Bengals interested in Jordy Nelson

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(03-13-2018, 11:42 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: What does that even mean, Truck?

They had good enough wide receivers for the 27th ranked passing offense last year. How do you look at it and go "nah, we're good"? Was it a planned 27th passive offense, and any better would mess up the plan or something?

 Lol... just such a weird statement that somehow this offense makes better players somehow unnecessary. As if Lazor is talking to Marvin and Mike "Whatever you guys do, don't give me any WRs not named AJ Green who can run good routes, get open frequently, or make big plays. That'll just mess up EVERYTHING for my LaFell-5-yard-pass offense."




BTW: The Packers were in a 3-way tie for 17th in passing plays of 40+ yards. The year before they were in a 4-way tie for 10th. The year before that they were in a 3-way tie for 29th. Apparently that's throwing 50 yard bombs all day?

Yeah, because Aaron Rodgers played a full season, right? Because Hundley has the arm and talent to throw bombs like Rodgers, right?

It has been stated that we will be running a more balanced offense, "running the ball alot," and all that.

We don't need two 1500 yard receivers, if we're running the ball a lot; again, it will far from hurt us, but how useful would adding him REALLY be? Fix the oline and plug the holes before adding a luxury.

This is T.O. all over again (though even I didn't see 2010 being like it was...)

That's all I meant by that, easy with the snark.

EDIT: Not to play, he said, she said or to turn this into a popularity contest, but it seems that many understood and agree with my statement.

Just like the piece, its an opinion and I feel that with how our offense is, "supposed to be," we will not have a need for two big-time receivers, when there are other, more-pressing issues.