't know what it takes to win. And the saddest part of all is that the people around him aren't willing to call him out on that.


_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


April 21st, 2014, 10:13 am
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11945
Post Re: Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Li
The parts that stick out to me:
Quote:
The most disturbing aspect of Ndamukong Suh's absence from the Detroit Lions' voluntary offseason program isn't that he isn't there. It's that his team doesn't have the courage to forcefully question that choice.


The predictable defense of Suh -- who hasn't joined his team since voluntary workouts began last week -- is that these sessions indeed are not required....What nobody was willing to say is what is plainly obvious to anybody watching this situation: It says plenty that Suh chose to not attend these workouts. Even if he's getting into phenomenal shape on his own, this was the first opportunity that Caldwell and his assistants had to educate their players on the team's new offensive and defensive schemes. If Suh wasn't crazy about the team's philosophies on strength and conditioning, he could've seen the upside in that. These are the types of gestures that leaders make in order to foster a winning atmosphere.


They don't need Suh to just make Pro Bowls. They need him to help build a sustainable foundation for success.


It's not as if the Lions have reached a point where they can operate like teams that actually do contend for championships


He has been suspended once, fined nearly $217,000 and also accused by Fox analyst Heath Evans of being "uncontrollable" in the Lions' locker room (Evans said three unnamed Detroit players gave him that news).


The team's decision to vote Suh as a captain should have been a huge turning point in his career. He clearly coveted the role, a desire that suggested he was prepared for the added responsibility. These are the kinds of things the Lions should be bringing up when they talk about his absence from these workouts. He desperately wanted to lead this team last fall, and now he's sending an entirely different message with his actions.


If voluntary workouts weren't such a big deal, then Stafford might as well be training elsewhere. Pro Bowl wide receiver Calvin Johnson also could have taken a pass


In fact, Caldwell could do a little more. He could talk about how critical it is to take advantage of this time and how most players in Indianapolis and Baltimore -- where Caldwell was part of Super Bowl-winning teams -- understood that.


Maybe Caldwell isn't ready to start a public beef with a star player yet. His personality suggests that he prefers to work behind the scenes and keep any issues in-house. But it's also hard to believe he isn't more upset about Suh's decision to skip these workouts. If the Fox report about Suh undermining Schwartz is true, it's only a matter of time before Caldwell encounters similar problems during his reign.


It's also worth noting that players in today's game aren't forced to spend unreasonable amounts of time with their teams during the offseason. The last collective bargaining agreement mandated that coaches could ask only so much of players at this time of year. The benefit was that players had more time to themselves and more freedom to work with their own trainers. They ultimately would have more than enough moments to do what they wanted to do throughout the spring and summer.

Apparently, Ndamukong Suh plans on doing whatever he wants until he absolutely has to be with his teammates. That's an acceptable stance for a player who has enjoyed postseason success or is able to show off at least one Super Bowl ring. For a young star such as Suh, it sounds very much like a player who still doesn't know what it takes to win.


I'm sure several will call me crazy, but perhaps it's time to consider Suh to Rams for #2......

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


April 21st, 2014, 10:21 am
Profile
Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)
User avatar

Joined: August 24th, 2010, 9:54 pm
Posts: 2249
Post Re: Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Li
This has come up before--see the 'Is Suh a bad teammate?' thread from a few years ago. My sense is that he's not a bad guy who's trying to undermine his coaches--he just thinks he can do everything on his own terms.

However, after this long in the league, and after all the stupid attention he's got, he should understand that optics matter. This was a misstep on his part, to be sure.

_________________
Driver of the Jim Caldwell bandwagon. Climb aboard.


April 21st, 2014, 10:28 am
Profile
Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)

Joined: March 5th, 2009, 8:42 pm
Posts: 2168
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Post Re: Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Li
TheRealWags wrote:
The parts that stick out to me:
Quote:
The most disturbing aspect of Ndamukong Suh's absence from the Detroit Lions' voluntary offseason program isn't that he isn't there. It's that his team doesn't have the courage to forcefully question that choice.


The predictable defense of Suh -- who hasn't joined his team since voluntary workouts began last week -- is that these sessions indeed are not required....What nobody was willing to say is what is plainly obvious to anybody watching this situation: It says plenty that Suh chose to not attend these workouts. Even if he's getting into phenomenal shape on his own, this was the first opportunity that Caldwell and his assistants had to educate their players on the team's new offensive and defensive schemes. If Suh wasn't crazy about the team's philosophies on strength and conditioning, he could've seen the upside in that. These are the types of gestures that leaders make in order to foster a winning atmosphere.


They don't need Suh to just make Pro Bowls. They need him to help build a sustainable foundation for success.


It's not as if the Lions have reached a point where they can operate like teams that actually do contend for championships


He has been suspended once, fined nearly $217,000 and also accused by Fox analyst Heath Evans of being "uncontrollable" in the Lions' locker room (Evans said three unnamed Detroit players gave him that news).


The team's decision to vote Suh as a captain should have been a huge turning point in his career. He clearly coveted the role, a desire that suggested he was prepared for the added responsibility. These are the kinds of things the Lions should be bringing up when they talk about his absence from these workouts. He desperately wanted to lead this team last fall, and now he's sending an entirely different message with his actions.


If voluntary workouts weren't such a big deal, then Stafford might as well be training elsewhere. Pro Bowl wide receiver Calvin Johnson also could have taken a pass


In fact, Caldwell could do a little more. He could talk about how critical it is to take advantage of this time and how most players in Indianapolis and Baltimore -- where Caldwell was part of Super Bowl-winning teams -- understood that.


Maybe Caldwell isn't ready to start a public beef with a star player yet. His personality suggests that he prefers to work behind the scenes and keep any issues in-house. But it's also hard to believe he isn't more upset about Suh's decision to skip these workouts. If the Fox report about Suh undermining Schwartz is true, it's only a matter of time before Caldwell encounters similar problems during his reign.


It's also worth noting that players in today's game aren't forced to spend unreasonable amounts of time with their teams during the offseason. The last collective bargaining agreement mandated that coaches could ask only so much of players at this time of year. The benefit was that players had more time to themselves and more freedom to work with their own trainers. They ultimately would have more than enough moments to do what they wanted to do throughout the spring and summer.

Apparently, Ndamukong Suh plans on doing whatever he wants until he absolutely has to be with his teammates. That's an acceptable stance for a player who has enjoyed postseason success or is able to show off at least one Super Bowl ring. For a young star such as Suh, it sounds very much like a player who still doesn't know what it takes to win.


I'm sure several will call me crazy, but perhaps it's time to consider Suh to Rams for #2......

I hate to say that I've been swayed by an article but this did frustrate me a little. We have put up with a lot of garbage from Suh obviously because of his skill set. Why was he the only player who chose to sit alone in the locker room while the team celebrated a playoff birth with the fans? That meant so much to the city and he could care less. Anyway, I don't know that Suh would be this way on a respectable franchise without accountability issues. As far as trading him to the Rams, I dunno, Fisher was able to get the most out of Fat Albert so it might be good for Suh but at the same time, Suh is the most reliable player on the team and he is definetely smart enough to pick up the new defense. For me it goes back to the saying "it's not what you do, it's how you do it". Suh not only drags his feet in negotiating a deal, he doesn't even hire an agent until it's too late for us to participate fully in free agency. He can't just let Levy score on a pick six, he has to target a guy's knee 15 yards away from the play and cost us a TD.

So while I do think he is our best player, I'm very hesitant to to pay one of the highest defensive contracts of all time to a guy who couldn't care less about the franchise.

_________________
Matthew Stafford is the only player in NFL history who is allowed to smoke cigarettes in the team huddle. He just chooses not to


April 21st, 2014, 3:32 pm
Profile
Veteran General Manager
User avatar

Joined: May 7th, 2005, 3:25 pm
Posts: 7260
Location: Earth/Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy
Post Re: Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Li
Someone other than me suggests it's time to trade Suh and NOW it's an acceptable idea?


April 21st, 2014, 4:48 pm
Profile
NFL Veteran

Joined: November 28th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Posts: 1336
Location: Newport Beach, Ca
Post Re: Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Li
It was a bad idea then and it's still a terrible idea. They are in win now mode, they can't trade away one of their best players for a rookie.


April 21st, 2014, 6:20 pm
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11945
Post Re: Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Li
Is it me or is Suh becoming another Big Baby? I seem to remember many peeps saying he was irreplaceable, a great DT, our D will never recover, yadda yadda yadda. Perhaps I missed something, but if I recall correctly Shaun Rogers didn't do crap after he was traded...

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


April 22nd, 2014, 9:44 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9378
Location: Dallas
Post Re: Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Li
BillySims wrote:
Someone other than me suggests it's time to trade Suh and NOW it's an acceptable idea?


