- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 68,349
- Reaction score
- 105,339
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.First of all, he's currently NOT healthy, so there is no need to file a waiver wire claim. IF he gets through waivers, and IF it is determined that he still wants to play here, THEN he would be a number the Pats would want on speed dial in case there is an injury in the TE's room.
And that is the ONLY way Marty will get asked back is if there is an injury to Gronk, Allen or Hollister. The call to dump Allen is just stupid. His lack of catches has a great deal to do with the lack of targets he has gotten. Given the way the Pats distribute the ball, 2 weeks from now he could easily have 10 catches. It isn't like Allen was the reason they lost those 2 games.
So I see the situation as this. If anything happens to any of our TE's it is nice to know that there is likely to be a decent option out there to replace the loss. But right now a lot of questions need to be asked before signing him becomes even a possibility
The guy doesn't even have a catch. One catch! I never liked the move to acquire him. I never liked him out of college. Too slow.
If he cannot block with that shoulder he is useless here, other than that whole "A TE not named Gronk can consistently catch multiple passes in a game" thing.
Fixed
There are two reasons he has ~6 targets.How many targets does he have? How many of those targets hit him in the numbers?
Sign Marty, put Dwayne Allen in a rocket and shoot him to the moon.
There are two reasons he has ~6 targets.
1) Brady doesn't like him as a receiver. Bad routes. Confidence. Trust. Better options, etc.
2) Gronk is healthy
Seeing that this team is down to three healthy receivers, having an additional target TB12 has confidence in might be something they need to seriously consider.
I disagree with your fix. The entire point of a TE is to offer something in the passing and the running game. If a TE can't block they are just a slow receiver.
I agree with @IcyPatriot . I don't think MB offers enough as a WR to be worth signing if he can't block.
Why would he cost us a pick? I thought the acquiring team just loses the comp pick. What am i missing?I would love to have him back if he can get healthy. But I don't think I could justify giving up a fith round pick to rent a guy for a few games.
The Patriots already have a TE3 who can't block, so I'm not sure what you're actually disagreeing with.
Why would he cost us a pick? I thought the acquiring team just loses the comp pick. What am i missing?
Yep. Could be multiple reasons for that.Allen didn't get targets in the TB game when Gronk was out.
1. I did not know Hollister could not block. TIL. Hyperbole?
2. Hollister is likely quicker than MB. He might have more value as a pure receiving threat.
3. A "move TE" & an "H-back" still have some value in the run game. Just less relative to a TE & a FB.
4. Hollister has 6.7% of offensive snaps. Lets assume he is bad at blocking as you claim. Do we want 2 TEs that can't block? Are you saying we cut him for MB?
Hollister has 3 catches in 8 games, Allen has 0 catches in 8 games, and Bennett, who had 55 receptions for the Patriots last year, has 24 receptions in 7 games for the Packers this year, and has caught 3 or more passes in 5 of those 7 games.
Who gets moved/cut isn't my concern. Neither backup TE currently on the team is worth worrying over at their current level of play.