LinderFournette Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 18 hours ago, Speedyg said: He's the pretty much the main thing that makes sense Murray imo also makes sense but i csnt see coughlin liking him cuz size Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LinderFournette Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 18 hours ago, BayRaider said: Really? Seems like the NFL hates Fournette, maybe not Jag fans I suppose. i dont hate fournette but i really think hes overated as hell and i didnt want him at 4 then(i wanted Jon allen, Mahomes, watson) cuz i mean Allen seemed like BPA and the qbs cuz well bortles dont do much well outside of running. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugboat Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 On 23/02/2019 at 5:55 PM, LinderFournette said: tyrell williams isnt an average wr. I did forget about him, but he's still a pretty darn average WR. Outside of one anomalous year, he's been what...a ~40 catch, 600-700 yard guy in a good situation with a really good ball-distributing QB? Like last year, 41 receptions puts him in the ~90s range, and 653 yds puts him ~60 ballpark. That's a pretty darn "average" #2ish WR imo. But with the market shortage...you're going to be paying him like that 1000 yard+ season anomaly. Like paying Hurns off that one great season he had...after he puts up two more after that to affirm that he's indeed actually a pretty average-ish receiver. Meanwhile, we're acting like Jesse James isn't gonna be "worth it" because he's only had a career high of...pretty much exactly what Williams has had for receptions the last couple years? As a TE who does more than just...be a receiver. I just don't really dig the idea of spending even "average receiver" money on more guys when we already have at least 3 very average dudes at the position, maybe even 4 if Chark can take a step forward to justify his high draft selection. We need a stud, a #1 target to really upgrade. Our 2/3/4 WRs are more than good enough...if you can get the right guy in front of them. But you can't just throw 5 number 2/3 receivers out there at once to really showcase that sort of quantity over quality at the position. At least when it comes to TE...we have jack squat. Even an "average" #1b or #2ish TE like Jesse James immediately slots in at the very top of our depth chart at the position. And isn't going to be dethroned anytime soon, unless we grab like TJ Hockenson or something, extremely high in the draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugboat Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 On 23/02/2019 at 8:15 PM, BayRaider said: Obv Giants got first dibs on a QB. Would you rather give us a 3rd and 6th according to value chart to swap 4 and 7 or give us Leonard Fournette straight up to swap? I really think Fournette could benefit from change of scenery. I'd rather do a 3rd and 6th rounder to move up...if that got us Haskins. I don't think you're finding a better back than Fournette with a 3rd round pick. I think people who believe that, are having a serious kneejerk reaction to his sophomore season and ignoring the absolute horse he was for us as a rookie. But honestly...i wouldn't be mad if they just just gave up Fournette to move up and get Haskins either. That'd be entirely reasonable and justifiable. Especially since getting a rookie deal QB instead of big game hunting in FA would probably allow them to keep some more guys and honestly probably even take a good shot on a FA RB who is at least a serviceable tandem guy to pair with a rookie. I'd be pretty surprised if either of those deals actually got it done, if Haskins is still on the board there. Trading up for QBs is never cheap. But when it comes to Fournette...i'm not even sure he really needs a "change of scenery", so much as he just needs to be healthy, and he needs our offensive line to be healthy (which is true of any RB we might hand the ball to). Put a healthy Fournette behind a good OLine with a competent QB to take at least a little bit of pressure off him...and i think he's a potential Top-5 RB. Who knows if any of that will happen though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LinderFournette Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 14 hours ago, Tugboat said: I did forget about him, but he's still a pretty darn average WR. Outside of one anomalous year, he's been what...a ~40 catch, 600-700 yard guy in a good situation with a really good ball-distributing QB? Like last year, 41 receptions puts him in the ~90s range, and 653 yds puts him ~60 ballpark. That's a pretty darn "average" #2ish WR imo. But with the market shortage...you're going to be paying him like that 1000 yard+ season anomaly. Like paying Hurns off that one great season he had...after he puts up two more after that to affirm that he's indeed actually a pretty average-ish receiver. Meanwhile, we're acting like Jesse James isn't gonna be "worth it" because he's only had a career high of...pretty much exactly what Williams has had for receptions the last couple years? As a TE who does more than just...be a receiver. I just don't really dig the idea of spending even "average receiver" money on more guys when we already have at least 3 very average dudes at the position, maybe even 4 if Chark can take a step forward to justify his high draft selection. We need a stud, a #1 target to really upgrade. Our 2/3/4 WRs are more than good enough...if you can get the right guy in front of them. But you can't just throw 5 number 2/3 receivers out there at once to really showcase that sort of quantity over quality at the position. At least when it comes to TE...we have jack squat. Even an "average" #1b or #2ish TE like Jesse James immediately slots in at the very top of our depth chart at the position. And isn't going to be dethroned anytime soon, unless we grab like TJ Hockenson or something, extremely high in the draft. hes got plenty of upside still because he has size and speed and while he had a good distrubuting qb whos to say that having some of those other recieving options limited his oppurtunities. its certainly no worse then giving moncrief 9 million