The Weird, Wacky and Awesome World of the NFL - General Banter thread

CoachTO

matthew8 wrote: »

The reason I'm asking for your rankings is I'm wondering where you place Welker on a list of the best WRs. He's 4 on mine.

Why did you say you were waiting on it? I don't do rankings in order. I already showed you the list of guys I consider Elite. The position of eliteness is irrelevant. Like I don't split up the QBs individually I group them. Face value right now Calvin Johnson is the best WR in the league.

CoachTO

matthew8 wrote: »

Sure Welker puts up the great stats, but how would he do if he was the only guy who could catch a ball on the team, which is what Fitzgerald is in Arizona and Johnson is in Houston.

So in Arizona who caught the other 2000+ yards and same in Houston who caught the other 3200 yards in 2011? I will tell you who the other outside guy and the 2 sots and Tight ends. Had those teams got a guy like Welker they would have added to those numbers. Saying Welkers numbers are only there because he is not the only one who can catch is stupid because in essence that is what you are saying.

Football is like chess. You depend on one move to create another. If your outside guy is getting locked up you hope your inside guy is using the space or your TE has room. But the yards they catch are still down to their abilities. I guarantee you if the Texans or Cards had Welker you could add another 400+ yards to that number.

You still fail to grasp the importance of having the best guys in every position on the field and the Pats are Very Lucky to have guys like Welker and Gronk and Hernandez and hopefully now Lloyd also this year. Their abilities plus the space that will be created should add to their tallys hopefully.

Welker is Elite no matter what way you swing it. He is important as a slot WR in the same way Fitzy or Johnson or C.Johnson are as outside deep threats.

matthew8

Look, there's no question that Welker is an excellent WR. I'm sure most people can accept that at the very least there's a good argument for the Johnsons and Fitz to be better than him, and I apply the elite term very selectively and there's no point in arguing over something so trivial.

CoachTO

matthew8 wrote: »

Look, there's no question that Welker is an excellent WR. I'm sure most people can accept that at the very least there's a good argument for the Johnsons and Fitz to be better than him, and I apply the elite term very selectively and there's no point in arguing over something so trivial.

Who's arguing? This debate was never about whether or not who the better WRs are i.e Johnson or Fitz or Welker. The comparisons and breakdown only came when you said only deep threats... Oh sorry you changed that as well and said you meant to say had to be able to catch deep etc etc could be elite. Its funny how you wiggle out every time and never discuss the valid points put to you.

davyjose

CoachTO wrote: »

So wait if they don't play well against the Ravens they are basically not Elite in your book because of it? You should really watch more games before you give your opinion. What you just said kind of makes sense more now to me to where all your debates lean.

So basically the other 1000 odd yards that has had Welker in the Top 2 WR for practically 4 of the last 5 years means nothing because he didn't do them against the Ravens. For what its worth the Last 5 seasons:

Welker: 6105 31TD
Fitzy: 6480 49TD
A Johnson: 5073 35TD
C Johnson: 5872 51TD

The reason I threw up those numbers is to rubbish your idea that Deep Threats should only be elite also. The fact Welker is up there with them should stand for something and to be frank Elites only being Deep threat guys is nonsense.

So is Wayne in the argument then? 6234 36TDs

CoachTO

davyjose wrote: »

So is Wayne in the argument then? 6234 36TDs

What argument? I think you are missing the point of those number being put up there. I could have a listed a few more guys there also. But those number were to show Welker as an inside guy holding his own against the deep threat guys. As to why I only used those 4 guys is because Matthew8 brought up the 2 Johnsons and Fitzy and I brought up Welker. As I said to him:

The reason I threw up those numbers is to rubbish your idea that Deep Threats should only be elite also. The fact Welker is up there with them should stand for something and to be frank Elites only being Deep threat guys is nonsense.

The question of Wayne being Elite is anothers days debate.

Justin10

But there is a flip side to this.

Yes Welker or any inside guy can put up elite numbers but can you win with this type of receiver alone.

I dont think you can.

matthew8

CoachTO wrote: »

Who's arguing? This debate was never about whether or not who the better WRs are i.e Johnson or Fitz or Welker. The comparisons and breakdown only came when you said only deep threats... Oh sorry you changed that as well and said you meant to say had to be able to catch deep etc etc could be elite. Its funny how you wiggle out every time and never discuss the valid points put to you.

I didn't say that only deep threats can be elite.

CoachTO

Rochey18 wrote: »

But there is a flip side to this.

Yes Welker or any inside guy can put up elite numbers but can you win with this type of receiver alone.

I dont think you can.

Win what though? Games? Championships? What are we talking? Either way I never said you could or couldn't and in fact it would be hard to either prove or disprove the theory as most successful teams have more than one solid WR and a decent QB. It is a team sport after all.

But you can apply your same logic for a whole compliment of WR i.e 2007 Patriots. Same can be said for a single excellent outside guy on a team full of average other WR. Or a great QB with Average WR or and Excellent offense with a poor defense etc etc etc.

Football is a team sport and every player on the field matters. Its how you put them all togther that counts. You are creating a whole different argument that has nothing to do with the player being an Elite player.

spiralism

eagle eye wrote: »

I often wonder just how good could Dwayne Bowe be? I think he would be up there in the talk for best in the NFL if he was with another team.

When you think of the list of QBs he has had throwing to him

Huard
Croyle
Thigpen
Cassel

I'd love to see him with Brady, Rodgers or Brees.

Having seen Bowe strut his stuff in the AFC west with any old loser at QB over the past few years and against elite cornerbacks too makes me wonder what he'd do with a top QB throwing to him. He won't always be there though, i see him with Rodgers or another elite QB at some point in the future.

Justin10

CoachTO wrote:

Win what though? Games? Championships? What are we talking? Either way I never said you could or couldn't and in fact it would be hard to either prove or disprove the theory as most successful teams have more than one solid WR and a decent QB. It is a team sport after all.

But you can apply your same logic for a whole compliment of WR i.e 2007 Patriots. Same can be said for a single excellent outside guy on a team full of average other WR. Or a great QB with Average WR or and Excellent offense with a poor defense etc etc etc.

Football is a team sport and every player on the field matters. Its how you put them all togther that counts. You are creating a whole different argument that has nothing to do with the player being an Elite player.

Well of course we aint talking about games, any team can win a game.
Im talking championships, I dont think you can win a championship with a slot receiver as your main target.

CoachTO

Rochey18 wrote: »

Well of course we aint talking about games, any team can win a game.
Im talking championships, I dont think you can win a championship with a slot receiver as your main target.

Lets be real here the only way you win a Championship is with a full compliment of players. But this is a stupid debate. You need all the indgredients for an offense to work.

You need the Outside guy to draw coverage to open up the inside and crossing routes. You need an inside guy or TE to draw in Coverage to give the outside guy 1v1 or room over the top. You need a receiving corp that you can spread the ball around.

A championship winning team doesn't depend on one target they depend on many. Look the last 4 Super Bowl Champions. They all had good outside guys and good inside guys. Really no such thing as a "Main Target" anymore. More so a QBs favourite.

Justin10

Yes you need a solid roster but obviously you need a couple of "Elite" players and what im saying is if one of them is a slot receiver without another Elite wide out you wont win anything.

nerd69

Rochey18 wrote: »

Yes you need a solid roster but obviously you need a couple of "Elite" players and what im saying is if one of them is a slot receiver without another Elite wide out you wont win anything.

pats just came within an eli manning of winning a sb with effectively 3 slot recievers

davyjose

CoachTO wrote: »

Who's arguing?

You're joking, right? Arguing is the life blood of this forum.

I'm just throwing my 2c in the "discussion" of elite WR's. I see Wayne's not included and I'm not sure why. He got stuck with the worst QB in the league last season and still put up decent numbers.

Justin10

nerd69 wrote: »

pats just came within an eli manning of winning a sb with effectively 3 slot recievers

Exactly my point, couldn't seal the deal.
Its just too much effort and work to do it over the course of a full game.

CoachTO

nerd69 wrote: »

pats just came within an eli manning of winning a sb with effectively 3 slot recievers

2 of which were TE and Gronk had a fooked up ankle but the Pats prove my point of needing solid guys across the board. Contrary to what most Pats fans tell you many though Branch was enough on one side but lets face it no defense would ever warrant Double coverage on Branch leaving the Giants in the Bowl to concentrate across the middle. You dont need an Elite guy out wide you just need a competent deep runner that if you leave 1v1 he will burn you.

Look at the end of it Rochey you brought it up as this main target nonsense winning a bowl where I never said a slot would be enough on his own. Every Offense needs a good compliment of Wide Reciever and a TE if you are going to win a Superbowl. But the outside guys and the inside guys are as important as each other without one of the ingredients you wont win a bowl. Its that simple.

nerd69

Rochey18 wrote: »

Exactly my point, couldn't seal the deal.
Its just too much effort and work to do it over the course of a full game.

come on if you come within a few mins of winning a sb then you can win a sb you dont discount them because there d was beaten by one of the most clutch players in the league

are you saying they got to the playoffs won there way to the sb but your discounting all of that because of a few mins.

with reguards to your last point (Its just too much effort and work to do it over the course of a full game) they won a lot of games last year

Justin10

Way I see it is, you need a WR who will stretch the field.
I aint seen a team who has won the Super Bowl without one, or a team that has won the Super Bowl with only slot receivers.

New England this year, the Denver game wasnt a game.
Miracle they got past Pittsburgh with their coaches having a brain fart.

If New England had a guy who could stretch the field and get them long yard passes the space that would create for Welker and the TEs would not be able to be handled by any team.

Welker is a great receiver but you have to have him down the list.
Same reason why people have QBs at the top of their list and drafted so early because teams cant win without them

nerd69

Rochey18 wrote: »

Way I see it is, you need a WR who will stretch the field.
I aint seen a team who has won the Super Bowl without one, or a team that has won the Super Bowl with only slot receivers.

New England this year, the Denver game wasnt a game.
Miracle they got past Pittsburgh with their coaches having a brain fart.

If New England had a guy who could stretch the field and get them long yard passes the space that would create for Welker and the TEs would not be able to be handled by any team.

Welker is a great receiver but you have to have him down the list.
Same reason why people have QBs at the top of their list and drafted so early because teams cant win without them

i agree but if the cardinals had adrian peterson at runnin back larry fitz would be better

let me say this i think megatron, andre and fitz are elite

welker is in a 2nd group with wayne desean (if he tries last season was a disgrace) and one or two others

i do think a team can win without a burner at wr but i think a slot guy if he was elite would be able to run every route and be a treat on any route ( the one exception off the top of my head being randy moss)

CoachTO

Rochey18 wrote: »

Way I see it is, you need a WR who will stretch the field.

I agree

I aint seen a team who has won the Super Bowl without one, or a team that has won the Super Bowl with only slot receivers.

And No one said you could with all slots you brought that up.

If New England had a guy who could stretch the field and get them long yard passes the space that would create for Welker and the TEs would not be able to be handled by any team.

No arguments there as I said again we have the best of the best inside all we need now is someone to stretch the field. Lloyd will most likely offer us that. My point is that you dont need an elite one if you have elite guys inside. You just need a solid guy who can stretch a field and a defense will definitely have to take into consideration.

Welker is a great receiver but you have to have him down the list.
Same reason why people have QBs at the top of their list and drafted so early because teams cant win without them

Why because he is a slot WR? That is a daft statement. Receivers are all lumped in one category but you could nearly split it 3 ways. Deep/Possesion/Welker types. Should you take away from Welker and the Possession guys who play just as an important role inside as the guys do outside? No you shouldn't. If you dont have good inside guys you can stretch the field all day and go nowhere if your slots are poor and the TE cant catch.

The stupid thing I am not disagreeing with you on most of it and had you said all of this in the first place rather than saying a Slot wont win you championships and an outside guy will etc etc half the battle would have been done.

The last 4 Superbowl winners had a good mix of guys across the board.

frostie500

Gotta say Im amazed that so many people believe you "need" a deep threat to win the Superbowl. Every team wants a deep threat but look at the stats of recent years. New England went to the Superbowl twice in the last five years. one year with a record setting offence that used Welker for underneath and Randy Moss as the deep threat. Moss is the best deep threat reciever of the last 15 years and yet the Pats were beaten by the Giants.

Last season the Pats had an offence built around utilising tight ends and welker and trying to create the best mismatch possible on every play by getting a linebacker lined up against as many of this trio as possible. They were also beaten by the Giants.

The Packers two years ago had Donald Driver and Greg Jennings along with a stable of decent recievers to win the superbowl. The Steelers in 08 had Santonio Holmes, Hines Ward outside with Heath Miller utilised quite a lot. The Saints in 09 had Marques Colston, Robert Meachem and Devery Henderson combined with a very solid running game. The Giants in 08 had a superb rushing attack combined with a solid recieving corp.

What did these teams all have in common? It wasnt a deep threat, it wasnt a tight end or a slot reciever, it wasnt a change of pace back. Quite simply what all those teams had was a balanced attack with lots of options for the QB to get the ball to.

All those teams had intelligent QBs that could pick apart a defence at its weakest points by analysing the matchup and getting the ball to the right players. Look back to the Cards in 2008. They didnt get to the Superbowl because Larry Fitz is an elite reciever. They got there because he had a superb QB throwing to him but also that the Cards had Anquan Boldin and Steve Breaston as alternative options for Kurt Warner.

---

I can understand why some people think you need to be able to go deep to be an elite reciever but a team also needs to be able to move the chains to win games. That's where having a player like Welker pays off. You need guys with great hands who are willing to go across the middle and makes plays. Welker is without doubt an elite WR. Honestly if, as an Eagles fan, we could have any WR in the league I'd pick Welker. He always seems to get open and rarely drops a pass even after contact

bruschi

matthew8 wrote: »

but for me if the WR is elite they should be a deep threat.

matthew8 wrote: »

I didn't say that only deep threats can be elite.

Pyjamarama

Are people really trying to say that a slot receiver is as valuable as an outside receiver?!?! That's clearly just wrong, some positions are just more important than others. For me Welker isn't even the most important receiver on his team. Gronk is a more dangerous player imo.

Welker drops too many passes for me to consider him elite. He also has Tom Brady the best qb (arguably Manning but for me it's Brady) of the last ten years throwing to him. I'm just not sold that he'd be as effective without a qb who could put it on the money every single time. Thats not to say Welker isn't a fine player but I wouldn't consider him elite (although those mentioning Desaun as the next tier are wrong too, he's one of the most dangerous player in the league when on form but he's got way too many holes in his game)

HigginsJ

frostie500 wrote: »

The Giants in 08 had a superb rushing attack combined with a solid recieving corp.

Plax was pretty special in the playoffs in 08. He was alot more than "solid". If he hadn't been an idiot he could have been one of the best WR's in the league in his prime.

frostie500

HigginsJ wrote: »

Plax was pretty special in the playoffs in 08. He was alot more than "solid". If he hadn't been an idiot he could have been one of the best WR's in the league in his prime.

Plax is a good reciever but in 07 he was a 1000 yard player with the likes of Skockey and Toomer as the complimentary recievers. The Giants werent a team built to dominate through the air that season they were built to get at the QB and run efficiently. That was the point I was looking to make as opposed to anything about individual players. The Giants, just like every recent championship winning team, were built on balance rather than a dependency on a "deep threat" WR

Justin10

I dont think anyone is saying a team has to be dependent on a deep threat.
I do think you need one though to win a Super Bowl.

Plax was considered a top receiver around that time.

HigginsJ

frostie500 wrote: »

Plax is a good reciever but in 07 he was a 1000 yard player with the likes of Skockey and Toomer as the complimentary recievers. The Giants werent a team built to dominate through the air that season they were built to get at the QB and run efficiently. That was the point I was looking to make as opposed to anything about individual players. The Giants, just like every recent championship winning team, were built on balance rather than a dependency on a "deep threat" WR

Fair enough. Wasn't disagreeing, we were def a run 1st team at that point, just pointing out that Plax was class in the playoffs.

CoachTO

Pyjamarama wrote: »

Are people really trying to say that a slot receiver is as valuable as an outside receiver?!?! That's clearly just wrong, some positions are just more important than others. For me Welker isn't even the most important receiver on his team. Gronk is a more dangerous player imo.

This shows nothing but ignorance to the game itself. In modern football the way the ball is spread out and the formations have gone pass orientated all the Receivers and Tight Ends are as important as each other. I have watched many online webinars and talked to many coaches who would agree with me and just look at the Last Superbowl winners and those teams taking part. All tactically built around personnel including their backfield.

The modern game has come a long way in recent years where in days gone teams just worried about the outside guys and not so much the inside guys and Tight ends. Nowadays with teams finding quality in the middle it creates mismatches all over the place if you have that balance across the board.

Take the Giants. They had run game and 2 very good outside guys in Nicks and Manningham and then came along Cruz who they ran out of slot a lot and they had Ballard also throughout most of the season. This helped them spread the ball around a lot and the times their opponents take Nicks out of the game and Cruz then was destroying them on mismatches or Ballard finding open space. What also helped the Giants is Defenses having to also key on those backs.

My point is the modern game depends on these mismatches when teams need to air the ball out and to say a slot WR and TE are not as important as the outside is stupid at best. The last 3 Superbowl winners prove that point. Steelers not so much as their Defense was pivotal in that game against the Cards and in fact the Cards had a very balanced Offense especially across their Receiving corp. Their defense let them down.

nerd69

Pyjamarama wrote: »

Are people really trying to say that a slot receiver is as valuable as an outside receiver?!?! That's clearly just wrong, some positions are just more important than others. For me Welker isn't even the most important receiver on his team. Gronk is a more dangerous player imo.
(although those mentioning Desaun as the next tier are wrong too, he's one of the most dangerous player in the league when on form but he's got way too many holes in his game)

i disagree on both counts a receiver should be abel to play inside and outside if hes elite neither is more important. if your outside player is just going deep hes never going to catch anything because the safety will just stay deep if you need a deep receiver to stretch the field you also need a "slot" receiver to keep the defense from playing 3 deep all day and stopping you the only player that could run deep routes all day was randy moss not even jerry rice could you need to do both.

im an eagles fan so i love jackson but hes not near the level of fitz andre and megatron they can do everything a wr has to do and do it well jackson will not out jump people he is good deep or on a deep slant route but if you put him across the middle more than once or twice hes gona get knocked outa the game hes insane quick and a very good route runner but not elite