Wrong Zach Miller.Tical21":ejav0uud said:Did anybody see what Zach Miller did today? Thurmond playing well. Malcolm Smith playing well.
peppersjap":11q96afn said:How many weeks are we going to get the "Zack Miller" comment? The Zack Miller that played for us is sitting at home raising his children and not playing football. As far as Unger being missed, there are plenty of other people on the inactive list where he was most of last year. He was going to be overpaid and probably would have been a salary cap casualty. So tired of hearing about who we should have kept when people would have freaked if we didn't sign Wagner, Sherman, Thomas, etc.
Sports Hernia":31giecz8 said:Wrong Zach Miller.Tical21":31giecz8 said:Did anybody see what Zach Miller did today? Thurmond playing well. Malcolm Smith playing well.
jammerhawk":9qi8o3hg said:The only player the team really to me misses is Tate. Unger was ready to be moved out. Giacomini was a big tough guy with a penchant for taking penalties. I doubt the team thought he was the answer at RT and were likely unwilling to pay him what the Jets did. I miss his physicality but not the stupid penalties.
TwistedHusky":mp980bm3 said:"Lockett is a good Tate replacement."
HAHAHAHAHA
No.
Lockett occasionally runs a few TDs back, occasionally catches a TD pass, and every now and then catches a few passes between.
Tate was a consistent threat, a 3rd down converter and ridiculously good at fighting for the ball. Those passes Lockett went up and missed? Tate would have had. To be fair, Tate was pretty mediocre his first few years, so maybe Lockett turns into that - but overall value of Tate now vs Lockett now? Not comparable.
razor150":1b2qv5ds said:TwistedHusky":1b2qv5ds said:"Lockett is a good Tate replacement."
HAHAHAHAHA
No.
Lockett occasionally runs a few TDs back, occasionally catches a TD pass, and every now and then catches a few passes between.
Tate was a consistent threat, a 3rd down converter and ridiculously good at fighting for the ball. Those passes Lockett went up and missed? Tate would have had. To be fair, Tate was pretty mediocre his first few years, so maybe Lockett turns into that - but overall value of Tate now vs Lockett now? Not comparable.
I am not talking now more towards the future. He is a far better returner then Tate ever was. Tate now is shining largely because he is 2nd fiddle, and I don't mean that to take anything away from him. He is great in his role, and the scheme he is in helps reach his full potential. Here he is the #1, with a system not as suited for him, and he just wasn't as effective here as he is in Detroit.
Would it be nice to have him? Sure it would. Would he make a huge difference? I am not as sure about that.