Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Da'rick Rogers

142 posts in this topic

Posted

You said let me know when he is a number 2 wr. He is number 2 WR here so do what you said you would do and stfu. You dumbass idiot. In every forum you say some of the stupidest poo. I honestly don't know how you breath and walk at the same time. Without choking or tripping every 2 steps.

Come back at me when Lafail become a sure no.2 wr. For now, shut your hole dumb bit(h

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Come back at me when Lafail become a sure no.2 wr. For now, shut your hole dumb bit(h

What do you not understand you fuging moron? He is the number 2 wr on this team . Do I have to link the depth chart? Now stfu and go eat paint chips.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Jungle when you learn something about football can you come talk to me.

Not one DC is putting his safety in the Box if Randy is lined up on the outside running a deep route. If you don't think that helps a offense then please watch soccer.

But just to end this look at the Targets for Wr in option offenses then look at the targets for WR in west coast and traditional play action offenses. When you see the difference you can come back and say you were wrong. If you would have heard what Smitty said on the radio about Lafell today you would know how wrong you are.

So you're basically refusing to accept the idea that the receivers' ability and the style of offense are linked. And you're refusing to accept that a man who played for three teams in 2010 and was out of football in 2011 is anything less than a game-changing threat. For such a condescending poster you don't do much thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So you're basically refusing to accept the idea that the receivers' ability and the style of offense are linked. And you're refusing to accept that a man who played for three teams in 2010 and was out of football in 2011 is anything less than a game-changing threat. For such a condescending poster you don't do much thinking.

I like how "you" can say in one post that he didn't hit the 700 yards and 5td mark you set and avoid the fact in 5 post that he was 23 yards and 1td in 14 games away from that. I also like how your dogging Lafell but slobbing a WR who is just like him and adds nothing different then he does.

But I'm loving the fact you're discrediting the affect that Randy Moss can have on a opposing defense. This alone lets me know you don't know poo about football stick to tennis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I like how "you" can say in one post that he didn't hit the 700 yards and 5td mark you set and avoid the fact in 5 post that he was 23 yards and 1td in 14 games away from that. I also like how your dogging Lafell but slobbing a WR who is just like him and adds nothing different then he does.

But I'm loving the fact you're discrediting the affect that Randy Moss can have on a opposing defense. This alone lets me know you don't know poo about football stick to tennis.

Why am "I" in quotation marks?

Why does it matter that he was close? He iddn't hit 700 yards or 5 touchdowns. I believe that those are the measures of value in the NFL, correct? Touchdowns and yards?

Again, Rogers jumps higher and changes directions faster. And actually, that's all I've said about him. I'm not a huge fan of Rogers, but he's a better physical prospect than was LaFell.

Why did all 32 NFL teams leave Moss off of their rosters last year if he's still a game changing player? And why didn't he, you know, produce more than 450 yards if he's still a game changing player? I'm still confused as to why you're chasing this point so hard. There's absolutely nothing to suggest that Moss is a good player, except your word against 32 NFL front offices. What would possess you to try to pass off that argument as valid?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Why am "I" in quotation marks?

Why does it matter that he was close? He iddn't hit 700 yards or 5 touchdowns. I believe that those are the measures of value in the NFL, correct? Touchdowns and yards?

Again, Rogers jumps higher and changes directions faster. And actually, that's all I've said about him. I'm not a huge fan of Rogers, but he's a better physical prospect than was LaFell.

Why did all 32 NFL teams leave Moss off of their rosters last year if he's still a game changing player? And why didn't he, you know, produce more than 450 yards if he's still a game changing player? I'm still confused as to why you're chasing this point so hard. There's absolutely nothing to suggest that Moss is a good player, except your word against 32 NFL front offices. What would possess you to try to pass off that argument as valid?

1. He was only 23 yards and 1TD away from your dumbass bench mark. At the same time playing 2 less games and most of a 3rd do to a concussion. Are you seriously this ANAL???

2. No he doesn't Lafell is quicker and changes direction a lot more then he gets credit for.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft/player/_/id/25590/brandon-lafell

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft/player/_/id/30177

Rogers also has a lower Scouts Grade then Lafell. So the better Prospect thing is wrong.

Better change of direction really???

3. 31 teams passed on A Rodgers so that don't mean poo. One of the best Coaches in the league didn't pass on Moss and he could see how Moss can help the rest of his WR. No matter what dumb poo you can think of. Moss is still a player that can take the top off of a defense and is still a deep threat. Don't act like that doesn't effect a defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

1. He was only 23 yards and 1TD away from your dumbass bench mark. At the same time playing 2 less games and most of a 3rd do to a concussion. Are you seriously this ANAL???

2. No he doesn't Lafell is quicker and changes direction a lot more then he gets credit for.

http://insider.espn..../brandon-lafell

http://insider.espn....ayer/_/id/30177

Rogers also has a lower Scouts Grade then Lafell. So the better Prospect thing is wrong.

