Thank you!! I had leftover ziti for lunch, which resulted in an almost equally impressive deuce! One of the best parts of being Sicilian is all the yummy pasta dishes!

Sherman looks like he's about 5'10". Putting him at TE isn't going to do us any favors.

It's difficult to understand the Sherman hate (or disfavor or whatever). He has good qualities and has contributed to the team. Let us consider a few of them now ...

Point One; He knows the offense and can play any and all of the RB or TE positions as required at any time.

Point Dos: When used as a receiver, he has very dependable hands.

Point Trì: Does not give up on a play and works to the whistle and beyond. If that means he must flatten the enemy and cause them to weep, so be it ... in that respect, he has Honey Badger qualities.

Point Vier: Excellent special teams player.

FAX

You'll have to tell that one to Andy Reid, who was just fine using him as our TE2 while Harris was suspended in Week 1.

Andy obviously didn't have a problem working with Sherman's size

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/HaRhRkORTXY" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

In todays NFL positions like blocking TE and FBs even though we still have one are basically being phased out because well...

Why do you need a blocking TE when you can just put in a 6th OL?

This is exactly why you carry him. As we saw in the last Denver game of 2017, he can carry the ball. We saw a couple receptions last year that contributed to victories. He hits his guy and then runs downfield to blast another.
I personally like 3 TE sets, especially in goal line situations. You can add a 6th OL, but other than maybe Schwartz, I can't think of any of ours that have hands I'd depend on.

Because Offensive lineman can't catch or carry the football...

Yes but if you are using a 2nd TE for his blocking ability why wouldn't you just let an OL block?

I think you probably should carry a couple of athletic TE's and a FB if you have a versatile one but after that just mix and match to fill spots.

Because the TE presents a credible threat to go into the pattern and keeps the opponent from just throwing 9 in the box.

If you're gonna run the ball and don't care who knows it - sure, use a jumbo package. But we don't even had a RB who is well suited to that job. Our RBs need a little operating room and they're not going to get that plowing into a 6 man OL and 8/9 man fronts.

I think 12 personnel should be more prominently featured throughout the NFL, to be honest. Especially if you have a TE2 that can move and threaten the seams and a RB that can catch out of the backfield. It gives defenses so much that they have to account for. They really cannot sell out to stop the run at that point and with the extra strength you get from having a TE2 in there, you can really push the line at times as well.

Honestly, using 6 o lineman might not have been a bad idea against the Pats in the playoffs...

If you are using it to create mismatches you are better off having an athletic guy who blocks alright than you are having Jason Dunn out there.

Schematically, you're taking a possible pass catcher off the field in that scenario so the defense doesn't have to account for.

Sherman, IMO, is worth every penny they pay him. He's on every special teams unit, is really good at it, and is a vocal emotional leader.

He's a badass.

And sometimes you just need those guys.

Can someone help me to understand something? Is the personal Conduct Policy for private behavior or public behavior?

Like, if a player had an argument with his wife and called her an dumb bitch at the dinner table, but it wasn't recorded, is that a violation of the NFL Personal Conduct Policy?

If not...then how can it be a violation if the player was being recorded, unbeknownst to him?

I get that physical violence would be different, but the "threat" made on a covert recording...to me that's not a violation because if it hadn't been recorded we'd never have known about it to begin with...it's not like he was screaming at her and making a public spectacle of himself, which would indeed violate the policy as I understand it...

...meh. Who knows...

I thought he was threatening her with his knowledge of her possible crimes, and not actually threatening her with physical violence. I only listened to part of it, because I just want to cheer for my team and didn't want anything to hinder that.

Am I just way off?

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk