Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

18 Prospect
  1. Is Larry Fitzgerald Still A Top 12 WR Talent Wise?

    Nope. We were discussing route running technique, which is completely different from those, which I explained.
  2. Is Larry Fitzgerald Still A Top 12 WR Talent Wise?

    Most NFL offenses these days resemble college offenses. It has never been easier to get open in the NFL. Fitzgerald has benefitted from this since Todd Haley took over as the Cardinals' offensive coordinator.
  3. Is Larry Fitzgerald Still A Top 12 WR Talent Wise?

    You shouldn't have even started if you're going to use something Bill Belichick said to the media before a game as evidence to support something.
  4. Best Average Prime Year: T.O Versus Antonio Brown

    Nah. His yards per game high was in 2000 (unless you count his 7 game stretch in 2005 with the Eagles). His TDs per game high was a tie between the 04 Eagles season, the 01 49ers season, and the 07 Cowboys season.
  5. Is Larry Fitzgerald Still A Top 12 WR Talent Wise?

    Did you read what I wrote? You're putting stock in what Belichick says to the media, as if he cares about the accuracy of what he says to people he has no respect for. All he cares about is that he doesn't give them anything to work with. Your argument that everybody already knows how teams are going to try to defend a player, so coaches wouldn't care about tipping off their strategy...utter nonsense. Coaches try different game plans all the time. Coaches are surprised by what other coaches do as strategy all the time.
  6. Is Larry Fitzgerald Still A Top 12 WR Talent Wise?

    That's literally what your statement means. If that's not what you meant, you should have written something different. Spread offenses also dominate the NFL these days, in case you missed it. "An amateur who has been coming to this board for over a decade now to talk football on a regular basis." Are you....serious? Please tell me you're joking. You think posting on football forums means you're not an amateur?
  7. Is Larry Fitzgerald Still A Top 12 WR Talent Wise?

    You honestly think Belichick cares about giving the media an accurate scouting report on a player he's going against? His goal is to not give them anything. He views sports media as a liability. He's only there so he won't get fined. He doesn't want media-created distractions. He doesn't want people saying, "Belichick said you struggle against press coverage." He doesn't want opposing coaches hearing about it and thinking, "oh, he's going to press him? Well, we'll just send him in motion, then."
  8. Is Larry Fitzgerald Still A Top 12 WR Talent Wise?

    You can't be asked to prove a negative. That's fallacious. Prove there isn't a unicorn living in Antartica right now. Sherman obviously thinks Fitzgerald's timing is part of what makes him a good receiver. He sacrifices technically good route running to make the play work (ad-libbing). But that's a separate category from route running. And it's a separate category from being quick in change of direction, which is the claim that was made in this thread that led us down this path. "...you and your unnamed sources don't have it either. Citing baseline stats you can pull up from Google isn't the Rosetta Stone you're making it out to be, especially when you're talking about instances in the 10s (think I went over this before)." Didn't I already explain how utterly absurd it is to pretend 36-8 isn't an enormous difference in the 40+ yard touchdown department? Like it would just be some fluke where the guy who got 36 got lucky 28 more times in 132 games than the guy who got 8 in 218 games? Did a FS who had 36 INTs in 132 games just get lucky 28 more times than a FS who had only 8 in 218 games, so you can't say that the guy who got 36 was the better ball hawk? One of those is Tyrone Braxton if you condense his career INTs into a career where he didn't play his last 3 seasons. Or Reggie Nelson, if you condensed his career INTs into everything but the last 2 seasons and 5 games. The other would be a safety we've never even seen before. He would be laughed at and referred to as a "linebacker pretending to be a safety" and the like. But I guess to you, interceptions don't prove who the better ball hawk is, then, because there aren't enough of them? How about if a DT recorded just 8 sacks in 218 starts? Maybe the DT who recorded 36 in 132 games just got 28 coverage sacks/was left totally unblocked on all of them, so you can't say that he's a better pass rusher. Total nonsense. As I said before, you could say this about every statistic there is, because football isn't a sport where the statistics describe the play itself. But in cases where they're so overwhelmingly in someone's favor, they're a certainty. The point of statistics isn't to say what happened on every single play of a certain kind. It's the broad point that is important. I never said the statistic was precise. If it were like 10 to 8 in the same number of games, that's close. 36-8 is not even remotely close. As shown, the highest number of 40+ yard touchdown receptions was Jerry Rice with 54. The figures for each receiver demonstrate the context for what a large difference is. 36-8 is a landslide. And even the names alone at the top and bottom demonstrate that the statistic accurately reflects what I say it does.
  9. Is Larry Fitzgerald Still A Top 12 WR Talent Wise?

    No. This is what you said: "Shirley you cant be serious? The age old adage in the nfl is everyone is fast. Everyone is a great athlete what separates players in the nfl is technique. There is a reason that "unathletic" guys like Tom Waddle were able to consistently get open." According to you, everyone is a great athlete but what separates players in the NFL is technique. That means that what separates Randy Moss from Tom Waddle is technique, not athleticism, since everyone is a great athlete, and what separates them is technique. Again, who said anything about peewee until you did? I mentioned college and the NFL. The guys who play wide receiver nearly always played it in college, and received quite a bit of coaching there. Once they got to the NFL, they received tons of professional coaching. Learning technique is not about talent, it's about work. NFL players either put in the work or they're gone.
  10. Is Larry Fitzgerald Still A Top 12 WR Talent Wise?

    No scouts think Fitzgerald is quick out of his breaks. Sherman didn't say his route running is, "anything but poor." He just said he doesn't view it as poor. You're turning that into, "Sherman said he's a good/great route runner!" He could have said, "some may mistake that for less-than-ideal route running." He could have said, "some may mistakenly think that's not great route running." But the word that came to mind when he was explaining this was, "poor." I don't even think Fitzgerald is necessarily a "poor" route runner. I don't really think any NFL receivers are, because truly poor route running is the kind of stuff where you would be cut. Perhaps when he said, "do it all," he was just speaking in a general terms, and not thinking about every component of playing wide receiver. I mean, he already proved he wasn't giving it too much thought because he ignored the fact that Fitzgerald objectively lacks explosiveness as a runner. That's not even debatable. All the metrics show that. If Sherman had said, "Jarvis Landry is faster and more explosive than DeSean Jackson," would it suddenly become true? Let me tell you a little related story. A friend of mine was diagnosed with metastatic testicular cancer last year. He did surgery, chemo, etc. After the treatments, while there were still numerous lesions in his lungs, the doctors decided to take the approach of short-term monitoring, thinking they were just necrotic tissue from the treatment, as opposed to any malignant lesions being left. A couple months later, the scans showed one of the lesions had grown. They weren't sure whether the lesion was some cancer that had been left over or a slow-growing tumor called "teratoma." My friend flew out to the most famous testicular cancer doctor in the world (the guy who treated Lance Armstrong and developed the chemotherapy protocol that led to such a high cure rate). The doctor walked in and told him, in no uncertain terms, that what they were looking at in the scans was a teratoma. My friend didn't buy it. My friend had done some research on the topic and saw that the growth rate didn't match up. He also knew that the doctor was basing this diagnosis on his tumor markers being within the normal range, but he had had low tumor markers to begin with. My friend brought this stuff up to the doctor, but the doctor insisted, at one point even agitatedly telling him, "IT'S NOT GOING TO BE CANCER." So he came home and did the surgery to have it removed. Cancer. Here's a guy who had seen thousands upon thousands of cases, and in this particular instance, he wasn't any better at diagnosing what was going on from the information than my friend. Richard Sherman may think he was facing a receiver who can do it all, but he wasn't. Nothing outweighs the NFL receiver pathology reports.
  11. Is Larry Fitzgerald Still A Top 12 WR Talent Wise?

    Because he was just rattling off a bunch of qualities a receiver could have off the top of his head so the reporters leave him alone. If he had said something like, "he's a big guy who uses his body to shield defenders from the ball, and he's good at the subtle push-off, but he's not really quick out of his breaks. He can struggle against press coverage," he's potentially tipping off his plan for defending him.
  12. Is Larry Fitzgerald Still A Top 12 WR Talent Wise?

    "Some might mistake this for poor route running" does not translate to, "he's a good/great route runner." It just means Sherman doesn't view the way he runs routes as poor. And Sherman saying that Fitzgerald is a do-it-all guy like Julio Jones doesn't make it true. It doesn't suddenly make his 4.6 40 into a 4.4, or his horrid rate of explosive plays into a good or great rate. The numbers say he's wrong. And he already explained what he meant by, "do it all." He was talking about speed, hands, and leaping ability. He never said anything about route running (because that wasn't what he meant).
  13. Is Larry Fitzgerald Still A Top 12 WR Talent Wise?

    Oh man. You are so clueless it's unbelievable. NFL receivers spend hours nearly every single day practicing routes. Most of the time players spend at practice is with their position coaches. Who said anything about peewee? What are you even babbling about? But I mean, I'm talking to the guy who said that the difference between Tom Waddle and Randy Moss is that Waddle had nowhere near the technique of Moss, since everybody in the NFL is a great athlete and it's all about technique, so why should I be surprised?
  14. Is Larry Fitzgerald Still A Top 12 WR Talent Wise?

    He's saying that while Fitzgerald isn't technically a good route runner, his choices set up the timing, which makes him effective. Your reading comprehension is appalling. When he said, Jones "can basically do everything," he meant the following: "He has great hands, great speed, he can leap up and ****** the ball out of the air — he has the all-around game you want in a wide receiver. There are no weaknesses in his game." How do I know? Because that's his very next sentence. And he's simply wrong about Fitzgerald in that regard, as the numbers prove. Fitzgerald has the hands the ability to leap up and ****** the ball. He doesn't have the speed. Sherman never described either of them as great route runners/quick out of their breaks. Here's what he says about Doug Baldwin, however: "For Doug, it all starts at the line of scrimmage. I think he has some of the most explosive releases in the league. But also, at the top of his route, no matter what the route might be, he’s equally explosive. We can talk about hand fighting and changing speeds and physicality all we want. But when it comes to Doug, it’s all about creativity."
  15. Is Larry Fitzgerald Still A Top 12 WR Talent Wise?

    And what does that have to do with route running, which every team practices constantly? The lack of logic and reasoning abilities from people in this thread is unreal. Re: Gholston: That's called, "lazy and doesn't listen to coaches, and didn't play as a result." The guys who play and make rosters are the guys who don't ignore coaches.