Thread Rating:
  • 3 Vote(s) - 4.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
"We're not trading that guy"
#66
(10-10-2019, 11:31 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: The problem with more 2 TE sets is that Boyd is the only WR that can get open. Now, IF/WHEN Green comes back...that's a different story.

That's why I said 2 TE sets with Mixon and Gio on the field at the same time...

Boyd and the best Receiver out of Willis, Tate and Morgan until AJ gets back.


(10-11-2019, 08:27 AM)jason Wrote: The leading the AFC in rushing is a talking point more than it's some great accomplishment. Le'Veon Bell didn't play, Melvin Gordon got injured, Nick Chubb didn't start getting a healthy workload til the season was half over. Kareem Hunt didn't finish the season... And Elliot, Kamara, and Gurley are in the NFC. But yes; he lead the AFC in rushing.

Mixon also missed two games and still led the AFC in rushing.

He is not a dime a dozen RB and to say so is crazy. The run blocking just needs to get better.


(10-11-2019, 09:23 AM)bengalfan74 Wrote: Yep

We're the 26th ranked offense in the NFL averaging 16 points a game. We're in 11 personnel (1RB, 1TE, 3 WR) the most in the NFL 83% of the time !

We need to get Eifert, Uzomah, Mixon, and Gio on the field more and more involved in the passing game. Mixon and Gio are both averaging like 2.5 catches a game, they need to double that. And not just the screens we can't run.

If we had AJ and Ross 11 personnel would make more sense.

You know it BF74, that is ridiculously predictable. We just throw all the time and the Receivers aren't good blockers in the
run game. We line up TE's who can block and catch along with Mixon and Gio who are not just runners but are Receivers 
and you suddenly become unpredictable and you WILL run it better I guaranfrickintee it.
Reply/Quote





Messages In This Thread
"We're not trading that guy" - pally - 10-10-2019, 05:10 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - Okeana - 10-10-2019, 08:06 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - JSR18 - 10-12-2019, 12:24 AM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - J24 - 10-10-2019, 06:30 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-10-2019, 08:58 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 08:27 AM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 02:09 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 02:33 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 08:20 AM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - Synric - 10-10-2019, 09:39 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - Synric - 10-11-2019, 07:29 AM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - HuDey - 10-11-2019, 12:42 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - Nate (formerly eliminate08) - 10-11-2019, 03:19 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 05:28 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 06:07 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)