(09-02-2021, 08:26 AM)Mikey Wrote:

(09-01-2021, 07:07 PM)Bullseye Wrote: Is anyone else concerned about there only being one waiver wire claim by the team thus far.

no?

I am pretty firm in my belief that the positional values we board members have are vastly different from those of our team's management. I'll leave that to the reader whether that's a positive or a negative. Sometimes, it's a little of each.

I'd like to see a few young guys brought in to kick the tires and see what they can do, sure, but I'm not sweating the team passing on older guys that faded their way off a roster.

---

(09-01-2021, 07:21 PM)jessepeck1213 Wrote: We just refuse to address the TE situation. Hopefully they are working out a contract with Hollister. Really wish we could pry njoku away from Cleveland. He's just wasting away there.

It's not we aren't addressing the TE situation, it's theyre not addressing it in the way the vox populi want them to.

If the offense has no use for a catch-first TE, why would we want to bring them in to languish, other than to keep them off an opponent's roster?

Look at who of our own we cut and who we kept. If we have a TE that pushes 500 yards receiving on the season, I'll be shocked.

About the bolded part, "I'd like to see a few young guys brought in to kick the tires and see what they can do..."  I see that sentiment a lot, but the problem with doing that is that we would have to cut someone on our 53 man roster to do that.  And that person would either become a free agent, or be exposed to a waiver claim.  Now, I know people would respond to what I just said with "Well, who cares if we lose [insert name of player they hate]?"  But if the Jags kept a guy on the 53 man roster, it seems they would value that guy enough that they wouldn't discard him to kick the tires on some guy they don't know, and who hasn't been in camp.

---