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.
McCourty got paid for the same reason Wallace got paid, weak competition around them in free agency. You're saying if McCourty got paid like a top 3 FS then he's surely a top 3 FS, my counter argument to your logic is Mike Wallace who got paid like a top 5 WR but surely is not one.
I got called homer for whatever reason, and I'm saying my posts in this very thread suggests otherwise.the wording in this is very confusing.
).Yup. And a few of his catches were chain movers. We don't win without Vereen because he changed the way seattle defended us.
Helu at 2 years $4m looks like a steal compared to some of the other deals
Why so many no's? It's not as if Vereen was a great runner and Richardson has shown he can catch passes if nothing else, obviously if he has a bad attitude BB won't bring him in
Some comments on the Comments
1. My original thought on Bush was, "it makes too much sense, so it's unlikely to happen".
2. My guess is that Bush, who is a warm weather guy, wanted more money that the Pats were willing to give to keep him in the cold. I think when details of his deal with SF comes out, it will be for in excess of $3MM/yr, and that's more than the Pats wanted to pay for a situational RB who averages 3-5 fumbles a year.
3. Helu was the perfect fit when it came to a combination of price and skill. Unfortunately he decided to go home before the Pats even had a chance to bid for him.
4. There is more than just Pierre Thomas out there. Bradshaw and CJohnson could be low cost options. OR they just might want to go with who hey have with White and Gaffney competing for the job.
5. An out of the box option would be to move Boyce to RB, since 70% of the "3rd down RB" is catching the ball anyway. Boyce is about the same size as Vareer, faster, quicker, more sure handed (in college), and has a good rep at running the ball after the catch. I might be easier for him to make the roster as a RB than as a WR. Just a thought
6. As for the Tim Wright talk, his disappearance from the game plan the last half of the season is one of the biggest mysteries I have. I'd love to find out why that happened.
7. I think signing Chandler is more about Hooman than Wright. If Chandler is as good a blocker as Hooman, as a much better receiving option, he might make Hooman redundant.
8. I talked to a Bills fan I know and he was not as high on Chandler as we are, though he acknowledged that he was great against the Pats. No so much against the rest of the league. Too many drops and only an average blocker was his assessment.
9. I wonder if the Pats might go with 4 TE's this year. It could be they might be looking for the offense to become more run orientated and control the clock more in order to protect the D. Just a thought.
10. Chandler/Wright are 2 legitimate TE receiving options. When Gronk is on the field it might take the pressure off him to be the threat up the seam. I love having TE's who can block on the field at the same time. Just by alignment, it causes some problems for DC's and makes it easier for the QB to identify the coverage. Some interesting chips for Josh to play with, and increases the intensity of the competition at TC. That's not a bad thing.
Why not give him a shot? Doesn't it usually take RB's a few seasons before they acclimate to NFL level play? Can't he be "coached up" to actualized some of the potential he showed in college?
Mike Loyko @NEPD_Loyko 11m11 minutes ago
