Re: Holt released by Rams
 

[quote=budw38;537017]It would not hurt to bring him in and put him through a workout ? If he can still run and shows a good burst , make him an offer , if Holt signs and that does not motivate the other wr's , nothing will . I will assume that the young guys have shown enough good things if we do not make Holt an offer . The O-Line is still our #1 issue .[/quote]

mark my words...despite the Jet's denial... Holt will be a Jet and be back with Coach Henry Ellard..perfect replacement for Coles

Re: Holt released by Rams
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;536989]Holt's numbers were better than ARE's.[/quote]

Not to mention that he has had 1,000 yrd season every yr except last. He has caught atleast 5 td's a yr mostly 7-10 every yr except last. If everyone is looking at last yr they are sadly mistaken to his talent.

He's definitly an upgrade over Thrash. I would cut Thrash...you know ...the guy who can only get 1 Td a yr if he's lucky. Bring in Holt and let the younger guys play. Holts aging. He is a #1 who would help out the team but I would use him sparingly and in certain packages to create mismatches. Atleast we would get more TD's perhaps and a true #1 until Kelly and Thomas step up and depth.

Re: Holt released by Rams
 

[quote=SBXVII;537038]Not to mention that he has had 1,000 yrd season every yr except last. He has caught atleast 5 td's a yr mostly 7-10 every yr except last. If everyone is looking at last yr they are sadly mistaken to his talent.

Bring in Holt and let the younger guys play. Holts aging. He is a #1 who would help out the team but I would use him sparingly and in certain packages to create mismatches. Atleast we would get more TD's perhaps and a true #1 until Kelly and Thomas step up and depth.[/quote]

if the younger guys are going to play..there should be no touchs for Holt..
Moss and Cooley will still get the ball..hopefully the other guys will earn their
looks

Re: Holt released by Rams
 

[quote=terpsez11;537039]if the younger guys are going to play..there should be no touchs for Holt..
Moss and Cooley will still get the ball..hopefully the other guys will earn their
looks[/quote]


and....if the younger guys don't show anything like last yr? what's our game plan? play the same WR's Moss, ARE, and Thrash. You all keep mentioning Cooley, keep in mind he's a TE not a WR. Yes he does catch the ball but he's not a #1 WR. So what's the game plan if Kelly and Thomas still are not getting open or running right routes?

It's been said it takes 2-3 yrs for WR's to become great. We need great now.

Re: Holt released by Rams
 

[quote=SBXVII;537041]and....if the younger guys don't show anything like last yr? what's our game plan? play the same WR's Moss, ARE, and Thrash. You all keep mentioning Cooley, keep in mind he's a TE not a WR. Yes he does catch the ball but he's not a #1 WR. So what's the game plan if Kelly and Thomas still are not getting open or running right routes?

It's been said it takes 2-3 yrs for WR's to become great. We need great now.[/quote]

You're not going to develop the young guys if you keep putting them on the back burner. They need to play now. Sure there's a chance one or both doesn't work out, but you're never going to know unless you play them.

Re: Holt released by Rams
 

Picking up another WR at this point is a worthless move if JC cannot get him the ball. I say we stick with what we have and if our rookies and/or JC cannot get the job done then we address that next year. People say the skins don't have any type of plan but then turn around everytime so was is dropped by a team want us to run out and sign them.

Re: Holt released by Rams
 

Holt has like 10 tds the last 2 seasons. He used to average 10 a season. If he was super-cheap I say yeah, But we can't pay him alot we don't have alot and have bigger concerns. Give the rookies a chance they've shown some promise at times, And how many times did JC overthrow him. Anyway Zorn is still ahead of expectation so everyone coming back for a 2nd year with Zorn can only be good.

Re: Holt released by Rams
 

[quote=firstdown;537046]Picking up another WR at this point is a worthless move if JC cannot get him the ball. I say we stick with what we have and if our rookies and/or JC cannot get the job done then we address that next year. People say the skins don't have any type of plan but then turn around everytime so was is dropped by a team want us to run out and sign them.[/quote]

You guys are funny. I don't mean to say lets pick up another WR and screw the OL. I was talking about picking up Holt and cutting Thrash. Thrash's whole career he never had a season where he got 1,000 yrds. Nor did he have like 10 TD's. So to cut him would be no harm done. Bringing in Holt would add a TD or two and the kids could learn from the best. I also never said lets bring in Holt, keep Thrash and not play Kelly and Thomas.

I could see Holt, Moss, and Kelly on the field. Maybe even a 4 set with Thomas. I probably would relegate ARE to 3rd or 4th WR spot.

Re: Holt released by Rams
 

Thrash's real value is on special teams. I'm not talking about returns. I'm talking about tackles, blocks, and the numerous times he's downed the ball deep in enemy territory. It doesn't make sense to bring Holt in to replace that, mainly because that's not what Holt does.

Re: Holt released by Rams
 

I would be more in favor of spending more for Holt and cutting Thrash if Holt could play special teams. A younger guy could add more to teams and we tend to forget how bad we sucked on teams last year. There are only so many roster spots. We can keep taking away from teams if we want to, but then don't complain when we can't get good field position because ST's suck.

Re: Holt released by Rams
 

I guess we were thinking the same thing around the same time Smoot.

Re: Holt released by Rams
 

Ok, for those of you who don't want Holt, may I ask the reason?

You can't say he's too old, we have Thrash on the team who is older.

You can't say he sucks because of one bad yr, due to team injuries. That would be like saying JC sucks simply cause the OL had issues.

You can't say he's another teams cast off cause I think most of us agree he was let go due to his high salary not due to his production last yr.

Most would agree he's an upgrade to our WR corpse so the only reason I can figure out is that you all just want to see what Kelly and Thomas bring to the table and so they will get experience. I'll agree the more playing time they get the better they will be, but I'm baffled as to why anyone would want to keep Thrash over Holt?

Everyone wanted a young WR out of the draft or most did. We got two. Everyone was satisfied thinking they were going to start right a way and be our CJ, T.O., or Randy Moss. How wrong we were. One didn't get in due to injuries the other played a limited role and only caught what....2 passes? I would count the third but is was brought back. So if you ask me this yr was a wash. If they get any significant playing time this yr I would count it as their Rookie yr playing. Especially for Kelly.

Having said that you guys are willing to bank that our two WR's from last yrs draft are going to come out and knock the socks off other teams? I have faith in the team but would always like an insurance policy in case for what ever reason Kelly has to go under the knife again, or Thomas still has not matured and not running good routes. If for any reason the two don't step up atleast I would feel more confortable going into the season with Moss, Holt, ARE instead of Moss, ARE, Thrash.

Re: Holt released by Rams
 

[quote=SmootSmack;537061]Thrash's real value is on special teams. I'm not talking about returns. I'm talking about tackles, blocks, and the numerous times he's downed the ball deep in enemy territory. It doesn't make sense to bring Holt in to replace that, mainly because that's not what Holt does.[/quote]


I agree his true and only value is to be a gunner. but if I'm not mistaken I thought Horton and some one other then Thrash and Rock got most of the tackles on SP's? I think it was....ummm..Thomas. If other people can do it then let Thrash go.

Re: Holt released by Rams
 

[quote=SBXVII;537066]Ok, for those of you who don't want Holt, may I ask the reason?

You can't say he's too old, we have Thrash on the team who is older.

You can't say he sucks because of one bad yr, due to team injuries. That would be like saying JC sucks simply cause the OL had issues.

You can't say he's another teams cast off cause I think most of us agree he was let go due to his high salary not due to his production last yr.

Most would agree he's an upgrade to our WR corpse so the only reason I can figure out is that you all just want to see what Kelly and Thomas bring to the table and so they will get experience. I'll agree the more playing time they get the better they will be, but I'm baffled as to why anyone would want to keep Thrash over Holt?

Everyone wanted a young WR out of the draft or most did. We got two. [B]Everyone was satisfied thinking they were going to start right a way and be our CJ, T.O., or Randy Moss.[/B] How wrong we were. [B]One didn't get in due to injuries the other played a limited role and only caught what....2 passes?[/B] I would count the third but is was brought back. So if you ask me this yr was a wash. If they get any significant playing time this yr I would count it as their Rookie yr playing. Especially for Kelly.

Having said that you guys are willing to bank that our two WR's from last yrs draft are going to come out and knock the socks off other teams? I have faith in the team but would always like an insurance policy in case for what ever reason Kelly has to go under the knife again, or Thomas still has not matured and not running good routes. If for any reason the two don't step up atleast I would feel more confortable going into the season with Moss, Holt, ARE instead of Moss, ARE, Thrash.[/quote]
Really? In their first year?
15 actually.

Re: Holt released by Rams
 

[quote=SBXVII;537066]Ok, for those of you who don't want Holt, may I ask the reason?

You can't say he's too old, we have Thrash on the team who is older.[/quote]

I'm not against cutting Thrash. But I don't see the value of cutting and old veteran who's currently our 5th or 6th receiver/special teams ace to bring in another old veteran WR who's not going to want to do the little things Thrash does and would probably impede the development of Kelly and Thomas

[quote]You can't say he sucks because of one bad yr, due to team injuries. That would be like saying JC sucks simply cause the OL had issues.[/quote]

I don't think he sucks at all

[quote]Most would agree he's an upgrade to our WR corpse so the only reason I can figure out is that you all just want to see what Kelly and Thomas bring to the table and so they will get experience. I'll agree the more playing time they get the better they will be, but I'm baffled as to why anyone would want to keep Thrash over Holt?[/quote]

Corpse? Freudian slip there

[quote]Everyone wanted a young WR out of the draft or most did. We got two. Everyone was satisfied thinking they were going to start right a way and be our CJ, T.O., or Randy Moss. How wrong we were. One didn't get in due to injuries the other played a limited role and only caught what....2 passes? I would count the third but is was brought back. So if you ask me this yr was a wash. If they get any significant playing time this yr I would count it as their Rookie yr playing. Especially for Kelly.

Having said that you guys are willing to bank that our two WR's from last yrs draft are going to come out and knock the socks off other teams? I have faith in the team but would always like an insurance policy in case for what ever reason Kelly has to go under the knife again, or Thomas still has not matured and not running good routes. If for any reason the two don't step up atleast I would feel more confortable going into the season with Moss, Holt, ARE instead of Moss, ARE, Thrash.[/quote]

I think Thomas had like 15 catches