Jump to content

PSA- Beane on PMT


plenzmd1

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, NewEra said:

And like I had asked.  When you don’t have a #1 wr and you are a team clearly improving and making a push, what would you say when asked about not having a #1 WR.  
 

it’s not as if they just offer their opinion on the matter. They were asked about a #1 WR.  They didn’t have a legit #1.  So, what would you say?

 

 

 

Yeah, I agree -- WEO just likes to be the contrarian.

 

If you're a coach/GM and your team is in the midst of a playoff run you don't talk about what you don't have.  And even after the season is over, before you've made any roster moves, you still don't "tip your hand" publicly even if everyone else knows what your team needs.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Poster upstream said Beane said they were trying to get a #1 WR last season before the trade deadline.  Yet McD had already stated that todays' NFL doesn't require one.

 

Then Beane himself said this "“I’m not one that subscribes to a ‘number one receiver’,” Beane told reporters during the NFL Combine. last year

 

Whats wrong with that statement?  Doesnt mean he doesnt like talented WR's, just means he doesnt see it as a team must have a #1 to succeed.  But if talent is available he has always said he will do everything he can to make the roster and team better and likes draft assets to use both to acquire veteran players in trade and to move around the draft to get guys they covet.  

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, eball said:

 

Yeah, I agree -- WEO just likes to be the contrarian.

 

If you're a coach/GM and your team is in the midst of a playoff run you don't talk about what you don't have.  And even after the season is over, before you've made any roster moves, you still don't "tip your hand" publicly even if everyone else knows what your team needs.


Oh I know. Really just wanted to see how he’d manipulate what I said in order to avoid answering the question

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eball said:

 

Well aren't we glad Beane changed his mind then.

 

Learning can happen.

52 minutes ago, eball said:

 

Yeah, I agree -- WEO just likes to be the contrarian.

 

If you're a coach/GM and your team is in the midst of a playoff run you don't talk about what you don't have.  And even after the season is over, before you've made any roster moves, you still don't "tip your hand" publicly even if everyone else knows what your team needs.

 

 

Contrarian by pointing out how the guy's quotes were contradictory? Ok...

 

When that ("we don't need a #1 WR") was posted here last year a lot of posters were agreeing with it----simply because Beane said it.  Now, of course, same folks are saying the opposite----because Beane now says you need one.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Whats wrong with that statement?  Doesnt mean he doesnt like talented WR's, just means he doesnt see it as a team must have a #1 to succeed.  But if talent is available he has always said he will do everything he can to make the roster and team better and likes draft assets to use both to acquire veteran players in trade and to move around the draft to get guys they covet.  

 

If you truly believe it, nothing wrong with it at all.  When you conclude the opposite less than a year later, it's not evidence that you now like WRs.  The neglect of this position until this offseason has been well documented elsewhere anyway...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

If you truly believe it, nothing wrong with it at all.  When you conclude the opposite less than a year later, it's not evidence that you now like WRs.  The neglect of this position until this offseason has been well documented elsewhere anyway...

 

Neglect?  No offense man, but thats a misguided statement.

  1. You can not fix all positions at once.
  2. In a surprise playoff run year 1, they made a move to get a WR who did actually help us make the playoffs as we dont win the snow game without KB.
  3. Then with the QB in place, he went and got Brown and Cole last year and said they tried to trade for another in season.
  4. Now he traded for Diggs.

Sorry bud, saying he has neglected WR position is just false.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Neglect?  No offense man, but thats a misguided statement.

  1. You can not fix all positions at once.
  2. In a surprise playoff run year 1, they made a move to get a WR who did actually help us make the playoffs as we dont win the snow game without KB.
  3. Then with the QB in place, he went and got Brown and Cole last year and said they tried to trade for another in season.
  4. Now he traded for Diggs.

Sorry bud, saying he has neglected WR position is just false.  

 

KB was a bust.  1 game doesn't change what was obvious.   They booted his dumpy azzzz

 

Beasely was a solid pickup.  Brown wasn't enough.  Bunch of solid WR available in the 2nd last year.  Went with T that will now move to G...and perhaps draft another T. 

 

 

Edited by Mr. WEO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

KB was a bust.  1 game doesn't change what was obvious.   They booted his dumpy azzzz

 

Beasely was a solid pickup.  Brown wasn't enough.  Bunch of solid WR available in the 2nd last year.  Went with T that will now move to G...and perhaps draft another T. 

 

 

I'm not sure they know how to evaluate collegiate wr, but the actual wr room right now is good. Still like to see someone like Pittman or Claypool added.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:

I'm not sure they know how to evaluate collegiate wr, but the actual wr room right now is good. Still like to see someone like Pittman or Claypool added.

 

I would be shocked if they went WR in the 2nd.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...