Quote:
Originally Posted by SBXVII
Yes, it's stupid. but when your trying to upgrade why not look to see if you could possibly upgrade across the board to make your team better.
It was very apparent by the opposing comments that Holt is:
1. Better then Thrash.
2. Better then ARE.
3. Better then Kelly and Thomas.
4. Would upgrade this offense.
5. Too old.
6. On the decline.
7. and people would rather stay mediocre and develope Kelly and Thomas instead of having a proven WR to help this team if Kelly and Thomas don't step up this yr again.
No hard feelings. I'm not bedding the dude or anything so I don't care if we pick him up or not. I was simply trying to point out he would upgrade us. As far as trading out Thrash? Who in there right mind would keep him when he had only 1 TD (very productive) and old versus a Holt who usually has 1,000 yrd and has 12yrd avg each yr, and usually no less then 7 TD's? but I was totally wrong. We should keep Thrash. Maybe it will force Kelly and Thomas to step up, hopefully, but this would be my last yr with Hixon if I were the team if he and they not productive.
|
ARE is a "proven" WR, though. So you sign Holt and bump ARE to No. 3. Okay, that makes us better in the short term. It also totally blocks the second-year guys from playing in the short term.
So you bump Randle El out of the top three guys to make room for Malcolm Kelly/Devin Thomas to split third receiver reps. Well, now you're not any better in the short-term. Holt plays the same role Randle El plays in the offense, except he has a small learning curve due to the scheme and Randle El is not on the field, rather he's still returning punts which he isn't good at anyway.
Basically, the only way it makes any sense is that we pick him up at a fraction of the cost of Thrash, and then slot him on the bench beneeth Kelly and Thomas as an insurance policy should Moss or Randle El get hurt, while Kelly is not developing. Yeah, I'm sure Holt is coming here to do that.