Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 13 to 24 of 41
  1. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Behind enemies lines Shitsburgh
    Posts
    764

    Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?



    True, Cox is very important and should be back. He has played very well. Reed, well see you later buddy! Let him go, and give , doss, Thompson , and Williams a shot. And Harewood, well we can find another cheaper depth player for him.

    So of those three, only Cox is important to bring back. Highly important!!





  2. #14

    Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?

    Quote Originally Posted by alien bird View Post
    If the Ravens choose to keep Jacoby Jones and plan on drafting a WR, I see the handwriting on the wall for David Reed. With limited value at that point, he might end up like Marcus Smith, losing out in a numbers game.
    Unless its Tavon Austin the Ravens probably aren't drafting a receiver. Their first 3 are set (pending potential restructures) with Tandon Doss being giving every chance to be the fourth receiver.

    I really think that Tommy Streeter will end up being the 5th receiver and may move up if he shows anything in practice. He's a 6'5" guy with speed but if he can consistently catch the ball he's going to be productive.




  3. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Cockeysville, MD
    Posts
    2,092

    Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?

    Quote Originally Posted by bmore finest View Post
    True, Cox is very important and should be back. He has played very well. Reed, well see you later buddy! Let him go, and give , doss, Thompson , and Williams a shot. And Harewood, well we can find another cheaper depth player for him.

    So of those three, only Cox is important to bring back. Highly important!!
    Agreed, do not mess with the kicking game. I seem to remember us winning a couple games this year and one that extended our season in Denver because of the help of Mr. Cox. This should be a non-debate.




  4. #16

    Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?

    Harewood according to PFF is a good run blocking guard. Top 1/3 among his peers. His pass pro stinks, but he only surrendered 1 sack (12 hurries though). Again, as per PFF. Having said that, I can't imagine us not giving Harewood an ORD tender.

    I would not tender Reed.
    Give Cox the league minimum? What are the options for UDFAs?
    Yea at #17--running list: Beckham Jr, Dennard, Donald, Gilbert
    Nay at #17--running list: Clinton-Dix, Ebron, Hageman, Jernigan, Lee, Mosley, Pryor
    On the fence at #17: Cooks, Martin

    Having fun talking football on Twitter @BigPlayReceiver




  5. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    23,140
    Blog Entries
    3
    The Ravens generally tender all of their players, so I dont even think this is a debate.

    Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger


    My RSR Blog:
    http://russellstreetreport.com/author/paullukoskie/




  6. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post
    The Ravens generally tender all of their players, so I dont even think this is a debate.

    Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner
    Normally, I would agree, but this year with such a tight Cap, I could see one or two of these guys being non-tendered.

    I'm sure they would offer them minimum deals to return, but it's possible that the player might rather try his luck elsewhere.
    “Talk's cheap - let’s go play.” - #19, Johnny Unitas

    Follow me on Twitter @ravenssalarycap




  7. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pasadena
    Posts
    8,387
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?

    I wouldn't be quick to give up on Harewood especially with Castillo on the coaching staff. Lets see what Castillo can do with him.




  8. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    23,140
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by B-more Ravor View Post

    Normally, I would agree, but this year with such a tight Cap, I could see one or two of these guys being non-tendered.

    I'm sure they would offer them minimum deals to return, but it's possible that the player might rather try his luck elsewhere.
    David Reed is the only one I can see jot getting tendered. He just plays a position that is crowded.

    Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger


    My RSR Blog:
    http://russellstreetreport.com/author/paullukoskie/




  9. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wilton, CT
    Posts
    11,348
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Excellector View Post
    You know, your line of thinking with the long snapper is exactly why the New York Giants used to screw the pooch in the postseason, before they eventually came around to winning the Super Bowl. Special teams takes timing, rhythm and stability to be successful. You can't just go cheap everywhere. It's not that hard to end up with a long snapper that shoots it high and costs you a game. You get what you pay for.

    As for Ramon Harewood, his talent will lend to him getting the low tender and playing out his rookie contract. The one guy I would not tender is David Reed.

    I'm with you on Morgan Cox. We've seen teams lose playoff games because of a long snapper. Since Cox has been here we've never even thought about the position. That's exactly what you want. I think it would be nuts not to tender him.
    He Who Dares.....Wins




  10. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Westminster - Raventown, MD!
    Posts
    12,484
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?

    Quote Originally Posted by B-more Ravor View Post
    Normally, I would agree, but this year with such a tight Cap, I could see one or two of these guys being non-tendered.

    I'm sure they would offer them minimum deals to return, but it's possible that the player might rather try his luck elsewhere.
    I think we've done this before...non-tendered a guy and then given him a pretty fair deal straight up. Ramon Harewood and David Reed have little shots of hooking on elsewhere for much more money. Morgan Cox is a tough call, we've generally found talented LS in UDFA time and time again. But I do remember what happened the last year Katula was here, his hand got injured and a bunch of snaps got messed up.
    .
    .
    FOR REED, BIRK, BOLDIN, RAY, ART, TEVIN, OJ, and BALTIMORE...
    SUPER BOWL 47 CHAMPION RAVENS!!!!!!

    "We don't make it easy, but that's the way the city of Baltimore is, and that's the way we are. We did this for them back home." - Joe Flacco, Super Bowl 47 MVP


    Call me a Special Teams coach again. I dare you! I double dare you, MFer!




  11. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wilton, CT
    Posts
    11,348
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paintballguy View Post
    I wouldn't be quick to give up on Harewood especially with Castillo on the coaching staff. Lets see what Castillo can do with him.
    Harewood was a starter the first game of the season. They must see something in him. I think he gets tendered too.
    He Who Dares.....Wins




  12. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    947

    Re: Should we use RFA tenders on Reed, Harewood, and Cox?

    I'm thinking that Reed is still valuable to the team. At a minimum I would not tender him but offer him a contract and I might just tender him anyway.

    Right now Reed is the 5th WR on the team, behind Boldin, Smith, Jones, and Doss, and ahead of Williams, and Streeter. He's also a good special teams guy, something that any WR that far down the pecking order needs to be. Looking forward, I am not sure how the team views Williams vs Reed, but it is hard to imagine Streeter moving ahead of him in the pecking order cause Streeter was pretty bad last year at training camp. Honestly Streeter looks close to a bust and if he were not a draft pick he would have been cut. I would also say that Reed is closer to overtaking Doss than losing ground to other WR's.

    It is also hard to see the team picking a WR like Austin (a high draft pick) unless the team cuts Jones or Boldin so I think there's a good chance that next year the team will use the same WR corps as last year. Of course with a non-Cam-led offense the pecking order of the WR's might change this offseason...




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland