Dolphins have serious interest in WR Brandon Gibson

It's not articificial, it's assessing the investment based on how we expect it to be used and therefore produce for us.

We don't expect our WRs to get many rushes, and screens count if the offense uses WR screens and you expect that to be a way you'll get production from him.

I suppose if a wide receiver happened to kick extra points for his team we should include those when projecting him at flanker in the NFL too?

He will produce the way he is used. Perhaps you expect someone like Austin or Patterson to run a lot of reverses, shovel passes, etc. I don't. SOme WR screens, probably, but that other stuff will not occurt on a consistent enough basis. Honestly, how do you value a company for acquistion if it has a division you intend to close? Do you consider the revenue it makes but that it won't make for you?

There guys will not be spending their careers returning punts, or running reverses on any sort of regular basis unless they are busts as wide receivers and the team is trying to salvage some value.

 

Hey Marve, it's funny NFLN's #7 ranked receiving corps of All Time features THREE 5'9 guys... at weights of 177, 184, and 185.

What's ironic is I bet all these people against Tavon Austin probably cherished the franchise's best all-time receiver, Mark Clayton, who was nearly identical in size to Austin at 5'9 177.

4x Pro Bowler Gary Clark (member of NFLN's #8 All Time WR corps) was only 5'9 173.... with 11,000 yards & 65 TD.

The outstanding Houston Oilers run & shoot receiving corps with Warren Moon featured 5'9 170 Drew Hill and 5'9 178 Ernest Givens (with 18,000 yards & 110 TD between them).

..... and none of these guys were afforded the rules that benefit today's receivers.

 

I think they should move Fasano to center. I mean, he outweighs Jim Langer and Dwight Stephensenby 5 pounds, but I'm sure he could slim down a bit.

 

.... and what happens after they catch the ball? Isn't that essentially considered running?.... or are they supposed to just fall down like Hartline and the play ends there? What they do with the ball in their hands in college helps give you an idea of their RAC potential in the NFL. No one's saying those players have to become part time running backs in the league to succeed. Jeremy Maclin carried the ball 91 times at Mizzou (6 rushing TD). Harvin carried it 194 times (19 TD). Cobb- 228 times (22 TD). Their ability in college has shown that if you can just get the ball in their hands they make plays.

Have you watched how Percy Harvin & Randall Cobb are used in the NFL? The rushing ability they brought with them from college most certainly does factor into their value & production in the NFL. It's likely no different for Austin. You don't draft playmakers like that and then decide to not find easy, extra ways to get them the ball. That's one of the points of drafting a playmaker- because you CAN throw them a quick 2 yard pass and turn it into plus yardage or even a TD instead of being tackled immediately like Hartline would (which is a negative play for the offense).

 

I wouldn't pick any of you at #12.

 

Oh give me a ****ing break, that's already included in the receiving stats.

And shelve the condescending, rude, snarkytone, Todd. I'm not ****ing tolerating it.

[EDIT: I was pissed and frustrated when I wrote this. My sentiment remains the same, though I'd rather not have gotten that reactive about it.]

 

Is that Meryl Streep in your avatar with that dude from Two and a Half Men?

 

I think it's Helen Hunt and El DeBarge.

 

Response:

 

What don't you understand about this? Tavon's ability & success as a college running back is a tool to assess his ability to make plays in the NFL regardless of whether or not he spends much time at the position ever again. When you rush for 344 yards & 2 TD vs Oklahoma, that tells you something about his ability to make plays with the ball in his hands, period. Some of the things he does as a running back tells a coach or GM that you can creatively get him more involved in the offense than a typical receiver just as GB does with Cobb and Minnesota does with Harvin b/c these guys can make something of those high percentage short passes that players like Hartline cant; otherwise Hartline would be a 100 catch/year player. I mean, WADR do you believe every reception Harvin, Cobb, or the other guys in GB's offense makes is a result of only running complex routes? Are you so accustomed to Hartline & Bess that you forget what an actual playmaker can do with the ball in his hands?

Seriously, Barry? Need I remind you of your post I commented on?.... the part that goes something like, "I suppose if a wide receiver happened to kick extra points for his team we should include those when projecting him at flanker in the NFL too?". That's not condescending?

 

Barry is right...

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

let me fix this for you:

 

Please stay on topic sir.

Love u.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

The problem is you're making an assumption that the skill set used on run plays differs from the skill set used on screen plays. This is a bad assumption. Same skill set. It all counts.

 

Safeties keyed on Tavon Austin because of the position he played. He primarily got open against linebackers and safeties.

 

You forgot one major difference, Flynn is average, Jennings is great.

 

We don't really know that, do we?

I mean his crime in Green Bay is staying backup to one of the best quarterbacks the NFL has ever seen, and his crime in Seattle is losing out to the best rookie quarterback I've ever seen.

 

I wonder if the "Green Bay Code" talked about last year is preventing Philbin from poaching any GB players.

EDIT: Maybe that was just coaches.

 

Oh ok, thanks. It's hard to tell in such a small pic and I'm not familiar with DeBarge before anyway.

 

Not sure if it's been covered, but why would Gibson be the target over Ammendola, who is also rumored as hitting the FA market. Is it about money? Report I heard said Ammendola will be looking for about 6M/ year. You could make a case that Gibson is the 3rd best WR (behind Ammendola and Givens) on a not so great offense. Color me unimpressed if Gibson is the play.

 

Amendola offers something we already have, IMO.

 

Agree very much so. To me that's just tying up 8 or 9% of our salary cap in 2 players who don't raise the overall talent level of the team.

 

As does Gibson. Poor man's Hartline imo. It may be too much too ask but if we acquired Amendola...our wr core would all of a sudden be deadly.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

Today's rules are going to continue to make things easier for the smaller, shifty types of receivers. I think we'll continue to see more of them being successful as the seasons go by, at least to some extent the rules that limit contact and protect receivers from hits over the middle.

 

I'm going to be rather ticked if we are signing any FA WRs other than Wallace or Jennings, to be honest. The rest of the crop strike me as neither upgrades nor potential replacements. I'd rather trade #12 for Victor Cruz than tie up money in ****ty #2/#3 WRs for $6-$7 million a year.

 

Well, I disagree with your statement that those two don't fit the category of "playmaker" need for this team... These are both guys that do nothing but make plays...they aren't 'take the top off the D' guys, but they make plays, better than what we've had on the roster...

Wallace is the big sexy out there, no doubt. He's the take the top off guy, but arguably, he's the ONLY take the top off guy...

 

The thing is, while those are most accomplished guys out there, Jennings isn't much of a speedster...Wallace is the ONLY speed guy out there, but is he the best option for us ?? That has become debatable... One thing for sure, if it turns out that we aren't pursuing Wallace as fervently as the media seems to think, it reeks of Philbin continuing to put his stamp on this team... Of course, what the media doesn't know is who is really pursuing who out there right now...