Pollard should start?

[gimmesix]

not bashing you, just asking or saying I never seen you defend him in all the bash threads

I mostly stay out of it because there's not much you can say to change the mind of someone who has an agenda, but there are a few threads where I've added to the defense. I usually post later in a lot of threads because I'm only on here at certain times instead of when a thread is first posted.

 

[gimmesix]

exactly i said this in other posts fans want to make people choose..i support those wearing the Star..

There are definitely some I've wanted upgraded, but that doesn't mean I don't support them. They are playing for my team, so I wish them the best. Some seem to actually want certain players to fail to confirm the stance they've taken against the player.

 

[jazzcat22]

There are definitely some I've wanted upgraded, but that doesn't mean I don't support them. They are playing for my team, so I wish them the best. Some seem to actually want certain players to fail to confirm the stance they've taken against the player.

I could never understand this either. Many do seem to want a player to fail so they can be right.
If they have a star on their helmet I want them to do well.

I don’t like Crawford all that much for what he brings, or does not bring, but I sure was pulling for him to get to the QB every week.

I believe the tankers wanted to tank more to be right to say we are a bad team as to truly have a better draft pick.
As next year it will be a different agenda as to why we will be bad no matter who we draft.

 

[DanA]

If Pollard starts then Zeke as a general rule doesn’t so it is kind of adversarial. I’d rather be talking about the no.1 and 2 RB’s in the league but if we were then I’d still be pointing out the weaknesses of the inferior option.

And statistically it’s not even close, Pollard has been much better, especially considering the concerning number of fumbles this year, that has been a trend thoughout Zeke’s NFL career.

I get the argument that Pollard might not get those numbers playing every down, and that Zeke is a good blocker, but I’d like to see Pollard tested. I think Pollard should be starting rather than automatically selecting Zeke.

 

[gimmesix]

I could never understand this either. Many do seem to want a player to fail so they can be right.
If they have a star on their helmet I want them to do well.

I don’t like Crawford all that much for what he brings, or does not bring, but I sure was pulling for him to get to the QB every week.

I believe the tankers wanted to tank more to be right to say we are a bad team as to truly have a better draft pick.
As next year it will be a different agenda as to why we will be bad no matter who we draft.

Right. Crawford is a good example. He's been a player who has stepped in at various positions because we've failed to get anyone better. That's not on him. If Charlton had worked out, Crawford and his high contract might not be here. If Hill had worked out by now, same thing. If both, you could almost guarantee Crawford wouldn't be here. (And I would have been thankful for him being here when we had no one else better for those roles.)

However, some act like getting rid of a player automatically means the next man up will automatically be better. I wish it were that simple. In the Elliott vs. Pollard debate, some want to cut Elliott believing that Pollard can just take his place. We don't know that and even if he is able, he's not going to be able to carry the load alone, so we still would need another quality back. Others want to make it seem like Pollard isn't a quality backup, which he is. I'm glad to have both of them and hope for their success primarily because it makes our team better.

I'm not opposed to upgrading either player or any player to make the team better, but it isn't that easy to do. We've seen that this year with all those who wanted Byron Jones gone. I don't blame the team for not overpaying for his services, but I don't think we can say our defense has been better because of it.

 

[G2]

I think there is an argument on when Pollard should have started this season while Elliott was injured. In my opinion, it's detrimental to start Elliott over Pollard if Elliott is hindered by injuries and Pollard is fresh and good to go. He's a back up, but isn't a healthy Elliott better? Most players that are that competitive probably wouldn't agree with getting subbed, but if you are thinking postseason, you have to factor it in.