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!

     

D-Jax Big Possibility of Being Cut

Real Emotional Trash

Recommended Posts

methodtoll Proficient

methodtoll

Posted
Posted

The fact you had to list Steve Smith as an example of a "prototypical" WR along with the amazing likes of Golden Tate tells me that it's false.

Looking at the top 7 WRs last year in yards, it consisted of Josh Gordan (6'3"), Antonio Brown (5'10"), Calvin Johnson (6'5"), Demaryius Thomas (6'3"), A.J. Green (6'4"), Alshon Jeffrey (6'3"), and Andre Johnson (6'3"). The back end of this list contains a few short people (including D-Jax), but it looks like 6"3" is the sweet spot.

Top 10 in TDs? A few tall TEs, Dez Bryant (6'2"), Fitz (6'3"), and Brandon Marshall (6'4").

So no, the prototypical AMAZING WR is not Shorty McShorts. It's guys 6'2" and up.

All I am saying is that height isn't everything. I still will take deceptiveness and quickness and great hands over height. I could care less how tall the guy, if he has the qualities then I feel we will be a dangerous team to watch.

Sent from my XT907 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Billy Love Mentor

Billy Love

Posted
Posted

Actually, 6'2-6'4 is not prototypical in this generation of the NFL. Look around the league: Steve Smith, Wes Walker, DeSean Jackson, Golden Tate are your prototypical receivers now because teams rely on speed and shiftiness as opposed to a big possession receiver.

Size isn't everything and I understand Cam tends to over throw but to me deception and quickness> size, especially if a small guy has a high vertical.

Sent from my XT907 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

You most certainly wrong sir. Completely wrong. The receivers you listed are not considered prototypical "in size" receivers. They are in fact very small...effective, but small.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted

Actually, 6'2-6'4 is not prototypical in this generation of the NFL. Look around the league: Steve Smith, Wes Walker, DeSean Jackson, Golden Tate are your prototypical receivers now because teams rely on speed and shiftiness as opposed to a big possession receiver.

Size isn't everything and I understand Cam tends to over throw but to me deception and quickness> size, especially if a small guy has a high vertical.

Sent from my XT907 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

Its  true that a big vertical can overcome a smaller wingspan but in a vertical passing offense like ours it would seem that size and height would be a distinct advantage. Obviously speed and quickness works no matter the other variables. In spread or west coast offenses or in the slot perhaps quick smaller guys give linebackers or safeties fits but as a number 1 WR playing on the outside against a bigger corner, I would think that guys like Walker or Jackson are clearly not prototypical or even desirable.  Smitty was always the exception to the rule rather than the rule.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
methodtoll Proficient

methodtoll

Posted
Posted

You most certainly wrong sir. Completely wrong. The receivers you listed are not considered prototypical "in size" receivers. They are in fact very small...effective, but small.

I don't think of size as being a prototypical receiver these days. I feel that teams are trying to make the game faster by using shifty guys as oppose to tall, possession guys. Again, I could care less about height as I do about guys who get open and make plays, whether it is 5"10 or 6'4.

Sent from my XT907 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jackofalltrades Proficient

Jackofalltrades

Posted
Posted

I don't think of size as being a prototypical receiver these days. I feel that teams are trying to make the game faster by using shifty guys as oppose to tall, possession guys. Again, I could care less about height as I do about guys who get open and make plays, whether it is 5"10 or 6'4.

Sent from my XT907 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

Prototypical as a word is useless without context. Thus this splendid debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chimera Community Regular

Chimera

Posted
Posted

I'm not going to lie. Going into next year with our receiving corps as:

Jackson

Olsen

Cotchery

Underwood

Rookie receiver

We'd have one of the best receiving corps in the nfl. Good luck covering the different routes we could run.

problem is.....

Shula will still be our OC

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Billy Love Mentor

Billy Love

Posted
Posted

It does help when your receivers actually catch the ball. Cam is not the definition of accurate. But I can't tell you how many "catchable" balls were dropped last year. Knowing cam is not as accurate as we would like...you need to increase the catch radius of your receivers....ie: tall, long arm receivers who can catch. Not midgets!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • tukafan21
      Evero HC requests!

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      Evero to the Raiders makes zero sense unless the OC he's pitching them is a failed HC who doesn't have interest in trying for it again. They're a team about to draft a QB #1 overall, developing him is job #1 for the new coach/staff.  Hiring a DC with a young up and coming OC wouldn't make any sense, because then you risk losing that OC to a HC job after maybe just a year or two and that young QB has to change system, play caller, etc. It's why hiring an offensive minded coach makes the only sense.  The Raiders have to make the right hire/pick with this HC hire and #1 pick combo because of that division they're in, it's a gauntlet and you can't screw up this opportunity.  
    • Khyber53
      Very intrigued how Morgan and Canales handle the offseason

      By Khyber53 · Posted

      1. Sadly, it's just too early to tell with Icky. And the draft will have come and gone before we have anything, FA, too probably. Njiman was good, but there's dollars to be invested there as well. This is really our biggest puzzle to figure out. And Moton on the other flank is getting long in the tooth, too.  2. Coker: Pay the man WR2 money.  3. Most WRs take three years before you really know what you've got. We'll know for sure by the end of this one and he's still on a relatively inexpensive rookie contract. Now if someone comes calling for a good, good trade... 4. This is the make or break for good teams vs bad teams. And depth development is essential. We've had a bit of that but there isn't a spot on our line that doesn't have worries except for maybe on guard.  5. I think you draft the best ILB, the smartest one in the first round and don't look back. People lost their poo here on this board when we "wasted" a pick on Luke Kuechly.  6. Yeah, I think Chuba is a workhorse. But we need to be more decisive in his use. Still not sure Rico doesn't come back next season, too. He'll get to see the marketplace first, though, and we'll offer similar numbers to him.  
    • Anybodyhome
      25-26 NHL Regular Season Thread

      By Anybodyhome · Posted

      I've grown to enjoy Mike & Tripp, even more so after listening to the ESPN, TNT, TBS hacks who, for whatever reason, seemingly don't know dick about the Canes. 
×
×
  • Create New...