Re: Devin Thomas' inconsistency continues
 

It will be interesting to see what happens to Patrick Crayton. I don't see hom making the Dallas roster.

Re: Devin Thomas' inconsistency continues
 

I'm honestly not as worried about our receivers as everyone else seems to be. I've seen Devin Thomas wide open so many times only to have Campbell not even look for him because he was locked onto another receiver the entire time. In the past, our offense has been hampered by a poor offensive line not giving Campbell much time and then Campbell not using the time he had effectively, thereby nullifying potential big plays on a regular basis.

In 2010, we have an improved offensive line, a hall of fame quarterback, a hall of fame coach, and one of the brightest young offensive coordinators in the league. Remember, neither Devin Thomas nor Malcom Kelly has ever played a game with a starting caliber quarterback and proven playcaller. If Kelly and Thomas are even #2 and #3 caliber receivers, our offense will be decent in 2010. Remeber, Shanahan's offense is pretty run-heavy anyways, and we've got two elite pass-catching TEs on the roster. The pressure on our WRs isnt going to be superdemanding. They only need to play a part. We arent relying on them to win games for us.

Re: Devin Thomas' inconsistency continues
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;705291]I'm honestly not as worried about our receivers as everyone else seems to be. I've seen Devin Thomas wide open so many times only to have Campbell not even look for him because he was locked onto another receiver the entire time. In the past, our offense has been hampered by a poor offensive line not giving Campbell much time and then Campbell not using the time he had effectively, thereby nullifying potential big plays on a regular basis.

In 2010, we have an improved offensive line, a hall of fame quarterback, a hall of fame coach, and one of the brightest young offensive coordinators in the league. Remember, neither Devin Thomas nor Malcom Kelly has ever played a game with a starting caliber quarterback and proven playcaller. If Kelly and Thomas are even #2 and #3 caliber receivers, our offense will be decent in 2010. Remeber, Shanahan's offense is pretty run-heavy anyways, and we've got two elite pass-catching TEs on the roster. The pressure on our WRs isnt going to be superdemanding. They only need to play a part. We arent relying on them to win games for us.[/quote]

You summed it up very well...I'd agree with all of it.

I'm also not worried about DT, I really think he'll break out this year despite (and maybe due to) not needing to be the key to the offense. Kelly should also do well in some games, but he's the inconsistent one we should be talking about. Galloway will be a possession, key catch kind of guy...much like James Thrash was...not a major factor but makes plays when we need him to.

2011: DT will be the #1 and MK will be on the hot seat to step up, basically Devin's position this year.

Re: Devin Thomas' inconsistency continues
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;705291]I'm honestly not as worried about our receivers as everyone else seems to be. I've seen Devin Thomas wide open so many times only to have Campbell not even look for him because he was locked onto another receiver the entire time. In the past, our offense has been hampered by a poor offensive line not giving Campbell much time and then Campbell not using the time he had effectively, thereby nullifying potential big plays on a regular basis.

In 2010, we have an improved offensive line, a hall of fame quarterback, a hall of fame coach, and one of the brightest young offensive coordinators in the league. Remember, neither Devin Thomas nor Malcom Kelly has ever played a game with a starting caliber quarterback and proven playcaller. If Kelly and Thomas are even #2 and #3 caliber receivers, our offense will be decent in 2010. Remeber, Shanahan's offense is pretty run-heavy anyways, and we've got two elite pass-catching TEs on the roster. The pressure on our WRs isnt going to be superdemanding. They only need to play a part. We arent relying on them to win games for us.[/quote]

I'm not overly concerned about the WR spot either. I think we'll get enough out of them to get the job done. McNabb worked with a lot less for most of his time in Philly and managed to put up big numbers. And we've got a pair of superb TE's to throw to as well.

Re: Devin Thomas' inconsistency continues
 

[quote=Buster;705294]You summed it up very well...I'd agree with all of it.

I'm also not worried about DT, I really think he'll break out this year despite (and maybe due to) not needing to be the key to the offense. Kelly should also do well in some games, but he's the inconsistent one we should be talking about. Galloway will be a possession, key catch kind of guy...much like James Thrash was...not a major factor but makes plays when we need him to.

2011: DT will be the #1 and MK will be on the hot seat to step up, basically Devin's position this year.[/quote]

so one thing i havent heard is what roles we are trying to put our receivers in? who's getting most of the #1 and #2 reps?

Re: Devin Thomas' inconsistency continues
 

[quote=Mattyk;705298]I'm not overly concerned about the WR spot either. I think we'll get enough out of them to get the job done. McNabb worked with a lot less for most of his time in Philly and managed to put up big numbers. And we've got a pair of superb TE's to throw to as well.[/quote]

Finally, we've got a quarterback worth picking up in fantasy football. I usually try to get atleast one redskin. Usually, its been Cooley, but i'm not sure if i'd consider him this year. With the emergence of Davis, I dont know if Cooley will be starting-TE material for FF.

Re: Devin Thomas' inconsistency continues
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;705304]Finally, we've got a quarterback worth picking up in fantasy football. I usually try to get atleast one redskin. Usually, its been Cooley, but i'm not sure if i'd consider him this year. With the emergence of Davis, I dont know if Cooley will be starting-TE material for FF.[/quote]

Yeah too early to tell how many snaps Davis might take away from Cooley. Still, hard to see CC not getting at least 60 catches IMO. I tend to think they'll be used together rather than one taking away time from the other.

