Ted Ginn re-signed

Originally posted by PTulini:
Even with Randy Moss, Michael Crabtree, Mario Manningham, Ted Ginn Jr., and Kyle Williams... I'm still not satisfied with the 49ers WR depth! I'd add 2 more in the draft. I'm not banking on Randy Moss making the 49ers 53-man roster! And Ted Ginn is primarily a return man on special teams, NOTHING MORE.

Yeah, it takes at least 8 great wide receivers in order to truly evaluate a quarterback's play...especially one as great as Awex.

Randy Moss is a 4, Michael Crabtree a 5, Manningham a 6, Ginn a 7, and Kyle Williams a junior varsity backup.

Let's hope GInn NEVER sees the field as a WR.

PR covered, I was very happy about this. He wont play much in the receiving game but adds depth.

PR covered, I was very happy about this. He wont play much in the receiving game but adds depth.

The intersting thing about this signing is that if we use a high pick on a WR, then one of the veterans is going to be cut. Which begs the question, who in danger of being cut?
My answer is Ginn. If some emerges as a good alternative at punt returner, then Ginn will not be on the roster opening day. IMO

Originally posted by jta854:
The intersting thing about this signing is that if we use a high pick on a WR, then one of the veterans is going to be cut. Which begs the question, who in danger of being cut?
My answer is Ginn. If some emerges as a good alternative at punt returner, then Ginn will not be on the roster opening day. IMO

I think it's more likely that we cut no WRs.

Originally posted by jta854:
The intersting thing about this signing is that if we use a high pick on a WR, then one of the veterans is going to be cut. Which begs the question, who in danger of being cut?
My answer is Ginn. If some emerges as a good alternative at punt returner, then Ginn will not be on the roster opening day. IMO

I think it is more a reflection of thinking any coveted receiver wont be around at the 30th pick. Ginn showed his value in PR, that will be his job.

great to have him back, as long as he stays as our pr only and not as a wr

Originally posted by Wodwo:

Originally posted by jta854:

The intersting thing about this signing is that if we use a high pick on a WR, then one of the veterans is going to be cut. Which begs the question, who in danger of being cut?
My answer is Ginn. If some emerges as a good alternative at punt returner, then Ginn will not be on the roster opening day. IMO

I think it's more likely that we cut no WRs.

So do you think we will not draft a WR or that we will carry 6 WRs if we draft one?

I don't see them drafting a wr anymore. But if they do I agree with jta854 Ginn would be on the chopping block if they see good return skills from Cox or whoever.

Simply ask yourself how many active WR's we keep on game day. 4, 5 at most? How often does the #4 or #5 even see the field? And if we draft a Wr #1 overall, it will take a year or two to get him acclimated to OUR offense and build trust/chemistry with Alex (see Morgan/Williams). And who is he going to start over? Manningham, Moss and Crabtree? Really? Hell, even Williams and Ginn have a full year under this offense and played pretty well. Ginn isn't a great receiver but he did fairly well last year and without his (threat of) speed, the Giants had no issues locking down on Crabtree and paying 8-9 in the box all game.

So what is the rationale thinking behind drafting a #1 WR. To groom for next year?

That's VERY good news.

After going through FA with NO TAKERS, I wonder what his thought process is. Will it light a fire in him or will he underperform?

My money is that he lights it up!

Originally posted by jta854:

Originally posted by Wodwo:

Originally posted by jta854:
The intersting thing about this signing is that if we use a high pick on a WR, then one of the veterans is going to be cut. Which begs the question, who in danger of being cut?
My answer is Ginn. If some emerges as a good alternative at punt returner, then Ginn will not be on the roster opening day. IMO

I think it's more likely that we cut no WRs.

So do you think we will not draft a WR or that we will carry 6 WRs if we draft one?

Either one is more likely.

Originally posted by NCommand:


So what is the rationale thinking behind drafting a #1 WR. To groom for next year?

Yeah.