Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Big WR

Cdparr7

By Cdparr7,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

micnificent28 Mentor

micnificent28

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

6-5, 255?

I don't know what world that is considered small.

Olsen didnt play very big. you rarely saw him just jump up and win a jump ball. If he got touched he was going down on first contact. he was really finesse like in his play. Robbie Anderson was the same way he played a small game even tho he was 6'3 DJ Moore played bigger than Anderson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, micnificent28 said:

Olsen didnt play very big. you rarely saw him just jump up and win a jump ball. If he got touched he was going down on first contact. he was really finesse like in his play. Robbie Anderson was the same way he played a small game even tho he was 6'3 DJ Moore played bigger than Anderson.

You are just generally moving the goalposts on what you think we don't have. Olsen was very obviously the kind of red zone receiving threat we relied on(same with Shockey, Walls, etc) at that position. Sometimes because we didn't have reliable red zone WR's.

I am not gonna get caught up on the idea of throwing jump balls or fades. If you have quality threats, you can scheme them open. You don't need these old possession/jump ball end zone threats from the bygone era. Especially when you have even bigger and more athletic LB's and DB's that are more suited to defending that stuff.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
micnificent28 Mentor

micnificent28

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, kungfoodude said:

You are just generally moving the goalposts on what you think we don't have. Olsen was very obviously the kind of red zone receiving threat we relied on(same with Shockey, Walls, etc) at that position. Sometimes because we didn't have reliable red zone WR's.

I am not gonna get caught up on the idea of throwing jump balls or fades. If you have quality threats, you can scheme them open. You don't need these old possession/jump ball end zone threats from the bygone era. Especially when you have even bigger and more athletic LB's and DB's that are more suited to defending that stuff.

 

not trying to move the goal post just pain the picture on what type of player olsen was. And yes when you think big WR or TE you think throwing fades and jump balls. thats another part of the game we judt dont have. if you mean just a redzone target you scheme open like you do then Moore can do that. just picks and route running. what i mean is above 6'4 big body muscle a guy out the way allen Robinson gronk aj brown that sort of thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, micnificent28 said:

not trying to move the goal post just pain the picture on what type of player olsen was. And yes when you think big WR or TE you think throwing fades and jump balls. thats another part of the game we judt dont have. if you mean just a redzone target you scheme open like you do then Moore can do that. just picks and route running. what i mean is above 6'4 big body muscle a guy out the way allen Robinson gronk aj brown that sort of thing.

Yeah but just hat on a hat "beat him" is less effective than actually scheming people open and running effective plays. Like I said, that is old school stuff.

It's fine if you have a Calvin Johnson, Randy Moss, Jimmy Graham, etc. It works a lot less effectively if you don't have an elite guy like that. 

That's trying to attempt to take the hard way out of a situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
micnificent28 Mentor

micnificent28

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah but just hat on a hat "beat him" is less effective than actually scheming people open and running effective plays. Like I said, that is old school stuff.

It's fine if you have a Calvin Johnson, Randy Moss, Jimmy Graham, etc. It works a lot less effectively if you don't have an elite guy like that. 

That's trying to attempt to take the hard way out of a situation.

im not saying this should be your only way of beatinf an opponent. im saying having the threat of it or even having this as an option should be on every team i think. the more you can give the opposition to think about the better. i feel the same way about having a dual threat qb. the more you can do...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stratocatter Mentor

stratocatter

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, philw5289 said:

With the rules favoring the offense so much the receiver position is getting smaller. More and more receivers 6’0” and under fast and speedy are getting drafted and used more 

Seems it is always a cyclic evolution. This small trend counters the long tall corners brought in to counter the big WR guys. Someone will counter that and so on…. 
Somehow you have to get on the right side of those trends. A balancing act.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
1of10Charnatives Mentor

1of10Charnatives

Posted
Posted
On 10/30/2022 at 9:23 PM, Cdparr7 said:

When is the last time we had a “Big WR”. I watched those fade passes to Terrace Marshall and scratched my head. He is the tallest WR on the roster at 6’2”. 
 

We have Preston Williams on the practice squad at 6’5”. Tommy and Ian are 6’3” but we really don’t have a “Big WR”.

Here is the fundamental issue I take with asking questions like this:

If playoff winning teams don't have a pronounced tendency to have big WR's on the roster vs the rest of the league, I find the notion that they contribute to winning when it counts tenous at best. As a fan who wants to win, I think we should be looking at SB winners and conference championship participants and asking what these teams seem to have more or better of than the rest of the league.

Fantasy football imo has led to an overemphasis by fans on WR's and RB's because they generate fantasy points and thus garner attention. This creates a false perception of how important they are to winning football. It is a passing league, and you need solid play from your receivers to win, but like running back, I believe the evidence that having big or elite WR play leads to playoff success is scant on the ground. QB play, OL play, pass rushing and secondary play are the position groups that both matter to winning, and where true talent is rare.

Does having big WR's have it's obvious advantages? Of course.

Do these advantages correlate to a high degree with playoff wins? Doubtful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stingray3030 Proficient

Stingray3030

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, Ghostface Chilla said:

We should trade Atlanta for rookie WR Drake London. He was a phenom at USC and has hands for sure. Atlanta doesn't target him too often, but he will be a #1 soon. We should snatch him up before that happens on another team, especially a rival of ours!

There is zero chance Atlanta is interested in this - he is literally their #1 target and it isn't close... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stingray3030 Proficient

Stingray3030

Posted
Posted

People - cmon - how many times are y'all gonna keep saying "we need to upgrade our TE" - "get taller receivers" - that is just trying to fix symptoms of the real problem.  You don't win Superbowls with TE's and WR's....you win them with Defense, OLine, and QB play....period.  We haven't had a MLB defensive captain since Luke.  We haven't had a good OLine since 2011.  We haven't had a consistent, top tier QB dang near ever.  We had Steve Smith, Greg Olsen, DJ Moore, CMC and never consistently saw the playoffs...Give me a top 10 QB, top 10 OLine, or a top 10 MLB or stop making excuses....we have spent the last 12 years focused on the wrong things.  Go look at the teams who are consistently in the playoffs and they all have at least 2 of those 3 things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • tukafan21
      With the first pick, don't draft a QB? Draft a DE? C'mon!

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      Sweet jebus this is idiotic Yes, overall team success in this league, you need a good QB, but beyond just that painfully obvious fact, let's get into the rest of the stupid in there......... First things first, you say.. "if we need a good QB for him to have success, then why are you drafting that player with the #1 pick" Show me one time I've ever said we would need a good QB for T-Mac himself to have success... you can't, because I never have.  I think you're referring to the "he's bad enough that we then have a Top 5 pick to target a QB" part of my post, which is very clearly talking about said QB, not T-Mac.  The other way to interpret that is just overall team success, which again, wouldn't be anything about T-Mac or his ability to impact the offense or overall team wins and losses. I'm quite sure I could do this with a number of teams over the years, but I don't want to spend the time to do multiple, so I'll keep it to just the 2023 Vikings right now since you wanted to use Jefferson as your example....... The Vikings went 3-6 after Cousins went down last year.  And two of those wins came before Jefferson even came back from his own injury, they were 1-4 in the final 5 weeks after Jefferson came back. In those 5 games, Jefferson had 31 catches, 503 yards, and 2 TDs Having the WR you specifically called out didn't help them go better than 1-4 with a bad QB, even though he still put up a great stat line for that time period either.  It also didn't make that QB good enough to where they then went out and brought in TWO new QB's this year to replace Doubs and Mullens who started down the stretch for them last year. And that's with 4th year Jefferson, not a rookie that T-Mac would be If you expect a WR getting drafted #1 overall to be the player to turn a franchise as bad as we are around in 1 season, make whatever QB we're able to put in there be successful, and lead us to a solid season, then you are literally insane. We are AWFUL, we have a few young guys who could turn into great players, but we are so far from being a good team, that there isn't any player we could draft next year that is going to change that in 2025.
    • DamnItJake!
      Canes vs Bruins 7pm Halloween Edition!

      By DamnItJake! · Posted

      They might be ass but it’s the professional level like NFL!! I will take a win no matter what!! Still not over
    • ForJimmy
      With the first pick, don't draft a QB? Draft a DE? C'mon!

      By ForJimmy · Posted

      So you are just going by what these analysts are saying. So if come draft time they say Ward/Sanders is worth pick 1 you should be good. The future draft QB class is always going to be projected as the next great thing until these young players start playing the game and scouts can see some flaws. Think of all of the high school phenoms that didn’t look as good in college.  If Manning does turn out to be the next great prospect only one team gets to draft him. Odds are someone else could get the top pick, especially if go all in on building a supporting roster. I’m never going to be a just wait another year guy, because there are so many variables. If our staff loves Ward/Sanders then we should just draft them with our pick. It’s as simple as that. I also might go with Hunter over TMac as WR1 in this class.  The roster has the OL to help a young QB, young weapons in Coker, XL, and JT to grow with a QB, and a RB who can catch in Brooks as a safety net for a young QB. Sign a vet WR, extend BC and our offense would be set outside of depth. Let our young offensive core go through their growing pains while we iron out the defense. It’s definitely a path forward.
×
×
  • Create New...