PDA

View Full Version : Where is James Casey?


valleytexfan
10-12-2009, 04:46 PM
No, I'm not saying we would be undefeated with him in there, but I thought his versatility could help us on offense. I've seen him on special teams, but not on offense. Just curious. I know OD's the starter and Vonta is the FB, but surely Casey can spell either of them from time to time...the kid's a physical specimen.

eriadoc
10-12-2009, 04:57 PM
He was in on offense for two plays against the Cards, and one of them was a frantic right side rollout with a weak out of bounds throw by Schaub. Casey dove for it out of bounds.

TheRealJoker
10-12-2009, 05:01 PM
No, I'm not saying we would be undefeated with him in there, but I thought his versatility could help us on offense. I've seen him on special teams, but not on offense. Just curious. I know OD's the starter and Vonta is the FB, but surely Casey can spell either of them from time to time...the kid's a physical specimen.

He's versatile but unfortunately for him he's not better than what we've got in front of him quite yet. I think its a good thing we've got in allowing him to develop at multiple positions slowly instead of throwing him right in there immediately.

Leach doesn't need to be spelled, we go to 3 WR sets often enough where he gets enough of a breather. Dreesen is further ahead than Casey at this point and is making a case for us not having to pay OD big bucks next year.

I wouldn't mind seeing us work Casey into some type of short yardage wild cat formation. I think, especially in yesterday's game, having something like that in our bag of tricks could've helped us out in all the 3rd/4th and short situations we failed to convert on including the big one at the end.

Casey showed some short yardage ability at Rice and having him get a direct snap could cure what ails us, especially if he can throw the ball a little bit to present that threat.

Goldensilence
10-12-2009, 05:14 PM
He's versatile but unfortunately for him he's not better than what we've got in front of him quite yet. I think its a good thing we've got in allowing him to develop at multiple positions slowly instead of throwing him right in there immediately.

Leach doesn't need to be spelled, we go to 3 WR sets often enough where he gets enough of a breather. Dreesen is further ahead than Casey at this point and is making a case for us not having to pay OD big bucks next year.

I wouldn't mind seeing us work Casey into some type of short yardage wild cat formation. I think, especially in yesterday's game, having something like that in our bag of tricks could've helped us out in all the 3rd/4th and short situations we failed to convert on including the big one at the end.

Casey showed some short yardage ability at Rice and having him get a direct snap could cure what ails us, especially if he can throw the ball a little bit to present that threat.

I think that's the ultimate problem. It's not that he's terrible, but at the same time he's not better then OD and Dressen has looked like a good second option.

He's just going to have a difficult time breaking the starting lineup with the guys ahead of him. I am not sure if that makes him a wasted pick, but makes it questionable in my eyes.

TheRealJoker
10-12-2009, 05:22 PM
I think that's the ultimate problem. It's not that he's terrible, but at the same time he's not better then OD and Dressen has looked like a good second option.

He's just going to have a difficult time breaking the starting lineup with the guys ahead of him. I am not sure if that makes him a wasted pick, but makes it questionable in my eyes.

Hard to be upset with a 5th round pick who backs up TE/FB/LS and contributes on special teams. He has proven to be a good pick so far, if he were a questionable pick he would be cut already.

Wolf6151
10-12-2009, 05:37 PM
I think that's the ultimate problem. It's not that he's terrible, but at the same time he's not better then OD and Dressen has looked like a good second option.

He's just going to have a difficult time breaking the starting lineup with the guys ahead of him. I am not sure if that makes him a wasted pick, but makes it questionable in my eyes.

He's not a bad player and I really like the guy but I agree he was a wasted pick. 4th string TE/bench warmer is not a high priority and shouldn't have been taken in the draft. We could have used more quality and/or depth at Safety or O-line instead.

TheRealJoker
10-12-2009, 05:44 PM
He's not a bad player and I really like the guy but I agree he was a wasted pick. 4th string TE/bench warmer is not a high priority and shouldn't have been taken in the draft. We could have used more quality and/or depth at Safety or O-line instead.

Again, a contributor is not a wasted pick. If you want to see a wasted pick look at Anthony Hill thus far. He cant even get on the field and he was supposed to be a big boost to helping the OL block against 3-4 defenses.

Plus, in the 4th round you have a better chance of actually finding some help at safety and OL. Hard to ask a 5th rounder to step in and be "the answer" at a problem position.

TimeKiller
10-12-2009, 07:02 PM
He's versatile but unfortunately for him he's not better than what we've got in front of him quite yet.

He's a better threat as a wr/motion fb than Vonta Leach is.

I'm sure all the crayola and waterpaints were nice but teacher stuck with lil' Shan's supersecret ultraplays too long. That whole series was crap. Let's see a full house backfield with Leach/Casey playing FB and Slaton the HB. Hell, motion Casey into and do some crazy misdirection stuff. Jeez I've played Madden before, it's not that hard to be sneaky.