(10-20-2021, 08:15 AM)Mikey Wrote:

(10-20-2021, 04:34 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: If Wingard is lined up too deep for your taste, that's not on Wingard, that's on Cullen.  Right?

That doesn't fit the narrative, though.

Seriously, though, I don't understand how this board can spew this much venom at Wingard because the golden boy Cisco isn't getting PT, but we hear crickets about Jawann Taylor's superior play keeping little on the bench. It's dumbfounding.

Taylor has been called out repeatedly in multiple threads and many of us have openly "spewed venom" at this staff for the weeks when Little was a healthy scratch.  Let's not get it twisted, please. I have zero "narrative" on Wingard. I just know he's not a quality starter and we have a rookie with way more upside languishing on the bench.

As the weeks wear on - it is indeed looking more and more like Wingard's ridiculously ineffective play style in zone coverage is a product of scheme and coaching moreso than just Wingard freelancing well beyond the typical FS backpedal. 

We'll likely learn more on this soon, but thats's what it looks like and that has been speculated upon SEVERAL times here. 

The kid is decent around the LOS, he plays hard and occasionally makes a positive play, but don't you think if he was faster and took better lines to the football they wouldn't drop him so deep that he can't possibly come up in time to affect or prevent a first down conversion on an 15 yard in-route?
Seriously, think about that for a second. When he drops, he is so deep that the literally one thing he can do is stop a TD if another back 7 player misses a tackle. That's not very effective use of a FS when you do it on any significant % of snaps. 

That kind of bend but don't break play is very extreme and not in a good way. 
 Only explanations are:

• the scheme is completely broken (allows everything underneath to be open)
  
• they don't trust him to play closer to the line and potentially let one get by him
  
• a combination of the two above
  

---