Better change of direction really???

3. 31 teams passed on A Rodgers so that don't mean poo. One of the best Coaches in the league didn't pass on Moss and he could see how Moss can help the rest of his WR. No matter what dumb poo you can think of. Moss is still a player that can take the top off of a defense and is still a deep threat. Don't act like that doesn't effect a defense.

I'm not using 700 yards as an absolute bench mark. 700 yards does not represent some sort of barrier between average and good. In saying that he's never gotten 700 yards, I was merely pointing out that he's never put up impressive numbers. You can call him a 700 yard receiver if you'd like, but that's still merely middling production, and could definitely be upgraded upon.

Three-cone drill. Shuttle run. These are drills designed to test the speed at which players change directions. Rogers ran every single one of them faster than did LaFell. When I say that Rogers changes directions better than LaFell, I'm using real statistical evidence, not some Youtube highlights. Rogers is the same size, he runs faster, he jumps higher, he changes directions more quickly, and his hands are bigger. He is a superior physical prospect. Again, these are just facts.

31 teams did not pass on Rodgers. 23 teams passed on Rodgers (kind of funny that you missed than when you've been calling me a tennis fan all week). Anyway, all 32 teams did pass on Tom Brady, so I get the point that you're trying to make. The problem is that Tom Brady and Randy Moss were in entirely different situations. Brady was totally unproven. Moss had been in the league for a long, long time. Everybody knew exactly what they were getting with Moss, and only one team wanted him. A smart team, yes, but there's more than one of those in the league. Regardless, the original point was that the 49ers didn't have a great receiving group, and I'm still right in that regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm not using 700 yards as an absolute bench mark. 700 yards does not represent some sort of barrier between average and good. In saying that he's never gotten 700 yards, I was merely pointing out that he's never put up impressive numbers. You can call him a 700 yard receiver if you'd like, but that's still merely middling production, and could definitely be upgraded upon.

Three-cone drill. Shuttle run. These are drills designed to test the speed at which players change directions. Rogers ran every single one of them faster than did LaFell. When I say that Rogers changes directions better than LaFell, I'm using real statistical evidence, not some Youtube highlights. Rogers is the same size, he runs faster, he jumps higher, he changes directions more quickly, and his hands are bigger. He is a superior physical prospect. Again, these are just facts.

31 teams did not pass on Rodgers. 23 teams passed on Rodgers (kind of funny that you missed than when you've been calling me a tennis fan all week). Anyway, all 32 teams did pass on Tom Brady, so I get the point that you're trying to make. The problem is that Tom Brady and Randy Moss were in entirely different situations. Brady was totally unproven. Moss had been in the league for a long, long time. Everybody knew exactly what they were getting with Moss, and only one team wanted him. A smart team, yes, but there's more than one of those in the league. Regardless, the original point was that the 49ers didn't have a great receiving group, and I'm still right in that regard.

1. He's only had 1 year of (real Opportunity) to even hit these bench marks. 2010 = Nobody hit that bench Mark not even 89. 2011= he was the 4th target most games behind Smith, Shockey, Olsen, and Legadue. 2012 he missed 3 games and was only 23 yards and 1 TD away. Also like to mention Smith only had 4td as well. Is he not a Number 1?? You are really being Anal.

2. Well I don't care about what a player does running around " inanimate objects". If we are going to use that as "facts" then Mike Mamula should have been better then Michael Strahan. And Dontari Poe (who blew up the Combine) should have blew away all DT this year. To bad cones don't move and tackle. That's why I go by Film where I can see a player cut change direction and separate from real moving obstacles. And this is where Lafell shows more elusiveness then Rogers.

3. I said Good WR crop not great which it was. Everybody played a part and everybody posed different threats to a defense. That is how a WR group is suppose to work. And I promise you Frank Gore loved the fact that the Safeties had to keep a eye on Moss running a deep pass route.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

1. He's only had 1 year of (real Opportunity) to even hit these bench marks. 2010 = Nobody hit that bench Mark not even 89. 2011= he was the 4th target most games behind Smith, Shockey, Olsen, and Legadue. 2012 he missed 3 games and was only 23 yards and 1 TD away. Also like to mention Smith only had 4td as well. Is he not a Number 1?? You are really being Anal.

2. Well I don't care about what a player does running around " inanimate objects". If we are going to use that as "facts" then Mike Mamula should have been better then Michael Strahan. And Dontari Poe (who blew up the Combine) should have blew away all DT this year. To bad cones don't move and tackle. That's why I go by Film where I can see a player cut change direction and separate from real moving obstacles. And this is where Lafell shows more elusiveness then Rogers.

