Was Chark a mistake?

[tukafan21]

1 minute ago, Jon Snow said:

You seem to be obsessed with this #1 wr thing. 

First of all, the chemistry between he and Bryce has nothing to do with wr position that you are concerned with. Bruce has chemistry with several others as well.

Secondly, it was always going to be receiver by committee. Chark is one of them.

Third, Frank has clearly stated numerous times that any receiver that wants to make this team must be able to play all 3 positions at receiver. They must be able to play the x, y, and z position. 

So for the last time. No, Chark is not being depended on the be the "#1" receiver. 

WR by committee doesn't work though if the committee can't stay on the field.

Are you comfortable with a committee that week 1 might be Thielen, Mingo, Shenault, and this new guy from KC as the Top 4 WR options for our rookie QB?  Hell... I'm not even sure having TMJ healthy for week 1 makes that an acceptable WR room for a rookie QB.

If you told me Chark would play in 15 or more games, I'd have no issue with it, but I don't think he will.  Hamstring injuries tend to linger and pop up as the season moves on, so for a guy who already has issues staying healthy, it's not a good sign for him long term this season.

[Ricky Prickles]

4 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

Unless Mingo absolutely breaks out for a 1k type of rookie season, then yes, that would make it a disastrous deal because of the other side of the equation.

As I've said, in a vacuum, the contract we gave Chark wasn't a bad one.  The problem is that the money and roster/depth chart spot would have been better spent on someone more likely to play in more games.

If this was year 3 or 4 of Bryce, it's a totally different story, but this year has 1 goal above all others, and it's the development of Bryce.  To do that, he needs his weapons on the field, and we already have a questionable WR room, to have the top depth chart guy be someone with his injury history was never a good idea.

I want to be optimistic and hope he is back in the lineup soon and remains relatively injury free this year.

[CRA]

Just now, ForJimmy said:

With Chark the contract matches the risk.  It was a good deal.  1 year $5 million for a potential WR1.  Say he plays half of the games this year.  $5 million for 8.5 games of healthy Chark isn't a terrible deal in itself.  

Chark wasn't a mistake.  He was a great add given his cost.  He should be a role-player given his health history.  We ideally should of built a better overall skill group for Young.   

I mean, you can look at recent high-end QB prospects that didn't meet expectations as a rookie and generally it's the weak supporting cast largely talked about.  Got to help rookie QBs out.  Give them some bailout options. Trevor.  Fields.  Even a Wilson.   As rookies, they were throwing to committees of bland WRs. 

[tukafan21]

1 minute ago, Ricky Prickles said:

He wasnt that expensive and I dont see anywhere that he was signed to be a number 1 unless I missed it?

Okay, so everyone who keeps saying things like this with Chark not being our #1....

Please rank our WR's right now assuming full health for all of them and I don't mean in terms of career prospects/potential, I mean right now and what they can provide for us on the field.

If you don't think Chark would clearly be the #1 WR on that list than I don't know what to tell you, but I think objectively everyone would say he'd top that list.  

Everyone keeps saying it's going to be a committee, which it mostly will be, but if Chark was fully healthy for the entire season, he'd 100% lead this team in targets, catches, and yards and I have no doubt in my mind about that, which is why I'd consider him our WR 1.

[Jon Snow]

Just now, tukafan21 said:

WR by committee doesn't work though if the committee can't stay on the field.

Are you comfortable with a committee that week 1 might be Thielen, Mingo, Shenault, and this new guy from KC as the Top 4 WR options for our rookie QB?  Hell... I'm not even sure having TMJ healthy for week 1 makes that an acceptable WR room for a rookie QB.

If you told me Chark would play in 15 or more games, I'd have no issue with it, but I don't think he will.  Hamstring injuries tend to linger and pop up as the season moves on, so for a guy who already has issues staying healthy, it's not a good sign for him long term this season.

I'm not worrying about anything until it proves to be a concern.  You should have known that this was coming.  We traded our best 2 receivers to get Young. Yes McCaffrey was our best and DJ was #2.  We have to rebuild the group with whatever we can this year and upgrade as we go.

[tukafan21]

3 minutes ago, Ricky Prickles said:

I want to be optimistic and hope he is back in the lineup soon and remains relatively injury free this year.

I think we all hope for that as well, but in a sport like football, I don't think you should be building out a team based on optimism and hope, it should be based in reality.  And the unfortunate reality is Chark has been injury prone his whole career, so why did we build this WR room around the hope that he'll stay healthy for a change?

[Jon Snow]

2 minutes ago, CRA said:

Chark wasn't a mistake.  He was a great add given his cost.  He should be a role-player given his health history.  We ideally should of built a better overall skill group for Young.   

