NickelCity

I'm counting Bernard out based on too-early reports and too-harsh size judgements. Which means Spector is maybe the only "exciting" choice. It's fun to route for some of these guys during the summer lol.

I don't think much on sherfield today other than hearing that he was shut down by Dane (in early 1x1s? Can't recall). Would be a big boost if he can add something reliable to this team...

I think on other teams, Elam might be further along in his learning curve. We have other viable options here which seems to have led to a more gradual approach with him. I'd love to see him get tons of playing time early in the season. Nothing like learning by doing.

Would be great to have a reliable RT on the roster, but I'm not sure we do. It's a shame neither Brown nor Doyle inspire much confidence.

This sucks.

Good signing for them.

Grab a sup and a fly rod and chase the tailing permit and juvenile tarpon in that lagoon...

Nice. Love that Montana has a zillion options, cool to see some for WNY.

Nonsense.

We are kindred spirits with Evertonians. That's for damn sure.

The OLine has to perform, we need multiple receiving options beyond diggs to show up every week, and the defense needs to perform in the playoffs. Plus a ton of luck. Winning the Superbowl requires a bunch of it.

So was it OLine, pay design, Josh? All?

Me neither. That was ridiculous. @Mark Vader and I were watching at the local bar and I blame that performance for my poor attendance from there on out lol.

It's absolutely wild that this hasn't made it past a single page.

Your prior post suggested two distinct benefits: getting rid of diggs, and adding Jefferson. One of those is a win and one isn't. And yes, on aggregate, we all know the vikings replaced one of the best receivers in the game with the best receiver in the game and are reasonably happy with the net gain.

Obviously. But they haven't won a thing and "getting rid of diggs" isn't a net positive despite this thread and drama. Sheesh.

It's only a soap opera for weirdos like us. This is a headline-only story for a couple days in June to most football fans.

No argument from me on that.

I believe he sees it as poor situational usage. I couldn't tell you if Stef was targeted less in critical moments and games, and I don't have an argument that he wasn't. But for the offense as a whole, despite the stats, looked a bit out of sorts for much of the year. Or at least had long spells where things looked more difficult for them than I would have expected. It's certainly possible that my nebulous "eye test" is incorrect fan nonsense, but they sure didn't look as efficient as we've seen them to me. Certainly Josh not taking the short and intermediate options as the year progressed made it seem like a boom/bust operation.

This could absolutely be rose colored glasses - but I bet he's thinking about how he feels he could be better leveraged to win, as opposed to just stat hunting. (The two are related, I realize)

Yes. I thought that was relatively self explanatory.

Like many aspects of the Dorsey offense, the aggregate statistics appear to gloss over the situational shortcomings of the play calling/ execution.

If he's putting pressure on Dorsey and how the offense is conducted, he's in line with a lot of the fans. As a professional today is a weird look, but I've got no qualms with more scrutiny on offensive play calling. (If this is related to that, which I believe it is)

You don't say?

Our potential success is hugely dependent on Josh taking the short and intermediate throws. We've seen him do it ad nauseam to become one of the best in the game. Let's hope the abandonment of it last year was an aberration...I think it was.