Talking Tutu (many of) you!

[dieterbrock]

Is Forrest Lamp still available?

 

[1maGoh]

I have no idea what you are talking about. I’m just breaking down some odd things that PA said and pointing out how absurd they are, fascetiously.

You started talking about the Chiefs game. I was pointing out that no single factor of building a team (such as the one PA Ram discussed) will hold up in every game. Or even across every season. You can't point at one game and say the theory doesn't hold up.

PA Ram is saying that having the best QB and weapons combo is more important than having the best o line, not that the o line is totally worthless out you can just throw a bunch of garbage players at it. My point was that even if he's right, that method of team building won't be the deciding factor in every game. Just like having the best o line won't lead to a win in every game. I know that at this point you're thinking something like "duh. Of course it won't always lead to a win in every single game." But that means you can't point to one game in an attempt to discredit it. It's a "trend across the league" thing. It's a "chance to win the super bowl year, in year out" thing.

The question, or the argument, isn't "did the team with the better QB/weapons win this one particular game?" The question is "does having the best QB/weapons lead to a higher likelihood of success across a season than prioritizing any other position group or combo of position groups?" On this board every year, hell almost every week, we talk about it being a QB driven league. We hear over and over again that if you don't have the QB you don't have a chance. But when someone says the QB is more important than the o line...

The argument in PA's favor is that there is always a point of diminishing returns and it's possible that for the o line, that point is much lower than it used to be. With defense being neutered and rules favoring the offense, is very possible that having the absolute best o line is less important than having an above average o line and great weapons/QB. You obviously can't let one position group go to complete shit. But maybe you can only aim for a B+ o line and A+ QB/weapons and be better if as a team. The Titans are a great example of this. Tannehill is a B/B+ QB at best. Poor weapons. Maybe I'm wrong but I thought they had a really good offensive line, great RB, and a quality defense. That's classic, old school win the championship football. That's the model that fits getting the best o line possible. But they couldn't pull it off because their QB is deficient and they made some bad choices on play calls. They aren't real super bowl contenders and we know it. The reason they aren't is because they don't have a good enough QB or weapons. Maybe with Woods that changes, maybe not.

He's another way to think about it. How long do the metrics say the o line needs to block and is there significant value in having them able to block longer than that? What I think PA is really trying to get at, or at least what I think he should be getting at, is that the o line only has to block for so long. There isn't much reason to have them able to reliably block longer than that because it has an opportunity cost at other positions. The Rams ara very metric driven team. I bet they've done the research to know how long that is and they're trying to staff to that metric. Maybe that threshold for how long they really really need to block is lowering with all the offense favoring rule changes, and composing the team with a strong set of weapons and great QB lowers it even more. You can get by with less. It's kind of like a car built specifically for drag racing at the track. A trailer queen. How good does the gas mileage need to be and how much gas do you need to put in the tank? Because of how you've built the car, the mileage matters less and you don't need a full tank. If you put enough good weapons on the field with a great QB, the line's job will generally be easier/shorter most of the time. You can't ignore it together, but it takes less to be effective. Having the best would be cool, but generally isn't possible and costs you opportunities to do other things. If they can block as long as they need to 90-95% of the time, eh good enough

For the record, I didn't like the Atwell pick either. I just haven't given up on him and I think the pick could have gone to another non-center position.

 

[Mojo Ram]

As long as we’re ok with Brian Allen getting punked every once in a while because he was overpowered more than once by different. DT’s. And Humphreys might become an all pro, on a rookie contract

I am okay with it. I don't expect perfection or near perfection or even excellence from Allen or this years RG or LG or even Havenstein. I expected more from Whit...because he is a better player at a more critical position.

Those here who do expect more from the lesser players on this team, or want those players replaced with better players, i get it, but that is unrealistic. Teams must have a player position/cap philosophy that says "We're going to be very good here, and not as good here."

I think the Tutu pick sucks...but let's assume that Creed was drafted here and he plays outstanding his first couple years, then comes the i want more money distraction, and WE KNOW the Rams aren't going to pay BIG or extend a Center.

The Good: We got a couple years of affordable, outstanding Center play.

The Bad: We aren't going to build around a Center so we're going to have to trade or let this guy go for nothing sooner rather than later.

The Ugly(not really ugly but i'm having fun with it): Maybe we should've drafted(2nd rd) at a position that we're willing to make a life long Ram and build around as a core piece(QB, WR, TE, CB, EDGE or generational talent) that supports the team building philosophy we have.

There are teams that wanna go a different way and meticulously build an OL with five studs and lock them all up to protect their QB but who is their QB? And who is he throwing too? Can their defense get stops?

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

You started talking about the Chiefs game. I was pointing out that no single factor of building a team (such as the one PA Ram discussed) will hold up in every game. Or even across every season. You can't point at one game and say the theory doesn't hold up.

PA Ram is saying that having the best QB and weapons combo is more important than having the best o line, not that the o line is totally worthless out you can just throw a bunch of garbage players at it. My point was that even if he's right, that method of team building won't be the deciding factor in every game. Just like having the best o line won't lead to a win in every game. I know that at this point you're thinking something like "duh. Of course it won't always lead to a win in every single game." But that means you can't point to one game in an attempt to discredit it. It's a "trend across the league" thing. It's a "chance to win the super bowl year, in year out" thing.

The question, or the argument, isn't "did the team with the better QB/weapons win this one particular game?" The question is "does having the best QB/weapons lead to a higher likelihood of success across a season than prioritizing any other position group or combo of position groups?" On this board every year, hell almost every week, we talk about it being a QB driven league. We hear over and over again that if you don't have the QB you don't have a chance. But when someone says the QB is more important than the o line...

The argument in PA's favor is that there is always a point of diminishing returns and it's possible that for the o line, that point is much lower than it used to be. With defense being neutered and rules favoring the offense, is very possible that having the absolute best o line is less important than having an above average o line and great weapons/QB. You obviously can't let one position group go to complete shit. But maybe you can only aim for a B+ o line and A+ QB/weapons and be better if as a team. The Titans are a great example of this. Tannehill is a B/B+ QB at best. Poor weapons. Maybe I'm wrong but I thought they had a really good offensive line, great RB, and a quality defense. That's classic, old school win the championship football. That's the model that fits getting the best o line possible. But they couldn't pull it off because their QB is deficient and they made some bad choices on play calls. They aren't real super bowl contenders and we know it. The reason they aren't is because they don't have a good enough QB or weapons. Maybe with Woods that changes, maybe not.

He's another way to think about it. How long do the metrics say the o line needs to block and is there significant value in having them able to block longer than that? What I think PA is really trying to get at, or at least what I think he should be getting at, is that the o line only has to block for so long. There isn't much reason to have them able to reliably block longer than that because it has an opportunity cost at other positions. The Rams ara very metric driven team. I bet they've done the research to know how long that is and they're trying to staff to that metric. Maybe that threshold for how long they really really need to block is lowering with all the offense favoring rule changes, and composing the team with a strong set of weapons and great QB lowers it even more. You can get by with less. It's kind of like a car built specifically for drag racing at the track. A trailer queen. How good does the gas mileage need to be and how much gas do you need to put in the tank? Because of how you've built the car, the mileage matters less and you don't need a full tank. If you put enough good weapons on the field with a great QB, the line's job will generally be easier/shorter most of the time. You can't ignore it together, but it takes less to be effective. Having the best would be cool, but generally isn't possible and costs you opportunities to do other things. If they can block as long as they need to 90-95% of the time, eh good enough

For the record, I didn't like the Atwell pick either. I just haven't given up on him and I think the pick could have gone to another non-center position.

That all goes out the window when you apply it to the Tutu/ Creed discussion. What would have been better to have? A great center or a receiver that maybe is the 5th or 6th pass catching option on the team?

Just because the Rams don’t put as high a value on Oline doesn’t mean they should ignore a chance to upgrade an interior line position. The plan at the time was to move a guard to center and plug in another guard who failed miserably twice before, into his spot. To me that says need. To a large portion of the fan base that says need. They clearly weren’t thinking Allen was a better option than Corbett. Otherwise there’s be no reason to plan on movie Corbett and bringing in Evans. They got lucky that Allen was outperforming Corbett at center. But that was a few months after the draft.

