Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
ß .

Kenny Britt

Recommended Posts

No one is twisting stats. You are mistaken. I don't know the reasons he was so grossly misused last year. Do you? We can speculate, sure.

I am with you in that at one point he displayed WR1 abilities, but the whole "misused" characterization is hurting the credibility of the argument as a whole. He wasn't "misused" at all. He was given a fair amount of opportunity early on in 2013, and looked HORRIBLE. If anything, he wasn't pulled soon enough. Drops are drops, and no amount of excuses makes them go away. He also wasn't getting open, and wasn't running well after the catch (what few there were). Other than that, he looked great. ;)

So please, make the case that at one point he looked like a very different receiver. Make the case that he could find his way out of the muck. But don't say he was misused last year. He SUCKED last year.

"Misused" is a subjective term. You read it that way. I meant it to be that he played 298 of 1074 offensive snaps and had 35 targets. Granted, he did nothing with that "opportunity".

It's pretty clear that last year both Britt and the Titans had moved on from each other.

ETA: Also, the "misused" term wasn't the point of my post, so I'm not sure why you made that a focal point of a reply.

Misused has a VERY different connotation than "played poorly" which is what he did. Both phrases are subjective, but one is much more accurate. Saying he had "moved on" doesn't really excuse the performance. He played a third of the snaps not because there was some problem with the scheme and his fit in it, he stopped receiving snaps because nothing he did indicated he deserved more. The team was fairly clearly worse with him in there. The drops were unbelievable. The unnecessary penalties were a joke. The lack of separation of was obvious. The sloppy routes were painful.

Just how long was the team required to hope he was going to improve before replacing him with a more effective player? This isn't Pop Warner, the best players are going to play for the most part.

I thought I explained why I selected this to comment on. I think not being honest about the actual 2013 performance hurts your overall argument. It makes folks think, "This guy obviously has an agenda if he is blaming 2013 on the team before the player". So if you don't have a completely biased opinion, my thought is to simply say, yeah, he was awful, but he was once really good and could be again with a fresh start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Misused" is a subjective term. You read it that way. I meant it to be that he played 298 of 1074 offensive snaps and had 35 targets. Granted, he did nothing with that "opportunity".

It's pretty clear that last year both Britt and the Titans had moved on from each other.

ETA: Also, the "misused" term wasn't the point of my post, so I'm not sure why you made that a focal point of a reply.

Misused has a VERY different connotation than "played poorly" which is what he did. Both phrases are subjective, but one is much more accurate. Saying he had "moved on" doesn't really excuse the performance. He played a third of the snaps not because there was some problem with the scheme and his fit in it, he stopped receiving snaps because nothing he did indicated he deserved more. The team was fairly clearly worse with him in there. The drops were unbelievable. The unnecessary penalties were a joke. The lack of separation of was obvious. The sloppy routes were painful.

Just how long was the team required to hope he was going to improve before replacing him with a more effective player? This isn't Pop Warner, the best players are going to play for the most part.

I thought I explained why I selected this to comment on. I think not being honest about the actual 2013 performance hurts your overall argument. It makes folks think, "This guy obviously has an agenda if he is blaming 2013 on the team before the player". So if you don't have a completely biased opinion, my thought is to simply say, yeah, he was awful, but he was once really good and could be again with a fresh start.

Thank you for clearing up why he was "misused". I had stated that I didn't know why. Now I do.

Please tell me what part of this statement is me blaming the team before the player?

I don't know the reasons he was so grossly misused last year. Do you? We can speculate, sure. Maybe the injuries have zapped all of his ability he flashed prior. Maybe the coaching staff had just moved on from him. Maybe he was still showing the knucklheaded tendencies.
Edited by doowain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go re-watch first 3 weeks of regular season on Rewind and you see why Britt was benched.

It wasn't for lack of opportunity -- led team in snaps first 2 weeks. Started Week 3 & finally benched after his ineffective play & comedy of errors.

Catch Pct = 31%/ Drop Pct = 11%. But they're supposed to keep playing and feeding him the ball? :lol: I'm sure most of this has been covered in this thread, but the guy had the lowest catch Pct in the NFL of guys with at least 30 targets.

You'll see a common trend with NFL players with catch %s around Kenny Britt :)

http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/drops/2013/

Edited by Craig_MiamiFL
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Misused has a VERY different connotation than "played poorly" which is what he did. Both phrases are subjective, but one is much more accurate. Saying he had "moved on" doesn't really excuse the performance. He played a third of the snaps not because there was some problem with the scheme and his fit in it, he stopped receiving snaps because nothing he did indicated he deserved more. The team was fairly clearly worse with him in there. The drops were unbelievable. The unnecessary penalties were a joke. The lack of separation of was obvious. The sloppy routes were painful.

Just how long was the team required to hope he was going to improve before replacing him with a more effective player? This isn't Pop Warner, the best players are going to play for the most part.

I thought I explained why I selected this to comment on. I think not being honest about the actual 2013 performance hurts your overall argument. It makes folks think, "This guy obviously has an agenda if he is blaming 2013 on the team before the player". So if you don't have a completely biased opinion, my thought is to simply say, yeah, he was awful, but he was once really good and could be again with a fresh start.

Thank you for clearing up why he was "misused". I had stated that I didn't know why. Now I do.

Please tell me what part of this statement is me blaming the team before the player?

I don't know the reasons he was so grossly misused last year. Do you? We can speculate, sure. Maybe the injuries have zapped all of his ability he flashed prior. Maybe the coaching staff had just moved on from him. Maybe he was still showing the knucklheaded tendencies.

This seems fairly obvious to me, but here goes:

"Grossly misused" implies pretty strongly to me that the team had a lot to do with his individual performance. The entity doing the "using" is the team. Misusing means the team did it wrong. Grossly misusing implies that not only was the team managing him poorly, but doing so in some way that was obviously correctable. Basically, that he wasn't put in a position to succeed. Or that he was benched for something other than on-field performance. Something along those lines. I don't think that's an accurate representation of what happened last year. What happened was that the team started him, played him a lot, and got nothing to show for it, so they eventually benched him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Misused has a VERY different connotation than "played poorly" which is what he did. Both phrases are subjective, but one is much more accurate. Saying he had "moved on" doesn't really excuse the performance. He played a third of the snaps not because there was some problem with the scheme and his fit in it, he stopped receiving snaps because nothing he did indicated he deserved more. The team was fairly clearly worse with him in there. The drops were unbelievable. The unnecessary penalties were a joke. The lack of separation of was obvious. The sloppy routes were painful.

Just how long was the team required to hope he was going to improve before replacing him with a more effective player? This isn't Pop Warner, the best players are going to play for the most part.

I thought I explained why I selected this to comment on. I think not being honest about the actual 2013 performance hurts your overall argument. It makes folks think, "This guy obviously has an agenda if he is blaming 2013 on the team before the player". So if you don't have a completely biased opinion, my thought is to simply say, yeah, he was awful, but he was once really good and could be again with a fresh start.

Thank you for clearing up why he was "misused". I had stated that I didn't know why. Now I do.

Please tell me what part of this statement is me blaming the team before the player?

I don't know the reasons he was so grossly misused last year. Do you? We can speculate, sure. Maybe the injuries have zapped all of his ability he flashed prior. Maybe the coaching staff had just moved on from him. Maybe he was still showing the knucklheaded tendencies.

This seems fairly obvious to me, but here goes:

"Grossly misused" implies pretty strongly to me that the team had a lot to do with his individual performance. The entity doing the "using" is the team. Misusing means the team did it wrong. Grossly misusing implies that not only was the team managing him poorly, but doing so in some way that was obviously correctable. Basically, that he wasn't put in a position to succeed. Or that he was benched for something other than on-field performance. Something along those lines. I don't think that's an accurate representation of what happened last year. What happened was that the team started him, played him a lot, and got nothing to show for it, so they eventually benched him.

Again, you are focusing on the term "misused". Dude, I'm asking what about that entire quote says that I'm blaming the team before the player? I specifically questioned Britt's attitude and effectiveness from the injuries. Are you not getting that?

Anyway, I'm not trying to derail this with a back and forth over your interpretation of a single term in what IMO was an otherwise pretty spot on post. You don't get what I'm saying, fine. I'm done trying to explain my use of that term when it doesn't really change anything in the post, except for you.

Edited by doowain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Misused has a VERY different connotation than "played poorly" which is what he did. Both phrases are subjective, but one is much more accurate. Saying he had "moved on" doesn't really excuse the performance. He played a third of the snaps not because there was some problem with the scheme and his fit in it, he stopped receiving snaps because nothing he did indicated he deserved more. The team was fairly clearly worse with him in there. The drops were unbelievable. The unnecessary penalties were a joke. The lack of separation of was obvious. The sloppy routes were painful.

Just how long was the team required to hope he was going to improve before replacing him with a more effective player? This isn't Pop Warner, the best players are going to play for the most part.

I thought I explained why I selected this to comment on. I think not being honest about the actual 2013 performance hurts your overall argument. It makes folks think, "This guy obviously has an agenda if he is blaming 2013 on the team before the player". So if you don't have a completely biased opinion, my thought is to simply say, yeah, he was awful, but he was once really good and could be again with a fresh start.

Thank you for clearing up why he was "misused". I had stated that I didn't know why. Now I do.

Please tell me what part of this statement is me blaming the team before the player?

I don't know the reasons he was so grossly misused last year. Do you? We can speculate, sure. Maybe the injuries have zapped all of his ability he flashed prior. Maybe the coaching staff had just moved on from him. Maybe he was still showing the knucklheaded tendencies.

This seems fairly obvious to me, but here goes:

"Grossly misused" implies pretty strongly to me that the team had a lot to do with his individual performance. The entity doing the "using" is the team. Misusing means the team did it wrong. Grossly misusing implies that not only was the team managing him poorly, but doing so in some way that was obviously correctable. Basically, that he wasn't put in a position to succeed. Or that he was benched for something other than on-field performance. Something along those lines. I don't think that's an accurate representation of what happened last year. What happened was that the team started him, played him a lot, and got nothing to show for it, so they eventually benched him.

Again, you are focusing on the term "misused". Dude, I'm asking what about that entire quote says that I'm blaming the team before the player? I specifically questioned Britt's attitude and effectiveness from the injuries. Are you not getting that?

Anyway, I'm not trying to derail this with a back and forth over your interpretation of a single term in what IMO was an otherwise pretty spot on post. You don't get what I'm saying, fine. I'm done trying to explain my use of that term when it doesn't really change anything in the post, except for you.

I AM focusing on "grossly misused" because that is the phrase that implies something that is patently absurd. It DOES change the implications of the overall statement. Without that phrase, I agree you don't really push the "misused" angle that hard. And you even go on to say the post was "spot on" EXCEPT for the characterization that Britt was misused. So why not just say from the beginning that it was a poor choice of words and not what you intended? But you don't really come off that way. In your original response you suggest that being misused was related his number of snaps, but that really didn't clear anything up. Seems like you want to let it stand (and the underlying impression that it was not really all his fault and the team had a lot to do with the failure) and blow it off as unimportant at the same time.

That's what I don't understand. You either believe he was misused (i.e. the team screwed up and should've given him more snaps), or you don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Misused has a VERY different connotation than "played poorly" which is what he did. Both phrases are subjective, but one is much more accurate. Saying he had "moved on" doesn't really excuse the performance. He played a third of the snaps not because there was some problem with the scheme and his fit in it, he stopped receiving snaps because nothing he did indicated he deserved more. The team was fairly clearly worse with him in there. The drops were unbelievable. The unnecessary penalties were a joke. The lack of separation of was obvious. The sloppy routes were painful.

Just how long was the team required to hope he was going to improve before replacing him with a more effective player? This isn't Pop Warner, the best players are going to play for the most part.

I thought I explained why I selected this to comment on. I think not being honest about the actual 2013 performance hurts your overall argument. It makes folks think, "This guy obviously has an agenda if he is blaming 2013 on the team before the player". So if you don't have a completely biased opinion, my thought is to simply say, yeah, he was awful, but he was once really good and could be again with a fresh start.

Thank you for clearing up why he was "misused". I had stated that I didn't know why. Now I do.

Please tell me what part of this statement is me blaming the team before the player?

I don't know the reasons he was so grossly misused last year. Do you? We can speculate, sure. Maybe the injuries have zapped all of his ability he flashed prior. Maybe the coaching staff had just moved on from him. Maybe he was still showing the knucklheaded tendencies.

This seems fairly obvious to me, but here goes:

"Grossly misused" implies pretty strongly to me that the team had a lot to do with his individual performance. The entity doing the "using" is the team. Misusing means the team did it wrong. Grossly misusing implies that not only was the team managing him poorly, but doing so in some way that was obviously correctable. Basically, that he wasn't put in a position to succeed. Or that he was benched for something other than on-field performance. Something along those lines. I don't think that's an accurate representation of what happened last year. What happened was that the team started him, played him a lot, and got nothing to show for it, so they eventually benched him.

Again, you are focusing on the term "misused". Dude, I'm asking what about that entire quote says that I'm blaming the team before the player? I specifically questioned Britt's attitude and effectiveness from the injuries. Are you not getting that?

Anyway, I'm not trying to derail this with a back and forth over your interpretation of a single term in what IMO was an otherwise pretty spot on post. You don't get what I'm saying, fine. I'm done trying to explain my use of that term when it doesn't really change anything in the post, except for you.

I AM focusing on "grossly misused" because that is the phrase that implies something that is patently absurd. It DOES change the implications of the overall statement. Without that phrase, I agree you don't really push the "misused" angle that hard. And you even go on to say the post was "spot on" EXCEPT for the characterization that Britt was misused. So why not just say from the beginning that it was a poor choice of words and not what you intended? But you don't really come off that way. In your original response you suggest that being misused was related his number of snaps, but that really didn't clear anything up. Seems like you want to let it stand (and the underlying impression that it was not really all his fault and the team had a lot to do with the failure) and blow it off as unimportant at the same time.

That's what I don't understand. You either believe he was misused (i.e. the team screwed up and should've given him more snaps), or you don't.

"Grossly misused" was offered up with the caveat that I wasn't sure why he wasn't on the field or used more. Which was why I asked the guy I was replying to if he knew. Then I gave some suggestions as to why. You have since then cleared that up.

My original post still stands.

No one wants to read these posts, so move on. You won't get another response from me. This is adding nothing to the thread.

Edited by doowain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Britt was misused, simple as that. There were no better replacement receivers when Britt was benched, then the Titans went on to have a poor passing game and miss the playoffs. They would have been better off to feed him the ball in his final year and know if he was the player they thought he was when drafted.

Targets in 2013:

Week 1 - 2 targets, Britt is misused and not happy

Week 2 - 9 targets, 4 catches, bad game for Britt

Week 3 - 0 targets, coaches are going out of their way to misuse Britt

From there Britt is pissed. 11 targets in the first three weeks? It is clear Kenny Britt was not the new coaches "guy". I could care less what Britt did last year, the coaches are to blame.

He will get his shot in STL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats to the Titans for having the 22nd best passing offense in 2013!

Jan 5th, 2014 - Munchak fired.

Edited by Touchdown There

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Elsewhere in the thread (not from you, but I'll address it here), the issue came up that Bradford's numbers were inflated in 2013 due to high passing TD numbers, in order to diminish or dismiss them. This is a common critique. What isn't usually brought up is the context.

I find the critique typical in viewing this fact purely through a negative lens and in a one sided manner (it was a fluke).

Sigh... it was only a matter of time before you showed up to make excuses for Bradford. Considering he was on pace for an NFL record for goal line passing TDs, yes, it absolutely was a fluke. Thus, Bradford's PPG last year should not be a reason for optimism this year. I'd like to believe Britt and Bradford will light it up next year, as I'm sure both can be had extremely cheaply in all formats, but I can't say I have much faith in either of them, particularly Bradford, and Britt can't do anything without a QB. However, as you said, it is encouraging that his former coach is the one that signed him.

Actually I was already in the thread (hard to project Britt while leaving out the QB) and similarly thought it was inevitable you would rear your completely one sided, unswervingly negative slant.

From that perspective, it would be consistent to dismissively label the suggestion that maybe it didn't help the QB to not have the starting RB play in the first month an "excuse". Dismissing the point in the absence of addressing it may be the best strategy if it isn't the most defensible ground to attempt to argue that the presence of Stacy from the first game couldn't have improved the offense (more sustained drives and red zone appearances) and positioned the QB to score other passing TDs in different ways than he might have otherwise.

As the custodian of flukiness, how many TDs is the QB allowed to have where the total isn't mechanically, reflexively lumped into the flukey category? The QB throwing for a historically high percentage of passing TDs in close is objective. The choice, and belief it is based on, to dismissively ignore it, mentally slap in previous numbers with absolutely no attempt to explore and examine possible CONTEXTUAL and SITUATIONAL differences between the past, present and future, and to treat it exactly the same as if it didn't happen, is your interpretation and opinion. Your "excuse" for your contextless, situationless dismissal.

While on the subject of dismissing and ignoring, the QBs low INT number could be relevant. A detractor would predictably note that as an indication of "not taking chances". This could be countered by stating the obvious that this interpretaion or opinion overlooks the fact that it facilitates an uptick of TD passes when you have the ball instead of turning it over. Who is "really right" and who is making excuses isn't that clear in this case. BTW, by all means ignore the below like you ignored the TD/INT ratio and PPG. I am as disinterested in your predictable dismissal as you are no doubt with discussing "excuses". It is for the thread, so others can make up their own mind and come to their own conclusions.

What are some CONTEXTUAL and SITUATIONAL positive factors (what you would call "excuses") to consider the possibility that the 14/4 TD/INT ration may not have been ENTIRELY flukey, and safe to completely ignore and dismiss, but evidence of the possible inflection point of an improvement arc and trajectory:

1 - Free agent LT Jake Long. While not playing at his former 4 X Pro Bowl level, he was easily the best LT in the QBs tenure.

2 - Free agent TE Jared Cook. Though not a complete TE, was easily the most explosive receiver at the position in the QBs tenure.

3 - 1.8 WR Tavon Austin. Mixed growing pains with flashes of explosiveness, the highest pedigree STL WR since Torry Holt in '99.

SITUATIONAL and CONTEXTUAL negative factors, the reversal of which could possibly point to cause for future optimism.

4 - Austin Pettis is plodding, pedestrian, one of the least explosive WRs in the league and struggles to gain separation.

5 - Brian Quick continued to miss assignments, struggle with the level of competition transition and lose the confidence of Fisher.

6 - Chris Givens failed to develop as a route runner, making him easy to defense as a one trick deep threat and no help in the red zone.

7 - Stedman Bailey, who may run the best routes and have the best hands on the team, inexplicably didn't start until very late.

8 - Kenny Britt, IF he returns to form, represents a combo of pedigree, size, physicality, talent and skill set absent last year.

9 - Dahl at guard and Saffold at OT on the right side of the OL were not as strong of a combo as Saffold at guard and Barksdale at OT.

10 - STL (1.2) could plug Greg Robinson or Jake Matthews in at LG or Sammy Watkins at starting WR, obviously unavailable in 2013.

As noted, late in the season, far too late to be of any use to the QB, Bailey (one of the most natural and talented WRs on the team) ascended the depth chart and was in the process of surpassing Pettis and Quick. His development and that of Austin, which was stunted early with horrifically unimaginitive route concepts and designs by OC Schottenheimer (he flashed his potential when used more creatively against IND and CHI), as well as the presence of a potentially motivated Britt (and possibly Watkins) COULD be some positive factors translating to differences between the first half of 2013 and what preceded it, and 2014 and beyond (or instead choose to ignore and dismiss them as "excuses").

Does all this mean I think the QB is likely to replicate a 14/4 TD/INT ratio through the first seven games of 2014 (with Jake Long, currently rehabbing a torn ACL)? No. But I also don't think it makes sense to completely dismiss and ignore clearly present and different CONTEXTUAL and SITUATIONAL positive factors just because they don't comfortably align or mesh with a negative confirmation bias.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Britt was misused, simple as that. There were no better replacement receivers when Britt was benched, then the Titans went on to have a poor passing game and miss the playoffs. They would have been better off to feed him the ball in his final year and know if he was the player they thought he was when drafted.

Targets in 2013:

Week 1 - 2 targets, Britt is misused and not happy

Week 2 - 9 targets, 4 catches, bad game for Britt

Week 3 - 0 targets, coaches are going out of their way to misuse Britt

From there Britt is pissed. 11 targets in the first three weeks? It is clear Kenny Britt was not the new coaches "guy". I could care less what Britt did last year, the coaches are to blame.

He will get his shot in STL.

too funny how you continuously miss the drops

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go re-watch first 3 weeks of regular season on Rewind and you see why Britt was benched.

It wasn't for lack of opportunity -- led team in snaps first 2 weeks. Started Week 3 & finally benched after his ineffective play & comedy of errors.

Catch Pct = 31%/ Drop Pct = 11%. But they're supposed to keep playing and feeding him the ball? :lol: I'm sure most of this has been covered in this thread, but the guy had the lowest catch Pct in the NFL of guys with at least 30 targets.

You'll see a common trend with NFL players with catch %s around Kenny Britt :)

http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/drops/2013/

outstanding post.

But it was Munchak's fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have much faith in Bradford at this point, like most of you. But sadly, I do still think the case can be made that he just hasn't had a very talented receiving core in his entire career. It's not his fault the coaching staff wouldn't let Danario Alexander play more than a few snaps a game - in the rare event he was even allowed to dress. I think it's interesting that Danny Amendola, probably the best WR Bradford has had on a consistent basis, put up identical numbers with Brady.

So if the case really is that Bradford just hasn't had anyone talented enough then all we know at this point is he isn't Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning, but perhaps you put him in the right situation like an Atlanta or a Detroit and he would thrive like those QBs have (and haven't when their weapons were on the shelf). He needs better protection from his line because he can't move and he needs guys that can get open. I'm not really sure he's had either very often.

What does this mean for Britt? I don't know. I would say the odds are low he turns his career around in St. Louis but if they don't spend a first on a WR he should definitely see plenty of the field because if he can't beat out the other scrubs on the roster then he was never going to succeed anyway. If you're really sold on Britt still having the talent, ability and desire then hope the Rams pass on a WR in the draft and find a way to improve the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have much faith in Bradford at this point, like most of you. But sadly, I do still think the case can be made that he just hasn't had a very talented receiving core in his entire career. It's not his fault the coaching staff wouldn't let Danario Alexander play more than a few snaps a game - in the rare event he was even allowed to dress. I think it's interesting that Danny Amendola, probably the best WR Bradford has had on a consistent basis, put up identical numbers with Brady.

So if the case really is that Bradford just hasn't had anyone talented enough then all we know at this point is he isn't Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning, but perhaps you put him in the right situation like an Atlanta or a Detroit and he would thrive like those QBs have (and haven't when their weapons were on the shelf). He needs better protection from his line because he can't move and he needs guys that can get open. I'm not really sure he's had either very often.

What does this mean for Britt? I don't know. I would say the odds are low he turns his career around in St. Louis but if they don't spend a first on a WR he should definitely see plenty of the field because if he can't beat out the other scrubs on the roster then he was never going to succeed anyway. If you're really sold on Britt still having the talent, ability and desire then hope the Rams pass on a WR in the draft and find a way to improve the line.

Excellent, well thought out post. Some people really like Bradford. Others like Britt. For either to have value they both have to hit and the odds of that are really low.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Britt was misused, simple as that. There were no better replacement receivers when Britt was benched, then the Titans went on to have a poor passing game and miss the playoffs. They would have been better off to feed him the ball in his final year and know if he was the player they thought he was when drafted.

Targets in 2013:

Week 1 - 2 targets, Britt is misused and not happy

Week 2 - 9 targets, 4 catches, bad game for Britt

Week 3 - 0 targets, coaches are going out of their way to misuse Britt

From there Britt is pissed. 11 targets in the first three weeks? It is clear Kenny Britt was not the new coaches "guy". I could care less what Britt did last year, the coaches are to blame.

He will get his shot in STL.

too funny how you continuously miss the drops
How many drops did he have in weeks 1 and 3 last year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Misused has a VERY different connotation than "played poorly" which is what he did. Both phrases are subjective, but one is much more accurate. Saying he had "moved on" doesn't really excuse the performance. He played a third of the snaps not because there was some problem with the scheme and his fit in it, he stopped receiving snaps because nothing he did indicated he deserved more. The team was fairly clearly worse with him in there. The drops were unbelievable. The unnecessary penalties were a joke. The lack of separation of was obvious. The sloppy routes were painful.

Just how long was the team required to hope he was going to improve before replacing him with a more effective player? This isn't Pop Warner, the best players are going to play for the most part.

I thought I explained why I selected this to comment on. I think not being honest about the actual 2013 performance hurts your overall argument. It makes folks think, "This guy obviously has an agenda if he is blaming 2013 on the team before the player". So if you don't have a completely biased opinion, my thought is to simply say, yeah, he was awful, but he was once really good and could be again with a fresh start.

Thank you for clearing up why he was "misused". I had stated that I didn't know why. Now I do.

Please tell me what part of this statement is me blaming the team before the player?

I don't know the reasons he was so grossly misused last year. Do you? We can speculate, sure. Maybe the injuries have zapped all of his ability he flashed prior. Maybe the coaching staff had just moved on from him. Maybe he was still showing the knucklheaded tendencies.

This seems fairly obvious to me, but here goes:

"Grossly misused" implies pretty strongly to me that the team had a lot to do with his individual performance. The entity doing the "using" is the team. Misusing means the team did it wrong. Grossly misusing implies that not only was the team managing him poorly, but doing so in some way that was obviously correctable. Basically, that he wasn't put in a position to succeed. Or that he was benched for something other than on-field performance. Something along those lines. I don't think that's an accurate representation of what happened last year. What happened was that the team started him, played him a lot, and got nothing to show for it, so they eventually benched him.

Again, you are focusing on the term "misused". Dude, I'm asking what about that entire quote says that I'm blaming the team before the player? I specifically questioned Britt's attitude and effectiveness from the injuries. Are you not getting that?

Anyway, I'm not trying to derail this with a back and forth over your interpretation of a single term in what IMO was an otherwise pretty spot on post. You don't get what I'm saying, fine. I'm done trying to explain my use of that term when it doesn't really change anything in the post, except for you.

mis-1
a prefix applied to various parts of speech, meaning “ill,” “mistaken,” “wrong,” “wrongly,” “incorrectly,” or simply negating: mistrial; misprint; mistrust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Britt was misused, simple as that. There were no better replacement receivers when Britt was benched, then the Titans went on to have a poor passing game and miss the playoffs. They would have been better off to feed him the ball in his final year and know if he was the player they thought he was when drafted.

Targets in 2013:

Week 1 - 2 targets, Britt is misused and not happy

Week 2 - 9 targets, 4 catches, bad game for Britt

Week 3 - 0 targets, coaches are going out of their way to misuse Britt

From there Britt is pissed. 11 targets in the first three weeks? It is clear Kenny Britt was not the new coaches "guy". I could care less what Britt did last year, the coaches are to blame.

He will get his shot in STL.

too funny how you continuously miss the drops
How many drops did he have in weeks 1 and 3 last year?

The answer is none.

Here is the deal. Kenny Britt was ready to go for 2013. When he was targeted two times in week 1, he was not happy. If you have a diva wide receiver, you feed him the ball or you release him to another team. The last thing you want to do is have some sort of a head knocking between the coaches and the player. This messed with his head for week 2, which ended with Britt talking to Jim Wyatt of the Tennessean.

“It’s just a point of them saying they took me out because of [blocking]. Were they wrong for benching me? I believe so. And I believe the excuse they gave was wrong because at that point in time when they did bench me it had nothing to do with me having mistakes. … I saw what happened with Cook last year, and them saying he wasn’t getting the ball because he was making mistakes. I don’t think that was the case last year, and I don’t think that’s the case with me this year.”

Not-so-shockingly this led to zero targets in week 3. This is also when the offensive coordinator, Dowell Loggains (FIRED after the season), decided to talk up Justin Hunter to the media calling him a "special player".

The Titans coaches played this all wrong. You play your best players in the NFL and go for a title. The coaches are to blame for not supporting Britt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mis- 1

a prefix applied to various parts of speech, meaning “ill,” “mistaken,” “wrong,” “wrongly,” “incorrectly,” or simply negating: mistrial; misprint; mistrust.

My response earlier (happy trolling!):

"Grossly misused" was offered up with the caveat that I wasn't sure why he wasn't on the field or used more. Which was why I asked the guy I was replying to if he knew. Then I gave some suggestions as to why. You have since then cleared that up.

My original post still stands.

Edited by doowain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mis- 1

a prefix applied to various parts of speech, meaning “ill,” “mistaken,” “wrong,” “wrongly,” “incorrectly,” or simply negating: mistrial; misprint; mistrust.

My response earlier (happy trolling!):

"Grossly misused" was offered up with the caveat that I wasn't sure why he wasn't on the field or used more. Which was why I asked the guy I was replying to if he knew. Then I gave some suggestions as to why. You have since then cleared that up.

My original post still stands.

I wasn't trying to troll, just pointing out why your use of the word "misued" would imply that you were saying the coaching staff did not use him properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Targets in 2013:

Week 1 - 2 targets, Britt is misused and not happy

Week 2 - 9 targets, 4 catches, bad game for Britt

If he gets pissed about getting two targets and responds by playing like crap the next week then he's not long for the Rams' spread the ball around offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Britt was misused, simple as that. There were no better replacement receivers when Britt was benched, then the Titans went on to have a poor passing game and miss the playoffs. They would have been better off to feed him the ball in his final year and know if he was the player they thought he was when drafted.

Targets in 2013:

Week 1 - 2 targets, Britt is misused and not happy

Week 2 - 9 targets, 4 catches, bad game for Britt

Week 3 - 0 targets, coaches are going out of their way to misuse Britt

From there Britt is pissed. 11 targets in the first three weeks? It is clear Kenny Britt was not the new coaches "guy". I could care less what Britt did last year, the coaches are to blame.

He will get his shot in STL.

too funny how you continuously miss the drops
How many drops did he have in weeks 1 and 3 last year?

The answer is none.

Here is the deal. Kenny Britt was ready to go for 2013. When he was targeted two times in week 1, he was not happy. If you have a diva wide receiver, you feed him the ball or you release him to another team. The last thing you want to do is have some sort of a head knocking between the coaches and the player. This messed with his head for week 2, which ended with Britt talking to Jim Wyatt of the Tennessean.

“It’s just a point of them saying they took me out because of [blocking]. Were they wrong for benching me? I believe so. And I believe the excuse they gave was wrong because at that point in time when they did bench me it had nothing to do with me having mistakes. … I saw what happened with Cook last year, and them saying he wasn’t getting the ball because he was making mistakes. I don’t think that was the case last year, and I don’t think that’s the case with me this year.”

Not-so-shockingly this led to zero targets in week 3. This is also when the offensive coordinator, Dowell Loggains (FIRED after the season), decided to talk up Justin Hunter to the media calling him a "special player".

The Titans coaches played this all wrong. You play your best players in the NFL and go for a title. The coaches are to blame for not supporting Britt.

That's not the answer AT ALL. Just because Kenny Britt says it wasn't really his fault doesn't make it so. That's part of the problem, maybe the MAIN problem - he doesn't ever seem to hold himself accountable. And by the way, he was wrong about Cook too - he did suck at blocking and was a big reason he didn't play as much as he otherwise might have.

Blocking WAS a part of the benching. Guess what Kenny - blocking matters. He was called for a drive-killing lazy hold in each of the first two games, one of which was a game lost in OT. How many of those should a 6'3" 218 pound guy be allowed to make before being called on it? Nevermind the inaccurate routes and the dropped balls and total lack of any yards after contact on the balls he did manage to get open for and catch.

Then in week 3 he DID have two drops and zero catches on five targets. Not sure where you are getting zero targets. Meanwhile, Nate Washington puts up 130 yards in a winning effort, Justin catches the game winning TD, and Wright catches 100% of his six targets. None of them have any drops or penalties. All of that leads you to believe Britt should have been a bigger part of the game plan for week #4?

