Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs

vin.couve12

New member
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
5,079
Reaction score
1
Location
Vancouver, WA
Basically offensive football 101. Doesn't fly with most fans because of a strange need to idolize, but he's absolutely right.
 

Trrrroy

New member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
3,304
Reaction score
0
Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.
 

brimsalabim

Active member
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Messages
4,509
Reaction score
3
How many receivers have we had that scare the defense though? The last few years it’s been Baldwin and Jimmy. Baldwin may make them a bit nervous but I don’t know that he strikes fear and no one is afraid of Jimmy the blocker.
 

sdog1981

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
3,367
Reaction score
240
Trrrroy":39u877dq said:
Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.


Edelman has had 165 targets two years ago.
Gronk has had more than 100 targets for 4 seasons in a row.

Yes the pats have always had a number one WR. They do not spread the targets out that much.
 

A.D.I.D.A.S.

Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2018
Messages
143
Reaction score
16
brimsalabim":321uh91u said:
How many receivers have we had that scare the defense though? The last few years it’s been Baldwin and Jimmy. Baldwin may make them a bit nervous but I don’t know that he strikes fear and no one is afraid of Jimmy the blocker.
This has always been my issue with the team. There is NOBODY on the offense that keeps a DC up at night except Wilson.
 

Trrrroy

New member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
3,304
Reaction score
0
sdog1981":2e2quktd said:
Trrrroy":2e2quktd said:
Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.


Edelman has had 165 targets two years ago.
Gronk has had more than 100 targets for 4 seasons in a row.

Yes the pats have always had a number one WR. They do not spread the targets out that much.

Now we're talking semantics. Edelman was a #1 in the sense that he got targets, but to me he was no more a #1 than Bobby Engram was a #1. He got targets due to scheme, matchups, and Brady throwing the ball a ton. He's not a guy you throw the ball to in 1 on 1 no matter what. He's not a guy like Julio Jones, AJ Green, DeAndre Hopkins, or Fitzgerald. But again, we're talking semantics. Different definitions for what a #1 truly is.
 

ZorntoLargent

Active member
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
1,510
Reaction score
7
Trrrroy":p219ggqt said:
Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.
Seahawks never had one? So what do you consider Steve Largent? :(
 

lukerguy

Active member
Joined
Feb 18, 2012
Messages
2,320
Reaction score
20
Partly why the Hawks were less productive with Graham. Poor run blocker, added a very nice red zone option which took 2 years to utilize, but we didn't need a WR#1/TE#1 to force the ball to. We needed another guy who could block and get separation with a LB 1on1.

A strong miss unfortunately but Graham is one of my favorite people to have played in Seattle. How can you not root for the guy with a background like he has?
 

Ad Hawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2011
Messages
3,185
Reaction score
403
Trrrroy":1zi0k1yl said:
sdog1981":1zi0k1yl said:
Trrrroy":1zi0k1yl said:
Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.


Edelman has had 165 targets two years ago.
Gronk has had more than 100 targets for 4 seasons in a row.

Yes the pats have always had a number one WR. They do not spread the targets out that much.

Now we're talking semantics. Edelman was a #1 in the sense that he got targets, but to me he was no more a #1 than Bobby Engram was a #1. He got targets due to scheme, matchups, and Brady throwing the ball a ton. He's not a guy you throw the ball to in 1 on 1 no matter what. He's not a guy like Julio Jones, AJ Green, DeAndre Hopkins, or Fitzgerald. But again, we're talking semantics. Different definitions for what a #1 truly is.

I'd bet the idea of having a WR that "scares people", a true #1, is this list above. They're taller (read: 6'1 or taller), fast (4.4 40), great hands, fluid body control, and vertical jump, and run crisp routes. That's hard to find, and makes a DB's job especially hard because the ideas like "open" or "separation" are now far broader. This WR gets the ball more often because of this ability to be open vertically, horizontally or deep down the field due to leap, speed and reach.

