- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
- Messages
- 43,979
- Reaction score
- 22,036
I thought that I would restructure the analysis a bit with our lack of 2 top tight ends. And yes, we could run more. However, given that we were the #7 running team in the league, that opportunity seems somewhat limited. We were #3 in running this past week, so it is possible.
TIGHT ENDS (65 for 996)
This excludes Hernandez who was used a more of a WR. In any case, I have moved Hernandez to WR's. We are likely to emphasize more 1 TE sets this year, so it seems right to move the production to the WR's
Gronkowski 55 790
Others 10 206
This is not too huge a goal for this years tight ends.
==============================
RUNNING BACKS (56 for 677)
This is almost 5 catches a game for running backs. This will be a challenge in the first part of the year. Washington may be able to fill the void, or not.
============================
WIDE RECEIVERS (280, 3118)
Hernandez is included here since his production needs to be met by wide receivers.
Welker 118 1354
Lloyd 74 911
Hernandez 51 483
Edelman/Branch 37 370
This our challenge. Can the kids step up (at least one)? Can Edelman stay healthy?
TIGHT ENDS (65 for 996)
This excludes Hernandez who was used a more of a WR. In any case, I have moved Hernandez to WR's. We are likely to emphasize more 1 TE sets this year, so it seems right to move the production to the WR's
Gronkowski 55 790
Others 10 206
This is not too huge a goal for this years tight ends.
==============================
RUNNING BACKS (56 for 677)
This is almost 5 catches a game for running backs. This will be a challenge in the first part of the year. Washington may be able to fill the void, or not.
============================
WIDE RECEIVERS (280, 3118)
Hernandez is included here since his production needs to be met by wide receivers.
Welker 118 1354
Lloyd 74 911
Hernandez 51 483
Edelman/Branch 37 370
This our challenge. Can the kids step up (at least one)? Can Edelman stay healthy?