3. I said Good WR crop not great which it was. Everybody played a part and everybody posed different threats to a defense. That is how a WR group is suppose to work. And I promise you Frank Gore loved the fact that the Safeties had to keep a eye on Moss running a deep pass route.

The fact that he was the fourth target in the offense is proving my point, but we've established that you don't understand the difference between causation and correlation, so I'm done arguing it. And Smith was obviously a #1. He actually produced (yards) like one.

I'm also fairly certain that I've used the phrase 'physical prospect' every time I mention this. And I'm still right. You're right that the best athletes aren't the best football players, but again, I never said that they were. You've ogot a thing for knocking down arguments that I don't make.

Who was good? I'm seeing 800 yards distributed among the four receivers not named Crabtree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The fact that he was the fourth target in the offense is proving my point, but we've established that you don't understand the difference between causation and correlation, so I'm done arguing it. And Smith was obviously a #1. He actually produced (yards) like one.

I'm also fairly certain that I've used the phrase 'physical prospect' every time I mention this. And I'm still right. You're right that the best athletes aren't the best football players, but again, I never said that they were. You've ogot a thing for knocking down arguments that I don't make.

Who was good? I'm seeing 800 yards distributed among the four receivers not named Crabtree.

1. Coaches make stupid roster Depth decision all the time. It's not the player's fault that it happen nor does it mean their not talented. Again John Fox started D Foster over DWill . Does that mean Dwill was sorry?

You also didn't mention that while 89 put up yards he was also targeted 63 more times then Lafell was. Maybe if Lafell got half of those he would have more yards as well.

2. And again I think Lafell was a better all around prospect. You do know that blocking is a physical act by a WR? Well Lafell was way more of a better blocker then Rogers is now. If you're talking about Rogers being a little bigger muscle wise. Who cares? David Boston was a muscle man to. How long did his career last again?

3. If you go by the offense they ran and the jobs they were ask to do I think they were a pretty good group. New Orleans only has Colston and Graham putting up numbers. But Henderson and Moore did their part and as a whole they are considered a good WR corp.

Edit Lance had a really good season this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

1. Coaches make stupid roster Depth decision all the time. It's not the player's fault that it happen nor does it mean their not talented. Again John Fox started D Foster over DWill . Does that mean Dwill was sorry?

You also didn't mention that while 89 put up yards he was also targeted 63 more times then Lafell was. Maybe if Lafell got half of those he would have more yards as well.

2. And again I think Lafell was a better all around prospect. You do know that blocking is a physical act by a WR? Well Lafell was way more of a better blocker then Rogers is now. If you're talking about Rogers being a little bigger muscle wise. Who cares? David Boston was a muscle man to. How long did his career last again?

3. If you go by the offense they ran and the jobs they were ask to do I think they were a pretty good group. New Orleans only has Colston and Graham putting up numbers. But Henderson and Moore did their part and as a whole they are considered a good WR corp.

Edit Lance had a really good season this year.

I don't mention the targets because targets are dependent on a receiver's ability to get open. Smith and LaFell were on the field for the vast majority of the passes, and Smith got open for more often than did LaFell. If LaFell was a better receiver, his numbers would've been better. You're trying to make it work the other way around.

Again, you're arguing against points I never made. I stopped at 'Rogers is physically superior.' You've been talking to yourself ever since.

No, not really. You mentioned Ginn and AJ, and both of those players literally did nothing in the passing game. Moss and Manningham were nothing more than mediocre. There just wasn't a threat, a guy or collection of guys that would make Harbaugh want to pass more.

Yeah, Lance was a 1,000 yard receiver last year. Not sure what you were going for there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I don't mention the targets because targets are dependent on a receiver's ability to get open. Smith and LaFell were on the field for the vast majority of the passes, and Smith got open for more often than did LaFell. If LaFell was a better receiver, his numbers would've been better. You're trying to make it work the other way around.

Again, you're arguing against points I never made. I stopped at 'Rogers is physically superior.' You've been talking to yourself ever since.

No, not really. You mentioned Ginn and AJ, and both of those players literally did nothing in the passing game. Moss and Manningham were nothing more than mediocre. There just wasn't a threat, a guy or collection of guys that would make Harbaugh want to pass more.

Yeah, Lance was a 1,000 yard receiver last year. Not sure what you were going for there.

1. Again showing your stupidity. This is dumbest poo you said in this whole thread. Cam would throw to Steve even when he wasn't open. Steve could be triple covered and Cam would try and get him the ball. Another example of your dumb argument is Boldin. A Bold in is never open but still gets a lot of balls thrown his way. So just stop.

2. He's a little bigger but that doesn't mean he is more of a physical prospect then lafell was.

3. You had your number 1 (crabtree). You had your deep threat (moss). You have your possession WR (Manningham). You had a guy who can play special team (Ginn). You had your Rookie fill in (AJ). Then you add the Do it all TE's (Davis, Walker). Pretty good group in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites