Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?
True, Cox is very important and should be back. He has played very well. Reed, well see you later buddy! Let him go, and give , doss, Thompson , and Williams a shot. And Harewood, well we can find another cheaper depth player for him.
So of those three, only Cox is important to bring back. Highly important!!
Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
alien bird
If the Ravens choose to keep Jacoby Jones and plan on drafting a WR, I see the handwriting on the wall for David Reed. With limited value at that point, he might end up like Marcus Smith, losing out in a numbers game.
Unless its Tavon Austin the Ravens probably aren't drafting a receiver. Their first 3 are set (pending potential restructures) with Tandon Doss being giving every chance to be the fourth receiver.
I really think that Tommy Streeter will end up being the 5th receiver and may move up if he shows anything in practice. He's a 6'5" guy with speed but if he can consistently catch the ball he's going to be productive.
Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bmore finest
True, Cox is very important and should be back. He has played very well. Reed, well see you later buddy! Let him go, and give , doss, Thompson , and Williams a shot. And Harewood, well we can find another cheaper depth player for him.
So of those three, only Cox is important to bring back. Highly important!!
Agreed, do not mess with the kicking game. I seem to remember us winning a couple games this year and one that extended our season in Denver because of the help of Mr. Cox. This should be a non-debate.
Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?
Harewood according to PFF is a good run blocking guard. Top 1/3 among his peers. His pass pro stinks, but he only surrendered 1 sack (12 hurries though). Again, as per PFF. Having said that, I can't imagine us not giving Harewood an ORD tender.
I would not tender Reed.
Give Cox the league minimum? What are the options for UDFAs?
Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?
I wouldn't be quick to give up on Harewood especially with Castillo on the coaching staff. Lets see what Castillo can do with him.
Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Excellector
You know, your line of thinking with the long snapper is exactly why the New York Giants used to screw the pooch in the postseason, before they eventually came around to winning the Super Bowl. Special teams takes timing, rhythm and stability to be successful. You can't just go cheap everywhere. It's not that hard to end up with a long snapper that shoots it high and costs you a game. You get what you pay for.
As for Ramon Harewood, his talent will lend to him getting the low tender and playing out his rookie contract. The one guy I would not tender is David Reed.
I'm with you on Morgan Cox. We've seen teams lose playoff games because of a long snapper. Since Cox has been here we've never even thought about the position. That's exactly what you want. I think it would be nuts not to tender him.
Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
B-more Ravor
Normally, I would agree, but this year with such a tight Cap, I could see one or two of these guys being non-tendered.
I'm sure they would offer them minimum deals to return, but it's possible that the player might rather try his luck elsewhere.
I think we've done this before...non-tendered a guy and then given him a pretty fair deal straight up. Ramon Harewood and David Reed have little shots of hooking on elsewhere for much more money. Morgan Cox is a tough call, we've generally found talented LS in UDFA time and time again. But I do remember what happened the last year Katula was here, his hand got injured and a bunch of snaps got messed up.
Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Paintballguy
I wouldn't be quick to give up on Harewood especially with Castillo on the coaching staff. Lets see what Castillo can do with him.
Harewood was a starter the first game of the season. They must see something in him. I think he gets tendered too.
Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?
I'm thinking that Reed is still valuable to the team. At a minimum I would not tender him but offer him a contract and I might just tender him anyway.
Right now Reed is the 5th WR on the team, behind Boldin, Smith, Jones, and Doss, and ahead of Williams, and Streeter. He's also a good special teams guy, something that any WR that far down the pecking order needs to be. Looking forward, I am not sure how the team views Williams vs Reed, but it is hard to imagine Streeter moving ahead of him in the pecking order cause Streeter was pretty bad last year at training camp. Honestly Streeter looks close to a bust and if he were not a draft pick he would have been cut. I would also say that Reed is closer to overtaking Doss than losing ground to other WR's.
It is also hard to see the team picking a WR like Austin (a high draft pick) unless the team cuts Jones or Boldin so I think there's a good chance that next year the team will use the same WR corps as last year. Of course with a non-Cam-led offense the pecking order of the WR's might change this offseason...