(11-26-2019, 10:23 AM)TJBender Wrote:

(11-26-2019, 09:36 AM)LMD Wrote: I don’t disagree, in principle. Where I lose that train though, is when I realize this isn’t the first week Dareus was out. If this was the first week post-Dareus, it’d be one thing. But this is a couple weeks without Dareus at this point. Russel apparently wasn’t good enough to even cut into Bryan’s snapcount the first few weeks after Dareus was IR’d, but now he plays one week and out-snaps Bryan.

This also isn’t just Russel cutting into Bryan’s snap count; this is Russel coming off being inactive every week to play more snaps than Bryan.

If after weeks of letting Bryan replace Dareus, the team concluded that the one move they could make to try to salvage the run defense was essentially benching their first round draft pick for a guy who wasn’t good enough to make the active game day roster as a space-eating run-stopper the past few weeks, I think that leaves room for worry about Bryan’s overall career trajectory... 


I’m more worried that Bryan basically got shelved for a guy who couldn’t make the active roster. I understand Bryan’s role isn’t to be a space-eating run-stuffer like Dareus, or hopefully Russel. But he’s still a first round draft pick playing the interior of the line; he should be, at least, somewhat competent to play the run. Yet he’s basically the only guy who lost playing time—to a guy who was inactive every week, even after Dareus went out—in an attempt to save this run defense. 

With how many issues the run defense had, in total, you don’t see any reason to worry that the one move they made was reducing Bryan’s snap count? (I’m not counting the linebackers coming back from injury as that wasn’t so much of a strategic choice as a “our first option is finally available again” move.)

If this team signed Tommy Bohanon off the scrap heap this week and then gave him more snaps than Fournette next week, would we say “well, Tommy’s a better blocker and the team needed to find a way to block better for Foles, so it makes sense Fournette, a running running-back, lost snaps?” (I realize this is a significantly more dramatic example than Russel v. Bryan, but I haven’t had any coffee yet today, so this is the best my brain can come up with. I’m open to better comparisons.)

1. Russell has been on the team all year. He made the roster out of camp.
2. Bryan hasn't been "benched" in favor of Russell. He played 22 snaps to Russell's 26. Campbell and Bryan do the same thing most of the time. Russell is a space eater. Bryan as the primary run stopper wasn't working because that's not what he's built to do, but Russell and his 325 lbs. are a natural fit at the position.
3. Signing Bo is a nutty example, yes. It would be more like if Fournette was placed on IR and Armstead took over the starting job, but the team decided that Ervin is a better third-down option then spent most of the game in passing sets. Yes, Ervin would get the majority of snaps in that situation, just like how Russell has gotten lots of snaps while the team is spending most of its time not defending the run. It's not that Armstead is necessarily mediocre or underachieving. It's that Ervin is a better fit for what the team wants to do in the formation they're spending most of their time in.

1. I understand he’s on the team, but for game day purposes he’s been inactive the last 9-10 weeks. He’s essentially a practice squad player under those circumstances.

2. “Benched” was too harsh on my part. You are right. I will retract that statement. I rushed my reply before work and before coffee; that’s on me. 

As for the 26-22 snap differential, I think I’d feel better if it was reversed or if it had been built up to this point. It’s not Bryan’s strong suit, but if this trend continues (I.e. Bryan has 14 snaps next week and Russel has 30 or something), it’s not exactly comforting thoughts for a first round draft pick. 

Which ties in with:

3. My Fournette/Bohanon example wasn’t great, but your Armstead/Erving example goes too far the other way. My issue with the Armstead/Erving situation is Armstead is a 5th round rookie. It is conceivable he wasn’t drafted to be an every down back and was always intended to be more of a role player. That we’re, apparently, equating his significance to the team to Bryan’s, who was a first round draft pick a year ago, realistically says everything I’m concerned about with this news in so many words... 

A better example probably would have been if back in Henderstroud’s prime, one of them saw less snaps than a backup who was “better suited” for a specific task. When you draft a guy as high as Bryan, at least I expect him to be competent enough in all facets of the game to not have to be hidden as the only move a coaching staff makes to fix the defense. 

But maybe it was a one week experiment and all my fears are for naught. I’m just a little uneasy that the only real move the team made to try to fix the run defense was taking snaps away from Bryan, after weeks of giving him significant run in that role.

---