quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

I know he makes effort to run with the ball after catching it, too.

Point taken.

I feel like I am a bad guy because I have been defending Rudolph until now. It's just that we didn't protect our quarterback and we didn't run the ball very well last year. I came to the conclusion that it's not all on the O-linemen.

Rudolph has strengths. He catches almost everything and he converts first downs and scores touchdowns. But it still is a team game.

That doesn't make you a bad guy in this. There are some that say Rudolph isn't good. I think Rudolph is good---I just think he is the one you trade or cut over Waynes or Griffen (at this point). I saw how little Cousins went to Rudolph except for one game. Diggs and Thielen are so dominant that Rudolph is the fourth or fifth option which makes him expendable at 7.5 million.

Rudolph was the third option in the passing game catching about 4 passes per game. In the next to last game last season against Detroit he busted out for 9 receptions on 9 targets, 122 yards and 2 TDs. I think assuming he remains on the team he will continue to be the #3 option, but eventually be supplanted by Smith for that role.

Again....targets last year

Thielen 153
Diggs 149

Rudolph 82
Treadwell 53
RBs 75 (cook 49 Murray 26)

He is a third option but when you have Thielen and Diggs with so many targets (like I mentioned in the last post)...you can get by w/o Rudolph if they find someone better than Treadwell (beebe, Mitchell, etc.)

We will most likely be using two TE base sets this year. In the Kubiak offense the #3WR averages 21 receptions per season. Expect Rudolph and Smith to combine for over 100 receptions.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/den/2015.htm

Did Vernon Davis and Owen Daniels have 100 receptions in 2015 when Denver had two stud WRs? (nope)

Good point. If Rudolph can maintain his 64 all Smith needs to do is catch 36 that's barely over 2 a game. If they can both catch 3 a game that's 96. I think it's doable, but certainly not a lock. How many did VD and Reed combine for in their best year together? Did they manage 100?

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

I know he makes effort to run with the ball after catching it, too.

Point taken.

I feel like I am a bad guy because I have been defending Rudolph until now. It's just that we didn't protect our quarterback and we didn't run the ball very well last year. I came to the conclusion that it's not all on the O-linemen.

Rudolph has strengths. He catches almost everything and he converts first downs and scores touchdowns. But it still is a team game.

That doesn't make you a bad guy in this. There are some that say Rudolph isn't good. I think Rudolph is good---I just think he is the one you trade or cut over Waynes or Griffen (at this point). I saw how little Cousins went to Rudolph except for one game. Diggs and Thielen are so dominant that Rudolph is the fourth or fifth option which makes him expendable at 7.5 million.

Rudolph was the third option in the passing game catching about 4 passes per game. In the next to last game last season against Detroit he busted out for 9 receptions on 9 targets, 122 yards and 2 TDs. I think assuming he remains on the team he will continue to be the #3 option, but eventually be supplanted by Smith for that role.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

I know he makes effort to run with the ball after catching it, too.

Point taken.

I feel like I am a bad guy because I have been defending Rudolph until now. It's just that we didn't protect our quarterback and we didn't run the ball very well last year. I came to the conclusion that it's not all on the O-linemen.

Rudolph has strengths. He catches almost everything and he converts first downs and scores touchdowns. But it still is a team game.

That doesn't make you a bad guy in this. There are some that say Rudolph isn't good. I think Rudolph is good---I just think he is the one you trade or cut over Waynes or Griffen (at this point). I saw how little Cousins went to Rudolph except for one game. Diggs and Thielen are so dominant that Rudolph is the fourth or fifth option which makes him expendable at 7.5 million.

Rudolph was the third option in the passing game catching about 4 passes per game. In the next to last game last season against Detroit he busted out for 9 receptions on 9 targets, 122 yards and 2 TDs. I think assuming he remains on the team he will continue to be the #3 option, but eventually be supplanted by Smith for that role.

Again....targets last year

Thielen 153
Diggs 149

Rudolph 82
Treadwell 53
RBs 75 (cook 49 Murray 26)

He is a third option but when you have Thielen and Diggs with so many targets (like I mentioned in the last post)...you can get by w/o Rudolph if they find someone better than Treadwell (beebe, Mitchell, etc.)

We will most likely be using two TE base sets this year. In the Kubiak offense the #3WR averages 21 receptions per season. Expect Rudolph and Smith to combine for over 100 receptions.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/den/2015.htm

Did Vernon Davis and Owen Daniels have 100 receptions in 2015 when Denver had two stud WRs? (nope)

Good point. If Rudolph can maintain his 64 all Smith needs to do is catch 36 that's barely over 2 a game. If they can both catch 3 a game that's 96. I think it's doable, but certainly not a lock. How many did VD and Reed combine for in their best year together? Did they manage 100?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

I know he makes effort to run with the ball after catching it, too.

Point taken.

I feel like I am a bad guy because I have been defending Rudolph until now. It's just that we didn't protect our quarterback and we didn't run the ball very well last year. I came to the conclusion that it's not all on the O-linemen.

Rudolph has strengths. He catches almost everything and he converts first downs and scores touchdowns. But it still is a team game.

That doesn't make you a bad guy in this. There are some that say Rudolph isn't good. I think Rudolph is good---I just think he is the one you trade or cut over Waynes or Griffen (at this point). I saw how little Cousins went to Rudolph except for one game. Diggs and Thielen are so dominant that Rudolph is the fourth or fifth option which makes him expendable at 7.5 million.

Rudolph was the third option in the passing game catching about 4 passes per game. In the next to last game last season against Detroit he busted out for 9 receptions on 9 targets, 122 yards and 2 TDs. I think assuming he remains on the team he will continue to be the #3 option, but eventually be supplanted by Smith for that role.

Again....targets last year

Thielen 153
Diggs 149

Rudolph 82
Treadwell 53
RBs 75 (cook 49 Murray 26)

He is a third option but when you have Thielen and Diggs with so many targets (like I mentioned in the last post)...you can get by w/o Rudolph if they find someone better than Treadwell (beebe, Mitchell, etc.)

We will most likely be using two TE base sets this year. In the Kubiak offense the #3WR averages 21 receptions per season. Expect Rudolph and Smith to combine for over 100 receptions.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/den/2015.htm

Did Vernon Davis and Owen Daniels have 100 receptions in 2015 when Denver had two stud WRs? (nope)

Good point. If Rudolph can maintain his 64 all Smith needs to do is catch 36 that's barely over 2 a game. If they can both catch 3 a game that's 96. I think it's doable, but certainly not a lock. How many did VD and Reed combine for in their best year together? Did they manage 100?

Not what I was saying---I am saying he can be gone at little to no affect to the offense. Thielen basically is our possession TE when needed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

I know he makes effort to run with the ball after catching it, too.

Point taken.

I feel like I am a bad guy because I have been defending Rudolph until now. It's just that we didn't protect our quarterback and we didn't run the ball very well last year. I came to the conclusion that it's not all on the O-linemen.

Rudolph has strengths. He catches almost everything and he converts first downs and scores touchdowns. But it still is a team game.

That doesn't make you a bad guy in this. There are some that say Rudolph isn't good. I think Rudolph is good---I just think he is the one you trade or cut over Waynes or Griffen (at this point). I saw how little Cousins went to Rudolph except for one game. Diggs and Thielen are so dominant that Rudolph is the fourth or fifth option which makes him expendable at 7.5 million.

Rudolph was the third option in the passing game catching about 4 passes per game. In the next to last game last season against Detroit he busted out for 9 receptions on 9 targets, 122 yards and 2 TDs. I think assuming he remains on the team he will continue to be the #3 option, but eventually be supplanted by Smith for that role.

Again....targets last year

Thielen 153
Diggs 149

Rudolph 82
Treadwell 53
RBs 75 (cook 49 Murray 26)

He is a third option but when you have Thielen and Diggs with so many targets (like I mentioned in the last post)...you can get by w/o Rudolph if they find someone better than Treadwell (beebe, Mitchell, etc.)

We will most likely be using two TE base sets this year. In the Kubiak offense the #3WR averages 21 receptions per season. Expect Rudolph and Smith to combine for over 100 receptions.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/den/2015.htm

Did Vernon Davis and Owen Daniels have 100 receptions in 2015 when Denver had two stud WRs? (nope)

Good point. If Rudolph can maintain his 64 all Smith needs to do is catch 36 that's barely over 2 a game. If they can both catch 3 a game that's 96. I think it's doable, but certainly not a lock. How many did VD and Reed combine for in their best year together? Did they manage 100?

Not what I was saying---I am saying he can be gone at little to no affect to the offense. Thielen basically is our possession TE when needed.

You have your right to be wrong. Rudolph as a top ten TE in the NFL is very important to the Vikings especially considering the likelihood that Two TEs will be our base sets.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

I checked out Morgan's draft profile to see if he might be athletic enough. Still not sure. Maybe.

https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2632153-david-morgan-ii-nfl-draft-2016-scouting-report-grade-for-vikings-rookie.amp.html

Morgan is basically an O Lineman who has good hands for catching the ball. He is ridiculously slow for a TE at over 5 second 40. He was a great pick for us in the late 6th round IIRC, for his blocking ability and reliable hands. I'd never heard of him before we drafted him, but as soon as we did and I heard the reports I was confident that he would not only make the team, but be used regularly.

While slow, I think Morgan has bit of a knack for picking his way downfield after the catch.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

I checked out Morgan's draft profile to see if he might be athletic enough. Still not sure. Maybe.

https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2632153-david-morgan-ii-nfl-draft-2016-scouting-report-grade-for-vikings-rookie.amp.html

Morgan is basically an O Lineman who has good hands for catching the ball. He is ridiculously slow for a TE at over 5 second 40. He was a great pick for us in the late 6th round IIRC, for his blocking ability and reliable hands. I'd never heard of him before we drafted him, but as soon as we did and I heard the reports I was confident that he would not only make the team, but be used regularly.

While slow, I think Morgan has bit of a knack for picking his way downfield after the catch.

I'd be happy with Smith and Morgan as the primary TEs.

Even if Morgan is slower than Rudy, he's a much better blocker and while we don't throw his way much, he has shown an ability to get open, to know where the marker is and he's actually got a bit more wiggle after the catch than Rudy.

Plus it would most likely make Smith the #1 TE receiving option instead of the #2 if Rudy stays. And I like Smith's ability to draw the defense farther down the field opening up the running and short passing game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

I know he makes effort to run with the ball after catching it, too.

Point taken.

I feel like I am a bad guy because I have been defending Rudolph until now. It's just that we didn't protect our quarterback and we didn't run the ball very well last year. I came to the conclusion that it's not all on the O-linemen.

Rudolph has strengths. He catches almost everything and he converts first downs and scores touchdowns. But it still is a team game.

That doesn't make you a bad guy in this. There are some that say Rudolph isn't good. I think Rudolph is good---I just think he is the one you trade or cut over Waynes or Griffen (at this point). I saw how little Cousins went to Rudolph except for one game. Diggs and Thielen are so dominant that Rudolph is the fourth or fifth option which makes him expendable at 7.5 million.

Rudolph was the third option in the passing game catching about 4 passes per game. In the next to last game last season against Detroit he busted out for 9 receptions on 9 targets, 122 yards and 2 TDs. I think assuming he remains on the team he will continue to be the #3 option, but eventually be supplanted by Smith for that role.

Again....targets last year

Thielen 153
Diggs 149

Rudolph 82
Treadwell 53
RBs 75 (cook 49 Murray 26)

He is a third option but when you have Thielen and Diggs with so many targets (like I mentioned in the last post)...you can get by w/o Rudolph if they find someone better than Treadwell (beebe, Mitchell, etc.)

We will most likely be using two TE base sets this year. In the Kubiak offense the #3WR averages 21 receptions per season. Expect Rudolph and Smith to combine for over 100 receptions.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/den/2015.htm

Did Vernon Davis and Owen Daniels have 100 receptions in 2015 when Denver had two stud WRs? (nope)

Good point. If Rudolph can maintain his 64 all Smith needs to do is catch 36 that's barely over 2 a game. If they can both catch 3 a game that's 96. I think it's doable, but certainly not a lock. How many did VD and Reed combine for in their best year together? Did they manage 100?

The goal isn't to force favorable numbers to our tight ends. The goal is to maximize the chance of winning. I'd take ten less catches to our #1 TE for the season if it meant that we were able to add one catch per game for 25 yards up the seam.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

2) Thielen and Diggs get the majority of Targets,

Statistically they are more effective as red zone targets as well.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2018/redzone-receiving.htm

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

I checked out Morgan's draft profile to see if he might be athletic enough. Still not sure. Maybe.

https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2632153-david-morgan-ii-nfl-draft-2016-scouting-report-grade-for-vikings-rookie.amp.html

Morgan is basically an O Lineman who has good hands for catching the ball. He is ridiculously slow for a TE at over 5 second 40. He was a great pick for us in the late 6th round IIRC, for his blocking ability and reliable hands. I'd never heard of him before we drafted him, but as soon as we did and I heard the reports I was confident that he would not only make the team, but be used regularly.

While slow, I think Morgan has bit of a knack for picking his way downfield after the catch.

I'd be happy with Smith and Morgan as the primary TEs.

Even if Morgan is slower than Rudy, he's a much better blocker and while we don't throw his way much, he has shown an ability to get open, to know where the marker is and he's actually got a bit more wiggle after the catch than Rudy.

Plus it would most likely make Smith the #1 TE receiving option instead of the #2 if Rudy stays. And I like Smith's ability to draw the defense farther down the field opening up the running and short passing game.

I also like the potential for Smith and Conklin as a TE combo. This of course assumes Conklin has upgraded his blocking skills. I think he has the potential improve as he was a converted basketball player and not fully committed to football until his second year of college. Good athlete at the position.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

2) Thielen and Diggs get the majority of Targets,

Statistically they are more effective as red zone targets as well.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2018/redzone-receiving.htm

Thielen and Diggs make two reliable red zone targets. IMO it is even better to have 3 or 4 reliable red zone targets. Makes us less predictable and we can take advantage of what the defense gives us.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

I checked out Morgan's draft profile to see if he might be athletic enough. Still not sure. Maybe.

https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2632153-david-morgan-ii-nfl-draft-2016-scouting-report-grade-for-vikings-rookie.amp.html

Morgan is basically an O Lineman who has good hands for catching the ball. He is ridiculously slow for a TE at over 5 second 40. He was a great pick for us in the late 6th round IIRC, for his blocking ability and reliable hands. I'd never heard of him before we drafted him, but as soon as we did and I heard the reports I was confident that he would not only make the team, but be used regularly.

While slow, I think Morgan has bit of a knack for picking his way downfield after the catch.

I'd be happy with Smith and Morgan as the primary TEs.

Even if Morgan is slower than Rudy, he's a much better blocker and while we don't throw his way much, he has shown an ability to get open, to know where the marker is and he's actually got a bit more wiggle after the catch than Rudy.

Plus it would most likely make Smith the #1 TE receiving option instead of the #2 if Rudy stays. And I like Smith's ability to draw the defense farther down the field opening up the running and short passing game.

I also like the potential for Smith and Conklin as a TE combo. This of course assumes Conklin has upgraded his blocking skills. I think he has the potential improve as he was a converted basketball player and not fully committed to football until his second year of college. Good athlete at the position.

To me Conklin was very deficient in both blocking and receiving skills. The only reason he may be retained this year is if for some reason Rudolph is moved or as I expect we will primarily use 12 personnel making 4 TEs a greater need than before. I think we could survive without Rudy, but I think we would be taking a step backwards with our TEs which doesn't seem ideal with utilizing 12 personnel.
It has always been my contention that most of this board significantly underrates Rudy and I guess most of this board thinks I significantly overrate Rudy. Stats have been in Rudy's favor. Eye test according to many has not. If we move Rudy, it will be kind of fun to see how the backups and Smith can take the reigns. I won't lose any sleep over it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

I checked out Morgan's draft profile to see if he might be athletic enough. Still not sure. Maybe.

https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2632153-david-morgan-ii-nfl-draft-2016-scouting-report-grade-for-vikings-rookie.amp.html

Morgan is basically an O Lineman who has good hands for catching the ball. He is ridiculously slow for a TE at over 5 second 40. He was a great pick for us in the late 6th round IIRC, for his blocking ability and reliable hands. I'd never heard of him before we drafted him, but as soon as we did and I heard the reports I was confident that he would not only make the team, but be used regularly.

While slow, I think Morgan has bit of a knack for picking his way downfield after the catch.

I'd be happy with Smith and Morgan as the primary TEs.

Even if Morgan is slower than Rudy, he's a much better blocker and while we don't throw his way much, he has shown an ability to get open, to know where the marker is and he's actually got a bit more wiggle after the catch than Rudy.

Plus it would most likely make Smith the #1 TE receiving option instead of the #2 if Rudy stays. And I like Smith's ability to draw the defense farther down the field opening up the running and short passing game.

I also like the potential for Smith and Conklin as a TE combo. This of course assumes Conklin has upgraded his blocking skills. I think he has the potential improve as he was a converted basketball player and not fully committed to football until his second year of college. Good athlete at the position.

