Calvin Johnson
Andre Johnson
DeSean Jackson
Greg Jennings
Roddy White
Dwayne Bowe

 

Vincent Jackson. HE isn't a super speedster, but he's pretty damn fast, and relative to his size super damn fast.

EDIT: We have to have one of the slowest receiving corps in the league, I bet.

 

What scared me was VJ's DUI problems. If he can get that under control a la Jared Allen, sure. But at the time, it was a serious unknown.

I've never been a fan of the BM trade, even saying I ranked VJ and at that time, a rookie Desean Jackson (and roddy white) and many others over Brandon Marshall. I was almost labeled a heretic as BM was top 3. I always had BM top 10 but top 3, never.

 

BMarsh isn't the problem. Our archaic offense combined with zero threat from our TE and no running game + poor interior Oline play at the end of the season. We get a stud TE and it opens up the whole offense (assuming Daboll calls better plays than Henning). BMarsh + TE that can stretch the field opens up the other WRs like Bess and even Hartline would benefit greatly.

 

Calling discussion on this particularly topic "good" is incredibly charitable. There's a faction of people who popped wood over watching Desean Jackson or Mike Wallace this season that have developed a whole mythology around fast wide receivers, and nothing... Not statistics, not facts, not a basic understanding of how coverages work... will stop them from posting all day, every day on how it is a panacea.

 

Look at the list..... That is all you need to know.

http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/football/nfl/stats/reception-leaders

TD production means more to me.... and big plays of course. :up:

 

So you wouldn't want Mike Wallace on this team. NE passed and went with Tate at 83, Giants chose Barden after Wallace at 84 We took Turner at 87.....in 2009
Still think Mike Wallace was our pick. He went off the board we took status quo and lost out.

 

Regardless of speed, I wanted DJax in 2008 after watching him rape the combine. The simple fact is, the big teams usually, more often than not, have at least one speed guy, or a consistent down field player who can make a body play on the ball. Jennings is pretty fast, Steelers....we all know. Colts do have Garcon. Iggles have DJax. Falcs have White. Jets have Braylon and Holmes to an extent. Saints have just about every WR they currently have signed. Other teams scheme with what they have and make it work magic. Patriots for example. What they did was crazy with those guys. It wasn't enough, but it was still pretty crazy to watch.

I don't see Sparano or Daboll coming up with magic any time soon. I'd just like to see one guy who could either be fast, or consistently go down field and make a play on a ball.

 

LMAO. Not fast WRs, WRs with big play ability, speed is optional, but it sure helps. Tedd Ginn is fast, Larry Fitzgerald isnt, but Fitz is a much bigger threat and he's treated accordingly. But you're way to advanced to get caught up in the basics, so I wont waste your time.

 

Give me a break!! Nobody is saying we need DeSean Jacksons all over the field. That's a ridiculous and arrogant statement.

All some of us are saying is that we at least need SOME ability to attack the safeties from multiple positions simultaneously since we presently have little ability to defeat Cover 2. That's it!!!! That doesn't mean signing 14 guys with 4.3 speed. That can be as simple as bringing in a 4.5 guy like Greg Little who can create problems for defenses down field.

Panacea my a$$. For crying out loud, some teams are capable of running 3-4 verticals to attack a cover 2 and open up soft spots for guys underneath or up the seam to make plays. Don't tell me it's bs; teams around the NFL do this on a regular basis.


The Chargers do it ALL THE TIME with Jackson (4.41), Floyd (4.55), Nanee (4.41), Ajirotutu (4.58), Caryton (4.58) and Gates (4.6).

Packers do it OFTEN with Jennings (4.42), Driver (4.45), Nelson (4.45), Jones (4.52), Finley (4.66), Quarless (4.57). 6 of them can make plays downfield.

Jets do it a LOT with Holmes (4.35), Edwards (4.45), and Keller (4.53). which is why Edwards and Holmes had a 17 & 14 AVG and Keller and LT caught 100+.

Baltimore did it with Boldin, Housh, and Mason so that Heap and Rice can make plays underneath. They dont have to be fast if they're a threat to make a play.

Buffalo does it frequently with Evans (4.39), Parrish (4.37), Johnson (4.46), and Spiller (4.26).

Chicago does it with Knoxx (4.29), Hester (4.21), Olsen (4.51), and Forte.... which is why Forte can catch 547 yards, 10.7 avg, and 3 TDs.

Cincy did it frequently with Ocho (4.4ish), TO (4.38?), Caldwell (4.35), Simpson (4.42), Shipley (4.48), and Gresham (4.66). They did it vs us.

Dallas does it OFTEN with Austin (4.47), Dez (4.52), Williams (4.4), Witten (4.65), and Felix (4.42). That's 5 freakin guys who can attack coverage.

Broncos do it with Brandon LLoyd (18.8 avg), Royal (4.39), Thomas (4.38 supposedly), Gaffney (4.53), Eric Decker (4.54), and Moreno.

