PDA

View Full Version : Wide out committee



rainierjef
08-17-2012, 09:33 PM
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000051324/article/eli-manning-hints-at-committee-approach-to-no-3-wr?module=HP11_content_stream

i think GB carries 5-6 maybe 8 lol receivers on their roster.
we might start seeing a little more of the spread Offense in New york if this WR by committee thing is what goes down come season time

we know Nicks/Cruz/Randle and for most parts Jerrnigan is safe who are the next two.
yes i know....."NOT another receiver thread, somebody slit my keyboards wrist."
but i think we can all agree that if you take out the respective QB's of each system NO, GB, PAT's and plug in Eli the numbers in stats won't be that far off; the only thing limiting Eli from going off on these suckas is
1. we are a run first
2. personally i dont think we have th Oline for it
3. we've never had a plethora of receivers with different or situational attributes to pull it off

Now i think we do. you have your speed Slot guys in Cruz/jerrnigan/ Depalma/ Talley
Possesion receivers in Nicks i think hixon falls into this category as well?!?! personally
Big men in randle/stanback/ Barden
and i don't know where to put Collins/ Douglas yet

Eli is a QB that makes his receivers better and if they can get this system down we can have most cornerbacks sounding liek carlos rodgers in the NFCC game when he faced cruz.

i've always felt that eli can be elite in a spread offense its just that we don't run it or never had the WR core for it. this year might be different it will be interesting to see what the roster make up is come beginning of the season.

TheEnigma
08-17-2012, 10:07 PM
Nice post. When you look at the roster and the personnel we have, it could match to a spread offense.

Eli - Top 5 in making reads and adjustments at the line. Goes through his progressions like an NFL QB is supposed to. Can make all the throws.

Bradshaw - Consistently ranked top 5 in pass protection which would be vital from a RB in a spread.

OL - Even though they ranked dead last in pressures allowed, I'd still prefer them in pass blocking over the run game.

WR - Versatility all over. Deep threats, middle of the field, short range...Combined with Eli's awesome defense reading, this is a huge strength.

TE - Work in progress but Bennett is looking good so far and Robinson could contribute in a year or two.

Last but not least...Hynoski! Huge plus to have that pass catching threat from the backfield.

This offense has the potential to score 28+ points a game if everyone can be on the same level. The talent is too great for it not to happen. Oh and I left out Wilson too. Just way too many people on the offensive side of the ball to get excited for.

nhpgiantsfan
08-17-2012, 10:32 PM
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000051324/article/eli-manning-hints-at-committee-approach-to-no-3-wr?module=HP11_content_stream

i think GB carries 5-6 maybe 8 lol receivers on their roster.
we might start seeing a little more of the spread Offense in New york if this WR by committee thing is what goes down come season time

we know Nicks/Cruz/Randle and for most parts Jerrnigan is safe who are the next two.
yes i know....."NOT another receiver thread, somebody slit my keyboards wrist."
but i think we can all agree that if you take out the respective QB's of each system NO, GB, PAT's and plug in Eli the numbers in stats won't be that far off; the only thing limiting Eli from going off on these suckas is
1. we are a run first
2. personally i dont think we have th Oline for it
3. we've never had a plethora of receivers with different or situational attributes to pull it off

Now i think we do. you have your speed Slot guys in Cruz/jerrnigan/ Depalma/ Talley
Possesion receivers in Nicks i think hixon falls into this category as well?!?! personally
Big men in randle/stanback/ Barden
and i don't know where to put Collins/ Douglas yet

Eli is a QB that makes his receivers better and if they can get this system down we can have most cornerbacks sounding liek carlos rodgers in the NFCC game when he faced cruz.

i've always felt that eli can be elite in a spread offense its just that we don't run it or never had the WR core for it. this year might be different it will be interesting to see what the roster make up is come beginning of the season.

I don't think Nicks would appreciate being called a possession receiver. He is as explosive as they come.

And we haven't been a run first team in a few years now. People say it's because we haven't had success in the running game. Well call it what you want, But our QB has 9,000 yards in the past two seasons. This team is built for the verical passing game and we do it better than most teams in the NFL. It is what it is. These ain't your fathers Giants anymore.

rainierjef
08-17-2012, 11:59 PM
I don't think Nicks would appreciate being called a possession receiver. He is as explosive as they come.

And we haven't been a run first team in a few years now. People say it's because we haven't had success in the running game. Well call it what you want, But our QB has 9,000 yards in the past two seasons. This team is built for the verical passing game and we do it better than most teams in the NFL. It is what it is. These ain't your fathers Giants anymore.

hakeem nick did not run an explosive 40 time he has after the catch break away speed but he is not a burner like cruz (4.42-4.49) he was drafted cause of his catching ability at NC he is a possession receiver. non debatable

now as far as us being a run first, you might be right to a degree since 2007 where we had 2000+ rushing yards and in 2008 where we had two 1000 yd rushers for a total of 2500+, 1800+ the next year, then 2200 the year after that. that brings us to ( 2010) then we had 1427 last year. personally i don't think the philosophy has changed we are still the run first play action offense, we might see that change up this year like it did last year but to say a team a has changed its offensive philosophy you would have to see that consistently for more than 3 seasons just one or two won't really say much.

this is all in my opinion

NYGiants1411
08-18-2012, 12:16 AM
I don't think Nicks would appreciate being called a possession receiver. He is as explosive as they come.

And we haven't been a run first team in a few years now. People say it's because we haven't had success in the running game. Well call it what you want, But our QB has 9,000 yards in the past two seasons. This team is built for the verical passing game and we do it better than most teams in the NFL. It is what it is. These ain't your fathers Giants anymore.

Agree completely. We must adjust to how teams are evolving in the NFL. With all these QBs out there that can tear apart whatever defense they face, we need to keep up with them and a run first team doesn't cut it. It's extremely difficult to score 28-35 points while being a run first team. It shows with the way this team is evolving. Eli and his wide range of weapons should be enough to keep up with and outscore these powerful offenses that are popping up everywhere. While keeping up with the scoring, a defense that can simply slow down these QBs will then result in wins. This is exactly what we have and it's a great thing to watch.

giantsfan420
08-18-2012, 12:55 AM
id say cruz is more "possession" wr than Nicks. both have downfield ability but i believe nicks is more of a threat in that aspect while cruz is more of an underneath YAC threat. Cruz works a lot from the slot and usually that means he's getting open as fast as possible...smith played from the slot like cruz but he just didnt have near the big play ability. cruz is a big play possession wr imo. nicks is a legit downfield threat possession type wr

i mean both are really possession wr's in that they can give u 10 plus catches any given day for over a buck, but both can also burn u deep and with YAC

miked1958
08-18-2012, 01:20 AM
I don't know how many of them we can keep or hide on practice squad or pup.. We seem to have to much talent and not enough space on roster for them all

giantsfan420
08-18-2012, 01:26 AM
great problem to have

TheEnigma
08-18-2012, 01:29 AM
We have a better pass rush compared to the other elite offenses as well. In fact, with a defense that is more suited to stop the pass than the run, it only makes sense for us to adapt that "Quick strike and gain the lead" mentality. The bigger the lead we get, the more we force the opponent to pass the ball and in turn, we use our best players more often.

rainierjef
08-18-2012, 01:34 AM
^ exactly, if this team can start gaining big leads and keeping them with the run the defense can tee off on opposing offenses then we can see the true destructive nature of our front four

G.I. Ants
08-18-2012, 02:47 AM
The offense looks really solid but make no mistake, this team will not be blowing teams out in the regular season. The coaching staff will continue to develop the run game to open up the pass. Excellent strategy by not messing with the success.

The WR competition is crazy though: Nicks, Cruz, Hixon, JJ12, RR82, Barden & Stanback might be the final roster. I think Douglass and Talley will be placed on the practice squad to hide them from the competition.

BlueSanta
08-18-2012, 03:04 AM
hakeem nick did not run an explosive 40 time he has after the catch break away speed but he is not a burner like cruz (4.42-4.49) he was drafted cause of his catching ability at NC he is a possession receiver. non debatable

now as far as us being a run first, you might be right to a degree since 2007 where we had 2000+ rushing yards and in 2008 where we had two 1000 yd rushers for a total of 2500+, 1800+ the next year, then 2200 the year after that. that brings us to ( 2010) then we had 1427 last year. personally i don't think the philosophy has changed we are still the run first play action offense, we might see that change up this year like it did last year but to say a team a has changed its offensive philosophy you would have to see that consistently for more than 3 seasons just one or two won't really say much.

this is all in my opinion

Well 1st off lemme say I hate the term "possession reciever." It is a term because it carries with it a meaning that is limmiting.

But, having said that 40 time does not determine if a guy is a possession receiver and Nicks is not a possession reciever. Nicks can be a possession guy but he certainly is not only that. A guy who average 15+ yards per catch is not a possession guy. 40 time is only a factor, but not the defining 1. People forget Plaxico ran 4.59, and its hard to say he was a possession receiver.

I also do not think we have been a run 1st offense since perhaps 2008. We are a balanced team, or at least we try to be according to the coaches.

greenca190
08-18-2012, 03:06 AM
hakeem nick did not run an explosive 40 time he has after the catch break away speed but he is not a burner like cruz (4.42-4.49) he was drafted cause of his catching ability at NC he is a possession receiver. non debatable

now as far as us being a run first, you might be right to a degree since 2007 where we had 2000+ rushing yards and in 2008 where we had two 1000 yd rushers for a total of 2500+, 1800+ the next year, then 2200 the year after that. that brings us to ( 2010) then we had 1427 last year. personally i don't think the philosophy has changed we are still the run first play action offense, we might see that change up this year like it did last year but to say a team a has changed its offensive philosophy you would have to see that consistently for more than 3 seasons just one or two won't really say much.

this is all in my opinion

Uhh. No. Very debatable.

