Can Ginn Be the Number #1 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Can Ginn Be the Number #1

Can he? Sure. Will he? Don't think so. At best I sort of see him as Joey Galloway. I think he can be a good credible #2 option and, with the right #1, a very good one.
 
Interesting article, Ginn is a intriguing guy to me.. He doesn't have the height to go get balls, but he has the ability to separate, as long as the ball is there, he'll catch it, his confidence coming down the stretch of last year grew tremendously and you saw it in the Jet's game, he was also good in his routes in the baltimore game, the ball just didn't get there.. The one thing I know is, even if fans and media doesn't respect Ginn, the opposing DB's did, I saw them give him hugh cushions, that's respect.
 
he absolutely can... hes highly scrutinized because of his draft status...

but as we know it takes recievers a good three years to develop

this could be a break out year for him
 
MDFINFAN said:
Interesting article, Ginn is a intriguing guy to me.. He doesn't have the height to go get balls, but he has the ability to separate, as long as the ball is there, he'll catch it, his confidence coming down the stretch of last year grew tremendously and you saw it in the Jet's game, he was also good in his routes in the baltimore game, the ball just didn't get there.. The one thing I know is, even if fans and media doesn't respect Ginn, the opposing DB's did, I saw them give him hugh cushions, that's respect.
Click to expand...

Two problems...if they gave Ginn hugh cushions...how come he doesn't take advantage of that...only 56 receptions...most top receivers have double that figure for a season...and the second problem...how many times have we seen him make a catch and get taken down for no YAC.'s? He plays like he is...a 180 pound receiver...except he doesn't make defenders miss.
 
Can he? Sure. Will he? Don't think so. At best I sort of see him as Joey Galloway. I think he can be a good credible #2 option and, with the right #1, a very good one.
Click to expand...

In his prime, I think Galloway was a legit #1.
 
ZILLA said:
he absolutely can... hes highly scrutinized because of his draft status...

but as we know it takes recievers a good three years to develop

this could be a break out year for him
Click to expand...

Actually this could not be any more false. It takes *Some* WRs three years to develop. Some come into the NFL right away ready to play with the big boys. Ginn just wasn't one of those.
 
What is this conversation about he already is for the phins. Now how good is really the question!
 
The reality is we'll never really know that for sure until he becomes the target of a field-stretching canon arm. Until then, he can be an effective #2 fersure.
 
GoonBoss said:
Actually this could not be any more false. It takes *Some* WRs three years to develop. Some come into the NFL right away ready to play with the big boys. Ginn just wasn't one of those.
Click to expand...

actually its entirely true...

someone posted stats of the first couple seasons of all the so called "#1" recievers in the league and most are almost identical to ginns...

what are u basing ur claims on?

theres really not that many mosss and fitzgeralds
 
player Yr1 Yr2 Yr3

steve smith 154 872 1110
roddy white 446 506 1202
greg jennings 632 920 1292
brandon marshall 309 1325 1265
reggie wayne 345 716 838
terrell owens 520 936 1097
santana moss 40 433 1105
hines ward 246 638 672 and then the next year 1003
braylon edwards 512 884 1289
and the list goes on...

ted ginn??? 420 790 ???? well see

people who dont fit in this criteria? moss fitz and boldin and AJ

hes on track IMO

hopefully he has a breakout year
 
With all the other plans & weapons on offense he may have the ball thrown to him even less this year.
 
fishypete said:
Two problems...if they gave Ginn hugh cushions...how come he doesn't take advantage of that...only 56 receptions...most top receivers have double that figure for a season...and the second problem...how many times have we seen him make a catch and get taken down for no YAC.'s? He plays like he is...a 180 pound receiver...except he doesn't make defenders miss.
Click to expand...
That is one of my problems with Ginn. I saw a lot of passes he caught last year we he made nothing after the catch. That and his fumbling.

I'd really like for Ginn to try harder for more yards after the catch. He seems to have raw top end speed but he's not really shifty or elusive. If he can't beat defenders with pure speed he seems unable to make the big play.
 
ZILLA said:
actually its entirely true...

someone posted stats of the first couple seasons of all the so called "#1" recievers in the league and they are almost identical to ginns...

what are u basing ur claims on?

theres really not that many mosss and fitzgeralds
Click to expand...

*Sigh*.... Ok. Here we go again. Again, keep in mind you said it was common knowledge that all WRs take 3 years to develop.

2008-
Eddie Royal, DEN 91 Rec 980 yds
DeSean Jackson, PHI, 62 Rec, 912 yds

2007
DeWayne Bowe, KC 70 Rec, 995 yds
Calvin Johnson, Det 48 Rec 756 yds

2006
Marques Colston, NO 70Rec 1051 Yds
Santonio Holmes, Pitt 49 Rec 824 yds

I could go back further, and pick out names like Clayton, Fitzgerald, Moss, Boldin, Williams, A. Johnson, etc that all came into the NFL like big boys, ready to play.

It does not take all NFL WRs three years to develop. It takes SOME NFL WRs three years to develop.

3
 
GoonBoss said:
*Sigh*.... Ok. Here we go again. Again, keep in mind you said it was common knowledge that all WRs take 3 years to develop.

2008-
Eddie Royal, DEN 91 Rec 980 yds
DeSean Jackson, PHI, 62 Rec, 912 yds

2007
DeWayne Bowe, KC 70 Rec, 995 yds
Calvin Johnson, Det 48 Rec 756 yds

2006
Marques Colston, NO 70Rec 1051 Yds
Santonio Holmes, Pitt 49 Rec 824 yds

I could go back further, and pick out names like Clayton, Fitzgerald, Moss, Boldin, Williams, A. Johnson, etc that all came into the NFL like big boys, ready to play.

It does not take all NFL WRs three years to develop. It takes SOME NFL WRs three years to develop.

3
Click to expand...

i never said all... u assumed i meant all like u were looking for an arguement
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom