- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What's wrong with possession receivers?
Posted on 8/20/13 at 10:37 pm to Patrick O Rly
Posted on 8/20/13 at 10:37 pm to Patrick O Rly
IT doesn't stretch the field. and that is something you want to be able to do.
Posted on 8/21/13 at 9:03 am to SammyTiger
quote:
doesn't stretch the field. and that is something you want to be able to do.
Which makes the possesion receiver better. A team needs both; they are equally important. When NE had Moss and Welker playing at high capacity, that offense was ridiculous. If a defense took out Moss, then Welker gets the ball underneath and has room to gain additional yards.
This is what we need, and we may finally have it
Posted on 8/21/13 at 9:32 am to Midget Death Squad
quote:
hhhh how about you look over in Arizone. Larry Fitzgerland is one of the top 5 best WR's in the league and he's not racking up 2000 yard regardless of who he's throwing the ball.
Posted on 8/21/13 at 9:34 am to Patrick O Rly
Brees' accuracy with the so-called possession receivers is uncanny. Less accurate with the so-called stretching the field receivers.
More accuracy = more yards, longer drives.
Possession receivers are OK in my book.
More accuracy = more yards, longer drives.
Possession receivers are OK in my book.
Posted on 8/21/13 at 9:45 am to liquid rabbit
quote:
Brees' accuracy with the so-called possession receivers is uncanny. Less accurate with the so-called stretching the field receivers.
More accuracy = more yards, longer drives.
Possession receivers are OK in my book.
To be clear, are you advocating ONLY having possession receivers?
Posted on 8/21/13 at 9:51 am to moneyg
Nope. I'm saying they're more important than stretch-the-field guys.
Posted on 8/21/13 at 3:00 pm to Patrick O Rly
quote:You need a mix. The possession guys tend to do better if the defense is stretched.
Seriously, give me a possession receiver every time. If I know a guy will get open, and be on the spot he's suppose to be, and catch the ball 95% of time, give me that guy.
I know many Saints fans have lamented how we don't have a receiver that scares anyone, but what's scarier to an opposing team to have a bunch of guys that do nothing but pick up first downs and move down the field?
In addition, the WR position will take up more roster spots than it provides guys actually targeted- the Saints are expected to keep 5-6 WRs. In reality, if we split out 5 receivers, we're still gonna see a TE (Graham) and a RB (Sproles) on the field, so that leaves only 3 actual WRs (Colston, Moore, Stills/Toon). That's because the odd man out of the Stills/Toon choice won't give us the advantages Graham (size) and Sproles (quickness) give us.
Given that, if we're talking the last couple slots at WR (guys who rarely play on offense), give me athletes who can contribute in other areas. A guy like Roby who is a special teams ace; or like Hakim who WILL beat any deep coverage (he just might not catch it). If Hakim can play well on ST, I think he's a lock.
I'm posting this long opinion in reference to players like Tanner- sure, he's got good hands. He'll never play on offense here, so let him go and keep a gunner or returner, or a speed-burner.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News