Reich Liking His Young Receiving Corps - NFL.com

[Nickster]

4 hours ago, coltsfeva said:

  Jerry Rice didn’t have elite speed either. Neither did Reggie, when Marvin retired.
  I’m  not comparing Pittman to them but my point is that, although 4.3 is nice to have, it’s not a prerequisite to being a #1.

   He can beat the elite corners by route running , by scheme and by winning 50/50 balls, which shouldn’t be dismissed.

    Wouldn’t it be more difficult to defend 4 or 5 “solid” receivers (to go along with an elite run game and an emerging group of TEs,) than to have 1 “superstar” who a.could get injured and b. could be the focus of the defense to slow down? 
        I hope Frank is right and this group excels this year. There’d be a whole lot of “eating crow” amongst the media, if they’re honest.

    

No.  It would be better to have a superstar and Jags.  You need a guy that can take over a game.

[Nickster]

47 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

To follow this up I would take Pittman over Kirk, Woods, or Cooks who are all in our division and are good. 

But our division sucks.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, Nickster said:

But our division sucks.

It does but that isn't our fault. I hope because it does we can get a high seed.

[2006Coltsbestever]

7 minutes ago, Nickster said:

But our division sucks.

I think a win over Tennessee would be a quality win and actually winning at Jacks would be as well since we haven't won there since 2014. Tennessee is still a good team but I just think we will better in 2022.

[Nickster]

I think our assessment on WR is similar. I’d put Pittman a notch above in the Very Good category.

 

all the arguments I make are with the ultimate football goals of competing and winning the championship.  We are at least decent.  But I just think we are possibly going to struggle to rise above our 7-11 win-p/struggle to make the post/not really contend if we make it mode we are stuck in.

 

So I don’t know if this comes through, but I think we are a decent team, but I’m not sure we are going to be able to make a leap with what we have On the field right now.  And I think if it doesn’t work out it will be increasingly difficult to improve the team because our best players are in less important positions.  Having a great RB, Will, LG and RT is fine, but those are among the easiest positions to fill adequately.  

 

the one thing I am really hopeful for is this Dline becomes the nickname type.  There has been a ton invested in this unit.  If they can become a holy terror, then it could be a fun year watching a very aggressive D.  That would be cool.  I grew up a Bears fan and loved defense and the old 46 was super agressive.

 

 

[Nickster]

9 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I think a win over Tennessee would be a quality win and actually winning at Jacks would be as well since we haven't won there since 2014. Tennessee is still a good team but I just think we will better in 2022.

TN is Ok.  If TLaw is the real deal, Jax could be much much better this against other teams, maybe as good against them as they are v the Colts.

 

but our division is and has been among the weakest for years now.  In the last 7 seasons the AFC South has won a total of 7 playoff games and one of those was intradivision.  In those seasons AFC South champs, have won with win totals 9,9,10, 11, 10, 11, and 12 wins.  In 3 of those seasons AFC South teams had zero postseason wins including the last two.

 

point being having the best WR in this Division ain’t saying much.

[Four2itus]

10 minutes ago, Nickster said:

but our division is and has been among the weakest for years now.  In the last 7 seasons the AFC South has won a total of 7 playoff games and one of those was intradivision.  In those seasons AFC South champs, have won with win totals 9,9,10, 11, 10, 11, and 12 wins.  In 3 of those seasons AFC South teams had zero postseason wins including the last two.

 

point being having the best WR in this Division ain’t saying much.

Context. 

 

If you have 8 guys who are wealthy in a specialized group, and they stack up their total wealth comparison as:

 

10 billion

5 billion

2 billion

100 million

50 million

10 million

1 million

100,000

 

....it becomes easy to see the gigantic difference in actual wealth

 

But if the same 8 guys difference in wealth was:

 

10 billion

9.8 billion

9.5 billion

9 billion

8.8 billion

8.6 billion

8.5 billion

8.44 billion

 

...you can still say one guy is the wealthiest, and one guy is the most poor on the list of that selected group. My point is...every year....every year, a team that is supposedly crap, beats the all world team. It happens a few times a year....every year. Why? Because the difference in most NFL games, is a play or two. So in my world, the second group above is a better representation of the NFL than the first group, but many fans act is if the first group is. 

 

So having the best wide receiver in the division in todays NFL....IS saying something. 

 

 

[DattMavis]

Please, somebody correct me if I’m wrong, because this is how I’ve always understood the WR positions.

I feel like MPJ has the perfect skill set to be a Z; thick, good in traffic, and elite run blocker being on the strong side. Pierce has the perfect skill set to be an X; tall, fast, and (seemingly) good against press. I think Parris clearly has the skill set to be an elite slot, if he can stay healthy.

Am I incorrect on this thinking? I see people say MPJ can only play X. Why is that?

[LiveAndLetAddai]

2 hours ago, Four2itus said:

Context. 

 

If you have 8 guys who are wealthy in a specialized group, and they stack up their total wealth comparison as:

 

10 billion

5 billion

2 billion

100 million

50 million

10 million

1 million

100,000

 

....it becomes easy to see the gigantic difference in actual wealth

 

But if the same 8 guys difference in wealth was:

 

10 billion

9.8 billion

9.5 billion

9 billion

8.8 billion

8.6 billion

8.5 billion

8.44 billion

 

...you can still say one guy is the wealthiest, and one guy is the most poor on the list of that selected group. My point is...every year....every year, a team that is supposedly crap, beats the all world team. It happens a few times a year....every year. Why? Because the difference in most NFL games, is a play or two. So in my world, the second group above is a better representation of the NFL than the first group, but many fans act is if the first group is. 

 

So having the best wide receiver in the division in todays NFL....IS saying something. 

 

 

Any given Sunday....

 

And Indy does have something special in Pitt....

[coltsfeva]

3 hours ago, Nickster said:

No.  It would be better to have a superstar and Jags.  You need a guy that can take over a game.

A guy like…Taylor, Hines or Pittman? Don’t know how far you think these guys are from Superstars but it’s not a stretch to think any of them couldn’t take over a game.

[Boondoggle]

6 hours ago, DougDew said:

Well, this thread has turned into a bunch of label making.  I think what @Moosejawcoltsays has a lot of merit.

 

At the end of the day, a teams #1 receiver is the guy that the defense fears will score on any play, usually by over the top speed but in some cases exceptional agility or combination of those and strength, like the unicorn DK Metcalf.  

 

( It also applies to RBs, where Henry and JTs ability to hit the home run put them above most other RBs, the kind the NFL doesn't give big second contracts to)

 

Pittman is not that home run threat, and will never be an NFL #1 WR...he may get the most yards and receptions on the team, and may even be the first target on the team, but that's not the same thing as being a #1 NFL WR.  

 

Reggie Wayne was never a #1.  He had either Marvin or TY as the home run threat.  He was a great X, and Pittman could be the same.  But that's not a #1.

 

And Moose is right about Corners.  The #1s have the whole package.  Gilmore and Rhodes were probably NFL #1 Corners in their prime.  I think defenses play a much greater mix of coverages and situational coverages these days than years before, so maybe those #1 corners either don't have the opportunity to dominate like they used to, or teams are not so much looking to spend money on a #1 corner and accept less talent and make up for it with situational schemes.

I don't argue your definition of a "#1 receiver."  I think you hit on how most folks define it, the mainstream definition if you will.  But in today's league it's not about having a #1 receiver.  It's about depth of matchups.  At what level can you isolate my DBs and win consistently.

 

Some teams can win with the top matchup.  That's when you have that true #1 you're talking about.  But over the years defenses have usually shut those guys down in the big games, when they run into defenses that can tool for them or do the old CB1 on your WR2 and double up your top weapon thing and shut you down.

 

So today's league is about going three deep or more in pass game threats.  It's about depth of matchups, moreso than having those super elites at the top and hoping they can beat the focus.  Look at the Super Bowl we just had.  The moment OBJ went down the Rams offense stalled out.  Prior to the injury OBJ was unstoppable, feasting on the back side of the play and the Bengals had zero answers.  They were overrun by the matchup and it was a different game after the injury because the Bengals rolled everything to Kupp and there wasn't enough talent out there after him to threaten them.  Great as Kupp is that lack of threats put them at risk of losing the game.

 

Look at the Rams moves this offseason and there's no mistake they added Robinson to the group.  The elite offenses all go easily to three threats or more.  Bengals are also stupidly stacked with Chase, Higgins and Boyd.  Contenders are going to sort out in part based on this equation.  Packers for example lost Adams to the Raiders, who now have a top three of Adams, Renfrow, and Waller which puts them on the map now as a top passing offense.  Raiders have a dogfight in that division but they're gonna put up points.  Packers might be ok but they're loaded with if's.  Titans took a huge hit losing Brown and I think Burks might bust, so now they need Woods and probably the kid from UCLA with his crisp routes to sustain their offense.  As a result they're going to be a lot less explosive.

