The thing is...the reasons you believed CJ was better than Rudock are probably not the sole reasons Kirk went to CJ ultimately. To say "I knew after one game that CJ was better" does not support the fact that you therefore are always correct in typical/similar situations.
I don't ever post any opinion on this board where I position myself as an expert over the coaches. I'm smart enough to know they they know infinitely more about football, and infinitely more about the players on the squad - than I ever will.
Now, does that mean we are not supposed to criticize the coaches? Hail no. I am saying that you damn well be pretty certain in proving your reasons why you think they should do this or that, because when it gets right down to it, you see 1/1000th of the evidence they see. In addition, if you predict something that winds up not being close to the truth, not acknowledging you were wrong immediately paints you into the position that all you are here to do is to criticize and lends us to believe that this is your chief motivation here.
That, you chose. Live with it. Just don't be surprised posters question your points with equally valid points. Neither side truly knows the truth...but one thing I do know - the most likely people that do know the truth are the coaches.
There is a damn good reason why Wadley wasn't playing over Canzeri, and that was most likely ball security as the leading reason. The numbers prove that out, and the coach's comment supports that. To state unequivocally that Wadley should be playing over Canzeri merely based upon what we have seen from two games total that Wadley has starred in is not taking into account ALL the facts that lend to the decision coaches made regarding who ultimately was playing.
Coaches expect a "reasonable predictability of output" based upon practice and games, and all the little things we as fans are never privy to. Outwardly, we see fumbles in limited usage comparing one to another. Given the comment Kirk made, and what we have seen, one can reasonably assume, what we've seen in games is probably supported also by what we don't get to see.
You might be correct, then again, you might be incorrect. We shall see. Wadley will get yet another opportunity to prove us all wrong...or right.
One last thing...nobody here supports not playing the best guy for the job. All we are saying is that logic tends to dictate that there's probably a damn good reason(s) why he wasn't. That applies to CJ/Rudock. that applies to Willies/rest of the WR's, that applies to that idiotic thread about Scheel a couple weeks ago, and that applies to Wadley/Canzeri.
