(12-18-2023, 10:28 AM)Mikey Wrote: I keep thinking to myself, are we a vastly different offense with him here vs. what we were the year prior? Right now, I feel the team is missing Kirk way more than we would be missing Ridley.

Mind you, Ridley is a dang technician and runs some great routes, and drawing the flags keeps the O on the field. Question is still to be answered whether the money spent to keep him is better than to either run with what ya got in guys like Washington, Agnew, or another FA, or if you keep him around to try to build on what's started. The fact that the team seems more lost without Kirk on the field than they were killing it with him and Ridley in place gives me pause when it comes time to make an offer.

Again, it's that killer instinct. I don't see it. When we are down or need a big play, does Ridley elevate? I don't see it. I can remember Jimmy, though. 3rd and 6, you knew it was going his way and he'd still toast the CB and get you 10. And then he'd remind the CB he's gonna come back and do it again. We need some of that [BLEEP] on the field.

• protection - TL is under duress on many of the incompletions to #0 or he throws the ball early as a result - plus the general ability to throw deep to him on early downs would increase
  
• Ridley has shown inconsistency with knowing the details of plays such as when to look for the ball early in a route, where to adjust a route based on DB leverage, and whether or not he is a target or decoy
  
• Pederson and Taylor have struggled with a rotating cast behind Ridley (Jones and Kirk injuries) that have affected the way defenses concentrate on receivers
  
• When you can't run the ball - defenses are going to focus on taking away aspects of the passing game