Hakeem Nicks is one of the most complete wide receivers in the league. And he was solely drafted because of his catching ability? The guy is a wide receiver. I hope he can catch.

rainierjef
08-18-2012, 03:38 AM
Uhh. No. Very debatable.

Hakeem Nicks is one of the most complete wide receivers in the league. And he was solely drafted because of his catching ability? The guy is a wide receiver. I hope he can catch.

not the fastest receiver.
good route runner,
great catching ability,
not every receiver coming out of the draft or transitioning from college to the pro, is a great receiver where their catch radius and percentage are stellar.
just because you can catch 5/10 balls don't make your skills great, nicks is a great possession receiver

rainierjef
08-18-2012, 03:59 AM
Well 1st off lemme say I hate the term "possession reciever." It is a term because it carries with it a meaning that is limmiting.

But, having said that 40 time does not determine if a guy is a possession receiver and Nicks is not a possession reciever. Nicks can be a possession guy but he certainly is not only that. A guy who average 15+ yards per catch is not a possession guy. 40 time is only a factor, but not the defining 1. People forget Plaxico ran 4.59, and its hard to say he was a possession receiver.

I also do not think we have been a run 1st offense since perhaps 2008. We are a balanced team, or at least we try to be according to the coaches.

lol why are you guys acting like possession receivers are a bad thing, they are great you know they are going to make the tough catches, and they run crisp routes, most QB's are looking for the possession receiver first, i.e eli to smith. nick is not the fastest receiver but with those hands and concentration and knowledge ofthis offense he catches most of what comes his way and runs good routes he knows how to get seperation using those routes and has break away speed but he doesn't have off the line speed. and as far as the run first offense; to be a pass first offense you have to have more spread whether that be 4 wide or trips, more shoutgun looks . i just didn't see that, to me last year we opened up as a more vertical threat than a run threat, and i expect us to do it more this year.

BlueSanta
08-18-2012, 06:20 AM
lol why are you guys acting like possession receivers are a bad thing, they are great you know they are going to make the tough catches, and they run crisp routes, most QB's are looking for the possession receiver first, i.e eli to smith. nick is not the fastest receiver but with those hands and concentration and knowledge ofthis offense he catches most of what comes his way and runs good routes he knows how to get seperation using those routes and has break away speed but he doesn't have off the line speed. and as far as the run first offense; to be a pass first offense you have to have more spread whether that be 4 wide or trips, more shoutgun looks . i just didn't see that, to me last year we opened up as a more vertical threat than a run threat, and i expect us to do it more this year.

Could you point me to the part that I said it is a bad thing? I simply said he isnt just a possession reciever. Again, you said he was a possession reciever based on his 40 time( seriously?) so then again I ask you was Plaxico Burress also a possession reciever since he ran a full tenth of a second slower than Nicks? Furthermore, since when do possession recievers average almost 16 yards per catch?

Steve Smith was a great possession receiver for us. Towards the end of his career, Toomer was also a good possession receiver. I have no problem with a possession receivers. I have a problem with you saying that Nicks is a possession receiver, especially based on such bogus criteria as his 40 time, because he so clearly more then just that. He is a very dangerous deep threat and he is a very good yards after catch reciever on top of being a good possession guy.

rainierjef
08-18-2012, 06:46 AM
Well 1st off lemme say I hate the term "possession reciever." It is a term because it carries with it a meaning that is limmiting.


end quote.....

rainierjef
08-18-2012, 06:49 AM
Could you point me to the part that I said it is a bad thing? I simply said he isnt just a possession reciever. Again, you said he was a possession reciever based on his 40 time( seriously?) so then again I ask you was Plaxico Burress also a possession reciever since he ran a full tenth of a second slower than Nicks? Furthermore, since when do possession recievers average almost 16 yards per catch?

Steve Smith was a great possession receiver for us. Towards the end of his career, Toomer was also a good possession receiver. I have no problem with a possession receivers. I have a problem with you saying that Nicks is a possession receiver, especially based on such bogus criteria as his 40 time, because he so clearly more then just that. He is a very dangerous deep threat and he is a very good yards after catch reciever on top of being a good possession guy.

no i said he was a possession receiver based on his catch radius/ catch rate or percentile and that he runs crisp routes. i annotated his run time to quell the notion that he is a speedster off the line he has the after burners yes but initial speed no. doesn't make him a bad receiver look at heyward bey great run time terrible receiver.

since they can gain YAC? i don't quite understand where your going with your argument. nicks catches the ball and he makes plays after the catch. maybe people are looking at steve smith and saying well he was a possession receiver but didn't gain much yards after the catch so that's what a possession receiver does? catch the ball then falls down. i am not saying that

nicks catches 8-9/10 balls thrown his way tough catches, juggling catches, ones where he knows hes going to get planted after the catch and he makes plays after the catch that's a possession receiver key word possession. i really dont understand why this is a debate.

by the way wes welker is a possession receiver and he has a lot of YAC as well.

giantsfan420
08-18-2012, 10:19 AM
no i said he was a possession receiver based on his catch radius/ catch rate or percentile and that he runs crisp routes. i annotated his run time to quell the notion that he is a speedster off the line he has the after burners yes but initial speed no. doesn't make him a bad receiver look at heyward bey great run time terrible receiver.

since they can gain YAC? i don't quite understand where your going with your argument. nicks catches the ball and he makes plays after the catch. maybe people are looking at steve smith and saying well he was a possession receiver but didn't gain much yards after the catch so that's what a possession receiver does? catch the ball then falls down. i am not saying that

nicks catches 8-9/10 balls thrown his way tough catches, juggling catches, ones where he knows hes going to get planted after the catch and he makes plays after the catch that's a possession receiver key word possession. i really dont understand why this is a debate.

by the way wes welker is a possession receiver and he has a lot of YAC as well.

bc by ur definition of possession wr applies to practically every wr in the league.
a possession wr isnt a downfield big play threat. they are chain movers. barely any YAC...just crisp routes. while nicks certainly does run crisp routes, his ability to get downfield, or ru intermediate routes, kinda makes him way more than a possession wr. i dont think that term is a bad thing, but it still doesnt change that it isnt the proper way to describe nicks play.

really, cruz would be considered the possession wr before nicks. yeah cruz has a bunch of huge YAC plays, but they usually come off an underneath route at the markers that cruz will then make the defenders miss on his way to the house. when ur lining up out of the slot, ur gonna be used to run routes at the 1rst down marker and make sure u get into open space as quick as possible.

ill just say both are wrs who can give u possession play, as well as downfield, big play YAC style of play.

GameTime
08-18-2012, 10:28 AM
the biggest issue with the WR by committee is the complexity of the Giants passing game. The routes and what the WR sees has to be spot on with what Eli is seeing. Trying get that consistently out of 5 or 6 players would not be easy. Plus what have we all said about Eli or any other QB about having a chemistry with a reciever. With 5 or 6 guys rotating in and out that would be almost impossible.

rainierjef
08-18-2012, 10:45 AM
the biggest issue with the WR by committee is the complexity of the Giants passing game. The routes and what the WR sees has to be spot on with what Eli is seeing. Trying get that consistently out of 5 or 6 players would not be easy. Plus what have we all said about Eli or any other QB about having a chemistry with a reciever. With 5 or 6 guys rotating in and out that would be almost impossible.

i hear you. eli's number one rule is get open, eli reads the field with the best of them i think he can do it. its just a matter of getting the receivers on board learning the routes, which shouldn't be a problem for cruz,nicks,barden, hixon they should know the playbook like the back of their palm right now. its getting whomever the next two on the roster going to be spun up.

"... I think that's why you usually carry six receivers, so you can put guys in certain spots, have them do what they do best." this is what eli said int he link, mismatching guys on the field like having cruz and nicks on the outside and JJ and randle / barden slot can create mismatches that would spread the defense thin someone is going to abuse a defender, i think eli can make that system work, but your right its up to the receivers to get in sync with him.

jomo
08-18-2012, 11:01 AM
Either Jernigan or Barden will not make the final roster. Just an educated hunch. Neither has an edge because neither has distinguished themself on special teams.

rainierjef
08-18-2012, 11:05 AM
Either Jernigan or Barden will not make the final roster. Just an educated hunch. Neither has an edge because neither has distinguished themself on special teams.

damn jomo you cutting Jerrnigan, i thought he would at least have one more safe year on his belt lol.
but i agree if they ain't contributing to the ST cause and not showing nothing in games guys like Collins and Douglas are waiting to step up!

GameTime
08-18-2012, 11:19 AM
i hear you. eli's number one rule is get open, eli reads the field with the best of them i think he can do it. its just a matter of getting the receivers on board learning the routes, which shouldn't be a problem for cruz,nicks,barden, hixon they should know the playbook like the back of their palm right now. its getting whomever the next two on the roster going to be spun up.

"... I think that's why you usually carry six receivers, so you can put guys in certain spots, have them do what they do best." this is what eli said int he link, mismatching guys on the field like having cruz and nicks on the outside and JJ and randle / barden slot can create mismatches that would spread the defense thin someone is going to abuse a defender, i think eli can make that system work, but your right its up to the receivers to get in sync with him.

knowing the play book and executing it are two distinct things......

rainierjef
08-18-2012, 11:23 AM
knowing the play book and executing it are two distinct things......

well just cruz and nicks then maybe hixon

nhpgiantsfan
08-18-2012, 12:04 PM
The best example of a possession receiver that I can think of is Wayne Chrebet. Nothing like Nicks. Just because you have amazing hands, it doesn't mean you are a possession receiver. The term was given to guys who don't really make big plays but can be counted on to move the chains on third down. Kind of like when people used the phrase "3rd down & Steve Smith."

ELIte4MVP
08-18-2012, 12:57 PM
i like your thinking ranier. between nicks, cruz, randle, hixon, and jernigan, i think we have 5 wide receivers who would be top 3 on any teams depth chart. then throw in mystery guys like depalma and douglas (can't wait to see this kid tonight), we definitely could have lots of depth at the position. don't forget bennett also. I mean, if you have most of these guys on the field at the same time (even depalma or douglas) with other receiving threats, even if they are the last or second to last read, you don't think they'd be able to get open? its a great problem to have like someone else said

BeatYale
08-18-2012, 01:03 PM
hakeem nick did not run an explosive 40 time he has after the catch break away speed but he is not a burner like cruz (4.42-4.49) he was drafted cause of his catching ability at NC he is a possession receiver. non debatable


Yet he's made plenty of big plays after the catch and along the sidelines since entering the NFL. Regardless of his 40 time or the label he had as a possession/slot-type receiver coming into the NFL, that isn't what his potential was limited to. These guys were all part time athletes in college, at the pro level they can expand their craft.

nhpgiantsfan
08-18-2012, 01:39 PM
As far as this WR by committee talk. I would think if Randle becomes what everyone within the organization and media think he will become, then his will be a non issue. I understand the idea right now as Randle is a rookie,but I fully expect I'm to emerge as the permanent #3 if it at some point this year, then def next year.

BlueSanta
08-18-2012, 02:00 PM
end quote.....
Lol you do understand hating the term possession receiver and hating possession receivers themselves is not the same thing right?

BlueSanta
08-18-2012, 02:10 PM
end quote.....


no i said he was a possession receiver based on his catch radius/ catch rate or percentile and that he runs crisp routes.

No you tried to backpedal off your initial statement and change your definition later in the thread once you realized how silly your statement was. Here is what you said as the reason he is a possession receiver in your 1st post in the thread.



hakeem nick did not run an explosive 40 time he has after the catch break away speed but he is not a burner like cruz (4.42-4.49) he was drafted cause of his catching ability at NC he is a possession receiver. non debatable


So, based on his 40 time, he is a possession receiver "non debatable."Your words, not mine.

So again, I ask you since you refuse to answer. Was Plaxico Burress a possession receiver? He ran even slower than Nicks, so according to your own definition, he must have been. Same with Brandon Marshal since he ran a 4.55. Btw, in his final year at NC, Nicks averaged 18 yards per catch. LOL that is some possession receiver.

But, I can't blame you for backpedalling from this initial statement. It really is that stupid.

giantsfan420
08-18-2012, 02:17 PM
No you tried to backpedal off your initial statement and change your definition later in the thread once you realized how silly your statement was. Here is what you said as the reason he is a possession receiver in your 1st post in the thread.



So, based on his 40 time, he is a possession receiver "non debatable."Your words, not mine.

So again, I ask you since you refuse to answer. Was Plaxico Burress a possession receiver? He ran even slower than Nicks, so according to your own definition, he must have been. Same with Brandon Marshal since he ran a 4.55. Btw, in his final year at NC, Nicks averaged 18 yards per catch. LOL that is some possession receiver.

But, I can't blame you for backpedalling from this initial statement. It really is that stupid.

lol well played. i like the original post but i too, like everyone else, disagree strongly with the possession wr remark

while nicks can help extend possessions, he is way more than just a possession wr, 40 time be damned

BlueReign
08-18-2012, 02:51 PM
Don't like WR by committee. Makes the offense predictable.

jomo
08-18-2012, 02:54 PM
damn jomo you cutting Jerrnigan, i thought he would at least have one more safe year on his belt lol.
but i agree if they ain't contributing to the ST cause and not showing nothing in games guys like Collins and Douglas are waiting to step up!Well, you are making my point, I think lol. Douglas and Collins have had good camps and the numbers game may squeeze out one of the first 2. I agree that Jernigan is the less likely, only his second year and in fairness hasn't had much time to show his stuff. Barden is running out of time fast.

rainierjef
08-18-2012, 05:33 PM
No you tried to backpedal off your initial statement and change your definition later in the thread once you realized how silly your statement was. Here is what you said as the reason he is a possession receiver in your 1st post in the thread.



So, based on his 40 time, he is a possession receiver "non debatable."Your words, not mine.

So again, I ask you since you refuse to answer. Was Plaxico Burress a possession receiver? He ran even slower than Nicks, so according to your own definition, he must have been. Same with Brandon Marshal since he ran a 4.55. Btw, in his final year at NC, Nicks averaged 18 yards per catch. LOL that is some possession receiver.

But, I can't blame you for backpedalling from this initial statement. It really is that stupid.


the reason i did not answer that is cuase if i am going to debate with you stay on topic, plax was not something i brought up. the topic was you hate the term possession receiver and me labeling nicks as one. i never changed my definition if you read logically and stop getting all emo over it talking about you absolutely hate this term, and look at it from a objective stance you would understand why i said hey! " nicks is not a burner guy he didn't run a fast forty time, but he runs crisp routes which helps him get separation from receivers and he has ATC speed but almost everything thrown his way is caught, hence possession."

wes welker is a possession receiver that has ATC speed he catches almost everything thrown his way and he ran a 4.65 smfh

no one back pedaled you did the same thing most emotional people on here do focused on one part of the paragraph and tee-off on just that.

like i said i brought up 40 time to quell any notion that he is this burner type threat, now does he have the ability to do that yeah we've seen it, is he a play maker yeah definitely, but he does that running the routes exactly as they were designed, great route runners don't need fast twitch muscle speed. someone said he's a complete receiver sure i'll take that but he's possession first. huge catch radius, big hands, runs good-great routes, knows how to separate in and out of his cuts, catches the ball at all axises. possession!

@ NC how many balls did he catch, how many were thrown his way, Whats the percentage? to get a full understanding of his stats at college and that YPC number i need those as well as well as his YAC.

i don't think you know what the meaning of possession receiver is, i think you already have this negative connotation of the word and its disturbing you to no end that your resorting to calling my opinion stupid. whatever guy i'm not going down that emotional roller coaster with you on this and turn this into a 10+ thread of stay free tampon rage. if you can't stay on topic and refrain from that type of talk don't even bother responding as i'll just ignore it and don't take that as we'll he's backing down like you did the first time as me backpedaling. come correct or don't come at all.

rainierjef
08-18-2012, 05:38 PM
Don't like WR by committee. Makes the offense predictable.

it could be a wrinkle in the offense but i hear you. i rather stay with the run first play action pass game, but the nfl is evolving and its a copy cat league, we will see this year how it shakes out.

nhpgiantsfan
08-18-2012, 05:52 PM
the reason i did not answer that is cuase if i am going to debate with you stay on topic, plax was not something i brought up. the topic was you hate the term possession receiver and me labeling nicks as one. i never changed my definition if you read logically and stop getting all emo over it talking about you absolutely hate this term, and look at it from a objective stance you would understand why i said hey! " nicks is not a burner guy he didn't run a fast forty time, but he runs crisp routes which helps him get separation from receivers and he has ATC speed but almost everything thrown his way is caught, hence possession."

wes welker is a possession receiver that has ATC speed he catches almost everything thrown his way and he ran a 4.65 smfh

no one back pedaled you did the same thing most emotional people on here do focused on one part of the paragraph and tee-off on just that.

like i said i brought up 40 time to quell any notion that he is this burner type threat, now does he have the ability to do that yeah we've seen it, is he a play maker yeah definitely, but he does that running the routes exactly as they were designed, great route runners don't need fast twitch muscle speed. someone said he's a complete receiver sure i'll take that but he's possession first. huge catch radius, big hands, runs good-great routes, knows how to separate in and out of his cuts, catches the ball at all axises. possession!

@ NC how many balls did he catch, how many were thrown his way, Whats the percentage? to get a full understanding of his stats at college and that YPC number i need those as well as well as his YAC.

i don't think you know what the meaning of possession receiver is, i think you already have this negative connotation of the word and its disturbing you to no end that your resorting to calling my opinion stupid. whatever guy i'm not going down that emotional roller coaster with you on this and turn this into a 10+ thread of stay free tampon rage. if you can't stay on topic and refrain from that type of talk don't even bother responding as i'll just ignore it and don't take that as we'll he's backing down like you did the first time as me backpedaling. come correct or don't come at all.

Actually every one else that has posted here has tried to explain to you that your use of the term possession receiver in regards to Nicks is wrong.

The term "possession receiver" was coined to describe that type of WR that is like the QB's security blanket. The guy that you almost know every time on 3&6, he is getting the ball. A guy that is usually not a deep threat. A guy that is not afraid of getting popped in the middle of the field. Guys like Chrebet, SS12, Toomer at the end of is career, even Ike to a degree. Nicks absolutely does not fall into this category.

He is the total package. Great routes, outstanding huge hands, explosiveness, the total package. He is one of the best WRs in the game.

rainierjef
08-18-2012, 06:03 PM
Actually every one else that has posted here has tried to explain to you that your use of the term possession receiver in regards to Nicks is wrong.

The term "possession receiver" was coined to describe that type of WR that is like the QB's security blanket. The guy that you almost know every time on 3&6, he is getting the ball. A guy that is usually not a deep threat. A guy that is not afraid of getting popped in the middle of the field. Guys like Chrebet, SS12, Toomer at the end of is career, even Ike to a degree. Nicks absolutely does not fall into this category.

He is the total package. Great routes, outstanding huge hands, explosiveness, the total package. He is one of the best WRs in the game.

and nicks is not a security blanket for eli
hes not afraid of catching the ball in the middle of the field knowing hes going to take a hit

toomer was a deep threat at times .

you say hes the total package but you just limited him in your assessment. make up your mind
for the explosive speed he does not have off the line speed he has after the catch speed
everything else you said was right on with what i'm saying.

i just don't understand the negative nature of calling someone a possession receiver, go goggle hakeem nicks possession receiver and most analyst would agree he is one. but to each its own.

smfh i am sorry for calling nicks a possession receiver guys i didn't know it was going to create a water show, i'll find a better term for a receiver that has a huge catch radius, great hands, runs great routes and knows how to get separation without straight line speed like a cruz.

BlueSanta
08-18-2012, 06:25 PM
end quote.....


the reason i did not answer that is cuase if i am going to debate with you stay on topic, plax was not something i brought up. the topic was you hate the term possession receiver and me labeling nicks as one. i never changed my definition if you read logically and stop getting all emo over it talking about you absolutely hate this term, and look at it from a objective stance you would understand why i said hey! .

Huh? You set the topic by saying Nicks is a possession receiver based on his 40 time. That is what I replied to. That is the topic. Ill quote for you again:


hakeem nick did not run an explosive 40 time he has after the catch break away speed but he is not a burner like cruz (4.42-4.49) he was drafted cause of his catching ability at NC he is a possession receiver. non debatable



That is what I, and many others responded negatively to. It is not off topic to then ask why, since it "isnt debatable" that Nicks is a possession receiver in your mind, all the other guys who ran slow 40 times aren't also possession receivers.

I also like how you bring up Wes Welker(who btw was rumored to be injured for his 40 time) to support your arugment. But me bringing up a guy like Plax or Brandon Marshal is "off topic" in your eyes.

Please, you have been shown to be wrong on so many levels Ill review some of your uneducated remarks:.

-You said Nicks was a possession receiver in college. Stats and YPC clearly refute this. 18 ypc is all that needs to be said.

-You said that is why we drafted him. No sir, we drafted him to replace the all around physical presence of Plaxico. We had Steve Smith as our possession guy back then.

-You said he is a possession receiver based on his 40 time. It was the premise for your entire arguement. But that argument makes no sense at all and there are a million examples of fast guys who were possession Wrs and slower guys who were deep threats. Therefor, you entire point in every way is just WRONG. Im sorry and Im not being "emo" as you put it. You saying something dumb does not make everyone else emo for pointing out your fallacy.

giantsfan420
08-18-2012, 06:36 PM
Huh? You set the topic by saying Nicks is a possession receiver based on his 40 time. That is what I replied to. That is the topic. Ill quote for you again:



That is what I, and many others responded negatively to. It is not off topic to then ask why, since it "isnt debatable" that Nicks is a possession receiver in your mind, all the other guys who ran slow 40 times aren't also possession receivers.

I also like how you bring up Wes Welker(who btw was rumored to be injured for his 40 time) to support your arugment. But me bringing up a guy like Plax or Brandon Marshal is "off topic" in your eyes.

Please, you have been shown to be wrong on so many levels Ill review some of your uneducated remarks:.

-You said Nicks was a possession receiver in college. Stats and YPC clearly refute this. 18 ypc is all that needs to be said.

-You said that is why we drafted him. No sir, we drafted him to replace the all around physical presence of Plaxico. We had Steve Smith as our possession guy back then.

-You said he is a possession receiver based on his 40 time. It was the premise for your entire arguement. But that argument makes no sense at all and there are a million examples of fast guys who were possession Wrs and slower guys who were deep threats. Therefor, you entire point in every way is just WRONG. Im sorry and Im not being "emo" as you put it. You saying something dumb does not make everyone else emo for pointing out your fallacy.

bam! well said

giantsfan420
08-18-2012, 06:37 PM
and nicks is not a security blanket for eli
hes not afraid of catching the ball in the middle of the field knowing hes going to take a hit

toomer was a deep threat at times .

you say hes the total package but you just limited him in your assessment. make up your mind
for the explosive speed he does not have off the line speed he has after the catch speed
everything else you said was right on with what i'm saying.

i just don't understand the negative nature of calling someone a possession receiver, go goggle hakeem nicks possession receiver and most analyst would agree he is one. but to each its own.

smfh i am sorry for calling nicks a possession receiver guys i didn't know it was going to create a water show, i'll find a better term for a receiver that has a huge catch radius, great hands, runs great routes and knows how to get separation without straight line speed like a cruz.

i dont know what nicks you are watching but the one i watch most def has straight line speed

giantsfan420
08-18-2012, 06:39 PM
i don't think you know what the meaning of possession receiver is, i think you already have this negative connotation of the word and its disturbing you to no end that your resorting to calling my opinion stupid. whatever guy i'm not going down that emotional roller coaster with you on this and turn this into a 10+ thread of stay free tampon rage. if you can't stay on topic and refrain from that type of talk don't even bother responding as i'll just ignore it and don't take that as we'll he's backing down like you did the first time as me backpedaling. come correct or don't come at all.

actually i dont know if u understand the term bc anyone who catches the ball is a possession wr by your definition...

and why do you always say someone has a tampon or is emo when they challenge (and honestly disprove) a claim you make? you are the one taken it to an "emo" level claiming that of people bc they state on opinion that differs from urs...

rainierjef
08-18-2012, 06:50 PM
Huh? You set the topic by saying Nicks is a possession receiver based on his 40 time. That is what I replied to. That is the topic. Ill quote for you again:

that was in response to nhpgiantsfan calling him explosive. he is not an explosive receiver off the line guy the rest you can sort out yourself as, your using a slippery slop method to tangle up the debate and i am not that stupid to fall for it.

nick a possession receiver running a 4.5 40 does not = all receiver who run a similar number as possession receivers. stay on course

Fritzgerald/ anquan boldin are possession receivers that can get you YAC. Marshall is more of a physical receiver over powers defenders has possession ability as well.

please post all his college stats since you researched them to prove your claim i told you int he post before what i would like to see or needed to discuss that.

nicks coming out of college did not have the typical speed you looked for in a Y/Z receiver, he was physical. he projected best at the X cause he was a possession receiver that can make plays after the catch much like the guys i mentioned in wes, fritz, boldin. ( i dont now why they were drafted or picked up to their selective teams... i am using analogies)

once again you are going off of one thing this 40 time, i said that to refute explosiveness and i have stated that to you multiple times before its either you don't care or are just not reading what i am posting and your determined to get some sort of satisfaction is proving I've back pedaled.

nhpgiantsfan said: "He is as explosive as they come."
i responded: " hakeem nick did not run an explosive 40 time"

see the common word there? explosive that's what i am refuting.

then i went on to say he was drafted for his catching ability i.e his high percentage catch rate, his ability to get the ball if thrown behind him or at its highest point; his catch radius.

separate the arguments sir.

an analyst once said: "Average possession receivers are fungible; good ones are valuable."
and nicks is a good possession receiver.

sigh. we don't agree and your referring to what i post as being dumb or stupid, like i said before i am not interested in going down that road with you especially on game day a happy day for me. have a nice one

nhpgiantsfan
08-18-2012, 07:40 PM
that was in response to nhpgiantsfan calling him explosive. he is not an explosive receiver off the line guy the rest you can sort out yourself as, your using a slippery slop method to tangle up the debate and i am not that stupid to fall for it.

nick a possession receiver running a 4.5 40 does not = all receiver who run a similar number as possession receivers. stay on course

Fritzgerald/ anquan boldin are possession receivers that can get you YAC. Marshall is more of a physical receiver over powers defenders has possession ability as well.

please post all his college stats since you researched them to prove your claim i told you int he post before what i would like to see or needed to discuss that.

nicks coming out of college did not have the typical speed you looked for in a Y/Z receiver, he was physical. he projected best at the X cause he was a possession receiver that can make plays after the catch much like the guys i mentioned in wes, fritz, boldin. ( i dont now why they were drafted or picked up to their selective teams... i am using analogies)

once again you are going off of one thing this 40 time, i said that to refute explosiveness and i have stated that to you multiple times before its either you don't care or are just not reading what i am posting and your determined to get some sort of satisfaction is proving I've back pedaled.

nhpgiantsfan said: "He is as explosive as they come."
i responded: " hakeem nick did not run an explosive 40 time"

see the common word there? explosive that's what i am refuting.

then i went on to say he was drafted for his catching ability i.e his high percentage catch rate, his ability to get the ball if thrown behind him or at its highest point; his catch radius.

separate the arguments sir.

an analyst once said: "Average possession receivers are fungible; good ones are valuable."
and nicks is a good possession receiver.

sigh. we don't agree and your referring to what i post as being dumb or stupid, like i said before i am not interested in going down that road with you especially on game day a happy day for me. have a nice one

He sure looked explosive when he split the DB's against Atlanta in the playoffs.

I think you do a good job of describing Nicks for the most part. I think you are confusing people because you used a term that is typically used to describe a different type of player. Not that possession receivers aren't good, its just that they usually aren't home run threats, and Nicks certainly is.