Suh has done this year after year. He comes into camp in awesome shape, was nominated a team captain last year, says he doesn't really care about stats but in making the team better, makes everyone around him better by eating up double teams, and makes Pro Bowls (was also the first pick in the PB this year).

Yeah, lets go ahead and dump this guy for a rookie who we have no idea will be good or not!

TheRealWags wrote:
Is it me or is Suh becoming another Big Baby? I seem to remember many peeps saying he was irreplaceable, a great DT, our D will never recover, yadda yadda yadda. Perhaps I missed something, but if I recall correctly Shaun Rogers didn't do crap after he was traded...


Actually, Rogers went into a 3-4 defense with the Brown as an NT, not his best scheme and still was a PB alternate. Meanwhile, without him that year the Lions went 0-16. What do you guys want to do next, bring back Marinelli and Millen?

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


April 22nd, 2014, 9:49 am
Profile WWW
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11945
Post Re: Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Li
Pablo wrote:
TheRealWags wrote:
Is it me or is Suh becoming another Big Baby? I seem to remember many peeps saying he was irreplaceable, a great DT, our D will never recover, yadda yadda yadda. Perhaps I missed something, but if I recall correctly Shaun Rogers didn't do crap after he was traded...
Actually, Rogers went into a 3-4 defense with the Brown as an NT, not his best scheme and still was a PB alternate. Meanwhile, without him that year the Lions went 0-16. What do you guys want to do next, bring back Marinelli and Millen?
LOL So now you're going to say the because Rogers was traded the Lions went 0-16???? Um..ok...riiiight... ](*,)

BTW - How many playoff games has Big Baby helped his team to win?

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


April 22nd, 2014, 10:03 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9378
Location: Dallas
Post Re: Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Li
TheRealWags wrote:
Pablo wrote:
TheRealWags wrote:
Is it me or is Suh becoming another Big Baby? I seem to remember many peeps saying he was irreplaceable, a great DT, our D will never recover, yadda yadda yadda. Perhaps I missed something, but if I recall correctly Shaun Rogers didn't do crap after he was traded...
Actually, Rogers went into a 3-4 defense with the Brown as an NT, not his best scheme and still was a PB alternate. Meanwhile, without him that year the Lions went 0-16. What do you guys want to do next, bring back Marinelli and Millen?
LOL So now you're going to say the because Rogers was traded the Lions went 0-16???? Um..ok...riiiight... ](*,)

BTW - How many playoff games has Big Baby helped his team to win?


Actually, comparing Suh to Big Baby is kind of silly to start with. What kind of shape did Rogers report to camp in each year? How many times was he elected as a team leader?

I haven't followed his career closely since leaving the Lions (who watches the Browns afterall), I know the one year we've made the playoffs since he has been gone (2011) he played for the Saints who knocked us out.

I'm also not saying the Lions went 0-16 only because they traded Big Baby, but they won 7 more games the year before with him. They replaced him with Leigh Bodden and a draft pick (for which they took DT Andre Fluellen). I can tell you our DT's were much more disruptive with him and Corey Redding than with Redding and Chartric Darby who replaced him in the starting lineup. I can tell you in the two years after Big Baby was gone, the Lions gave up the most points in franchise history and averaged one (count em, one) win a season. I really hope we learned some lessons from such dark days.

Who on our defense will scare opposing OCs with Suh gone? He is the only player OCs have to currently game plan for, we do not have the luxury of letting player like that leave for a roll of the dice.

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


April 22nd, 2014, 11:01 am
Profile WWW
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11945
Post Re: Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Li
Pablo wrote:
Actually, comparing Suh to Big Baby is kind of silly to start with. What kind of shape did Rogers report to camp in each year? How many times was he elected as a team leader?
Perhaps, which is why I stated: 'Is it me or is Suh becoming another Big Baby?' Apparently it's just me....
Pablo wrote:
Who on our defense will scare opposing OCs with Suh gone? He is the only player OCs have to currently game plan for, we do not have the luxury of letting player like that leave for a roll of the dice.
Perhaps the real question is, does Suh really scare anyone anymore? It seems as though teams have managed to take him out of plays on a consistent basis, whether it be by scheming or double teaming him. Not too mention, if I remember correctly, the defense as a whole took a crap the second half of last year (couldn't seem to stop anyone) and that was WITH Suh.

If football is the 'ultimate team sport' as has been portrayed time and again, then 1 player does NOT make a team. Will it hurt to not have Suh on the team? Sure, but I'd rather get something for him now before he decides to sign somewhere else next year.

Then again, maybe the better question is: Which would benefit the Lions in the long run: Signing Suh to a high-dollar contract or letting him go and using said contact money on several other players?

Final point: If the Lions are striving to be a top-notch organization that is consistently competitive year in and year out, then they cannot have 3 players counting $20+MM against the cap.

My reasoning is simple: Do Indy, Denver, New England, New Orleans, Giants have this issue?

Now, if the Lions want to continue to be the Cleveland of the NFC North or the Jets of the NFC, then they should just keep on with the status quo.

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


April 22nd, 2014, 11:20 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9378
Location: Dallas
Post Re: Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Li
Personally, I'd rather have one great player than to use that money on 3 average players - that dilutes our overall talent and average players are a dime a dozen.

Suh does scare people still. Fans might not see this as he (being a DT) doesn't pile up statistics. Double teams don't show up in statistics. Forcing a runner to go outside doesn't show up in a statistic. There are many ways in which he contributes that doesn't show up on the stat sheet.

You'd rather get something for him now rather then nothing for him later. Well, first you would get a whole years worth with a PB DT. Second, you would get a bunch of cap space if he comes off the roster. Third, you would most certainly get a high comp pick. Fourth, you have an entire year to try to sign him to a long-term contract.

TheRealWags wrote:
My reasoning is simple: Do Indy, Denver, New England, New Orleans, Giants have this issue?


OK, when the Colts were winning they had Manning who was the highest paid player in the league. Do you know who replaced him at the top, that would be Dwight Freeney. So yes they had that issue. And Robert Mathis certainly isn't cheap with a contract in the $18-$20M range.

In Denver, Champ Bailey was one of the top 25 paid players in the league, Manning and Dumervil were both top 10 (at least for 2012, when I last looked at such numbers). So yes, they have that issue.

The Pats, Saints, and Giants all have very high paid QBs on their rosters. For the Pats add Login Mankins $22M, I'm pretty sure guys like Mayo, Revis, Wilfork and Gronk aren't cheap. For the Saints, Jahri Evans makes good money and lets see what Graham's new contract adds to the cap - it will be huge. In New York, they have Cruz counting over $13M in dead money and that is a bargain compared to William Beatty's $15.5M - try to cut them alone.

So yes, the Lions are in a similar situation to many NFL teams. You have to pay the QB, and you will pay for your other stars - it is the way the system works. Some team have higher pay #2 and #3 guys like the Lions, some teams spread it a little more evenly but pay guys #4-#7 more than Detroit. Some teams are more attractive to players than others who might have to pay a premium (hello Detroit).

The NFL, like virtually any sports league, is a environment that places a premium on collecting talent. It is usually a bad, very bad idea, to get rid of the precious talent that you have. Do you think the Heat win the title after dumping Lebron and Wade to even out their roster with more quality players? Are the Tigers better off spending money on more players rather than having Cabrera and Verlander?

TheRealWags wrote:
Now, if the Lions want to continue to be the Cleveland of the NFC North or the Jets of the NFC, then they should just keep on with the status quo.


Really, the Browns have what talent?

As for the Jets, they tried a similar approach with Revis and dumped his contract and added a bunch more players as you are suggesting the Lions do. That wasn't sticking with the status quo. How did that work out for a team that was a perennial SB contender with their star CB? I'll tell you, they used to be a top 5-6 defense with him, the last two years you will find them in the 20-25 range and out of the playoffs altogether.

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


April 22nd, 2014, 12:37 pm
Profile WWW
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 am
Posts: 2741
Post Re: Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Li
This thread makes it sound like all other players around the league are all doing their workouts with their team. Anyone remember the "U" players all going back to Miami to train? Yup, the reporters covering those teams make the same type of connection that they're missing out on lifting weights with the team, somehow will kill the team. Well, did it hurt Michael Irvin with the Cowboys and their multiple rings? Did it hurt Warren Sapp? Ed Reed? Ray Lewis?

And the Big Baby comparisons just make me giggle. That was someone out of shape regardless if he worked out or not. Has Suh ever reported out of shape? That is the key of offseason voluntary workouts. It's also a chance for players to work with coaches or trainers NOT associated with the Lions. Warford worked out with LeCharles Bentley in the offseason to get him ready for his rookie season. Slay is working out with Rod Woodson. In my opinion, those players will see a bigger advance in skills year to year because they're learning new things to throw in with the stuff they learn over and over with the team. Our strength and conditioning coaching has probably been one of the worst over the last few decades, so it's a good thing that some work out elsewhere. We know CJ still works out at Gtech, but no one will bring that up. We could only hope Stafford was working with a QB coach...

The only thing you can learn from the position coach is the playbook, which you don't need to be at the facility to learn. The coaches can't be on the field with the players, so what is the fuss about? What can a coach tell a player in an meeting room at this point in the offseason program that they can't tell them one on one over the phone. It's voluntary for a reason. Every single player will be locked in those rooms soon enough. The draft hasn't even happened yet, and people are getting upset that players are taking advantage of what their contracts give them. *scratches head*


April 22nd, 2014, 6:05 pm
Profile
Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)

Joined: March 5th, 2009, 8:42 pm
Posts: 2168
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Post Re: Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Li
TheRealWags wrote:
Pablo wrote:
Actually, comparing Suh to Big Baby is kind of silly to start with. What kind of shape did Rogers report to camp in each year? How many times was he elected as a team leader?
Perhaps, which is why I stated: 'Is it me or is Suh becoming another Big Baby?' Apparently it's just me....
Pablo wrote:
Who on our defense will scare opposing OCs with Suh gone? He is the only player OCs have to currently game plan for, we do not have the luxury of letting player like that leave for a roll of the dice.
Perhaps the real question is, does Suh really scare anyone anymore? It seems as though teams have managed to take him out of plays on a consistent basis, whether it be by scheming or double teaming him. Not too mention, if I remember correctly, the defense as a whole took a crap the second half of last year (couldn't seem to stop anyone) and that was WITH Suh.

If football is the 'ultimate team sport' as has been portrayed time and again, then 1 player does NOT make a team. Will it hurt to not have Suh on the team? Sure, but I'd rather get something for him now before he decides to sign somewhere else next year.

Suh absolutely demands respect from other teams otherwise he will hurt the QB. And I think your memory might be off about the defense. They held Baltimore without a TD, held MN to 14 pts in the finale, and held NYG to 20 pts in regulation making a enough clutch plays for a competent offense to win the game. Our offense did everything in its power to score just a little bit less than our opponents.

I'll say it again, SUH IS THE BEST PLAYER ON THE TEAM

_________________
Matthew Stafford is the only player in NFL history who is allowed to smoke cigarettes in the team huddle. He just chooses not to


April 22nd, 2014, 6:19 pm
Profile
Veteran General Manager
User avatar

Joined: May 7th, 2005, 3:25 pm
Posts: 7260
Location: Earth/Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy
Post Re: Suh's absence from voluntary workouts is bad sign for Li
Killwill25 wrote:
TheRealWags wrote:
Pablo wrote:
Actually, comparing Suh to Big Baby is kind of silly to start with. What kind of shape did Rogers report to camp in each year? How many times was he elected as a team leader?
Perhaps, which is why I stated: 'Is it me or is Suh becoming another Big Baby?' Apparently it's just me....
Pablo wrote:
Who on our defense will scare opposing OCs with Suh gone? He is the only player OCs have to currently game plan for, we do not have the luxury of letting player like that leave for a roll of the dice.
Perhaps the real question is, does Suh really scare anyone anymore? It seems as though teams have managed to take him out of plays on a consistent basis, whether it be by scheming or double teaming him. Not too mention, if I remember correctly, the defense as a whole took a crap the second half of last year (couldn't seem to stop anyone) and that was WITH Suh.

If football is the 'ultimate team sport' as has been portrayed time and again, then 1 player does NOT make a team. Will it hurt to not have Suh on the team? Sure, but I'd rather get something for him now before he decides to sign somewhere else next year.

Suh absolutely demands respect from other teams otherwise he will hurt the QB. And I think your memory might be off about the defense. They held Baltimore without a TD, held MN to 14 pts in the finale, and held NYG to 20 pts in regulation making a enough clutch plays for a competent offense to win the game. Our offense did everything in its power to score just a little bit less than our opponents.

I'll say it again, SUH IS THE BEST PLAYER ON THE TEAM


And he is likely going to be the best player on someone else's team after next season. Wouldn't you rather get a 1st and 3rd round pick in trade for him instead of a 4th round pick for him as compensation? Because that's what a 3rd round Comp pick is. A 4th rounder. It comes after the 3rd round is completed.


April 22nd, 2014, 10:29 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 40 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.