Rockport
AmberBeer
- Messages
- 46,580
- Reaction score
- 46,004
Right. I think every team and their fan base wants to lose their best player on defense.... Just so they can be blessed.
Who said anyone wanted this to happen? Only you. Geez.
Right. I think every team and their fan base wants to lose their best player on defense.... Just so they can be blessed.
I would rather 6 or 9 games of this than 0.
This guy's injury history is really odd.
Has he ever had the same thing twice?
Broken toe, broken wrist (that he played with), strained neck, now an ACL. It seems so fluky and random...except it can't be fully random if something different happens annually.
I think you miss his point. He should have used if instead of when. The point is instead of throwing a guy out there if Lee gets injured during the season, having the injury this early gives somebody a chance to learn and practice in the middle so the backup is better prepared. Although your statement about Spence, Ratliff, Crawford and Bass more describes the word you used, it would have been better if we had backups better prepared than they were last year.
INJURIES ARE NEVER A BLESSING IF IT TAKES ANYBODY AND ESPECIALLY ONE OF YOUR TWO OR THREE BEST PLAYERS OFF THE FIELD. However, if it happens during the OTAs it isn't quite as difficult to prepare somebody to fill in rather than it happen in the middle of the season and somebody is thrown into the situation.
If we lived in an ideal world, then nobody would ever get injured on the Cowboys' team. Yet every year it seems the Cowboys have more injuries than anybody else. While it is always bad, the timing of the injury can make it even worse. Again the timing is the issue here. I hope Lee will be with the Cowboys for many years and is never injured again. When I saw the news, I told my wife that the Cowboys just lost their BEST player on defense.
The idea that someone can now learn is flat out stupid. Second string players aren't sitting at home. They're practicing every day just like the starters.
Whatever benefit there would be in having him in there now because of time to learn would have been matched by an addition X number of weeks to learn if Lee hadn't gotten hurt but was destined to.
Guy now has about 4-1/2 months to learn.
Anyone who chooses that over the 7-8 months of learning time he would have had if Lee had been able to play for 8-10 weeks is a fool.
I absolutely agree. I would rather he had one game than O. Yet, I also would rather have his backup better prepared than we had last year. Hopefully, he will be back sometime during the season. I'm waiting for the results of the MRI.
I think you miss his point. He should have used if instead of when. The point is instead of throwing a guy out there if Lee gets injured during the season, having the injury this early gives somebody a chance to learn and practice in the middle so the backup is better prepared. Although your statement about Spence, Ratliff, Crawford and Bass more describes the word you used, it would have been better if we had backups better prepared than they were last year.
INJURIES ARE NEVER A BLESSING IF IT TAKES ANYBODY AND ESPECIALLY ONE OF YOUR TWO OR THREE BEST PLAYERS OFF THE FIELD. However, if it happens during the OTAs it isn't quite as difficult to prepare somebody to fill in rather than it happen in the middle of the season and somebody is thrown into the situation.
If we lived in an ideal world, then nobody would ever get injured on the Cowboys' team. Yet every year it seems the Cowboys have more injuries than anybody else. While it is always bad, the timing of the injury can make it even worse. Again the timing is the issue here. I hope Lee will be with the Cowboys for many years and is never injured again. When I saw the news, I told my wife that the Cowboys just lost their BEST player on defense.
A positive note. It provides a built in excuse for a .500 season.
Stupid to talk about letting him go now. Let him rehab. Find his replacement and just understand that he can no longer be considered a starter on this team.
It's a disaster. He's the only blue chip player we definitely had on that side of the ball. Any replacement is a major step down in both talent and leadership.
I'm sick about this.
Let's face it. Lee wasn't going to be able to play most of the season anyways. I mean he hasn't for his whole football career basically. He's too small for his position and plays at 100% all the time. It's a blessing in disguise that he's out for the season in May. This gives the GM plenty of time to come up with an alternative. We may not have a player for the opener who's as good as Lee is, but at least we'll have someone who's had a chance to learn the system and not be thrown to the wolves in game 6 or 9 as in years past.
He's hardly ever on the field so it's not a big loss considering that fact.
This gives the GM plenty of time to come up with an alternative.
You're overall point is that it can be a good thing that it at least happened early so we have time to adjust. That's the bright side of losing your best defensive player for the year. I appreciate that, and appreciate the positive post. It's just that the bright side of losing such a good player is not very comforting right now. And it's not like we have anything other than stop-gaps in the LB corps beyond Lee and, maybe, Bruce Carter. This basically puts Carter out of position and Durant probably on the field and then leaves us with very little established depth at two of the three LB positions. It sucks. I'd take however many games we could get from our best guy and scramble to replace him, any day.
So let me see if I get this right. It is a blessing in disguise because the Front Office is so inept that they cannot be counted on to come up with a contingency plan for an oft injured player unless that oft injured player is unavailable three months before the season?