Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Cordarrelle Patterson vs. Tavon Austin


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#31 BigSyke

BigSyke

    I Know you Watching me but I'm watching you too Playa...

  • Joined: 07-November 11
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,192
  • Reputation: 113
  • LocationFLORIDA
HUDDLER

Posted 24 March 2013 - 06:47 AM

I see what Chuck is saying. Welker is the main go to guy and technically is the "no1".

But since he is limited to a degree and can't line up on the outside, he's not considered a true number 1 wide-out.

Now Desean Jackson, another short wr, is limited to only the 9 route. But since HE IS A DEEP THREAT he has more value. And he's not really limited to the 9 route, it's just that dude can't take those big hits because he is small as fug.

One of the things(big hits) I'm worried about Tavon dealing with

#32 Bwood

Bwood

    It's all about the

  • Joined: 04-November 12
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,491
  • Reputation: 190
  • LocationSouthern California
HUDDLER

Posted 24 March 2013 - 08:09 AM

LOL Welker is not a fugging #1 receiver.

Just because he was Brady's safety valve doesn't mean he is their "number one" receiver. That's like saying Greg Olsen is our #1 receiver.

Brandon Lloyd was the Patriots number one receiver. Your number one receiver should be able to run every route, get jump balls, and take on the opposing defenses #1 corner.

Welker was a miss match for teams nickle corners, safeties, and linebackers. He wouldn't do squat against a true shutdown corner.

And can we PLEASE keep in mind who made Welkers name? Bill Belichick and Tom Brady. Watch Julian Edleman do the exact same thing.

Austin is nothing more than a slot receiver and kick returner.

Now Patterson and Allen, can be #1 receivers. They have the size and potential to be Julio Jones like. Not megatron or AJ, but they are bigger speedy receivers that make perfect flankers on the outside.

Stop being close minded.

#33 jarhead

jarhead

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-May 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,632
  • Reputation: 995
  • Locationnear Charlotte
HUDDLER

Posted 24 March 2013 - 08:34 AM

You dont draft slot wr's / KR's with the 14th pick.

Austin is good, but he is a luxury pick, something we dont have


He is more than just a slot receiver....he can add that scat back element to our running game as well especially knowing Dwill still may be a June 1 cut

#34 Dash Global

Dash Global

    Member

  • Joined: 12-November 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,050
  • Reputation: 139
HUDDLER

Posted 24 March 2013 - 08:48 AM

He is more than just a slot receiver....he can add that scat back element to our running game as well especially knowing Dwill still may be a June 1 cut


scatback / slot still not worth a 14th pick when we got this many needs.

luxury pick

#35 BigSyke

BigSyke

    I Know you Watching me but I'm watching you too Playa...

  • Joined: 07-November 11
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,192
  • Reputation: 113
  • LocationFLORIDA
HUDDLER

Posted 24 March 2013 - 10:05 AM

Glad to see others see that Tavon is just a slot. mannnnnnn...WHEW LOLOL

#36 panther4life

panther4life

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,655
  • Reputation: 1,181
HUDDLER

Posted 24 March 2013 - 10:45 AM

I have yet to see Austin catch a pass higher than 7 feet vertically. He rarely goes deep and seems to make all of his plays in space. You get him jammed up against an NFL corner on the outside and I don't think he will be nearly as effective.

Just not a fit for our offense. Cam throws a lot of his balls too high, so we need someone who can go up and get them.

Cam's accuarcy is also much better on deep routes than the short quick routes you'd have to employ to get Austin the ball in space to utilize his strengths.

#37 Squirrel

Squirrel

    Drink a beer and relax

  • Joined: 01-December 08
  • posts: 13,392
  • Reputation: 1,144
SUPPORTER

Posted 24 March 2013 - 11:45 AM

Back in 2002 Smitty wasnt a number 1 receiver either.

#38 La Pantera

La Pantera

    humpin' habanero

  • Joined: 22-April 11
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,863
  • Reputation: 802
  • LocationWinston-Salem
HUDDLER

Posted 24 March 2013 - 11:51 AM

I have yet to see Austin catch a pass higher than 7 feet vertically. He rarely goes deep and seems to make all of his plays in space. You get him jammed up against an NFL corner on the outside and I don't think he will be nearly as effective.

Just not a fit for our offense. Cam throws a lot of his balls too high, so we need someone who can go up and get them.

Cam's accuarcy is also much better on deep routes than the short quick routes you'd have to employ to get Austin the ball in space to utilize his strengths.




I love both guys. I wanted Austin after I seen the show he put on against Clemson in that bowl game. And I've wanted to get CP since the begining of the season. I totally agree, I've yet to see TA high point a ball in the air and CP is raw. I'd take either, but both have areas that need improvement.

#39 panther4life

panther4life

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,655
  • Reputation: 1,181
HUDDLER

Posted 24 March 2013 - 12:02 PM

Back in 2002 Smitty wasnt a number 1 receiver either.


Was that his fault or John Fox's? Smith can do things Austin can't. Namely go up and compete for passes in the air. Fight off the jam against physical NFL corners.

Its all about being a fit for the offense. Austin can and likely will have success in this league,I just don't see it being with us. I'd seriously rather have your boy Bailey in the 2nd.

#40 BigSyke

BigSyke

    I Know you Watching me but I'm watching you too Playa...

  • Joined: 07-November 11
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,192
  • Reputation: 113
  • LocationFLORIDA
HUDDLER

Posted 24 March 2013 - 12:50 PM

^I had been asking him about Bailey...but he always seemed to favor Tavon........


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users