LaDairis Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 "Why are WR's getting bigger in the NFL?" Why are QBs, DEs, TEs, and LBs getting bigger? DUHHHH.... A: roids, improved weight training, hormonal treatment etc.. Players in the NFL have been getting bigger for three plus decades. It is quite telling that your BIRDBRAIN only noticed that at the WR position... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 "You do realize that the article you linked stands in complete opposition to the ridiculous point you don't have the guts to abandon, that height doesn't matter for WR's, don't you?"No, rather, that article PROVES that you were WRONG about 6'1" being "Tall" for an NFL WR, and that you are way too much of a PARROTING little chicken@@@@ to admit that... NFL players at all positions have been getting larger over the years. So what. 709642[/snapback] Please point out where I opined that 6-1 was tall for the 40 top college receivers invited to the NFL combine as opposed to 6-1 being tall for WR's period. Perhaps they don't cover statistics and the importance of sample sizes in 5th grade? For bonus points, explain how an article demonstrating the increasing size of the most highly regarded college receivers, the ones invited to the combine, supports your point that height is never, ever, ever a factor in evaluating a WR? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 "Why are WR's getting bigger in the NFL?"Why are QBs, DEs, TEs, and LBs getting bigger? DUHHHH.... A: roids, improved weight training, hormonal treatment etc.. Players in the NFL have been getting bigger for three plus decades. It is quite telling that your BIRDBRAIN only noticed that at the WR position... 709655[/snapback] There are no short guys to draft? They are ony drafting the taller ones? hmmm...why would that be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaDairis Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 "There are no short guys to draft? They are ony drafting the taller ones? hmmm...why would that be?" In your little world of lying, parroting and make believe, the NFL would be following your brilliant BIRDBRAIN's advice. Of course, Sinorice Moss went in Round 2 to the NYG, but he is short, so he must sukk according to you, just like his older brother sukks, right? In fact, two of the three tallest WRs at the Senior Bowl went undrafted... But facts have never stopped you from lying, parroting, and changing the subject... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaDairis Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 "Please point out where I opined that 6-1 was tall for the 40 top college receivers invited to the NFL combine as opposed to 6-1 being tall for WR's period" LMAO!!! Like, OK, you meant Martian WRs... Got it. I was talking about Earth... Those green players are kinda short... There comes a point when it is clear that your opponent is so badly defeated, so desperate, so petty, and so dishonest that to continue the "debate" would just be an exercise in futility. Needless to say, Mickey is a classic little parrot who knows absolutely NOTHING about football except height, parroting, and how to weasel and slime when busted for lying... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 There comes a point when it is clear that your opponent is so badly defeated, so desperate, so petty, and so dishonest that to continue the "debate" would just be an exercise in futility. 709667[/snapback] Have you reached that POINT yet? This thread sucks!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Long Beach Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 Every so often another one crawls out from under a rock. Eventually they stop getting the attention their mommy didn't give them when they were young and they go away. Although there are some that just get more abusive and we ban 'em. I could care less which one happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 "Please point out where I opined that 6-1 was tall for the 40 top college receivers invited to the NFL combine as opposed to 6-1 being tall for WR's period" LMAO!!! Like, OK, you meant Martian WRs... Got it. I was talking about Earth... Those green players are kinda short... There comes a point when it is clear that your opponent is so badly defeated, so desperate, so petty, and so dishonest that to continue the "debate" would just be an exercise in futility. Needless to say, Mickey is a classic little parrot who knows absolutely NOTHING about football except height, parroting, and how to weasel and slime when busted for lying... 709667[/snapback] Quite to the contrary, you know nothing more than how to avoid and not answer someone's question. You evade any basic question asked of you and hurl insults because you know you are wrong. You also demonstrate a basic lack of grasp of the english language as evidenced by your inability to recognize what someone else is asking. You sit here are repeat the same whiny pathetic insult, in an attempt to impress your little 6th grade friends. I only ask, next fall, hows it going to feel to still be in 6th grade english class when all of your little buddies are in 7th grade? Now put away your vaseline, close both TBD and your porn browser and run along. Mommy will be home soon, and you havent unloaded the dishwasher and cleaned your room yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 On average. The only point here is that height is a factor. Not the only factor. Ask Pete Metzalars if his height was a factor in his success. At the same time, Duper and Clayton did okay without it. All else being equal, who would you take, a 5-10 WR or a 6-2 WR? Remember, all other factors are totally equal. 