Hawkpilot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2014
- Messages
- 2,563
- Likes
- 4,438
To expand the implications of what this means for boosters/Currie...
Currie was content, either by design (likely) or by negligence (unlikely), to continue letting Jones coach through the season. For what reason, who knows. The boosters felt the time was right for a change and decided to force the issue. The Kendrick injury provided the right opportunity for them to push Currie into action, or accept the inevitable consequences of inaction.
Put into military terms, a commander sees a position on the battlefield that could give them an advantage. But it's not the main objective of the fight. Now, instead of sending in troops to occupy said position, they may perform a feint that forces the opposing commander to commit his own troops to defending it. Which leaves the opposing force potentially weak in another area where your main attack is coming from and the objective you wanted in the first place. But forcing the opposing commander to commit their reserves to the position you didn't want, the opposing commander is now weaker overall. He has no reserves to commit to the battle and will have to voluntarily give ground or be defeated.
Put into Currie/booster terms, I take it you are implying the boosters have used this situation to force Currie to defending an area he does not want to and it weakens him in other areas they wanted to begin with. Hence, Currie now has to commit on Jones by firing (if true) which leaves the only option to him what the boosters wanted in the first place.
Thanks for keeping me up, Beaver.
Love the fient. Also commits resources to the Kendrick situation weakening the main objective. GV are you really Schwarzkopf...not trying to dox u
