NewEra Posted September 3, 2019 Posted September 3, 2019 Maybe they’re listing Zay as a starter because it’ll raise his value as they’re desperately trying to trade him? 1
Kelly the Dog Posted September 3, 2019 Posted September 3, 2019 1 minute ago, NewEra said: Maybe they’re listing Zay as a starter because it’ll raise his value as they’re desperately trying to trade him? It's not surprising at all, as that is the way they have been running all preseason. If they come out with three WR then Zay is likely to be one of them, although it may be Foster. If they play two it will be Brown and Beasley.
ndirish1978 Posted September 3, 2019 Posted September 3, 2019 Man would I rather have Nsekhe at T and Ford at G 2
RoyBatty is alive Posted September 3, 2019 Posted September 3, 2019 Just now, ndirish1978 said: Man would I rather have Nsekhe at T and Ford at G Ford at T to me is a great sign they have a lot of confidence in him and he could prove to be extremely valuable OT for years to come.
Wayne Arnold Posted September 3, 2019 Posted September 3, 2019 1 minute ago, ndirish1978 said: Man would I rather have Nsekhe at T and Ford at G Best five linemen regardless of position. 1 1
HT02 Posted September 3, 2019 Posted September 3, 2019 I like that we are starting 12 players, smart! 5
NewEra Posted September 3, 2019 Posted September 3, 2019 1 minute ago, Kelly the Dog said: It's not surprising at all, as that is the way they have been running all preseason. If they come out with three WR then Zay is likely to be one of them, although it may be Foster. If they play two it will be Brown and Beasley. My bad, it was more sarcasm than anything. I fully expected him to be the starter as Beasley only really plays the slot 1
nucci Posted September 3, 2019 Posted September 3, 2019 Just now, HT02 said: I like that we are starting 12 players, smart! creates a mismatch 1 2
Laughing Coffin Posted September 3, 2019 Posted September 3, 2019 I don't put too much weight into these unofficial depth charts as they've been all over the place before, but it's interesting that they have Singletary listed as the backup KOR lol
Kelly the Dog Posted September 3, 2019 Posted September 3, 2019 Barring late injuries, it will be relatively tough to predict the inactive list. Two OL, likely McDermott and Boettinger One safety, probably Johnson but maybe Marlowe. One TE, Kroft. After that it gets dicey. Maybe they dress only 5 LB, likely Mo Alexander. Foster or Isaiah may not be active, which would suck IMO. It's possible they dress only seven OL with Bates being able to play anywhere. Maybe they dress only three safeties with Neal being able to slide in a pinch.
YoloinOhio Posted September 3, 2019 Author Posted September 3, 2019 9 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said: Barring late injuries, it will be relatively tough to predict the inactive list. Two OL, likely McDermott and Boettinger One safety, probably Johnson but maybe Marlowe. One TE, Kroft. After that it gets dicey. Maybe they dress only 5 LB, likely Mo Alexander. Foster or Isaiah may not be active, which would suck IMO. It's possible they dress only seven OL with Bates being able to play anywhere. Maybe they dress only three safeties with Neal being able to slide in a pinch. It will likely depend on the game plan but I think Neal dresses since he’s so versatile and they don’t have a lot of outside corner depth. I think foster is active. They will want to test Trumaine Johnson’s bum hammy early on.
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted September 3, 2019 Posted September 3, 2019 9 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said: Barring late injuries, it will be relatively tough to predict the inactive list. Two OL, likely McDermott and Boettinger One safety, probably Johnson but maybe Marlowe. One TE, Kroft. After that it gets dicey. Maybe they dress only 5 LB, likely Mo Alexander. Foster or Isaiah may not be active, which would suck IMO. It's possible they dress only seven OL with Bates being able to play anywhere. Maybe they dress only three safeties with Neal being able to slide in a pinch. One WR too I'm sure. I'll be surprised if it isn't Foster particularly if he's not 100% yet as he basically is a clone of Brown, really doesn't bring anything different where as McKenzie has some more unique talents.
YoloinOhio Posted September 3, 2019 Author Posted September 3, 2019 3 minutes ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said: One WR too I'm sure. I'll be surprised if it isn't Foster particularly if he's not 100% yet as he basically is a clone of Brown, really doesn't bring anything different where as McKenzie has some more unique talents. I could see some jet sweeps with McKenzie, put some stress on their LBs where they are thin
whatdrought Posted September 3, 2019 Posted September 3, 2019 I like Ford at T- positional value says that if we can have it either way, we want him to be a T, not a guard. That way as well, We have Ty for either side if needed. I'm surprised to see Milano listed as the Strong backer, I always thought he was the WLB. Is that a misjudgment on my end, or has something changed there? Glad to see Gore is listed as the starter- I expect it to be pretty heavy in the rotation though. I love that Levi Wallace had that spot locked down from day one- I expect a big jump from him. Really excited to see D. Johnson backing up Murphy- I think that bodes well for his playing time. He and Lawson are not terrible depth at End at all. Our DL looks deep, and I like that- rotational DL is critical in todays NFL.
DCbillsfan Posted September 3, 2019 Posted September 3, 2019 42 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said: Barring late injuries, it will be relatively tough to predict the inactive list. Two OL, likely McDermott and Boettinger One safety, probably Johnson but maybe Marlowe. One TE, Kroft. After that it gets dicey. Maybe they dress only 5 LB, likely Mo Alexander. Foster or Isaiah may not be active, which would suck IMO. It's possible they dress only seven OL with Bates being able to play anywhere. Maybe they dress only three safeties with Neal being able to slide in a pinch. Teams usually only dress 7 OL. So Bates, McDermott, and Boettger likely not dressing.
RiotAct Posted September 3, 2019 Posted September 3, 2019 55 minutes ago, CLTbills said: I love the "Pronunciation guide" remember, it’s LEE-vye. Not Levvie or Luh-VYEZ 1
Recommended Posts