As much as it pains for me to say this... We should re-sign Tre'Quan Smith. (1 Viewer)

[No2DC]

Outside of my hope for us to select a WR high in the draft, I think it's critical that the WR/TE group is improved significantly. It's nothing personal against TQS, but we only have one guy on our roster that demands double coverage or who can beat the top corner on any team (and he was hurt).

 

[JvilleJoe]

If we can keep Smith for veteran minimum to compete I am all for that. I must say that I don't really have any expectation of him, however, if we can sign him cheap just maybe the light will come on and his injury history turns around!

 

[sfidc3]

Thanks for bringing up Austin carr. Couldn’t remember his name, but TQS is Carr 2.0 or the Andy (let’s keep bringing him back) tanner.

You really couldn't be more wrong in comparing the 2....by all accounts Carr has been healthy through his very minimal production of the last few years.

TQS has put up numbers in some games but just has not been able to stay healthy, and I agree that it is a legit point to argue in favor of letting him walk....but healthy? He is a legit NFL WR.....

 

[St. Widge]

The problem is when you bring in udfa scrubs to complete with him, he wins by knowing the playbook. TQS competing with udfa is like MT competing against TQS. No challenge.


He’s a low end #4, 5 WR and he’s being used like a #2,3 WR. That’s how much we’ve neglected the receiving corps. I get COVID games, but even prior to that. I get it’s not his fault he’s being put in that position, but the idea of settling because he can do his secondary job in blocking while underperforming his primary role at WR. Ugh!

Who said anything about only bringing in udfa scrubs to compete with him? I'm saying bring in a high draft pick or two and a mid-level free agent WR and then see who makes the team. Keeping TQS does not stop the team from doing that. I don't see why you think because he would be on the team we would need to "settle" for udfa rookies as TQS's only competition. The point would be that TQS would be the floor of your talent level at receiver 4/5 with the hope that one of the draft picks or a mid-level free agent WR would be better and improve the team.

 

[Optimistic Ozzy]

Walk, not even a thought more.

 

[Clintonrebel]

Why would that pain you? We have 51 other players to compare the pain to. He is not the weakest link.

 

[Cougar 2]

U keep him cause he makes for good depth. He’s still young, n knows the system. He can block n give u 30-35 catches, 400 yds n 3-4 TDs. He’ll come fairly cheap, so money shouldn’t b an issue.

So yeah, keep him

 

[Mojomajik9]

I’m not going to be upset either way but I lean towards keeping him for depth purposes. No the team should not ride into next season with this same WR corp and expect a different result. Ideally they bring in high draft picks snd quality FAs and make TQS, Callaway and Humphrey earn their roles. But having TQS isn’t bad if he’s your 4 or 5 receiver. He’s flashed a little here and there and he may just be a late bloomer. But if he’s not and he is who he is he’s still an acceptable #4 guy.