- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
- Messages
- 37,390
- Reaction score
- 16,178
2007 Receivers
In 2007, we had one of the best offenses in the history of the nfl, with similar offensive players. Let's examine the importance of the #5 WR, the #6 WR and the #3 TE in catching the ball.
#5 WR ZERO catches
#6 WR ZERO catches
#3 TE ONE catch
Unless they are returning the ball or are critical on special teams, there is no reason for more than four wide receivers to active. Even in 4 receiver sets, a TE and Faulk are often one of the receivers.
I suspect that we will have all three TE's active because of their roles as both receivers and blockers.
===========
To be clear, I am fine with have a 5th and 6th position receiver on the 53-man squad, but that is only as protection in case of injuries and because of the need to develop players.
If both Edelman and Tate are ahead of Holt in the depth chart by the last preseason game, I would think that we would cut him. We don't need Holt as an inactive insurance policy. On the other hand, I don't expect that to happen.
It is rather amazing how many of us thought of the receiver position to be a major weakness going into the offseason. Now, Welker and Tate are coming back strong from injuries. We have added free agents Crumpler and Holt. And we have drafted Grankowski, Hernandez and Price. Great work Belichick!!!!!!
In 2007, we had one of the best offenses in the history of the nfl, with similar offensive players. Let's examine the importance of the #5 WR, the #6 WR and the #3 TE in catching the ball.
#5 WR ZERO catches
#6 WR ZERO catches
#3 TE ONE catch
Unless they are returning the ball or are critical on special teams, there is no reason for more than four wide receivers to active. Even in 4 receiver sets, a TE and Faulk are often one of the receivers.
I suspect that we will have all three TE's active because of their roles as both receivers and blockers.
===========
To be clear, I am fine with have a 5th and 6th position receiver on the 53-man squad, but that is only as protection in case of injuries and because of the need to develop players.
If both Edelman and Tate are ahead of Holt in the depth chart by the last preseason game, I would think that we would cut him. We don't need Holt as an inactive insurance policy. On the other hand, I don't expect that to happen.
It is rather amazing how many of us thought of the receiver position to be a major weakness going into the offseason. Now, Welker and Tate are coming back strong from injuries. We have added free agents Crumpler and Holt. And we have drafted Grankowski, Hernandez and Price. Great work Belichick!!!!!!