709593[/snapback] I don't disagree that height is a factor in what type of player a WR is or can be, but I guess I didn't think that particular stat really helped to solidify your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 Actually, the reason that WRs are getting bigger is simply because agents are tutoring the players on how to prepare for the measurements. If they spend a week or so right before the tape, they can often fool it by up to 1.8 or so inches, like they can work on their .40 times and Wonderlics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5 Wide Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 "Why are WR's getting bigger in the NFL?"Why are QBs, DEs, TEs, and LBs getting bigger? DUHHHH.... A: roids, improved weight training, hormonal treatment etc.. Players in the NFL have been getting bigger for three plus decades. It is quite telling that your BIRDBRAIN only noticed that at the WR position... 709655[/snapback] Two of your three answers are banned and strictly enforced by the league. Improved weight training is a component. The NFL has become a multi-billion dollar business over the years. Getting drafted is quickly approaching the status of essentially hitting the lottery. Personal trainers, dieticians, and the like are all now implemented because of the large sums of money at stake. The league is a 12 month job as opposed to 30 years ago when training camp was specifically for training. The talent pool on which to draw from is also expanding, the NFL is turning global so inherently, better athletes are being exposed to the limelight. As far as your other quote about his birdbrain only noticing it at the WR position, you have me perplexed. Why would he bring LB's and Linemen into a thread specifically discussing the potential merits of a tall WR? Why compare apples to oranges when you can compare apples to apples? Its not a being naive, it's staying on topic. I'm not comprehending your crusade here. I remember when I was 15, I was able to converse with others without going into a derisive and insult laden tangent. Nance has the physical tools that are in line with the ideological prototype receiver in the NFL. Yes there are exceptions like Steve Smith who excel in spite of their physical stature, but that is by far the exception and not the norm. You talk about the 6-4 Nance being only 3 inches taller than Wilson, however you fail to take into accout the added arm length that a taller person also has. Now you are looking at a 6 inch advantage over Wilson, which in a game of inches can be a distinct difference maker. What do you have to lose by seeing if the kid can develop under all-world tuteledge? Your answer: Nothing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 WR Maurice Stovall, Notre Dame drafted in the 3rd round by Tampa: Part of the reason for his effectiveness as a blocker, Stovall said, is his size, but he said there was a bigger reason. “I was always coached to be an aggressive wide receiver,” he said. “By that, I mean my releasing with defensive backs and also my blocking, making plays downfield and attacking the ball also.” Stovall said he didn’t start out as a big, physical receiver. He was 5-feet-10 as a sophomore at Philadelphia (Pa.) Archbishop High School, but after a growth spurt, he returned for his junior season at 6-3. Since then, he said, his size has been a “big advantage.” “Real big,” he said. “An average defensive back is about 5-10, 5-11 and me being 6-4 gives me a height advantage. Also, my wing span, my long arms, gives me an advantage also. It allows me to shield defenders from the ball and gives me an advantage.” But what does he know compared to Ladipwad? Size doesn't matter, not one bit, never, ever, ever says Ladipwad so it must true. Actual NFL WR says Size matter, Ladipwad swallows his crayons ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mel Kiper, a goof, sure but a goof who makes a living at this crap as opposed to Ladipwad who doesn't: Players such as Michigan State's Charles Rogers, Texas' Roy Williams, Miami's Andre Johnson, Washington's Reggie Williams and Oklahoma State's Rashaun Woods -- as well as freshmen phenoms such as USC's Mike Williams and Pittsburgh's Larry Fitzgerald -- have all taken over games, proving to be the primary difference-makers in a number of contests this season. What allows for mismatches against the cornerbacks they work against is a combination of athleticism and size. Of this group of wideouts, the average height is 6-3¼ and the average weight is 211 pounds. Zillionaire draft guru says Ladipwad really is a dip ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- By the way, the average WR height in 2004 was 6-1/2 inch while the average height at the combine was 6-1 1/8 thus making my point that 6-1 is tall for a receiver and that the WR's invited to the combine would be expected to be taller than the average WR. At an average of 6-1, that WR class was considered to be abnormally tall. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Why are WR's getting taller? "The trend, according to several coaches, can be traced to wide receiver's growth into a marquee position and an increase in passing at the high school and college levels, where coaches often recruit average basketball players to become exceptional receivers. "It used to be a handful of big receivers -- Herman Moore and Randy Moss and Michael Irvin and that bunch, Terrell Owens," Lions coach Steve Mariucci said. "Now there's going to be one on every team." NFL Coaches disagree with Ladipwad, film at 11 Thats from NFL coaches, not Ladipwad so I guess we should reject it because, hell, what do they know compared to the Ladipwad, Origin of Wisdom who has decreed that size doesn't matter for receivers. All those coaches recruiting basket ball players for their height just don't know what he knows. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other NFL coaches on tall receivers: "Almost everyone seems to be moving in that direction [taller] at corner," Oilers coach Jeff Fisher says. "We're doing that ourselves, for sure. One scouting service report has six of the top 12 receivers in the NFL being in our division, and every one of those receivers is six feet or taller." "...Panthers coach Dom Capers, after watching too many wideouts pluck balls off the top of his cornerbacks' helmets the last three seasons, raided Green Bay for Doug Evans in the offseason.... "They would throw jump balls, over and over. And in a one-on-one game, the shortest player is hardly ever going to jump the highest. Coaches and players toss around basketball analogies all the time when they talk about wide receivers vs. cornerbacks." ""We make sure our wide receivers have good size," says Shanahan, who starts McCaffrey and Rod Smith (6-0, 195) in Denver. "That helps as much as anything." Capers, Shanahan and Fisher disagree with Ladipwad, world shocked None of that matters. Ladipwad says size doesn't matter and all who disagree, me, Shanahan, Fisher, Capers, players, coaches, draft gurus, we are all, all total idiots for thinking that size can, in fact, matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaDairis Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 "Why would he bring LB's and Linemen into a thread specifically discussing the potential merits of a tall WR?" That's not what he posted. This is... Today, 01:22 PM "Why are WR's getting bigger in the NFL?" Nice try... "I'm not comprehending your crusade here" The only "crusade" I have here is about the right to post one's own opinion on a subject when such opinion conflicts with the "guru parroting" those who have never seen such player play insist must be true despite facts like this kid was at the Senior Bowl and went undrafted. I have the right to come here and post that I observed Martin Nance 1. drop or bobble 1 out of 4 or so 2. fail to adjust to the ball 3. demonstrate poor turning ability once up to top speed 3. take several strides and seconds to get to top speed If you think that "guru parroting" should so trump my right to post my take, then you are on the side I am crusading against... "Nance has the physical tools that are in line with the ideological prototype receiver in the NFL" Ah, ha, never seen him play either... And, by the way, which ideology are we talking aobut here? Dropadjustitarian?? Liberalparrotingism? Iamaparrotsoimneverwrongian? "Yes there are exceptions like Steve Smith who excel in spite of their physical stature" Yeah, just one. Every single other good WR in the NFL is TALL TALL TALL... and every single TALL TALL TALL WR is GOOD GOOD GOOD... "Now you are looking at a 6 inch advantage over Wilson" 6? http://www.buffalobills.com/team/roster.html 15 Wilson, George WR 6-0 210 17 Nance, Martin WR 6-3 212 Your girlfriend must think 10 inches is the length of the Chap Stick dispenser... Wilson is a quality football player, a tough kid who gets it done as a gunner and WR. You can fantasize all you want about that one play where adjustment doesn't matter, hands don't matter, just those 3 inches matter. That happens maybe twice a season. Those 20+ additional drops, bobbles, and failures to adjust to the ball will cost more... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 Actually, the reason that WRs are getting bigger is simply because agents are tutoring the players on how to prepare for the measurements. If they spend a week or so right before the tape, they can often fool it by up to 1.8 or so inches, like they can work on their .40 times and Wonderlics. 709678[/snapback] Good point but see the article I linked about recruiting basketball players and the increased passing going on in HS and college for an additional view point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 "There are no short guys to draft? They are ony drafting the taller ones? hmmm...why would that be?"In your little world of lying, parroting and make believe, the NFL would be following your brilliant BIRDBRAIN's advice. Of course, Sinorice Moss went in Round 2 to the NYG, but he is short, so he must sukk according to you, just like his older brother sukks, right? In fact, two of the three tallest WRs at the Senior Bowl went undrafted... But facts have never stopped you from lying, parroting, and changing the subject... 709663[/snapback] You need to buy a thesaurus. Please quote a post of mine where I ever said that short receivers can't be good receivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 "Please point out where I opined that 6-1 was tall for the 40 top college receivers invited to the NFL combine as opposed to 6-1 being tall for WR's period" LMAO!!! Like, OK, you meant Martian WRs... Got it. I was talking about Earth... Those green players are kinda short... There comes a point when it is clear that your opponent is so badly defeated, so desperate, so petty, and so dishonest that to continue the "debate" would just be an exercise in futility. Needless to say, Mickey is a classic little parrot who knows absolutely NOTHING about football except height, parroting, and how to weasel and slime when busted for lying... 709667[/snapback] Well, you might be surprised that there is an alternative place where WR's can be found besides the NFL combine and Mars. Its called the NFL. Those are the receivers I was talking about which include at least 5 or 6 per team not including the practice squad which amounts to about 160-190 WR's as opposed to just the 40 you included that were at one combine. Here is a homework question for you to dodge: Which sample size will provide a more accurate result showing the average size of an NFL WR, the 160-190 actually in the league or the top 40 college recruits invited to one combine? Use a number two pencil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 "Now you are looking at a 6 inch advantage over Wilson" 6? http://www.buffalobills.com/team/roster.html 15 Wilson, George WR 6-0 210 17 Nance, Martin WR 6-3 212 709692[/snapback] listen up LaDumbass, if you had displayed some reading comprehension, you;d see that Mickey said Nance had 6 inches on wilson, when taking into account his larger wingspan He didnt say that Nance was 6 inches taller, but apparently you couldnt comprehend that. You seem to be good at taking things out of context and twisting things to fit your childish crusade. If you ever grow up, ever consider being a political campaign manager? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 listen up LaDumbass, if you had displayed some reading comprehension, you;d see that Mickey said Nance had 6 inches on wilson, when taking into account his larger wingspan He didnt say that Nance was 6 inches taller, but apparently you couldnt comprehend that. You seem to be good at taking things out of context and twisting things to fit your childish crusade. If you ever grow up, ever consider being a political campaign manager? 709710[/snapback] Actually, it was 5 Wide whose comments LaDipwad was mangling this time around. At least I am not alone. Notice how he hasn't responded to all the "size is good" stuff I posted from coaches and players? Imagine how awful it would be for him to have say, "yeah, I guess being tall could be of benefit for some receivers"? Apparently it would just kill him given his resistance to admitting what is so screechingly obvious even my dog is wondering what his freaking problem is and Rufus hates football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaDairis Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 "Notice how he hasn't responded to all the "size is good" stuff I posted from coaches and players?" There is absolutely nothing to respond to. What you have done there is PARROTED. Your PARROTING there is absolutely blown out of the water by the reality of S. Moss, Mason, Smith etc., and yet because it is "guru parroting" you sit there with your beak up sure it is true. What is true is that NFL morons like Jack Del Rio of Jacksonville agree with your BIRDBRAIN that TALL=GOOD and waste a fortune on JJ Stokes Donald Hayes 04 #9 overall pick Reggie Williams 05 #22 overall pick Matt Jones and have very little to show for it except a flock of BAWKING MORONS incapable of assessing the obvious... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 "Notice how he hasn't responded to all the "size is good" stuff I posted from coaches and players?"There is absolutely nothing to respond to. What you have done there is PARROTED. Your PARROTING there is absolutely blown out of the water by the reality of S. Moss, Mason, Smith etc., and yet because it is "guru parroting" you sit there with your beak up sure it is true. What is true is that NFL morons like Jack Del Rio of Jacksonville agree with your BIRDBRAIN that TALL=GOOD and waste a fortune on JJ Stokes Donald Hayes 04 #9 overall pick Reggie Williams 05 #22 overall pick Matt Jones and have very little to show for it except a flock of BAWKING MORONS incapable of assessing the obvious... 709722[/snapback] Can you at least learn how to quote text from another post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts