Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Recommended Posts

Due to COVID the overall time for Rivers to get his timing down would mean that the coaches have to prioritize the wideouts, TE and RBs to work with him. That's alot of players. 

I think the priority should be:  TY, Doyle, Hines, Mack, Pittman, Burton (if he is healthy). 

I realize he is a veteran QB and has thrown to many receivers, but given the limited time he has, this is going to be a huge challenge or maybe not?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, AustexColt said:

Due to COVID the overall time for Rivers to get his timing down would mean that the coaches have to prioritize the wideouts, TE and RBs to work with him. That's alot of players. 

I think the priority should be:  TY, Doyle, Hines, Mack, Pittman, Burton (if he is healthy). 

I realize he is a veteran QB and has thrown to many receivers, but given the limited time he has, this is going to be a huge challenge or maybe not?

It’s an unknown for sure. Plus you now have the NFLPA coming out against private group workouts. So it’s gonna be a stumbling block but we won’t be the only team dealing with it

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, csmopar said:

It’s an unknown for sure. Plus you now have the NFLPA coming out against private group workouts. So it’s gonna be a stumbling block but we won’t be the only team dealing with it

Exactly. 

IMO with Rivers already being familiar with Reich and Sirianni he will be fine.

I also think we will see a major improvement in our receiving crew.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, AustexColt said:

 

I think the priority should be:  TY, Doyle, Hines, Mack, Pittman, Burton (if he is healthy). 

 

I'd remove Mack from that list and replace him with Campbell.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really worried for many reasons.

 

1. Rivers is top 10 all time completion %

2. Rivers has always thrown a pretty good, catch-able ball, with good timing. 

3. All teams are going through the same limitations.

4. The quality of throws and timing will easily be much better than last year.

5. Rivers has been running the same/similar system for many years.

6. Rivers will have more time to throw, going from the 28th worst OL, to 3rd best.

 

There will be a difference between who will get the most time with Rivers, and those that need the most time with Rivers. The starters of course will get most time with Rivers, but TY, Doyle, and Pascal will be more than fine and probably need less love/time. Pittman should be fine, and will be like any other rookie. He's already a decent route runner and be more of a possession guy early on. He'll need to develop the timing for back shoulder and comebacks. Paris and Hines probably need more time than any of the WRs we assume to get a lot of snaps. MAC and Burton will need time too.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, MB-ColtsFan said:

So I guess everyone has abandoned Fountain?  As it stands right now I think he still has a chance to be #5 or 6.

The competition for the bottom two WR spots will be intense

 

Will they carry 6 WRs or 5?

 

The bottom 5th and or 6th WR will HAVE to ALSO contribute on Special Teams

(I would think)

 

The middle and bottom of this roster is SO MUCH BETTER than it was 2-3 years ago

 

The cuts will be painful.... but thats what happens when you have a good roster

 

Some of the fan favorites (mine included) wont be wearing the horseshoe this year....

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MB-ColtsFan said:

So I guess everyone has abandoned Fountain?  As it stands right now I think he still has a chance to be #5 or 6.

 

Or even #4.  I love what Pascal does for us, but I have the feeling we've seen his ceiling.  However, besides being a clutch receiver, Pascal's also a good blocker, so he's the incumbent.

 

I'm thinking they may keep four RBs and the FB, which may mean only five WRs (and likely three TE's).  Fountain, Tulin, Johnson, and Patmon are probably competing for one spot.

 

That's going to be a fun position to watch in the preseason (if we have one).

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, w87r said:

2 extra roster spots this year. That will help, I think we keep 6 WRs.


Is that true this season?  I thought they only changed PS sizes.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

Or even #4.  I love what Pascal does for us, but I have the feeling we've seen his ceiling.  However, besides being a clutch receiver, Pascal's also a good blocker, so he's the incumbent.

 

I'm thinking they may keep four RBs and the FB, which may mean only five WRs (and likely three TE's).  Fountain, Tulin, Johnson, and Patmon are probably competing for one spot.

 

That's going to be a fun position to watch in the preseason (if we have one).

