A. Henry is a big loss

I remember when not long ago, this thread was undeservingly titled, "Henry sucks".

:laugh2:
 
sportsman;1709199 said:
I was thinking if we lost Roy Williams would we
even notice?

No, we should cut him Monday.
 
I don't know how much help Henry would have been against the slants the Pats were running on us all day, since he is not the fleetest of foot
 
I thought Henry would've been huge in this game. No way Nate or Reeves is better than Henry, and if it would've caused Brady to wait an extra second, that could've been the difference in sacks/fumbles.
 
JPM;1709330 said:
No, we should cut him Monday.

Heck, why wait a day, cut him now! :rolleyes:

Henry would have helped, he is a better corner than Reeves, a lot better instinctively. Probably wouldnt have helped us enough to win, but wouldnt have allowed Brady 366 yards passing...
 
Bob Sacamano;1709340 said:
I don't know how much help Henry would have been against the slants the Pats were running on us all day, since he is not the fleetest of foot

Actually, I believe he would have helped us a little against those 3 WRs sets, with him on the outside. That would have gotten Jones off the field.

Now whether we would have won is a whole different thing, I mean, we weren't the only team with injuries. You can play this "what if" game all day long, and but the other team can do that also.
 
Reeves did well today Roy Williams and Hamlin stunk it up, anyone else feel as though Hamlin will be out the door after this year?
 
cowheel;1709210 said:
Henry wouldn't have helped today.


Sure he would have.

That was a huge disparity between their 3rd wr and our 3rd corner.

Would it have been enough? No. But it would have made for a closer game.
 
A. Henry is a big loss
I was thinking if we lost Roy Williams would we even notice?

??? Seriously, are you a skins fan?
 
MichaelWinicki;1709378 said:
Sure he would have.

That was a huge disparity between their 3rd wr and our 3rd corner.

Would it have been enough? No. But it would have made for a closer game.

Agreed, just said this in another thread. ;)

Injuries are part of the game though, the pats had them too.
 
Deep_Freeze;1709374 said:
Actually, I believe he would have helped us a little against those 3 WRs sets, with him on the outside. That would have gotten Jones off the field.

Now whether we would have won is a whole different thing, I mean, we weren't the only team with injuries. You can play this "what if" game all day long, and but the other team can do that also.

I agree w/ you, that Henry in the lineup would have meant Reeves against Welker, which is a good matchup because Reeves is fast, but Henry struggles w/ speed, and the Pats had alot of speed out on the field today, plus they ran alot of what is a pretty much indefensable(SP) passing play, the inside slant

our biggest problem was that we were so worried about getting beat deep, and the Pats knew this, that we weren't really trying to stop the slant, and the Pats played against that strategy
 
Bob Sacamano;1709412 said:
I pretty much agree w/ you, but Henry struggles w/ speed, and the Pats had alot of speed out on the field today, plus they ran alot of what is a pretty much indefensable(SP) passing play, the slant

If it was that hard to defend the slant, that is all teams would run.

You can play your CB to the inside, and have help on the outside. Problem is our corners needed so much help that we couldn't help all of them.

Now I'm not a Henry fanatic, but I am a fanatic of getting Jones off the field unless it is an emergency.
 
The secondary was our biggest weakness last year, and it is this year too.

Still, with Henry in there and some more discipline and half as many penalties on offense, this game looked very winnable. Maybe it would have made the difference? I almost thought we had it there for awhile in the third.
 
Back
Top