Duron Carter had dinner with Rivera and Gettleman lastnight.

[Doc Holiday]

Am I the only one that doesn't care? He played in the cfl meaning he couldn't even make it in the NFL so why should I care because his last name is carter?

Remind me how Michael Jordan's kids are doing in pro sports...

Meaningless until he proves something in the NFL

[MHS831]

Football fans in Canada watch the NFL.  Canadian Football is kind of like the Arena League. 

[Mr. Scot]

But you're continuing to minimize who he had to beat out. Wayne is a future hall of fame, Hilton is better than anything we have, and Moncrief showed huge potential late.

Not excusing it, but weren't there rumors before that Nicks wasn't a good practice player and/or had a poor work ethic? That's not a good thing, but he may be a guy that just shows up and when put in the right position, plays and excels. I doubt Pagano allowed him to do that.

And you're also giving our guys too much credit... But it's the same scenario at play. Cotchery put up the numbers he did because he was put in a position to, whether he deserved it or not. I seriously doubt any other team in the league wouldve had Cotchery as their #1 or #2. He put up numbers because he had to. If he was a #4, do you think he would put up similar numbers to Nicks? I don't.

And yes, I would take him over Cotchery, Avant, and Bersin because if given their playing time, undeserved like those three did, he would put up bigger numbers with it.

Those three guys might work hard and be professional, but that doesn't mean they deserved the prominent roles they were awarded here simply because the talent pool was so shallow.

It's everybody's fault but Hakeem's, right?

[*FreeFua*]

Football fans in Canada watch the NFL. Canadian Football is kind of like the Arena League.

Not true, there's idiots up here that actually watch the CFL over the NFL. They'll argue that the CFL game is better since there's only 3 downs and teams have to pass more. I've heard it all, it's pretty funny and sad of course

[top dawg]

We got three guys for the price of one, but you think we'd have been better if it were the other way around?

Seriously?

You might have an argument if Nicks had outproduced all three guys, but he didn't even outproduce Cotchery.

And the excuse that he didn't play enough doesn't fly. If he were really as good as you seem to think he is, he would have earned playing time.

You'll have to pardon me if I don't find the argument that we should have paid more for a guy who couldn't beat out the backup tight end compelling.

 

I know that you won't agree, but I believe you're downplaying Nicks a bit.  I believe that if he were here, he would have outplayed Cotchery, and I don't even think that it's really an argument.  Nicks produced roughly 70 percent of the yardage and more TDs with markedly less snaps (perhaps someone with PFF can get the exact number).  Plus, Nicks began showing flashes of his old self later in the year:

 

Since racing for a 26-yard touchdown and hauling in a twisting, 18-yard back-shoulder throw in Week 15 versus the Texans, however, Nicks has recaptured playmaking skills that were believed by many to be long gone

 

 

 

Link

 

Showing more elusiveness and better leaping ability than he has since carrying the Giants to the Super Bowl three years ago, Nicks is finally popping off the game film again, making two or three big plays per week on limited snaps.

 

 

 

Now purely on its face, you are absolutely correct from an economic standpoint for the reality of last season. That's not even arguable.  But what is arguable is whether or not he would have produced more than Cotchery if he had been here. This is something that no one can answer.  But just looking at what he did with limited snaps, and also looking at how he seemed to get better with limited opportunities, and looking at some things that he has done over the course of his career, I just don't see why anyone would argue that Nicks wouldn't have been better than 80 percent of the wide receivers that we have here.

 

Now, again, I am not saying that Nicks definitely would have been worth investing in last season, but the question is whether or not he would be investing in going forward, provided that he doesn't command a contract where we would have to overspend for his services.

[Proudiddy]

It's everybody's fault but Hakeem's, right?

Lol, didn't I just say in the post you JUST quoted that it was rumored he lacked work ethic and wasn't a practice player?

Where did I say it was anyone's fault BUT Hakeem's?

This is pointless...

[Proudiddy]

I know that you won't agree, but I believe you're downplaying Nicks a bit. I believe that if he were here, he would have outplayed Cotchery, and I don't even think that it's really an argument. Nicks produced roughly 70 percent of the yardage and more TDs with markedly less snaps (perhaps someone with PFF can get the exact number). Plus, Nicks began showing flashes of his old self later in the year:

Link

Now purely on its face, you are absolutely correct from an economic standpoint for the reality of last season. That's not even arguable. But what is arguable is whether or not he would have produced more than Cotchery if he had been here. This is something that no one can answer. But just looking at what he did with limited snaps, and also looking at how he seemed to get better with limited opportunities, and looking at some things that he has done over the course of his career, I just don't see why anyone would argue that Nicks wouldn't have been better than 80 percent of the wide receivers that we have here.

Now, again, I am not saying that Nicks definitely would have been worth investing in last season, but the question is whether or not he would be investing in going forward, provided that he doesn't command a contract where we would have to overspend for his services.

Nahhhhh... The all-seeing, all-knowing, Mensa member Gettleman didn't sign him so, he sucks.

[Mr. Scot]

Lol, didn't I just say in the post you JUST quoted that it was rumored he lacked work ethic and wasn't a practice player?

Where did I say it was anyone's fault BUT Hakeem's?

This is pointless...

From your post...

but he may be a guy that just shows up and when put in the right position, plays and excels. I doubt Pagano allowed him to do that.

It's such a shame that Nicks is so much better than these other guys and yet somehow these professional coaches and talent evaluators continually underestimate him.

[Cam's New Arm]

Here we are making another post to get me to the end of the thread.. Yay page cycling

[Mr. Scot]

I know that you won't agree, but I believe you're downplaying Nicks a bit. I believe that if he were here, he would have outplayed Cotchery, and I don't even think that it's really an argument. Nicks produced roughly 70 percent of the yardage and more TDs with markedly less snaps (perhaps someone with PFF can get the exact number). Plus, Nicks began showing flashes of his old self later in the year:

Link

Now purely on its face, you are absolutely correct from an economic standpoint for the reality of last season. That's not even arguable. But what is arguable is whether or not he would have produced more than Cotchery if he had been here. This is something that no one can answer. But just looking at what he did with limited snaps, and also looking at how he seemed to get better with limited opportunities, and looking at some things that he has done over the course of his career, I just don't see why anyone would argue that Nicks wouldn't have been better than 80 percent of the wide receivers that we have here.

Now, again, I am not saying that Nicks definitely would have been worth investing in last season, but the question is whether or not he would be investing in going forward, provided that he doesn't command a contract where we would have to overspend for his services.

Whether or not he'd have been worth what it would have cost to sign him is really the only question I find pertinent.

I've not seen anything that makes me think the answer is 'yes'.

[ThinkAboutIt]

It'll be fun watching him be the next Victor Cruz next season... I wonder if Gman told him to go to indy because it was a better situation for him?

 

And just as infuriating watching shortsighted fools around here all of a sudden wishing he would've come to Carolina, like it's supposed to be funny. 

[top dawg]

Whether or not he'd have been worth what it would have cost to sign him is really the only question I find pertinent.

I've not seen anything that makes me think the answer is 'yes'.

 

To me that's a bit of a simplistic way to look at it, but fine.  That being said, I don't think any GM in the league is really worried about what he did last season with the Colts, but are more concerned what they think he can bring to the table in the coming season, especially relative to the contract that they would have to sign him to to enlist his services. 

[Proudiddy]

From your post...

It's such a shame that Nicks is so much better than these other guys and yet somehow these professional coaches and talent evaluators continually underestimate him.

And you ignore the exact quote that disproved your point and pick that one out of context while inferring I meant something other than what I stated.

I said knowing what we have heard about him, it can be assumed that he went there with the same habits and Pagano doesn't strike me as a guy that let's guys slide by on talent alone. As in, if you don't put in the work and show it in practice, then you aren't going to be given a job on your talent alone. Hence, that part you emphasized there....

Then I compared that to our wide reciever corps, where guys were given jobs because they worked hard but their talent didn't merit it...

[Proudiddy]

Proudiddy, you're not very bright, are you? I think your obsessive hatred over Gettleman cutting Smitty has gone to your head in the same way brain-eating amoeba does.

I'm really going to have to change my avi being that too many mouth breathers here assume that because of it, i have some raging hate boner for Gettleman.

If you read my posts, which might be hard for you because not all of them come with pictures, then you will understand what the grown ups are talking about.