Texans @ Green Bay "Dont Get Hurt Bowl"

[AlexGreen#20]

29 minutes ago, Donzo said:

 

Well, that would be OK. But, it had nothing to do with what I said.

Like I said, I think some of the reason for the Allison hate is because he was such an atrocious compliment to Adams and Cobb the last two years with his John Kuhn/Richard Rodgers esque speed. Adams and Cobb needed someone that could take the top off of the defense. Rather than someone that allowed the defense to squat on Cobbs' slot routs and Adams' dig, out, curl, comeback and slant routs.

So, are you actually saying a receiver has to "consistently win deep" to take the top off the defense? If not, what are you saying?

So what you're saying is that your issue with Allison is the erroneous 40 time?

[Donzo]

Just now, AlexGreen#20 said:

So what you're saying is that your issue with Allison is the erroneous 40 time?

No.

I'm going to the bar. Talk to you later.

[vegas492]

Goodwin is a great example of a complimentary receiver that can "take a top off".

But those guys are few and far between.  

Trying to come up with more off the top of my head....  Maybe Desean Jackson?  Though you can argue that he's at least a #2 WR.

Think KC had a fast kid...err, another fast kid.  Conley maybe?  

Jon Brown?  Though he's a #2 in my book.

I think that next year's version of MVS is the compliment you want.  Maybe even this year.

[AlexGreen#20]

20 hours ago, vegas492 said:

Goodwin is a great example of a complimentary receiver that can "take a top off".

But those guys are few and far between.  

Trying to come up with more off the top of my head....  Maybe Desean Jackson?  Though you can argue that he's at least a #2 WR.

Think KC had a fast kid...err, another fast kid.  Conley maybe?  

Jon Brown?  Though he's a #2 in my book.

I think that next year's version of MVS is the compliment you want.  Maybe even this year.

Goodwin is very clearly their top guy and is a decent QB away from being widely recognized as one of the 15ish best receivers in the league.

In 3 fewer starts, Jackson only fell short of Alshon Jeffrey by 70 yards and 2 TDs. I'm not sure Jackson isn't the #1 receiver on the Eagles.

The Chiefs currently have Sammy Watkins as their #2. Most don't consider him a burner. They've got a fight for WR#3 going on right now between Demarcus Robinson (not a burner) and Mecole Hardman (raw rookie burner). Chris Conley you're thinking of is now on the Jaguars.

John Brown is probably a good example of a true burner fitting into a complimentary role in an offense but his line over the last three year average is: 34/510/3. And he's got the sickle cell trait.

[MrBobGray]

Taking the top off a defense isn't really a thing anyway. Winning deep is important because it prevents the corners from sitting on the short stuff; you need the CB to commit to his bail or be on his heels in off coverage if you want any kind of YAC/non-contested catches on stuff that's in that five to seven yard range. There are very few defenses that are going to play single high against an 11 set unless it's short yardage, so the safeties are already back. 

[Donzo]

4 minutes ago, MrBobGray said:

Taking the top off a defense isn't really a thing anyway. 

OH boy... If "isn't really a thing" means it's a big deal, then yes. 

Ever since Jordy popped his ACL, the Packers have had an issue with not being able to take the top of the defense. Even  when Jordy came back, he didn't have the same ability to take the top off the defense that he previously had. 

This year could be different; LeFluer values taking the top off the defense. With MVS and Davis at ready at WR. Graham and Tonyan  ready at TE to stretch the field down the middle. The Packers look capable of taking the top off defenses for the first time in many years.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Being a viable deep threat is more about route running than speed.

If a WR can't run the short breaking routes well, then the corner can just add an extra yard or two to the cushion and stay on top of the deep route.

We will have to wait and see who of the younger receivers can become that type of player.

[MrBobGray]

4 minutes ago, Donzo said:

OH boy... If "isn't really a thing" means it's a big deal, then yes. 

Ever since Jordy popped his ACL, the Packers have had an issue with not being able to take the top of the defense. Even  when Jordy came back, he didn't have the same ability to take the top off the defense that he previously had. 

This year could be different; LeFluer values taking the top off the defense. With MVS and Davis at ready at WR. Graham and Tonyan  ready at TE to stretch the field down the middle. The Packers look capable of taking the top off defenses for the first time in many years.

Can you explain exactly how this manifested itself?  Because they were 4th in points in 2016 and made the NFC Championship game.  Where exactly did you see evidence that they were struggling because they couldn't "take the top off the defense?"  This is even more bizarre because the Packers played MVS, EQ and Graham last year; why could they not "take the top off" then, but they can now?  

What does "taking the top off" even mean to you?  Because @AlexGreen#20 is dead on that this phrase is generally meaningless and is usually used to say "lots of big plays."  Do you feel teams are playing too much Cover-1 against Green Bay?  What exactly is the manifestation of this issue?

[incognito_man]

On 8/14/2019 at 9:43 AM, vegas492 said:

Goodwin is a great example of a complimentary receiver that can "take a top off"

Little S.A.T. exercise:

Goodwin is to defenses AS
@Norm's ________ is to parties

(a) gf
(b) sister
(c) mom

[MrBobGray]

11 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Little S.A.T. exercise:

Goodwin is to defenses AS
@Norm's ________ is to parties

(a) gf
(b) sister
(c) mom

Nice try, it's clearly 

d) All of the above

[AlexGreen#20]

39 minutes ago, Donzo said:

OH boy... If "isn't really a thing" means it's a big deal, then yes. 

Ever since Jordy popped his ACL, the Packers have had an issue with not being able to take the top of the defense. Even  when Jordy came back, he didn't have the same ability to take the top off the defense that he previously had. 

This year could be different; LeFluer values taking the top off the defense. With MVS and Davis at ready at WR. Graham and Tonyan  ready at TE to stretch the field down the middle. The Packers look capable of taking the top off defenses for the first time in many years.

Now you're just using the phrase for the sake of using the phrase.

[incognito_man]

18 minutes ago, MrBobGray said:

Nice try, it's clearly 

d) All of the above

I should have said (d) self

[Norm]

32 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Little S.A.T. exercise:

Goodwin is to defenses AS
@Norm's ________ is to parties

(a) gf
(b) sister
(c) mom

Nobody wants my GF to take her top off though

Edited August 15, 2019 by Norm

[Uffdaswede]

1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Now you're just using the phrase for the sake of using the phrase.

I heard Elliot Wolf use it talking about Davis when he was drafted, and it made me think that Davis was HIS guy. It also makes me not that sad that E Wolf moved on to Cleveland.

We know what people mean when they use the phrase. But really, it’s the playcalling more than the receiver that puts vertical pressure on a defense—correct, or naw? I mean any 4.6 receiver has to be accounted for closely on a deep fly route. Whether it’s Julio Jones or Laquon Treadwell the coverage is the same, yes? Unless “taking the top off the defense” has more to do with shifting additional safety help to the elite receivers on deep routes. In that case the term may have some utility, even if it is too general to accurately describe all of the potential defensive responses to a feared receiver sent deep. 

[Donzo]

41 minutes ago, MrBobGray said:

Can you explain exactly how this manifested itself?  Because they were 4th in points in 2016 and made the NFC Championship game.  Where exactly did you see evidence that they were struggling because they couldn't "take the top off the defense?"  This is even more bizarre because the Packers played MVS, EQ and Graham last year; why could they not "take the top off" then, but they can now?  

What does "taking the top off" even mean to you?  Because @AlexGreen#20 is dead on that this phrase is generally meaningless and is usually used to say "lots of big plays."  Do you feel teams are playing too much Cover-1 against Green Bay?  What exactly is the manifestation of this issue?

You’re mucking up the situation with technical jargon nonsense, meaningless stats and some paper Tiger arguments. Really, it’s just silly to even debate this topic. It’s like trying to say water isn’t wet.

But I’ll try a little bit. It’s simple, like I said, the Packers have had trouble getting receivers open ever since Jordy got hurt. This isn’t opinion, it’s fact. It’s been widely discussed in detail by many outlets. The reality that Rodgers could still generate big plays, with the help of some amazing protection at times, doesn’t change that fact.

Yes, the Packers have had a number of players on the roster since Jordy’s injury that were capable of taking the top off the defense. For a number of reasons, mostly because the player wasn’t ready to be a full-time contributor or had fringe NFL talent, they weren’t able to provide this benefit to the offense. Last year, Rodger’s health/accuracy issues also hurt MVS and Graham.