What is a "true #1 WR"??

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,225
Name
Tim
And is there one in the Ram's plans for this offense?

I do not believe there is such a thing in this offense and trying to fit one in would be a mistake.

The Rams offense is going to be one that is built on a balanced attack running and throwing and distributing the ball to multiple players throughout the year.

3 main WRs with 5 per game Cook 5 per game other TEs 3-5 per game other WRs 3-5 per game and RBs 3-5 per game. That would be throwing the ball 30-35 times a game which is the way I believe is most likely to produce wins.

There may be games where individuals are better match up s and the game plan is to get them the ball more but there is no indication that this team wants to throw the ball to the same guy 10-12 times every game.
 

iced

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
6,620
i'll settle for a receiver who can consistently get open and catch the ball - don't see one of those on this roster
 

Mojo Ram

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
22,905
Name
mojo
It is the best WR on any given team. Every team has a #1 WR...its just that most of them aren't very good.
 

The Rammer

ESPN Draft Guru
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
2,400
Name
Rick
And is there one in the Ram's plans for this offense?

I do not believe there is such a thing in this offense and trying to fit one in would be a mistake.

The Rams offense is going to be one that is built on a balanced attack running and throwing and distributing the ball to multiple players throughout the year.

3 main WRs with 5 per game Cook 5 per game other TEs 3-5 per game other WRs 3-5 per game and RBs 3-5 per game. That would be throwing the ball 30-35 times a game which is the way I believe is most likely to produce wins.

There may be games where individuals are better match up s and the game plan is to get them the ball more but there is no indication that this team wants to throw the ball to the same guy 10-12 times every game.
No we dont have a true #1 WR on this team.... I propose we trade the whole 2007 rams draft for Calvin Johnson or Andre Johnson or somebody with a Johnson last name.. What say you?
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,225
Name
Tim
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
No we dont have a true #1 WR on this team.... I propose we trade the whole 2007 rams draft for Calvin Johnson or Andre Johnson or somebody with a Johnson last name.. What say you?
LOL I would rather stay with using multiple players catching the ball and a strong running game
 

RamBill

Legend
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
8,874
The NFL definition of a #1 WR is one who has to be accounted for on every play....a WR that dictates coverages...defenses roll coverage to his side every time. It's not about stats, it's about how defenses have to adjust to defend him. There aren't 32 #1 WR's in the NFL.
 

The Rammer

ESPN Draft Guru
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
2,400
Name
Rick
LOL I would rather stay with using multiple players catching the ball and a strong running game
Not saying I didn't like the GSOT days at all but I agree I prefer a Pounding and punishing running game coupled with a Defense that doesn't play nice. That is my kind of football!!! ha
 

The Rammer

ESPN Draft Guru
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
2,400
Name
Rick
The NFL definition of a #1 WR is one who has to be accounted for on every play....a WR that dictates coverages...defenses roll coverage to his side every time. It's not about stats, it's about how defenses have to adjust to defend him. There aren't 32 #1 WR's in the NFL.


To quote Mr. Iced this is what my take of a #1 WR is:

A Go-to receiver that consistently separates, wins 1 on 1 coverage, and catches the ball.. When the games on the line and everyone knows the ball is going to him, he can still make the play.
This team does not have a receiver in that mold. Size, measurables are irrelevant when talking about the niches of the wide receiver position - you don't have to be a world track star or a giant to get open and catch the ball

Reminds me of watching Lions-Cowboys game last year and Lions needed to drive ball down field and everybody knew ball was going to Calvin and he still came away with 1v1 or 1v3 matchups on that drive.
 

Mojo Ram

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
22,905
Name
mojo
The NFL definition of a #1 WR is one who has to be accounted for on every play....a WR that dictates coverages...defenses roll coverage to his side every time. It's not about stats, it's about how defenses have to adjust to defend him. There aren't 32 #1 WR's in the NFL.
Right. So its a WR thats very good...and every team wants a WR thats very good. Until we get one who is elite...Tavon Austin or maybe J.Cook is our #1 WR.
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,225
Name
Tim
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #10
Tavon Austin or maybe J.Cook is our #1 WR.

And that is one of the best things about having multiple players that could be considered your #1. They all have to be accounted for not just 1 guy.
 

Memphis Ram

Legend
Joined
Jun 26, 2010
Messages
6,802
Amendola had to be accounted for on every play.
Amendola consistently separated.
Amendola won 1 on 1 coverage and caught the ball.
When the game was on the line everyone knew the ball was going to him and he still made plays.

Perhaps the Rams should bring back Amendola after the Patriots cut him. Or maybe the should let the young guys already on the roster develop as few go-to or #1 WRs get that title within their first couple of NFL seasons. Not even Amendola.
 
Last edited:

jjab360

Legend
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
6,645
Amendola had to account for on every play.
Amendola consistently separated.
Amendola won 1 on 1 coverage and catch the ball.
When the game was on the line everyone knew the ball was going to him and he still made plays.

Perhaps the Rams should bring back Amendola after the Patriots cut him. Or maybe the should let the young guys already on the roster develop as few go-to or #1 WRs get that title within their first couple of NFL seasons.
I'd be open to that. Bring him back on a cheap contract, already has a great rapport with Bradford, also allows us to use Tavon on the outside where some have speculated he's most effective.
 

Blue and Gold

Pro Bowler
Joined
Jan 6, 2014
Messages
1,741
Name
B and G
Amendola had to account for on every play.
Amendola consistently separated.
Amendola won 1 on 1 coverage and catch the ball.
When the game was on the line everyone knew the ball was going to him and he still made plays.

Perhaps the Rams should bring back Amendola after the Patriots cut him. Or maybe the should let the young guys already on the roster develop as few go-to or #1 WRs get that title within their first couple of NFL seasons.
o me the #1 has to be a X or a Z. Not a slot. When Amendola was in the slot . . .yes, what you say is true. But when he tried to play Z . . . he was not as effective, couldn't get off good CBs.

The #1 WR Rams had was Gibson, from 2010-2012. And he was not a #1 talent. But to be a #1 WR you have to do more than play slot, when you off the line and don't have to face as many double teams or bump corners. Gibson simply couldn't beat good corners. He could beat the average ones.
 

jjab360

Legend
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
6,645
o me the #1 has to be a X or a Z. Not a slot. When Amendola was in the slot . . .yes, what you say is true. But when he tried to play Z . . . he was not as effective, couldn't get off good CBs.

The #1 WR Rams had was Gibson, from 2010-2012. And he was not a #1 talent. But to be a #1 WR you have to do more than play slot, when you off the line and don't have to face as many double teams or bump corners. Gibson simply couldn't beat good corners. He could beat the average ones.
So Victor Cruz and T.Y. Hilton aren't no.1 receivers?
 

Memphis Ram

Legend
Joined
Jun 26, 2010
Messages
6,802
o me the #1 has to be a X or a Z. Not a slot. When Amendola was in the slot . . .yes, what you say is true. But when he tried to play Z . . . he was not as effective, couldn't get off good CBs.

The #1 WR Rams had was Gibson, from 2010-2012. And he was not a #1 talent. But to be a #1 WR you have to do more than play slot, when you off the line and don't have to face as many double teams or bump corners. Gibson simply couldn't beat good corners. He could beat the average ones.

Count me in with the personnel executives that point out that there aren't really that many #1 NFL talents in the entire league. But, I'll just add that having one is not necessary to score a buttload of points, yet I'm perplexed as to why so many seem to believe this team can't succeed without one.
 

rdlkgliders

"AKA" Hugo Bezdek
Joined
Jul 1, 2013
Messages
7,822
Name
Don
I believe it is a guy that has to be covered by the number 1 corner, he draws extra attention by involving other defensive players. A number 1 guy is versatile, running routes on the outside and over the middle creating mismatches. He wins nearly all 1 on 1 battles. Most of all defenses game plan around him.
 

-X-

Medium-sized Lebowski
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
35,576
Name
The Dude
I know one when I see one.
 

Boffo97

Still legal in 17 states!
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
Messages
5,278
Name
Dave
Count me in with the personnel executives that point out that there aren't really that many #1 NFL talents in the entire league. But, I'll just add that having one is not necessary to score a buttload of points, yet I'm perplexed as to why so many seem to believe this team can't succeed without one.
Of course a team CAN succeed without one, but even in a more conservative offense, it gives you a huge advantage.
 

Memphis Ram

Legend
Joined
Jun 26, 2010
Messages
6,802
Of course a team CAN succeed without one, but even in a more conservative offense, it gives you a huge advantage.

An advantage? Sure. Huge Advantage? That still depends upon the quality of the player and if his OC and QB can get him the ball. Again, most consider Larry Fitzgerald to be a #1 WR. But, he hasn't been a HUGE advantage for the Cardinals when that wasn't the case.