Originally Posted by VAChief:
I would like to see more heavy sets, (12 and 13 personnel). Rotating our 3 most reliable receivers in those sets and pound the ball off play action. In the Chargers game we caught them under matched and just pounded it down their throats in a hurry up without allowing them to change their personnel.
We should have a 3 WR rotation (Worthy, Watson, and Ju Ju) with Mecole as a brief breather as needed. That is going to require us to shift a little more to heavier sets, which Andy knows how to get the most out of if needed. Rotate Kareem and Perine to keep them fresh. Let Steele give a blow occasionally, but limit his snaps for now.
That’s where I’m reading into the fortson signing. He was actually becoming a solid run blocker before he got hurt. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
Watson may end up leading the team in WR yards (if Hollywood & Rice are out the entire year and we don't make a move)
NOT counting Kelce. Just the WRs
No he will not. Watson has had plenty of opportunities to put up big numbers, but it doesn't matter if he plays 30% of the snaps or 75% of the snaps he is going to get 2 rec for 20-30 yards. Xavier Worthy will lead the WR room in rec yards. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dlphg9:
No he will not. Watson has had plenty of opportunities to put up big numbers, but it doesn't matter if he plays 30% of the snaps or 75% of the snaps he is going to get 2 rec for 20-30 yards. Xavier Worthy will lead the WR room in rec yards.
Thats who I would bet on as well but it would not surprise me if Watson had more. They will be focusing on Worthy now. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dlphg9:
No he will not. Watson has had plenty of opportunities to put up big numbers, but it doesn't matter if he plays 30% of the snaps or 75% of the snaps he is going to get 2 rec for 20-30 yards. Xavier Worthy will lead the WR room in rec yards.
Justin Watson is fully capable of exploding for 60 yards in a game. [Reply]
I think we need to go run heavy. They will expect we will focus on Kelsey, and Mahomes should obviously look to him. But the real emphasis should be on worthy. Not on stuff over the middle like rice ran as that will expose him and juju can do those roots, but worthy can run a full root tree and we should utilize that. Just hope Mahomes doesn’t get happy feet.
I’m starting worthy and benching Mahomes in my fantasy leagues. Feel really bad about that but I’ve got Danielle’s and I can’t help myself. [Reply]
Originally Posted by gordonelloyd:
I think we need to go run heavy. They will expect we will focus on Kelsey, and Mahomes should obviously look to him. But the real emphasis should be on worthy. Not on stuff over the middle like rice ran as that will expose him and juju can do those roots, but worthy can run a full root tree and we should utilize that. Just hope Mahomes doesn’t get happy feet.
I’m starting worthy and benching Mahomes in my fantasy leagues. Feel really bad about that but I’ve got Danielle’s and I can’t help myself.
Originally Posted by ToxSocks:
Worthy is going to need some rapid development, ala Rice last season, so that we can really lean into him by playoff time.
He's already shown he can handle running actual routes. If they cut down the decoy plays and actually have him running real routes I bet he gets 1000 yards this season.
It's so crazy that we see how good he is on drags, slants, and crossers and we rarely run those for him. Lean more into that and use him like a real WR and not just a deep threat and we'll be cooking. [Reply]
Here's the deal, we still have enough to keep winning and we'll get some talent back fresh for the playoffs. We're still better with Worthy as our #1 than we were in 2022 with JuJu at #1 and JuJu still here. [Reply]
I think Juju will step into the Rashee role, but I think a lot of the Rashee snaps will go to Noah Gray, and Xavier Worthy will get more looks. So overall, my hunch is that Rashee's snaps will go as follows:
This assumes that the number of passing snaps won't change. Maybe they'd have a few more running plays without Rashee, but I doubt that'll be significant. [Reply]