Back2Buff Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 The Dolphins have none of the X,Y,Z crappy classifications and had the number 1 passing offense. Teams that over think these roles will end up setting themselves back. Speed and explosiveness will always kill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey152 Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 1 minute ago, Back2Buff said: The Dolphins have none of the X,Y,Z crappy classifications and had the number 1 passing offense. Teams that over think these roles will end up setting themselves back. Speed and explosiveness will always kill. Not true...alignment is alignment. They have to have an eligible receiver on each side of the LOS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 I'm kinda old. When did the X, Y, Z nomenclature take over? WR1, TE, Slot Or from my early days: Split End, Tight End, Flanker (that one was before my time, but I knew what it meant) Isn't it all the same thing, different name? Or am I missing some subtlety here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo716 Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 3 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: I'm kinda old. When did the X, Y, Z nomenclature take over? WR1, TE, Slot Or from my early days: Split End, Tight End, Flanker (that one was before my time, but I knew what it meant) Isn't it all the same thing, different name? Or am I missing some subtlety here? Flanker and split end are just old school names for alignments The x is the split end.. he is lined up on the line of scrimmage and cannot motion The z is the flanker and lined off the line of scrimmage 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 7 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said: Flanker and split end are just old school names for alignments The x is the split end.. he is lined up on the line of scrimmage and cannot motion The z is the flanker and lined off the line of scrimmage Thanks. That's what I thought. Same thing, different name. Maybe I'll live long enough to see it change again! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethan in Cleveland Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 Good thread. I don't know how the pros look at WR but to me I see body size and route trees as the differentiator. To me Samuel is closer to what Diggs was. I think they still need to replace what Davis didn't pan out to be. A guy that can get deep and be a big body on deep crossing routes. They have enough small fast guys that can find holes in the zones. They need a guy that takes the top off the defense and forces them to play 2 deep safeties. That opens up all kinds of things underneath and helps the run game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 12 minutes ago, Ethan in Cleveland said: Good thread. I don't know how the pros look at WR but to me I see body size and route trees as the differentiator. To me Samuel is closer to what Diggs was. I think they still need to replace what Davis didn't pan out to be. A guy that can get deep and be a big body on deep crossing routes. They have enough small fast guys that can find holes in the zones. They need a guy that takes the top off the defense and forces them to play 2 deep safeties. That opens up all kinds of things underneath and helps the run game. I more or less agree. See my breakdown a few posts back. To be a complete passing game you need a variety of receivers. Not on every single play, but in general skill sets, so as to keep the defense from taking everything away. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigAl2526 Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 I'm wary of Worthy's lack of body mass, though I don't know of a specific reason he couldn't add 15 -20 lbs of muscle. If the Bills did draft him, that would be my hope. I don't know that I would rule out the possibility that Thomas and Mitchell cand develop their route running and ability to gain separation. They have ample athleticism to do so, and have already grown in their route running through the course of their college careers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey152 Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 Bottom line is, the more tools a guy has in his toolbelt, the more you can do with him. It doesn't always trump guys who are really good at a few things, but if all your receivers are limited in some way, you do become predictable on offense. Not everyone needs to be a jack of all trades, but having a guy who lines up on the ball and can get open is a big benefit for an offense...because a defense needs to roll coverage to stop them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 3 hours ago, Mikey152 said: Bottom line is, the more tools a guy has in his toolbelt, the more you can do with him. It doesn't always trump guys who are really good at a few things, but if all your receivers are limited in some way, you do become predictable on offense. Not everyone needs to be a jack of all trades, but having a guy who lines up on the ball and can get open is a big benefit for an offense...because a defense needs to roll coverage to stop them. Agreed. And with a mobile QB like Josh Allen the smart move is to design plays with layers of receiver depths for him to choose from in a roll out mode. The defense can’t cover every depth AND also protect against Josh running it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeGOATski Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 13 hours ago, Dr. Who said: I don't see Samuel as a Davis replacement, so I don't see that move as addressing the loss of the boundary receiver, or now Diggs. Unless you think Shakir can take over for Davis, I think you still need two. Samuel is a 700-800 yard receiver in Brady's offense and still has the speed to go deep. He's definitely a Davis replacement in my book. Now we just get an all-around star to replace Diggs. I'd prefer a bigger guy with good hands. I bet the Bills will land one of Odunze, Thomas, or Legette. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 1 hour ago, LeGOATski said: Samuel is a 700-800 yard receiver in Brady's offense and still has the speed to go deep. He's definitely a Davis replacement in my book. Now we just get an all-around star to replace Diggs. I'd prefer a bigger guy with good hands. I bet the Bills will land one of Odunze, Thomas, or Legette. The definitions of these guys is literally all over the place! Samuel was a running back and is 5’ 11” at best. Gabe Davis is considered a big body WR and is listed at 6’ 2”. Their output might be similar in terms or yards, but are they at all similar in terms of their generally considered WR role? I didn’t think so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 Who didn't love the Bills dominating the Cowboys? The Bills do not want to be a finesse team, they want to smash teams. If we drafted Worthy, we would have the shortest WR group in NFL. Thats not physically dominating, it's more towards finesse. We need a big WR that can take the top off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeGOATski Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 21 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: The definitions of these guys is literally all over the place! Samuel was a running back and is 5’ 11” at best. Gabe Davis is considered a big body WR and is listed at 6’ 2”. Their output might be similar in terms or yards, but are they at all similar in terms of their generally considered WR role? I didn’t think so. You're not wrong, but you can reference the whole thread about WR roles currently on the front page. Some people in there explain I better than me. Samuel's on the shorter side, but not skinny/small. He has good hands can run any route Davis did. Davis is not a super-athletic, jump ball-catching boundary WR, anyway. Samuel can get the production Davis did, while hopefully the star rookie takes over the WR1 role by year two, if not year 1. I'm hoping the replacement for Diggs has that contested catch ability and super speed in his arsenal. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 (edited) 30 minutes ago, LeGOATski said: You're not wrong, but you can reference the whole thread about WR roles currently on the front page. Some people in there explain I better than me. Samuel's on the shorter side, but not skinny/small. He has good hands can run any route Davis did. Davis is not a super-athletic, jump ball-catching boundary WR, anyway. Samuel can get the production Davis did, while hopefully the star rookie takes over the WR1 role by year two, if not year 1. I'm hoping the replacement for Diggs has that contested catch ability and super speed in his arsenal. One of the things that I gleaned from the up thread discussion is the NFL no longer relies on what we all knew as the traditional roles…much like the NBA has gone away from guard, forward, center lineups in favor of a bunch of versatile 6’ 6” guys. Edited April 9 by SoCal Deek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appoo Posted April 10 Share Posted April 10 On 4/9/2024 at 7:00 AM, The Frankish Reich said: I'm kinda old. When did the X, Y, Z nomenclature take over? WR1, TE, Slot Or from my early days: Split End, Tight End, Flanker (that one was before my time, but I knew what it meant) Isn't it all the same thing, different name? Or am I missing some subtlety here? When I played freshman football in 1995 I was an X Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCofNC Posted April 10 Share Posted April 10 On 4/8/2024 at 12:31 PM, SoonerBillsFan said: Cosell said he sees Thomas and AD Mitchell as guys who will develop into #1 WR's. BUT.... there is no denying the pure speed of Worthy. I don't know if we need a true X in the form of size. We just need guys who can beat man coverage, create space and catch the ball consistently. A guy can be 5'11 and 190lbs and do that esp if he has a good Vertical for contested balls. Speed is great, when there is space. Give me a guy that can produce in the RZ ALL DAY over a pure burner. How many of those super fast guys are worth anything when it counts? Think 4th quarter, December, 3rd and goal from the 8. Ball has to come out fast, screw the smurfs, give me a DUDE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBF81 Posted April 10 Share Posted April 10 (edited) A team can have great WRs but if they don't use them optimally then you'll never get the most out of 'em. Someone mentioned it the other day in a thread, but Allen's going to have to expand his playing to hit the open guys underneath, in the flats, and on the outsides short-medium and we'll be fine. If Brady/Allen don't do that then we leave a lot on the table regardless of who our WRs are. Allen did it best in '21 but still not exceptionally well. All the great QBs have done that well. Edited April 10 by PBF81 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerBillsFan Posted April 10 Share Posted April 10 11 minutes ago, DCofNC said: Speed is great, when there is space. Give me a guy that can produce in the RZ ALL DAY over a pure burner. How many of those super fast guys are worth anything when it counts? Think 4th quarter, December, 3rd and goal from the 8. Ball has to come out fast, screw the smurfs, give me a DUDE. Several of the WR's in this draft have 39+ in verticals, so they get contested balls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCofNC Posted April 14 Share Posted April 14 On 4/10/2024 at 5:18 PM, SoonerBillsFan said: Several of the WR's in this draft have 39+ in verticals, so they get contested balls. But can they get off the press coverage in time for it to matter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.