They must have liked something about him.

I for one have aproblemn with the notion of not needing an elite receiver due to WCO.

I get it that the ball gets distributed more, but speed , separation, route running, getting open, and catching the ball in traffic is still a valuable asset.

]There are teams with WRs that can do both - ie New England. I think its a head game and that we need to evaualte talent that can perform when its thier time yet not so into the ego that they have to have it all the time, to the point the team suffers less completions because the defense can concentrate on any one wr.

I wonder if this means we will only take 1 WR in the draft and not DOuble Down at the position as most believe.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wonder if this means we will only take 1 WR in
> the draft and not DOuble Down at the position as
> most believe.


Could be but I think we still take at LEAST two wr's in the draft.

GB carried 6 Wr's and 5 TE last year.

Right now we have hartline, bess, Moore, Wallace and Naanee.

I don't think bess has the speed or size for our offense long term so I expect him to be traded.

We could draft 3 wr's if the right guys fall In the draft.

only think I know about this guy is that when he was on SD and I had V Jax and fantasy NeNe always poached his TDs from me. He looked pretty good

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

Bess and Hartline are in the last year of their deals. They are negotiating with Hartline on an extension, but we haven't heard anything about Bess. We have heard that this regime likes receivers who can line up at any WR position and be versatile. That may mean that Bess is on his way out. With his skill set, he is really limited to playing the slot. That may not keep him around here. Moore and Wallace and Pruitt are all lottery tickets. And Gates still has a lot to prove. And Naanee is not going to be handed anything. Given how deep this draft class is at WR, I still think they will take two. But, the second one may come in the 5th round or later. Think someone like Michigan's Junior Hemingway.

bess just reupped the other year, you sure?

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> bess just reupped the other year, you sure?


My bad. He signed a 3 year extension in 2010, but it didn't start until 2011. So, he has two years left. I still wouldn't count on him being here for both of those years, though. It all depends on how he fits in this system.

So you don't need a franchise WR in this offense?

They might want to run that one by Joe Montana and Steve Young.

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

eesti,

Jerry Rice is in a league of his own.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

eesti, I have been lectured about trying to compare the football of the 1980's and have been told that it is totally irrelevant to what is going on today.

I tried to say that Woodley was a lousy QB who because of the team he was around went to the Superbowl and could not win and we added Marino to that team and went back to the SuperBowl without a good defense and got outscored.

I was told that that was a different day and age.

I agree with you about a franchise WR and Montana and Young but if I were you I would expect "incoming" on how what they did in the 80's and 90's is irrelevant today.

STYLE of football, CB. Great players are great players any generation. Come on you know that.

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

OK...surely there are/have been other successful WCO's with Franchise WR's. Just can't think of any right now.

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

LOL....

You are going to be thinking for a loooooong time.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

The Eagles run a west coast system. I think Andy Reid would agree that Desean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin are pretty critical to that offense.

Hokie Phin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Eagles run a west coast system. I think Andy
> Reid would agree that Desean Jackson and Jeremy
> Maclin are pretty critical to that offense.


Sure.

Both are good WR's. Jackson in particular is a terrific talent. But neither is elite, although you could make an argument for Jackson.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/2012 06:56AM by THE Truth.

I think the WCO can accomodate elite WRs, but like Phinjim said, just not the Diva type.

Gary Kubiak runs a west coast passing offense in Houston, which he learned under Shanahan.

If Andre Johnson does not fit the definition of elite WR, then who does?

1. Lets define elite ... in my humble opinion, an elite wide receiver is one who has exceptional skills and exercises them in a manner that makes the team remarkably successful.

Ie James lofton, Jerry Rice, Dwight Clark, Wes Welker, Larry Fitzgerald ...I'd add Desean Jackson too.

2. Then there are those who are elite ... in that they dominate stats and are arguably exceptional in their own right, they tend to dominate attention, require attention, and expect to get a disproprtinate role in the success of the team.

They have exceptional gifts, and perform above the norm, even if their teams do not necessarily perform exceptionally.

Examples: Randy moss, TO (Ochocinco),

3. I'd add one m,ore category that is somewhere in between, and that is receivers with exceptional speed and moves in tandem with a really gifted QB, not necessarily head cases, but gifted none the less.

Mark Clayton and Duper with marino
Donald Driver with Brett Farve
Randy Moss before he got the big head with Culpepper

Bottom line ... my position is the ideal elite WR is both talented and unselfish.

TRUTH ************** Last point ... with all due respect,
> I think the point about WR's in the west coast offense isn't that it doesn't produce elite WR's or that they can't play in it.
> The point is that you don't NEED them for it to be successful.


I have to disagree with this position. They don't have to dominate, they instead do their role and the offense as a whole dominates. Thus the defense has a bigger task trying to figure out who they need to cover.

Still need
1. Precise route running
> 2. Able to catch in traffic
> 3. Unselfish / coachable
> 4. Strong, can catch in traffic & not get
> distracted

IMHO

Chyren, the most recent Steelers Super Bowl winning team did not have a great offensive line. In fact, Roethlisberger was the most sacked QB in the league.

Bottom line, is it is dumbing donw the complexity of WCO to suggest it does not require talented / elite WRs and by the way even better TEs to run a WCO.

Dropping Marshall was dropping a supposedly elite WR, that by the way was raising his percentage of drops, and all the while demanding even more throws to him.

WCO needs talented receivers, but also balanced receivers who can fake a route to draw attention from another receiver ... thus a team win, not just a Marshall win.

looking forward to see what Bess and Hartline do in this scheme ... im thinking its going to be a setp up!

Phinjim Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bottom line, is it is dumbing donw the complexity
> of WCO to suggest it does not require talented /
> elite WRs and by the way even better TEs to run a
> WCO.
>
> Dropping Marshall was dropping a supposedly elite
> WR, that by the way was raising his percentage of
> drops, and all the while demanding even more
> throws to him.
>
> WCO needs talented receivers, but also balanced
> receivers who can fake a route to draw attention
> from another receiver ... thus a team win, not
> just a Marshall win.
>
> looking forward to see what Bess and Hartline do
> in this scheme ... im thinking its going to be a
> setp up!

Chyren, honestly I'm not crazy about Tannehill, but I do think he's a better QB option than anyone on our roster. So with that being said I would be fine drafting Tannehill or the best defensive player available. Just my personal preference, but I love watching great defenses.

Give me a really good QB and a really good defense and you're always going to be relevant . That model has been successful in Pittsburgh for the last decade.

To me, he does not JUSTIFY a number 8 pick.

And that's the whole point.

Some people act as though or only choices are to draft him or not upgrade our team.

We lose a BETTER opportunity to upgrade our team by drafting a quarterback of such QUESTIONABLE value with ONE OF THE TOP TEN PICKS IN THE FIRST ROUND.

Like the Matt Ryan-Jake Long thing, when you draft (even a Matt Ryan who I don't think Tannehill comes close to) you at the same time LOSE THE OPPORTUNITY to draft a Jake Long.

You don't get BOTH.

Also, Hokie, Weeden would be a better option than probably anyone on our roster, an argument could be made. And we wouldn't have to give up the no. 8 for him, only our 2nd round pick (no. 9 from the top of the round) plus one of our 3rd round picks because Weeden probably will go at the bottom of the 1st or the top of the second round. We just need to know our competitors for Weeden and outflank them. But if we DON'T draft Tannehill, he becomes an option himself for such competitors. And if HE IS NOT AN OPTION FOR THEM AND THEY PREFER WEEDEN, WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU ABOUT THE VALUE OF TANNEHILL?

Again, maybe that would not be my way of going if I had my "druthers" but AT LEAST it would be preferable, if you HAVE TO HAVE A QB NOW, than giving up an opportunity to upgrade the team in an additional way by using our number 8 on Tannehill.

I see what you're saying Chyren, I just dont really like Weeden. If you watch alot of college football you see Oklahoma State quarterbacks putting up huge numbers year after year. I think its more a product of Mike Gundy's system than the talent of Weeden.

Personally, after Luck and RG3, I'm not overly impressed with this draft class and I think the talent drop off after Tannehill is substantial.