This bxtches anonymous meeting is brought to you by kleenex.Uber's post brought to you by running out of Midol.
#1 - Allowing Dennis Allen to hire Greg Knapp.
Now I'm all for hiring a HC and letting him pick his staff because I dont think it will truly work any other way. However, in this particular case, Reggie should have known that hiring Greg Knapp was a mistake and he should have STRONGLY suggested to Dennis Allen that he might want to look into alternatives. Greg Knapp NEVER should have gotten another OC job after we fired him the last time. The rest of the NFL already knew this, so why didnt Reggie?
#2 - S.Spencer & R.Bartell over T.Porter?
Now T.Porter isnt a shut down CB by any stretch but he was younger and more of a play maker than Bartell & Spencer were. Reggie could have signed him for the same price that he got R.Bartell so I'm still not sure why he didnt make that move.
#3 - Cutting DVD.
Now I dont think this was a MAJOR mistake or anything but it just didnt make sense. DVD had shown promise as a cover CB and he has at the very least enough speed to help out on special teams. Cutting a player that young that fast just didnt make any f'n sense.
#4 - Not re-signing S.Satele.
This was another move I didnt get. Satele was coming off a year where he played really well and S.Wisniewski was playing exceptionally well at LG. I would have kept the line intact with the only exception being that I would have replaced C.Carlisle at RG. As far as I'm concerned, we dismantled a unit of strength unnecessarily..
#5 - Not forcing the coaches to give more playing time to the young guys once the season was clearly over.
This one really agitated me. The fact that Dennis Allen said that M.Leinhart & T.Pryor would "compete" for the starting job in week #17 was just plain f'n stupid. What in the hell did they have to gain by not starting T.Pryor over M.Leinhart? Luckily for us, word is that M.Davis pretty much told them that T.Pryor had better be starting that game. If that's true, then good for Mark.
Week #17 aside, why wasnt T.Pryor getting reps in weeks 14, 15 & 16? The season was over and we had nothing to gain OTHER than getting our young guys some much needed experience. We wasted several opportunities to be able to get a solid look at young guys like T.Pryor, T.Bergstrom, J.Criner and C.Bilukidi. When you're 4-10 and out of the playoffs, there is NO reason not to give young guys more playing time.
That is still the problem here for Allen choses to play "his"players rather than the players that give the team the best chance to win. That's why players like Pryor, Ausberry and Ross could hardly get on the field while Carson constantly killed drives and red zone opp,Guess the receivers who couldn't get open or flat out dropped balls for TD's and in the red zone are Carson's fault also. He made some dumb throws at times but he clearly tried forcing the ball since his receivers weren't helping him at all. He also had no running game especially in the red zone. Carson is a good QB but he needs help which he hasn't had since he has been here.
Keeping <span style="color: #0d3a80;">Tyvon Branch over <span style="color: #0d3a80;">Kamerion Wimbley didnt and will never make sense to me.K.Wimbley had what, 4 years left on his deal? At what, around $9-10 million per year? There is no f'n way Reggie or any GM with a brain was going to keep that contract. Now if you didnt like the T.Branch deal that understandable but I dont know how you justify paying someone like K.Wimbley over $10 million per year when he's not even a double digit sack guy and he's actually below average as an everydown 4-3 OLB.
I think instead of restructuring players like Seymour and Palmer in particular he should have just told them to take a pay cut. If they refused which they very well may have and probably would have, its gonna be pretty hard to wear that C on your jersey and its gonna be a hard sell to other teams that you are a "team" player and or leaderBecause he had no leverage, especially with R.Seymour. Al Davis guaranteed almost every penny of R.Seymours deal so there was no way Seymour would have taken a pay cut to stick with a team that everyone knew wasnt going to be winning anything. Reggie pretty much had his hands tied with those two ridiculous contracts.
Ok, they didn't but they had the opportunity last year and if he didn't agree to it, who looks like the bad guy now?No offense but since when did players start giving a fugg about public perception enough to take LESS MONEY? Now I may be wrong but I cant think of a single instance where a player took less money because he was worried about what his public perception would be if he didnt. The NFL is a business and these players know that. If a team is willing to tear up their contract after having one bad year or finding someone better, why wouldnt the players view things the same way? These guys dont play for the fans or even their teammates, they play for the money.
You may think it doesn't apply but it damn sure does in the case of Carson.What makes you say that? Carson doesnt give a flying fugg about public perception because if he did, he wouldnt have told the Bengals to "trade me or I'll retire". If he was willing to pull a move like that on the team that took him #1 and paid him $100 million what makes you think he wouldnt tell Oakland to pound sand when they demand a pay cut?