T.D. showed Moss some love!

To catch a hundred passes AND have other receivers still be fairly productive (happy) you need to be a situation where you are more inclined to pass (losing and needing to catch up). Let's hope that we are in a position more often than not that we are running and not passing.

Not much of a standard, I guess. ;)lol. So true.

I don't care how many he catches as long as the offense gets in the damn endzone more often than last year or at least puts our defense in position to create a turnover for points.

If the new offense is geared towards dumping the ball and quick hitches there's no reason to believe he couldn't catch 100 balls. Truth be told it all depends how defenses play us and the kind of impact our new receivers will have.

If the new receivers garner no respect form opposing defenses, no way in hell Moss catches 100 balls. If they do and they leave Moss in single coverage, well, I'll take Moss over any DB (except maybe Champ, cause we all know Champ is the MAN! :P).

p.s. Portis might have 50+ catches this year.It just doesn't make sense to garner coverage to unproven recivers when Santana Moss is coming off a 1400 yard season. Certain coodinators (Jim *cough* Johnson) are egotistical, but at absolute best (for Moss), the coverages he sees will be balanced zones, such as your standard cover 3, cover 4, cover 2 etc.

Or in the case of Dallas, the classic cover nobody.

And if Brunell isn't the starter?

I'm just saying.............

Many people on this forum are too critical.

I didn't say that Brunell would complete 70%. I simply did the math to show that it wasn't unreasonable to think Moss might catch 100 balls. But still, people must insist that I am wrong (or unrealistic). Gimme a break!

Not sure what you were trying to say then.

It sure looked to me that you were saying 70% of the passes would be completed, with 30% of that 70% going to Moss.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Not sure what you were trying to say then.

It sure looked to me that you were saying 70% of the passes would be completed, with 30% of that 70% going to Moss.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

I wanted to show that it wasn't unreasonable to think Moss could have 100 catches this season--that's all. I didn't offer my opinion on how either would perform. Still, people want to criticize my post. I find that on this forum people are constantly trying to defend themselves (and attack other posts). It sucks.

I wanted to show that it wasn't unreasonable to think Moss could have 100 catches this season--that's all. I didn't offer my opinion on how either would perform. Still, people want to criticize my post. I find that on this forum people are constantly trying to defend themselves (and attack other posts). It sucks.

LOL

But by saying 70%, that is unreasonable. Impossible? No. Unreasonable? Yes.

Don't take things too seriously. I think you just didn't word your post all that well. It looked like you're saying that Brunell will complete 70%.

Relax Inspector. This is a happy space. Remember that we're all hyped up for the upcoming season. Ever since the post-game interviews after the Seattle game we all have been looking forward to August (I love watching pre-season games). Just stay cool and have fun.

So we're all stuck on 70%?

What's the difference between 60% and 70% for a season?

60% of 450 = 270
70% of 450 = 315
315-270 = 45 completions
45/16 = 2.8 completions per game

So, is it unrealistic to believe that Brunell will complete 2-3 more passes per game? I don't think so. I think the argument should be made that the attempts will decline--not so much on 70%.

Either way, it's just statistics--not my opinion.