So he's out week 4 for the injury anyway. Team wins in a romp. So week #5 comes around and they say, OK, let's roll Kenny out there and see if we can get him on track. Result? 6 targets, 1 catch, bad drops. One loss.

They gave him four full weeks and he was awful in every facet of the game, in addition to making a nuisance of himself off the field. After that, all bets are off, and it is IMO impossible to fault the team for anything regarding Britt's usage going forward.

Edited by Holy Schneikes
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Britt was misused, simple as that. There were no better replacement receivers when Britt was benched, then the Titans went on to have a poor passing game and miss the playoffs. They would have been better off to feed him the ball in his final year and know if he was the player they thought he was when drafted.

Targets in 2013:

Week 1 - 2 targets, Britt is misused and not happy

Week 2 - 9 targets, 4 catches, bad game for Britt

Week 3 - 0 targets, coaches are going out of their way to misuse Britt

From there Britt is pissed. 11 targets in the first three weeks? It is clear Kenny Britt was not the new coaches "guy". I could care less what Britt did last year, the coaches are to blame.

He will get his shot in STL.

too funny how you continuously miss the drops
How many drops did he have in weeks 1 and 3 last year?

The answer is none.

Here is the deal. Kenny Britt was ready to go for 2013. When he was targeted two times in week 1, he was not happy. If you have a diva wide receiver, you feed him the ball or you release him to another team. The last thing you want to do is have some sort of a head knocking between the coaches and the player. This messed with his head for week 2, which ended with Britt talking to Jim Wyatt of the Tennessean.

“It’s just a point of them saying they took me out because of [blocking]. Were they wrong for benching me? I believe so. And I believe the excuse they gave was wrong because at that point in time when they did bench me it had nothing to do with me having mistakes. … I saw what happened with Cook last year, and them saying he wasn’t getting the ball because he was making mistakes. I don’t think that was the case last year, and I don’t think that’s the case with me this year.”

Not-so-shockingly this led to zero targets in week 3. This is also when the offensive coordinator, Dowell Loggains (FIRED after the season), decided to talk up Justin Hunter to the media calling him a "special player".

The Titans coaches played this all wrong. You play your best players in the NFL and go for a title. The coaches are to blame for not supporting Britt.

That's not the answer AT ALL. Just because Kenny Britt says it wasn't really his fault doesn't make it so. That's part of the problem, maybe the MAIN problem - he doesn't ever seem to hold himself accountable. And by the way, he was wrong about Cook too - he did suck at blocking and was a big reason he didn't play as much as he otherwise might have.

Blocking WAS a part of the benching. Guess what Kenny - blocking matters. He was called for a drive-killing lazy hold in each of the first two games, one of which was a game lost in OT. How many of those should a 6'3" 218 pound guy be allowed to make before being called on it? Nevermind the inaccurate routes and the dropped balls and total lack of any yards after contact on the balls he did manage to get open for and catch.

Then in week 3 he DID have two drops and zero catches on five targets. Not sure where you are getting zero targets. Meanwhile, Nate Washington puts up 130 yards in a winning effort, Justin catches the game winning TD, and Wright catches 100% of his six targets. None of them have any drops or penalties. All of that leads you to believe Britt should have been a bigger part of the game plan for week #4?

So he's out week 4 for the injury anyway. Team wins in a romp. So week #5 comes around and they say, OK, let's roll Kenny out there and see if we can get him on track. Result? 6 targets, 1 catch, bad drops. One loss.

They gave him four full weeks and he was awful in every facet of the game, in addition to making a nuisance of himself off the field. After that, all bets are off, and it is IMO impossible to fault the team for anything regarding Britt's usage going forward.

:own3d:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some pretty bad excuse making going on in here. Britt absolutely sucked in 2013, no way to sugar coat it and maintain any type of intellectual honesty. Now, does that mean he's 100% certain to continue sucking forever moving forward? Not at all. But there's no need to rewrite history. It's totally reasonable to see room for optimism moving forward while also acknowledging that he absolutely earned his benching in 2013.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Britt was misused, simple as that. There were no better replacement receivers when Britt was benched, then the Titans went on to have a poor passing game and miss the playoffs. They would have been better off to feed him the ball in his final year and know if he was the player they thought he was when drafted.

Targets in 2013:

Week 1 - 2 targets, Britt is misused and not happy

Week 2 - 9 targets, 4 catches, bad game for Britt

Week 3 - 0 targets, coaches are going out of their way to misuse Britt

From there Britt is pissed. 11 targets in the first three weeks? It is clear Kenny Britt was not the new coaches "guy". I could care less what Britt did last year, the coaches are to blame.

He will get his shot in STL.

too funny how you continuously miss the drops
How many drops did he have in weeks 1 and 3 last year?

The answer is none.

Here is the deal. Kenny Britt was ready to go for 2013. When he was targeted two times in week 1, he was not happy. If you have a diva wide receiver, you feed him the ball or you release him to another team. The last thing you want to do is have some sort of a head knocking between the coaches and the player. This messed with his head for week 2, which ended with Britt talking to Jim Wyatt of the Tennessean.

“It’s just a point of them saying they took me out because of [blocking]. Were they wrong for benching me? I believe so. And I believe the excuse they gave was wrong because at that point in time when they did bench me it had nothing to do with me having mistakes. … I saw what happened with Cook last year, and them saying he wasn’t getting the ball because he was making mistakes. I don’t think that was the case last year, and I don’t think that’s the case with me this year.”

Not-so-shockingly this led to zero targets in week 3. This is also when the offensive coordinator, Dowell Loggains (FIRED after the season), decided to talk up Justin Hunter to the media calling him a "special player".

The Titans coaches played this all wrong. You play your best players in the NFL and go for a title. The coaches are to blame for not supporting Britt.

That's not the answer AT ALL. Just because Kenny Britt says it wasn't really his fault doesn't make it so. That's part of the problem, maybe the MAIN problem - he doesn't ever seem to hold himself accountable. And by the way, he was wrong about Cook too - he did suck at blocking and was a big reason he didn't play as much as he otherwise might have.

Blocking WAS a part of the benching. Guess what Kenny - blocking matters. He was called for a drive-killing lazy hold in each of the first two games, one of which was a game lost in OT. How many of those should a 6'3" 218 pound guy be allowed to make before being called on it? Nevermind the inaccurate routes and the dropped balls and total lack of any yards after contact on the balls he did manage to get open for and catch.

Then in week 3 he DID have two drops and zero catches on five targets. Not sure where you are getting zero targets. Meanwhile, Nate Washington puts up 130 yards in a winning effort, Justin catches the game winning TD, and Wright catches 100% of his six targets. None of them have any drops or penalties. All of that leads you to believe Britt should have been a bigger part of the game plan for week #4?

So he's out week 4 for the injury anyway. Team wins in a romp. So week #5 comes around and they say, OK, let's roll Kenny out there and see if we can get him on track. Result? 6 targets, 1 catch, bad drops. One loss.

They gave him four full weeks and he was awful in every facet of the game, in addition to making a nuisance of himself off the field. After that, all bets are off, and it is IMO impossible to fault the team for anything regarding Britt's usage going forward.

:own3d:

:hifive:

I agree, lol... not to mention the shape of his knees, let alone his mind and will. It's a flyer by the Rams, ya never know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not the answer AT ALL.

It is the answer in Tennessee, but that does not mean that Britt would not have busted out anyway. Maybe he does suck, but the Titans played it all wrong. If they were not going to throw it his way 7-10 times a game they should have released him. This is especially true if you do not want him on Twitter, talking to reporters, and causing a negative vibe in the locker room. They know who they drafted and then they played it wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not the answer AT ALL.

It is the answer in Tennessee, but that does not mean that Britt would not have busted out anyway. Maybe he does suck, but the Titans played it all wrong. If they were not going to throw it his way 7-10 times a game they should have released him. This is especially true if you do not want him on Twitter, talking to reporters, and causing a negative vibe in the locker room. They know who they drafted and then they played it wrong.

Final note on Kenny Britt - you are right that he needs to take more ownership of his production. However, it was clear that in 2013 he was not the coaches *guy*. Coaches like to pick their guys and the staff that was fired picked Justin Hunter. Reports were out last year that they were trying to trade Britt and that is most likely why they did not drop him. It did not just end poorly for Britt, but also for the Titans and the coaches need to take ownership of that.

I do not like defending Britt at all. He is certainly a bonehead. That does not mean he is 100% at fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then in week 3 he DID have two drops and zero catches on five targets. Not sure where you are getting zero targets.

Recheck your stats as you are wrong. http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/12556/kenny-britt

Week 3-vs. San Diego: 5 targets, 0 catches.
12. (1Q-14:53) 1-10-TEN13 (Shotgun) J.Locker pass incomplete short left to K.Britt.
Aligned wide left, outside the numbers, with Washington in the slot in what ends up as a 2×1 look once CJ motions wide right. CB Cox is playing well off. Britt runs the short smash route against the off coverage and can't hang on. Pure, unadulterated, no excuses drop. PYD 5.
13. (1Q-:10) 1-10-SD19 J.Locker pass incomplete deep right to K.Britt (D.Cox).
Aligned wide right, outside the numbers, in a 1×2 look, with CB Cox playing 7 yards off. Even with Weddle retreating late to the middle of the field, this is a clear Britt v Cox coverage, very likely man. Britt runs a hitch-and-go. Cox doesn't really bite on the hitch and is an excellent position to battle for the deep play. You could argue this should be DPI on Cox for not getting his head around to play the ball, but I'm not buying it with a throw that forces Britt to go through Cox to make the play. Compare Hunter's TD, which I think was an easier play for him even without the push-off. Call it PYD 22 (19+3 yards deep in the end zone).
14. (2Q-8:00) 2-20-TEN46 (Shotgun) J.Locker pass incomplete short right to K.Britt.
Aligned wide right, outside the numbers, in a 1×3 look (Walker on the wing, counting him). CB Cox playing 4 yards off before retreating deeper right before the snap. Britt runs a 9 yard smash route, Locker throws a 7 yard out. One of them is wrong. PYD 7.
15. (2Q-7:56) 3-20-TEN46 (Shotgun) J.Locker pass incomplete short right to K.Britt (J.Addae). TEN-K.Britt was injured during the play.
Aligned wide right, outside the numbers, in a 1×2 set. Cox aligned 7 yards off, SD this time showing a 2-deep look, possibly quarters with both outside CBs aligned well off. Britt runs the 18-yard dig. When he goes up for the high throw, S Addae comes up and pops him, and he loses the ball when he goes to the ground. The Titans call this a drop. By Football Outsiders charting guidelines, it's a pass defensed. On this play, I lean with the FO definition, though you do want your receivers to make contested catches. PYD 18.
16. (4Q-8:18) 3-3-SD40 (Shotgun) J.Locker pass incomplete deep left to K.Britt (D.Cox).
Aligned with left, with a bunch close right. CB Cox in press position, SD in a 2-deep look, though it ends up much more Cover-3-ish after the snap. Britt gets a good outside release and has a half-step or so on Cox. It's an edge, but not enough of one to win on a good but imperfect throw from Locker under pressure from Liuget off an inside move against Levitre (who maybe should've gotten more help from Turner considering Liuget's 1-tech alignment). Yes, you'd like to see your receiver win one of these, but this is a good defensive play. PYD 28.
ESPN is letting you down brother. Britt was targeted in week 3. I watched the game.
Here is another snippet from ESPN from the recap:
Titans receiver Kenny Britt, booed heavily when he dropped the first pass of the game, was on the sideline throughout the final drive and finished without a catch despite five passes thrown to him.
I think maybe the box score guys at ESPN were getting their info from Britt, you, or his agent. ;)
Edited by Holy Schneikes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then in week 3 he DID have two drops and zero catches on five targets. Not sure where you are getting zero targets.

Recheck your stats as you are wrong. http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/12556/kenny-britt

Week 3-vs. San Diego: 5 targets, 0 catches.

12. (1Q-14:53) 1-10-TEN13 (Shotgun) J.Locker pass incomplete short left to K.Britt.

Aligned wide left, outside the numbers, with Washington in the slot in what ends up as a 2×1 look once CJ motions wide right. CB Cox is playing well off. Britt runs the short smash route against the off coverage and can't hang on. Pure, unadulterated, no excuses drop. PYD 5.

13. (1Q-:10) 1-10-SD19 J.Locker pass incomplete deep right to K.Britt (D.Cox).

Aligned wide right, outside the numbers, in a 1×2 look, with CB Cox playing 7 yards off. Even with Weddle retreating late to the middle of the field, this is a clear Britt v Cox coverage, very likely man. Britt runs a hitch-and-go. Cox doesn't really bite on the hitch and is an excellent position to battle for the deep play. You could argue this should be DPI on Cox for not getting his head around to play the ball, but I'm not buying it with a throw that forces Britt to go through Cox to make the play. Compare Hunter's TD, which I think was an easier play for him even without the push-off. Call it PYD 22 (19+3 yards deep in the end zone).

14. (2Q-8:00) 2-20-TEN46 (Shotgun) J.Locker pass incomplete short right to K.Britt.

Aligned wide right, outside the numbers, in a 1×3 look (Walker on the wing, counting him). CB Cox playing 4 yards off before retreating deeper right before the snap. Britt runs a 9 yard smash route, Locker throws a 7 yard out. One of them is wrong. PYD 7.

15. (2Q-7:56) 3-20-TEN46 (Shotgun) J.Locker pass incomplete short right to K.Britt (J.Addae). TEN-K.Britt was injured during the play.

Aligned wide right, outside the numbers, in a 1×2 set. Cox aligned 7 yards off, SD this time showing a 2-deep look, possibly quarters with both outside CBs aligned well off. Britt runs the 18-yard dig. When he goes up for the high throw, S Addae comes up and pops him, and he loses the ball when he goes to the ground. The Titans call this a drop. By Football Outsiders charting guidelines, it's a pass defensed. On this play, I lean with the FO definition, though you do want your receivers to make contested catches. PYD 18.

16. (4Q-8:18) 3-3-SD40 (Shotgun) J.Locker pass incomplete deep left to K.Britt (D.Cox).

Aligned with left, with a bunch close right. CB Cox in press position, SD in a 2-deep look, though it ends up much more Cover-3-ish after the snap. Britt gets a good outside release and has a half-step or so on Cox. It's an edge, but not enough of one to win on a good but imperfect throw from Locker under pressure from Liuget off an inside move against Levitre (who maybe should've gotten more help from Turner considering Liuget's 1-tech alignment). Yes, you'd like to see your receiver win one of these, but this is a good defensive play. PYD 28.

ESPN is letting you down brother. Britt was targeted in week 3. I watched the game.

You are saying that the data displayed at ESPN is wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Previous Britt owner good riddance...can't beat man to man coverage which is mainly what there playing in the NFL these days

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not the answer AT ALL.

It is the answer in Tennessee, but that does not mean that Britt would not have busted out anyway. Maybe he does suck, but the Titans played it all wrong. If they were not going to throw it his way 7-10 times a game they should have released him. This is especially true if you do not want him on Twitter, talking to reporters, and causing a negative vibe in the locker room. They know who they drafted and then they played it wrong.

Final note on Kenny Britt - you are right that he needs to take more ownership of his production. However, it was clear that in 2013 he was not the coaches *guy*. Coaches like to pick their guys and the staff that was fired picked Justin Hunter. Reports were out last year that they were trying to trade Britt and that is most likely why they did not drop him. It did not just end poorly for Britt, but also for the Titans and the coaches need to take ownership of that.

I do not like defending Britt at all. He is certainly a bonehead. That does not mean he is 100% at fault.

Tried and failed to trade, what's wrong with that? Maybe I suppose it could be the Titans should have asked for a bag lunch in return.

It has possibly never been on a player moreso. You're totally confused on the coaching. Munchak coached as a HC for 3 years. I have issues with the team, no doubt, but Munchak-the man- is oh so well respected in the league. He was and always has been about hardwork and results. "Everyone" said "uh oh" when he got promoted and we discussed Britt.

The Titans (all WRs except Williams IMO) got to a point where everyone was dropping passes way too often. Munchak let the whole world know he doesn't care who ya are, he's benching you if you don't catch the ball. Other pressers, same thing if ya don't show to practice and....oh so many of us saw the writing on the wall for Britt.

The reason this post irks me is because last summer Britt put some work in. He worked hard for a change so Munchak gave him the start. He stayed true to his word despite possible trade and any negative press about Britt. As posted above, Britt did nothing but mess up his opportunity.

As far as understanding the team and the coach's thinking, I loved Munchak's transparency and simple old school way of running things.

WR coach Shawn Jefferson has had his detractors because he's an awfully mouthy coach that claims to inspire that way but Britt did put the work in last summer.

We have no idea if Britt is fully healed and back to his ol' self because he can't catch the ball and now we have to plan 2014, again, wondering if a WR will catch the ball. STL has some horses at WR, he won't have a big athletic advantage like with the Titans. He has nothing to hang his hat on that will keep him there, he must catch the ball-no more excuses.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rotoworld:

ESPN Rams blogger Nick Wagoner reports Kenny Britt has earned the nickname "The Incredible Hulk" from some of his new teammates.

Britt, who stands in at 6-foot-3, 223 pounds, snagged two long touchdown passes in Thursday's OTAs session. Per Wagoner, his "subsequent reactions" spurred two minor scuffles. Coming off a lost 2012-13, Britt has reportedly shown well since the Rams reported for voluntary work. The team's official website breathlessly reported Thursday that Britt "looked every bit like the talent he displayed in 2009-10." That's big-time hyperbole, but it's not outside the realm of possibility that Britt rebounds to WR3 status in fantasy leagues. The numbers are there for the taking in St. Louis' unsettled receiver corps.

Source: ESPN.com

Jun 5 - 9:51 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rotoworld:

Coach Jeff Fisher said Kenny Britt has done a "great job" at OTAs, and has had no setbacks physically.

So far, so good on Britt's fresh start with old pal Fisher. He's kept his nose clean off the field, and isn't having any issues with his troublesome knee while impressing at non-contact practices. There's plenty of opportunity in the Rams' wayward receiving corps, especially for a player of Britt's physical gifts. We're still taking a wait-and-see approach because he was one of the worst receivers in the NFL last year, committing five penalties and dropping four passes in the first four games alone.

Source: St Louis Post-Dispatch

Jun 9 - 11:52 AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unbelievable that he's still only 25.

Holding him in a dyno league I took over... this guy could be a monster WR4 for me, if he puts it together

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sold him mid rookie draft for a 2nd round pick. I have the feeling I am going to regret making that trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unbelievable that he's still only 25.

Holding him in a dyno league I took over... this guy could be a monster WR4 for me, if he puts it together

This guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will not draft again. will not......................ugh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will not draft again. will not......................ugh

I was happy as a lark to trade him. He may recover from his knee issues. He may overcome his character issues. But the odds aren't great on either score and he isn't exactly starting along side Peyton Manning or Drew Brees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I drafted him a bunch last year and probably will again if he's cheap. Good chance it doesn't work out but he's prototypical WR1 physically and it seems like Fisher must like him. Hilarious to read the puff piece from last year and contrast it with how the season actually went though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.