Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 43
  1. #21
    ItalianStallion's Avatar
    ItalianStallion is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,615

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Wide Receiver

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    Why is Berrian not regarded as a #1 receiver?

    - He was the #1 receiver in Chicago.
    - He had 17 more catches than our best receiver last year.
    - Among receivers, he was top 20 in catches. Everyone above, except for Shaun McDonald, is a #1 receiver. Players such as Boldin, Ward, Bowe, and Buress were below him.
    - 22 In Receiving yards among receivers. Higher than Greg Jennings and Lee Evans.
    - There are 32 teams in the NFL. Not all of them (Vikings, Titans, Jaguars) had #1 guys, but Berrian is above the cut line.

    Is Berrian an elite, game changing receiver? No, but I believe there is a distinction between that and being a #1 WR, which Berrian is. In any event, he is a major upgrade for us. We did not have a #1 WR last year. We have one now.

    I expect 70 catches, 900 yards, and 5 TDs. That's what he had last year, when he was the only weapon on the offense.
    Again, it backs to what you call a number one reciever.
    Is it the guy who makes the most catches?
    Is it the guy who runs the deep route.
    Is it the guy that will catch the most TDs?

    I agree he is a very nice upgrade and that he will help solidify the WR corp, but again, when talking about a WCO you don't use the term #1, #2 or #3.
    The number 1 receiver is the player who is more often than not the first read on passing plays...


    I m like a Ja Rule poster, cause I'm off the wall.

  2. #22
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,928

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Wide Receiver

    "ItalianStallion" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    Why is Berrian not regarded as a #1 receiver?

    - He was the #1 receiver in Chicago.
    - He had 17 more catches than our best receiver last year.
    - Among receivers, he was top 20 in catches. Everyone above, except for Shaun McDonald, is a #1 receiver. Players such as Boldin, Ward, Bowe, and Buress were below him.
    - 22 In Receiving yards among receivers. Higher than Greg Jennings and Lee Evans.
    - There are 32 teams in the NFL. Not all of them (Vikings, Titans, Jaguars) had #1 guys, but Berrian is above the cut line.

    Is Berrian an elite, game changing receiver? No, but I believe there is a distinction between that and being a #1 WR, which Berrian is. In any event, he is a major upgrade for us. We did not have a #1 WR last year. We have one now.

    I expect 70 catches, 900 yards, and 5 TDs. That's what he had last year, when he was the only weapon on the offense.
    Again, it backs to what you call a number one reciever.
    Is it the guy who makes the most catches?
    Is it the guy who runs the deep route.
    Is it the guy that will catch the most TDs?

    I agree he is a very nice upgrade and that he will help solidify the WR corp, but again, when talking about a WCO you don't use the term #1, #2 or #3.
    The number 1 receiver is the player who is more often than not the first read on passing plays...
    Exactly.
    Depending on what the defense shows that could be the X, Y or Z reciever.
    ;D
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  3. #23
    ItalianStallion's Avatar
    ItalianStallion is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,615

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Wide Receiver

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "ItalianStallion" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    Why is Berrian not regarded as a #1 receiver?

    - He was the #1 receiver in Chicago.
    - He had 17 more catches than our best receiver last year.
    - Among receivers, he was top 20 in catches. Everyone above, except for Shaun McDonald, is a #1 receiver. Players such as Boldin, Ward, Bowe, and Buress were below him.
    - 22 In Receiving yards among receivers. Higher than Greg Jennings and Lee Evans.
    - There are 32 teams in the NFL. Not all of them (Vikings, Titans, Jaguars) had #1 guys, but Berrian is above the cut line.

    Is Berrian an elite, game changing receiver? No, but I believe there is a distinction between that and being a #1 WR, which Berrian is. In any event, he is a major upgrade for us. We did not have a #1 WR last year. We have one now.

