Austin Rogers

#128
#128
orangetanker11 said:
yes. or, he can catch a few first downs, and not drop big plays, or just be a flat out playmaker, or consistent option a la Wes Welker.
Click to expand...

Just curious...you do know that Michael freaking Crabtree didn't have 1200yds receiving, right? I mean, if AR needs 73 receptions/1200 yards/10 touchdowns to prove he's not "a turd" I have to ask just what exactly are you expecting our leading receiver to do (pick your fave) for him to NOT be, you know, a turd?
 
#131
#131
hndog609 said:
Just curious...you do know that Michael freaking Crabtree didn't have 1200yds receiving, right? I mean, if AR needs 73 receptions/1200 yards/10 touchdowns to prove he's not "a turd" I have to ask just what exactly are you expecting our leading receiver to do (pick your fave) for him to NOT be, you know, a turd?
Click to expand...

Not to play.
 
#132
#132
orangetanker11 said:
4 Rec for 44.5 YPG is not "producing" or "putting up numbers." The bottom line is that this guy, in no way ever, has been a good reciever. He, in no way, should be considered for a starting job. This isn't an argument I am trying to support, I am merely expressing my opinion that Austin Rodgers is not worthy of a starting job, nor has he ever been.
P.S. When did I contradict myself? I am curious to know considering I have been bashing Rodgers this entire time.
Click to expand...

It was also once the OPINION of many doctors that Thalidimide was a good thing for pregnant women to take. Turns out, that too, was a shi**y opinion.
 
Last edited:
#133
#133
orangetanker11 said:
Not to play.
Click to expand...


???

You need 73 receptions, 1200yds, and 10 TD's from AR to prove he's not "a turd."

You therefore expect your favorite receiver (insert name here) to have how many catches for how many yards for how many TD's to empirically demonstrate he clearly is not a turd.
 
#134
#134
hndog609 said:
???

You need 73 receptions, 1200yds, and 10 TD's from AR to prove he's not "a turd."

You therefore expect your favorite receiver (insert name here) to have how many catches for how many yards for how many TD's to empirically demonstrate he clearly is not a turd.
Click to expand...

Stats are not the sole reason he is a turd. His uncanny ability to completely destroy a good drive is up there.
 
#135
#135
orangetanker11 said:
Yes. I have an ulcer. Diagnosed 2 years ago. The doctor said it was from watching Austin Rodgers. He said it happened to everyone he knows who watches UT football. LOL! Look, saying that I threw up everytime I saw him play was in fact fictitious, although I really hate seeing the guy play. I'm not taking anything away from AR, I'm just stating that I don't like him, I don't think he should start, and my opinion of him as a player is that of a turd. Why get so bent out of shape?
Click to expand...

You are a tool....why do you feel the need to call a kid names....you don't think he is a good player....yeah...we get it....no need to be a d-bag about it.
 
#137
#137
VolBuck24 said:
besides lucas taylor and gerald jones i dont see how u can say that any of the other should play over austin maybe if ahmad paige gets things straight he might be another ahead of him but since he didnt see the field this year for one reason or another, you cant put him there but austin is an sec caliber player with good speed since he runs a 4.4...same as jones
Click to expand...

So I guess you think Rogers is better than Moore? And what big-time catch has shown off this great supposedly 4.4 speed?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#138
#138
I understand you guys may like Rogers because he's from the state but get serious he wouldn't have played in past years. He's really a Vandy type of player. Not the type of talent that we should put on the edge at UT. Lucas Taylor, Josh Briscoe, and AR was one of the least athletic groups of receivers that we have ever had. Don't bring up stats because they were dominated by the competition in big games. They didn't make big plays against the big boys with Ainge and I won't lose any sleep when the last of that group Rogers graduates.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#142
#142
Lockdown1 said:
So I guess you think Rogers is better than Moore? And what big-time catch has shown off this great supposedly 4.4 speed?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

at this point yes i would say rogers is better than moore and as for the catch where he shows off his speed i havent seen gerald jones or anybody show off much speed either
 
#145
#145
If I hear the word "turd" one more time I'm going to mangle someone's cranium. Get a dictionary and quit talking like a second grader.
 
#146
#146
VolBuck24 said:
at this point yes i would say rogers is better than moore and as for the catch where he shows off his speed i havent seen gerald jones or anybody show off much speed either
Click to expand...

How can u say that? I want to see what happens when Moore is given a bigger role. Rogers has maxed out his ability and it's not up to the standards of former vols so let's give some other guys a shot to bring the bar back up.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#149
#149
Rogers is decent. He has proven himself in the SEC. But if Kiffin is modeling us after USC, looking at them they have explosive athletes and playmakers all over the field. Game-changers. Their receivers are either huge or ridiculously fast, or both. Rogers is neither. He is solid, and serviceable, but he will not break a game wide open for us the way Jones and Moore can. There is no particular quality about him that will scare a defense. Rogers is not good enough at route running, not quick enough and doesn't have good enough hands to be a Wes Welker or Anthony Gonzalez type. Instead, off the top of my head, he reminds me of Mike Furrey of the Lions. He put up numbers when there weren't many other options, but when the younger and more talented receivers came into their own, he was mostly pushed to the backburner.

I remember reading something about how Kiffin was surprised that Paige was not seeing the field much last year, and if that is the case with Paige's talent I would expect to see Rogers as our fourth receiver. But I do think that he has proven himself enough to be a good slot receiver and to play ahead of Hancock. Unless Hancock has improved significantly, I think Rogers should see more playing time. A new coaching staff changes everything, though.
 
#150
#150
VKAman said:
Rogers is decent. He has proven himself in the SEC. But if Kiffin is modeling us after USC, looking at them they have explosive athletes and playmakers all over the field. Game-changers. Their receivers are either huge or ridiculously fast, or both. Rogers is neither. He is solid, and serviceable, but he will not break a game wide open for us the way Jones and Moore can. There is no particular quality about him that will scare a defense. Rogers is not good enough at route running, not quick enough and doesn't have good enough hands to be a Wes Welker or Anthony Gonzalez type. Instead, off the top of my head, he reminds me of Mike Furrey of the Lions. He put up numbers when there weren't many other options, but when the younger and more talented receivers came into their own, he was mostly pushed to the backburner.

I remember reading something about how Kiffin was surprised that Paige was not seeing the field much last year, and if that is the case with Paige's talent I would expect to see Rogers as our fourth receiver. But I do think that he has proven himself enough to be a good slot receiver and to play ahead of Hancock. Unless Hancock has improved significantly, I think Rogers should see more playing time. A new coaching staff changes everything, though.
Click to expand...

Um, are you sure you aren't basing this off of the color of his skin?
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top