Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Dante Pettis is HUNG

jhfstyle24
jhfstyle24 Member Posts: 3,256
in Hardcore Husky Board
out to dry by Brownsocks
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
«13

Comments

  • haie
    haie Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 24,675 Founders Club
    Let’s be honest, he left a lot to be desired as a pure #1 receiver. Great player overall, though. We just needed Bryant or someone to be the #1.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • puppylove_sugarsteel
    puppylove_sugarsteel Member Posts: 9,133
    edited March 2018
    haie said:

    Let’s be honest, he left a lot to be desired as a pure #1 receiver. Great player overall, though. We just needed Bryant or someone to be the #1.

    If Bryant is your #1 we in trouble...need a burner who can stretch field and attack ball in air. I like Bynum...not a burner, but a true WR. I think he makes a move.

    Bryant is a big WR basically, but hardly a #1. Need 2-3 WR's to help browning. We saw how shitty we were with Pennis out ( and Bryant at TE)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • PurpleBaze
    PurpleBaze Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 30,565 Founders Club
    haie said:

    Let’s be honest, he left a lot to be desired as a pure #1 receiver. Great player overall, though. We just needed Bryant or someone to be the #1.

    *Quite honestly
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • haie
    haie Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 24,675 Founders Club
    puppylove_sugarsteel said:

    haie said:

    Let’s be honest, he left a lot to be desired as a pure #1 receiver. Great player overall, though. We just needed Bryant or someone to be the #1.

    If Bryant is your #1 we in trouble...need a burner who can stretch field and attack ball in air. I like Bynum...not a burner, but a true WR. I think he makes a move.

    Bryant is a big WR basically, but hardly a #1. Need 2-3 WR's to help browning. We saw how shitty we were with Pennis out ( and Bryant at TE)
    He was pretty much our #1 against Cal before he got hurt.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • puppylove_sugarsteel
    puppylove_sugarsteel Member Posts: 9,133
    haie said:

    Let’s be honest, he left a lot to be desired as a pure #1 receiver. Great player overall, though. We just needed Bryant or someone to be the #1.

    Who are you talking about? Bryant?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • puppylove_sugarsteel
    puppylove_sugarsteel Member Posts: 9,133
    edited March 2018
    haie said:

    puppylove_sugarsteel said:

    haie said:

    Let’s be honest, he left a lot to be desired as a pure #1 receiver. Great player overall, though. We just needed Bryant or someone to be the #1.

    If Bryant is your #1 we in trouble...need a burner who can stretch field and attack ball in air. I like Bynum...not a burner, but a true WR. I think he makes a move.

    Bryant is a big WR basically, but hardly a #1. Need 2-3 WR's to help browning. We saw how shitty we were with Pennis out ( and Bryant at TE)
    He was pretty much our #1 against Cal before he got hurt.
    And that's a huge problem. Can't win the pac12 with a TE as a #1 receiver. Need at least 1WR, hopefully 2 with more catches than Bryant.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • TTJ
    TTJ Member Posts: 4,827
    haie said:

    Let’s be honest, he left a lot to be desired as a pure #1 receiver. Great player overall, though. We just needed Bryant or someone to be the #1.

    I didn’t see that at all. Pettis was terrific, when someone could get the ball to him.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • jhfstyle24
    jhfstyle24 Member Posts: 3,256
    edited March 2018
    haie said:

    Let’s be honest, he left a lot to be desired as a pure #1 receiver. Great player overall, though. We just needed Bryant or someone to be the #1.

    a) He was fantastic
    b) Jake Browning was his QB
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter