Vikings Message Board.Com

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Sun Sep 08, 2019 8:52 pm

J. Kapp 11 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 08, 2019 8:19 pm
Next week and the week after that, we're going to need Alexander Mattison. If the Vikings run the style of offense that Kubiak runs with only one good back, they'd run Dalvin Cook into the ground. Mattison is a better choice than Boone, period. If he weren't, it would have been Boone getting those carries today.

But hey, you're the only one making this argument, so you're obviously the smartest one in the room. I mean, what do the rest of us clueless "koolaid drinkers" know?

Me being the only one making an argument doesn't make it invalid. I was the only one saying we needed to fix the oline last season before it fell apart. I was the only one saying we didn't have a 3rd WR when you guys were still super high on Bebbe. What happened to him and that love? You are still not addressing the point I am making and I don't know how to get you guys to discuss what is being raised and not trying to prove something that I isnt in contention. No one said Boone was better than Mattison (i did say that he out played him in the preseason). The argument was and still is that Mattison (while playing well) was less of a need than WR. Both positions have starters who are injury prone. Only one position right now has a starter already banged up ( it aint RB). We wont always win games this way and when we run into a game where we are in a shoot out and have to pass, our lack of ability to go 3 Wide will bite us in the butt. We have KC up soon. If they jump up 14 on us, we don't have the personal to go into a pass offense and keep up. I'm more confident in our 3rd with Doctson (if he learns the playbook) but at the time of this thread we had no one after Diggs and we still dont.

CharVike wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:07 am

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Sun Sep 08, 2019 8:52 pm

Me being the only one making an argument doesn't make it invalid. I was the only one saying we needed to fix the oline last season before it fell apart. I was the only one saying we didn't have a 3rd WR when you guys were still super high on Bebbe. What happened to him and that love? You are still not addressing the point I am making and I don't know how to get you guys to discuss what is being raised and not trying to prove something that I isnt in contention. No one said Boone was better than Mattison (i did say that he out played him in the preseason). The argument was and still is that Mattison (while playing well) was less of a need than WR. Both positions have starters who are injury prone. Only one position right now has a starter already banged up ( it aint RB). We wont always win games this way and when we run into a game where we are in a shoot out and have to pass, our lack of ability to go 3 Wide will bite us in the butt. We have KC up soon. If they jump up 14 on us, we don't have the personal to go into a pass offense and keep up. I'm more confident in our 3rd with Doctson (if he learns the playbook) but at the time of this thread we had no one after Diggs and we still dont.

The OL still isn't fixed. Elf can't pass block at all. Someone, Cousins, will get hurt. We won't win a shoot out either. With the 3rd best pass defense a shoot out should never be on the table anyway. So that don't really matter at this point. If it is pack it in. Some were high on Beebe but to me he shouldn't be on an NFL roster. He's very small, slow and can't catch at an NFL level. When cut he will be out of the NFL. Doctson was cut because he was like number 6 or 7 on the roster. He's filling a roster spot. I don't see him active on game day anytime soon. We should be a 10 to 20 pass attempt team. We don't need many WRs. We picked this TE in round 2 to be the 3rd WR also. That's what I read. So WR 3 is covered by a high draft pick. Once Cook sits Boone will get his chance and he will need to step up. I wouldn't count on that but it may happen. As for Matti he had a nice game. But don't expect 5+ yards per attempt. He's a 3.8 guy. But he can carry the load or so I have read. If KC jumps up 14 the game is over. Because we are a run based team. It's not a come from behind scheme were it's pass after pass. Our D can't allow that to happen. Or any other piece.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 8:13 am

CharVike wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:07 am
The OL still isn't fixed. Elf can't pass block at all. Someone, Cousins, will get hurt. We won't win a shoot out either. With the 3rd best pass defense a shoot out should never be on the table anyway. So that don't really matter at this point. If it is pack it in. Some were high on Beebe but to me he shouldn't be on an NFL roster. He's very small, slow and can't catch at an NFL level. When cut he will be out of the NFL. Doctson was cut because he was like number 6 or 7 on the roster. He's filling a roster spot. I don't see him active on game day anytime soon. We should be a 10 to 20 pass attempt team. We don't need many WRs. We picked this TE in round 2 to be the 3rd WR also. That's what I read. So WR 3 is covered by a high draft pick. Once Cook sits Boone will get his chance and he will need to step up. I wouldn't count on that but it may happen. As for Matti he had a nice game. But don't expect 5+ yards per attempt. He's a 3.8 guy. But he can carry the load or so I have read. If KC jumps up 14 the game is over. Because we are a run based team. It's not a come from behind scheme were it's pass after pass. Our D can't allow that to happen. Or any other piece.

lol you just went on a full negative rant right here.

-Yeah Elflein is worrying everyone.

-Not sure why you're worrying about shootouts. We've played 1 game. We arent throwing 10 times every game.

-Chad Beebe is FAR from "slow". Beebe is no different that some of the other small white WRs. He's quick, shifty, smooth in and out of his routes, etc. I have no clue where you come up with your assessment of him.

-Doctson was NOT the #6 or #7 WR. He wasnt buried on the depth chart like Treadwell was. He was surpassed by rookie Terry McLaurin who took over as X WR. And he's pretty darn good. He just went off this past week.

-No team should be a 10 pass attempt team. That's pretty unheard of. This team is going to throw quite a bit more from here on out. Zim said in his presser there was simply no need to because we went up 21-0 so fast.

-Not sure why you think Mattison is a 3.8 YPC guy??

-Also not sure why you're already talking about the KC game which is 8 weeks away.

CharVike wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 12:04 pm

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 8:13 am

lol you just went on a full negative rant right here.

-Yeah Elflein is worrying everyone.

-Not sure why you're worrying about shootouts. We've played 1 game. We arent throwing 10 times every game.

-Chad Beebe is FAR from "slow". Beebe is no different that some of the other small white WRs. He's quick, shifty, smooth in and out of his routes, etc. I have no clue where you come up with your assessment of him.

-Doctson was NOT the #6 or #7 WR. He wasnt buried on the depth chart like Treadwell was. He was surpassed by rookie Terry McLaurin who took over as X WR. And he's pretty darn good. He just went off this past week.

-No team should be a 10 pass attempt team. That's pretty unheard of. This team is going to throw quite a bit more from here on out. Zim said in his presser there was simply no need to because we went up 21-0 so fast.

-Not sure why you think Mattison is a 3.8 YPC guy??

-Also not sure why you're already talking about the KC game which is 8 weeks away.

The KC game was part of the string. As for Beebe here is what I read in the Startrib "While the 5-foot-10 Beebe's 40 times were around 4.6 seconds" I don't consider that blazing. But maybe he was timed at 4.2 another day. Plus I've seen his weigh from 170 to 195. Big swing. I always thought he was a slower than average and smaller than average player. IMO Mattison is a 3.8 guy. I see him as the short yardage runner. I also see him as the guy to burn the clock up. But that's my expectation and again I could be wrong. He averaged more game one than in his college days. I don't expect that to continue. "No team should have 10 pass attempts" Why not. It's something different. Why do the same as every other team? Do your own thing. IMO if we get into this 40+ PA a game the show will end quickly. Doctson wasn't buried but was cut? I don't understand that one. They should have traded him for a draft pick or something. Doctson was a bust and I don't expect him to be active unless someone is banged up. He fills a roster spot. Nothing more. Do you think Zim tells the press anything of value? What will he say for this week. The same old stuff. Rodgers is great, green bay is a tough place ect....... What I see is our secondary is banged up and our hands are full. We need to pound the ball and run the clock out. Don't put the ball up because we are having a tough time pass blocking right now. If we have 40 PAs we might get sacked 6 times which could lead to anything. But that won't be said by Zim.

Scary Terry was downright terrifying in his pro debut. Deadly fast with 4.35 wheels at 6'/210, McLaurin ran right by slow-footed Eagles CB Rasul Douglas for a 70-yard touchdown and also made some really tough sideline catches. He was extremely impressive and tied for the team lead in targets among wideouts. McLaurin should have had another 73-yard touchdown in the second half, but Case Keenum badly overthrew his wide-open receiver who could have walked into the end zone. McLaurin is someone to definitely grab off waivers heading into Week 2 against Dallas. McLaurin is who made Josh Doctson expendable in D.C.

What I see is our secondary is banged up and our hands are full. We need to pound the ball and run the clock out. Don't put the ball up because we are having a tough time pass blocking right now. If we have 40 PAs we might get sacked 6 times which could lead to anything. But that won't be said by Zim.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 2:53 pm

CharVike wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 12:04 pm
The KC game was part of the string. As for Beebe here is what I read in the Startrib "While the 5-foot-10 Beebe's 40 times were around 4.6 seconds" I don't consider that blazing. But maybe he was timed at 4.2 another day. Plus I've seen his weigh from 170 to 195. Big swing. I always thought he was a slower than average and smaller than average player. IMO Mattison is a 3.8 guy. I see him as the short yardage runner. I also see him as the guy to burn the clock up. But that's my expectation and again I could be wrong. He averaged more game one than in his college days. I don't expect that to continue. "No team should have 10 pass attempts" Why not. It's something different. Why do the same as every other team? Do your own thing. IMO if we get into this 40+ PA a game the show will end quickly. Doctson wasn't buried but was cut? I don't understand that one. They should have traded him for a draft pick or something. Doctson was a bust and I don't expect him to be active unless someone is banged up. He fills a roster spot. Nothing more. Do you think Zim tells the press anything of value? What will he say for this week. The same old stuff. Rodgers is great, green bay is a tough place ect....... What I see is our secondary is banged up and our hands are full. We need to pound the ball and run the clock out. Don't put the ball up because we are having a tough time pass blocking right now. If we have 40 PAs we might get sacked 6 times which could lead to anything. But that won't be said by Zim.

I dont understand you're obsession with speed and how fast a guy is? Beebe isnt the first guy you've criticized for this. So outside of his 40 yard dash that was "around 4.6" what else are you going off of? I can tell you that you arent going off of his play on the field. Because he sure as hell doesnt look slow on the field. A guy doesnt need to be fast to be good. You sound like YV when it comes to Mattison. All he complained about when we drafted him was that he was slow. Is Mattison being "slow" in some peoples eyes effecting his play? No. He sure doesnt look slow and neither does Chad Beebe. Football isnt just about speed. If you have attributes like strength, speed, elusiveness, route running ability, vision, etc you can be good in this league. You dont just need to be "fast" to be good. So many players over the years have proved that.

As for the 10 passes, I mean it happened, its done and over with. My point is, that shouldnt and wont be a weekly thing. It was all about game flow.

As for Doctson, no he was not buried. Look at Washington's WRs, they arent very good. Doctson's problem was he was an X WR. He didnt play multiple positions. He was surpassed by Terry McLaurin.

via Rotoworld:

Scary Terry was downright terrifying in his pro debut. Deadly fast with 4.35 wheels at 6'/210, McLaurin ran right by slow-footed Eagles CB Rasul Douglas for a 70-yard touchdown and also made some really tough sideline catches. He was extremely impressive and tied for the team lead in targets among wideouts. McLaurin should have had another 73-yard touchdown in the second half, but Case Keenum badly overthrew his wide-open receiver who could have walked into the end zone. McLaurin is someone to definitely grab off waivers heading into Week 2 against Dallas. McLaurin is who made Josh Doctson expendable in D.C.

And regarding Mattison, where you come up with a "3.8 guy" is beyond me. Nobody is saying he's going to average 5+ YPC his whole career. I guess my thing is what's the difference between a "3.8 guy" and a "4.0 guy"?? Like what separates those players? Just a very odd assessment by you.

What I see is our secondary is banged up and our hands are full. We need to pound the ball and run the clock out. Don't put the ball up because we are having a tough time pass blocking right now. If we have 40 PAs we might get sacked 6 times which could lead to anything. But that won't be said by Zim.

....you're stressing me out dude lol. The Packers arent that good. Chicago's offense was just THAT bad. Granted its on the road so that's always tough but I see us winning this game.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 2:53 pm

CharVike wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 12:04 pm
The KC game was part of the string. As for Beebe here is what I read in the Startrib "While the 5-foot-10 Beebe's 40 times were around 4.6 seconds" I don't consider that blazing. But maybe he was timed at 4.2 another day. Plus I've seen his weigh from 170 to 195. Big swing. I always thought he was a slower than average and smaller than average player. IMO Mattison is a 3.8 guy. I see him as the short yardage runner. I also see him as the guy to burn the clock up. But that's my expectation and again I could be wrong. He averaged more game one than in his college days. I don't expect that to continue. "No team should have 10 pass attempts" Why not. It's something different. Why do the same as every other team? Do your own thing. IMO if we get into this 40+ PA a game the show will end quickly. Doctson wasn't buried but was cut? I don't understand that one. They should have traded him for a draft pick or something. Doctson was a bust and I don't expect him to be active unless someone is banged up. He fills a roster spot. Nothing more. Do you think Zim tells the press anything of value? What will he say for this week. The same old stuff. Rodgers is great, green bay is a tough place ect....... What I see is our secondary is banged up and our hands are full. We need to pound the ball and run the clock out. Don't put the ball up because we are having a tough time pass blocking right now. If we have 40 PAs we might get sacked 6 times which could lead to anything. But that won't be said by Zim.

I dont understand you're obsession with speed and how fast a guy is? Beebe isnt the first guy you've criticized for this. So outside of his 40 yard dash that was "around 4.6" what else are you going off of? I can tell you that you arent going off of his play on the field. Because he sure as hell doesnt look slow on the field. A guy doesnt need to be fast to be good. You sound like YV when it comes to Mattison. All he complained about when we drafted him was that he was slow. Is Mattison being "slow" in some peoples eyes effecting his play? No. He sure doesnt look slow and neither does Chad Beebe. Football isnt just about speed. If you have attributes like strength, speed, elusiveness, route running ability, vision, etc you can be good in this league. You dont just need to be "fast" to be good. So many players over the years have proved that.

As for the 10 passes, I mean it happened, its done and over with. My point is, that shouldnt and wont be a weekly thing. It was all about game flow.

As for Doctson, no he was not buried. Look at Washington's WRs, they arent very good. Doctson's problem was he was an X WR. He didnt play multiple positions. He was surpassed by Terry McLaurin.

via Rotoworld:

Scary Terry was downright terrifying in his pro debut. Deadly fast with 4.35 wheels at 6'/210, McLaurin ran right by slow-footed Eagles CB Rasul Douglas for a 70-yard touchdown and also made some really tough sideline catches. He was extremely impressive and tied for the team lead in targets among wideouts. McLaurin should have had another 73-yard touchdown in the second half, but Case Keenum badly overthrew his wide-open receiver who could have walked into the end zone. McLaurin is someone to definitely grab off waivers heading into Week 2 against Dallas. McLaurin is who made Josh Doctson expendable in D.C.

And regarding Mattison, where you come up with a "3.8 guy" is beyond me. Nobody is saying he's going to average 5+ YPC his whole career. I guess my thing is what's the difference between a "3.8 guy" and a "4.0 guy"?? Like what separates those players? Just a very odd assessment by you.

What I see is our secondary is banged up and our hands are full. We need to pound the ball and run the clock out. Don't put the ball up because we are having a tough time pass blocking right now. If we have 40 PAs we might get sacked 6 times which could lead to anything. But that won't be said by Zim.

....you're stressing me out dude lol. The Packers arent that good. Chicago's offense was just THAT bad. Granted its on the road so that's always tough but I see us winning this game.

CharVike wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 4:19 pm

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 2:53 pm

I dont understand you're obsession with speed and how fast a guy is? Beebe isnt the first guy you've criticized for this. So outside of his 40 yard dash that was "around 4.6" what else are you going off of? I can tell you that you arent going off of his play on the field. Because he sure as hell doesnt look slow on the field. A guy doesnt need to be fast to be good. You sound like YV when it comes to Mattison. All he complained about when we drafted him was that he was slow. Is Mattison being "slow" in some peoples eyes effecting his play? No. He sure doesnt look slow and neither does Chad Beebe. Football isnt just about speed. If you have attributes like strength, speed, elusiveness, route running ability, vision, etc you can be good in this league. You dont just need to be "fast" to be good. So many players over the years have proved that.

As for the 10 passes, I mean it happened, its done and over with. My point is, that shouldnt and wont be a weekly thing. It was all about game flow.

As for Doctson, no he was not buried. Look at Washington's WRs, they arent very good. Doctson's problem was he was an X WR. He didnt play multiple positions. He was surpassed by Terry McLaurin.

via Rotoworld:


And regarding Mattison, where you come up with a "3.8 guy" is beyond me. Nobody is saying he's going to average 5+ YPC his whole career. I guess my thing is what's the difference between a "3.8 guy" and a "4.0 guy"?? Like what separates those players? Just a very odd assessment by you.




....you're stressing me out dude lol. The Packers arent that good. Chicago's offense was just THAT bad. Granted its on the road so that's always tough but I see us winning this game.

I liked the Mattison pick when it was made. He's a battering ram. He can take the carries. That's what I posted when he was picked. Plus he don't fumble. I like speed and size. That's hard to beat. But there have been some non speed guys that have had great careers. Like Fred B from the Raiders. I'm aware of that. But a speed guy scares a defense. Moss scared defenses because he could blow the top off with his speed. Bullet Bob Hayes could do the same with his speed. Teams needed to respect that.Yes we should beat the Pack but I have much respect for Rodgers. He's a very good QB and maybe the best in the NFL. But that's another argument. We should have won at Green Bay last year but somehow we couldn't do it. Hopefully it's different this year.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 8:29 am

CharVike wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 4:19 pm
I liked the Mattison pick when it was made. He's a battering ram. He can take the carries. That's what I posted when he was picked. Plus he don't fumble. I like speed and size. That's hard to beat. But there have been some non speed guys that have had great careers. Like Fred B from the Raiders. I'm aware of that. But a speed guy scares a defense. Moss scared defenses because he could blow the top off with his speed. Bullet Bob Hayes could do the same with his speed. Teams needed to respect that.Yes we should beat the Pack but I have much respect for Rodgers. He's a very good QB and maybe the best in the NFL. But that's another argument. We should have won at Green Bay last year but somehow we couldn't do it. Hopefully it's different this year.

Did Troy Williamson's speed scare defenses? lol. I mean it's not much of an argument. Speed helps yeah. But it goes for any player attribute. For example, I think Brian O'Neill is a very good RT. Doesnt have the bulk and strength but he gets the job done well because of other attributes like athleticism and footwork.

As for GB, they played Chicago well. But what they did was try and force Trubisky to beat them with his arm and they couldnt. Trubisky is just not a good QB. With us, it's a whole different animal. Kirk Cousins is a QB that CAN beat you with his arm, you have to focus on Diggs and AT AND Dalvin Cook is someone that CAN beat you. So they have to pick their poison here which is a lot tougher than facing Chicago's offense. Chicago doensnt have the QB we do, they dont have the RB we do, they dont have the WRs we do, heck they dont even have the TE's we do. We'll see how good GB's defense really is but I dont see them holding up against this offense. And Zim has been all over Rodgers for quite some time now. He always has excellent game plans against him and knows how to contain him. No less I think Rodgers has lost a step anyways. If this game was home, I think we wipe the floor with them. Given it's in GB, it will be tougher but I see us walking away with this one. We just need to start fast like we did last week. March down the field and get a TD and force some early 3 and outs.

And last year we collapsed in a few areas. Their first TD came off a blocked punt, we missed 3 FGs, Treadwell's drop that they picked off, etc. Stuff like that should not be happening. I dont think we make those mistakes this time around.

J. Kapp 11 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 1:23 pm I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that speed is far from the most important attribute in a football player. It certainly doesn't hurt, but there plenty of factors that are more important.

Need proof? Let's take an inventory of some of the great WRs of all time ... those in the Hall of Fame. I'll only go back to the 1970s, as it was a totally different game in the 1940s, 50s and 60s.

Bob Hayes (1965-75) -- Definitely fast. A burner.
Michael Irvin (1988-99) -- Not fast
Charlie Joyner (1968-86) -- Average speed for a WR
Steve Largent (1976-89) -- Average
James Lofton (1979-93) -- Faster than average
Art Monk (1980-95) -- Not fast
Jerry Rice (1985-2004) -- Not fast
John Stallworth (1974-87) -- A little faster than average
Lynn Swann (1974-82) -- A little faster than average
Charley Taylor (1964-77) -- Not fast
Paul Warfield (1964-77) -- Definitely fast.
Fred Biletnikoff (1965-78) -- Slow
Cris Carter (1987-2002) -- Not fast
Randy Moss (1998-2012) -- One of the fastest ever

This list isn't all-inclusive. I'm on my break at work, and it's all I have time to do. But as you can see, SPEED is not the number one factor in making a great WR. Of these 14 WR greats, only 6 of them would qualify as "faster than average" or better.

Other factors are more important. The ability to separate is high on the list. Catching the ball in traffic/contested catches ranks right up there. "Football speed" is important. So are great hands, good route running, and the general tendency to make plays. It's pretty difficult to be really slow, like a lineman or Tom Brady, and be a WR. But most great WRs aren't all THAT fast.

Mike Zimmer has said why Chad Beebe has potential, and it's not because of speed. It's because he doesn't have to slow down to make his break. That gives him separation. In today's NFL, separation is far more important than raw speed. Teams aren't going to let burners run by them anymore without rotating coverage. Staubach to Pearson couldn't happen in this day and age. Can you imagine a situation late in a game where the opponent's best (and fastest) receiver was in single coverage with no help over the top? If so, that would be a mistake.

Also, size is important along the line, but it's not THE most important thing. Not even close. Functional strength is much more important. Leverage. Footwork. Hand placement. Balance. Those are all WAY more important than size.

CharVike wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:52 pm

J. Kapp 11 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 1:23 pm I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that speed is far from the most important attribute in a football player. It certainly doesn't hurt, but there plenty of factors that are more important.

Need proof? Let's take an inventory of some of the great WRs of all time ... those in the Hall of Fame. I'll only go back to the 1970s, as it was a totally different game in the 1940s, 50s and 60s.

Bob Hayes (1965-75) -- Definitely fast. A burner.
Michael Irvin (1988-99) -- Not fast
Charlie Joyner (1968-86) -- Average speed for a WR
Steve Largent (1976-89) -- Average
James Lofton (1979-93) -- Faster than average
Art Monk (1980-95) -- Not fast
Jerry Rice (1985-2004) -- Not fast
John Stallworth (1974-87) -- A little faster than average
Lynn Swann (1974-82) -- A little faster than average
Charley Taylor (1964-77) -- Not fast
Paul Warfield (1964-77) -- Definitely fast.
Fred Biletnikoff (1965-78) -- Slow
Cris Carter (1987-2002) -- Not fast
Randy Moss (1998-2012) -- One of the fastest ever

This list isn't all-inclusive. I'm on my break at work, and it's all I have time to do. But as you can see, SPEED is not the number one factor in making a great WR. Of these 14 WR greats, only 6 of them would qualify as "faster than average" or better.

Other factors are more important. The ability to separate is high on the list. Catching the ball in traffic/contested catches ranks right up there. "Football speed" is important. So are great hands, good route running, and the general tendency to make plays. It's pretty difficult to be really slow, like a lineman or Tom Brady, and be a WR. But most great WRs aren't all THAT fast.

Mike Zimmer has said why Chad Beebe has potential, and it's not because of speed. It's because he doesn't have to slow down to make his break. That gives him separation. In today's NFL, separation is far more important than raw speed. Teams aren't going to let burners run by them anymore without rotating coverage. Staubach to Pearson couldn't happen in this day and age. Can you imagine a situation late in a game where the opponent's best (and fastest) receiver was in single coverage with no help over the top? If so, that would be a mistake.

Also, size is important along the line, but it's not THE most important thing. Not even close. Functional strength is much more important. Leverage. Footwork. Hand placement. Balance. Those are all WAY more important than size.

We all have opinions. You can't take a 120 pound guy and have him play OL at the NFL level. Even though he is strong as an ox, great foot work, leverage ect he will get engulfed by a massive man. That's what your missing. My example is extreme. If the size isn't there you can't play the position. That's why I like the bigger dude. All that other BS means nothing if the guy is bigger than you.

CharVike wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:52 pm

J. Kapp 11 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 1:23 pm I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that speed is far from the most important attribute in a football player. It certainly doesn't hurt, but there plenty of factors that are more important.

Need proof? Let's take an inventory of some of the great WRs of all time ... those in the Hall of Fame. I'll only go back to the 1970s, as it was a totally different game in the 1940s, 50s and 60s.

Bob Hayes (1965-75) -- Definitely fast. A burner.
Michael Irvin (1988-99) -- Not fast
Charlie Joyner (1968-86) -- Average speed for a WR
Steve Largent (1976-89) -- Average
James Lofton (1979-93) -- Faster than average
Art Monk (1980-95) -- Not fast
Jerry Rice (1985-2004) -- Not fast
John Stallworth (1974-87) -- A little faster than average
Lynn Swann (1974-82) -- A little faster than average
Charley Taylor (1964-77) -- Not fast
Paul Warfield (1964-77) -- Definitely fast.
Fred Biletnikoff (1965-78) -- Slow
Cris Carter (1987-2002) -- Not fast
Randy Moss (1998-2012) -- One of the fastest ever

This list isn't all-inclusive. I'm on my break at work, and it's all I have time to do. But as you can see, SPEED is not the number one factor in making a great WR. Of these 14 WR greats, only 6 of them would qualify as "faster than average" or better.

Other factors are more important. The ability to separate is high on the list. Catching the ball in traffic/contested catches ranks right up there. "Football speed" is important. So are great hands, good route running, and the general tendency to make plays. It's pretty difficult to be really slow, like a lineman or Tom Brady, and be a WR. But most great WRs aren't all THAT fast.

Mike Zimmer has said why Chad Beebe has potential, and it's not because of speed. It's because he doesn't have to slow down to make his break. That gives him separation. In today's NFL, separation is far more important than raw speed. Teams aren't going to let burners run by them anymore without rotating coverage. Staubach to Pearson couldn't happen in this day and age. Can you imagine a situation late in a game where the opponent's best (and fastest) receiver was in single coverage with no help over the top? If so, that would be a mistake.

Also, size is important along the line, but it's not THE most important thing. Not even close. Functional strength is much more important. Leverage. Footwork. Hand placement. Balance. Those are all WAY more important than size.

We all have opinions. You can't take a 120 pound guy and have him play OL at the NFL level. Even though he is strong as an ox, great foot work, leverage ect he will get engulfed by a massive man. That's what your missing. My example is extreme. If the size isn't there you can't play the position. That's why I like the bigger dude. All that other BS means nothing if the guy is bigger than you.

CharVike wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:06 pm

CharVike wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:52 pm
We all have opinions. You can't take a 120 pound guy and have him play OL at the NFL level. Even though he is strong as an ox, great foot work, leverage ect he will get engulfed by a massive man. That's what your missing. My example is extreme. If the size isn't there you can't play the position. That's why I like the bigger dude. All that other BS means nothing if the guy is bigger than you.

As a real NFL example the Bears would use the Fridge as a RB at the goal line. He had zero skill to be a RB. But his massive size allowed him to plow into the end zone. Gimmick? Yes. But it worked because of the mass. And that was against massive men. It all starts with size. And the bigger man will win the battle.

CharVike wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:52 pm

J. Kapp 11 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 1:23 pm I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that speed is far from the most important attribute in a football player. It certainly doesn't hurt, but there plenty of factors that are more important.

Need proof? Let's take an inventory of some of the great WRs of all time ... those in the Hall of Fame. I'll only go back to the 1970s, as it was a totally different game in the 1940s, 50s and 60s.

Bob Hayes (1965-75) -- Definitely fast. A burner.
Michael Irvin (1988-99) -- Not fast
Charlie Joyner (1968-86) -- Average speed for a WR
Steve Largent (1976-89) -- Average
James Lofton (1979-93) -- Faster than average
Art Monk (1980-95) -- Not fast
Jerry Rice (1985-2004) -- Not fast
John Stallworth (1974-87) -- A little faster than average
Lynn Swann (1974-82) -- A little faster than average
Charley Taylor (1964-77) -- Not fast
Paul Warfield (1964-77) -- Definitely fast.
Fred Biletnikoff (1965-78) -- Slow
Cris Carter (1987-2002) -- Not fast
Randy Moss (1998-2012) -- One of the fastest ever

This list isn't all-inclusive. I'm on my break at work, and it's all I have time to do. But as you can see, SPEED is not the number one factor in making a great WR. Of these 14 WR greats, only 6 of them would qualify as "faster than average" or better.

Other factors are more important. The ability to separate is high on the list. Catching the ball in traffic/contested catches ranks right up there. "Football speed" is important. So are great hands, good route running, and the general tendency to make plays. It's pretty difficult to be really slow, like a lineman or Tom Brady, and be a WR. But most great WRs aren't all THAT fast.

Mike Zimmer has said why Chad Beebe has potential, and it's not because of speed. It's because he doesn't have to slow down to make his break. That gives him separation. In today's NFL, separation is far more important than raw speed. Teams aren't going to let burners run by them anymore without rotating coverage. Staubach to Pearson couldn't happen in this day and age. Can you imagine a situation late in a game where the opponent's best (and fastest) receiver was in single coverage with no help over the top? If so, that would be a mistake.

Also, size is important along the line, but it's not THE most important thing. Not even close. Functional strength is much more important. Leverage. Footwork. Hand placement. Balance. Those are all WAY more important than size.

We all have opinions. You can't take a 120 pound guy and have him play OL at the NFL level. Even though he is strong as an ox, great foot work, leverage ect he will get engulfed by a massive man. That's what your missing. My example is extreme. If the size isn't there you can't play the position. That's why I like the bigger dude. All that other BS means nothing if the guy is bigger than you.