Antonio Posted November 8 Posted November 8 Mack is what he is, a good No. 4 WR that has been called to be the No. 2 due to injury and he has performed ok. He has couple of TDs, important 3rd down convertion (last week at least), cuple of nice catches, some good blocks on runs and short passes, good ST. Why the hate?! 2 Quote
GoBills808 Posted November 8 Posted November 8 More like why are we arguing about mack hollins lol Quote
NewEra Posted November 8 Posted November 8 39 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said: Your reasoning is so selective. "only game where Josh HAD to throw to Mack..." Josh Allen throws to eight to ten guys every game. "Josh had one of the worst games of his career and Amari was a Bill a week later." After which they immediately cut... MVS. I'm not even sure what your point is. Do you think I'm arguing that Mack Hollins is a #2 WR? I'm not. He's a #4, role player, and valuable as such. He often creates them once he realizes he has no leg to stand on. As in this case. He’s done it several times in just this discussion 16 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: More like why are we arguing about mack hollins lol Because some say he sucks. Some say he’s useless. Some say he’s overpaid. While none of them are true. He has a role on this team and has been very successful in that role. the “look at this receiving yards” crew is grasp in by at straws. That’s a small part of why he’s here and why we plays. Quote
GoBills808 Posted November 8 Posted November 8 2 minutes ago, NewEra said: He often creates them once he realizes he has no leg to stand on. As in this case. He’s done it several times in just this discussion Because some say he sucks. Some say he’s useless. Some say he’s overpaid. While none of them are true. He has a role on this team and has been very successful in that role. the “look at this receiving yards” crew is grasp in by at straws. That’s a small part of why he’s here and why we plays. ok i haven't read this whole thread full disclosure but i think there's justification for both 'he's not a very good NFL player' and 'he has a role on a team w a bad WR room' 1 Quote
Saxum Posted November 8 Posted November 8 15 minutes ago, NewEra said: the “look at this receiving yards” crew is grasp in by at straws. That’s a small part of why he’s here and why we plays. It reminds me of Robert Woods whose play (12 TDs, 2451 yards in 4 years) was discounted by fans who did a lot more than just catch the ball. 1 Quote
GoBills808 Posted November 8 Posted November 8 9 minutes ago, Saxum said: It reminds me of Robert Woods whose play (12 TDs, 2451 yards in 4 years) was discounted by fans who did a lot more than just catch the ball. this is such a terrible comparison lol hollins and woods are literally nothing alike. not their play, not their situation, not their perceived value by fans Quote
ChevyVanMiller Posted November 8 Posted November 8 I honestly opened this thread thinking Trump had told a follow-up to his Arnie Palmer story. Quote
Rocky Landing Posted November 8 Author Posted November 8 (edited) 3 hours ago, GoBills808 said: ok i haven't read this whole thread full disclosure but i think there's justification for both 'he's not a very good NFL player' and 'he has a role on a team w a bad WR room' Shakir is one of the best slot receivers in the league. And if we had acquired Davante Adams, instead of Cooper, and Coleman was playing like a 1,200 yard receiver (which he was starting to do before Poyer took him out), then Mack Hollins would still be on the 53, and still getting significant playing time. In my opinion. Edited November 8 by Rocky Landing Quote
FireChans Posted November 8 Posted November 8 2 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said: Shakir is one of the best slot receivers in the league. And if we had acquired Davante Adams, instead of Cooper, and Coleman was playing like a 1,200 yard receiver (which he was starting to do before Poyer took him out), then Mack Hollins would still be on the 53, and still getting significant playing time. In my opinion. Would Mack Hollins be getting significant playing time if we acquired Darius Slayton AND Cooper/Coleman were healthy? More importantly, should he be? Quote
Captain Hindsight Posted November 8 Posted November 8 4 hours ago, Antonio said: Mack is what he is, a good No. 4 WR that has been called to be the No. 2 due to injury and he has performed ok. He has couple of TDs, important 3rd down convertion (last week at least), cuple of nice catches, some good blocks on runs and short passes, good ST. Why the hate?! Quote
Rocky Landing Posted November 8 Author Posted November 8 (edited) 1 hour ago, FireChans said: Would Mack Hollins be getting significant playing time if we acquired Darius Slayton AND Cooper/Coleman were healthy? More importantly, should he be? Of course he wouldn't be on the field as often, under that scenario. But, under your scenario, I imagine they would probably cut Samuel. And (I suppose to your chagrin), we would still be seeing Hollins on the field for blocking, check-downs, screens, and some red zone situations. He would still have a role on offense. Edited November 8 by Rocky Landing Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.