A myth that you need a "big" wide receiver?

[Athos]

You can disagree all you want. You're still wrong. Go watch the GSOT. Normally, I wouldn't tell someone their opinion is wrong but in this case, it simply can't be defended. You don't NEED a big WR. We've seen plenty of offenses without big WRs thrive...and those offenses scored plenty of TDs...including our GSOT.

Last I checked, we aren't running the GSOT and Givens/Austin/Bailey are most assuredly NOT Holt and Bruce. And interestingly enough, Pitt's O, since you brought it up basically, seems to be humming right along more with the sudden emergence of Martavis Bryant, a 6'4 WR. Give me an offense that doesn't lean a lot on a big pass catcher. Running down the list of top offenses in the NFL this year:

-Indy have Dwayne Allen, signed Nicks(beat up or not) and drafted Moncrief because they lacked size in the WR position.
-Saints have had Colston and Graham
Steelers only team that really falls under your position, but even then, they lacked a big WR before drafting Bryant.
-Dallas Bryant and Williams
Skins Had to get two of the best smaller stature WRs
NE Gronk. We saw the downfall in the Patsies O without supplementing those tiny WRs with big bodies.
-Philly: Cooper and Matthews and Maclin (who's still 6' 200)
-Packers: Nelson. At their best, imo, when they also had James Jones and Driver who may be 6 flat basically, but are ruggedly built.
Ravens: Just simply have one of the best of the smaller WRs ever to play the game.
-Bears: Big WRs.
-Falcons: Big WRs

A big WR isn't the rule, but based on past drafts, teams have looked to add a bigger WR to improve their O.

And I don't think it's a coincidence that barring QB play, the offense has looked much better with the addition of Britt and prior to injury emergence of Quick, guys who can win a 50/50 ball.

It doesn't matter where Graham or Cook line up. It matters what coverage they see.

I don't agree. They're still lining up as WRs and running traditional WR routes. The TE position, as the game used to know it, doesn't even really exist anymore and I don't care what coverage they're seeing. Size doesn't matter. If the Lions ran Ebron as a WR instead of a TE, I'd bet they'd have better success with him as well.

--------

Regardless, have a quality big WR makes the QBs job easier. That can't really be denied. And as Davis is proving, a taller QB is necessary to see the little guys breaking open when/if they break open.

 

[WvuIN02]

Steelers offense was leading the league once it got in rhythm last year, they scored more than any team in the second half of 2013......but they lost Emmanuel Sanders to FA who is tearing it up in Denver. Who is not a big receiver, but it was a big loss.

So no they didnt need a 6'4'' receiver, just a competent third receiver. Not to mention Heath Miller had a terrible injury and still isnt back to form. Again, it's a bonus but its not better....imo its still just a myth.

 

[RamsOfCastamere]

That's the point, though. It's not size. It's targets. Taint is still winning with ability. So it's not a lack of Calvin so much as it is the increase in targets that coincides with not having Calvin.

I still do not like that dirty Hag. My opinion of him is still biased haha.

 

[jrry32]

Last I checked, we aren't running the GSOT and Givens/Austin/Bailey are most assuredly NOT Holt and Bruce. And interestingly enough, Pitt's O, since you brought it up basically, seems to be humming right along more with the sudden emergence of Martavis Bryant, a 6'4 WR. Give me an offense that doesn't lean a lot on a big pass catcher.

Last I checked, the GSOT still existed and contradicts your theory. I don't recall bringing up Pittsburgh's offense.

Running down the list of top offenses in the NFL this year:

-Indy have Dwayne Allen, signed Nicks(beat up or not) and drafted Moncrief because they lacked size in the WR position.

Dwayne Allen is a TE. Nicks and Moncrief aren't relied on. They're secondary options. Hakeem Nicks is also only 6'1".

Steelers only team that really falls under your position, but even then, they lacked a big WR before drafting Bryant.

So?

Skins Had to get two of the best smaller stature WRs

Nobody faults the Bears for having Marshall and Jeffery. I don't get the point.

NE Gronk. We saw the downfall in the Patsies O without supplementing those tiny WRs with big bodies.

Gronk is a TE. The Patriots O didn't struggle because their WRs were small. They struggled because their WRs weren't good. They had small WRs when they had their mini dynasty from 2001 to 2004.

-Packers: Nelson. At their best, imo, when they also had James Jones and Driver who may be 6 flat basically, but are ruggedly built.

Donald Driver was built like Isaac Bruce. James Jones is 6'1".

Ravens: Just simply have one of the best of the smaller WRs ever to play the game.

So? Are you supposed to have a talented offense with untalented small WRs? Your logic here doesn't make sense. It's like me saying an offense with Randy Moss doesn't count because they had to have one of the best big WRs to ever play the game. It's an illogical stance in this conversation.

-Falcons: Big WRs

Not that it matters but Julio Jones is the only big WR they have.

A big WR isn't the rule, but based on past drafts, teams have looked to add a bigger WR to improve their O.

Well, yea. Why wouldn't you? It's not a disadvantage to have big WRs.

And I don't think it's a coincidence that barring QB play, the offense has looked much better with the addition of Britt and prior to injury emergence of Quick, guys who can win a 50/50 ball.

I don't think it is either considering the WR play of the recent past. Now, swap Britt and Quick out with Antonio Brown and Golden Taint. Do you think our offense doesn't look better with those two?

It's not about winning the 50/50 ball. It's about effective WR play.

I don't agree. They're still lining up as WRs and running traditional WR routes. The TE position, as the game used to know it, doesn't even really exist anymore and I don't care what coverage they're seeing. Size doesn't matter. If the Lions ran Ebron as a WR instead of a TE, I'd bet they'd have better success with him as well.

You don't care what coverage they're seeing? I do. Beating Richard Sherman is a whole lot harder than beating Alec Ogletree. I'd rather have the guy that beats Sherman than the guy that beats Ogletree. Which is why TEs are paid less than WRs. Because WRs that can win 1 on 1 match-ups with CBs are more valuable. It's like the LT vs. the RT or the #1 CB vs. the #2 CB or the XWR vs. the SLWR. Match-ups are everything in football.

In fact, Jimmy Graham was FAR less effective when covered by a CB in 2013:

Brees only threw a pass toward Graham 40 times in the 2013 season against a cornerback. Graham caught 22 of those passes (55 percent success rate).

Graham's rate vs. corners would rank 81st out of 111 wide receivers last season, tied with Atlanta's Darius Johnson, according to the catch percentage rate compiled at Pro Football Focus. It would be the lowest rate among Saints wide receivers. By comparison, teammate Marques Colston ranked 11th last year, catching 70.1 percent of the passes thrown his direction.

But it didn't hurt that a safety, linebacker or lineman covered Graham 71.3 percent of the time in 2013 (454 pass routes).

Graham finished with 90 catches for 1,267 yards and 16 touchdowns last season, including the postseason. Only 22 of his receptions were made against a cornerback, for 258 yards and four touchdowns. Graham caught a pass only 12 percent of the time a cornerback covered him.

Predictably, Graham created most of his damage when not covered by a cornerback, catching 68 passes for 1,007 yards and 12 TDs last season. Brees targeted Graham 115 times in this situation (74.2 percent of Brees' targets to Graham) and completed passes to Graham on 59.1 percent of his throws.

Regardless, have a quality big WR makes the QBs job easier. That can't really be denied. And as Davis is proving, a taller QB is necessary to see the little guys breaking open when/if they break open.

No. It can't be denied. Just like having a quality small WR makes the QB's job easier. Any quality WR makes the QB's job easier.

A taller QB really isn't necessary. Plenty of 6'2" and shorter QBs are capable. Davis just isn't a quality QB. It would be like me saying that (insert bad QB here) proves that big WRs don't help with their increased catch radius because that QB can't hit the broad side of a barn.

 

[jrry32]

I still do not like that dirty Hag. My opinion of him is still biased haha.

I don't like the guy but I grudgingly respect him.

 

[Athos]

Not that it matters but Julio Jones is the only big WR they have.

Then we just have different definitions of big then. I don't consider Roddy White small because the dude is built like crazy. Let me be clear here, small to me is a WR under 6 foot, in that 5'8-5'10 spread. Big to me means the strength to physically break the tackle, not just run through it, or using short area quickness so guys can't get a good hold on you. I'd also consider Boldin to be a big WR, because he plays huge and is a built like a tank.

And you're subbing in some of the best of the smaller WRs in the game? Well, my counter then would be T. Thomas and Alshon. I'm not saying small and quick isn't good, I'm saying I like big and strong better and I believe a "two-towers" duo can be more effective.

Jeffery and Marshall - 19 TDs
Decker and Thomas - 25 TDs
Fitz and Floyd - 15 TDs
Green and Jones - 21 TDs
Jones and White (when healthy, 2012 is only full year together) - 17 TDs

Again, not saying building a smaller WR crew can't work, but FINDING those WRs is much harder than finding bigger WRs who can score. We don't even have the small WRs that can score. Givens troubles scoring at all are well known and the reasons why well known as well. Amendola could pick up the tough yards, but couldn't/can't score much either. Yet to have Bailey score a REC TD. Haven't used Austin in the RZ this year from what I can remember.

 

[Zaphod]

Yea, that made a lot of sense. It seems like we've gone away from a lot of crossing routes and Davis seems to miss them when we do run them. Which is a major issue because those are where Cook, Austin, and Givens are most dangerous.



That's the point, though. It's not size. It's targets. Taint is still winning with ability. So it's not a lack of Calvin so much as it is the increase in targets that coincides with not having Calvin.



Cook has actually been blocked well. It doesn't matter where Graham or Cook line up. It matters what coverage they see.

Just like YAC, blocking ability is more about skill and attitude than size.

You can disagree all you want. You're still wrong. Go watch the GSOT. Normally, I wouldn't tell someone their opinion is wrong but in this case, it simply can't be defended. You don't NEED a big WR. We've seen plenty of offenses without big WRs thrive...and those offenses scored plenty of TDs...including our GSOT.



Wes Welker still faces CBs. A number of the big WRs including Brandon Marshall, Jordy Nelson, and Larry Fitzgerald line-up in the slot on a good sized percentage of plays.

TEs are not WRs. WRs are not TEs.

Sorry, before but the tight end has to be an effective option to block to draw that defensive match up.

That, to me is what separates a tight end from a slot receiver, and who the defense uses to defend.

 

[Zaphod]

Oh yes, and no disregarding the fact that this offense worked better with both Quick and Britt out there on their worst day.

 

[jrry32]

Then we just have different definitions of big then. I don't consider Roddy White small because the dude is built like crazy. Let me be clear here, small to me is a WR under 6 foot, in that 5'8-5'10 spread. Big to me means the strength to physically break the tackle, not just run through it, or using short area quickness so guys can't get a good hold on you. I'd also consider Boldin to be a big WR, because he plays huge and is a built like a tank.

Roddy White is not a big WR. It's not either small or big. Roddy White is average sized. 6'2" or taller is big to me. 5'11" or smaller is small to me.

And you're subbing in some of the best of the smaller WRs in the game? Well, my counter then would be T. Thomas and Alshon. I'm not saying small and quick isn't good, I'm saying I like big and strong better and I believe a "two-towers" duo can be more effective.

Okay, you take your two towers. I'll take Torry Holt and Marvin Harrison.

Jeffery and Marshall - 19 TDs
Decker and Thomas - 25 TDs
Fitz and Floyd - 15 TDs
Green and Jones - 21 TDs
Jones and White (when healthy, 2012 is only full year together) - 17 TDs

Again, not saying building a smaller WR crew can't work, but FINDING those WRs is much harder than finding bigger WRs who can score. We don't even have the small WRs that can score. Givens troubles scoring at all are well known and the reasons why well known as well. Amendola could pick up the tough yards, but couldn't/can't score much either. Yet to have Bailey score a REC TD. Haven't used Austin in the RZ this year from what I can remember.

It's really not. Scoring is all about scheme. If you want to scheme the smaller guys open, you can easily do that. We often were able to scheme Pettis open for TDs in the red-zone. Pettis might be big in terms of height but his TDs were not size related.

Torry Holt became a TD scoring WR later in his career when we decided we needed him to be that. Receiving TDs are all about scheme. Yea, who doesn't love a guy like Calvin who you can just lob the ball up to but there aren't many Calvins in the NFL.

Sorry, before but the tight end has to be an effective option to block to draw that defensive match up.

That, to me is what separates a tight end from a slot receiver, and who the defense uses to defend.

Which is why Graham, Cook, etc. all see LBs and safeties. Because most teams don't feel comfortable putting CBs on them if they have to stop the run.

 

[Athos]

It's not either small or big. Roddy White is average sized. 6'2"

See, I factor in weight when I look at big WRs. Bruce was 6 foot and 188. Holt 6 foot 192. White has about 12 pounds at the same height. You seem the dude's arms? Friggen huge. White has an element of power that Bruce and Holt didn't. Not saying he's a better WR, but at the same height, White is strong. Huge upper body. And a 41 inch vertical to boot. He plays big.

At any rate, Bruce and Holt were special WRs. Harrison as well, who also had the benefit of Manning. It's great that you want them, finding them is harder. Amari Cooper may be the closet to any of them that have come out recently. Still though, the most productive WRs year in and year out are still made up predominantly of the bigger WRs who have bigger scoring output.

If you want to scheme the smaller guys open, you can easily do that

Doesn't seem to work for the Rams though. Unless it's the OC, in which case, we definitely need a new one. I'll all for the Coopers, etc of the world. But I want my Kevin Whites, DGBs, Greens, Jones, more.

 

[jrry32]

See, I factor in weight when I look at big WRs. Bruce was 6 foot and 188. Holt 6 foot 192. White has about 12 pounds at the same height. You seem the dude's arms? Friggen huge. White has an element of power that Bruce and Holt didn't. Not saying he's a better WR, but at the same height, White is strong. Huge upper body. And a 41 inch vertical to boot. He plays big.

At any rate, Bruce and Holt were special WRs. Harrison as well, who also had the benefit of Manning. It's great that you want them, finding them is harder. Amari Cooper may be the closet to any of them that have come out recently. Still though, the most productive WRs year in and year out are still made up predominantly of the bigger WRs who have bigger scoring output.

Roddy White is thicker but he plays the same style of football as Holt and Bruce. He wins with his route running skills, speed, and quickness. He's not a jump ball WR. He doesn't overpower defenders with physicality when running routes. He wins with his technical prowess.

Doesn't seem to work for the Rams though. Unless it's the OC, in which case, we definitely need a new one. I'll all for the Coopers, etc of the world. But I want my Kevin Whites, DGBs, Greens, Jones, more.

Cooper isn't your typical average sized WR. He's an example of a guy that plays big. I'd take Kevin White over him but that's not because of size. White is 1 to 1.5 inches taller. Next to nothing. And I'd take White by a very narrow margin right now.