I know, and we've been there before. When you have more than one promising prospect for an opening and consistent playing time is essential for development, then the decision who gets first and more consistent runway is already a decision at the cost of the prospects who have to wait on the runway. That's been my beef all along. I don't care either who wins it, that's why I kept harping they better be right, because if prospect A blocks prospect B and prospect A fails, that can have a negative trickle down effect. See our OF decisions.
For SS, if Arias fails and blocks Rocchio out of his chance, this increases the chances Rocchio fails too, because he either doesn't get a lengthy runway himself or the decision on him gets rushed.
My point all along has been: pecking order matters... Like a fucking lot. Both are risks? Cool. But why go with risk A over B and why for so fucking long? That's not even only Arias vs Rocchio. This decision has already cost Freeman's prospects.
Yes, my opinion is that they've chosen the wrong one, I've been vocal about that too. Not because I don't see Arias' talent, but because I believe he'll take years to "maybe" get there and fully flourish. I hope I'm wrong because I want to see the Guards winning in April and May too. That's why I keep saying that they better have this right M, because Arias is their no1 guy. If he fails, he probably failed a couple of others in the process and everyone coming after him starts off a step behind.
Arias got the clean sheet, the red carpet and that's the decision I have a problem with.
Sure, every prospect is a risk, but that's just scout double speak to hide a conscious decision. I'm sorry Bimbo, but you've placed your bet too. It's like you say you like two girls and then propose to one of them and see how it goes. If it fails you can always say you liked them both. Second girl is gone though.