Jump to content

Vee-Rex

Members
  • Content Count

    189
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Vee-Rex

  1. 14 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

    Stefanski never had a good #3. Minnesota tried for years to find a #3 and were never able to. It’s more about what they had to work with, not necessarily on the personnel he likes. 
     

    If you don’t think Ruggs would have an immediate impact, I don’t know what to tell you. He has game breaking speed and plays like a WR 2x his size. Steve Smith clone. The HOF-caliber 89. 

    Stefanski's offense is about creating a marriage with the pass and run. The more receivers you have on the field, the less convincing you are to a defense that you may run the ball. This is why tight ends are valuable in his offense - they are the perfect marriage between run (blocking) and pass (receiving).

    That's why we signed Hooper for 11 million and will utilize him with Njoku. That's why we traded for a very talented FB who grades out extremely well and will get plenty of snaps. This IS the type of offense Stefanski likes running, man. I'm not opposed to looking for a 3rd receiver but it would be mind-boggling if we blew #10 on it. That's just not happening.

    • Like 6
  2. 6 hours ago, sdrawkcab321 said:

    Which is why he won’t be on the roster. Teams rarely carry someone whos just a returner. He can’t play WR. 150 pounds wouldn’t hold up and he hasn’t played it yet. 

    With the new CBA we can have 55 (instead of 53) players on the roster. 48 (instead of 46) players active. 

     

    A good returner can get a touchdown or two during the year, and lots of big yardage returns. That could very well be the difference in a game, which could impact the playoffs. We could be 9-7 instead of 8-8.

     

    Point is, if he's good, we would be idiots to cut him just because he's "only a returner". The Hilliard/Landry experiment as returners is hopefully over with.

    • Like 3
  3. Yeah, Hubbard's not worth the contract. Cut him and find someone serviceable at RG.

    We still have Wyatt Teller and Drew Forbes who can compete with any new additions. Draft a LT @ 10 and the o-line is looking much better.

    • Like 3
  4. 22 hours ago, bruceb said:

    Hahaha...talk about drawing conclusions.

    Look pal, if you want to see the Mayfield glass as half full, go right ahead.

    I am in a wait-and-see mode.

    I mean, that goes without saying. You'd be a complete idiot to want to move on from him after just one year, given the QB-hell we've been in for the last 20 years.

    What do you believe? Don't be on the fence ready to pounce on whatever side looks right when the time comes.

    • Like 1
  5. 4 minutes ago, Mind Character said:

    If Josh McDaniels is the clear best Head Coach candidate everyone makes him out to be why did the Panthers, Washington, Giants, and Cowboys hire a different coach.

    Could it be quite possibly that the information they gathered suggested he had issues of leadership?

    Passing on Stefanski makes sense due to his resume but passing on McDaniels "amazing resume" should tell people something.

    Well, the idea is that Josh will want more alignment with the front office, meaning he'd want his GM in place or someone he is close to and trusts. This is likely his last crack at a HC position and I'm sure he wants to put himself in the best position possible to succeed.

    That rules out the Panthers (Hurney), Giants (Gettleman), and Cowboys (Jones) who already have GMs in place.

    Only team that had a vacant GM opening was the Redskins who swiftly hired Rivera as their HC. I don't think those teams passing on McDaniels is any indication at all of the person McDaniels is, rather, they just weren't good fits at this point in time.

    • Like 1
  6. And for the record, I'm not blown away by ANY of the HC candidates this year. However, Josh McDaniels is a freaking offensive mastermind and game plans as good as any other person in the league. Unlike Freddie, he heavily invests time and energy into uncovering the opponents defensive weaknesses and designs his weekly scheme to exploiting them. This is even more noticeable during the playoffs.

    You don't know what type of offense New England would implement each week - sometimes it's a heavy dose of running, or intermediate/deep passing routes, or short/slashing routes. But it's all based on what the defense is most vulnerable to.

    When it comes to unlocking Baker's potential and developing him fully, JM is as good of a choice as anyone.

    • Like 3
  7. 1 hour ago, MWil23 said:

    McDaniels won’t accept a job unless he has GM control. That’s an absolute reality.

    You say this so absolutely and it's not necessarily true.

    If this was the case, then why was Josh McDaniels longing for an interview last year with us when there was 100% absolutely no way we would consider getting rid of Dorsey? Surely if this was true he wouldn't have been trying to come here, right? Albert Breer is the mouthpiece for JM and was basically indicating that JM loves Baker and was pining to interview for us last year.

    It's BS. While I'm sure JM would prefer GM control you can't sit there and say he WON'T take a job unless he has GM control.

  8. On 12/8/2019 at 8:39 PM, brownie man said:

     I think ima win it all

    idk how y’all let me get this team

     

    I honestly don't know how I ended up with:

    Tyreek Hill

    Michael Thomas

    Julian Edelman

    Keenan Allen

    Jarvis Landry

    as my receivers and Lindsay, Mack, and Drake as my RBs.

    I feel like once the top RBs left the board people were scrambling trying to pick up meh RBs while I was picking off elite receivers lol.

  9. On 9/13/2019 at 10:51 PM, pnies20 said:

    This is going to be very unpopular but I wish we didn’t trade for Beckham.

    I wish we kept peppers, drafted hockenson somehow and rolled with the WR we had...

    Not to bust you but... do you still feel this way?

    Honestly, if not for OBJ's big plays I wonder if we could've lost that game.

    He's arguably the most talented receiver in the league - we'll NEED him against the top-tier defenses and players if we're looking to make the playoffs and go beyond. Sometimes play-calling alone just isn't enough and sheer talent bridges the gap in the middle of games.

  10. 2 minutes ago, NJC33 said:

    Yup. We're down our starting QB,WR,TE,DL, and 3 LBs for a team who isn't overly talented and top heavy (no depth) to begin with. Browns obviously have the talent, but this game shouldn't this close given the circumstances 

    Offense still trying to find its identity. I wouldn't be mad with a 32-6 victory (current pace). Maybe by mid year they will be firing on all cylinders. The potential/flash is definitely there.

  11. 1 minute ago, oldman9er said:

    What they showed from that Trubisky sack was a bad call. 

    What they showed from that Simieon sack was a just call. MG landed completely on him, and knowing full well the ball was already out. 

    Eh, it wasn't a jerk move. Chill out.

×
×
  • Create New...