I have a movie you need to watch it's called money ball! These are Gibson's numbers he gets on first base!
I don't like Gibson and I do not want him being our third receiver. Anyone who has closely watched Gibson has seen him run wrong routes(leaving Bradford out to dry), miss huge blocks in the run game and make all sorts of mistakes.Basically Gibson is making the mistakes a first year player is as a third year player and all while not contributing much.
I just do not understand why you are so against signing an impact receiver next year
And that's OK, I have spelled it out for you, we can leave it at that.
Givens takes a step back next year like many 2nd year players do?
What if Givens takes a step back next year like many 2nd year players do? Why do you keep saying Jennings "only" had 1,200 yards plus when Amendola and Givens have never even come close to matching those numbers?
Again it's a what if... that being said not sure you are right about that statement a lot of receivers get better in year two not regress, IMO. If you want to provide some stats to back that up I will like to see that.
Considering Givens has yet to finish one year we don't know that yet, 1200 yards was his best... Danny best 2,364 Amendola led the NFL in all-purpose yards with 2,364 2010. Not sure why you are acting like Amendola is a scrub. I would say Danny came close or surpassed his production.
Why do you keep saying Jennings "only" had 1,200 yards plus when Amendola and Givens have never even come close to matching those numbers?
We can play the what if all day! What if Jennings gets hurt next year then what? We paid him big money it could happen. Then what?
I provided you numbers for next year that shows we can get the production while we develop the younger WRs.
I just don't understand your theory at all. Just because we have two decent to good receivers it doesn't mean we no longer have a pressing need at WR.
What's so hard to understand. After next year Quick will be in his breakout year three, Givens will also be in his third year. Do you not think either or both of them will not be good in year three? I do, I think we can get enough production until they are full developed. Which is the following year. Now if you think they both will never be any good and you hate Gibson and think Amendola is injury prone and you don't want to draft a receiver this year to develop then yeah we need to go get a VET now. I don't, there will be a season in 2014.
Having 2 good receivers is not some sort of stockpile
I agree unlike you I think Quick will be good sooner then later and drafting another young WR will add to the depth along with a stud TE.
I think Bradford would say he had something to do with how the receivers played in the Jets game he was not at his best.
Most of the good times have multiple talented receivers.
It's almost like somehow last weeks game erased your memory of what's happened the last 2 years. Did you forget how awful our receiving corps played against the Jets?
Some how you forgot what Givens did last Sunday and has been doing. What happen the last two years has nothing to do with what Givens and Quick and a future rookie WR and TE will provide. I'm adding several offensives players to your one VET and you act like Jennings will somehow out produce them all next year and beyond. Jennings as pointed out to me he is 29, so in a few years when he is winding down. Givens, Quick, Williams and Eifert will be in their prime.
Also Wells has played 1 game how can you possibly insinuate that this draft class has no one who could contribute as much as him from day 1
Since you don't want to really try and understand the point I'm making.... I will communicate on your level. Jennings only has 12 catches for 78 yards one TD this year why would you want him?
Really he stinks!
Come on you can do better... you know Wells is hurt like I know Jennings is hurt, unlike you I did not factor Jennings lack of production this year in my example. I used his best and went back to 2011.
Again where did I state your idea was bad or that I'm dead set against it? We are in week 11 and I'm going to be looking at how all the players finish this year.
It just seems really strange you are dead set on focusing on drafting a receiver when the class is so mediocre and FA strong and signing an OL when the draft class is so strong.
If you really think there is not a WR we can take in the first round that will develop into a good WR then I disagree. Time will tell, if no WR go in the first round I will be the first to tell you, you called it.
If the draft class for the O line is so strong it makes sense to me, we can get a really good one in rounds two and three and add playmakers in round one.