Re: Wide Reciever
 

I agree with all SaintFan.
The Brees to CGM connection is high 80%. Other guys currently on roster just need to catch the ball when called upon. CGM doesn’t seem to take big shots, so there’s no need to worry about his production.
Only problem is other guys not catching da da*n ball. If Cook catches 2 of his drops, we win in a blowout. Bringing in someone else is just gonna take away from CGM’s production. CGM only had 6 catches because we tried to get other guys involved, see where it got us. Punting the ball.
I’m all for bringing in other guys if they produce when called upon.

Re: Wide Reciever
 

That argument goes both ways:
Is Thomas great because or Curtis? If so, why aren't Ginn, Carr, Arnold, Smith, et al better?

Re: Wide Reciever
 

Problem isn't at 3rd and 4though, we dont have **** after MT...trequan is a hot mess. Dez should be brought in to see what he has. Better than anything we have day 1...no doubt. And he is big so good run blocking

Re: Wide Reciever
 

^^^^

Not sure why that is so hard for some to comprehend.

If CGM misses any time, we're screwed at WR.

Re: Wide Reciever
 

Thomas will succeed with any coach or QB throwing him the ball. He's been above avg since middle school.

Re: Wide Reciever
 

It's hard to comprehend for me because I simply don't see enough targets to justify the argument. Out of 421 targets, CGM has 132, the backs including Line has about 110, and the tight ends are just shy of another 100. Of the 80 targets left Ginn has 46 of them and TH has 16 more. So at most we're talking about Ginn's 46 targets and the 20 leftovers.

As for CGM being unavailable it's unclear what the redistribution would be. Brees has shown in the past that he can redistribute the ball. The distribution now is a choice of the offense, not a dictate of the defense.

Folks were asking what happened to Sneed a couple of years ago. He got caught in the black hole that CGM represents where he simply wasn't targeted anymore.

Bringing in someone else isn't necessarily going to change the distribution of targets. So this is why I wonder why we keep talking, and talking, and talking about it.

SFIAH

Re: Wide Reciever
 

I’m shocked that there is an argument against needing another WR.

Best yet the argument is, hey, just throw it more to Thomas you don’t need another WR because he is so good lol...

This isn’t about how good MT is, it’s about having the D respect another WR. More importantly having another guy that doesn’t drop every other pass thrown their way. Outside of MT we have absolutely nothing at WR and TE that makes a defense even think twice.

Re: Wide Reciever
 

I'll leave it here ...

Can anyone honestly say you're comfortable with the Saints chances if say the 49ers or Vikings can take away MT13 and our running game struggles against a stout front? How will the Saints move the ball then without a capable receiver who can catch and get reasonable separation?? Cook, Ginn and Tre have yet to deliver consistently.

This offense has performed well, however it would be better served with a competent #2 opposite CGM. He'd have even more opportunities without bracket coverage.


It is what it is ... I'm just a arm chair GM but I surely hope the Saints front office/ scouts are targeting a WR in the 2020 draft and not un drafted guys who will need year(s) to develop.

Re: Wide Reciever
 

Of course it would.

We are talking about it because we need another weapon and it is obvious from all of the possessions ending in Fg and punts. We just eeked by a team with 3 wins and missing their two top offensive weapons. That be why

Re: Wide Reciever
 

Of course not. Exactly this