But here is where your argument falls apart. Team building is based on the salary cap. Of course when you have AD, Stafford, Ramsey, etc,… on the roster there is less money for other positions. But Humphries wasn’t a free agent. They wouldn’t have upset the delicate balance of not putting a lot of cap resources into the center position. He’s a rookie. He wouldn’t get 15 million a year. So it has nothing to do with the ‘how to build a team’ strategy that the Rams use. So why not upgrade a position instead of playing musical chairs? They’d have him for 4 years at the least and if he’s really good they’d get a third round comp pick for him once he leaves. They do that with a lot of players.

Now back to who they picked instead. If Atwell ended up being good in year one and pushing Woods, Kupp, Higbee, DeSean Jackson and Jefferson and taking snaps away from them then maybe it was an okay pick. But still a poor choice for their first pick where they could have addressed a need. The likelihood of a 150 5’9” receiver doing that is ridiculously low considering that there is no track record of it being done in the league. I agreed with PA about Adebo being a better pick. But I’ve said more than once that the pick didn’t have to be Humphries. The problem is there were more pressing needs and better players on the board. Atwell was a reach in round 2. That is the single biggest issue with the pick.

Here’s another issue. This concept on here that Snead is infallable. Nobody should be criticizing his decisions, because the Rams won the Super Bowl is silly. He’s made his share of mistakes in the past. He’s not infallable and fans can criticize him if he made a bad pick. Which he did. But for some reason there are a few people here that think they can tell others how they should think about that.

Regarding all of that of that other crap you were talking about, I believe you either jumped in late or just took it out of context. I know perfectly well what PA meant. But his argument was flawed. He said you don’t need a good center if you can win a Super Bowl with an average center. So I said you don’t need a good QB if you can win a Super Bowl with an average QB. Ask Nick Foles. The point was you can win with deficiencies at certain positions, but that doesn’t mean that a team shouldn’t upgrade those positions if the opportunity arises. The other point he said the Bengals made it to the Super Bowl with a bad Oline. They barely made it and if not for two poor plays by Tannehill they don’t get past the titans and if not for poor play by the Chiefs they don’t win that game either. If I proved his point using the Tannehill example, then I disproved it with the second example. The Chiefs have Mahomes, Kelce, and Hill and aside from the best center in the league their line stunk. I’m supposed to think that that is all you need right? A good QB and Weapons plus a shot Oline. But they lost.

This doesn’t apply to you but it does others, The whole concept of the Super Bowl being the measuring stick on team building. It’s dumb. One play here or there and different teams are in that game. A missed field goal, bad penalty, a dropped pass or dropped interception, whatever. The Niners with a bad QB could have been in that game. The Rams only won by three. They beat the Bucs by three. If the Rams steam rolled every team in the playoffs then maybe, but they didn’t. There is more than one way to build a team. The Niners for example beat the Rams 7 in a row with a different configuration. I disagree with you on the Titans. They easily could have been in the Super Bowl and are the team I wanted the Rams to face the least of all AFC playoff teams.

Either way I’m out of this argument. Think what you like. As far as I’m consider I’m right. You can’t make me think otherwise, especially by repeating some of the inane logic I’ve had thrown at me on this thread. You think what you want. I’ll think what I think.

 

[So Ram]

They were unlikely to take a pass rusher too in the 2nd round. They had already drafted Terrell Lewis and signed Leonard Floyd. Plus they already had Samson, Double O, and Justin Hollins to rotate in. They had plenty of guys ,and a rookie in the late 2nd wasn't magically going to make them over the top. Hell Von Miller couldn't do that until he got acclimated.



Yup. WRs, corners, and in some cases pass rushers are the 2 main groups taken. Especially early. Then later you'll get the linemen, if the team feels they need the body.

This year being in the late 3rd, but I'm pretty sure they'll take a corner w/ their 1st pick, then a tackle, and possibly a TE/WR to round it out in the 5th.

My belief is you could be right about the DE/OLB . What type of defense does The Rams play ? 3/4 or 4/3? They play enough 3/4 that those Von Miller & Floyd types work.

Ebukham went to the 9ers. Justin Lawler was a guy who actually made the team &’got hurt &’cut.

Von Miller was a total IT Factor. He was coming off an injury & that was the main reason he took more time besides your point.

Chris Garrett IMO is a Freak from the 7th rd. I honestly think he can be ALL That ? A solid pass rusher who can make a name for himself. In the next 3 seasons I’d say at least 12 plus sacks? What happened to him really sucked for him. Probably in the long run was the best in the end result.Covid got him good.He was the 1 player who didn’t get vaccinated.He was coming into the season on the High End & flashing.
— I like T. Lewis as well & think he will be so much better because of the time just to rehab & get right.I LMAO at Ram Fans who want to doubt him with his knee injury.Cooper Kupp showed what hard work can do from a knee injury standpoint. Cam Akers is another one is going to show what hard work does.
The above makes me think a RB if Sony Michael is not brought back.Someone mentioned Kentucky O’Lineman. I’d say a certain UK player.
—Just Rambling——-
Talking WR - wow

21- Atwell,Harris & Sko
there is a lot of upside there.Les Snead added nice depth there

20- Van Jefferson- this guy is a Franchise Player.I was a little down on him.OBj is better.Then again that is me.Truth is is Allen Robinson is a Ram in a major sense because they both come from the same HooD.
(Hopkins) Well I’ll add Hopkins is out if Mcvay’s Dawg House. He really opened some eyes. Blanton as well got such awesome NFL experience.

19 — ??????! Darrell Henderson,The Rams depth is on the roster now for a few more years. — This brings us(me) back to the thinking of Free Agents &
future depth. Example Humphries at Center last season. A RB is a need & IMO at least 217 lbs.

B. Powell was signed for one year so that goes back to Atwell ? Can he or anyone else handle PR/KR in the future ?

 

[So Ram]

I am okay with it. I don't expect perfection or near perfection or even excellence from Allen or this years RG or LG or even Havenstein. I expected more from Whit...because he is a better player at a more critical position.

Those here who do expect more from the lesser players on this team, or want those players replaced with better players, i get it, but that is unrealistic. Teams must have a player position/cap philosophy that says "We're going to be very good here, and not as good here."

I think the Tutu pick sucks...but let's assume that Creed was drafted here and he plays outstanding his first couple years, then comes the i want more money distraction, and WE KNOW the Rams aren't going to pay BIG or extend a Center.

The Good: We got a couple years of affordable, outstanding Center play.

The Bad: We aren't going to build around a Center so we're going to have to trade or let this guy go for nothing sooner rather than later.

The Ugly(not really ugly but i'm having fun with it): Maybe we should've drafted(2nd rd) at a position that we're willing to make a life long Ram and build around as a core piece(QB, WR, TE, CB, EDGE or generational talent) that supports the team building philosophy we have.

There are teams that wanna go a different way and meticulously build an OL with five studs and lock them all up to protect their QB but who is their QB? And who is he throwing too? Can their defense get stops?

Just got done looking up Ram draft history.

The 2018 draft was the Worst Draft in Mcvay’s & Sneads working career together. That was the Fallout of the Playoffs imo.

2018 draft though is sort of ripping late like a good red wine.

Joesph Noteboom 3 more years
Brian Allen 3 more years

There was a lot of waste,but OBo & Howard could be back ? Just a real poor draft by The Rams.

Tutu Atwell is still young & has a lot to prove, but this 2021 draft IMO could be The Rams best draft Ever still.

 

[PARAM]

Nobody here is saying Snead/McVay are infallible. That's a strawman.

I think the Humphrey/Lamp comparison DB insinuated is on point. Truth is we'd love to have All Pros at all 22 positions but that's not only unrealistic, it's impossible.

Is Creed Humphrey a better center than Tutu is a receiver? After 1 season, no doubt. Does that make the pick "the wrong one"? Some will say 'yes' because we could have had a Pro Bowl center for the next 4 years (2021-2024).

Teams who draft well, draft smart. Need + big board. The fallibility of "Creed was the right pick, Tutu was the wrong pick" is based on fan need not being in sync with management need.

Humphrey playing well further cemented the argument for those who's board didn't match the Rams board. Plans? They had a plan. They were attempting to improve the offensive skills positions, special teams and defense. Hard to argue with that approach.

