Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

July 1 issue of Sporting News...

NFC:
[B]Rams[/B] - A
[B]Lions[/B] - A-
[B]Green Bay[/B] - B+
[B]Vikings[/B] - B+
[B]Saints[/B] - B+
[B]Cardinals[/B] - B
[B]Panthers[/B] - B

[B]Eagles[/B] - Terrell Owens' presence frees No. 2 Todd Pinkston to be a deep threat... Grade - B

[B]Giants[/B] - Neither Plaxico Burress not Amani Toomer is a sure thing, but each is tall and talented... Grade - B-

[B]Bears[/B] - C+

[B]Cowboys[/B] - There's little proven depth behind Keyshawn Johnson,32 and Terry Glen, 30... Grade - C+

[B]Seahawks[/B] - C+
[B]Buccanerrs[/B] - C

[B]Redskins[/B] - Santana Moss has to stay healthy; David Patten should provide more speed... Grade - C

[B]Falcons[/B] - D
[B]49ers[/B] - D



AFC:
[B]Colts[/B] - A
[B]Raiders[/B] - A
[B]Bengals[/B] - A-
[B]Ravens[/B] - B
[B]Bills[/B] - B
[B]Dolphins[/B] - B
[B]Patroits[/B] - B
[B]Jets[/B] - B
[B]Steelers[/B] - B
[B]Texans[/B] - B-
[B]Jaguars[/B] - B-
[B]Chargers[/B] - B-
[B]Browns[/B] - C+
[B]Broncos[/B] - C+
[B]Titans[/B] - C
[B]Chiefs[/B] - C-

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

Meh. I would say with how unproven we are, that would be a fairly accurate assessment.

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection]Meh. I would say with how unproven we are, that would be a fairly accurate assessment.[/QUOTE]

I agree.

Personally I feel that this unit has the chance to really shine. I think Patten is going to prove to be a great pickup for us. I see him bringing alot of intangibles to the WR corp., leadership, guidance for the younger guys, and he's a proven winner.

If Moss can give us the big play threat we lacked last year and if Jacobs can step up and start to produce, I think by the end of the year we could have a very good WR corp.

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

Exactly. I DO think we have the most potential of any team in the league. If all the WRs live up to their potential, we will have one of the top WR corps.

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

To call Taylor Jacobs a sleeper is understating it, I think the rest of the league is comatose on his potential this year based on the rumblings out of Redskin Park.. I think it was Patten or Moss who was raving about him saying all he needs is to gain his confidence and he'll break out.. 3rd year is always the make or break time for WR, he needs to man up..

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

Its way too soon to try and grade our receiving corps because we have too many un answered questions. I do believe that this group could be the sleeper of the NFL as was or defense of last year. We can only hope that Ramsey and our RW's can build that need chemistry before the start of the season. I would not be surprised if our first offensive play of the season is a deep pass to one of our speedy wr's. I think Gibbs has a chip on his shoulder after last season and is going to give the offense most of his attention this off season and will show that he can adjust in this new era of football.

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

I'm pretty scared about our WRs. They could be very good, or they could be miserable.

I'm mixed about Patten... Whenever I saw him play in New England, I thought he was pretty good... but he was the 4th receiver on their depth chart and they let him go even though he wasn't asking for a ton of money.

Moss could be great, but he never lived up to the Jets' expectations.

Jacobs has only shown flashes of brilliance. I'm sick of hearing that he has a huge upside.

Thrash is steady but unspectacular.

Brown has a lot to prove.

McCants will be lucky if he makes the team.

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

It's definitely hit or miss with this bunch.

That being said, I also feel that if anyone has a sleeper, we do.

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

Brown could be a great sleeper, defenses will have to respect his speed. Even if we just toss him in there and let him run nothing but deep routes, he'll have to be accounted for.

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection]It's definitely hit or miss with this bunch.

That being said, I also feel that if anyone has a sleeper, we do.[/QUOTE]I think if we can get Portis running the ball like he did in Denver that will do wonders for our passing game. It could be the make or break of our passing game.

