View Single Post
Old 02-18-2013   #43
CloakNNNdagger
Hall of Fame
 
CloakNNNdagger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,303
Rep Power: 242285 CloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: The Cost Of James Casey

Quote:
Originally Posted by sandman View Post
Here is the deal. They had "that guy" that everyone thinks we need in the FB role, and were not willing to pay him market price. They've brought in others like him, and finally gave the role to hybrid TE. That tells me that they may not value the traditional FB role as much as some here think they should, or at least were not going to pay for it.

Casey came in and succeeded in the opportunities that were given to him. They did not ask him to be a Leach. They asked him to do something different. He was on pace for 40+ catches on the season until the last 5 games when the offense sputtered to 18 points a game. Only one FB had more receptions than Casey on the year, even with only 6 receptions in the last 5 games. Foster had 13 of his 17 rushing TD's from 3 yards or less, and while I don't have the data handy, I'll go on a limb and say Casey was lead blocker in goal situations.
In case no one noticed, stout Brandon Brooks was called in on goal line situations quite a bit to act as lead blocker.
CloakNNNdagger is offline   Reply With Quote