Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Our Roster -- Players We Feel Good About (Part 1 - Offense)**


SetfreexX
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

From Person:

Is Brady Christensen bound to be an OG or do you see Matt Rhule giving him a shot at LT? I thought he showed some good things during the few games when he was lined at that position. Thanks. — Guillaume G.

Rhule and Fitterer both said nice things about Christensen and left open the possibility that last year’s third-round pick could be the left tackle of the future. But they also made sure to point out Christensen’s versatility, with Rhule saying he’s confident Christensen will start … somewhere. But given what we’ve heard from Rhule previously about Christensen’s arm length and the fact that this is a draft loaded with talent at the tackle position, I’d bet they draft a tackle high and slide Christensen inside to guard.

Every time I hear about BC I just get annoyed all over again. Year 3 and we're still looking for a left tackle. I don't see how we are different or better off from the last regime. The same baffling negligence remains.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, frankw said:

Every time I hear about BC I just get annoyed all over again. Year 3 and we're still looking for a left tackle. I don't see how we are different or better off from the last regime. The same baffling negligence remains.

We should be drafting lineman in the first every other year in the draft until this poo gets sorted out

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, frankw said:

Every time I hear about BC I just get annoyed all over again. Year 3 and we're still looking for a left tackle. I don't see how we are different or better off from the last regime. The same baffling negligence remains.

We could have Slater and still be looking for a LT. Rhule doesn't evaluate offensive line talent well. He's looking for the prototypical LT and while it may exist on paper, it doesn't in the real world. Choosing a LT in this draft should not be left up to Rhule. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Offensively we have talent that with the right coaching could do well.  Darnold had is moments good and bad (more bad than good) but I don't know many QBs in this league that could stand up to the pressure he was under.   You spend 4 or 5 series in a row with 3 and out you tend to try and make things happen.  Coaching IMO will be the difference.

What we need is an NFL caliber OC and O-line coach.   That's your beginning.   We have skill players at RB and WR.  TE could use some help but I am high on Tremble.  Get me an O-line coach and an OC and those players we see as weak could be good.   IMO we should go all in on the best interior linemen in free agency.  I don't want these bargain players that might be good or might be bad.  Give me a free agent that has a solid resume. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, L-TownCat said:

Pretty spot on.

What we have:

CMC, DJ, an ok pair of T’s.

What we don’t have:

QB, interior line, goal line back, TE, and CMC.

 

 

 

I think that Chuba can be an effective goal line back.  Admittedly he's not your prototypical power back, but he has some juice. I suspect that his play jumps with a higher quality line. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I think that Chuba can be an effective goal line back.  Admittedly he's not your prototypical power back, but he has some juice. I suspect that his play jumps with a higher quality line. 

Safe assumption on an improved line.

Chubba can do it.  I’d just rather have a bruiser type.  
One that when the 4th quarter comes, guys have to start making business decisions before they try to tackle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, L-TownCat said:

Safe assumption on an improved line.

Chubba can do it.  I’d just rather have a bruiser type.  
One that when the 4th quarter comes, guys have to start making business decisions before they try to tackle.

I will admit, I covet an AJ Dillon type. The Packers should get him involved early this weekend to counteract that 49ers run game.

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.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Oh I totally get it, but just because we can do that, doesn't mean it's the right way to go.  If this was Madden with video game players, then sure, do it because it helps the cap.  But with real people, doing that is likely only going to piss him off and make him want to sign with any other team the following offseason. I'm not saying give him a stupid deal, but giving him like $3-5 million for the one season would be a massive raise over the minimum, it wouldn't hurt our cap situation, he'd still likely play well above that level of contract, and it would help keep him happier with the franchise. But in the end, all I really want is for them to find a way to make sure they won't be needing to do deals for both Coker and T-Mac in the same offseason, as that's a terrible way to spend your cap space in a single offseason.  Separating their contracts expiring/negotiations into different offseasons would be the best way to keep them both around long term.
    • Going into that drive with 3 timeouts in our back pocket, I could never imagine the game plan was for Bryce to throw the ball away 3 times in a row to result to this 4th down situation. 3 fuging time outs available and acted like it was hail mary situation
    • Absolutely should have been a fireable offense (and this coming from a guy who defended Evero throughout the season) There is only 3 outcomes you want on that drive. 1) Turnover  2) sack 3) They score fast so we get the ball back with a lot of time and 3 timeouts to win the game We chose the absolutely WORST possible scenario. We let them waltz down the field playing soft zone AND let them kill the clock in the process. If there was EVER a time to play aggressive with no consequence, it was on that drive. Ok, we play aggressive and get burnt on a long TD. Who cares, then we have the last possession to go win the game with 3 timeouts and  at least 1:30 left. Pisses me off just watching that video. 
×
×
  • Create New...