Can someone explain the logic of sitting players that fumble?

[BillsFan130]

I prefer positive reinforcement myself instead of punishment myself.

 

As a head coach, (leader) I would have went to Singletary and said something positive/encouraging while also stressing the importance of protecting the football, and would have put him right back into the game.

[The Wiz]

You don't do dat. dat bad. you go to the box and 2 minutes by yourself and you feel shame.... and den you go free.

Edited November 18, 2019 by The Wiz

[Dablitzkrieg]

2 hours ago, Phil The Thrill said:

I know that this is Belichick’s philosophy - you fumble the ball, you go to the bench.  
 

I can understand this, if it’s a backup or a marginal player losing the ball.  But from everything that I’ve read, for most players, fumbles are random.  Some players are just prone to fumble the ball given their running style, but others fumble for random reasons.  Bad luck or great timing by the defense.  

 

Often times it’s not concentration penalties like false starts/personal fouls or technique issues.   So as long as it’s not a technique or focus issue, if you sit a player as a punishment, how will stop him from fumbling again?
 

I get that Singletary can’t fumble the football but he is far and away the best player on the team.  When Gore was in the game after the 2nd fumble, there was one run designed off tackle where there was a huge gap in the middle of the field.  I’m certain that Singletary cuts it back and pops a big run but Gore just hurts the corner and was taken down for a 1 yard gain.

 

I guess I get the message that turning the call over is not ok - but sitting a player like Singletary just seems the old “cutting off your nose, to spite your face” mentality.  
 

Can someone tell me what sitting Singletary accomplishes?

Well, logically speaking, to avoid fumbles.

[Phil The Thrill]

1 minute ago, Dablitzkrieg said:

Well, logically speaking, to avoid fumbles.

Again, that is like benching a kicker who misses a field goal.  He’s not trying to miss that kick - what’s the point?

 

Seems to me that situations like today just end up hurting the offense by benching a better a better player, over some outdated principle

27 minutes ago, dneveu said:

 

The better player doesn't put the ball on the turf in a 2 score game. 

Sure but what are the chances that said, player with no history of fumbling, puts the ball on the turf again?

 

To me it doesn’t make sense

[tcampbell104]

2 hours ago, Phil The Thrill said:

I would have to go back to the play to watch.  I would understand if it was a player who is know for fumbling, but the offense sputtered with Gore in backfield and Motor on the bench.  
 

I think on this case, it was a mistake.  

some times i dont think it is totally punishment but to let the guy cool down and think about what he is doing

[LABILLBACKER]

2 hours ago, Phil The Thrill said:

I know that this is Belichick’s philosophy - you fumble the ball, you go to the bench.  
 

I can understand this, if it’s a backup or a marginal player losing the ball.  But from everything that I’ve read, for most players, fumbles are random.  Some players are just prone to fumble the ball given their running style, but others fumble for random reasons.  Bad luck or great timing by the defense.  

 

Often times it’s not concentration penalties like false starts/personal fouls or technique issues.   So as long as it’s not a technique or focus issue, if you sit a player as a punishment, how will stop him from fumbling again?
 

I get that Singletary can’t fumble the football but he is far and away the best player on the team.  When Gore was in the game after the 2nd fumble, there was one run designed off tackle where there was a huge gap in the middle of the field.  I’m certain that Singletary cuts it back and pops a big run but Gore just hurts the corner and was taken down for a 1 yard gain.

 

I guess I get the message that turning the call over is not ok - but sitting a player like Singletary just seems the old “cutting off your nose, to spite your face” mentality.  
 

Can someone tell me what sitting Singletary accomplishes?

I know the exact play you're talking about.  He could've cut back right but continued left right into 2 defenders. I'm not happy about Motor's 2 fumbles today. But his cut back abilities are far better than Frank's. 

[Chandemonium]

If Singletary did everything right from a ball security standpoint and both fumbles were just the result of great defensive plays to rip the ball out I might agree with the OP, but they were self inflicted. Those types of fumbles can’t happen at this level and deserve some time on the pine to think about ball security and calm the nerves a bit. 

Edited November 18, 2019 by Chandemonium

[Rochesterfan]

1 hour ago, BillsFan130 said:

I prefer positive reinforcement myself instead of punishment myself.

 

As a head coach, (leader) I would have went to Singletary and said something positive/encouraging while also stressing the importance of protecting the football, and would have put him right back into the game.

 

So when McDermott did that after fumble #1 and then fumble #2 occurs (like today) - then what?  More encouragement and let him go right out for fumble #3?
 

At some point - you take him out for a few plays/series and let the veteran with no ball security issues ensure that you do not fumble the game away.

 

Why is it that most successful coaches like Belichek and Reid bench these guys for a few series, but when McDermott does it - well he should not do that.  

52 minutes ago, Phil The Thrill said:

Again, that is like benching a kicker who misses a field goal.  He’s not trying to miss that kick - what’s the point?

 

Seems to me that situations like today just end up hurting the offense by benching a better a better player, over some outdated principle

Sure but what are the chances that said, player with no history of fumbling, puts the ball on the turf again?

