"To Tank or Not to Tank"

Discussion in 'Tennessee Titans and NFL Talk' started by Titanium, Jan 21, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. #1TitansFan

    #1TitansFan Camp Fodder

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    89
    Its possible that Tank won't get beat deep as often next year, being that he would be 1 full year from an ACL.
    #31
  2. super_titan

    super_titan Camp Fodder

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    260

    The same coaches that saw T Beckham in practice too.
    #32
  3. Soxcat

    Soxcat Starter

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    8,487
    One poster says Tank is great against the run. Only if he is on the LOS and they don't block him.
    Another says he is improving. Fact is he isn't any better now than he was as a rookie.
    Tank's situation is nothing like EGs IMO. Tank never was a super star and the club will not and should not cut him any breaks however on the bright side we might get him cheaper than his true value because of the injury and poor year he had. If he comes cheap he is at the least decent depth. Reese knows what his market value is and IMO he shouldn't get a dime more than a little more than the vet minimum. If we do sign him I would give him a small SB and grab him for three years. If we are not comfortable signing him for 3 years at a reasonable CAP number he isn't worth keeping around.
    #33
  4. Starkiller

    Starkiller 9

    Joined:
    May 30, 2002
    Messages:
    14,957
    Yeah, and you'll note he was glued to the bench most of the year...
    #34
  5. 2toneblue77

    2toneblue77 Guest

    It seems the main reason for keeping Tank is that hes a vet and we have a young team. The only problem I have with that is that when you have bad vets the younger players dont mature as well as they could with stronger players. How many times did we see tank sidestep a runner and try and tackle with his arms last season rather than hit the guy with his whole body? If we want this team to be aggressive again, it has to come from aggressive vets and Tank is not one of them. Let him go. Id rather have a younger guy with less experience that isn't afraid to lay it on someone than have a safety that takes a hit rather than gives one.
    #35
  6. super_titan

    super_titan Camp Fodder

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    260
    Yea but during spring practice and training camp all we heard was how much he had improved and how good he was gonna be that season.

    But I guess they didnt have to many other options at the time as well.
    #36
  7. Soxcat

    Soxcat Starter

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    8,487
    The other problem with vets like Tank is they end up getting the playing time even though they are not getting the job done while a young guy rots on the bench. We could have done as well with Randall and Nickey at the safeties last year.
    #37
  8. The Mrs

    The Mrs Crush on Casey Starbucks!

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,551
    Yeah, poor Rey Hill and Pac Jones just rotted on the bench while T. Beck and Woofolk played up a storn!:sad2:
    #38
  9. Starkiller

    Starkiller 9

    Joined:
    May 30, 2002
    Messages:
    14,957
    What, you think Fisher was going to say "Well, he sucks, but he's the best we've got" or something like that?
    #39
  10. Soxcat

    Soxcat Starter

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    8,487
    Historically Fisher has been reluctant to bench vets even if they are marginal players. Obviously Pacman is an acception because he was the #6 pick in the draft. He was going to start no matter what. I was a little surprised that Hill got his opportunity early but even then it took a Woolfolk injury to get him into the lineup.
    #40
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.