Sky Diver Posted September 29, 2018 Share Posted September 29, 2018 4 minutes ago, The Wiz said: Every player is under the microscope during every play. So no you don't just them after 3 games. You judge them by what they are doing during the plays they do or don't make. It typically takes a WR at least a year or two to get their legs under them. Eric Moulds wasn’t good until his third year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted September 29, 2018 Share Posted September 29, 2018 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Sky Diver said: It typically takes a WR at least a year or two to get their legs under them. Eric Moulds wasn’t good until his third year. He's got his legs under him just fine. It's the others end that he's being criticized for. Edited September 29, 2018 by The Wiz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sky Diver Posted September 29, 2018 Share Posted September 29, 2018 8 minutes ago, The Wiz said: He's got his legs under him just fine. It's the others end that he's being criticized for. Start a petition to cut him and send it to the coaching staff if you feel that strongly about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Sky Diver said: Start a petition to cut him and send it to the coaching staff if you feel that strongly about it. They wouldn't care from all the letters why he should be the #1 receiver they've gotten from you. I'm critical of the abilities he doesn't have right now. Not boosting about what he does have. Yes he's fast, yes he can be a deep threat, yes he gets off the line and forces defenders to catch up with him. That all means squat if he can't catch a ball dropped in his hands. If he develops great, if he doesn't he's just a large/strong track star in the NFL. And for the record I've only been responding to you to see how hard you were favoring him. Pretty hard it seems, ROLL TIDE! Edited September 30, 2018 by The Wiz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 17 hours ago, The Wiz said: Is there reasoning behind that. That's all I can find is that wording without real explanation. I believe the thinking was, without such a rule the pre-CBA rookie holdout and shakedown would just get deferred to the second season Any player who played lights-out would be using a holdout as leverage to get the team to renegotiate then and there, and rookie contract would really mean "pay for your first year if you're looking great" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sky Diver Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 (edited) 18 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Just because, no. I do think Foster wound up on the roster because he happened to go to college where Daboll was OC. I think there are other guys of demonstrated potential, maybe greater demonstrated potential, but they didn't happen to attend college where our new OC coached last year so we went with the "devil he knew" I think nepotism played a role in a couple of choices we made this year at the low end of the roster. Austin Proehl would be another example - currently not on a roster. It's not necessarily a problem, though one would like to see a wider net cast for talent even at the lower end. That would never be counted as a drop by an ESPN scorer. Foster was a high priority FA. The Daboll connection helped us secure him. We lucked out. https://www.google.com/amp/s/articles.al.com/alabamafootball/index.ssf/2018/02/why_some_nfl_teams_didnt_want.amp Edited September 30, 2018 by Sky Diver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts