Our WR group

[NCFINFAN13]

Wallace, Hartline, Gibby and Mathews are a good combo. All have different, necessary skill sets that can be very beneficial to winning. I'm okay with this.

Tanney and Wallace just have to adjust their play differently.

For one, the obvious is the long ball. Tanney needs to fling away and not worry about an overthrow. This was something Rapistberger spoke about before. He couldn't over throw the guy.
Second, Wallace needs to be moved around to create better matches for him in the short game. Finally, Wallace needs to aggressively attack the ball. He's too passive.
They get that straight, and it's a different story.

Gibby is great in the middle of the field. Hartline at the boundaries and Mathews underneath.

This can be an impressive WR core if coached and utilized correctly.

 

[dlockz]

Pitt didn't choose anything, they offered Wallace a contract first. He declined it and they gave it to Brown.

I was saying they chose not to go above a certain mark. There are many other recevers I would much rather pay 12 million a year for

 

[NCFINFAN13]

I wanted to draft a decent WR as well, mainly for depth. Gibson is good but he's on the sidelines, recovering from surgery. In any season you have to be lucky to go through with no injuries. Part of the process is planning by covering contingencies for injury.

I wanted Bailey.

 

[J. David Wannyheimer]

For one, the obvious is the long ball. Tanney needs to fling away and not worry about an overthrow. This was something Rapistberger spoke about before. He couldn't over throw the guy.
Second, Wallace needs to be moved around to create better matches for him in the short game. Finally, Wallace needs to aggressively attack the ball. He's too passive.
They get that straight, and it's a different story.

I think this is absolutely right. It's more complicated than "Tanny sucks." It's more complicated than "Wallace blows." It's more complicated than "Mike Sherman fills me with seething rage."

It's on all of them.