Quote Originally Posted by gilthethrill View Post
Sure Dukes deserved the bulk of the playing time down the stretch….but 4 snaps for Scott? Not exactly a strong endorsement. I agree the organization has had its offseason disrupted, but there was plenty of time to get the D side of the staff resolved prior to that coming out.
Gil, if they had played Scott for, say, half of a game, and then Dukes got forced into a playoff game due to injury and crapped the bed, we'd all be second-guessing their personnel deployment down the stretch. Hell, we all second-guessed their personnel deployment over the last six games anyway. I was among those who wanted to see Scott play some during that run of meaningless games. But not playing him was defensible IMO. How many snaps did Argos give Zach Collaros in 2012? One quarter, 11 passes, and only after Trevor Harris played in two games and threw 19 passes. Did that mean they weren't giving a strong endorsement to Collaros? And regardless of all this, my main point is that -- especially in the situation we're in, with the starter's status uncertain -- I'd far rather have two guys who have at least been in the system for a year and been exposed to Cdn football than jettison one of them in favour of a kid fresh out of the U.S. Now if they were to sign Taylor Cornelius, I'd be much more open to cutting Scott.