dougthonus wrote:Take any skill in the world you want to learn that is a competitive skill. Do you think you will get better practicing 2 hours a week with no or minimal competition or 4 hours a week with and full competition. This isn't differential equations here, this is plain old common sense about how people learn things and it applies to literally anything you want to learn. I can't think of a single thing I learned way better by watching someone else do it than by practicing and doing it myself. The idea is simply absurd on the surface.
This is a simplistic way of thinking about things.
First of all, the decision on when to start Fields affects more than just Fields, it affects the whole team. If it is true that Dalton is noticeably better than FIelds right now, then starting Fields sends a message to the rest of the team that this season is basically meaningless for them. Now maybe in the grand scheme of things, it's still the right decision (especially considering the Bears aren't going to win anyway even with Dalton starting). But it's a factor the coach has to consider when he stands in front of his team every day and tries convincing them to fight for wins. Beyond that, again, if Dalton is the better player now, that likely means the other offensive players are going to play worse, which for soon-to-be free agents might mean they will make less money. Defensive players will likely play worse too since they'll be spending more time on the field, which increases their risk of injury, which could seriously impact their next contracts.
Long story short, the decision on Fields isn't limited to him only. It has fallout effects on the rest of the franchise.
Second, even if you just focus on Fields, the premise that he will automatically be better if he starts right away is just not true. You attempt to liken the situation to any other type of endeavor, but even that falls short. Let's take for example a lawyer coming right out of law school. Would it necessarily benefit him if his employer had him single handedly try a massive lawsuit in front of a jury, despite him clearly being ill-prepared and destined for embarrassing failure? No. Sure it
might benefit him in the long run. But the experience could also scar him psychologically (especially if the trial loss is publicized and tarnishes his reputation). It might also teach him bad habits that he never shakes. It might even make him feel entitled to always having big cases since he was undeservedly gifted one right out of the gate and therefore causes him to put in less effort.
All these potential considerations apply to Gase's decision to start Fields. In addition, football carries the unique potential of injury. If Fields is truly not ready to play at a professional level, that likely means he isn't able to accurately and efficiently read defenses, in which case he would be more susceptible to getting hit, which would increase his risk of injury. This risk is further compounded if the coach knows his offensive line isn't good.
I mean, today's game basically proved all these potentials could come to fruition. What exactly did Fields learning getting sacked 8 times? What exactly did he learn completing 6 passes for 68 yards and rushing for 12? Maybe this will help him. But maybe it won't. And even if it were to help him, would it have been worth it if Fields got seriously injured?
It's just not nearly as simple as you make it seem. Today proved that.