But you don't need to have all of these to be a great WR, and in my view, still be a #1. Edelman isn't this kind of #1; neither is Baldwin, or Largent, or Engram, or many other great primary targets. Many WRs get open with intelligence, their moves at the line, etc. That may be the most important part of their craft, as illustrated by Baldwin breaking JNorman's jam, and scoring against the Redskins. He'll cause D-coordinators headaches, I"m sure.
 

Recon_Hawk

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
3,294
Reaction score
448
Location
Vancouver, Wa
Yet in recent years the league is spending more on WR than ever. Just last years draft, three WR get selected in the top 10 even though most thought that they were graded lower. This off season Brandon Cooks is traded for a 1st round pick. Sammy Watkins signs for $16m per year after catching only 39 passes for 593 yards. Landry gets $15m per year. I could go on.

It sure feels like the league is going hard after star WRs when they can, as opposed to a moneyball committee approach to the position if that is what this guy is suggesting.
 

mikeak

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
8,202
Reaction score
25
Location
Anchorage, AK
sdog1981":2cbcimb6 said:
Trrrroy":2cbcimb6 said:
Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.


Edelman has had 165 targets two years ago.
Gronk has had more than 100 targets for 4 seasons in a row.

Yes the pats have always had a number one WR. They do not spread the targets out that much.

So listing a TE proves that you always need a number one WR?
 

MontanaHawk05

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
17,886
Reaction score
404
Baldwin keeps OC's up at night for sure. Forget his height, the man works hard and he and Wilson have chemistry. Every time we win, Baldwin is usually part of the formula.

Golden Tate, Zach Miller, and Sidney Rice were part of the equation as well. Nobody considers them #1 receivers. Drew Brees stacked up records with guys that nobody's heard of since they left for other teams (well, except for Graham).

I think the best way to say it is, what may be a #1 WR for one team might not be for another. A lot of it comes down to chemistry with the QB.

What you REALLY want is more than one reliable guy, so that guys like Baldwin don't get doubled up. Which means we really need someone to emerge on this team next year. I hope Lockett is ready to have a contract year.
 

lobohawk

New member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
952
Reaction score
0
Trrrroy":2191k3w4 said:
Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.

I’d count the rams with Bruce and Holt. Again, that was a while ago.
 

sdog1981

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
3,367
Reaction score
240
mikeak":26yp4crk said:
sdog1981":26yp4crk said:
Trrrroy":26yp4crk said:
Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.


Edelman has had 165 targets two years ago.
Gronk has had more than 100 targets for 4 seasons in a row.

Yes the pats have always had a number one WR. They do not spread the targets out that much.

So listing a TE proves that you always need a number one WR?


That goes back to the Jimmy Grah arbitration case when his argument was he was a pass catcher and a number one target not just a TE.
 

IndyHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2013
Messages
7,956
Reaction score
1,594
Someone will have to rise besides Doug.
There is no $$$ to spend on a star WR when they have to pay RW $30 plus million a year soon.
There is a salary cap which you can stupid like Dallas with it and find out the hard way.
 

KiwiHawk

New member
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
4,203
Reaction score
1
Location
Auckland, New Zealand
A.D.I.D.A.S.":92h30wnq said:
This has always been my issue with the team. There is NOBODY on the offense that keeps a DC up at night except Wilson.
I don't get how 300-odd rushing yards keeps DCs up at night. Or are you referring to his passing yards and passing touchdowns that require someone to catch them?

Because if that's the case then you have to consider the receivers as well.

This is what Fantasy Football does. It' promotes the idea that we don't have a big point-scoring WR so we must have a bunch of nobodies.

It's actually WORSE for a DC to defend a QB who spreads the ball around to a lot of targets because when the game is on the line you have to guess who to cover instead of knowing the ball will be thrown to Larry Fitzgerald (for example).

We know Wilson is going to sandlot every third play. So the first criteria for our WRs is coping with a QB who deviates from the playbook, and convincing him to trust throwing you the ball. I don't think anyone in the league does it better than Doug Baldwin, so based solely on that criteria, Baldwin is he best WR in the NFL.

Wilson only keeps DCs up at night because he has receivers who can be on the other end of his Benny-Hill plays. You don't get highlights running around throwing incomplete passes.
 
Top