To me Conklin was very deficient in both blocking and receiving skills. The only reason he may be retained this year is if for some reason Rudolph is moved or as I expect we will primarily use 12 personnel making 4 TEs a greater need than before. I think we could survive without Rudy, but I think we would be taking a step backwards with our TEs which doesn't seem ideal with utilizing 12 personnel.
It has always been my contention that most of this board significantly underrates Rudy and I guess most of this board thinks I significantly overrate Rudy. Stats have been in Rudy's favor. Eye test according to many has not. If we move Rudy, it will be kind of fun to see how the backups and Smith can take the reigns. I won't lose any sleep over it.

It was interesting to me when Paul Allen said on the radio this morning that Conklin will definitely make the team this year. I do believe he will benefit from a year under his belt.

I found this article about Conklin just before last year's draft.

http://ramstalk.net/2018-nfl-draft-profile-central-michigan-te-tyler-conklin/

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

I checked out Morgan's draft profile to see if he might be athletic enough. Still not sure. Maybe.

https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2632153-david-morgan-ii-nfl-draft-2016-scouting-report-grade-for-vikings-rookie.amp.html

Morgan is basically an O Lineman who has good hands for catching the ball. He is ridiculously slow for a TE at over 5 second 40. He was a great pick for us in the late 6th round IIRC, for his blocking ability and reliable hands. I'd never heard of him before we drafted him, but as soon as we did and I heard the reports I was confident that he would not only make the team, but be used regularly.

While slow, I think Morgan has bit of a knack for picking his way downfield after the catch.

I'd be happy with Smith and Morgan as the primary TEs.

Even if Morgan is slower than Rudy, he's a much better blocker and while we don't throw his way much, he has shown an ability to get open, to know where the marker is and he's actually got a bit more wiggle after the catch than Rudy.

Plus it would most likely make Smith the #1 TE receiving option instead of the #2 if Rudy stays. And I like Smith's ability to draw the defense farther down the field opening up the running and short passing game.

I also like the potential for Smith and Conklin as a TE combo. This of course assumes Conklin has upgraded his blocking skills. I think he has the potential improve as he was a converted basketball player and not fully committed to football until his second year of college. Good athlete at the position.

To me Conklin was very deficient in both blocking and receiving skills. The only reason he may be retained this year is if for some reason Rudolph is moved or as I expect we will primarily use 12 personnel making 4 TEs a greater need than before. I think we could survive without Rudy, but I think we would be taking a step backwards with our TEs which doesn't seem ideal with utilizing 12 personnel.
It has always been my contention that most of this board significantly underrates Rudy and I guess most of this board thinks I significantly overrate Rudy. Stats have been in Rudy's favor. Eye test according to many has not. If we move Rudy, it will be kind of fun to see how the backups and Smith can take the reigns. I won't lose any sleep over it.

It was interesting to me when Paul Allen said on the radio this morning that Conklin will definitely make the team this year. I do believe he will benefit from a year under his belt.

I found this article about Conklin just before last year's draft.

http://ramstalk.net/2018-nfl-draft-profile-central-michigan-te-tyler-conklin/

Conklin is considered to be pretty decent at catching the ball. A lot of the cons associated to Conklin could have to do with his relative inexperience. A lot of technique things that, if they can be cleaned up, could make him a pretty solid TE.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

I know he makes effort to run with the ball after catching it, too.

Point taken.

I feel like I am a bad guy because I have been defending Rudolph until now. It's just that we didn't protect our quarterback and we didn't run the ball very well last year. I came to the conclusion that it's not all on the O-linemen.

Rudolph has strengths. He catches almost everything and he converts first downs and scores touchdowns. But it still is a team game.

That doesn't make you a bad guy in this. There are some that say Rudolph isn't good. I think Rudolph is good---I just think he is the one you trade or cut over Waynes or Griffen (at this point). I saw how little Cousins went to Rudolph except for one game. Diggs and Thielen are so dominant that Rudolph is the fourth or fifth option which makes him expendable at 7.5 million.

Rudolph was the third option in the passing game catching about 4 passes per game. In the next to last game last season against Detroit he busted out for 9 receptions on 9 targets, 122 yards and 2 TDs. I think assuming he remains on the team he will continue to be the #3 option, but eventually be supplanted by Smith for that role.

The second Detroit game was a true gem for Rudolph. The 44-yard Hail Mary TD catch put us back in that game and gave the team a nice jolt of momentum going into halftime. The flipside of this is that while that game was fantastic for Rudolph it leaves even weaker stats for the other 15 games he started. Through the other 15 games he averaged 3.7 catches, 34 yards, 0.1 TDs and 9.3 yards-per-catch. Embarrassing numbers for a 'top-10 TE'.