Commanders Post at The Warpath - View Single Post

TenandSix:Unacceptable · 05-17-2007, 07:44 PM

I think one of the things that a lot of people forget is that in 2005, we were firing on all cylinders in the run game, Santana was unguardable in single coverage, and Cooley was a reception machine, but our offense still sputtered in the end, badly. While it might be all on MB, which I think could easily be the case, IMO we are going to need very solid production from either BL or ARE or both next year to be successful. Thinking that they have any sort of track record to do so is a bit of a reach. I would definitely argue that we can be effective offensively without big contributions from our second and third receivers before arguing that ARE and BL are anything more than below average as numbers 2 and 3. However, if we did get a REAL #2, ARE is a fine #3 and BL an excellent #4. I think that is what the "we need a possession WR" camp is trying to point out as well as the fact that we struggle in the red zone where bigger targets are generally more effective. Plus there is the fact that it would really open things up for Cooley and Santana. What we really need is the ability to utilize the skill players that we already have without them getting gameplanned out by opposing defensive coordinators, which is exactly what happened at the end of 2005.

In the end, I think we could use an upgrade at #2 WR or JC needs to play well enough to negate the fact that we don't have top end depth at the WR position ala Donovan McNabb. (Or the Saunders offense needs to go back to the KC days, but I'm afraid we don't quite have the OL talent or TE depth to be a clone of those teams' virtually receiverless offenses.)

05-17-2007, 07:44 PM	#95
TenandSix:Unacceptable Special Teams Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 331	Re: Jason Campbell's development I think one of the things that a lot of people forget is that in 2005, we were firing on all cylinders in the run game, Santana was unguardable in single coverage, and Cooley was a reception machine, but our offense still sputtered in the end, badly. While it might be all on MB, which I think could easily be the case, IMO we are going to need very solid production from either BL or ARE or both next year to be successful. Thinking that they have any sort of track record to do so is a bit of a reach. I would definitely argue that we can be effective offensively without big contributions from our second and third receivers before arguing that ARE and BL are anything more than below average as numbers 2 and 3. However, if we did get a REAL #2, ARE is a fine #3 and BL an excellent #4. I think that is what the "we need a possession WR" camp is trying to point out as well as the fact that we struggle in the red zone where bigger targets are generally more effective. Plus there is the fact that it would really open things up for Cooley and Santana. What we really need is the ability to utilize the skill players that we already have without them getting gameplanned out by opposing defensive coordinators, which is exactly what happened at the end of 2005. In the end, I think we could use an upgrade at #2 WR or JC needs to play well enough to negate the fact that we don't have top end depth at the WR position ala Donovan McNabb. (Or the Saunders offense needs to go back to the KC days, but I'm afraid we don't quite have the OL talent or TE depth to be a clone of those teams' virtually receiverless offenses.)