Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Ok, "want” is a stronger term than my feelings. But I do think they should add a back to Duce’s quiver that has a bit more to his power game - and no way he’s going to break the bank after sitting unemployed this long. 

  • Like 2
Posted

I'd still rather trade for Fournette, but this is probably the best consolation price available.

Posted

I'd definitely like to see Hyde added. I think he'd really bring something to this RB room. I've wanted us to add him for a couple of years now. 

  • Like 1
Posted

Yes.

Posted

I like the move as we really don't know if Sanders can be a full three-down back.

 

  • Like 1
Posted

Adam Caplan is saying they have real interest in Hyde. Hopefully it happens because it makes a lot of sense. 

Posted
3 hours ago, Infam said:

I'd still rather trade for Fournette, but this is probably the best consolation price available.

Depends on what you have to give up with Fournette. I have a feeling he wants to be the guy and he won't be that here with our rotation so probably not in his best interests and would quickly be a headache. Hyde is used to being part of a rotation and won't cost draft picks.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, SPIDER-MAN said:

I like the move as we really don't know if Sanders can be a full three-down back.

 

I don't think you want him as a 3 down back. I'm pretty sure he can do it but you want him fresh when it matters at the end of the year.

  • Like 2
Posted
10 minutes ago, judunno said:

I don't think you want him as a 3 down back. I'm pretty sure he can do it but you want him fresh when it matters at the end of the year.

Plus I feel like he has a bit of an injury history (I may be wrong on this but whenever I have him on my fantasy team in the past he always seemed banged up). A rotation could be great for him with Sanders getting most of the touches, Scott coming in on some passing downs to keep Sanders fresh, and Clement being able to help on passing downs and carries as well.

Posted

As long as Sanders would get the bulk of the work, fine. If they're going to start up this committee crap where he only gets 8 touches a game then forget it.

If they were so concerned about this not sure why they didn't just re-sign Howard.

  • Like 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, KOJO said:

As long as Sanders would get the bulk of the work, fine. If they're going to start up this committee crap where he only gets 8 touches a game then forget it.

If they were so concerned about this not sure why they didn't just re-sign Howard.

I don't think they would. I just think they want a RB who can be relied upon to produce. Sprinkle him in to save Sanders sometimes and bring in if Sanders got hurt. 

Posted

Smart move if they sign him

He's Cheap

Sanders gets bulk of touches, Hyde 5-7 carries a game, and Scott does the Sproles type of role (minus special teams part)

Posted
14 minutes ago, Matt03785 said:

Smart move if they sign him

He's Cheap

Sanders gets bulk of touches, Hyde 5-7 carries a game, and Scott does the Sproles type of role (minus special teams part)

Exactly. And Hyde has produced in the league so can step in should Sanders be hurt short term or need a rest. 

Posted

Hyde had himself a nice productive season with the Texans last year. Bring him in. 

Posted

Get it done. He'd be a perfect compliment to Sanders and Scott.

  • Like 1
Posted
5 hours ago, Matt03785 said:

Smart move if they sign him

He's Cheap

Sanders gets bulk of touches, Hyde 5-7 carries a game, and Scott does the Sproles type of role (minus special teams part)

While I understand the logic, it kills me. Pay a guy x amount of money to touch the ball 5 times a game... Might as well give Sanders 1-2 more touches and Scott the other 3-4. But who knows. 

Posted
6 hours ago, KOJO said:

As long as Sanders would get the bulk of the work, fine. If they're going to start up this committee crap where he only gets 8 touches a game then forget it.

If they were so concerned about this not sure why they didn't just re-sign Howard.

Howard clearly doesn't fit what Pederson wants in the passing game. A shame because i really liked him as a runner but if it shows your hand everytime he's in that's not helpful.

Posted
11 hours ago, Infam said:

I'd still rather trade for Fournette, but this is probably the best consolation price available.

Hyde costs no picks and probably less $. Fournette - picks + more moneys. And Hyde is pretty good.

With that said, we had Howard and hes cheap... i don't get it.

  • Like 1
Posted

Give or take a little bit based on game flow, matchups, etc, touches per game

Sanders  16-20

Hyde  8-10

Scott  6-8

  • Like 2
Posted
2 hours ago, T-1000 said:

Give or take a little bit based on game flow, matchups, etc, touches per game

Sanders  16-20

Hyde  8-10

Scott  6-8

I'd be good with that. Sanders absolutely should get the bulk of the touches but Hyde really does bring size and also receiving ability.

Posted
4 hours ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

I'd be good with that. Sanders absolutely should get the bulk of the touches but Hyde really does bring size and also receiving ability.

Right. Hyde is a complete player, so unlike Blount (who was awesome for us anyway), you can roll him out there in any situation and not tip the play. Looked rejuvenated in Houston last year. I used to always be about fresh legs, but a heavier RB who has learned the nuances of the game and pass pro is the best complement to Sanders and Scott. Last thing we need is a road grader who tips the defense to a power run every time he’s on the field. 

  • Like 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, FastFreddie said:

Right. Hyde is a complete player, so unlike Blount (who was awesome for us anyway), you can roll him out there in any situation and not tip the play. Looked rejuvenated in Houston last year. I used to always be about fresh legs, but a heavier RB who has learned the nuances of the game and pass pro is the best complement to Sanders and Scott. Last thing we need is a road grader who tips the defense to a power run every time he’s on the field. 

Completely agree. He fits what we need in terms of being a little bigger and more physical but he also can catch the ball out of the back field and so would be able to keep defenses off balance. 

Posted
10 hours ago, What The F said:

While I understand the logic, it kills me. Pay a guy x amount of money to touch the ball 5 times a game... Might as well give Sanders 1-2 more touches and Scott the other 3-4. But who knows. 

Picture this 

Sanders for 8 yards

Sanders for 12 yards

Sanders for 50 yards

...Sanders needs a breather

Hyde for 8 yards 

Posted
5 hours ago, Matt03785 said:

Picture this 

Sanders for 8 yards

Sanders for 12 yards

Sanders for 50 yards

...Sanders needs a breather

Hyde for 8 yards 

Exactly. Or when we are beating the snot out of Baltimore, San Francisco, Seattle, Green Bay and New Orleans we can give Sanders a break. 

Posted
On 5/11/2020 at 4:22 PM, KOJO said:

As long as Sanders would get the bulk of the work, fine. If they're going to start up this committee crap where he only gets 8 touches a game then forget it.

If they were so concerned about this not sure why they didn't just re-sign Howard.

The RBBC "crap" has won the vast majority of super bowls over the last 20 years......they NEED 3-4 multi dimensional backs.......teams with a work horse 3 down back don't win anything.

Keeping sanders at a 12-15 touch game would be ideal for his durability.  Scott, Hyde and a 4th backs could split the rest.  If a teams goes deep into the playoffs and their top back is getting 20-25 touches a game, he's going to either get hurt or wear out before his contract.  RBBC keeps guys fresh, can withstand an injury and can create mismatch problems.  As long as you have 4 versatile backs.

  • Like 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...