Players you could see leaving via FA

[Bemular]

Well, it is worth noting that losing Walker could mean more blocking assignments for Davis just as easily as it could mean more receiving opportunities.

However, letting Walker go tells me that Celek is ready to take the next step which means Davis' role could be nearly identical to what it was last year. If Baalke wants to deal Davis then G-Ro calling 85 a little more and 15 a little less would be considered very common.



Bem - i TRY to leave thngs earlier now before it gets 'out of hand', but i believe you're asking straight up here. so just a quick explanation.....in your post above in bold, you say Davis remains in the 'identical' role.

if you read your post #40, you then post about personnel changing roles? so when i posted "your position changed", i was referring to..........first you said same role, then a few posts later, said they'll change roles.

now if I read this in a "disjointed" way, then MY bad, but lets not argue over this.

Okay, I think I can see where the disconnect is coming from

For starters you mistakenly interpreted my 'perspective' as a statement of fact. I never once stated that "Davis remains in the 'identical' role." I stated: "Davis' role could be nearly identical to what it was last year."

Furthermore, this statement is to be interpreted in conjunction with the preceding sentence which would/should have helped you make sense of where I was coming from.

Following this you differentiated between blocking assignments based on personnel. I simply stated it is the assignment that receives the focus and not the player chosen to execute the assignment.

If Celek cannot execute Walker's route & blocking assignments then either Davis or someone else will have to in lieu of Roman changing the playbook, and I just don't see changing the playbook as a reasonable alternative.

Additionally and just to add more perspective, Celek may prove to be a more reliable target than Davis and that could change how each player is used as well. Again, I doubt we let Walker go without having a suitable replacement given Walkers role in our offense.

I hope this makes sense, but, again, if it doesn't - then just ask.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

I wonder if Celek is still hitting this:

 

[Bemular]

I wonder if Celek is still hitting this:

 

[mem49er]

I wonder if Celek is still hitting this:

Goodness gracious, I flipped my laptop off my lap!

 

[Flyingiguana]

I wonder if Celek is still hitting this:

tranny

 

[4lifer9er]

That's one hot tranny.........I mean.........F**K IT.. That's one hot tranny............

 

[deep9er]

tranny

whaaaa?


what do you see that tells you this?

 

[Bemular]

Okay, I think I can see where the disconnect is coming from

For starters you mistakenly interpreted my 'perspective' as a statement of fact. I never once stated that "Davis remains in the 'identical' role." I stated: "Davis' role could be nearly identical to what it was last year."

Furthermore, this statement is to be interpreted in conjunction with the preceding sentence which would/should have helped you make sense of where I was coming from.

Following this you differentiated between blocking assignments based on personnel. I simply stated it is the assignment that receives the focus and not the player chosen to execute the assignment.

If Celek cannot execute Walker's route & blocking assignments then either Davis or someone else will have to in lieu of Roman changing the playbook, and I just don't see changing the playbook as a reasonable alternative.

Additionally and just to add more perspective, Celek may prove to be a more reliable target than Davis and that could change how each player is used as well. Again, I doubt we let Walker go without having a suitable replacement given Walkers role in our offense.

I hope this makes sense, but, again, if it doesn't - then just ask.

Deep, I'm assuming this explanation makes sense to you?