 

 

I think with the FB position they keep 3 RBs, Mack, Taylor, and Hines.  But you do think more highly of Wilkins than I do.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Smonroe said:


Is that true this season?  I thought they only changed PS sizes.  

Yeah regular rosters are expanded to 55.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

But you do think more highly of Wilkins than I do.

 

What's there not to like about Wilkins? All he does is produce.

 

5.8yds/ carry for his career

Wilkins has 8 fewer receptions(23) than Mack(31) over last 2 seasons.

Wilkins has career catch%(82.1) which is .3 less than Mack's best year(82.4 last year)

 

He did fumble 2 times his rookie year, but didn't fumble last year at all. While he had similar touches. I would say Rathman has worked on that with him and he has improved. 

 

I get it he is our 4th RB, which is a great thing to have.  His roster spot is probably not a guarantee, but I will be hoping he makes the team. That would mean our RBs would still be looking nice if Mack is gone next year.(imo, most likely)

 

Edit:

Not implying you don't like Wilkins at all, just that you said, you don't think as highly of Wilkins as other poster.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MB-ColtsFan said:

So I guess everyone has abandoned Fountain?  As it stands right now I think he still has a chance to be #5 or 6.

That's a good point.    The Colts have some investment in Fountain.   Mostly just keeping him on the roster for 2 years.  The also recently placed a tender on him.

 

Given that he was an exclusive rights free agent, the Colts have total control over Fountain’s contract. Once they extend the tender to the player, they have to sign the deal or sit out the season. Teams can’t contact tendered ERFAs.

4 minutes ago, w87r said:

 

What's there not to like about Wilkins? All he does is produce.

 

5.8yds/ carry for his career

Wilkins has 9 fewer receptions(23) than Mack(31) over last 2 seasons.

Wilkins has career catch%(82.1) which is .3 less than Mack's best year(82.4 last year)

 

He did fumble 2 times his rookie year, but didn't fumble last year at all. While he had similar touches. I would say Rathman has worked on that with him and he has improved. 

 

I get it he is our 4th RB, which is a great thing to have.  His roster spot is probably not a guarantee, but I will be hoping he makes the team. That would mean our RBs would still be looking nice if Mack is gone next year.(imo, most likely)

 

 

I agree with all of this.   

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, MB-ColtsFan said:

So I guess everyone has abandoned Fountain?  As it stands right now I think he still has a chance to be #5 or 6.

I think Fountain makes the roster so long as he's fully recovered.  Purely my opinion, but think it end up like

 

X - Pittman, Pascal

Z - TY, Fountain

Slot - Paris, Dulin

1 hour ago, w87r said:

Yeah regular rosters are expanded to 55.

I think it's still 53, you're just able to dress 2 more game day, and you have extra slots on the PS (and it's easier to elevate them).

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I think with the FB position they keep 3 RBs, Mack, Taylor, and Hines.  But you do think more highly of Wilkins than I do.

 

My logic is that we expect Taylor to be the #1 in 21, and Mack will probably get a better contract elsewhere than we can offer. 

 

Wilkins would be signed at a reasonable.  He'd be a solid #2, and he has the experience.  And I doubt Ballard would want to spend even a mid round draft pick for another RB.

 

Plus, we can expect injuries, as usual, and as long as Wilkins isn't one of them, he's a good sub.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, w87r said:

 

What's there not to like about Wilkins? All he does is produce.

 

5.8yds/ carry for his career

Wilkins has 8 fewer receptions(23) than Mack(31) over last 2 seasons.

Wilkins has career catch%(82.1) which is .3 less than Mack's best year(82.4 last year)

 

He did fumble 2 times his rookie year, but didn't fumble last year at all. While he had similar touches. I would say Rathman has worked on that with him and he has improved. 

 

I get it he is our 4th RB, which is a great thing to have.  His roster spot is probably not a guarantee, but I will be hoping he makes the team. That would mean our RBs would still be looking nice if Mack is gone next year.(imo, most likely)

 

Edit:

Not implying you don't like Wilkins at all, just that you said, you don't think as highly of Wilkins as other poster.

I like Wilkins, but he's just not that good between the Ts. He doesn't hit the hole that hard. He's best in zone blocking, and most productive hitting the edge. I would not be confident with him on 3rd and short taking it up the middle with a power/man call.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, w87r said:

Yeah regular rosters are expanded to 55.

 

Sort of.   Teams will still have a 53 man roster but can bring up to two guys from the PS each week.  Here are the new roster changes:

 

"Teams can designate an additional player to return from injured reserve each year (three instead of two).

Two practice-squad players each week can be elevated to the team's active roster, and a team doesn't have to replace the player on the practice squad.

Active game-day rosters increased from 46 to 48 players.

Practice squads expanded from 10 to 12 players in 2020-2021, then to 14 players starting in 2022 (including between two and four players with unlimited accrued seasons per team)"

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfls-new-cba-explained-heres-a-look-at-all-the-season-roster-and-salary-changes/

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, w87r said:

 

What's there not to like about Wilkins? All he does is produce.

 

5.8yds/ carry for his career

Wilkins has 8 fewer receptions(23) than Mack(31) over last 2 seasons.

Wilkins has career catch%(82.1) which is .3 less than Mack's best year(82.4 last year)

 

He did fumble 2 times his rookie year, but didn't fumble last year at all. While he had similar touches. I would say Rathman has worked on that with him and he has improved. 

 

I get it he is our 4th RB, which is a great thing to have.  His roster spot is probably not a guarantee, but I will be hoping he makes the team. That would mean our RBs would still be looking nice if Mack is gone next year.(imo, most likely)

 

Edit:

Not implying you don't like Wilkins at all, just that you said, you don't think as highly of Wilkins as other poster.

Wilkins is just a dime a dozen back.  He has good speed so if the hole is there he will hit it and make positive yards, but he typically goes down on first contact and he is not going to find an open hole if it's not where it is supposed to be.  He's just a guy that can be replaced by another just a guy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Wilkins is just a dime a dozen back.  He has good speed so if the hole is there he will hit it and make positive yards, but he typically goes down on first contact and he is not going to find an open hole if it's not where it is supposed to be.  He's just a guy that can be replaced by another just a guy.

I think he is better than that.

His yards after contact are better than Mack.  To be fair, his sample size is small.  

 

With a 5.8 yards per carry, I'd keep him on the roster until he proves to be average.   

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Wilkins is just a dime a dozen back.  He has good speed so if the hole is there he will hit it and make positive yards, but he typically goes down on first contact and he is not going to find an open hole if it's not where it is supposed to be.  He's just a guy that can be replaced by another just a guy.


Well, he is the all time Colts leader for average yards per carry...so there’s that.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I think it's still 53, you're just able to dress 2 more game day, and you have extra slots on the PS (and it's easier to elevate them).

 

17 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

Sort of.   Teams will still have a 53 man roster but can bring up to two guys from the PS each week.  Here are the new roster changes:

 

"Teams can designate an additional player to return from injured reserve each year (three instead of two).

Two practice-squad players each week can be elevated to the team's active roster, and a team doesn't have to replace the player on the practice squad.

Active game-day rosters increased from 46 to 48 players.

 

Which still in more roster spots.

 

So say Fountain is on PS, he could be brought up, or whoever is on the bubble for a spot.  (Patmon, Rodgers etc...)

 

So I get it from both sides, as some players are not eligible, but it still increases the chances of a bubble player. Making the  team/ getting possible playing time from PS. Which in theory adds additional spot for non eligible/don't want to risk losing, player.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, w87r said:

Which still in more roster spots.

 

So say Fountain is on PS, he could be brought up, or whoever is on the bubble for a spot.  (Patmon, Rodgers etc...)

 

So I get it from both sides, as some players are not eligible, but it still increases the chances of a bubble player. Making the  team/ getting possible playing time from PS. Which in theory adds additional spot for non eligible/don't want to risk losing, player.

PS squad guys can only be elevated a limited amount of times. It's easier, but not a free for all. I think you can do it twice for a player before having to make him part of the 53, and cutting another. The big think I like is that a few PS slots are now unlimited in terms of years of experience. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Myles said:

I think he is better than that.

His yards after contact are better than Mack.  To be fair, his sample size is small.  

 

With a 5.8 yards per carry, I'd keep him on the roster until he proves to be average.   

I would need to see the yards after contact because Wilkins was a weak runner in college and he's a weak runner in the NFL.

 

And if the Colts keep 4 RBs they will keep him because to replace him they would sign just another guy so they might as well keep the just another guy on the rookie deal.  But my premise was they keep 3 Rbs and a FB.  And with just 3, Wilkins doesn't make the cut.  It's established he's not better than Mack, the Colts are not going to cut Taylor and Hines is a hard runner and has a better skill set.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I would need to see the yards after contact because Wilkins was a weak runner in college and he's a weak runner in the NFL.

 

 

In 3 college years, Wilkins average YPC - 6.9, 5.3, 6.5.    I', starting to think maybe his 5.8 YPC in the NFL may not be a fluke.   

5 years as RB in college and the NFL:

6.9

5.3

6.5

5.6

6.0

On 390 carries.   

 

I don't think he would keep that up with more carries, but I don't think it's be 3.2 YPC either.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, w87r said:

 

 

Which still in more roster spots.

 

So say Fountain is on PS, he could be brought up, or whoever is on the bubble for a spot.  (Patmon, Rodgers etc...)

 

So I get it from both sides, as some players are not eligible, but it still increases the chances of a bubble player. Making the  team/ getting possible playing time from PS. Which in theory adds additional spot for non eligible/don't want to risk losing, player.

IMO if Fountain does well in camp and whatever pre season games we have another team would snatch him right off the practice squad. I think he has the talent that a few teams would gamble on.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Myles said:

In 3 college years, Wilkins average YPC - 6.9, 5.3, 6.5.    I', starting to think maybe his 5.8 YPC in the NFL may not be a fluke.   

5 years as RB in college and the NFL:

6.9

5.3

6.5

5.6

6.0

On 390 carries.   

 

I don't think he would keep that up with more carries, but I don't think it's be 3.2 YPC either.  

 

14 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I would need to see the yards after contact because Wilkins was a weak runner in college and he's a weak runner in the NFL.

 

And if the Colts keep 4 RBs they will keep him because to replace him they would sign just another guy so they might as well keep the just another guy on the rookie deal.  But my premise was they keep 3 Rbs and a FB.  And with just 3, Wilkins doesn't make the cut.  It's established he's not better than Mack, the Colts are not going to cut Taylor and Hines is a hard runner and has a better skill set.

 

Here's his combine review farther below. I posted similar last year when there some debate between Williams and Wilkins.

 

In short, and as I said earlier, he's historically struggled between the Ts, but is highly effective in a zone blocking scheme on the edges. He was weak after contact through his college career, but at the same time, you can't ignore some of the numbers he put up vs SEC defenses. 100+ yard games vs Bama, MissSt, LSU, Vandy, and TAMU in 2017. Had an 8.4 AVG vs Bama, and 8.9 vs LSU.

 

IMO, both Williams and Wilkins are both great backups. They are very different from each other, but still quality backups. And let's be honest, a lot of RBs will look good behind our OL. As for Wilkins, he didn't get a lot of use before his senior year, so who's to say he not still learning, and may have already improved in terms of running between the Ts and YAC. IMO, I think he'd have gone higher in the draft had he stayed in college another year.


 

Quote

 

Overview

Finesse runner with good size and great agility with the lateral agility to elude tacklers in the open field and the speed to make them feel it. Wilkins lacks the aggressive running demeanor to take it to tacklers, but he does have moments of effectiveness along the interior thanks to his footwork and vision. Wilkins 12 carries against Alabama could be hard for teams to ignore as they look to project his NFL potential. He should find work as a solid backup with a shot at finding starters carries at some point.

 

Strengths

Checks the height, weight, and speed boxes

Hips swivel freely and is very agile

Able to access any side door he needs to for quick escapes

Plays with slasher qualities

Saw over 10 percent of his runs in 2017 go for 15-plus yards

Has sudden, one-cut ability with the juice to launch himself through line of scrimmage and into the open field

Feet are light and nimble

Runs with knee bend and good pad level

Excellent footwork in tight quarters

Has balance and vision to navigate fluid run lanes

Glides behind lead blockers allowing them to do their work

Wiggle makes him dangerous in space

Not much tread off his tires as a runner

Averaged 7.1 yards per carry against SEC competition including 101 against Alabama

 

Weaknesses

May have NFL size, but doesn't run like it

Much more flight than fight in his game

Averaged just 1.7 yards after contact

Slows into contact and doesn't finish behind his pads

Has moments of indecisiveness between the tackles

Plays with too much gear-shifting as a runner allowing run creases to muddy

Needs clear point of entry before committing to the cause

Tempo and pace can be inconsistent early in the carry

Pass protection was miserable against Mississippi State

 


 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

IMO if Fountain does well in camp and whatever pre season games we have another team would snatch him right off the practice squad. I think he has the talent that a few teams would gamble on.

I was just using him as an example. Just as easy could be Patmon Chad Williams, Marcus Johnson on PS and be elevated.

 

Did read something yesterday that NFL and NFLPA are in talks about roster size. May end up being more than normal anyway.

 

I would think adding a few more active roster spots would be the way to go about, or not even allow players taken from PS this year?

 

Who knows, I think the fewer players that switch teams in middle of the year would be for the better.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, w87r said:

I was just using him as an example. Just as easy could be Patmon Chad Williams, Marcus Johnson on PS and be elevated.

 

Did read something yesterday that NFL and NFLPA are in talks about roster size. May end up being more than normal anyway.

 

I would think adding a few more active roster spots would be the way to go about, or not even allow players taken from PS this year?

 

Who knows, I think the fewer players that switch teams in middle of the year would be for the better.

 

I've thought for a while now they should allow teams to keep 10-20 more at PS squad pay because of the Covid possibilities. It would at least keep extra folks in the system and allow for some consistency should a team get hit hard.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

I've thought for a while now they should allow teams to keep 10-20 more at PS squad pay because of the Covid possibilities. It would at least keep extra folks in the system and allow for some consistency should a team get hit hard.

 

 

It only makes sense, IMO. 

 

Also, like I said above, they need to make PS so the players cant be taken this year. Just a team of players that is readily available to play when needed. Would be cool, if they did that for this season, then realized that was the thing to do moving forward. Allowing teams to work with a guy till they're ready, without having to risk losing the player.?

 

Teams are clearly going to be hit and have players out multiple weeks.

 

Hell I just got my 5th straight positive test(over 6 weeks) result. So I imagine it will be sticking around some players for up to a month or more. These players have to get 2 negative test. I haven't been able to get 1 yet. All these basketball players that tested positive(Brogdon) will have to.(test negative ×2) If it shows in their system, like mine, they won't be able to play. Even if they feel alright. I'm not sure they realize that possibility right now. That they could feel completely normal or asymptomatic and still not be able to play for 4-6 weeks possibly, because ot still shows in their system.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, w87r said:

It only makes sense, IMO. 

 

Also, like I said above, they need to make PS so the players cant be taken this year. Just a team of players that is readily available to play when needed. Would be cool, if they did that for this season, then realized that was the thing to do moving forward. Allowing teams to work with a guy till they're ready, without having to risk losing the player.?

 

Teams are clearly going to be hit and have players out multiple weeks.

 

Hell I just got my 5th straight positive test(over 6 weeks) result. So I imagine it will be sticking around some players for up to a month or more. These players have to get 2 negative test. I haven't been able to get 1 yet. All these basketball players that tested positive(Brogdon) will have to.(test negative ×2) If it shows in their system, like mine, they won't be able to play. Even if they feel alright. I'm not sure they realize that possibility right now. That they could feel completely normal or asymptomatic and still not be able to play for 4-6 weeks possibly, because ot still shows in their system.

I don't think you should be able to protect them all, but I would agree to some. So let's say they allowed each team to add 20 guys to the PS, or for ease, let's just say a total of 30. Let teams "protect" 10-15. If you let them protect them all, then a team that gets hit hard wouldn't be able to draw from other team's PSs to replenish. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I don't think you should be able to protect them all, but I would agree to some. So let's say they allowed each team to add 20 guys to the PS, or for ease, let's just say a total of 30. Let teams "protect" 10-15. If you let them protect them all, then a team that gets hit hard wouldn't be able to draw from other team's PSs to replenish. 

thats a good point.

 

I do think that players changing teams in middle of weeks can be problematic though.

 

Crazy situations. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, w87r said:

thats a good point.

 

I do think that players changing teams in middle of weeks can be problematic though.

 

Crazy situations. 

It's the new new.

 

The more I think about it, I'd like to see them temporary increase the 53 roster to 72, so you basically have 3x each of the 22 starting positions, and 2x STs (K, P, H). Have teams basically isolate 3rd string and PSs from the two deep. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, w87r said:

 

What's there not to like about Wilkins? All he does is produce.

 

5.8yds/ carry for his career

Wilkins has 8 fewer receptions(23) than Mack(31) over last 2 seasons.

Wilkins has career catch%(82.1) which is .3 less than Mack's best year(82.4 last year)

 

He did fumble 2 times his rookie year, but didn't fumble last year at all. While he had similar touches. I would say Rathman has worked on that with him and he has improved. 

 

I get it he is our 4th RB, which is a great thing to have.  His roster spot is probably not a guarantee, but I will be hoping he makes the team. That would mean our RBs would still be looking nice if Mack is gone next year.(imo, most likely)

 

Edit:

Not implying you don't like Wilkins at all, just that you said, you don't think as highly of Wilkins as other poster.

Wilkins is one of the underdogs that I find myself rooting for.......

 

He plays special teams which should help his cause......  but he is likely 50/50 (Or LESS) to be on this roster after camp.

 

He seems to have really good vision, to allow him to get the extra yards.

 

Though its not popular, I hope for success for Chad Kelly.

 

But......

 

I think it will be VERY tough for this guy to make the roster

 

Maybe 10-20% chance

 

It may be an irrational "rooting"  ....... but for the miniscule time that that he had to play against 2nd and 3rd rounders he looked like he knew what he was doing. He is my second underdog for this team

 

Unless Eason robs a 7-11,  I would say our lineup at QB will probably be Rivers, JB, and Eason

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MikeCurtis said:

Wilkins is one of the underdogs that I find myself rooting for.......

 

He plays special teams which should help his cause......  but he is likely 50/50 (Or LESS) to be on this roster after camp.

 

He seems to have really good vision, to allow him to get the extra yards.

 

Though its not popular, I hope for success for Chad Kelly.

 

But......

 

I think it will be VERY tough for this guy to make the roster

 

Maybe 10-20% chance

 

It may be an irrational "rooting"  ....... but for the miniscule time that that he had to play against 2nd and 3rd rounders he looked like he knew what he was doing. He is my second underdog for this team

 

Unless Eason robs a 7-11,  I would say our lineup at QB will probably be Rivers, JB, and Eason

No harm in rooting for a player.  

I'm rooting for Eason and Kelly to look good enough that Brissett gets released.   I know there is almost no chance of that happening, but I can still root for it.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, MikeCurtis said:

Wilkins is one of the underdogs that I find myself rooting for.......

 

He plays special teams which should help his cause......  but he is likely 50/50 (Or LESS) to be on this roster after camp.

 

He seems to have really good vision, to allow him to get the extra yards.

 

Though its not popular, I hope for success for Chad Kelly.

Wilkins had the most STs snaps of any O player. 6th overall including all players. Dulin was right behind him at 7th. They are the only two O players in the top 15.

 

I think Kelly will be on the PS again this year.

12 minutes ago, Myles said:

No harm in rooting for a player.  

I'm rooting for Eason and Kelly to look good enough that Brissett gets released.   I know there is almost no chance of that happening, but I can still root for it.

Yup, no chance lol... 

I'm more than fine with keeping JB. Might as well if we're not going to spend the money elsewhere. If it were a question of JB vs signing a stud, I'd be fine with cutting him. Doubt we'll be so close to the cap, and doubt we'll sign any more big names that would put us in that position though.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

The rule says that 2 PS players can dress each week

It's not that simple though.  A PS player can only be elevated twice in the year, and not for consecutive games. If they want to elevate a guy more than twice, or if they want to elevate him more than a week at a time, they have to do it the old fashion way.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...