PDA

View Full Version : The Eli Factor



B&RWarrior
09-21-2012, 01:07 PM
Lets do some trend analysis here. Shockey gets traded and Boss steps up and puts up good numbers. Boss leaves via free agency and another unknown starts producing (I forgot the kids name). The unknkown gets an ACL adn Bennett produces. Toomer retires, Plax fiasco occurs, and Steve Smith leaves us, Nicks and Cruz, and Manningham give us an even deadlier WR core. Now Barden is showing signs of being the latest to produce. The two constants here is for one KG and his offensive system, but more important is Eli. I think Eli has the ability to what Trent Dilfer terms "throw receivers open". His best attribute by far as a quarterback is his anticipation on his throws. As soon as the receiver makes the cut the ball is in his hands. This means Eli threw it before he made the cut sometimes a good bit before he cuts, so not that much separaton is needed.

Bottom line is that I think as long as we have Eli we'll see good receivers put up great numbers and mediocre receivers look good because Eli's anticipation allows him to get them the ball as soon as they get separation. So as we hail Barden the latest new kid on the block to produce we should really be hailing Eli as well.

GameTime
09-21-2012, 01:10 PM
you cant remember Ballard?????

QB and WR are a symbiotic relationship.

Toadofsteel
09-21-2012, 01:11 PM
Lets do some trend analysis here. Shockey gets traded and Boss steps up and puts up good numbers. Boss leaves via free agency and another unknown starts producing (I forgot the kids name). The unknkown gets an ACL adn Bennett produces. Toomer retires, Plax fiasco occurs, and Steve Smith leaves us, Nicks and Cruz, and Manningham give us an even deadlier WR core. Now Barden is showing signs of being the latest to produce. The two constants here is for one KG and his offensive system, but more important is Eli. I think Eli has the ability to what Trent Dilfer terms "throw receivers open". His best attribute by far as a quarterback is his anticipation on his throws. As soon as the receiver makes the cut the ball is in his hands. This means Eli threw it before he made the cut sometimes a good bit before he cuts, so not that much separaton is needed.

Bottom line is that I think as long as we have Eli we'll see good receivers put up great numbers and mediocre receivers look good because Eli's anticipation allows him to get them the ball as soon as they get separation. So as we hail Barden the latest new kid on the block to produce we should really be hailing Eli as well.

I think that Barden hugging Eli moment sums it all up nicely...

nygfanmaybe
09-21-2012, 01:24 PM
I think that Barden hugging Eli moment sums it all up nicely...My thoughts exactly!

burier
09-21-2012, 01:27 PM
you cant remember Ballard?????

QB and WR are a symbiotic relationship.

actually the other day I had a hard time finding his name..took me like 5 minuntes.

B&RWarrior
09-21-2012, 01:34 PM
you cant remember Ballard?????

QB and WR are a symbiotic relationship.

Sometimes yes and sometimes no. In terms of who receives the benefit I'd say the ratio varies . For Plax it might have been 60% : 40% with Eli getting the majority of the benefit as a younger QB. As Eli has matured I'd say the pendelum has swung to where the receivers are getting 60% of the benefit. Nicksy helps Eli out alot. Cruz I'd say equilibrium. Bennet and Barden I'd say they receive most of the benefit out of their relationship. Ballard, Pascoe, Hynoski, I'd say they get 70% of the benefit.

GameTime
09-21-2012, 01:38 PM
Sometimes yes and sometimes no. In terms of who receives the benefit I'd say the ratio varies . For Plax it might have been 60% : 40% with Eli getting the majority of the benefit as a younger QB. As Eli has matured I'd say the pendelum has swung to where the receivers are getting 60% of the benefit. Nicksy helps Eli out alot. Cruz I'd say equilibrium. Bennet and Barden I'd say they receive most of the benefit out of their relationship. Ballard, Pascoe, Hynoski, I'd say they get 70% of the benefit.
symbiotic doesnt neccessarily mean "equal" . It just means and interdependant realationship. But I hear you.

B&RWarrior
09-21-2012, 01:45 PM
symbiotic doesn't neccessarily mean "equal" . It just means and interdependant realationship. But I hear you.
it usually is used to desribe a mutally beneficial relationship, though they don't usually quantify the benefits in terms of who recieves more benefit they differentiate it from a parisitic relationship. All the realtionships I desribed could be labeled symbiotic. I used the percentages to show varying levels of benefits depending on who the receiver was.

I think we're saying the same thing.