I'm very open to Henry if the salary is lower. Would be happy to have him and Singelary and then let them try to draft a RB late in the draft that's a zone scheme fit.
I wouldn’t complain if we signed Henry to a 1-2 year deal for cheaper. He would still make our run game waaaay better and goal line offense would actually score. But I prefer Barkley because I think the upside is higher. And if we’re gonna risk paying a running back, I want the higher reward. Plus, we would still need a receiving back. Barkley does both.
If y’all liked what demeco did with Warner and Greenlaw wait till y’all see what he does with Queen and Harris. We run a lot of nickel formation so I don’t care about Mike LB this and Will LB that. Give me the duo of two 4.4 LBs who are both 25 and under who fly sideline to sideline and have chemistry already because they both workout together in the off-season and Queen has learned under roquan for 2 years.
It's not about him being the 7th best DT in FA.. It's about him being a great player at a position of need. The 7th best DT is better than the best Edge. So you sign the 7th best DT even if you have to overpay a little bit and draft you're edge.
I’ve been thinking this for a while, but all I’ve been hearing is Saquon. Like any aging RB, Henry comes with risk, but he has seemed to defy that aging better than other physical RB’s in the past. But if you get 1 or 2 years of even last season’s version of Henry, your red zone TD percentage should be on the rise
He doesn't excite me too much. I mean, he's better than Pitre but there are better guys available. He is better than Stingley too in most categories except for interceptions. I mean, Stingley had 5. If we got him for a good price, and couldn't afford a better safety I'd be OK with it. PFF ratings SOLO TACKLES 70T-23rd INTERCEPTIONS 0 TARGETS 37T-27th RECEPTIONS ALLOWED 26T-24th
