Holt released by Rams

Yes, it's stupid. but when your trying to upgrade why not look to see if you could possibly upgrade across the board to make your team better.

It was very apparent by the opposing comments that Holt is:

1. Better then Thrash.
2. Better then ARE.
3. Better then Kelly and Thomas.
4. Would upgrade this offense.
5. Too old.
6. On the decline.
7. and people would rather stay mediocre and develope Kelly and Thomas instead of having a proven WR to help this team if Kelly and Thomas don't step up this yr again.

No hard feelings. I'm not bedding the dude or anything so I don't care if we pick him up or not. I was simply trying to point out he would upgrade us. As far as trading out Thrash? Who in there right mind would keep him when he had only 1 TD (very productive) and old versus a Holt who usually has 1,000 yrd and has 12yrd avg each yr, and usually no less then 7 TD's? but I was totally wrong. We should keep Thrash. Maybe it will force Kelly and Thomas to step up, hopefully, but this would be my last yr with Hixon if I were the team if he and they not productive.ARE is a "proven" WR, though. So you sign Holt and bump ARE to No. 3. Okay, that makes us better in the short term. It also totally blocks the second-year guys from playing in the short term.

So you bump Randle El out of the top three guys to make room for Malcolm Kelly/Devin Thomas to split third receiver reps. Well, now you're not any better in the short-term. Holt plays the same role Randle El plays in the offense, except he has a small learning curve due to the scheme and Randle El is not on the field, rather he's still returning punts which he isn't good at anyway.

Basically, the only way it makes any sense is that we pick him up at a fraction of the cost of Thrash, and then slot him on the bench beneeth Kelly and Thomas as an insurance policy should Moss or Randle El get hurt, while Kelly is not developing. Yeah, I'm sure Holt is coming here to do that.

Basically, the only way it makes any sense is that we pick him up at a fraction of the cost of Thrash, and then slot him on the bench beneeth Kelly and Thomas as an insurance policy should Moss or Randle El get hurt, while Kelly is not developing. Yeah, I'm sure Holt is coming here to do that.

That about sums it up. I am a big fan of Holt. Yes, he is not the receiver he once was. If he were willing to do so, he would be a great help in developing the young guys just by showing them what it takes to be good in this league.
If he were to come in as the number 2 he might be interested. But for him to be No.2 AND allow Kelly and Thomas playing time would pretty much relegating ARE to the five spot (or cutting him). I just don't think that happens.

The way the roster is configured, I just don't see a spot for Holt which, IMHO, is unfortunate.

ARE is a "proven" WR, though. So you sign Holt and bump ARE to No. 3. Okay, that makes us better in the short term. It also totally blocks the second-year guys from playing in the short term.

So you bump Randle El out of the top three guys to make room for Malcolm Kelly/Devin Thomas to split third receiver reps. Well, now you're not any better in the short-term. Holt plays the same role Randle El plays in the offense, except he has a small learning curve due to the scheme and Randle El is not on the field, rather he's still returning punts which he isn't good at anyway.

Basically, the only way it makes any sense is that we pick him up at a fraction of the cost of Thrash, and then slot him on the bench beneeth Kelly and Thomas as an insurance policy should Moss or Randle El get hurt, while Kelly is not developing. Yeah, I'm sure Holt is coming here to do that.

Yep, that sums it up. It's nice to know that WR's don't change out like CB's, DL, LB's, RB's, S's, and TE's during a game.

Sometimes I'm glad fans aren't GM's because we'd really suck. First off the reason why our offense "sucked" was because our pass pro was awful, it was not the receivers fault. Many people have already said this, you have to give Kelley and Thomas a chance to develope, 1 year is not enough. Don't you realize WR is not a need? What does that tell Thomas and Kelley if we got Holt? You were probably one of those guys that wanted TO in DC. He's 33 and declining it makes no sense to sign him considering he played in the spread O not the WCO. What's up with this love fetish w/ Holt? WE'RE NOT PLAYING FANTASY FOOTBALL DUDE!!! You can't have every big name FA that gets released, you have to be realistic, IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN BUDDY!

WR not a need?..Ha...that is why the used our best 3 picks last year on pass catchers.

Not WR fault?...too simplified.
So far...Thomas can't run a route and often makes mental errors, Kelly's injuries keep him from playing...and heres a coaching issue...where was our double tight end set for Davis?

I agree that you need to play these guys, but, c'mon...do it in practice...if they can't outperform a "supposed" sucky declining Holt...don't play em...its that simple.
There is no way Thomas or Kelly are even close to Holt at this point...even if he has slowed a bit.
In the old days...we did it this way...
You get the best players...and you play the best players.
If you ever have an opportunity to make your team better you do it.
If the rookies get their panties in a wad...screw em...perform better to earn your right on the field...it only makes them better.

BTW.
I absolutely did not wan't TO, don't start slinging out BS assumptions without doing any research...it only pissed people off....suggesting that I always jump all over any FA is a joke...and I can tell you have done no research at all. Holt is unique...and so is this particular situation...we have a fairly unproductive group of receivers...Holt has no issues, and has had an amazinging consistent career...if your argument is about his decline being real...I understand...if it is about system, I see that...if it is about turf vs grass...again valid....but to put me in a box of FO whores to discredit my point about an individual player only shows you don't understand the argument.

I can be swayed by those who say Holt has declined since many of those with that opinion I hold in high regard. I also understand the point about Special teams.

At this point, I would be excited if we got him but would not be depressed if we didn't. Oline LB DE are greater needs...I just dont see superstars...or even aging ones falling off the trees there...and our D is pretty damn good...Portis is great...so that leaves Oline and WR IF an established #2 reciever falls in your lap without trading draft picks.

That is why this particular FA is different and worthy of discussion.
I personally don't see any harm done to young WR's that don't have a clue yet. Cream always finds a way to rise to the top.

^Dude it's useless. Holt has 10yrs in the league. 8 seasons of over 1,000yrds. He averages atleast 12yrds per catch. He averages atleast 6 TD's every season. He had only 2 bad seasons in his whole career, his rookie yr and last yr.

.....but, he's on the decline.

I'm with you. Call him old, say he may not fit the system, say he's only good on turff, say he doesn't play special teams. All those are very big issues and would wonder and possibly agree. ....but you can't say he's on the decline after one bad season. Where were you people when the team signed Dockery? How come you guys weren't complaining about how he would retard Chad Rinhart's learning curve? Shouldn't we just stick Chad in and let him grow/learn te job like you guys want to do with Kelly and Thomas?

Holt's YPC has been slipping steadily since 2005. He didn't just hit the wall last year, the signs of his decline have been there for a few years now. He also has a knee problem that is scaring away some teams.

^ Good arguement. However looking at the numbers I would almost trade Moss out with Holt. Both are injury prone now so that's a wash. Both are close in age so that's a wash Holt had 8 1,000+ yrd seasons compared to Moss's 3. One of those was last yr at 1,044. Holt had 1189 last yr. A whole 144 more yrds. For someone on the decline he's better then our #1. Having said all this I did not say trade Moss out for Holt.

I suggested trading a player who hardly gets balls thrown his way. One that hardly see's the field as a WR. Thrash. ...and if I'm not mistaken we carried 7 WR's on the team last yr 2 on the practice squad. If I'm correct that would be Holt, Moss, ARE, Thomas, and Kelly, and two non drafted rookies to try and develope. All 5 WR's should get enough playing time.

I just don't think Holt is coming here to be part of a "WR by committee" where his part of the committee is as the No.2/3 and possibly 4th WR slot. If he is willing to come, great. I'd trade him out for Thrash in a heartbeat.

My guess is that there are several teams where he will be guarranteed a shot at the No. 1 spot or at least be the full time No. 2. Even with declining skills, and as others pointed out, he is an average to good WR with excellent work ethic and habits.

He will probably have a fairly good choice of places to land and get paid solid money (2 to 2.5 times vet min.) with a guarrantee to be a regular starter. I just don't see us paying him that much to be part of the WR committee.

I just don't think Holt is coming here to be part of a "WR by committee" where his part of the committee is as the No.2/3 and possibly 4th WR slot. If he is willing to come, great. I'd trade him out for Thrash in a heartbeat.

My guess is that there are several teams where he will be guarranteed a shot at the No. 1 spot or at least be the full time No. 2. Even with declining skills, and as others pointed out, he is an average to good WR with excellent work ethic and habits.

He will probably have a fairly good choice of places to land and get paid solid money (2 to 2.5 times vet min.) with a guarrantee to be a regular starter. I just don't see us paying him that much to be part of the WR committee.

Finally a good arguement. I can't dissagree. I know there are other teams who would make him their #1 and he would get #1 pay. I just don't buy the whole He's no longer good. but it would be nice if he did take the Skins into consideration and decided he would like to be here. Most likely not though. I'm done. Peace.

Finally a good arguement. I can't dissagree. I know there are other teams who would make him their #1 and he would get #1 pay. I just don't buy the whole He's no longer good. but it would be nice if he did take the Skins into consideration and decided he would like to be here. Most likely not though. I'm done. Peace.

I think several people have been trying to make that same point...but I guess Mr. Laywer Man has a special way with words