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
 Share

Recommended Posts

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • We’re in a pickle. My best hope is we protect him and can run the ball vs most Ds and the WRs are healthy so he has every chance to not look like what he looked like in too many games last year.   
    • I'm really not stressing about upgrading from Bryce. I'm frustrated with our inability (or refusal) to recognize overall bad QB performance and failure to seriously address the issue. QB is the most impactful position on the field, and we're not only settling for what we've been given to this point, but we've rewarded it with a fully guaranteed 5th year extension for a player that's never played 2 NFL franchise QB quality games back to back in 3 seasons. I can't understand how that's ok from a coach's or GM's viewpoint. Successful franchises don't do things like this. It just doesn't make sense.  We do not have a top half of the league QB right now. Since we don't have that player, we should be looking for him. Pickett isn't it. Grier isn't it. Bryce hasn't proven he is yet. Until you have that sure fire franchise QB, you keep looking. You're not consistently making the playoffs, a deep run, or a SB appearance without one.  What's the worst that could happen? We end up with 2 potential number 1 QBs? How horrible. 
    • Easy to understand Pickett, if this is anywhere close to on point. Canales wants to get as close to Bryce as he can- get the pace and timing in the throws as close a he can to Bryce. So the other players don’t have to adjust so much, to a new guy.       If Cam was the 1, he would look for a rocket arm.  But Bryce is the 1. Look for limited in the same way.  Low velocity, plenty of air under it, feels just like home when Picket comes in. And you have the guys on the second team not having such a radical adjustment (if they have to play) like with Dalton to Bryce.    Enter Grier. I guess we will collect those types.   
×
×
  • Create New...