- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Agree or Disagree...Kenny Vaccaro
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:20 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:20 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
Jenkins is horrible bro, I'd stick him at nickel until after the season then his arse is cut
0
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:20 pm to Brettesaurus Rex
I agree for the most part but I don't think they need to cut Jenkins. He does have talent. His problem is being terribly inconsistent, more on the bad side.
He would save $2.5 mil though and it would be a statement cut.
He would save $2.5 mil though and it would be a statement cut.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:20 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:22 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
to a much less valuable position
You know we got that whole 'value thing' you been pimpin.
Are you gonna insert this in every single football thread now
We got it. We might not agree but we fricking got it.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:22 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
quote:
Jenkins, he's not bad at all
got a wow from me
I'm not on the lynching committee but his flaws are readily evident. That he is in the last year of his rookie contract and no one anywhere even suggests he might be extended shows the Saints valuation of him.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:23 pm to SlowFlowPro
False. He showed great potential at NB. Maybe he never becomes an outside CB but he played much better at NB than he ever did at FS.
We moved him because we didn't have any FS once Sharper left. He was going to be our long term solution there.
We moved him because we didn't have any FS once Sharper left. He was going to be our long term solution there.
This post was edited on 4/28/13 at 2:25 pm
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:25 pm to bonethug0108
quote:
He showed great potential at NB.
revisionist history out of hope that our FO didn't frick up another early pick and our current pick not only justifies their drafting, but may be so good that we get TWO starters
he was crucified on this board and with good reason. he's a bad athlete for the CB position (esp the nickel)
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:29 pm to SlowFlowPro
It was his rookie year. He started to play better later in the year, but he didn't have the top end speed to play outside. He's quick enough and has the size to play nickel though.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:32 pm to Brettesaurus Rex
I'dklike to see Jenkins used as nickel.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:33 pm to Patrick O Rly
I think its obvious that the grand puppet master Loomis is the one keeping a guy (jenkins) on our team who can't play corner can't play nickle can't play dime and can't play safety despite all the coaches pleas.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:33 pm to Patrick O Rly
This. He started making a bunch of plays at the end of the year. Then he moved to FS and regressed every year.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:38 pm to Brettesaurus Rex
quote:
I'm going to be very disappointed if KV only sees the field in nickel or third down situations. He's a first round pick that needs to be starting day one.
If a year from now Vaccaro is starting and a difference maker, then this pick will be viewed as a good one.
It is dumb and shortsighted to say that the success of this pick is dependent on him starting day 1
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:41 pm to blueslover
quote:
Another thing, the old free/strong safety roles and designation is quickly becoming history. It's evolving just to left and right safeties. They have to do it all, jam the box and cover deep.
This. Having a clear strong safety and free safety, signals where the strength of coverage is located. Thus, having two safeties with range and run support abilities is optimal.
In regards to our situation, MJ has at least shown the ability to do both of those ( i know, i know, never consistent). Whereas, Roman, clearly can't perform one of the above listen prerequisites to be a quality safety in today's game. I've been firmly planted on the IAQ pain train, so don't take this as a petition for Malcolm.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:41 pm to bonethug0108
quote:
He would save $2.5 mil though and it would be a statement cut.
If that's true, see ya Jenkins.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:43 pm to St Augustine
quote:
Message Posted by St Augustine I'dklike to see Jenkins used as nickel.
I see a lot of people saying this...but what does that say about Robinson? I know that's asking to choose between two of Saints Talk's whipping boys, but I would much rather Robinson at nickel than Jenkins. Much, much more so.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 2:54 pm to Brettesaurus Rex
Problem with the secondary guys is the only two worth cutting are Jenkins and Harper (after June 1st for him). Everyone else costs cap to cut or is making peanuts.
For this reason alone Jenkins is the one most in jeopardy.
For this reason alone Jenkins is the one most in jeopardy.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 4:07 pm to Brettesaurus Rex
Agree.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 4:57 pm to moneyg
quote:
It is dumb and shortsighted to say that the success of this pick is dependent on him starting day 1
when your argument is based on him being a big need, it's kind of presumed that he has to make an early impact
otherwise, the "need" argument is irrelevant
Posted on 4/28/13 at 5:09 pm to SlowFlowPro
Agree he needs to be on the field for the pick to be "worth" it. I'm coming around to the pick due to the fact we needed immediate help at Safety. If he's not ready this year, he was too much of a reach
Posted on 4/28/13 at 5:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
when your argument is based on him being a big need, it's kind of presumed that he has to make an early impact
otherwise, the "need" argument is irrelevant
You are oversimplifying it.
The Saints NEED a LT...and they drafted a guy who will most likely require a year before he is ready. Why? Presumably, it was because there wasn't someone staring them in the face that would have been able to step in and play at a high level this year anyway...so they took a guy that had higher upside. In other words, the draft wasn't going to solve that problem this year.
Safety could be the exact same thing. They see the need to replace both safeties and perhaps think that Vaccaro could be a guy that replaces one of them soon. But, if the kid takes a little while to figure it out (very common for a rookie), and it is next year before he is ready, it doesn't disprove that safety was a huge need.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News