Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 16 to 28 of 28
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,490
    Butt was Mark Sanchez's favorite receiver.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Nelson, BC
    Posts
    19,414
    Quote Originally Posted by RocketArm006 View Post
    This thread stinks. I think a mod should wipe it clean.
    But I can’t figure out if the Klingon Lives matter
    http://s7.postimg.org/hjr8fcmaz/EM2.jpg

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Bear Valley in The 5280
    Posts
    14,599
    Quote Originally Posted by EddieMac View Post
    But I can’t figure out if the Klingon Lives matter

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Las Manzanitas, NM
    Posts
    31,823
    So much for a thread on Jeff Heuerman and which Tight Ends might make the roster.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,593
    Quote Originally Posted by samparnell View Post
    So much for a thread on Jeff Heuerman and which Tight Ends might make the roster.
    Allow me to help you out with this. I personally think they’ll probably go with 4

    Fant, Albert O, Vannett, Beck.

    I’m thinking Fant and Albert O will be the receiving TEs (obviously) with Beck and Vannett taking the blocking roles. I expect to see a bit more of Beck than Vannett just because he’s more of a utility player.

    I personally like Beck a lot. I really liked what I saw out of him last year. Still, with all of the offensive additions, there will only be so many receptions to divvy out.

    We’ll see how it all shakes down.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    5,799
    Fant, Albert O, Vannett, Beck.


    This is where I see us as well. The only question mark will be T.Fumagali. if he make a leap this year would we see him on the roster instead of Beck? I personally don't think so but you never know.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    FORT COLLINS COLORADO
    Posts
    8,631
    I could see us keeping 5 if we use beck or a te as a fullback

  8. #23
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,593
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyousukeneko View Post
    I could see us keeping 5 if we use beck or a te as a fullback
    This wouldn’t shock me. I’m just not sure how many TEs/FB will be utilized in Shurmur’s system. I personally don’t foresee many 3+TE formations in this offense, but I certainly could be wrong.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,413
    If I am understanding the changes there will be not just an expanded roster but more ability to move players between the active roster, inactive, and practice squads from week to week. Also some protections of your practice squad players not so easily picked up by other teams.

    Heard it being discussed by a couple local sports radio hosts. Pondering how it would be similar to MLB or NBA "bringing up a player" for a coulple games then assigning them back to the minors or G-League. Not positive if it was approved for the NFL season or still being discussed. But I like the concept if it has not been approved for the season.

    Normal IR assignments just don't make sense in this uncertain climate.

    If the team can have that kind of flexibility and protection I could see a 5th TE being kept. Under normal years, only 4 would be kept IMO. Going to be interesting to see how many unexpected or longshot players actually make the team without pre=season games. At multiple positions not just TE. But in this case, can Fumagalli, Fort or Butt earn a spot in limited practices?

  10. #25
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    FORT COLLINS COLORADO
    Posts
    8,631
    Quote Originally Posted by RocketArm006 View Post
    This wouldn’t shock me. I’m just not sure how many TEs/FB will be utilized in Shurmur’s system. I personally don’t foresee many 3+TE formations in this offense, but I certainly could be wrong.
    ya he doesn't use FB much but i could still see us rolling with 3 rbs and 5 te. while situationally using a TE as a FB. like beck has experence in this role. i would say it is more likely to see 2 TE with one lined up at FB or h-back. then a traditional FB. either Shurmer doesn't utilize fb much

    oakland raders gm
    latavis murray trade bait

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,413
    There are some interesting options in that TE group.

    I am excited to see if Fant and Albert O can be in together. Both mismatchs for opposing defenses and big play ability. Broncos can create a lot of pressure and opportunities with the WRs and those two on the field.

    Vannett has the reputation as a good blocker that can catch. Potentially valuable to help the OTs if either struggle or in the run game. Beck similar rep but has the mobility to be in as a FB if needed.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    136
    About. Damn. Time.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Muscatine, Iowa
    Posts
    15,152
    Jeff had the greatest nickname.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •