(03-01-2024, 04:13 PM)Caldrac Wrote:

(03-01-2024, 04:04 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote: The error was in expecting Fortner, who was a first year player, to come in stronger in year 2 and he didn't.  Many of our other problems stem from this as has been said ad nauseam.  I think many of the complaints about specific draft picks would be less loud if a)Fortner would have come in stronger last year or b)they would have had legitimate competition for him at the position.  Tough to not still trust your evaluation of a guy (Fortner) only 1 year later, so I don't blame them on not giving up on him, but they didn't have a contingency for him on the roster and they clearly should have.  That's the error of 2023 in my opinion.  They will at the very least have a contingency for him this year I have no doubt if they don't outright replace him.

I've said this before, but Bigsby in a small sample started to visibly look very good to me in the last game or two, stats aside.  He looked like he was running strong with purpose and confidence which was in contrast to how much of the season looked for him prior to that.

Agreed. There's hope for Bigsby. Just as long as he holds onto the football. Fortner I just don't know. Two years in. 37 career starts in. I appreciate his ability to stay healthy but he just doesn't seem to have "it" and he's too lost or overpowered at times. 

The lack of contingency plans for that offensive line in 2023 in general was concerning. Having the historical injuries with Cam Robinson at LT, Ben Bartch coming back from not playing football since October of 2022, Scherff's historical injuries and then only addressing the RT position early was just bad.

The admission of failure there lies within them trading for Ezra Cleveland before the deadline. The luxury picks of a glorified FB in RD2 and a turnover prone (again, knew this leaving Auburn) in RD3 is what makes it unforgivable.