Trade Nichols for a solid RB?

[Opus]

Re: Trade Nichols for a solid RB?

Again though, we're talking about what is evident from the stands. In a business where winning is job security, I don't think it's common for coaches to move away from productive play makers without some reason to do so. Practice habits, conflicts with teammates, pointing fingers, lack of discipline, not putting in the off-field work - be it training or film study. I'm not saying anything of these specifically applied to Porter, as I am as puzzled as the rest by his decline and demise.

Maybe your assertion is correct, that they didn't give him a chance for no apparent reason and risked cutting their own throat as a result. The way I think though is that people do things for reasons, and just because I don't have the visibility to know what those reasons are, doesn't mean they didn't exist and weren't valid. Most actions are explained by reasons, even if the reasons were flawed, than by lack of reasons, and surely we are not privy to viewing 90% of the dynamics that go on outside of gameday.

When I see a back like Porter go from virtually an every game 1000 yd rusher to an ineffective and sparsely used part, to the scrap heap where virtually no one else wants him, I'm looking for reasons behind it rather than chalking it up to mismanagement. That would be a more credible explanation if there were proof through the guy succeeding elsewhere, but here, we're talking about a good number of qualified and experienced football people that seemed to evaluate he player similarly based on some things we weren't seeing from our outside perspectives.

I think you're right, there was a reason. I'm just not sure it's the reason you think it is. Usually the simplest answer is the best. In this case it would be the ratio.

If they thought that they could get the same "production" from a NI back in Messam, then Whitlock and Porter become nothing more than spare parts. I know that you have enough experience to understand the mindset that most starting backs have. They don't like being used sparingly, because its rare they can be effective in that capacity.

Not to mention that I think Messam was a pet project for Reed.

[GreatWhiteNorth]

Re: Trade Nichols for a solid RB?

I think you're right, there was a reason. I'm just not sure it's the reason you think it is. Usually the simplest answer is the best. In this case it would be the ratio.

If they thought that they could get the same "production" from a NI back in Messam, then Whitlock and Porter become nothing more than spare parts. I know that you have enough experience to understand the mindset that most starting backs have. They don't like being used sparingly, because its rare they can be effective in that capacity.

Not to mention that I think Messam was a pet project for Reed.

Possibly, but something needed to open the door in my mind. Do you rush for all those big games and then lose your spot in the pecking order to an unproven guy without having let off the gas or giving the coaches a reason to doubt? What we're talking about, to some degree is a chicken or egg scenario.

The part I can't rationalize if it were strictly, or even mostly, a ratio consideration is why his body of work wouldn't have landed him more opportunities with other teams. There would seem to be evidence that there was something that stuck with him reputationally after his release in Edmonton.

[cmbuk]

Re: Trade Nichols for a solid RB?

I think he may have had some concussion issues

That would explain a lot..

[Opus]

Re: Trade Nichols for a solid RB?

Possibly, but something needed to open the door in my mind. Do you rush for all those big games and then lose your spot in the pecking order to an unproven guy without having let off the gas or giving the coaches a reason to doubt? What we're talking about, to some degree is a chicken or egg scenario.

The part I can't rationalize if it were strictly, or even mostly, a ratio consideration is why his body of work wouldn't have landed him more opportunities with other teams. There would seem to be evidence that there was something that stuck with him reputationally after his release in Edmonton.

There wasn't a lot of teams looking for import backs at the time, and even at the best it is an odd position in this league in where teams usually stick with their own guys.

Whitlock was never given a shot elsewhere either, and I don't think anyone could question his off field attitude or his cache on field.

[GreatWhiteNorth]

Re: Trade Nichols for a solid RB?

There wasn't a lot of teams looking for import backs at the time, and even at the best it is an odd position in this league in where teams usually stick with their own guys.

Whitlock was never given a shot elsewhere either, and I don't think anyone could question his off field attitude or his cache on field.

So at best he wasn't seen as a big upgrade over other import backs in the league. Here we are though, three years later with people lamenting his release as if he were the one that got away. It's almost as if he had lost out to Blake Ezor.

[Opus]

Re: Trade Nichols for a solid RB?

So at best he wasn't seen as a big upgrade over other import backs in the league. Here we are though, three years later with people lamenting his release as if he were the one that got away. It's almost as if he had lost out to Blake Ezor.

I think it's more a matter of what we have had in the meantime, and being somewhat disgruntled in that regard. Maybe White will turn out alright, but I don't think anyone is happy with Charles as the answer there.

[GreatWhiteNorth]

Re: Trade Nichols for a solid RB?

I think it's more a matter of what we have had in the meantime, and being somewhat disgruntled in that regard. Maybe White will turn out alright, but I don't think anyone is happy with Charles as the answer there.

And that's why I feel Porter is romanticized and made out to be more than he was based on only what was shown in game action during that stretch. I'm sure the comments in past threads will show I was as happy with his performance as anyone, but given that Messam went on to put up a top Canadian season and earn an NFL shot, it does reinforce the decision at the time. The lack of resume since then, IMO, tends to reinforce the decision since then.

[Opus]

Re: Trade Nichols for a solid RB?

And that's why I feel Porter is romanticized and made out to be more than he was based on only what was shown in game action during that stretch. I'm sure the comments in past threads will show I was as happy with his performance as anyone, but given that Messam went on to put up a top Canadian season and earn an NFL shot, it does reinforce the decision at the time. The lack of resume since then, IMO, tends to reinforce the decision since then.

Remember though that even thought they said they were going NI, the first thing done on e Whitlock and Porter were released was sign another import back.

It becomes a very good focal point of the mismanagement we were under. Once that is a given, it becomes almost I possible to defend the decision.

[GreatWhiteNorth]

Re: Trade Nichols for a solid RB?

Remember though that even thought they said they were going NI, the first thing done on e Whitlock and Porter were released was sign another import back.

It becomes a very good focal point of the mismanagement we were under. Once that is a given, it becomes almost I possible to defend the decision.

Two separate issues imo.

A) Was Daniel Porter the one that slipped through our fingers?

B) We're they right to try and go NI at the position or in their execution of that?

With regard to A): there was a demonstrated interest in having an import RB on the roster for depth, but there was not interest in Porter. If this were a rational decision, made with the intent of winning (short/med/long-term) - and here is where we disagree I think, then there was a reason or reasons based on information visible to insiders and not fans. That he never landed anywhere that gave him a chance seems to back up that there was something, whether concussion concerns, intangibles or otherwise, that had decision makers looking beyond his positive performance and cheap price tag.

With the GM in place at the time, we know the willingness to hoarders players on the IR, and by not keeping Porter despite the roster usage not likely being a huge part of the decision, it just heightens my belief that there were unstated/undisclosed reasons why the move was made.

[Opus]

Re: Trade Nichols for a solid RB?

You're thinking about it as if we were running things in a rational manner. While there may have been concussion issues with Porter, we don't know when they became relevant. We also know that those issues were not present with Whitlock.

What we do know is that our former GM had deals in place with agent buddies to give out roster spots.

In that light both AW and DP can become disposable. That I can believe.

[GreatWhiteNorth]

Re: Trade Nichols for a solid RB?

You're thinking about it as if we were running things in a rational manner. While there may have been concussion issues with Porter, we don't know when they became relevant. We also know that those issues were not present with Whitlock.

What we do know is that our former GM had deals in place with agent buddies to give out roster spots.

In that light both AW and DP can become disposable. That I can believe.

That presumes either collusion or similar irrationality from other GMs. If not, there were likely 6 other starting jobs and 10 other roster/practice roster spots around the league, which ultimately had other guys chosen for them.

I find it easier to believe that we had rational reasons for the release(s), rather than believing that the other GMs were largely irrational.

[Opus]

Re: Trade Nichols for a solid RB?

We will have to agree to disagree on this one my friend. There has always been a certain level of collusion between the GMs in this league IMO.

Further to that, by similar logic Kerry Joseph would have never taken a roster spot here for 3 years after he spent a year away from the game. There were certainly plenty of teams who could have used a QB somewhere on their roster, but it took Reed and Sitterhands to stick us with him.