And of course, those arguing that their hired scouts and personnel men reported back that Humphrey was the right pick are going to keep watch for more evidence to remind us so. Meanwhile, I (and others) will revel in the Championship that just was and the prospects of repeating, in spite of the front office making moves to impede things.

 

[AvengerRam]

Equine pate, anyone?

 

[Zodi]

How does this thread have life????

It's the off-season.

 

[1maGoh]

That all goes out the window when you apply it to the Tutu/ Creed discussion. What would have been better to have? A great center or a receiver that maybe is the 5th or 6th pass catching option on the team?

Just because the Rams don’t put as high a value on Oline doesn’t mean they should ignore a chance to upgrade an interior line position. The plan at the time was to move a guard to center and plug in another guard who failed miserably twice before, into his spot. To me that says need. To a large portion of the fan base that says need. They clearly weren’t thinking Allen was a better option than Corbett. Otherwise there’s be no reason to plan on movie Corbett and bringing in Evans. They got lucky that Allen was outperforming Corbett at center. But that was a few months after the draft.

But here is where your argument falls apart. Team building is based on the salary cap. Of course when you have AD, Stafford, Ramsey, etc,… on the roster there is less money for other positions. But Humphries wasn’t a free agent. They wouldn’t have upset the delicate balance of not putting a lot of cap resources into the center position. He’s a rookie. He wouldn’t get 15 million a year. So it has nothing to do with the ‘how to build a team’ strategy that the Rams use. So why not upgrade a position instead of playing musical chairs? They’d have him for 4 years at the least and if he’s really good they’d get a third round comp pick for him once he leaves. They do that with a lot of players.

Now back to who they picked instead. If Atwell ended up being good in year one and pushing Woods, Kupp, Higbee, DeSean Jackson and Jefferson and taking snaps away from them then maybe it was an okay pick. But still a poor choice for their first pick where they could have addressed a need. The likelihood of a 150 5’9” receiver doing that is ridiculously low considering that there is no track record of it being done in the league. I agreed with PA about Adebo being a better pick. But I’ve said more than once that the pick didn’t have to be Humphries. The problem is there were more pressing needs and better players on the board. Atwell was a reach in round 2. That is the single biggest issue with the pick.

Here’s another issue. This concept on here that Snead is infallable. Nobody should be criticizing his decisions, because the Rams won the Super Bowl is silly. He’s made his share of mistakes in the past. He’s not infallable and fans can criticize him if he made a bad pick. Which he did. But for some reason there are a few people here that think they can tell others how they should think about that.

Regarding all of that of that other crap you were talking about, I believe you either jumped in late or just took it out of context. I know perfectly well what PA meant. But his argument was flawed. He said you don’t need a good center if you can win a Super Bowl with an average center. So I said you don’t need a good QB if you can win a Super Bowl with an average QB. Ask Nick Foles. The point was you can win with deficiencies at certain positions, but that doesn’t mean that a team shouldn’t upgrade those positions if the opportunity arises. The other point he said the Bengals made it to the Super Bowl with a bad Oline. They barely made it and if not for two poor plays by Tannehill they don’t get past the titans and if not for poor play by the Chiefs they don’t win that game either. If I proved his point using the Tannehill example, then I disproved it with the second example. The Chiefs have Mahomes, Kelce, and Hill and aside from the best center in the league their line stunk. I’m supposed to think that that is all you need right? A good QB and Weapons plus a shot Oline. But they lost.

This doesn’t apply to you but it does others, The whole concept of the Super Bowl being the measuring stick on team building. It’s dumb. One play here or there and different teams are in that game. A missed field goal, bad penalty, a dropped pass or dropped interception, whatever. The Niners with a bad QB could have been in that game. The Rams only won by three. They beat the Bucs by three. If the Rams steam rolled every team in the playoffs then maybe, but they didn’t. There is more than one way to build a team. The Niners for example beat the Rams 7 in a row with a different configuration. I disagree with you on the Titans. They easily could have been in the Super Bowl and are the team I wanted the Rams to face the least of all AFC playoff teams.

Either way I’m out of this argument. Think what you like. As far as I’m consider I’m right. You can’t make me think otherwise, especially by repeating some of the inane logic I’ve had thrown at me on this thread. You think what you want. I’ll think what I think.

Ha. I didn't realize I actually posted that. I meant to give up because I know nobody is is really trying to see anything but their own perspective. Snead's not infallible. I'm sorry if I ever gave you the impression I think he is. I think he's more likely to be right than any of us, so I'll default to not serving guessing him, but he definitely makes mistakes. And I said (I think I said it and if not I'm saying it now) Atwell wasn't my choice for a pick either, so we are in agreement there.

 

[PARAM]

How does this thread have life????

It's already been 6 weeks since the biggest Rams win in 2 decades and only 4 weeks, 3 days until the draft.

Time to get out theand read the takes on why the Rams drafted this guy instead of the guy they should have drafted. I'd guess all those amateur experts have already watched all the film, reviewed the combine performances and listened to interviews with prospects. Personally, I watch Kiper and McShay's big board (where many critics get their info) and how wrong they are after the first 10 picks of the draft. I pine for the days I could print out Rick Gosselin's top 100 and see 95 of those guys go off the board in the first 3 rounds!!!

 

[So Ram]

A player or to players never heard around here from the 2021 draft is the young pups. The Brown Bro’s & what Henderson has in store. AD99 imo is going to have quiet holdout &
A’Robinson & Gaines step up. Hoecht is a player who works so hard he pushes these guys.Copeland surprisingly played ok minutes.

Once again these Brown Bro’s are Big & Young. E.Brown is the lesser of the 2,no doubt.He does seem like a sponge though.He witnessed a heck of a season from a defensive front.Thise extra reps count.

 

[TheTackle]

Setting aside the fact Tutu was picked too soon and most definitely shouldn’t have been the pick at 57, he got a reprieve in this draft and so I guess our coaches and GM don’t think he is a hopeless case

What would look like a good season from Tutu?

400 combined yards at around 18 yards a pop? I think he is capable of that from the slot and move position. He has incredible talent but perhaps he has to prove he can add and keep on some weight?

Scouting Report: TuTu Atwell, Packers' WR

The Packers have lacked a true “slot” wide receiver since Randall Cobb left after the 2018 season. Lucky for them TuTu Atwell is the perfect fit.

wisportsheroics.com

 

[Mackeyser]

You started talking about the Chiefs game. I was pointing out that no single factor of building a team (such as the one PA Ram discussed) will hold up in every game. Or even across every season. You can't point at one game and say the theory doesn't hold up.

PA Ram is saying that having the best QB and weapons combo is more important than having the best o line, not that the o line is totally worthless out you can just throw a bunch of garbage players at it. My point was that even if he's right, that method of team building won't be the deciding factor in every game. Just like having the best o line won't lead to a win in every game. I know that at this point you're thinking something like "duh. Of course it won't always lead to a win in every single game." But that means you can't point to one game in an attempt to discredit it. It's a "trend across the league" thing. It's a "chance to win the super bowl year, in year out" thing.

The question, or the argument, isn't "did the team with the better QB/weapons win this one particular game?" The question is "does having the best QB/weapons lead to a higher likelihood of success across a season than prioritizing any other position group or combo of position groups?" On this board every year, hell almost every week, we talk about it being a QB driven league. We hear over and over again that if you don't have the QB you don't have a chance. But when someone says the QB is more important than the o line...

The argument in PA's favor is that there is always a point of diminishing returns and it's possible that for the o line, that point is much lower than it used to be. With defense being neutered and rules favoring the offense, is very possible that having the absolute best o line is less important than having an above average o line and great weapons/QB. You obviously can't let one position group go to complete shit. But maybe you can only aim for a B+ o line and A+ QB/weapons and be better if as a team. The Titans are a great example of this. Tannehill is a B/B+ QB at best. Poor weapons. Maybe I'm wrong but I thought they had a really good offensive line, great RB, and a quality defense. That's classic, old school win the championship football. That's the model that fits getting the best o line possible. But they couldn't pull it off because their QB is deficient and they made some bad choices on play calls. They aren't real super bowl contenders and we know it. The reason they aren't is because they don't have a good enough QB or weapons. Maybe with Woods that changes, maybe not.

He's another way to think about it. How long do the metrics say the o line needs to block and is there significant value in having them able to block longer than that? What I think PA is really trying to get at, or at least what I think he should be getting at, is that the o line only has to block for so long. There isn't much reason to have them able to reliably block longer than that because it has an opportunity cost at other positions. The Rams ara very metric driven team. I bet they've done the research to know how long that is and they're trying to staff to that metric. Maybe that threshold for how long they really really need to block is lowering with all the offense favoring rule changes, and composing the team with a strong set of weapons and great QB lowers it even more. You can get by with less. It's kind of like a car built specifically for drag racing at the track. A trailer queen. How good does the gas mileage need to be and how much gas do you need to put in the tank? Because of how you've built the car, the mileage matters less and you don't need a full tank. If you put enough good weapons on the field with a great QB, the line's job will generally be easier/shorter most of the time. You can't ignore it together, but it takes less to be effective. Having the best would be cool, but generally isn't possible and costs you opportunities to do other things. If they can block as long as they need to 90-95% of the time, eh good enough

For the record, I didn't like the Atwell pick either. I just haven't given up on him and I think the pick could have gone to another non-center position.

Um… the super long posts are MY thing, yo!!!

 

[Corbin]

Setting aside the fact Tutu was picked too soon and most definitely shouldn’t have been the pick at 57, he got a reprieve in this draft and so I guess our coaches and GM don’t think he is a hopeless case

What would look like a good season from Tutu?

400 combined yards at around 18 yards a pop? I think he is capable of that from the slot and move position. He has incredible talent but perhaps he has to prove he can add and keep on some weight?

Scouting Report: TuTu Atwell, Packers' WR

The Packers have lacked a true “slot” wide receiver since Randall Cobb left after the 2018 season. Lucky for them TuTu Atwell is the perfect fit.

wisportsheroics.com

Was this thread locked and you dug it out of the trenches when it got lost to the fathomless deep of threads?

 

[MachS]

Setting aside the fact Tutu was picked too soon and most definitely shouldn’t have been the pick at 57, he got a reprieve in this draft and so I guess our coaches and GM don’t think he is a hopeless case

What would look like a good season from Tutu?

400 combined yards at around 18 yards a pop? I think he is capable of that from the slot and move position. He has incredible talent but perhaps he has to prove he can add and keep on some weight?

Scouting Report: TuTu Atwell, Packers' WR

The Packers have lacked a true “slot” wide receiver since Randall Cobb left after the 2018 season. Lucky for them TuTu Atwell is the perfect fit.

wisportsheroics.com

400 yards in year 2 would not be a good year for him IMO. He needs to take a considerable step this year and start pushing Van for WR3 duties in certain games. He needs to catch multiple long 50+ TDs and show his playmaking ability, all while staying healthy. I think around 600 all purpose yards would be a reasonable expectation given his draft status and the fact that he should take end-arounds for us as well. He should be able to break out with some big plays. It will be interesting to hear McVay this off-season talk about him because last year his comments regarding Tutu were not very positive.

 

[AvengerRam]

February 2023:

Wow. Another Super Bowl win! I thought we were dead in the water before that botched snap by Humphrey gave us the ball back. That TD pass to Tutu was so clutch!

 

[Riverumbbq]

February 2023:

 

[VegasRam]

I hope his reading and understanding of the playbook is better than his writing skills.

Just mean....




...but funny.

 

[PARAM]

I love it when fans put numerical parameters on a guy. Tutu is a WR.

Our #1 is Kupp
Our #2 is Robinson
Our #3 is Jefferson

Who's our #4? Tutu? Harris? Skowronek?
What if OBJ is re-signed?

I'll watch to see if he's able to break into the line up. At what level he's used. And whether he helps the team or not. He was a #57 pick by a team that won a Superbowl. Exact same slot as VJ was drafted the previous year. And since we won that Superbowl, I'd say our draft was a success. A question for old-timers......How long did we complain about Vermeil taking Rich Coady with the #68 pick in the draft? We could have had Joey Porter. Or Craig Yeast!!!