Quote:
Originally Posted by 30gut
Even if we're rebuilding (which I doubt) it makes sense for an offense to have a foundation.
Our best offensive unit was our passing game.
Moss was the focal point of a passing attack that only had 1 other viable WR threat yet was still able to produce like a top WR.
If you take Moss out of the equation you're asking an unproven group of WRs to become the focal point of the best unit (arguably the only good unit) on this team.
And even if Moss is re-signed all those wasted targets that went to Joey Galloway and Roydel Williams would be enough to for at least 1 other WR threat to emerge.
And 1 other target would help an already good passing attack be even better.
|
Ultimately, I don't believe Santana is going to be part of the foundation of the offense. You could be right. We might let him walk, and he signs elsewhere, and then we watch Armstrong struggle with additional coverage on him, and Kelly can't get on the field, and Terrence Austin gets easily taken away by single coverage. Then there is no foundation on which to build the receiving corps until Hankerson develops.
But at the very least, in the absolute worst case scenario, Hankerson would get the opportunities to produce as a no. 1 type as a rookie, and he can't do that if Moss is here. I would prefer to just do what Tampa Bay did, and not extend Antonio Bryant into his mid thirties, but rather take the steal of the draft at the receiver position, put him on the field, and end up with a "Top 100" player four months later.