USA Today predicts us 5-11

[ehb5]

Best receiving TE in football?

Are you forgetting Gronk, Travis Kelce and Greg Olsen? 10th among TEs in rec. yards, 7th among TEs in receptions and 10th among TEs in YAC. If you could get your RB situation handled you guys would be okay but it wouldn't matter much because of the Cowboys and Giants.

Gronk is better. That's it.

 

[Ruzious]

Gronk is by far the best receiving TE in football too.

He might have been; he isn't now - after his injury problems. This isn't my opinion, or some local guys' opinion, it's NFL analysts - that Jordan Reed is the best pass-catching TE now in the NFL.

 

[Yo Tee]

No, I'm listening to people who actually play or played the game saying he's is the NUMBER ONE receiving TE in all of football. Gronk blocks, too, and is a better all-around player. Olsen's awesome.

I think they know you're a Redskins fan and are just blowing smoke up you ass haha Reed might be in the top 5 but definitely not the best.

 

[Yo Tee]

Gronk is better. That's it.

Olsen is better as well. Would even argue Kelce is better too.

 

[j_y19]

Gronk and Olsen are better overall TEs, but Reed is arguably one of the best receiving TEs. He catches everything and runs great routes. LBs and safeties just can't cover him one on one. He has a ways to go, however, before he can be talked about in the same breath as Gronk. For starters, he needs to play an entire season. While Gronk has also suffered injuries the last couple of years, he has a much more consistent body of work. Reed puts in 16 games this year, and he will be, with out a doubt, a PB selection.

 

[ehb5]

Olsen is better as well. Would even argue Kelce is better too.

As all around TEs maybe but Reed is a better receiver.

 

[gkekoa]

As all around TEs maybe but Reed is a better receiver.

I like Reed a lot and tend to agree with your statement, but there is little evidence to suggest he is better than Gronk, Kielce, Olsen, or Graham at being a receiver of the football.

 

[ehb5]

I like Reed a lot and tend to agree with your statement, but there is little evidence to suggest he is better than Gronk, Kielce, Olsen, or Graham at being a receiver of the football.

Well hes not better than Gronk. Gronk is the GOAT.

But I think hes better than the rest as a receiver though theyre all very good. I mean the dudes basically uncoverable. His route running is unparalleled (although there are other ways to win and in a way this might go back to the size speed discussion lol).

 

[Skin'EmAll]

I think injuries are the only thing that prevent Reed from being the 3rd overall TE in the NFL.
Gronk and Olsen are better, I won't say Graham lost a step but if you put Reed on the Seahawks I think he has much better numbers. And Kelce should NOT be ranked higher than Reed, lol. He is the #1 receiver and I think this year defenses are going to treat him as such and take him out of games. He had a fluke year last year.
However by default, he likely is more talented than Ertz but behind Reed.

 

[gkekoa]

I think injuries are the only thing that prevent Reed from being the 3rd overall TE in the NFL.
Gronk and Olsen are better, I won't say Graham lost a step but if you put Reed on the Seahawks I think he has much better numbers. And Kelce should NOT be ranked higher than Reed, lol. He is the #1 receiver and I think this year defenses are going to treat him as such and take him out of games. He had a fluke year last year.
However by default, he likely is more talented than Ertz but behind Reed.

I believe Reed is the second best receiving TE in football. That being said, it is hard to truly argue it because he has had only one big year and it still wasn't as big as Kelce, Gronk, Graham, or Olsen.

 

[Skin'EmAll]

I believe Reed is the second best receiving TE in football. That being said, it is hard to truly argue it because he has had only one big year and it still wasn't as big as Kelce, Gronk, Graham, or Olsen.

I caught the end of this conversation, and so for me personally I just took an overall approach instead of just receiving. I agree injury weakens the argument of where Reed ranks, but I don't believe Kelce's season last year was better than Reed's 11 TD season. I would understand if someone did a top 5 and Reed was 4th and Kelce was 5th. I couldn't see it the other way around. Reed has dominated with solid targets around him, while Kelce has been force fed due to KC inability to the WRs involved...at least IMO.

 

[gkekoa]

I caught the end of this conversation, and so for me personally I just took an overall approach instead of just receiving. I agree injury weakens the argument of where Reed ranks, but I don't believe Kelce's season last year was better than Reed's 11 TD season. I would understand if someone did a top 5 and Reed was 4th and Kelce was 5th. I couldn't see it the other way around. Reed has dominated with solid targets around him, while Kelce has been force fed due to KC inability to the WRs involved...at least IMO.

Reed also plays in an offense that throws the ball more than 100 times more in a season. TD is a poor indicator often because KC prefers to run the ball in while we throw it.

Kielce isn't force fed because KC doesn't throw the ball. MacLin in is possibly better than Garçon and DJ.

 

[skinsdad62]

i am happy to have reed no matter where he ranks

 

[Hambombs]

9-7 team this year

 

[skinsdad62]

9-7 team this year

i am going to go with 10-6 . weare getting better depth as time goes on

 

[Hambombs]

Eagles over/under wins is at 8 and redskins is at 7.5. Lmao how are the eagles projected to win more games?

 

[Yo Tee]

Y'all know that your non-divisional games are against the Cardinals, Seahawks, Chiefs, Raiders, right? There's 4 losses right there. And if you split with your division, which y'all probably will, that's 7 losses right there. Arguably, the Saints at home are a loss and the Broncos are a loss. I just don't see how you guys have a winning record this season. At best, 6-10.

 

[countryroads316]

Y'all know that your non-divisional games are against the Cardinals, Seahawks, Chiefs, Raiders, right? There's 4 losses right there. And if you split with your division, which y'all probably will, that's 7 losses right there. Arguably, the Saints at home are a loss and the Broncos are a loss. I just don't see how you guys have a winning record this season. At best, 6-10.

B'S we will see

 

[deanpet21]

Eagles over/under wins is at 8 and redskins is at 7.5. Lmao how are the eagles projected to win more games?

I agree with you its ridiculous. I don't get why all the pundits are picking us last this year.

 

[deanpet21]

Y'all know that your non-divisional games are against the Cardinals, Seahawks, Chiefs, Raiders, right? There's 4 losses right there. And if you split with your division, which y'all probably will, that's 7 losses right there. Arguably, the Saints at home are a loss and the Broncos are a loss. I just don't see how you guys have a winning record this season. At best, 6-10.

Cardinals and Broncos are winnable. I have us at 4-2 in the division with losses with Dallas and NY. 9-7 is very possible this year. If the Offense clicks then 10 wins should be a given. The defense cant be any worst then last year.