Detroit does it VERY WELL with Calvin (4.35), Burelson (4.49), Pettigrew, and Best (4.34). We should know!!!

Houston definitely does it with Johnson (4.40), Walter (4.40), Jones (4.49), Daniels (4.65), and Arian Foster.

Indy does it with Wayne (4.45), Garcon (4.42), Collie (4.53), and Clark (4.55). Collie is their slow guy, yet he would be our Hartline.

Jags do it with Thomas (4.30), Sims-Walker (4.35), Jason Hill (4.32), Mercedes (4.79), and MJD (4.39).

Vikings did it with Rice (4.50), Harvin (4.39), Berrian (4.44), Shiancoe (4.62), and Peterson (4.40).

Saints do it well with Colston (4.50), Meachem (4.39), Henderson (4.32), Graham (4.53), Bush (4.37). Their slowest is our fastest.

Giants do it with Manningham (4.39), Nicks (4.49), Smith (4.44), and Boss (4.74).

Raiders CONSTANTLY do it with Ford (4.22), Bey (4.25), Murphy (4.32), McFadden (4.33), Miller (4.74), and Reece (4.44). 5 players average 13+ yards/catch.

Eagles of course do it with Jackson (4.29), Maclin (4.31), and Celek (4.79) .... hence McCoy leading team with 78 receptions.

Steelers as we know do it with Wallace (4.28), Sanders (4.40), Randle El (4.49), and Heath Miller (4.79).

49ers try to do it with Vernon (4.38), Ginn (4.28), Crab (4.5), Morgan (4.47), Walker (4.49), and Gore (442 yards). Unfortunately they cant pass block for crap.

Seahawks attempt it with Williams (4.56), Butler (4.31), Tate (4.36), Ben Obamanu (4.43), & Carlson (4.68).

Rams can even do it better with Avery (4.34), Alexander (4.41), Robinson (4.38), Clayton (4.41), Gibson (4.55), Amendola (4.58), Fells (4.83), & Jackson (4.45).

Bucs do it with Williams (4.53), Benn (4.48), Winslow (4.46), and Spurlock (?).

Titans can do it with Britt (4.47), Gage (4.45), Washington (4.53), Damian Williams (4.52), Jared Cook (4.49), Scaife (4.75)

Skins do it with Armstrong (4.25), Moss (4.31), Galloway (4.38), Davis (4.68), and Cooley (4.71).

Arizona can do it better with Fitz (4.48), Breaston (4.41), Roberts (4.4), and Doucet (4.54).

Atlanta has trouble doing it with White (4.46), Jenkins (4.4), Douglas (4.51), and an aging Gonzalez....... hence are looking for speed in the draft.

Carolina has more capability with a beat up Smith (4.38), Lafell (4.54), Gettis (4.39), and Rosario (4.78).

Cleveland challenges us with Massaquoi (4.51), Robiskie (4.46), Stuckey (4.49), Watson (4.57),
Evan Moore (4.67), and Hillis (4.57).

KC even has a leg up on us with Dwayne Bowe (4.4), old Chris Chambers, McCluster (4.44), Charles (4.38), and Moeaki (4.68). even they're looking for a WR.

NE has trouble like we do with Branch (4.47), Tate (4.45?), Welker (4.61), Hernandez (4.58), Gronkowski (4.65), Woodhead (4.33).

And the last place cookie goes to Miami with Marshall (4.5), Hartline (4.49), Bess (4.6), Fasano (4.71), Lex (4.66), Ricky (6.24), Ronnie (7.18).


I can give you video clips of all these teams if you like. :wink2:


Our fastest guy runs a 4.49. IF we're trying to run 3 verticals to get the ball to Brandon underneath in space, then can you honestly believe that diminutive 4.6 Bess, 4.49 Hartline, and 4.71 Fasano are the best guys for the job? Maybe you should come out of your fantasy world where a lack of speed and vertical playmakers have no effect on an offense's production. They do have an effect. The vertical game and attacking the safeties is a freakin part of the game. But apparently you're ok with dink dunk dink dunk and Henne constantly facing Cover 2 with a slow possession based offense.


This isn't some myth. Teams have been doing this for a LONG time. The Steelers did it with Swan & Stallworth. The 49ers did it with Rice, Young, and Owens (remember that guy Roger Craig having 1000 yard receiving yards as a back?). The Cowboys did it with Irving & the rest of those bums. We can go on for hours with great teams who had the personnel to attack defensive coverage.




Just answer this for me: Is Davone Bess a guy you want running vertical routes with? How about Fasano? let's just start with this.

 

There are many things amazing with this post, and I don't know where to start.

Did you really go through the effort to google dozens of 40 times and then just pick the first one you saw that sounds good, and post those? It didn't take me more than 10 seconds to find some on official websites that were different(And shockingly, slower) than the ones you posted.