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

I'd like to see a shotgun formation, 3/4 WR set and just have them all go deep and Ramsey chuck it up there. There's no way a defense could handle all that speed. I know that sounds very Spurrier-esque, BUT our offensive line should be worlds better this year.

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

Our WRs can't be much worse than last year, that's the way I'm looking at things.

RG was inconsistent as usual, and Coles was steady but unspectacular.

At least we've increased our overall speed at the position. That should help with creating seperation and hopefully getting some YAC.

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

Another thing on Gardner, the other night I was watching the Skins-Bucs game from week 1, and I just had to laugh when Brunell attempted the first pass of the season and RG dropped it.

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

LOL...I remember that Matty!

Why don't they just give an overall team grade and put us at the bottom with a D-.

Screw all this "posistional analysis."

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

i don't mind people thinking that we suck because we will prove everyone wrong.... i hope and that is just more fun

It is ignorant to say that gibbs didn't target these players that he got for a reason. The speed is the factor, i just heard cerratto on Total Access and he spoke of how short but how FAST that our recievers were. Gibbs targetted Moss and Patten and MOss happened to fall through and when gibbs saw that we could trade for him he did. In terms of yards per carry if you line up the recievers with 40 or more catches. the order goes somin like this, ashlie lelie, santana moss, and david patten. we now have 2 of the top 3 which will for sure stretch the field. i don't know about the rest of you but the most important thing in my eyes is not even production it is stretching the field. Do i expect moss to get 90 catches like coles... no but i do expect him to get more than 10 yards per carry. If we gain even the same yardage in total with moss as with coles it will help us just because we stretched the field. The defenses last year just stayed up at the line and knew that there was no deep threat and this didn't allow portis to run. Basically what i am saying is that we may not have the best set but we have the deepest threat possiblity in the league with fast speed and proven WRs who have been able to get 15+ yards per carry very consistantly. And these type of players are those that we need to open up our game and do what we want to do.
ANd portis helping in running will help in passing.

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

Potentially we have quite an impressive array of wideouts, in terms of production the grade of C is generous. We were last in plays of 40+ yards last year and near the bottom in plays of 20+ yards. To change that we went out and got some more speed at wideout, which will hopefully result in more big plays. I like our guys, I've been a Taylor Jacobs fan since draft day 3 yrs ago, and hopefully they play at higher than a C level.

I think the success of our offense will rest on the offensive line.

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

[QUOTE=memphisskin]Potentially we have quite an impressive array of wideouts, in terms of production the grade of C is generous. We were last in plays of 40+ yards last year and near the bottom in plays of 20+ yards. To change that we went out and got some more speed at wideout, which will hopefully result in more big plays. I like our guys, I've been a Taylor Jacobs fan since draft day 3 yrs ago, and hopefully they play at higher than a C level.

I think the success of our offense will rest on the offensive line.[/QUOTE]
40 yard plays..... i thought those were only in fairytales. i have forgotten how they look:(

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Brown could be a great sleeper, defenses will have to respect his speed. Even if we just toss him in there and let him run nothing but deep routes, he'll have to be accounted for.[/QUOTE]


Couldn't agree more, Brown has scary speed, how much of an opportunity he get's remains to be seen, but we do know that Gibbs really likes the kid.

The one very encouraging thing coming out of redskins park that we may very well be able to hang our hat's on is this, we keep hearing the word SEPERATION, especially from Ramsey, which leads me to believe that wasen't there last season, which makes me very leary of how effective Coles really was? Perhap's that is part the reason Gibbs was pushing Coles to have the toe surgery? It could very well be that Coles just didn't have the elite quickness and speed that Gibbs knew he needed to make the passing game work? Well that is a thing of the past we defiently have elite speed as it stands, the fact that Coles couldn't seperate, coupled with the fact that Gardner wasen't going to either, could point to a lot of our offensive woe's last season, we shall see.

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

I loved LC but that's why I didnt mind seeing him go. He could still make guys miss, but as far as route running and making cuts, he was hindered. Also we threw to him like 140 times and he only had 90 catches, thats not very good...even with #8 throwing it to ya.

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

We can't be any worse then we where last year. :vomit-smi I just wish we had at least one WR over 6 ft. :embarrass I guess this is the new version of the "Smurfs". I just hope they can play as well as the first version did.
But we should be a lot better then last year.


:httr:

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

[QUOTE=dirtbag2112]I loved LC but that's why I didnt mind seeing him go. He could still make guys miss, but as far as route running and making cuts, he was hindered. Also we threw to him like 140 times and he only had 90 catches, thats not very good...even with #8 throwing it to ya.[/QUOTE]I don't know if you can call #8 passes an actual throw. They were more like a pitch a lob or to put it better I think our long snapper could hike the ball further between his legs than Brunell could throw the ball. LOL

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

At least we have McCants and Dyson...

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

I think we have a lot of weapons at wideout, Coles and Gardner were more like scuds last year. Now a lot of that had to do with our offensive line play, deep routes had to be scrapped because there was no time and it took our qbs 12 weeks before either of them hit anything that even resembled a rhythm. Coles hasn't been right since injuring his toe two years ago, and 50/50 is well 50/50. There are still a lot of ifs, "if Taylor Jacobs can stay healthy, if Moss can handle the #1 receiver spot, if Ramsey can consistently play with poise and patience..."

Seems to me that we'll definitely have some defined roles for these guys, McCants did a good job in red zone situations under Spurrier so I don't see why he can't do the same under Gibbs. I don't think the Smurfs or the Fun Bunch had too much size but they were both successful groups of receivers. Hopefully Ramsey can get these guys the ball. :dallas:

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

we now have the rb and receiver corps that spurrier always wanted...

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

[QUOTE=Riggo44]We can't be any worse then we where last year. :vomit-smi I just wish we had at least one WR over 6 ft. :embarrass I guess this is the new version of the "Smurfs". I just hope they can play as well as the first version did.
But we should be a lot better then last year.


:httr:[/QUOTE]
McCants and Dyson are both over 6'. But yeah, it is like the "New Smurfs".....but remember that with the originals, Monk was there as the big tall WR to offset them, so I'd expect either DMac or Dyson to stick around in that role (hopefully McCants!)

And yes,we should be a lot better than last year!

:httr:

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection]Meh. I would say with how unproven we are, that would be a fairly accurate assessment.[/QUOTE]
I agree with you, but what I didnt add was that if you look they gave the Lions an A- and they even said that this grade was based only on potential. That is crazy to me, yes the Lions have an awsome wr stable,but they are more unproven than our wide outs...

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

[QUOTE=Redskins8588]I agree with you, but what I didnt add was that if you look they gave the Lions an A- and they even said that this grade was based only on potential. That is crazy to me, yes the Lions have an awsome wr stable,but they are more unproven than our wide outs...[/QUOTE]

But the Lions' wideouts potential is much more likely and credible than ours. Any one of the Lions' three wideouts has the potential to become hall-of-famers. That's more than can be said for Patten and Moss (not to knock them).

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

[QUOTE=Redskins8588]I agree with you, but what I didnt add was that if you look they gave the Lions an A- and they even said that this grade was based only on potential. That is crazy to me, yes the Lions have an awsome wr stable,but they are more unproven than our wide outs...[/QUOTE]

True. Typically I only check people in our division. But good observation...

Re: Unit Analysis: Wide Receivers
 

[QUOTE=Ramseyfan]But the Lions' wideouts potential is much more likely and credible than ours. Any one of the Lions' three wideouts has the potential to become hall-of-famers. That's more than can be said for Patten and Moss (not to knock them).[/QUOTE]
You are right they have the more potential than Patten or Moss to be HOF'ers but I dont see them developing into that type of receiver this season...