Quote
zn
Quote
max
Ok. I get all that, but the issue is they didn’t know NB would be this good when TC Started.
And given that they were never gonna play Whitworth, what was their plan to play Goff if NB wasnt a major hit?
I mean, go back a month and tell me what the plan was to play Goff in PS?
They knew about the Raiders deal so the 2nd game was out, and they weren’t gonna play Goff in the first game behind the unknown backup OL. That means McVays entire plan was based on playing Goff in the 3rd game ONLY and praying 2 things happened. 1. NB could play LT and 2. Hav was 100% healthy. That’s an extremely low percentage plan.
But they do know how good he is now.
And so just this one game, they were prepared (apparently) to go with NB for AW. It was (possibly) losing Hav too that has them (possibly) sitting Goff.
Going back a month? AW was not scratched for all 4 PS games a month ago.
I don't think they were going to play any of the starters, O or D, in game 1 because they didn't need to. They had just run 2 days of unscripted live scrimmages, 1s against 1s. In fact Gruden only had his starters in for at most 6 snaps in game 1.
Yes. It was all about game 3 only.
What happened is this (according to Vinny). The plan coming out of game 2 was to sit AW and play NB and Hav. So AW didn’t get the prep work for game 3, it went to NB. Then Hav tweeked ankle late Monday and didn’t realize until Tuesday that he shouldn’t practice. Then it was late to get AW back on board and move NB to RT. Plus they want to get NB as much work at LT as possible to prep for regular season backup roll.
Honestly, all this start Goff stuff is way overblown, IMO. The most important thing coming out of it is NB being a very encouraging development. Actually, if he develops into a legit LT, it’s a rare feat.
~ max ~
“The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity.” - Alexander Hamilton