re: Jimmay Graham is a WR, not TE

quote:

---

Jimmay Graham is a Pussy, not TE

---

Fixed it for you.

quote:

---

Please show me where the NFL or CBA defines lining up wide automatically makes you designated as a WR.

---

quote:

---

Under Article 9, Section 2 of the CBA, “[T]he tender will apply to the position in which the player participated in the most plays.” Thus, if Graham was lined up wide or in the slot more times than he was lined up as a tight end, he’s a receiver.

---

He has the leverage. Agent says new deal or we'll take the WR tag at $10+mil. They would win an arbitration over the tag designation IMO. Simply snap counts split wide.

So the immediate pressure for next year is on the Saints. $10mil+ one time cap hit might not even be manageable at all. Multi year deal most likely with the ability to keep the front end of the contract from swallowing your cap.

quote:

---

but he completely disappeared in the second half of the season

---

completely disappeared? da frick?


he also played with a partially torn plantar fascia from the NEw England game (week 6) until the end of the season.

No you haven't. All you have posted is a rule stating they will be tagged according to the position they played the most. It doesn't state anywhere that if a guy lines up wide, he is automatically a WR. This is my point. There is a lot of grey area. The article is based on a persons opinion and nothing else.

quote:

---

this is exactly what a WR is. TE is lined up on the LOS off tackle. Slot WR is off from the Line and WR is outside. A RB or TE can line up as a WR by being in the slot, z or x position, thus he is a WR for that play. This is like saying a WR that shifts into the backfield lining up as a half back is actually lining up as a WR. Or even when the QB lines up wide and a WR lines up under center, that the QB is not lined up as a WR and the WR is not lined up as a QB? This is not the case at all. You are wrong here.

Positions on the offense are designated. If a player lines up in a particular position on a given play, he is playing that position for that play. That's it. You're creating a "gray area" that simply doesn't exist

---

you can use a dildo to stir pancake batter but its still a dildo.

quote:

---

you can use a dildo to stir pancake batter but its still a dildo.

---

how would it get the lumps out of the batter?

quote:

---

They can label him TE all they want, but if they don't use him as such then he simply isn't one.

---

He sure doesn't block like one.

If true about Finley, that's interesting, because they are essentially the same type player. Neither block well, they create mismatches, excellent athletes for their size, etc... What's his contract? Because that should be the market for Graham. Graham is a good player but he wouldn't put up those numbers unless he's in the Saints or New England offense. In Denver or Green Bay, for instance, he would put up GOOD numbers, ala Julius Thomas or Finley, but not great numbers. He's one of the few true offensive threats the Saints have so he piles up opportunities and numbers. Then of course in offenses without QBs, he's just another guy running around.

And the Dildo comment is right. The dude looks and acts like a TE. He's only really an option when he has the mismatch with a LB or S. When he's covered by a corner, even an avg corner, he's never open. He's not a WR.

So, if his agent wants to debate semantics and bullshite, I get it. He needs to get paid, but if he's going to sit out, frick em. Saints will roll with Josh Hill and Watson and prob some other freak they find under a rock and Graham and his agent can watch as his best earning years are pissed away. "On this hand you have $8 MM, on this hand, you have dick. Now, choose Jimmy." Oh, and by the way, Gronk, when healthy, is an integral part of that offense and a great blocking TE, Jimmy clearly is not, per our playoff games. If the team offers him Gronk money and he wants more, frick em.