 

To me it doesn’t make sense

 

So if a kicker misses 2 kicks (ala 2 fumbles) you don’t think that plays into a coaches decision to go for it more on 4th down or go for 2.  We watched first hand in Tennessee how a stubborn coach kept going back to a kicker having issues.  That coach cost his team a chance at a win because he didn’t bench his kicker.
 

Why would it not be the same for a guy fumbling.  Suddenly all he is thinking about is not fumbling and he messes up assignments or he pushes it out his mind and fumbles again.

 

Give him a break and let someone else take on the load for a bit.

Edited November 18, 2019 by Rochesterfan

[djp14150]

3 hours ago, Phil The Thrill said:

But if it’s random and not a result of poor technique , what good is that going to do?  

 

 

More res often than not fumbles are a result of ball protection negligence

 

there areforced fumblesthat you can’t blame the player who fumbled.

 

if theyaretruely random the player fumble rate per carry should be the same.

 

 

 

 

[1ManRaid]

3 hours ago, Phil The Thrill said:

 

I get that Singletary can’t fumble the football but he is far and away the best player on the team. 

Now I am a big fan of Devin, but that's quite the reach.  FAR AND AWAY better than White and others?

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

1 hour ago, Phil The Thrill said:

Again, that is like benching a kicker who misses a field goal.  He’s not trying to miss that kick - what’s the point?

 

Seems to me that situations like today just end up hurting the offense by benching a better a better player, over some outdated principle

Sure but what are the chances that said, player with no history of fumbling, puts the ball on the turf again?

 

To me it doesn’t make sense

Would it be better if coach had him take a lap?

[ganesh]

4 hours ago, xsoldier54 said:

It gives them time to think about not fumbling the next time.  Lets them know that it NOT acceptable under any circumstances.  It's standard practice.  If you fumble the football you ain't gonna play much.  Period. 

I think the OP's question is  "Why it is a standard practice"....I agree with him that given that Singletary was playing much better than Gore, it would have been prudent to have him on the field

[Phil The Thrill]

11 hours ago, ganesh said:

I think the OP's question is  "Why it is a standard practice"....I agree with him that given that Singletary was playing much better than Gore, it would have been prudent to have him on the field

I don’t think it was any surprise that while Singletary was benched the first two

series, the Bills offense completely stalled.  It was the end of the game and you can argue that they were being safe but having Gore in place of Singletary hurt the team.  I guess I don’t understand why

11 hours ago, dneveu said:

Would it be better if coach had him take a lap?

Not if it means sitting him in favor of a player who is a clear downgrade.

 

I guess given the circumstances of the game, it wasn’t the worst thing.  But if this was a 7 game at the time of the fumble, I think it would be a bad call to have Motor on the sidelines 

[Matt_In_NH]

Turnover directly lead to losses, it is not acceptable for a players style to lead to more fumbles than another players.  All players need to have a style that minimizes fumbles.  It is understood that fumbles are part of the game but if you are being sloppy you should not have the ball.   I think that is the thought.  You could say should this apply to Josh Allen but the QB position is different than the RB.   RB's cannot be fumbling machines, it removes all the potential value of having them out there.

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

17 minutes ago, Phil The Thrill said:

I don’t think it was any surprise that while Singletary was benched the first two

series, the Bills offense completely stalled.  It was the end of the game and you can argue that they were being safe but having Gore in place of Singletary hurt the team.  I guess I don’t understand why

Not if it means sitting him in favor of a player who is a clear downgrade.

 

I guess given the circumstances of the game, it wasn’t the worst thing.  But if this was a 7 game at the time of the fumble, I think it would be a bad call to have Motor on the sidelines 

 

You also have to look at it like - pulling a goalie almost.  Can't let it snowball into something worse psychologically.

[DrDawkinstein]

16 hours ago, Phil The Thrill said:

Can someone tell me what sitting Singletary accomplishes?

 

Accountability. There really is no excuse for fumbling.

 

It is not the coaches who are cutting off our nose to spite our face, it is the player's fault and responsibility. Yeah, it would have been nice to have Singeltary back out there, but he earned the (short term) benching, and the coaches stuck to their word.

 

Hold onto the ball.

[Phil The Thrill]

39 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Accountability. There really is no excuse for fumbling.

 

It is not the coaches who are cutting off our nose to spite our face, it is the player's fault and responsibility. Yeah, it would have been nice to have Singeltary back out there, but he earned the (short term) benching, and the coaches stuck to their word.

 

Hold onto the ball.

 

 

What good is accountability if a player’s absence hurts the team?

 

I think in MOST cases fumbling is akin to the perfect storm type of deal.  Most players only fumble a few times during the year and its a fluke a lot of the time.

 

It just seems like a tired old NFL trope that hurts the team more than it does help

 

52 minutes ago, dneveu said:

 

You also have to look at it like - pulling a goalie almost.  Can't let it snowball into something worse psychologically.

Well I guess this would make a little more sense than pulling a player for disciplinary reasons like many on here support