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!

     

What magic can we pull to find a receiver?


RIPTreyLance
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

Woof, just saw this:

f01ade2j3jnb1.jpg?auto=webp&s=26fbe890432d298b0f50a2e49d874d20e4412f2f

If were are going forward with this group, they need to serious work with Shenault on his routes and hands.  He can get open and is a force once the ball is in his hands, but he's not a comfortable 'hands' catcher and to my knowledge isn't the most polished route runner.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he only has limited route tree capabilities.

My stock on TMJ is at an all-time low.  Considering I was never high on him in the first place, that's saying something.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

If were are going forward with this group, they need to serious work with Shenault on his routes and hands.  He can get open and is a force once the ball is in his hands, but he's not a comfortable 'hands' catcher and to my knowledge isn't the most polished route runner.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he only has limited route tree capabilities.

My stock on TMJ is at an all-time low.  Considering I was never high on him in the first place, that's saying something.

Shenault is a horrible route runner.  They are doing great with him.  All you can do is scheme plays up for him.   He is a gadget roleplayer.  

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JawnyBlaze said:

What about that young guy we just grabbed from the Chiefs? I forget his name but he’s supposed to be quick and has potential. It was probably too soon to throw him into the lineup yesterday but once he has the offense down he could be our stretch the field guy. 

The word on him is raw, but with a lot of potential.  They could have gave him some limited plays, but I guess the staff thought it was a bit too soon.  I imagine he will see a few offensive snaps next week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CRA said:

Shenault is a horrible route runner.  They are doing great with him.  All you can do is scheme plays up for him.   He is a gadget roleplayer.  

We used him beautifully on the opening drive and then just seemingly abandoned it. We have to get him the ball more frequently.

Edited by therealmjl
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

What about that young guy we just grabbed from the Chiefs? I forget his name but he’s supposed to be quick and has potential. It was probably too soon to throw him into the lineup yesterday but once he has the offense down he could be our stretch the field guy. 

Chicago had him for a few games last year and the fans loved him because he apparently helped secure them the #1 pick.

So that says something...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

Chicago had him for a few games last year and the fans loved him because he apparently helped secure them the #1 pick.

So that says something...

Naw if you watch Chicago last year or yesterday JF and their lack of playmaking helped them secure that number one draft pick. He doesn't scan the field and throw players open in his 3rd year. It's all check downs or him taking off running it's really an elementary looking offense.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, therealmjl said:

We used him beautifully on the opening drive and then just seemingly abandoned it. We have to get him the ball more frequently.

I mean, but he is a gadget roleplayer.   You can only go to that well so much.  Plus, if you leave him out there to try to make it less obvious it becomes just a WR that runs bad routes and can't get separation.   2-3 touches is about what that type guy is supposed to do.  The problem is elsehwere IMO. 

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

    • LOL... Yet again proving you can't look below anything than what you see on the surface Mock drafts ARE NOT draft grades They are what people think will happen.  They are mocking teams taking QB's in the top 5 of the draft because that's just historically how drafts go regardless of the grades on the QBs.  Almost every draft expert, even those mocking QB's going high, have said time and time again that none of these QB's actually grade out as those type of picks. This is again, where I say you don't like to actually read what I have to say, because I already explained it. 2022 the exact same thing happened, mock drafts had guys like Pickett and Willis going in the Top 5 because that's just what teams usually do, but GM's listened to their prospect grades and knew they weren't worth taking that high, so they didn't. It's not to say QB's won't go that high this year, but it's to say that they aren't graded out as elite QB prospects.  Mock drafts 
    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
×
×
  • Create New...