2010 NFL Free Agency: Texans Make Smart Move, Re-Sign Receiver Kevin Walter
You never underestimate the presence of a receiver who runs perfect routes, catches nearly everything thrown his way, and is fearless over the middle .
Apparently, the Houston Texans understand this .
The Houston Texans have reportedly come to an agreement with NFL&hl=169235&id=2523" title="Kevin Walter" target="_blank">Kevin Walter , who had a short-lived free agent life. The No. 2 receiver will return to the team for a multi-year deal and continue to line-up opposite of the star receiver, Andre Johnson.
Walter's strong fundamentals, underrated speed, and solid play-making ability were easily lost on some throughout the NFL for the past few years, but it wasn't until he was about to hit the open market that teams took a hold of his game tape and saw something they liked.
So, too, did the Texans, and they decided to hold onto that talent.
While there was a ton of hype building up around third receiver Jacoby Jones, the Texans weren't ready to throw caution to the wind.
Walter has never been the game-breaker that Andre Johnson is, but considering the small amount of targets he gets, that has to be understandable. Still, Walter has always been a solid No. 2 receiver, has a knack of coming up with big catches, and is fearless in traffic over the middle.
This move suggests the Texans are committed to giving Walter a bigger chance and role in the offense, and when/if star tight end Owen Daniels can make it back to full health, the Texans will be returning all the weapons that helped them produce the NFL's top overall passing offense last year.
Now that the Texans are set at receiver and with their passing game, they can turn to the running back position, while also adding depth to their growing defense.
Needless to say, retaining a guy they know well that can perform at a high level when needed was a bigger move than people are likely to give the Texans credit for.
For more NFL Free Agency news, head over to NFL Soup.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?