ESPN Predicts Ventell Bryant to make the 53

[Whatever]

(08-29-2019, 01:41 PM)ochocincos Wrote: If I'm being honest, I don't think any of Tate, Core, or Malone really will become a good quality starter, so I think the debate about which one is better is really not a big deal. It comes down to which one would fill a better role on the team.

Core - ST gunner and straight-line speed.
Malone - Speed to get deep.
Tate - Slow but really good hands and size. Hearing his ST is improving.

Out of the three, Malone played the least amount of snaps (ST and Off) last year.
Core - 189 ST snaps, 310 offensive snaps
Malone - 27 ST snaps, 68 offensive snaps
Tate - 43 ST snaps, 77 offensive snaps

Some may point to Malone being hurt, but he was still available for 9 games, which was 2 more than Tate. Tate still put up more snaps and offensive production than Malone.

I'm sorry, but Malone seems like the odd man out to me.

I 100%agree that none of these guys is going to suddenly become some stud.  I mean, a rookie UDFA has come in and outshone all of them to the point where he gets to sit the last preseason game.

The big thing with Malone and Core is that you can plug them into any of the 3 WR spots and still run your full playbook.  You can't do that with Tate.

It's also being overlooked that Malone has looked good on kickoff returns, which ups his ST's value considerably.

Simmons' comments about Tate are also being overblown.  He basically said Tate learned his assignments, which he didn't last year, and you can't use him like you would traditionally use a WR on ST's because of his speed, which is really a backhanded compliment.  He isn't raving about Tate like some seem to suggest.

Core being in a contract year hurts him, but if we're only going 5 CB's and PUP'ing Dennard, you need to keep him as a gunner, especially if you plan on keeping Tate who can't play gunner.