I see exactly what you're talking about. I think he will be highlighted but you know Cameron is going to get his touches, particularly in the red zone and probably between the 20s as well. Let's not forget that Cameron is probably as big a weapon as anyone on this offense right now. Cameron is as fast as Jarvis Landry yet is significantly more massive. All this talk about Jarvis Landry right here...we could (and should) be as excited about Jordan Cameron. If he didn't have his concussion history, he'd be the most potentially explosive weapon in my eyes moving forward considering Landry's lack of speed and Parker's rookie-status. I know you're excited about Landry but I think you might be discounting how much of a negative effect Cameron will have on Landry's numbers.
Lol..no it was not.. But I am also happy that we are always gaining new fans especially fans that we gained during losing or 500 Seasons they will be fans for a lifetime
Yeah I was a fan of Welker but the weasel gave the team no choice. He signed the NE offer sheet with a poison pill. Miami didn't want to trade him. They were forced to. Well from what we've heard he'll get the targets. If we throw it enough that he's at 1,200 and the rest of the corps are kicking butt we'll be good. He'll need to run deeper routes though (his passes were all caught an average of 4 yards from the LOS) and up his ypc to 10-11.
Hmmm. I take it you've done a pretty exhaustive study of every team and their various leaders? I'd be real interested in seeing that research. Also, what if the rumors of Landry playing outside some are true?
I have definitely not done an exhaustive study so I don't see the need for the sarcasm. It's a fair question...if you want to make "leadership" so important (1) what is it, (2) how do you measure it and (3) what teams are benefiting from their slot WRs having it? I can offer a subjective take on what leadership is. We all have our opinion. There's no good way to measure any of that because (1) it's qualitative and (2) we're observing from far, far away. Even if we pretended for a moment that we had answers as to what leadership was and how to measure it...do we feel that there would be many teams in cite to the case of the #3? I don't see why any of those questions would make you mad? They all seem very applicable and quite sensible for us to ask. I think that's what the thread is about.
You're changing your argument. You felt definitively that Landry isn't a leader because he's a slow slot receiver. Now you're claiming we can't know what leadership on a football team is, even though you knew enough of what it was and what it looks like on other teams, to say Landry isn't a leader. So which is it.....can we not know or do you know enough to say he isn't? I'm not mad at all. I just think its interesting that you refuse to acknowledge you're literally pulling benchmarks out of thin air.
Highest paid guys need to be the leaders, or you will not have an engaged team. To that end, QBs almost always have to be leaders.
That's his M.O. Fin...don't disagree with him or you'll be labeled a dumb extremist and ignored....not that you care any more than I do, just sayin'.
nope not at all, Jordan cameron is a beast..were loaded, but Landry will be the main man as far as targets, rec's, and yards i believe..
Opinion. Which is fine on a sports discussion forum. And I'd guess he based that opinion on a lifetime of knowledge and experience as an adult male. He could list every instance of articles he's read about sports, people he's known or witnessed in his life, heck maybe the time in 1984 when his parents had a dinner party and a guy in his 50's was there complaining about another guy at the office who seems bossy but "Who does he think he is?? I make twice what he does." Who knows how many thousand of times across his life he has read, heard and seen things that inform a common-sense opinion. Yet what is his proof, is the demand. Amazing. Imagine asking people to prove every common-sense opinion: "On exactly what do you base your belief that men admire guys who are winners?" "On exactly what do you base your belief that saving money is good?" "On exactly what do you base your belief that people can hold a grudge?" "On exactly what do you base your belief that accomplishing a goal together bonds people?" Life. And common sense. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
not "the" leader but "a" leader. you can have many leaders on a team (of any kind weather professional, sports team or what ever) and still identify a particular leader as the prime leader. and group structure requires levels of leadership to have any success.
I'm not asking someone to prove a common sense opinion. I'm asking for someone to give the reasons behind an opinion that is not necessarily common sense. .....which is also allowed and encouraged on a message board, thank you very much.
I don't mind Jarvis leading the receivers, but I guess I am from the old school because I feel it is very important for the QB to take the team by the reins and lead us to victory....to me it is just the NFL, it's part of the QB's m.o., and Ryan needs to 100% put the team on his shoulders and shoot for the moon. Also Ryan's teammates need to support him, which it seems they are starting to do. I expect Tannehill to come out this year on fire, and stay that way.Also, I think a whole unit can be a leader and I think this year that Suh and the Defense will win games for us...I think if the Defense stays motivated and plays hard every week that the offense will follow suit.
Wonder what the Dolphins and/or Giants will think of this idea if one of their players tweaks a hamstring trying to conduct a circus show when they should be getting ready for a game.
That was my first thought when I saw this last night. Although, my thought went to ACL or something similar while twisting and contorting their bodies in the air and trying to land in order to make a ridiculous catch in warmups. Personally, as much as I'd like to see it. I really dislike the idea of it.
Landry is a quality player. Hard not to love the kid and root for him. I also am hopeful that he'll find more avenues to be open with the new WR's we have. I think we'll have someone open on nearly every play. Hopefully RT will improve his progressions to take advantage of the WRs we have. But, anything we say about him beyond last year is just speculation (either way +/-). Should be some improvement in the quality of his numbers (not necessarily the totals) if he stays healthy esp. with the improved receiving corps. College plays are great but there are tons of great college play-makers who don't have the speed to do the same in the NFL. He averaged 9.0 ypc. That's just super low for any WR spot. He has great hands and runs good routes and will benefit from Jennings. But, his best 40 time was 4.61 and he ran a 4.71 at the combine and that was a bit evident last year. It would be different if he were 6'2, 225 with a 4.6/4.7 speed. I see him more as a possession type who can up his numbers to 11 ypc and maybe a few more receptions. But, to declare him Pro Bowl calibre is premature. However, he can be a very good player for us for years to come. There have been in the past comparisons to Hines Ward. Similar size. But, Ward was a bit faster. And didn't appear slow at all on the field. Aside from that Ward was arguably the most physical receiver in the NFL when he played in spite of not being very big. People hated him because he was borderline dirty. Different type of personality there, imo and not a true comparison. He's not exactly a Welker or Edelman in terms of quick feet - that I've seen. But, perhaps Landry can simply be his own player, carve out his own style, and be a quality reliable WR for RT. . People keep making a big deal about whether he can play on the edge. He's not a classic edge WR and I don't think he has the speed or size to be as effective out there. But, who really cares? A great slot WR is an incredible asset. Wes Welker (and now Edelman) have demonstrated that they can be some of the most important players on the field. Edelman could have been the MVP of the SB. The Pats don't win without him on the field. I really don't care about total numbers. It's just whether the offense moves and hopefully all 5 WRs will contribute over the course of the season as well as the TEs and RBs to make this a great passing offense.
You are not alone...views here are taken in a black and white manner when most of the time they are grey.
To me it's one thing if this is during the off season or even preseason. But to be doing this right before a game? If you're the team the only way you're signing off on this would be if they're just standing flat-footed catching the football one-handed like Greg Jennings in that Sports Science video where they ask him to one-hand two footballs thrown at him simultaneously by two QBs. But if they're out there trying to run around and jump and make circus catches and you OK'd it then you only have yourself to thank if the guy lands on his ankle the wrong way and tweaks it, suddenly he's not running well during the game. It doesn't even have to be an ACL or something dire like that. It could just be something that affects the game that they're about to play in an hour, and it would still be costly.
He pulled a hamstring in the combine. He doesn't run a 4.7. He is probably a 4.55 runner but I read somewhere last year that he had run an unofficial 4.49 somewhere.
There have been countless studies, reports, examinations, etc. that have investigated employee engagement and what leads to higher levels of engagement. There is pretty conclusive evidence of two things: - Leaders inherently are viewed as adding more value to organizations. - People that view compensation as being awarded in-line with value-added are more engaged. Therefore, if someone is highly-paid, but not a leader, his/her peers will likely view their compensation as unfair. When people believe an organization is not compensating its employees fairly, they will resent the organization. You can not only find plenty of cases in the business world, but you also see it regularly in the sports world. It is the underlying premise of players holding out.
I'm not sure how it isn't common sense. Player A is a strong leader. Player B is not a strong leader. Player B being compensated more than Player A will lead the rest of the players to believe that leadership is not highly valued.
I don't expect that Landry will be just a slot guy this season. Stills and Jennings are also good in the slot so I expect we'll see those three interchange quite a bit. (Parker may be more limited due to being a rookie and now the surgery. I do expect that Parker (and Jordan) will become the primary redzone targets. I wouldn't surprise me if most of those 22 redzone targets that Wallace got last year end up going to Parker). I expect that Landry will lead the team in overall targets and conceivably end up with 100 or so receptions. So I don't see Landry's leadership being limited his role as a receiver. There were also reports pre-draft during the try-outs of Jennings and Crabtree that regardless of which vet WR was signed that Landry would be the leader of that group. This was the opinion of someone in the organization. I don't know if it was a player or a coach. It came from one of our insiders who didn't cite his source (for obvious reasons). The opinion seemed to be based on Landry being a natural leader that had clearly taken over the role. This would seem to correspond with the opinions of LSU fans about his role there. I wasn't big on the drafting of Landry. I saw potentially great intangibles, but wanted more physical upside. Now I never bought the 4.7 40 time. On film he was about a 4.5 guy so the hamstring rumors made sense to me. I thought he was fast enough but did not have elite speed. He also did not have elite size. But I did see elite hands on Landry. My posts right after the draft placed Landry's upside as Hines Ward. I never saw Ward as a true #1 (a guy that dictated coverage and beat double teams), but I don't think anybody in Pittsburg regrets drafting Ward. I stated then that for Landry to reach that level he would need to have elite intangibles (leadership, work ethic, etc.). I stated then that such work ethic levels are rare. Most everybody who gets to this level works hard. Landry would have to be that rare guy who out-works them. Obviously I don't know how things will turn out, but early indicators suggest that Landry may just be one of those rare guys. I don't see his likelihood of becoming a Ward level player as remote as I once did.
Because, for the billionth time, the NFL is different. This a closed system with unusual (compared to the business world) contract structures like the rookie cap. I'm not sure why you always apply normal business world axioms to an industry set aside from the normal business world.
First, these aren't business axioms. These are based on the science of psychology. What exactly is a 'closed system'? There are plenty of other industries that use collective bargaining. You're essentially trying to get around what is widely accepted as scientific fact. The fact that there is a CBA does not change the psychological aspect of someone being less engaged because of what they perceive to be unfair. The fact that the CBA dictates a rookie cap does not change the psychological affect that will have on players. Either way, we have plenty of evidence of this affecting NFL players. We see plenty of players hold out every year because they perceive their compensation to be unfair.
The reason the Ward-Landry comparison is problematic, is not that Landry may not be a player who excels and reaches - in his own way - similar career accomplishments; but they are not the same kind of player (even if their size / speed / hands may be similar). Ward was a pure Steeler - physical and nasty. He'd take a guy out - not in an illegal way but borderline (he was what I'd describe as a "Rodney Harrison of WR's"). Landry is not that kind of player. At all. But, I'm not sure Landry looked 4.5 to me even in Miami. He is a very tough football player (not in the same form or mold as Ward, but still tough). He can take a hit. He is also very intelligent in running the football. Finally, he has great hands. But, I didn't see pure 4.5 speed on the kickoff returns, imo, where we'd see it most. He has decent speed. As far as leadership - he's not going to be a guy that Greg Jennings is going to need to look to. I think the whole WR corps has good players who will make plays and that's where real leadership comes in. But, with Jennings, he has so much more experience at a higher level of playing (legit Pro Bowl Calibre play and a SB win) that he'll be the player among the WR's that the others will look to quite often. Now, that doesn't mean this corps will not learn from each other or that even Jennings may ask Landry questions about the offense or that they won't pick nuances up from each other. No doubt Landry will, with his work ethic and good personality, be a brother - to Stills and to Parker in particular. That will be great. The "leadership" discussion is overdone, however - on both extremes, imo. I'm not saying he isn't. But, the WR's are teammates. They are good players. They are going to work together, and if all are professionals then all will lead in their own way. None of the top 3 are going to be bad apples, imo. So all of them will, in their own way at various times show leadership by their play on the field. The key is not "is this guy a leader" - so overdone at this level - but will the WR corps as a whole play together, unselfishly, as a unit and get the job done? That's all that matters.
Excellent post. Hines ward is the guy who I think he could become too. The way he fights for the ball is very reminiscent
IMO this team has been in need of more leaders. There was a quote a couple of seasons back from a player who said that he would add some vets to each unit to build that leadership. I agree. I think that every coach (Philbin maybe more than most) needs player leaders that support and bring the culture to the rest of the team. They provide positive examples for how to behave in practices or times of adversity. They provide direction on the field and sometimes motivate. Fortunately there seem to be a few candidates. On offense, Tannehill, Albert, Landry and Jennings could provide that. On defense, Wake and Suh seem to be the best candidates. Suh seems more of a lead by example guy, but Wake has become more of a vocal leader of late. Delmas could be a candidate, but he has to stay on the field. I don't know that I see a candidate yet among the LBs. I think we have enough leaders on offense, but I'd like somebody on the back half of the D to step up. And I don't know that money is all important to be a leader. Sure it helps and usually your best players get paid the most, but players can start leading before that. Often it will be the guy that takes charge when people are in disarray. To use a GoT example, Jon Snow was the guy who took charge when the wall was under attack. He wasn't pedigreed but he was the guy who took charge. On O your QB always has to be a leader. At a minimum he's the guy most often telling the offense what to do. On D it's usually a MLB or S that's directing people so that's usually your leader on that side.
The other guy I had in mind was O.J. McDuffie. I just thought that O.J. was a little more dynamic after the catch. I don't know that Landry will ever be that kind of play maker, but I had no trouble envisioning Landry becoming the scrappy guy who always makes the catch, always makes the block, always does and says the right thing. That's why I don't see a problem with the Ward comparison.
Although they don't seem to be your typical fiery leaders, Misi and Jenkins have a good work ethic and lead by example. I think our leadership will be much improved from last season's, both by additions through FA (Jennings, Suh) and by the maturation of players already on the team who will likely take another step this season (Landry, Tannehill, Jenkins).
I've watched about 150 reps of him in high school, this dude was a nasty mike linebacker..he tackled with anger, and early in his career he was a one man wrecking crew on special teams, where he would look to take your freakin head off. check him out as a true freshman https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqLJmJwMHEY also watch some of his high school highlights where he played mike.. its impressive stuff and shows you we might be dealing with a special player who lacks some size and speed.
I remember some of those STs hits at LSU. Any claim that Landry isn't a player that can be physical is just flat out wrong.
To me it's hard to understand asking for proof of things that seem somewhat self-evident. I mean, what's the proof that people don't like being lied to, for instance. And I do think the concept that the highest paid guy is more respected is fairly self evident, with rare exceptions when an organization is so dysfunctional that the people being paid the most do NOT bring the most value. But generally, those businesses do not survive. Generally those types of military units do not survive either. The leader is the most rewarded (paid, decorated, whatever) because they provide the most value to the end goal and well being of those involved in the cause or mission. If we list all the best QBs in the game today, especially ones who have won in the playoffs, how many of them are NOT the highest paid players on their team? And the few who are not, I'd wager that the player aking more did a new contract SINCE the QB did his contract, and that the QB would get more if he re-did his contract again. Anyways, I am belaboring the point.
