MrBigglesWorth
Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2006
- Messages
- 9,933
- Reaction score
- 1,637
Did he even play Thursday?You have Braxton Berrios over Myers or Harris?
Thats something
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Did he even play Thursday?You have Braxton Berrios over Myers or Harris?
Thats something
688 receptions 9330 yards 62 TDs
No. Not at this time.For some reason I think Gunner makes it
I select the players really fast. Meyers is making the team IMO
I find it interesting that folks are so sure of Dorsett
yeah total I can't remember TB12 ever even looking his way.
You missed something, Andy was talking about Calhoun not Dorsett.
I find it interesting that folks are so sure of Dorsett. What a difference a week makes for posters.
Almost no one has been willing to deal with the issues of numbers (excepting Andy). Having 6 WR's plus Slater is far from the norm. We need 4 WR's and a 5th could be on the PS (e.g. Berries and Patterson). Given the injury situations, and the fact that Gordon could be gone at any time, it seems reasonable to have the 5th EMERGENCY INACTIVE WR on the 53.
Folks have solved this by putting DT and/or Gordon on some list, having them unavailable for half the season.
=============
CONSIDER
If Dorsett is a lock, would we ever have Myers active. Edelman-Harry-Thomas-Gordon is plenty, and that leaves Dorsett inactive. Without one of the four not available, Dorsett is active. With FIVE active WR's, a bit heavy for most games, Dorsett should be active before Myers.
Are we all OK with having Myers on the 53 with little chance of him doing anything this year.
Having 6 WR's plus Slater is far from the norm.
If Dorsett is a lock, would we ever have Myers active. Edelman-Harry-Thomas-Gordon is plenty, and that leaves Dorsett inactive
That’s a good argument for keeping 5.The norm for the last 8-9 years has been Gronk on the roster. With him on the team you were less likely to go too much spread as his most impactful contribution was the uncertainty he gave the defense if what was coming up would be a run or a pass play.
Without him that layer falls away which is why I think it is much more likely we will see dramatically more 3 WR and 4 WR plays this year. Similarly, with Gordon you kinda keep yourself some additional depth as he could be theoretically gone at any point.
In other words this year I think it makes sense to go with 6 WR and I certainly wouldn't look into the past for historical guidance on.