Re: Devin Thomas' inconsistency continues
 

While the jury is definitely out, one thing I remember is that when Sherman Lewis took over play calling he seemed to be gradually bringing the 3 2nd rounders in to play. With Cooley out, FD had to step up, and did. In the next few games I remember DT starting to get some serious playing time, and then MK had his play in the finale. I hope those trends continue and we see a much more potent offense this year. Obviously, I can't wait till september!

Re: Devin Thomas' inconsistency continues
 

[quote=Mattyk;705305]Yeah too early to tell how many snaps Davis might take away from Cooley. Still, hard to see CC not getting at least 60 catches IMO. I tend to think they'll be used together rather than one taking away time from the other.[/quote]

i agree they'll probably be on the field alot together (reports are cooley has been lining up wide a lot), but having two good pass-catching TEs on a team hurts the players FF value the same way having two stud RBs on a team does. Its funny how with alot of positions, there are players i would pick on my FF team that i wouldnt necessarily want when assembling a real roster and vica versa.

Re: Devin Thomas' inconsistency continues
 

[quote=Mattyk;705277]I'm not sure anyone has made any iron clad predictions about these guys busting out. The general view seems to be that it's a little early to be worrying too much.

Personally I'm tired of folks tossing players to the curb prematurely. If some people had their way players would never get the chance to blossom. And we would have a team full of guys that shine in the preseason playing against 4th and 5th string players.

This is going to be a very telling year for both guys. Make or break.[/quote]

Hmm, you bring up an interesting point. Perhaps it wasn't you but I brought up Mason his second yr and everyone said no get rid of him. I said lets develope him for the future. I mention all the good news about these OTA's with Banks and Armstrong and people say stop worrying both will be gone by seasons start. I find it interesting how some players are ok to be developed and others are camp fodder. Just because we drafted them doesn't mean they are not camp fodder.

But like I said I'm on your side I too want to see what the new scheme will bring for them, but I would pick up a better insurance policy then Galloway and Wade.

Re: Devin Thomas' inconsistency continues
 

[quote=skinsfan69;705286]It will be interesting to see what happens to Patrick Crayton. I don't see hom making the Dallas roster.[/quote]

Nothing is going to happen to him unless he's traded for a player or someone throws draft picks at Dallas to get him. I wouldn't give Dallas anything and I seriously doubt they just cut him. The team has said they were not trading him then recently came out and said they wouldn't throw him away cause he's too valuable to them. Which to me means they will want compensation.

Re: Devin Thomas' inconsistency continues
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;705291]I'm honestly not as worried about our receivers as everyone else seems to be. I've seen Devin Thomas wide open so many times only to have Campbell not even look for him because he was locked onto another receiver the entire time. In the past, our offense has been hampered by a poor offensive line not giving Campbell much time and then Campbell not using the time he had effectively, thereby nullifying potential big plays on a regular basis.

In 2010, we have an improved offensive line, a hall of fame quarterback, a hall of fame coach, and one of the brightest young offensive coordinators in the league. Remember, neither Devin Thomas nor Malcom Kelly has ever played a game with a starting caliber quarterback and proven playcaller. If Kelly and Thomas are even #2 and #3 caliber receivers, our offense will be decent in 2010. Remeber, Shanahan's offense is pretty run-heavy anyways, and we've got two elite pass-catching TEs on the roster. The pressure on our WRs isnt going to be superdemanding. They only need to play a part. We arent relying on them to win games for us.[/quote]

Well they will also be required to partake in down field blocking for those runs or 10 yrd passes.

Re: Devin Thomas' inconsistency continues
 

[quote=SBXVII;705332]Hmm, you bring up an interesting point. Perhaps it wasn't you but I brought up Mason his second yr and everyone said no get rid of him. I said lets develope him for the future. I mention all the good news about these OTA's with Banks and Armstrong and people say stop worrying both will be gone by seasons start. I find it interesting how some players are ok to be developed and others are camp fodder. [B]Just because we drafted them doesn't mean they are not camp fodder.[/B]

But like I said I'm on your side I too want to see what the new scheme will bring for them, but I would pick up a better insurance policy then Galloway and Wade.[/quote]

Agreed but the simple fact is most of those preseason fan favorites don't make the team, and they don't make it for a reason.

Re: Devin Thomas' inconsistency continues
 

[quote=Mattyk;705335]Agreed but the simple fact is most of those preseason fan favorites don't make the team, and they don't make it for a reason.[/quote]

and I'll be honest the only reason we have kept these two WR's is cause we have so much invested in them. Meaning 2nd round picks and money spent on them. Otherwise I'd venture to say they would have been cut by now.

Re: Devin Thomas' inconsistency continues
 

[quote=SBXVII;705338]and I'll be honest the only reason we have kept these two WR's is cause we have so much invested in them. Meaning 2nd round picks and money spent on them. Otherwise I'd venture to say they would have been cut by now.[/quote]

Salaries aren't an issue, neither of them are making big money. They could be cut quite easily.

If we're having this same discussion next year at this time it would be reasonable to think they could be gone. After 2 years though it's still premature.