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!

     

I hate Mare.... but


Udogg

Recommended Posts

Kicking off of a tee for 70 yards is a bit different than having it on the ground with a holder. Some guys just struggle with kickoffs. Even if it hits at the 5 and we give the opposing offense the ball at around the 30, that isn't a big deal. Coverage has to be there whether we kick it 5 yards into the endzone or 10 yards short of the endzone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kicking off of a tee for 70 yards is a bit different than having it on the ground with a holder. Some guys just struggle with kickoffs. Even if it hits at the 5 and we give the opposing offense the ball at around the 30, that isn't a big deal. Coverage has to be there whether we kick it 5 yards into the endzone or 10 yards short of the endzone.

If Medlock's allergy to touchbacks continues, Mare will be the kicker going into the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mare hate just seems to be "in" right now. i know we are trying to be "young" and all, and develop our guys. but mare has been in the league, and [hopefully] can take pressure situations. i look at it as:

mare's spot to lose

medlock has to wow me to take over the spot

medlock has been good, but nothing unbelievable, e.g., the weak leg on kicks offs [which means A LOT considering our shoddy special teams]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • lol, that second part is quite literally one of the dumbest things ever. Having or not having guaranteed contracts has absolutely nothing to do with how much these billionaires have to pay.  Because there is a hard cap and a minimum cap spend requirement, and teams either use their cap or roll it over to use it all the next year, so the owners have to pay the same amount of money in the end no matter what. Having fully guaranteed contracts in the NFL would only hurt salary cap management, and thus would end up screwing over the team and its fan base when teams kiss on signings as they take up cap room that is needed to improve the roster. Look at the Browns with Watson, they gave him the fully guaranteed deal and all it’s doing is sucking up massive cap space now.  If they hadn’t done that, the owner would still be paying the same amount of money each year as that cap space would still be used elsewhere. If you want to argue for fully guaranteed contracts because the players deserve it, that’s an entirely different argument and a fair one to discuss.  But anyone against fully guaranteed deals isn’t doing it to argue for the billionaire owners.
    • Start posting in threads in the other forums instead of just creating threads. No one comes over here so you aren't starting conversations.  Get your ass up to 100 posts. It's not that hard. Don't create 100 posts. Contribute to conversations. 
    • Ryabkin could be the steal of the draft, he was a Top 10 pick heading into last season and had a rough year.  Lots of GMs passed on him because of that and his workouts. Pick has really high upside and Svech should be able to translate Rod tearing his arse a new one for making dumb plays since Svech has had several years of it.  🤣😂
×
×
  • Create New...