last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugboat Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 3 hours ago, LinderFournette said: hes got plenty of upside still because he has size and speed and while he had a good distrubuting qb whos to say that having some of those other recieving options limited his oppurtunities. its certainly no worse then giving moncrief 9 million last year. It wouldn't be worse than the Moncrief deal, no. But the Moncrief deal wasn't good. And at least was just a 1-year prove it deal. Doubt Williams is getting a 1-year prove it deal in this desperately starved WR free agent market. You're basically going to be committing to low-end #1 money on him for multiple years. I'd give that a firm pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedyg Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 Tyrell is a good height/speed combo guy, but the guy had Philip Rivers throwing to him too. I rather spend the money on a more proven guy like Tate if we are looking at upgrading our receiving core. We have enough guys with upside. What we need is someone we can rely on to move the chains and make big plays occasionally. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugboat Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 So the Eagles confirming that they won't be trying to pull a Tag and Trade with Foles. Now people can stop freaking out about having to not only pay him big $$$, but give up a pick as well. Still kinda icky about paying Nick Foles $20M+, but the advantage to that is clear, in that you're getting a QB who should be ready to step in more or less at his peak right now. And you could do it with all your draft picks intact, which means a lot of flexibility to go out and get him some weapons and supporting pieces. 4 picks in the first 3 rounds is potential to surround him with some good young prospective starting pieces to complement what should be a healthier OLine and returning top receiver in Lee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaguarCrazy2832 Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 I mean its a step in the right direction not having to trade a pick for Foles but I’m assuming the $ amt will still be crazy high Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Buzz Posted February 28, 2019 Author Share Posted February 28, 2019 Do it NYG. I wouldn't mind Foles but option 1a is Haskins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Buzz Posted February 28, 2019 Author Share Posted February 28, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugboat Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 2 hours ago, .Buzz said: Do it NYG. I wouldn't mind Foles but option 1a is Haskins. So weird that the Giants keep coming up with buzz around Foles. Like...they've already got an expensive guy who can sometimes not completely suck in just the right scheme, with Eli. They're going to cut him, eat $6M and change of dead money for the year...just to pay Foles a likely $20M plus to come in and be a fairly marginal upgrade? It just seems...weird to me. But who knows. If the Giants do sign Foles, watch Coughlin just bring in Eli here instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Buzz Posted February 28, 2019 Author Share Posted February 28, 2019 Missed this earlier somehow. I wish we knew whether this was being played out because there's actually truth/legs to it or because we hired DeFlippo and are a team people think just need average QB play to go back to being a legit contender. I'd be fine with Foles as I've stated, but I would very much prefer Haskins/Murray and possibly Lock as our route to take. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LinderFournette Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 8 hours ago, Tugboat said: So the Eagles confirming that they won't be trying to pull a Tag and Trade with Foles. Now people can stop freaking out about having to not only pay him big $$$, but give up a pick as well. Still kinda icky about paying Nick Foles $20M+, but the advantage to that is clear, in that you're getting a QB who should be ready to step in more or less at his peak right now. And you could do it with all your draft picks intact, which means a lot of flexibility to go out and get him some weapons and supporting pieces. 4 picks in the first 3 rounds is potential to surround him with some good young prospective starting pieces to complement what should be a healthier OLine and returning top receiver in Lee. r we sure that peak is any good considering hes only been good with doug pederson as his OC/HC compared his stint with the FIsher Rams. i see our offense closer to the the fisher rams then the eagles or chiefs style of offense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugboat Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 21 minutes ago, LinderFournette said: r we sure that peak is any good considering hes only been good with doug pederson as his OC/HC compared his stint with the FIsher Rams. i see our offense closer to the the fisher rams then the eagles or chiefs style of offense. He was good with Chip too. And our offense just hired a brand new Coordinator this year. Who literally worked with Foles while he was having success and winning a Super Bowl in Philly. I'd expect our offense to look pretty different this year, than the last couple years of retreads and in house promotions. Regardless of who they go with at QB. How badly Foles flopped with the Rams is definitely a concern. A pretty big one. But i at least hope we're not Fisher Rams bad. That Rams iteration also had absolutely nothing for good targets that fit Foles style. We saw the difference in what Fisher Jared Goff vs McVay Jared Goff looked like too. It's pretty startling. If we're going the Foles route, we have to go all-in on getting him the weapons he needs though. Our receiving corps right now WR/TE/RB combined...is trash. But if you get Foles as a FA...you've got 4 Top-100ish picks to spend on piece to help him get something done. Though it's once again, a real shame we don't still have ARob, who would probably be great with Foles. And instead, have Lee...who will probably suck with Foles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.