DJ finally gets his chance.

[frash.exe]

Jarrett's getting his opportunity and he will get his looks. He might not be a big play highlight reel, but that's what we have smith for anyway. He can move the chains for us though

[House]

Jarrett's getting his opportunity and he will get his looks. He might not be a big play highlight reel, but that's what we have smith for anyway. He can move the chains for us though

That is probably the only position on the football field that he is qualified for, being one of the guys that moves the chains around after first downs and between quarters.

[Snake]

Jarrett's getting his opportunity and he will get his looks. He might not be a big play highlight reel, but that's what we have smith for anyway. He can move the chains for us though

The funny thing is that in the Preseason he ran too short of routes on 3rd down and never made it to those chains.

[CRA]

Jarrett's getting his opportunity and he will get his looks. He might not be a big play highlight reel, but that's what we have smith for anyway. He can move the chains for us though

with Fox as the HC...I wouldn't rule out the fact he might put Jarrett in for 1st down, LaFell in for 2nd, only Smitty for 3rd down. Repeat random lineups with no #2 getting any consistant game reps. :eek:

[Snake]

Fox likes "his guys". That can be a vet like Jake or a young guy like Godfrey. There is enough to support that Fox is willing to keep better options on the bench when guys simply aren't getting it done on the field......as long as he likes you.

reports are Jarrett has looks strong in practice(going back a couple seasons now). The rare passing downs he has played in it is tough to say he looks as bad as people portray him on this message board. I don't think Jarrett fits here. I just don't think he is the hot garbage some choose to pretend he is.

Fox likes his incumbents. The Fact is he Will not replace a Starter once that have the Job. He will live or die with them. In our case Jake was the starter and he was not going to replace him.

Another situation was Godfrey and Martin. Godfrey was the starter and stayed that way.

Also Moose was a Starter and was not going to get replace.

The fact is that Rodney Pete was one of the very few Starters Fox ever yanked for a backup. The reason was that the comp was still open and no starter was ever decided. Same as the WR situation this year. We have yet to see who will start beside Smith and it may still be a few weeks before we know.

[top dawg]

he better try diving for catches. could've had a preseason TD if he had and succeeded.

Now you want the guy to be Superman. Jarret wouldn't have had to dive for Moore's overthrown ball, he would have had to fly. The man doesn't have an "S" on his chest.

[top dawg]

I think it's misleading to say he's finally getting his chance. Every player on the team gets a chance, it's called practice. It's the reason Tyrell Sutton sees more action than Goodson and the reason Captain Munnerlyn played so much last year.

The fact he was a high draft pick means he probably has been given more chances than others, he just hasn't done anything with those chances (one decent game against the Saints backups in the regular season...). Now that the team is cutting payroll, Jarrett gets a chance to be a starter since the team refused to bring in an NFL Caliber starting WR.

This guy has to be one of the luckiest in the NFL and is repeatedly given chances you could argue he hasn't earned or deserves. At least Keary Colbert showed a flash which got his chances. Jarrett has shown basically nothing and now finds himself starting.

If Hayden can get repeated chances, so can Jarrett.

[Kakarot]

I'm hoping DJ does his thing out there this year. He needs to go out there, ball, and shut the doubters(including me) up

[Kettle]

Be nice to see any of our wide recievers preform. Smith is all we got and he been on a decline

huh? he didn't look good with Jake throwing the ball, but who would have? his game was back up again once Matt was in.

Now you want the guy to be Superman. Jarret wouldn't have had to dive for Moore's overthrown ball, he would have had to fly. The man doesn't have an "S" on his chest.

i've seen shorter men make longer leaps. not asking him to do it in a meaningless pre-season game, but he better if needed come this sunday. you realize he's 6' 4" right?

[MadHatter]

Call me crazy (and I have been called worse by people that I like better than any of you:D), but I still think AE could be a positive wildcard in the passing game.

Smitty and LaFell on the outside to stretch the field. Then, let AE drag across the middle in the slot...ala Welker. His quickness and athleticism in that role could shine.

If Edelman in NE can be a weapon in that capacity, so can AE.

Not saying it is going to happen, but could be a possibility.

[HSCBandit07]

you are talking about NE here though, they know how to run plays for intermediate passing gains, we do not

[Happy Panther]

I going to pick up DJ in my fantasy football legaue

[magnus]

Fox likes "his guys". That can be a vet like Jake or a young guy like Godfrey. There is enough to support that Fox is willing to keep better options on the bench when guys simply aren't getting it done on the field......as long as he likes you.

reports are Jarrett has looks strong in practice(going back a couple seasons now). The rare passing downs he has played in it is tough to say he looks as bad as people portray him on this message board. I don't think Jarrett fits here. I just don't think he is the hot garbage some choose to pretend he is.

l like this better than the "Fox doesn't play young guys" argument but it's no more true. You earn your job, I don't know why that's ever been a problem - even DW. Learn your blocks, learn your protections.

So, I guess you'd have to show why Jarrett was ever the "better option".

[Davidson Deac II]

Fox kept Jake in to long, and some feel that he waited to long to replace Foster with Williams (I don't agree, but some do). That gives people the impression that he sticks with his guys, but there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.