Wagoner: Pettis on the bubble

[TheDYVKX]

Pettis isn't the best player, that's for sure. He's definitely extremely limited. But he has some uses. He has pretty good body control and awesome hands along with pretty great size, and extraordinary quickness. He's very slow and can't gain much separation, so he really is what he is at this point. He's a possession receiver, good in RZ and specific situations like 3rd down, who can play X, Z and slot, and is a good 3rd or 4th option.

Sam trusts Pettis, maybe the most out of all the receivers on the roster. He's Sam's go to guy in the red zone and on third down/fourth down, and can make the tough catches when you need them. Like Buffalo 2012, he made an insane catch to help us win the game.

Don't see the Rams getting rid of him. He shouldn't have been as high up on our depth chart as he was, but he's still useful and can contribute.

 

[max]

My tape is doctored up? So, I'm putting Pettis in the endzone by myself?

I already said I'm not getting sucked into this, so I'm not. This is my last post on this subject. I get it that Pettis is your new whipping boy, so hooray for your new pet project. But if you intend to shove the fact that he's "a bum" down my throat, you can find another sucker.

How's my last whipping boy doing? You know, the last guy you had tape on getting in the end zone.

I admit I do need to be more understanding of loyal Rams fans who see the glass half full with guys like Gibson and Pettis. We all want the team to be better, we just see things differently on the path to getting there.

 

[leoram]

I find this article irresponsible and pointless. For all his physical limitations (overblown since his shuttle time was off the charts and he has good size as well), Pettis has the second best hands on the team (Bailey #1), and Bradford has been able to trust him to be in the right place more than the others. What is the point of reporting he might not make the team? While it could happen, we haven't seen training camp yet and if they were going to release him before camp, they would've done it along with Cudjo and Richardson. There is no evidence to support the Rams thinking he is less than the sixth best receiver on the team so why make it a story? He isn't my favorite receiver but he deserves better than this.

 

[max]

I find this article irresponsible and pointless. For all his physical limitations (overblown since his shuttle time was off the charts and he has good size as well), Pettis has the second best hands on the team (Bailey #1), and Bradford has been able to trust him to be in the right place more than the others. What is the point of reporting he might not make the team? While it could happen, we haven't seen training camp yet and if they were going to release him before camp, they would've done it along with Cudjo and Richardson. There is no evidence to support the Rams thinking he is less than the sixth best receiver on the team so why make it a story? He isn't my favorite receiver but he deserves better than this.

Your #6 WR is usually a very good ST guy or a young guy who has potential. Pettis is neither.

His claim to fame is reportedly that he is a good redzone player. That's really all you say about a guy who is 116th in catches and 126th in receiving yards. Problem is, Pettis only had only 4 TDs last year, and there are 56 guys who have caught more.

Also, Pettis made only 25 first down catches, tied for 88th in the league. Even Givens had more.

 

[Dodgersrf]

The guy does a pretty good job in the EZ.

Although last year it seemed he and Bradford couldn't get on the Same page. Pettis can contribute.

He'll have a job somewhere if not here.

 

[Dodgersrf]

I'm sure this is simply stating that Pettis isn't a guarantee and is competing with the UDFA and other people brought in (I.E. TJ Moe, Veltung, Sherman, Blake, etc.)

I read on rotoworld that cutting Pettis saves 1.4m and only counts 140,000 in dead money. If they decide to keep someone else besides Pettis it might help to sign another vet at another position, such as bringing Harvey Dahl back for depth.

Excellent point.

It's tough to argue that a healthy Dahl would be more important than Pettis.

Though I like Pettis, I'd rather have Dahl back.

 

[den-the-coach]

i meant from highlights ive seen

Got it....I like his size/speed combo as well, but I get very concerned since I follow college football closely and believe you me I know about many schools, but I can honestly post I have never head of East Texas Baptist, however, I hope Sherman puts the school on the map like London Fletcher did for John Carroll University.

 

[den-the-coach]

Excellent point.

It's tough to argue that a healthy Dahl would be more important than Pettis.

Though I like Pettis, I'd rather have Dahl back.

I disagree even before Dahl's injury, he did not look good. IMO Rams have other options on the OL even other veterans that offer more than Dahl IMO, however, I'll take Pettis because of need over Dahl at this point in their careers.

 

[Dodgersrf]

I disagree even before Dahl's injury, he did not look good. IMO Rams have other options on the OL even other veterans that offer more than Dahl IMO, however, I'll take Pettis because of need over Dahl at this point in their careers.

Don't get me wrong. I don't want Dahl to start ahead of Robinson and Saffold. But he would offer nice depth at the oline. He could also start at guard if we had to move Robinson or Saffold outside for a couple of games.

 

[-X-]

I challenge you to find any impartial and reputable source that says Pettis is any good.

If you can leave the hyperbole in your back pocket, I'd be willing to discuss this. But when you throw out phrases like "zero threat to opposing defenses", you're really only setting out to put people on the defensive intentionally. Particularly ... me. Which is why, I assume, you put TEN brackets around words FOOTBALL GUYS VIEW (seriously, that was aimed at me). Sando is a football reporter. I have as much knowledge of the game as he does, and I probably watch more film. Per your assertion though, a receiver who poses zero threat, doesn't end up with 73% of his catches going for either a first down or touchdown. That's a receiver who is reliable in the clutch and has a role.

Per what I quoted from you: Impartial? Probably not. Reputable. WAY more so than Sando.

“You’ve got to have that trust with a wide receiver, a tight end, a back in order to turn things loose,” Bradford said. “I trust those guys to go make plays, but I would say right now with AP, he’s doing so many things so well that I really trust him. I think it showed up today, when we needed to make a play I went to AP and he made a tough catch, and it was a really, really big play for us.”

If your contention is that Pettis "isn't any good", then you're just wrong. No other way to put it. Can we upgrade? Sure. Absolutely. We can upgrade every receiver on the team until it's full of Megatrons. But 2 coaches have added him to the team after McDaniels suggested we draft him. That's 3 more reputable sources who say he's good, to add to the list that contains Bradford and Wagoner, who I quoted in italics above. If all 5 (Spagnuolo, Fisher, McDaniels, Bradford, Wagoner) are Pettis homers, then you might have a point.

But they're not.

 

[jrry32]

Pettis was playing solid football with Sam.

 

[lockdnram21]

Pettis isn't the best player, that's for sure. He's definitely extremely limited. But he has some uses. He has pretty good body control and awesome hands along with pretty great size, and extraordinary quickness. He's very slow and can't gain much separation, so he really is what he is at this point. He's a possession receiver, good in RZ and specific situations like 3rd down, who can play X, Z and slot, and is a good 3rd or 4th option.

Sam trusts Pettis, maybe the most out of all the receivers on the roster. He's Sam's go to guy in the red zone and on third down/fourth down, and can make the tough catches when you need them. Like Buffalo 2012, he made an insane catch to help us win the game.

Don't see the Rams getting rid of him. He shouldn't have been as high up on our depth chart a
s he was, but he's still useful and can contribute.

i think it all comes down to if Britt makes the roster. If Britt makes it i think Pettis gets cut. Towards the end of the year they started using Bailey and Quick on 3rd downs. Just dont think we keep 6 receivers

 

[-X-]

Pettis was playing solid football with Sam.

Of course he was. And the idea that he "only" had 38 catches is predicated on league-wide statistics. 38, as it turns out, is good for 3rd on a team that only had 22 freaking touchdowns all year, and a leading receiver who only had 51. Who was a tight-end. If the argument is that Pettis is an ineffective #1 receiver, then duh. This is a team without one, and a team that spreads the ball around instead. So, yeah. 38 receptions is about the average in a situation where there were only 301 pass completions spread across 13 receivers. If they all had an equal share, that would amount to 23 receptions per.

 

[den-the-coach]

Don't get me wrong. I don't want Dahl to start ahead of Robinson and Saffold. But he would offer nice depth at the oline. He could also start at guard if we had to move Robinson or Saffold outside for a couple of games.

Dahl looked a little long in the tooth to me last season even before the injury, IMO, I would rather give Barrett Jones a shot at RG if they have to move Saffold to LT and wait on Jake Long or if they're going to add a veteran I'd rather have an OL that's more a tackle than a guard.

 

[den-the-coach]

Pettis was playing solid football with Sam.

Exactly the hope is Bradford will make everyone better, but he looks for Pettis more he trusts him because he knows that Pettis will not drop the ball. The guy is not fast nor electric, but he can catch and I also trust him on punt returns because he's been blasted and has not fumbled. Sure hope I didn't jinx him just then.

 

[Dodgersrf]

Dahl looked a little long in the tooth to me last season even before the injury, IMO, I would rather give Barrett Jones a shot at RG if they have to move Saffold to LT and wait on Jake Long or if they're going to add a veteran I'd rather have an OL that's more a tackle than a guard.

Yeah his best days are behind him.

I'm crossing my fingers on Jones. I sure would like to know what his expectations are from the coaches. It seems that no one has any information on him at all. This more than likely will be considered a rookie year for him considering he was basically red shirted last season.

As far as tackles, I think we're in a better situation with Long, Barksdale, Robinson and Saffold. I guess we can put Jones in that category as well.

I still think Dahl can contribute if needed.

 

[Memphis Ram]

He's Ricky Proehl. As a #3 or #4, complimentary type WR, Proehl was pretty good. Locked in as a #1 or #2 guy he was not.

I still say that the Rams aren't using him to his strengths. With his hands, he's a back shoulder pass just waiting to happen. All they got to do is dial up the play.

As someone who looked for the organization to move on from Dane Looker yearly, I've come to appreciate what Pettis brings to the team.

 

[The Rammer]

Meh Pettis isn't a number #1 or#2 WR but I can tell you he has showed up when it counted when everybody is dropping balls or he is getting into the endzone to cap a drive. I don't see us releasing him unless one of these 'nobody' guys comes out of nowhere.

 

[leoram]

Your #6 WR is usually a very good ST guy or a young guy who has potential. Pettis is neither.

His claim to fame is reportedly that he is a good redzone player. That's really all you say about a guy who is 116th in catches and 126th in receiving yards. Problem is, Pettis only had only 4 TDs last year, and there are 56 guys who have caught more.

Also, Pettis made only 25 first down catches, tied for 88th in the league. Even Givens had more.

Fair enough. Name the six above him then.

 

[Athos]

Does Nick have some insight into the Rams view of Pettis? Who knows.

All I do know is my own view of Pettis from watching him for 3 years. He's a plodder who gets no separation and is a zero threat to any opposing defense. He is usually single covered by the worst DB and occasionally is able to make a catch because he does have good hands and a wide catching radius. If the Rams had drafted a WR, clearly Pettis would be out. I view him similar to Gibson, he's a subpar receiver who I would rather see on another team if only to make our DBs job easier when we face him.

For all of Gibson's faults (not knowing where the 1st down line is) and making boneheaded plays too often, Gibson was at least fairly athletic. Far more than Pettis.

Pettis plays a stiff, slow game. Won't shake a guy or really contest a 50/50 ball. Our WR corps, such as it is, has him as starter only on experience. He's a fine 4th or 5th WR you bring in on RZ packages imo. That's about it. Or desperate 3rd downs when you need size and length of the field.

What he's accomplished so far, is pretty much is NFL ceiling imo. He's peaked already.

Man was Spags shit at drafting offensive players.


The best case scenario, imo, is Austin learning to play outside more ala D-Jax. That frees up more slot duty for a guy like TJ Moe, who I think if healthy, definitely has the ability to really step up as an excellent 3rd down WR. He's definitely stronger than Pettis, (one of the best benches as a WR) and yes, he's probably the same straight line speed as Pettis, but imo, is way faster. And if you've seen Moe play, he was a wide array of things he does to get himself open.