I mean, you can look at recent high-end QB prospects that didn't meet expectations as a rookie and generally it's the weak supporting cast largely talked about.  Got to help rookie QBs out.  Give them some bailout options. Trevor.  Fields.  Even a Wilson.   As rookies, they were throwing to committees of bland WRs. 

It will take time. You cannot fix everything that was wrong with this team in one offseason.  There was just too much FUBAR to overcome at once.

[Ricky Prickles]

2 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

Okay, so everyone who keeps saying things like this with Chark not being our #1....

Please rank our WR's right now assuming full health for all of them and I don't mean in terms of career prospects/potential, I mean right now and what they can provide for us on the field.

If you don't think Chark would clearly be the #1 WR on that list than I don't know what to tell you, but I think objectively everyone would say he'd top that list.  

Everyone keeps saying it's going to be a committee, which it mostly will be, but if Chark was fully healthy for the entire season, he'd 100% lead this team in targets, catches, and yards and I have no doubt in my mind about that, which is why I'd consider him our WR 1.

Fair enough and would have to agree with you on that

[Ricky Prickles]

1 minute ago, tukafan21 said:

I think we all hope for that as well, but in a sport like football, I don't think you should be building out a team based on optimism and hope, it should be based in reality.  And the unfortunate reality is Chark has been injury prone his whole career, so why did we build this WR room around the hope that he'll stay healthy for a change?

Oh odds are totally against him staying healthy and I was trying to send good vibes that way but if I had to bet significant money on it I would have to go with not playing a full season and having some sort of injury that holds him out significant time unfortunately.

[tukafan21]

2 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

I'm not worrying about anything until it proves to be a concern.  You should have known that this was coming.  We traded our best 2 receivers to get Young. Yes McCaffrey was our best and DJ was #2.  We have to rebuild the group with whatever we can this year and upgrade as we go.

Yes, I get this, but my issue was that we all knew this and decided sign an injury prone player to fill our top outside WR position for the season when we didn't have any other proven outside WRs on the roster.

That's all

And again as I've said, I'd be completely fine with this WR room if it was a few years into Bryce's career.  I just don't like it for his rookie year where developing him and building up his confidence is so key.

[CamWhoaaCam]

14 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

Guy, you need to stop with this nonsense, the fact that you haven't been able to understand this one yet is a bit baffling.

Once we signed Chark and subsequently drafted Mingo, Hopkins was never even an option.  Signing Chark was the mistake, because if he didn't, we'd then have had the roster spot and money to go after Hopkins, but that ship had long sailed by the time he was released by the Cardinals.

You don't sign someone to be a starter, only to sign someone else for more money because you don't trust the guy you just signed to stay healthy, it doesn't work that way.  The way it works is to just not sign the injury prone guy from the start, but they screwed that one up, so we're stuck with it.

Guy this is my opinion. Deal with it and stop calling out others because they don't agree with you.

 

My goodness people speak for yourself. This board is obsessed with having others think like them. We all have different opinions at the end of the day.

[panthers320]

Just now, tukafan21 said:

Yes, I get this, but my issue was that we all knew this and decided sign an injury prone player to fill our top outside WR position for the season when we didn't have any other proven outside WRs on the roster.

That's all

And again as I've said, I'd be completely fine with this WR room if it was a few years into Bryce's career.  I just don't like it for his rookie year where developing him and building up his confidence is so key.

So who should we have signed as a free agent instead?

[Jon Snow]

Just now, tukafan21 said:

Yes, I get this, but my issue was that we all knew this and decided sign an injury prone player to fill our top outside WR position for the season when we didn't have any other proven outside WRs on the roster.

That's all

And again as I've said, I'd be completely fine with this WR room if it was a few years into Bryce's career.  I just don't like it for his rookie year where developing him and building up his confidence is so key.

He's a good receiver. Nothing wrong with his play. His contract is an indication of his health concerns.  We signed him thinking that he may not be available all season.  I see no problem here.

[tukafan21]

Just now, CamWhoaaCam said:

Guy this is my opinion. Deal with it and stop calling out others because they don't agree with you.

 

My goodness people speak for yourself. This board is obsessed with having others think like them. We all have different opinions at the end of the day.

No, it's not about agreeing with me or not, it's that you kept pushing the idea of signing Hopkins once he was cut and can't get past that we never did.

If there was even a 1% chance that we would have signed him, then sure, maybe I wouldn't take issue with you saying that.  But once we had Chark, Thielen, TMJ, Mingo... we were NEVER going to even consider signing Hopkins, it wasn't even an option, the ship had already sailed without him.

All offseason you've looked at building the roster like this was Madden, just go get everyone you want and disregard the real life implications of said desired moves, and it's been frustrating.