    I expect 70 catches, 900 yards, and 5 TDs. That's what he had last year, when he was the only weapon on the offense.
    Again, it backs to what you call a number one reciever.
    Is it the guy who makes the most catches?
    Is it the guy who runs the deep route.
    Is it the guy that will catch the most TDs?

    I agree he is a very nice upgrade and that he will help solidify the WR corp, but again, when talking about a WCO you don't use the term #1, #2 or #3.
    The number 1 receiver is the player who is more often than not the first read on passing plays...
    Exactly.
    Depending on what the defense shows that could be the X, Y or Z reciever.

    ;D
    true to an extent.
    Most plays are drawn up with a first read in mind (usually the X receiver I believe).
    Obviously with any offense a qb may make pre-snap reads, but that in itself is a read that may indicate the first read will not be open post-snap (or somebody else will be uncovered, or covered by a linebacker or something)


    I m like a Ja Rule poster, cause I'm off the wall.

  4. #24
    bleedpurple is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,951

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Wide Receiver

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    Why is Berrian not regarded as a #1 receiver?

    - He was the #1 receiver in Chicago.
    - He had 17 more catches than our best receiver last year.
    - Among receivers, he was top 20 in catches. Everyone above, except for Shaun McDonald, is a #1 receiver. Players such as Boldin, Ward, Bowe, and Buress were below him.
    - 22 In Receiving yards among receivers. Higher than Greg Jennings and Lee Evans.
    - There are 32 teams in the NFL. Not all of them (Vikings, Titans, Jaguars) had #1 guys, but Berrian is above the cut line.

    Is Berrian an elite, game changing receiver? No, but I believe there is a distinction between that and being a #1 WR, which Berrian is. In any event, he is a major upgrade for us. We did not have a #1 WR last year. We have one now.

    I expect 70 catches, 900 yards, and 5 TDs. That's what he had last year, when he was the only weapon on the offense.
    Again, it backs to what you call a number one reciever.
    Is it the guy who makes the most catches?
    Is it the guy who runs the deep route.
    Is it the guy that will catch the most TDs?

    I agree he is a very nice upgrade and that he will help solidify the WR corp, but again, when talking about a WCO you don't use the term #1, #2 or #3.
    Where do you get this ishtay from ???... Who told you WCO's dont have a true 1,2,3 receiver???... I don't think that makes any sense.. as in every offense you have a 1st, 2nd and 3rd option and obviously have the best receiver as the 1st read depending on the defense...



  5. #25
    crazyB is offline Starter
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    227

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Wide Receiver

    rather than have one go to big name guy i'd rather have a few good guys just below the rader of the defence, ie we move the ball and win games its better to have a great team full of good guys than have one star guy like Moss.
    8)

    8) crazyB that s Mr crazyB to you 8)

  6. #26
    bleedpurple is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,951

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Wide Receiver

    "crazyB" wrote:
    rather than have one go to big name guy i'd rather have a few good guys just below the rader of the defence, ie we move the ball and win games its better to have a great team full of good guys than have one star guy like Moss.
    I agree but even still, your gonna have a top guy and then a second guy... he doesn't have to be a star but he's gonna be your best receiver.. and if we have two or three of them, then the more the merrier!!...

  7. #27
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,928

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Wide Receiver

    "bleedpurple" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    Why is Berrian not regarded as a #1 receiver?

    - He was the #1 receiver in Chicago.
    - He had 17 more catches than our best receiver last year.
    - Among receivers, he was top 20 in catches. Everyone above, except for Shaun McDonald, is a #1 receiver. Players such as Boldin, Ward, Bowe, and Buress were below him.
    - 22 In Receiving yards among receivers. Higher than Greg Jennings and Lee Evans.
    - There are 32 teams in the NFL. Not all of them (Vikings, Titans, Jaguars) had #1 guys, but Berrian is above the cut line.

    Is Berrian an elite, game changing receiver? No, but I believe there is a distinction between that and being a #1 WR, which Berrian is. In any event, he is a major upgrade for us. We did not have a #1 WR last year. We have one now.

    I expect 70 catches, 900 yards, and 5 TDs. That's what he had last year, when he was the only weapon on the offense.
    Again, it backs to what you call a number one reciever.
    Is it the guy who makes the most catches?
    Is it the guy who runs the deep route.
    Is it the guy that will catch the most TDs?

    I agree he is a very nice upgrade and that he will help solidify the WR corp, but again, when talking about a WCO you don't use the term #1, #2 or #3.
    Where do you get this ishtay from ???... Who told you WCO's dont have a true 1,2,3 receiver???... I don't think that makes any sense.. as in every offense you have a 1st, 2nd and 3rd option and obviously have the best receiver as the 1st read depending on the defense...
    Ohhh so now you are using the term option.......

    Why not Z, X, Y. How about Slot, Flanker.........
    Which is it.

    Again, I will ask you. What is your term of a True #1 reciever.
    Seems to me that you might be changing your tune a bit now.
    ;D

    http://www.kffl.com/article/1790/204
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  8. #28
    bleedpurple is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,951

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Wide Receiver

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "bleedpurple" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    Why is Berrian not regarded as a #1 receiver?

    - He was the #1 receiver in Chicago.
    - He had 17 more catches than our best receiver last year.
    - Among receivers, he was top 20 in catches. Everyone above, except for Shaun McDonald, is a #1 receiver. Players such as Boldin, Ward, Bowe, and Buress were below him.
    - 22 In Receiving yards among receivers. Higher than Greg Jennings and Lee Evans.
    - There are 32 teams in the NFL. Not all of them (Vikings, Titans, Jaguars) had #1 guys, but Berrian is above the cut line.

    Is Berrian an elite, game changing receiver? No, but I believe there is a distinction between that and being a #1 WR, which Berrian is. In any event, he is a major upgrade for us. We did not have a #1 WR last year. We have one now.

    I expect 70 catches, 900 yards, and 5 TDs. That's what he had last year, when he was the only weapon on the offense.
    Again, it backs to what you call a number one reciever.
    Is it the guy who makes the most catches?
    Is it the guy who runs the deep route.
    Is it the guy that will catch the most TDs?

    I agree he is a very nice upgrade and that he will help solidify the WR corp, but again, when talking about a WCO you don't use the term #1, #2 or #3.
    Where do you get this ishtay from ???... Who told you WCO's dont have a true 1,2,3 receiver???... I don't think that makes any sense.. as in every offense you have a 1st, 2nd and 3rd option and obviously have the best receiver as the 1st read depending on the defense...
    Ohhh so now you are using the term option.......

    Why not Z, X, Y. How about Slot, Flanker.........
    Which is it.

    Again, I will ask you. What is your term of a True #1 reciever.
    Seems to me that you might be changing your tune a bit now.
    ;D

    http://www.kffl.com/article/1790/204
    The article proves my point as well as displays a basic principle of any sport...

    Often that means fantasy owners can't approach prospective WCO players in terms of the SE or flanker position on the depth chart. Obviously Johnson is often the first receiver in any progression, and therefore a prime target. But it is important to remember that, in nearly all cases, the WCO seeks open targets, not specific individuals. In other words, if Johnson doesn't get open, Johnson doesn't get the ball.
    So, i.e. Johnson being the PRIME target.. therefore, #1 receiver... but obviously, if he's not open he won't / shouldn't get the ball... but if he's a true #1.. chances are he will either draw double coverage or get his ass open...

    So while you may be thinking of it in the terms of flanker, SE, slot whatever, and while all the positions may be fluid.. You still have a Prime target or #1 receiver...

    I'm not looking at it in terms of 1st 2nd or 3rd option (Open man get's the ball, we all know that)... I understand that's not the case... but you do have a depth chart and the TOP GUY ON THERE WILL BE THE #1.... ie. 1st, 2nd, and 3rd guy!!...

    it's plain and simple as that!!!




  9. #29
    seaniemck7's Avatar
    seaniemck7 is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Posts
    1,453

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Wide Receiver

    "ItalianStallion" wrote:
    "seaniemck7" wrote:
    "Chazz" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    Instead of having a true go-to receiver, the team has taken the “wide receiver-by-committee” approach, with mixed results at best
    The Vikings have yet to fully recover from the loss the Moss and the level of production and fear he brought to the offense.
    I'll be so happy when sports writers and fans figure out that we aren't still trying to replace Moss.
    Hell, for that matter, we aren't trying to get a "True Number 1 Reciever" at all and are looking to solidify a WR Corp that is a reciever by committe concept.

    I know its hard to comprehend for those that loved to see Moss deep every throw, but those days are gone and will never return under this staffs offensive scheme.

    Ball control, dink and dunk with a occasional deep ball to stretch the defense/keep them honest approach to the passing game is what we will see for many years to come.

    :

    Name a great offense...and I can give you QB with a go-to guy.
    I don't want a great offense.
    We had that in the past.
    I want a superbowl victory.
    Give me Tampa Bay or a Baltimore offense than can win in January and Feburary.
    I think you'd be hard pressed to convince anyone that those offenses were better in any situation (playoffs, regular season etc.) than the ones we had with Moss.
    Those superbowl wins were all defense.
    The offenses we had with Moss would score sometimes in 3 plays, never giving our defense a rest.
    The high flying offense only exacerbated the problems we had on defense because we did not have a clock chewing, pound it down the D's throat offense, which would limit the time our D and the other teams O was on the field.
    Defense wins championships, not great offenses.
    You proved my point.

  10. #30
    kevoncox's Avatar
    kevoncox is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,910

    Re: Vikings Positional Analysis: Wide Receiver

    "seaniemck7" wrote:
    "ItalianStallion" wrote:
    "seaniemck7" wrote:
    "Chazz" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    Instead of having a true go-to receiver, the team has taken the “wide receiver-by-committee” approach, with mixed results at best
    The Vikings have yet to fully recover from the loss the Moss and the level of production and fear he brought to the offense.
    I'll be so happy when sports writers and fans figure out that we aren't still trying to replace Moss.
    Hell, for that matter, we aren't trying to get a "True Number 1 Reciever" at all and are looking to solidify a WR Corp that is a reciever by committe concept.

    I know its hard to comprehend for those that loved to see Moss deep every throw, but those days are gone and will never return under this staffs offensive scheme.

    Ball control, dink and dunk with a occasional deep ball to stretch the defense/keep them honest approach to the passing game is what we will see for many years to come.

    :

    Name a great offense...and I can give you QB with a go-to guy.
    I don't want a great offense.
    We had that in the past.
    I want a superbowl victory.
    Give me Tampa Bay or a Baltimore offense than can win in January and Feburary.
    I think you'd be hard pressed to convince anyone that those offenses were better in any situation (playoffs, regular season etc.) than the ones we had with Moss.
    Those superbowl wins were all defense.
    The offenses we had with Moss would score sometimes in 3 plays, never giving our defense a rest.
    The high flying offense only exacerbated the problems we had on defense because we did not have a clock chewing, pound it down the D's throat offense, which would limit the time our D and the other teams O was on the field.
    Defense wins championships, not great offenses.
    You proved my point.
    You need both. Because by the time you reach the superbol you are playing good teams. If your defenses are equal then all other aspects f the game come into play. ST and Offense. You need all three to win. Defense wins nothing.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Vikings Positional Analysis: Tight Ends
    By Mr-holland in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 05-16-2008, 06:51 PM
  2. Vikings Positional Analysis: Running Backs
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-11-2008, 07:42 AM
  3. Will Vikings select another wide receiver?
    By cogitans in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 02-22-2007, 03:08 AM
  4. Vikings sign veteran wide receiver
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 01-10-2007, 05:31 AM
  5. Jim Souhan - Vikings miss a certain wide receiver
    By Muggsy in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-21-2005, 08:30 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •