Relying on Rookies is Recipe for Disaster!

[JTech194]

For those of you who feel that we should bypass Wallace or Jennings because they want too much money and just draft a couple of rookies, I don't think this is the way to go! First off most rookie WR don't step right in and produce big numbers, does it happen sure but its rare! Secondly if a rookie comes in and starts right away that means the players on the team in that position aren't that good! We NEED to sign Wallace or Jennings I prefer Wallace, AND draft a receiver or two, what this does greatly improves the position and creates competition, which goes a long way in player development! If the veteran gets hurt then you have a capable rookie in place! When the veteran's contract is up or play declines, then you have a younger option already on the team! The moral of the story is WE SHOULD NOT RELY ON ANY ROOKIE TO COME IN AND MAKE HUGE IMPACTS RIGHT AWAY! ONLY BAD TEAMS DO THAT!

 

[finfan54]

I would rely on Ryan Swope. :)

 

[Built2Win]

i heard Wallace needs lots of improvement in route running. He does have speed to burn though. Ireland worries me with his inconsistent picks..

 

[psfign]

I agree. If we cant get wallace or jennings, then we need to get a serviceable #1 and then draft and groom.

 

[Oronde]

The moral of the story is WE SHOULD NOT RELY ON ANY ROOKIE TO COME IN AND MAKE HUGE IMPACTS RIGHT AWAY! ONLY BAD TEAMS DO THAT!

I'd like to see some evidence behind this. Because the way I see it, it seems like the bad teams are always overpaying vets in free agency.

 

[Asicswrg85]

A rookie WR most likely will not step in and be a huge contributor this season, I agree with you, but the fact is we are NOT superbowl caliber. It is smarter for us to be concerned with how good those WRs will be in the 2014-2015 / 2015-2016 seasons. Thus rookie WRs make more sense. This year we can make the playoffs I honestly believe but we are not gonna beat the top 3 teams. No way. So this team is still 2-3 years away from legitimately winning a superbowl. Thus drafting 2 stud rookie receivers now will be prime for those season. Everyone wants to spend like crazy now because we have the money but the only way that is smart is if Wallace or Jennings will be prime contributors in 2-3 years because that is when it will matter the most.

 

[ITS!MATEO]

Tell that to Ryan Tannehill....

 

[LikeUntoGod]

I'd look into adding young CHEAPER WRs who will grow up with Tannehill, not tell him what to do and who to throw to.

Anyone that does not believe that drafting and drafting well is the way to go must be related to George Allen.

 

[JTech194]

I'd like to see some evidence behind this. Because the way I see it, it seems like the bad teams are always overpaying vets in free agency.

I'm not for soley relying on FA to build a team either, you have to use both to properly build a team! but when you have a young 26 year old guy that is a proven playmaker you have to Juno over that! He's only 26 so who's to say he can continue to get better? I would NOT over pay for a Jennings though, he's older and is most likely not getting any better!

 

[JTech194]

Tell that to Ryan Tannehill....

Ryan Tannehill only started because the QB in front of him weren't that good! He wouldn't have started for the patriots, ravens, falcons etc... Any team with a good QB. That's my point if rookies come in and play right away the guys on the team in front of him aren't that good. We shouldnt rely on a rookie WR those guys especially don't excel in their first year

 

[JTech194]

I'd look into adding young CHEAPER WRs who will grow up with Tannehill, not tell him what to do and who to throw to.

Anyone that does not believe that drafting and drafting well is the way to go must be related to George Allen.

The problem with that is you have to be willing to miss the playoffs for the next couple of years and no one here is that patient and Ireland would be fired before those excelled

 

[j-off-her-doll]

Given our situation, Wallace makes sense to me. I would have preferred to not bring back Hartline. That's where I'd use the draft. Opposite Wallace, you want a guy who can make the D pay. Hartline has never been that guy. If you had a guy like Patterson or Wheaton, though, opposite Wallace, that's going to cause the D some heartburn. Those are guys who can score on any given play. It doesn't stop at those two. Deep class.

 

[ITS!MATEO]

Ryan Tannehill only started because the QB in front of him weren't that good! He wouldn't have started for the patriots, ravens, falcons etc... Any team with a good QB. That's my point if rookies come in and play right away the guys on the team in front of him aren't that good. We shouldnt rely on a rookie WR those guys especially don't excel in their first year

Matt Moore can start on about 6 teams right now....

 

[JTech194]

I'd like to see some evidence behind this. Because the way I see it, it seems like the bad teams are always overpaying vets in free agency.

Oh and as far as evidence.. Look at all of the WR picked in the first round last year... NONE of them produced numbers even close to Hartline who we all know is not a #1 receiver! So if we rely solely on the draft... Hartline will again be our BEST WR and that's not acceptable

 

[JTech194]

Given our situation, Wallace makes sense to me. I would have preferred to not bring back Hartline. That's where I'd use the draft. Opposite Wallace, you want a guy who can make the D pay. Hartline has never been that guy. If you had a guy like Patterson or Wheaton, though, opposite Wallace, that's going to cause the D some heartburn. Those are guys who can score on any given play. It doesn't stop at those two. Deep class.

I don't know man.... Saying that a rookie will come in and give us 74 catches and 1084 yards ... i guess its possible but I highly doubt it!!