 

Looking at the Colts the WR room isn't clear cut in terms of how deep they threaten a defense.  There's a lot of if's at work here too.  If this guy can stay healthy.  If that guy can take a step forward.  And that's ok, you're not always going to have a slam dunk unit.  But chances are they're going to need to play action off the fantastic run game they have in order to sustain production.  And that's also ok.  You just don't have a lot of room for error or loss to injury.  And there is no need to convince yourself everything is going to come out as best possible.  Chances are it'll be a mix.  So to me they look like a low end playoff team, all of whom tend to be dependent on if's in terms of weapons.  But of course if Pittman comes through and they stay healthy they might be much better than expected.  So I'm hopeful, but this is not some slam dunk group of wideouts.  It's a bit lottery ticket-ish.

[Nickster]

4 hours ago, Four2itus said:

Context. 

 

If you have 8 guys who are wealthy in a specialized group, and they stack up their total wealth comparison as:

 

10 billion

5 billion

2 billion

100 million

50 million

10 million

1 million

100,000

 

....it becomes easy to see the gigantic difference in actual wealth

 

But if the same 8 guys difference in wealth was:

 

10 billion

9.8 billion

9.5 billion

9 billion

8.8 billion

8.6 billion

8.5 billion

8.44 billion

 

...you can still say one guy is the wealthiest, and one guy is the most poor on the list of that selected group. My point is...every year....every year, a team that is supposedly crap, beats the all world team. It happens a few times a year....every year. Why? Because the difference in most NFL games, is a play or two. So in my world, the second group above is a better representation of the NFL than the first group, but many fans act is if the first group is. 

 

So having the best wide receiver in the division in todays NFL....IS saying something. 

 

 

in my world, there isn’t enough receiving talent in this division for one of its teams to compete with the best teams in the league in a consistent basis. 
 

I mean sure there can be an anomalous win on occasion, but I am not talking about that.  
 

you don’t think there is much separation between Pittman and Adams, Diggs, Samuel, Kupp, TBs all star team, hill, etc?

 

 

[holeymoley99]

"Just because a player hasnt done it in the past DOESN'T mean he cant when give then chance"  Vince Lombardi...

[Nickster]

1 hour ago, coltsfeva said:

A guy like…Taylor, Hines or Pittman? Don’t know how far you think these guys are from Superstars but it’s not a stretch to think any of them couldn’t take over a game.

Taylor is a super star.  I don’t think s superstar back moves the needle much.  At least there haven’t been any examples in years of a elite back’s team had much success.  TN a few years ago made an unlikely run the the AFC championship, but the teams they beat scored 25 points in 2 games.  Likely anomalous.  Balt was a run centric team too so one of them had to win.

 

I will say one thing.  If we can run 2back really well, we may have something there.  I speak from league trends but occasionally trends change and our team is certainly set up offensively to try that.

[Nickster]

1 hour ago, Boondoggle said:

I don't argue your definition of a "#1 receiver."  I think you hit on how most folks define it, the mainstream definition if you will.  But in today's league it's not about having a #1 receiver.  It's about depth of matchups.  At what level can you isolate my DBs and win consistently.

 

Some teams can win with the top matchup.  That's when you have that true #1 you're talking about.  But over the years defenses have usually shut those guys down in the big games, when they run into defenses that can tool for them or do the old CB1 on your WR2 and double up your top weapon thing and shut you down.

 

So today's league is about going three deep or more in pass game threats.  It's about depth of matchups, moreso than having those super elites at the top and hoping they can beat the focus.  Look at the Super Bowl we just had.  The moment OBJ went down the Rams offense stalled out.  Prior to the injury OBJ was unstoppable, feasting on the back side of the play and the Bengals had zero answers.  They were overrun by the matchup and it was a different game after the injury because the Bengals rolled everything to Kupp and there wasn't enough talent out there after him to threaten them.  Great as Kupp is that lack of threats put them at risk of losing the game.

 

Look at the Rams moves this offseason and there's no mistake they added Robinson to the group.  The elite offenses all go easily to three threats or more.  Bengals are also stupidly stacked with Chase, Higgins and Boyd.  Contenders are going to sort out in part based on this equation.  Packers for example lost Adams to the Raiders, who now have a top three of Adams, Renfrow, and Waller which puts them on the map now as a top passing offense.  Raiders have a dogfight in that division but they're gonna put up points.  Packers might be ok but they're loaded with if's.  Titans took a huge hit losing Brown and I think Burks might bust, so now they need Woods and probably the kid from UCLA with his crisp routes to sustain their offense.  As a result they're going to be a lot less explosive.

 

Looking at the Colts the WR room isn't clear cut in terms of how deep they threaten a defense.  There's a lot of if's at work here too.  If this guy can stay healthy.  If that guy can take a step forward.  And that's ok, you're not always going to have a slam dunk unit.  But chances are they're going to need to play action off the fantastic run game they have in order to sustain production.  And that's also ok.  You just don't have a lot of room for error or loss to injury.  And there is no need to convince yourself everything is going to come out as best possible.  Chances are it'll be a mix.  So to me they look like a low end playoff team, all of whom tend to be dependent on if's in terms of weapons.  But of course if Pittman comes through and they stay healthy they might be much better than expected.  So I'm hopeful, but this is not some slam dunk group of wideouts.  It's a bit lottery ticket-ish.

Man every one of those teams you are mentioning have elite receivers, at least others who are good to greatI don’t see your point other than you need multiple great receivers seemingly in today’s league more than ever, and at least 1 who is an elite top shelf talent.
 

I don’t get what you are saying.  

[EastStreet]

13 hours ago, AwesomeAustin said:

I know we will spread the ball around but I think a second receiver will emerge and flirt with 1k yards. Ryan will do a good job of getting the ball to the right spot.  He goes for 4K yards and someone besides Pitt will need to get a good chunk of it. Not saying it’s likely we have two 1k receivers but I think it’s possible. This is only a gut feeling but I think Paris gets at least 700yds this year. Going for more will rely on health and we all know that is the million dollar question with him. 

If Parris stays healthy, wouldn't be shocked at all to see him have a nice yards total this season. 

Pierce in time will may fit the bill too. 

I think Mo is going to have a career best season this year. 

I can also see both Hines and JT averaging a decent amount (relative to RBs) in the passing game. 

We have more options than folks think. And if Dulin emerges a bit too, it'll be a good year. 

[w87r]

@EastStreet

 

Can you pull up the stats for target percentage across all teams.

 

Top option vs 2nd leading option.

 

If that makes sense? I will try and see if I can find what I am looking for in the mean time.

 

So for example

Pittman 129 targets, Pascal 69 targets

 

129/502 total team targets 25.7% 

 

1 out of 4 Colts targets went to Pittman

 

D. Adams 169 targets, Aaron Jones 65 targets

 

169/570 total team targets 29.6%

 

3 out of 10 Packers targets went to Adams

 

So I guess a couple different numbers..

 

Highest percentage of top target vs #2 target

+

Highest percentage of team targets

[EastStreet]

12 hours ago, Nickster said:

Every team plays more zone than man every year.

 

Wouldn't say every team, but most. 

[EastStreet]

12 minutes ago, w87r said:

@EastStreet

 

Can you pull up the stats for target percentage across all teams.

 

Top option vs 2nd leading option.

 

If that makes sense? I will try and see if I can find what I am looking for in the mean time.

 

So for example

Pittman 129 targets, Pascal 69 targets

 

129/502 total team targets 25.7% 

 

1 out of 4 Colts targets went to Pittman

 

D. Adams 169 targets, Aaron Jones 65 targets

 

169/570 total team targets 29.6%

 

3 out of 10 Packers targets went to Adams

 

So I guess a couple different numbers..

 

Highest percentage of top target vs #2 target

+

Highest percentage of team targets

 

Sorry, I don't know of any wide view like that (team level).

Player profiler has target share and route participation on an individual level. 

 

Player profiler does rank the player (vs the league) though, if you're trying to see how our guys compare.

Pittman for instance was 14th in target share. Which lines up a bit with his 16th most yards as a WR.

He was #3 in route participation (not asked to block much). 

https://www.playerprofiler.com/nfl/michael-pittman/

[Nickster]

19 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

Wouldn't say every team, but most. 

I’ve been searching and couldn’t find it, but I thought I saw every team was under 50% man last year.  Could be wrong. Lions ran more man until Patricia was fired and BB did with the Pats occasionally, but this is bit deceptive because that includes 2 Man in and long downs, and let’s face it, that’s not really man coverage.  I mean yeah, but no not really.

 

I freaking love 2 man.  Coaches dream scheme.  

[EastStreet]

1 minute ago, Nickster said:

I’ve been searching and couldn’t find it, but I thought I saw every team was under 50% man last year.  Could be wrong. Lions ran more man until Patricia was fired and BB did with the Pats occasionally, but this is bit deceptive because that includes 2 Man in and long downs, and let’s face it, that’s not really man coverage.  I mean yeah, but no not really.

 

I freaking love 2 man.  Coaches dream scheme.  

 

Ds are a bunch of mish mash these days. 

Some calls have one half of the field playing man, the other playing zone. 

With the evolution of rip/liz and match type stuff, it's just really hard to classify. 

[OLD FAN MAN]

On 8/5/2022 at 10:16 AM, Flash7 said:

We've been down this road before. It's all too familiar. We have 1 guy and a bunch of hopefuls and by mid-season we're upset that we don't have any capable WRs. 

 

For the longest time it was just T.Y. and we were hoping that Dorsett could help take the pressure off of him, while guys like Quan Bray and Griff Whalen developed.

 

Then  it was just T.Y. while we hoped for more from Moncrief and Dorsett, while we guys like Chester Rodgers and Krishawn Hogan developed.

 

Then it was just T.Y. while we hoped for more from Moncrief and Chester Rodgers, while guys like Fountain, Pascal, and Marcus Johnson develop.

 

All the while, the GMs and coaches praised the WR room every off season. It's what they're supposed to do. They're not going to talk bad about their players.

 

Recently, it's been Pittman with a hurt and aging T.Y.. Now we're hoping that Pittman has a capable #2 in Pierce. I'm hopeful, but hopeful is all I've been nearly over the last decade.

 

 

nailed it

 

[Moosejawcolt]

10 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

To follow this up I would take Pittman over Kirk, Woods, or Cooks who are all in our division and are good. 

That ain't saying much lol

[EastStreet]

17 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

That ain't saying much lol

 

How about you provide us your stack rank of X WRs. 

[Moosejawcolt]

13 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

How about you provide us your stack rank of X WRs. 

That's like asking me to name top slot corners......not important to me lol. Ask me to name to top Z and I may accommodate. Yes I  being silly. I think this offence needs that vertical threat to be dynamic. Hoping Pearce and Campbell are those guys.

[throwing BBZ]

18 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

That's like asking me to name top slot corners......not important to me lol. Ask me to name to top Z and I may accommodate. Yes I  being silly. I think this offence needs that vertical threat to be dynamic. Hoping Pearce and Campbell are those guys.

 

I expect Dullin to be that guy.

[Moosejawcolt]

2 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

I expect Dullin to be that guy.

Yes,I think Dulin is opening eyes. However, I think Pearce is more of a Z receiver given his height and speed? He has been going up against Gilmore all camp. We all have to remember  that this is camp. Lots of guys shine and we go goo goo ga  ga  and they  end up doing nothing in games. The one comforting thing bout Dulin is that he has progressing year after year.

[EastStreet]

6 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

That's like asking me to name top slot corners......not important to me lol. Ask me to name to top Z and I may accommodate. Yes I  being silly. I think this offence needs that vertical threat to be dynamic. Hoping Pearce and Campbell are those guys.

WR units are more than just Zs.

[CanuckColt]

On 8/6/2022 at 7:43 PM, EastStreet said:

If Parris stays healthy, wouldn't be shocked at all to see him have a nice yards total this season. 

Pierce in time will may fit the bill too. 

I think Mo is going to have a career best season this year. 

I can also see both Hines and JT averaging a decent amount (relative to RBs) in the passing game. 

We have more options than folks think. And if Dulin emerges a bit too, it'll be a good year. 

Mo drops a lot of critical passes in a game.

All  of our TE's have had drop problems except Ogletree.

Ogletree looks like the best pass-catcher of the bunch so far.

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, CanuckColt said:

Mo drops a lot of critical passes in a game.

All  of our TE's have had drop problems except Ogletree.

Ogletree looks like the best pass-catcher of the bunch so far.

 

Mo has never been seen as a dropper. 

 

Even last year with Wentz, depending on which source you look at, Mo had a smaller drop % than most everyone playing big roles  on the team lol..

 

Taylor, Doyle, Pittman, and Pascal all had higher drop %s. 

And Mo's true catch rate has always been very good. 

 

But I agree that Granson, Woods, and Ogletree all had drop flags coming in. 

I discount the flag on Ogletree a bit cause he bad QBs and multiple bad QBs (musical chairs last season). 

[Moosejawcolt]

3 hours ago, EastStreet said:

WR units are more than just Zs.

Agreed. Just would be nice to have a legit take the top off the defence threat. Would mean so much to this offense.

[NewColtsFan]

10 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

That's like asking me to name top slot corners......not important to me lol. Ask me to name to top Z and I may accommodate. Yes I  being silly. I think this offence needs that vertical threat to be dynamic. Hoping Pearce and Campbell are those guys.

Small favor?

 

Our rookie wide receiver is Alec Pierce.   He’s not Pearce.   Believe me, I make way too many spelling mistakes.   They drive me CRAZY!   The difference is mine are accidental. 
 

Pierce, please….     Many thanks.       

[Moosejawcolt]

3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Small favor?

 

Our rookie wide receiver is Alec Pierce.   He’s not Pearce.   Believe me, I make way too many spelling mistakes.   They drive me CRAZY!   The difference is mine are accidental. 
 

Pierce, please….     Many thanks.       

Lol....k

[EastStreet]

16 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Agreed. Just would be nice to have a legit take the top off the defence threat. Would mean so much to this offense.

All teams need two things if they are to be successful. They need a WR that can get chunk plays (take the top off), and they need one that move the chains with physicality. Pittman is the later, who can also get the contested catch deep. He stacks well too.

 

Prior to Pitt, Reich tried to turn TY into that shallow sideline possession guy. Can't do that with TY's size. IMO that was the beginning of TY's decline. Yes he a great last cut guy, but should have never overused him on shallow stuff like we did. 

[Boondoggle]

On 8/6/2022 at 5:52 PM, Nickster said:

Man every one of those teams you are mentioning have elite receivers, at least others who are good to greatI don’t see your point other than you need multiple great receivers seemingly in today’s league more than ever, and at least 1 who is an elite top shelf talent.
 

I don’t get what you are saying.  

Well it's probably a lost cause to discuss this further then.  Bottom line is you can have one stud wideout but teams will figure out how to remove him on key downs that decide the game.  In today's league you need multiple matchups to allow you to break down a defense and isolate who you want on who for a given look and dismantle them.  If you get to that four threat range and have a QB who can dish it most defenses are gonna break down and the offense will get a fancy nickname in history.

 

Let me ask you this...  Do you think the Chiefs are a great offense this year?

 

If you say yes by assumption of they're great every year, I would refer you to their roster.  Who are their top threats in the passing game.  How deep do you think they go?

 

Way I see it Kelce is a top weapon.  You can ruin players days with him.  But after him there's some question marks.  Hardman?  Ok.  Sure.  Not a huge fan but he's a guy you can get some isolations with.  After that, though, I'm not seeing special.  Maybe I'm too high and missing someone, but I'm seeing two good weapons and an offense that is praying they hit on Sky Moore.  I'd say they go two deep.  Which is not a great offense btw.  So I'd expect their offensive throughput to dip in 2022, and when it does all the talking heads will bag on Mahomes but really it will be they had to run the ball more and protect longer to survive.

[EastStreet]

21 minutes ago, Boondoggle said:

Well it's probably a lost cause to discuss this further then.  Bottom line is you can have one stud wideout but teams will figure out how to remove him on key downs that decide the game.  In today's league you need multiple matchups to allow you to break down a defense and isolate who you want on who for a given look and dismantle them.  If you get to that four threat range and have a QB who can dish it most defenses are gonna break down and the offense will get a fancy nickname in history.

 

Let me ask you this...  Do you think the Chiefs are a great offense this year?

 

If you say yes by assumption of they're great every year, I would refer you to their roster.  Who are their top threats in the passing game.  How deep do you think they go?

 

Way I see it Kelce is a top weapon.  You can ruin players days with him.  But after him there's some question marks.  Hardman?  Ok.  Sure.  Not a huge fan but he's a guy you can get some isolations with.  After that, though, I'm not seeing special.  Maybe I'm too high and missing someone, but I'm seeing two good weapons and an offense that is praying they hit on Sky Moore.  I'd say they go two deep.  Which is not a great offense btw.  So I'd expect their offensive throughput to dip in 2022, and when it does all the talking heads will bag on Mahomes but really it will be they had to run the ball more and protect longer to survive.

 

I agree losing Hill is a huge loss. I do think they take a tiny step back, but they could also take a step forward. 

 

Not a bad pass catching group at all... 

 

RB - CEH is a good catching RB, not that he needs it though

TE - Kelce - don't need to say anything here

 

WR -

MVS - solid and quality X

JuJu - likely does better with Mahomes over Big Ben... 

Hardman - productive guy, and should take a step forward now that he's no longer in Hill's shadow

Moore - rook, but I like his chances.

 

A lot of teams would like to have that group

[Nickster]

5 hours ago, Boondoggle said:

Well it's probably a lost cause to discuss this further then.  Bottom line is you can have one stud wideout but teams will figure out how to remove him on key downs that decide the game.  In today's league you need multiple matchups to allow you to break down a defense and isolate who you want on who for a given look and dismantle them.  If you get to that four threat range and have a QB who can dish it most defenses are gonna break down and the offense will get a fancy nickname in history.

 

Let me ask you this...  Do you think the Chiefs are a great offense this year?

 

If you say yes by assumption of they're great every year, I would refer you to their roster.  Who are their top threats in the passing game.  How deep do you think they go?

 

Way I see it Kelce is a top weapon.  You can ruin players days with him.  But after him there's some question marks.  Hardman?  Ok.  Sure.  Not a huge fan but he's a guy you can get some isolations with.  After that, though, I'm not seeing special.  Maybe I'm too high and missing someone, but I'm seeing two good weapons and an offense that is praying they hit on Sky Moore.  I'd say they go two deep.  Which is not a great offense btw.  So I'd expect their offensive throughput to dip in 2022, and when it does all the talking heads will bag on Mahomes but really it will be they had to run the ball more and protect longer to survive.

Ok yeah I agree.  I just note that everyone of the teams you mentioned had an elite guy.

 

bills and GB were basically one guy and JAgs though.  Of course their QB situation is off the charts .  KC will be an interesting watch.

 

what I think is pretty clear is that all of the contending teams lately have had at least one  guy everyone covets and usually more than one.

[Nickster]

18 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

I expect Dullin to be that guy.

Eesh

[Nickster]

8 hours ago, EastStreet said:

All teams need two things if they are to be successful. They need a WR that can get chunk plays (take the top off), and they need one that move the chains with physicality. Pittman is the later, who can also get the contested catch deep. He stacks well too.

 

Prior to Pitt, Reich tried to turn TY into that shallow sideline possession guy. Can't do that with TY's size. IMO that was the beginning of TY's decline. Yes he a great last cut guy, but should have never overused him on shallow stuff like we did. 

On this East it seems you are arguing with Moose even though you both think the same thing.  We need a field stretcher .  

[Solid84]

6 hours ago, Boondoggle said:

Well it's probably a lost cause to discuss this further then.  Bottom line is you can have one stud wideout but teams will figure out how to remove him on key downs that decide the game.  In today's league you need multiple matchups to allow you to break down a defense and isolate who you want on who for a given look and dismantle them.  If you get to that four threat range and have a QB who can dish it most defenses are gonna break down and the offense will get a fancy nickname in history.

 

Let me ask you this...  Do you think the Chiefs are a great offense this year?

 

If you say yes by assumption of they're great every year, I would refer you to their roster.  Who are their top threats in the passing game.  How deep do you think they go?

 

Way I see it Kelce is a top weapon.  You can ruin players days with him.  But after him there's some question marks.  Hardman?  Ok.  Sure.  Not a huge fan but he's a guy you can get some isolations with.  After that, though, I'm not seeing special.  Maybe I'm too high and missing someone, but I'm seeing two good weapons and an offense that is praying they hit on Sky Moore.  I'd say they go two deep.  Which is not a great offense btw.  So I'd expect their offensive throughput to dip in 2022, and when it does all the talking heads will bag on Mahomes but really it will be they had to run the ball more and protect longer to survive.

They also have JuJu and MVS. They have a lot more proven talent at WR than us.