Secondly, are you really going to sit and pretend that a 40 time is at the end of the day all that particularly important, even in the context of talking about speed? You know what Ronnie Brown ran and how that has translated to the field. Its the same with many players.

Furthermore, do you have any idea how meaningless that .05 second spread that most of those 40 times fall into is from an actual time and speed difference? What do you think the gap would be if you had one guy run a 4.45 and another a 4.50 next to each other would be physically?

Point in case... this entire fetishization is based on a lack of understanding of how coverage works. You do not inherently need a fast player to beat cover-2. One of the major points of the cover-2 shell is to limit big plays over the top.

Not only that, most all of the institutionalized concepts of "attacking" a cover-2 involve not "attacking" the safeties, but attacking seams in the zone coverage between the safeties, linebackers, and corners, or using combination routes to pull a safety in one direction and go to another guy entering his zone. Its not about getting fast players and challenging a guy way off the line at a dead run.

No, not really.

 

IMO the key is to threaten the safeties. You really just need them to line up one step further back or to delay one beat before crashing down. That's more often than not the difference between a completion or conversion. This doesn't require speed everywhere. What it requires is good receiving targets. I actually think that Hartline is good enough to do that. I think that's shown by the fact that Henne's QBR dropped 10 points after Hartline was injured. After that we only had consistency from Marshall and Bess. Those two worked in similar areas and it was easy for defenses to compress on them. What I would like to see is the Dolphins get a TE that threatens the seam. I think that position would have the greatest impact on our offense. If you have a TE that can outrun most LBs then the safeties have to hesitate before leaving the middle. That will create the most space for the receivers outside or short middle and for our running game. Next I want a shifty receiving back (think Sproles). Really he does the same thing, outrun LBs, just generally in a different area of the field. It's all about mismatches as I have been saying for years. When you have mismatches the defense has to commit other players to help. That simplifies the reads for the QB and obviously makes it easier for other players to get open.

 

Great post Raffy. Makes a lot of sense (to me). Thanks for taking the time and making the effort to post your thoughts. :knucks:

 

I gave everyone the same benefit of the doubt by using their fastest clocked time at either the combine or Pro day INCLUDING the Dolphins. Nice try. lol.

No, I'm not going to say it's an end all indication of anything, but when it comes to getting vertical to beat a cover 2, then 40 times has it's place (unless the receiver is physically imposing and has the ability to dominate a defender downfield like Larry Fitz). I used 40 time to show that, despite what you say, these 4.3ish guys aren't exclusive to Mike Wallace & DeSean Jackson. They exist all across the NFL. A receiver doesn't have to be as productive as Wallace & Jackson to attack or pull the safeties and beat cover 2. Ginn's a perfect example that we're all familiar with. I don't think it's a coincidence that, now that he's gone and we have nobody to take the top off a defense, that we're seeing so much cover 2. As you know, the speed & playmaking ability forces safeties to respect you and allows you to stretch the field, creating opportunities for everyone else. One player's 40 might not translate, but when you look at the big picture and see an entire league of teams with 4.3 & 4.4 guys, it's much more telling.

We both know that speed does have its place in this game. The same way that Bess isn't a threat in the return game b/c his slow speed limits him is the same reason he isn't a threat in the passing game. If Percy Harvin ran a 4.6, what round would he have been drafted in? Would he still be the same electrifier? If Santonio Holmes runs a 4.55 instead of a 4.35, does he win those 3 or 4 games for the Jets where he takes a short pass to the house or catches one behind a defender? What if Johnny Knox, Jacoby Ford, Mike Wallace, DeSean Jackson, Devin Hester, and Anthony Armstrong all ran 4.5 instead of sub 4.3? Are they challenging the field deep or attacking/pulling the safeties in the same way? Do you think Fitzpatrick would've had the same success in Buffalo's spread, attacking offense using vertical timing routes if his receivers all ran 4.5 or slower rather than 4.39, 4.37, and 4.46? I could go on and on because the examples are many in this league. Where they're not many is in Miami, especially considering that Sparano has stated the desire for the passing game to become more vertical. We lack the ability from WR & TE to attack coverage because we were designed to be a possession based offense (which is common knowledge to everyone). I'm not sure how you can infer that a slow, possession based offense should be as capable of attacking a defense similarly to how vertically gifted ones do like Pitt, GB, Philly, Jets, Buffalo, Dallas, Cincy, Detroit, and SD, to name a few. One guy occasionally getting behind a corner doesn't constitute attacking a defense.

Are we talking 40 yards down field? I've seen the simulcam. It's the difference between separation and no separation. Unfortunately that grows significantly when we're comparing a 4.6 guy with a 4.39 guy, which is more closely indicative to our situation. A CB doesn't really need safety help over the top against a small 4.6 guy running a vertical; he does against a 4.3 guy.

My lack of understanding? lol.

We both know that a Cover 2 isn't designed to prevent the big play down field. It reduces the number of defenders deep so that more can focus on the short passing game and be closer to the LOS, allowing them to thwart a possession based passing game like ours. Constant use of Cover 2 against us is basically telling us that our personnel poses no threat to challenge 2 guys splitting the deep half of the field.

Sure, the Cover-2 shell limits big plays over the top....... if you're a possession team like us who can't bring more than 2 guys down the field at once, which is why offenses will spread out the field and run 4 verticals at it. Sorry but I don't see any concern on a defense's part if we're sending Bess, Fasano, Hartline, and Marshall downfield simultaneously. The nickel can run with Bess; a LB can stay with Fasano w/o much help; and that still leaves both safeties to help on Marshall & Hart (or put your #1 CB on Hart, double up Marshall, and the other safety is free to pick up whomever). How well can we run a hi-lo or in-out stretch to beat cover 2 if we happen to have Bess (as the hi guy clearing out the field), Fasano at TE, and say Ronnie in the backfield? Instead we ran it with Marshall & Hartline, taking our biggest threat out of the play.

I've said it all along---- that we don't necessarily need fast players provided the receiver can ACTUALLY make plays downfield (which we have only 1 guy capable). If he's big, physical, and excels at attacking the ball, then I'll take that as a speed replacement. That's why I'm a fan of Greg Little. IMO he, Marshall, Hartline, and a receiving TE like Virgil Green would suffice for attacking vertically.

I'm referring to attacking the safeties in the indirect sense that you're running a receiver(s) on a route with the intention of manipulating the safety so that others can make plays in the soft spots..... or that you're running multiple receivers vertically against the safeties in a direct attempt to beat Cover 2, in effect "attacking" them. In this sense, you can "attack" both safeties with Braylon Edwards and Santonio Holmes as decoys to get the ball to your primary target, Dustin Keller, in the soft spot...... or you can "attack" cover 2 safeties with Vincent Jackson, Malcom Floyd, Antonio Gates, and Naanee running 4 verticals. I prefer to group both concepts together by saying "attacking" the safeties because IMO that's kind of what you're doing when you're going at them like that. If the receiver is the primary target on a vertical pass, then I don't regard it as "attacking the safety". lol.

Me either.... and since I'd like to see Marshall or Hartline in the slot from time to time, I'm not a fan of seeing our playbook limited because Bess (on the outside) poses little threat "used in a combination route to pull a safety". Sorry, I still prefer "attacking the safety". lol.

If, for example, we want to get the ball to Marshall underneath with as much room as possible, then how effectively can we pull the safeties or LBs with Bess, Fasano, and Hartline? I mean, if you're hitting Marshall on a 3 or 5 step drop, how much space can those guys create for him in that amount of time? What if you want to hit Hartline on a quick slant to where he has room to split the defense? How about a back in the flats or over the middle with room to run?

 

I agree, and thanks for the point.

However, I'd like to see a little more versatility by allowing Marshall or Hart to occasionally play the slot without having Bess on the outside unable to really threaten the safeties. I never said speed has to be everywhere, although I can understand it might look that way by posting team's forty times. I merely did that to show there's much more speed out there than people maybe realize, and that I've seen a lot of those teams attack coverages with that speed and/or vertical threats in ways we simply cant. Hakeem Nicks & Mike Wiliams aren't fast but they can darn sure threaten a defense. The Chargers aren't blazers, but they're big, physical, and can make plays over DBs.

If we didn't have a group of 4.5 and slower guys, then I could care less about speed at WR, but since that's not the case and because we only have 3 valid receivers, IMO it's prudent to bring in a legit #4 (or even #2 pushing Hart to 4) who has the speed and/or playmaking ability that we need. Regardless, we need another receiver. So in that sense, is there anyone here advocating another possession guy rather than one who can make plays down field? And is there anyone here who wouldn't want this guy capable of challenging Hartline for the #2 spot? I didn't think so. lol.

 

Raf, that sounds awesome, but what about when we're in our base 3-1-1 and Fasano is in rather than the #2 TE, and maybe Lex is in as the big back rather than the speedy COP back? That could account for a decent bit of time when we are less able to threaten a defense.

That's why IMO, it's equally important to go after a receiver who could supplant Bess on 1st and 2nd down (and possibly even Hartline) giving us a greater percentage of snaps in which we can threaten a defense. IMO a guy like Greg Little in the 3rd would end up seeing more snaps than a #2 TE, and eventually more than a COP back. So the TE might allow us to threaten a little better (when he's on the field) but a WR might allow us to do it more often, and that's why I'd like to see us hit on all 3: WR, TE, and COP back so that we have a greater opportunity to make plays. Just my 2 cents.

 

I think Hartline is capable of threatening the safeties in that formation regardless of whether he's in the slot or outside. I'm thinking back to last season before Hartline was hurt. Henne was effective in the 3 WR set. He was about the 15th rated QB. That doesn't make him elite, but he was good enough. I actually think our bigger problem was the overly conservative coaching staff back then. Also why use Hilliard and not a speedier back. It doesn't even have to be the COP back. I think Dengelo Williams or even Ingram would still make that offense effective as long as we made better use of the back as a receiver instead of using him primarily to block as we did far too often last year. I'm not against bringing in another speed WR, in fact I'd like one, but I don't have it as a priority. On my list, that need would be behind, RB, TE, G/C, COP back and QB. Basically I have speed WR as y sixth highest need.

 

Good post. Thanks. I agree on the order, however I'd put receiver before QB because I'd rather get our final QB as a vet in FA than the draft. The only reason I'd put receiver as #5 is because we currently have no RBs, no quality LG (or one who can pull), and no #2 TE at all. So in this case, at least for me, having no #2 TE or RB supersedes 3 WRs. If we had 2 TEs, 2 RBs, and a decent line, then WR would go to the top of my list behind QB.

I still think we can address all 6 of these spots (if we can trade back). How would you honestly feel about the following offseason?:
RB- LeShoure, Taiwan Jones
LG- Harvey Dahl
RT- David Mims (as a project behind Carey)
TE- Virgil Green (or Cameron, Housler, Hendricks, DJ Williams, Julius Thomas). I'm partial to Virgil.
WR- Greg Little (or Jernigan, Young, Gates)
QB- Mark Bulger

Or....

RB: LeShoure, Taiwan
LG: James Carpenter
TE: Green (or insert guy of choice)
WR: Mike Sims Walker (or Jacoby Jones)
QB: Bulger (insert vet of choice)

Or...
RB: DeAngelo Williams, Taiwan
LG: Danny Watkins
WR: Little
TE: Green
QB: Bulger

Or.....

Option 4. None of this b/c you have something entirely different in mind. :lol:

 

You don't have official 40 times on nearly that many players, sorry.

We're not seeing any more cover-2 than we did, and I don't for the life of me understand how you could watch Ginn be defended day in and day out and draw the conclusions you are. Teams frequently chose take the risk of being burned by Ginn's speed knowing he couldn't get off press coverage. Hell, look at Ginn's most glorious moment. Revis gives him a half-assed jam on a man cover-2 play, he gets a step on him and I believe it was Kerry Rhodes was late getting to him over the top because he was more concerned about what was happening *away* from Ginn even though he had the deep zone on his side.

Yes, your lack of understanding. You've essentially invented a whole school of thought in regards to how the passing game works that doesn't really pass the smell test.

Take your Four Verticals example. It's much more nuanced than that, and you seem to be running with the assumption that more deep zones inherently mean better deep coverage, which isn't actually true.

Cover-2 zone is not a great defense against Four Verticals, but it's also frequently used to attack Cover-3 defenses(especially with one safety deep).

However, outside of Quarters, Cover-2 Man might be the best coverage for defending Four Verticals, given that all the players are single-covered and the two fastest/most dangerous may be double covered and in a quarters scheme the best you can hope for is single coverage on all four verticals.

 

Great post, I agree w/ all. A TE who can beat the MLB down the middle forces the safeties to play HONEST, creating room in the 15-25 yd area along the sidelines. Whether its a fade from outside the numbers, or a corner route from the slot, attacking that area is crucial if youre going to have success. None of our TEs or slot Wrs could threaten the seam so our outside guys were constantly being crowded and the windows to get them the ball out there were microscopic.

Second is anchoring the corners with flat routes and shallow crosses. If you dont threaten the CBs and make them play HONEST, they'll carry the WR all the way up the field, taking away the aforementioned fade/corner routes and creating a virtual double team on the outside WR. Again, we made no real attempt to do this, our backs and TEs were anchoring our OL in pass pro, not anchoring the CBs. Its a design flaw in Henning's offense IMO. I can understand max pro when you're expecting man-blitz type looks, but after the Green Bay game (excluding Oakland) we saw zone, Cover 2 type looks from every opponent for the rest f the season so I find it unforgivable that Henning never adjusted his philosophy.

Third is getting backs/TEs who can do something in space so that when the Cover 2 inevitably forces the check down, we can hurt the defense with it. A Ray Rice or MJD type who can outrun the OLBs pursuit angle and run over/past the CB stepping up to fill. If we can force that CB to stay at home consistently we can create one on one matchups for Marshall or Hartline against a safety, and in Marshall's case, that's going to be a winner for us more often than not. Again, we saw Cover 2 for most of the season and we never made a concerted effort to do this.

Lastly, running the ball effectively can force teams to abandon the Cover 2 all together. I knew we didnt have any speed on offense, but I thought we could get by w/o it b/c we'd be able to pound the ball and force teams into blitz/single high coverages that even our lead footed WRs would be able to have success against. I was wrong, but hey I'm not a coach. And it seems like our coaches had no answers whatsoever once it became evident that we couldn't rely on the run. We basically dumped the offense on Henne and said "Go get em, kid". Or better yet "Save us, kid". In the coaches defense, they tried to go w/ Pennington, a vet who was more suited to carry the offense w.o a run game, but we all know how that worked out.

Looking forward, I think a seam threat at #2 TE would be be great, but a #2 WR would be even better b/c he'd be on the field more and wouldn't pigeonhole us into Ace formations. That would allow us to play Hartline in the slot, and he is plenty fast enough to get down the middle, especially vs zone. Of course we need some speed/quickness at RB. A guy who can threaten the flats in the pass game, threaten the edges in the run game, bust a long run every now and then etc. Heck, our screen & draw games were a joke last year, a decent running back could help w/ that too. And lets not forget, some OL who can move. When I think of all the things we couldnt do on offense last year, I wonder how we ever scored any points at all.

 

I'm not sure I agree that another WR would see the field more. If we're going to be a run first team then we'll use a ton of two TE sets. And if the TE is good enough, I could see him displacing Fasano in situations. I don't think we're likely to add a WR that displaces Marshall or even Bess. Heck, even Hartline would be hard to displace this year.

 

IMO we should use whichever personnel group which gives us the greatest chance for success, base, Ace, 3 wide, whatever the case may be. Judging by what's available in the draft and free agency, IMO #2 WR will be the most feasible avenue for us to go in terms of finding an upgrade. Sid Rice, Santonio Holmes, Braylon Edwards, Sims-Walker & Vincent Jackson are all free agents, meaning we may be able to get one of them, or perhaps one of the 2nd tier WRs like James Jones at a bargain. Then there's AJ Green & Julio Jones in the draft, with Jernigan, Greg Little, Titus Young, Torrey Smith and a few others who can be had in rounds 2-4. Another advantage to going WR in FA is that you can skip the typical adjustment period that WRs tend to have. RB and TE are positions with easier transitions from college to pro, though admittedly, there is no wrong way to address our needs as long as they are filled.

 

On the contrary, I like Hartline quite a bit. IMO he's smart and instinctive and has enough height and speed and more than enough athletic ability. I believe he can be our deep threat. I just wouldn't go as far as to say he's not upgradeable. I think that if we took a guy like Julio Jones, that Jones would eventually supplant him b/c he will probably be a superior player. I see Hartline as a good but not elite talent so if he could be supplanted by an elite player. That being said, I had upgrading him way down the list. In fact, depending on the talent out there, I might even want to upgrade S, OLB and ILB before WR (in addition to all the other higher needs I listed above).

 

I like the FA prospects depending on the cost and I like Green and Jones. The other draft prospects I'm less high on. I'm not banking on any definitely being better than Hartline. I just think that the improvement in our offense from having a faster #2 is marginal compared to the improvements we'd gain from other positions.

 

I previously said that I gave everyone the same benefit of the doubt and used their fastest times, (official or not). That keeps things congruent across the board. There was no picking and choosing, and I disregarded any times that were recorded outside of the combine and pro day. The only exceptions are the guys who didn't run at either, and if their time was fast and they seem to play fast (Anthony Armstrong) then I let his declared time stand (taken at an Arena tryout IIRC). Ditto for anyone else who may have been injured, cramped, etc at the combine to where their combine time was a poor representation.

Even though I'm complaining about our poor offensive speed, I still gave us the benefit of the doubt. I can switch it if you like. Fasano is now his combine recorded 4.86 (not 4.72), Bess- 4.64 (not 4.6) Marshall- 4.57 (not 4.5), Hartline- 4.52 (not 4.49). How about just thanking me for taking the time to look these up in an impartial manner for our amusement, or lack there of. lol. :tongue2:

This is the first I've heard. I thought we faced much more cover 2 zone than we did in 2009, and that this was part of our problem. Sorry if I'm wrong.

No offense, but: A. NY had their best CB on Ginn who was beat regardless of how it's spun. B. Rhodes bit on a play action because we rushed for 151 yards and 2 TDs.

apparently I'm not the only one that speaks of "attacking" the coverage with a vertical threat. I'll pass along that he's using the word incorrectly. lol.

maybe you should tell Sparano what you told me. lol.

Even these NFL players are clueless. I can send an email if you like. j/k

Can you tell me where the safety is on this recent TD to Vernon Davis? It looks to me like Adrian Wilson is out in the middle of nowhere protecting a deep route that never happened (despite Vernon Davis of all people running a seam route).

[video=youtube;t-1JJsNyzUQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-1JJsNyzUQ[/video]

This isn't a discussion about our secondary. We're not talking about "defending 4 verticals", so why are you going off on a tangent and convoluting the discussion? We're not talking about Quarters, Cover 3, Cover 2 man (that we saw more of in 09 IIRC). We're talking about beating the coverage that we had a problem with much of last year. Thanks for telling me my "lack of understanding" but then repeating what I said about running 4 verticals in an attempt to beat cover 2 zone.

 

How about if that #2 allows for greater offensive flexibility and speed as a whole? For instance, Sims Walker on the outside is arguably and upgrade at the position while definitely providing the speed, and in doing so that allows you to occasionally play Hartline in the slot which in turn improves the speed and playmaking ability from 2 positions. Now that's 2 guys who can get down field (without having to use Brandon as a decoy) so that Marshall, the TE, and our backs can make plays else where, no?

I was under the impression that Hart's lack of <elite> speed is less noticeable in the slot verses outside. If we can put him on a LB, cant he do some damage that Bess is physically incapable of?

I know Sparano said we're going to be a running team, but he also said he wants the passing game to be more vertical. That doesn't necessarily mean more 2 TE sets right? Can't we still be an effective running team out of 3wr sets, especially if the receivers can better stretch the field/defense?


Maybe it's just me. I'm greedy that way. lol. I see shiny toys that other kids around the block have, and I want one, too. :lol:

 

I agree that the improvement in individual talent (at WR) may be marginal, but I think that team wise, the difference would be much greater. The number of ways in which we could attack defenses increase substantially, which is essential if you want to keep defenses off balance, something we never did last year.

I'm not just talking about a fast guy, I'm talking a big play threat. Hartline is a decent WR, but IMO people's opinion of him is tainted by his draft status. Basically he's pretty good, for a 4th round pick. He's also a one dimensional WR, in terms of big play potential. He can only get deep off of a double move, play action, or trick play. He struggles to make plays when he's well covered, or when battling for 50/50 balls. He cant take a short pass and do anything w/ it. He has a respectable YAC number (5+) but he's not making people miss or running away from anyone, he's catching the ball in space and getting a few extra yards. He's not a threat on fades, smoke routes, screens, shallow crosses or reverses. He's the very definition of a possession WR, w/ very little big play or scoring potential. If we had a Pro-Bowler at QB, or speed at other spots on the field (TE/Split End) Hartline might be good enough, but we don't. Bess is already the 3rd WR, Marshall isn't going anywhere, none of the available TEs are going to unseat Fasano & that leaves Hartline IMO.

 

Beyond the other point which still stands about the meaninglessness of 40 times... Those "official" times are frequently wrong depending on the website you look at. Not to mention the "unofficial" times. You're essentially Googling "Player Name 40 time" and picking up whatever some ******* came up with. How could that possibly be a problem.

I think the saddest thing is that taking information from dubious sources might be your least egregious intellectual violation in this post.

A. Your point is what? It's a whole lot more complicated than a #1 corner lined up against a perceived #1 receiver. Devis was on both Hartline and Bess in coverage in that game as well per Pro Football Focus.

B. Go rewatch the highlights. Rhodes clearly is coming from the center field area. Either he was cheating towards whomever the slot receiver was, or even funnier, coverage was rolled away from Ginn.

Attacking "coverage" has nothing to do with "vertical". You're inserting that.

You've got to "cover" Ginn? Really? That's a noteworthy statement about Ginn's value?

The fact that you even included the second quote is just hilarious given that it doesn't really do anything besides directly contradict your central "theories" on coverage, and you don't understand enough to realize it either.

There are very few coverage circumstances that Ginn could be expected to line up with a cornerback in underneath coverage and a safety over the top and NOT have it be either Cover-2, or a coverage that was essentially identical to Cover-2 on his side of the field, and they essentially require circumstances that would be very, very infrequent, if non-existent either in here or San Francisco.

Beyond the other point which still stands about the meaninglessness of 40 times... Those "official" times are frequently wrong depending on the website you look at. Not to mention the "unofficial" times. You're essentially Googling "Player Name 40 time" and picking up whatever some ******* came up with. How could that possibly be a problem.

I think the saddest thing is that taking information from dubious sources might be your least egregious intellectual violation in this post.

A. Your point is what? It's a whole lot more complicated than a #1 corner lined up against a perceived #1 receiver. Devis was on both Hartline and Bess in coverage in that game as well per Pro Football Focus.

B. Go rewatch the highlights. Rhodes clearly is coming from the center field area. Either he was cheating towards whomever the slot receiver was, or even funnier, coverage was rolled away from Ginn.

Attacking "coverage" has nothing to do with "vertical". You're inserting that.

Acting as if something you mentioned is somehow a tangent because you don't know the first thing about it and got called on it is pretty transparent.

And you said "Cover-2". Not Cover-2 zone. You threw out a blanket statement that was largely incorrect, and are getting uppity because it actually holds true for a specific set of cover-2 that you didn't identify and likely couldn't explain why.

 

How is using recorded combine and proday times considered "picking up whatever some ******* came up with"? I use CBS's nfldrafscout for most all of it, and if it happened to mention a player running a faster unofficial combine time, then I used that instead. Is the combine now a "dubious" source? Enough with the straw argument stuff already.

I did rewatch it and all I saw was Ginn catching the ball behind triple coverage. If you pause it at the 0:00 mark and then let it play, you can see Rhodes was in a backpedal before the snap. I can't make out for certain, but his backpedal looks to be at a slight angle toward the sideline (on Ginn's side). Not sure how that constitutes cheating towards the slot.

[video=youtube;MyPtJF-IgPc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyPtJF-IgPc[/video]

So running verticals isn't one way to attack coverage?
Sparano also seems to think it is. Damn, is there any way to attack coverage if verticals aren't apart of it? You're right---- to heck with anything vertical related. It's much effective to attack it with short stuff like we've been doing, which is why defenses are scared to play Cover 2 zone against us, right? <sarcasm>

Hey, dont shoot the messenger. Take it up with Sparano, Lewis, Marino, and the rest of those guys.

 

what are you talking about getting "called on it"? Does anyone here think that when we're talking about beating cover 2 that we're speaking of anything other than zone we had problems with? I shouldn't have to be explicitly technical when it's a given. If I'm writing about a chardonnay wine tasting, I dont have to keep specifying that each wine is a chard. It's implied.

I understand that you have great knowledge for the game; however, if you're the type of person who reads stuff in its strictest sense, you can always ask a person to clarify what they're saying rather than making a possible incorrect assumption and jumping into an unnecessary "educational lesson". We've talked about problems with zone coverage all year to the point I didn't think necessary to specify it in every post. If you had asked me, GM, or whomever else if we were referring to cover 2 zone when we said cover 2, then we would've replied with a simple yes.

 

Which is why he ends ups on the inside position on Ginn down the field, logically.

That's not in any sense what I'm saying. "Attacking coverage" is a generic platitude, and assuming it means he's going vertical constantly and he was a big threat doing so is not correct.

It has nothing to do with what they're saying, because that's clear. You're reading into it and coloring it with your weird *** ideas about how things actually work, and then claiming it's their message.

Please, I'd really love for you to explain to me what it is you think Lewis is saying there.

It's not in any sense being overly technical. "Cover-2" means one thing, two safeties in a deep zone. If you're using it to describe an overall defense, you're wrong. Frequently speaking when people do that they're describing a Tampa-2 defense, which makes it wrong on multiple levels.

 

I don't think it's a terrible idea to have a clear cut #1 & #2 while letting Hart & Bess both share the #3 role. They could still see a significant amount of snaps, no? Every pass thrown at a better playmaking #2 is one more opportunity we have of breaking a big play that Hartline likely would not. Ditto goes for passes Hartline's way while he's playing in the slot (rather than Bess). One extra play here and there could seem insignificant on the surface, but during a 16 game season where each game has great implication, if it can potentially be the difference between 1 extra win and making the playoffs (which you've already pointed out about the Jets).
We specialize defense to get the most out of it (nickel CBs, pass rush specialists, 2 down LBs, coverage LBs, etc), so why can't we do the same on offense with Bess and Hartline?

 

So it's not possible that he ends on the inside of Ginn because we ran play action after already beating them up on the ground? You would agree that one aspect of playaction is to manipulate the safety right? Is it not possible that play action on that particular play was successful to design? So then is it not possible that we specifically ran play action in a direct effort to freeze the safety so that Ginn could challenge Revis over the top? If the play was designed for Ted deep, then why run play action at all if the safety didn't care about him? Sparano stated that coverage often prevented us from throwing to Ted, did he not. I have a hard time believing extra safety attention had nothing to do with faking the run.

Gotchya, so Sparano mentioning Ginn "attacking coverage" (because of his "speed & ability to blow the top off coverage"- per Dan Henning) is acceptable, but when I mention using speed, verticals, playmakers etc to attack coverage it's all of a sudden some "weird *** idea about how things work"? WTF. So you can't attack coverage on isolated plays? Does it have to be play after play after play for the entire game to be considered "attacking"?

I merely referenced Ginn because defenses have to respect his speed DESPITE his overall mediocre production. It's probably the only position where you can suck as whole but still have worth in specific situations, is it not? Seriously, is there any other reason that Ginn could be spoken of as "attacking coverge" (like Sparano stated) other than using his elite speed and getting vertical? Surely they're not referring his pristine route running prowess, hands made of glue, or his ability to attack the ball in the face of a defender. lol.

see the last 2 sentences above, while adding to it that, as a safety himself, Lewis seems pretty straight forward about what he's saying. Don't think any explaining is needed, unless it's with a dictionary.

That's you interpreting this in its strictest sense, which I don't have a problem with. Again, if you think I'm randomly speaking of something unrelated, just ask and I'll clarify.

I understand people sometimes refer to tampa-2 when saying "cover 2", and if we played Tampa 2 defenses all year, then I would've simply said Tampa 2, not cover 2. If we were having a generalized conversation about coverages, then I would've been specific and stated "cover 2 zone". However, we're not having a generalized conversation; we're speaking of the one we had difficulty against all year.

Every time I mention Brandon Marshall going out for a pass, do I have to preface his name with "WR"? lol.