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!

     

Could we deactivate M. Jones?


TouchMeNot97

Recommended Posts

I know that this is not very likely but could we be deactivating Jones for the playoffs? He is useless in the offense and we could have both Jarrett and Hackett active and give us more offensive weapons. Smith could handle punt returns, don't forget he returned one last game for what Fox said was practice. Stewart could return the kickoffs like he did earlier this year. Don't get me wrong Jones has done a nice job but do we really want him out on the field when we are trying to come back or if one of the other guys gets hurt. Smith has said that he doesn't do returns anymore because it's too much for his body to take during the regular season but the playoffs are one game and your done and we need our best players playing. What do you guys think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

um did you forget the packers game? dude has been very good, no he hasnt shown that he is gona break one for a td, but he has been getting us great FP all year. he has earned a playoff spot without doubt.

as for stewie at returns, he could do it, but rather keep him healthy and fresh for the offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark Jones has had some nice games.

We don't throw enough to warrant Hackett and Jarrett being active. If we do have an extra player, it would probably be a dlineman.

Its been a long time since Steve had a decent punt return. Despite his natural talent, its probably something that even he needs to work at a little bit. And if he got injured doing it, some here would be howling for Fox's head on a platter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand but what if we are down by 14+ in the 4th, who would you rather have out there making catches Jones or Jarrett/Hackett. Again I'm not saying that we should do it but rather that it is a good option to think about. Also I'm not trying to take anything away from Jones but I think that both Smith and Stewart could replace him and do just as well as he does. They also posses a home run threat which he doesn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok...who returns for us then?? So you say Stewart.....you wanna risk one of our dynamic duo in our running game, to get 4 receivers out there.

We aren't that deep at RB nimrod!

Jesus H. Christopher........I know I didn't just read that ignorant suggestion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no way Foxy deactives Jones imo. Jones has played solid in area we have lacked in for years now. Fox imo doesn't have much faith in either Hackett or Jarrett at this point. Based on what Fox said on Sirius NFL radio this past week......I fully expect Hackett to be our #3 WR w/ Jarrett being deactivated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your hypothetical is really invalid. It's all well "what if" scenario's. You can't assume we'll be down by 14 and activate players accordingly, not very good coaching strategy if you ask me. Why mix things up in big games? He's had more time back there than anyone else on the roster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok...who returns for us then?? So you say Stewart.....you wanna risk one of our dynamic duo in our running game, to get 4 receivers out there.

We aren't that deep at RB nimrod!

Jesus H. Christopher........I know I didn't just read that ignorant suggestion.

You have to play your best players in playoff games. I know that it's a hypothetical situation but what if it does happen as a coach you have to be prepared for it. What you are saying is that it can't happen so we shouldn't be prepared for it, real smart. Yes Stewart could get hurt nut I trust Williams to carry the ball without any help. At the same time Smith could get hurt playing WR and you would be happy only having two Wr to throw to, again very smart. You need to look at all angles because we can't afford to not be prepared for all situations because if we are not we will be sitting at home the following week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • The bottom line is we saw long stretches this season where T-Mac wasn't even targeted.  He had games where he went an entire half without seeing a pass thrown his way, and it lead to a bunch of games with 5 or less targets.  If he's healthy and we're not up a stupid amount and only running the ball, I can't see him having more than a game or two next year with 5 or less targets. We were also only 22nd this year in pass attempts, and that was with a rookie #1 and no legitimate 2nd option for half the season.  And even then, we were only 46 pass attempts above 31st place. If we go into next season with T-Mac improved in his 2nd season and a healthy Coker for 17 games, there is absolutely no reason for us to not throw it more.  That right away increases both of their target totals without sacrificing any targets from each other or other players, add in them taking targets from the TEs and RBs on top of that, and your argument just doesn't hold water anymore. You can't look at targets/yards in a vacuum and think next year Coker just takes some from T-Mac.  You have to look at the team as a whole and our situations this year and then project what will happen next year. If he's healthy for 17 games, I'd bet my life savings that T-Mac sees increases across the board, targets/catches/yards/TDs.   Just as Coker will also see career highs in all categories, it's not one vs the other, it's shifting offensive strategy given our personnel, which next year will be much better for our passing game (QB issues aside).
    • C'mon now.... First, you can't switch up your argument once someone points out a major flaw in your point. You're saying we shouldn't expect a big increase in targets/yards for T-Mac, but then shift to talking about averages with Chase when I point out the significant leap he took there once you factor in his missing games.  He saw an increase in targets in 5 less games, averages aside, he saw a significant increase in targets in his 2nd season, what he then did with those targets is actually irrelevant in this discussion. Puka seeing no increase is pointless, as he saw such an absurd amount of targets for a rookie, it's near impossible to see an increase. But the real issue in this post is that you think I'm proving your point by showing how Waddle had to share targets with Hill. Tyreek Hill was a 1st team All Pro who was 2nd in the NFL in yards that season. If you think Jaylen Waddle sharing targets with a 1st team All Pro and a future HOFer is even remotely in the same category as T-Mac needing to share targets with Coker... then you are certifiably insane, lol. If anything, you could make the argument that Coker is to Waddle as T-Mac is to Hill in that discussion (which would then lead to a serious increase in targets/yards for T-Mac).  But even that is insane, as neither T-Mac or Coker will be as good as Hill and Waddle respectively that season.  I love both of their potential, but c'mon now, T-Mac isn't getting 119 catches for 1,700 yards and Coker isn't getting 117 for 1,350 next season.
    • Especially since we’re neck and neck with them for the play in
×
×
  • Create New...