Jump to content

Superbowl Mock 22


Madmike90

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Madmike90 said:

Just because you are on the field does not mean you have been given a chance...the percentage of targets to snaps is way higher for Horsted than Holtz.

That’s because Horsted has receiver skills and Holtz is as an H-Back/Blocking TE. I think Horsted has a far more straightforward path to making the roster in the new offensive scheme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Madmike90 said:

Just because you are on the field does not mean you have been given a chance...the percentage of targets to snaps is way higher for Horsted than Holtz.

His blocking is bad too.  It was decent and even good when he first arrived.  But went downhill, like a lot of Bears players.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Madmike90 said:

I don't think Holtz is any better or any worse than most 53rd man on an NFL roster...most importantly he is versatile and plays on teams.

Im guessing youre just trying to just add him back at a vet minimum? Wouldnt make a difference if that the option, but definitely dont Tag him, not worth that money for a "53rd man" 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, abstract_thought said:

That’s because Horsted has receiver skills and Holtz is as an H-Back/Blocking TE. I think Horsted has a far more straightforward path to making the roster in the new offensive scheme.

I wouldn't be so sure on that...I know when Getsy was an Mississippi they used an H-Back a fair amount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Madmike90 said:

I wouldn't be so sure on that...I know when Getsy was an Mississippi they used an H-Back a fair amount.

With that in mind, and the desire to have a "Shanahan like" offense that relies so much on the Juszczyk role. Could a higher tier H-Back be on the offensive wish list this offseason?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said:

With that in mind, and the desire to have a "Shanahan like" offense that relies so much on the Juszczyk role. Could a higher tier H-Back be on the offensive wish list this offseason?

No doubt it could be...I am just not sure we have the resources for it and from the GB side of things they don't really use that position much.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Madmike90 said:

Again I don't think he is much worse or better than most bottom of the roster H-backs.

Maybe that is true, but you know what you have in Holtz is bad so you go with someone else who might be or become good. 

We'll see.   It's new people.   Everyone gets a relatively fresh start.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

Maybe that is true, but you know what you have in Holtz is bad so you go with someone else who might be or become good. 

We'll see.   It's new people.   Everyone gets a relatively fresh start.  

 

 

The issue with that thinking is a "bad" as Holtz is he has been around this team for years...you replace him with a complete unknown and you really don't know what you have...

Again Holtz isn't going to win or lose us anything next year he is just a versatile guy who we know is at least a pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Madmike90 said:

The issue with that thinking is a "bad" as Holtz is he has been around this team for years...you replace him with a complete unknown and you really don't know what you have...

Again Holtz isn't going to win or lose us anything next year he is just a versatile guy who we know is at least a pro.

I don’t disagree, but Holtz adds zero to the offense even in a reserve role, so to justify keeping him IMO he’d have to be a stalwart on ST, and he’s not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

I don’t disagree, but Holtz adds zero to the offense even in a reserve role, so to justify keeping him IMO he’d have to be a stalwart on ST, and he’s not. 

I never thought Holtz would create this much debate 😂...

I don't think he offers a lot but I think he could offer more in this scheme than he did in the last.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Madmike90 said:

I never thought Holtz would create this much debate 😂...

I don't think he offers a lot but I think he could offer more in this scheme than he did in the last.

I want to argue about him too!!!

 

If rather keep Bars as a blocker. Even if he is told to get down to 280 pounds then he at least is a cheap body that is better than Holtz for the run game, and just as nonexistant in the pass game. 😁

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Madmike90 said:

The issue with that thinking is a "bad" as Holtz is he has been around this team for years...you replace him with a complete unknown and you really don't know what you have...

Again Holtz isn't going to win or lose us anything next year he is just a versatile guy who we know is at least a pro.

That is not winning thinking.  

The bottom of roster matters.   The practice squad matters.   Details matter.   How you practice matters.   How you develop those guys matters.   

Are you going to be satisfied with Holtz who does almost nothing for you?  You should always shifting and searching for guys to emerge and be difference makers. 

I understand you have to fill out bottom of your roster with guys that can actually make plays on special teams, but that being said it is possible to do both.   

I don't have to tell you lots of unknowns at bottom of rosters and/or practice squads suddenly emerge as great.   James Harrison, Jason Peters, Antonio Gates, Wes Welker, John Randle, Kurt Warner and on and on.

A lot of those guys were on teams and booted off because way teams practiced and evaluated they didn't see their talent or potential.   Details didn't matter - they just wanted to keep their Holtz's because those shoes were comfortable.  

And it doesn't have to be an amazing player like one of those guys.  Those are extreme examples.    Lots of guys just turn into good or adequate starters.   Much of league is like that.   And how many guys could have been great and never got the opportunity?   We'll never know.    A lot of those guys above could have given up.   

You never find Antonio Gates, Kurt Warner or James Harrison unless you make room for them.  Unless you move dead or stagnate weight out and then you actually practice in a way were those guys have opportunity to shine on occasion.   Where coaches actually pour teaching into bottom of roster.    

Holtz is not a good or even adequate starter and never will be.   He is a liability.   So what purpose does it serve to keep him?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, dll2000 said:

Holtz is not a good or even adequate starter and never will be.   He is a liability.   So what purpose does it serve to keep him?

I don’t think he’s a liability, but he’s not an asset of consequence either, which has me well in line with you on that last part. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, dll2000 said:

That is not winning thinking.  

The bottom of roster matters.   The practice squad matters.   Details matter.   How you practice matters.   How you develop those guys matters.   

Are you going to be satisfied with Holtz who does almost nothing for you?  You should always shifting and searching for guys to emerge and be difference makers. 

I understand you have to fill out bottom of your roster with guys that can actually make plays on special teams, but that being said it is possible to do both.   

I don't have to tell you lots of unknowns at bottom of rosters and/or practice squads suddenly emerge as great.   James Harrison, Jason Peters, Antonio Gates, Wes Welker, John Randle, Kurt Warner and on and on.

A lot of those guys were on teams and booted off because way teams practiced and evaluated they didn't see their talent or potential.   Details didn't matter - they just wanted to keep their Holtz's because those shoes were comfortable.  

And it doesn't have to be an amazing player like one of those guys.  Those are extreme examples.    Lots of guys just turn into good or adequate starters.   Much of league is like that.   And how many guys could have been great and never got the opportunity?   We'll never know.    A lot of those guys above could have given up.   

You never find Antonio Gates, Kurt Warner or James Harrison unless you make room for them.  Unless you move dead or stagnate weight out and then you actually practice in a way were those guys have opportunity to shine on occasion.   Where coaches actually pour teaching into bottom of roster.    

Holtz is not a good or even adequate starter and never will be.   He is a liability.   So what purpose does it serve to keep him?

I do get the thinking of just adding as many new guys and taking our chances to hit on someone that can help us more...difficult to do though as we have seen from the fact it has been ages since we have truly developed nothing into something...I think we can all say he isn't that good but we are on the outside looking in and he has survived the last 3 years here so he must offer something inside that building...again I would love to see competition brought in but I don't think he is such a huge liability that he can't make this roster as a bottom end player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...