This thread is silly. People going by the few game samples claiming someone should get more playing time. It's almost as if people have never played a competitive sport with a competent coach.
1. Coaches spend a hell of a lot more time around players, watching them perform, watching them put in work in practice and camp. In fact, game-time is a tiny fraction of the time coaches get to watch players compared to practice and offseason workouts.
2. The idea of the Allen Iverson-type "gamer" is pretty much a fantasy. If a guy practices like crap, it's an almost certainty that he'll be crap on gameday.
3. In the event that #2 actually does exist, rewarding a guy with playing time that dogs it in practice because he's marginally better than guys busting their ass at practice is a great way to make other people dog it at practice.
A good coach pushes a player to the best version of themselves. If they don't take care of their business but are simply more talented than someone else that works their ass off, you still have to send that message to that player and to the team that poor effort in practice, being late to meetings, etc. isn't acceptable. Otherwise you're going to develop a **** program. It's like people ******** and moaning about Beverly starting over Lard. Clearly Lard was a better player, but he didn't do what was asked of him and EVERYBODY ELSE in practice, at meetings, in the classroom, etc. Long-term for your program you have to send that message. Whether that sort of thing relates to Lewis, I have no idea. But a fan watching a few minutes of playing time and suggesting he's "earned" minutes over guys like Jackson or Grill have no idea what they are talking about.
