ticket 790 receiver comments | Page 2 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

ticket 790 receiver comments

CrunchTime said:
I will have to go with OJ Mc Duffies opinion who said on the radio last week that TO is the best receiver in the NFL today bar none and he included Moss.He said it wasnt even close .As a pretty fair WR himself OJ should know.
Click to expand...

i heard that to..:lol:
 
I'm sorry, but a receiver is only as good as the play calling, routes, etc. He benefits by the talent of the QB. And following that logic, a QB is merely only beneficial to those talents of is line that gives him time and protection.

I look at previously poor teams, and in general, you'll see one common factor to their poor showing of offense.

Think Owens or Moss is great? Could be. But how good would he be on the Bengals or the Bears? Still a good receiver, but the numbers would be drastically different.
 
Canadianfishfan said:
Now remember T.O. was traded for a 2nd....
Click to expand...

Ok, that is a fact. T.O. was traded for a second round pick. But, T.O. was calling his QB a homosexual. T.O. was, at every opportunity, begging to be gotten rid of. T.O. was a public relations disaster at that time (and was nearly so in Philly this year). So, a second round pick was not some outrageous steal by Philly, although T.O. is at the top of the WR class. There are many teams who's coaches or owners would not give anything for a person with T.O.'s ego-centric character and on-field/off-field shenanigans.
 
IceStorm said:
Think Owens or Moss is great? Could be. But how good would he be on the Bengals or the Bears?
Click to expand...

Boston was a pro-bowler on a poor San Diego team. Booker was a pro-bowler on a very poor Chicago team. Great players are great (period). Chambers is not a pro-bowler. Blame it on Fiedler, Wanny, Foerster, Sullivan, whomever you wish, only Chambers can decide if he wants to be great and rise above his surroundings.
 
TeeMoney said:
Boston was a pro-bowler on a poor San Diego team. Booker was a pro-bowler on a very poor Chicago team. Great players are great (period). Chambers is not a pro-bowler. Blame it on Fiedler, Wanny, Foerster, Sullivan, whomever you wish, only Chambers can decide if he wants to be great and rise above his surroundings.
Click to expand...


THANK YOU!:)
 
Canadianfishfan said:
On 790 they were talking about Chambers and McMichael elevating their play to substantiate their call to be top 5 players respectively at their positions.

A comment was made that Randy Moss in Minny.. had great numbers regardless who was throwing the rock... whether its Dante.. or Gus, Or Jeff George or whoever.... Moss made those QBs look better than maybe they were ... or at least made them look much better... Now look at Owens.. Look how good he made the 49ers and Garcia look...

The argument was made that if Chambers and McMichael want to be seriously considered "gamebreakers' they have to make those plays.. adjusting to the balls they get... to make those catches.. and also get some serious yards after the catch.

I thought the comments were valid... does anyone ever think that these guys should elevate their play... if they seriously want to be side by side with the Moss'.. or Owens... or Gonzalez.. type players?

Not that they arent very very good receivers... but perhaps not in the class of a Moss or Owens ..or Gonzalez...
Click to expand...


You know, Moss in Minny is not even a close analogy...Culpepper is 10X the QB as either of the guys we have...Gus and George were only in for a few games, not for the season, as the regular starter...

TO is different...I don't think Garcia was that good of a QB and once he left SF, he has proven that he is subpar. Besides, for most of the time Garcia was in SF, he had a good OL and surrounding quality players...Gonzo...same thing, great supporting cast as well as a QB that is much better than Gus, AJ, Ears, Lucas or Griese...

You can't compare apples to oranges...the fact that most league people think as highly of RM and CC speaks volumes of their ability...can they show more ?? That depends on whether the OL provides the QBs time and if they do, can our QBs get the ball to them...
 
LarryFinFan said:
You know, Moss in Minny is not even a close analogy...Culpepper is 10X the QB as either of the guys we have...Gus and George were only in for a few games, not for the season, as the regular starter.
Click to expand...

george played 14 games in 99 and put up good numbers. and randall cunningham was the starter the year before and he put up 34 TD's/10 INT's. moss made these guys look good.
 
LarryFinFan said:
...the fact that most league people think as highly of RM and CC ...
Click to expand...

I would like to see this, please.
 
TeeMoney said:
Boston was a pro-bowler on a poor San Diego team. Booker was a pro-bowler on a very poor Chicago team. Great players are great (period). Chambers is not a pro-bowler. Blame it on Fiedler, Wanny, Foerster, Sullivan, whomever you wish, only Chambers can decide if he wants to be great and rise above his surroundings.
Click to expand...

Every player is different. Your right that great players make the players around them better however each player brings different things to the table. With moss all the qb had to do was get time to throw the ball down field and hope moss would just out jump and make aplaye. With Owens being in the westcoast offence REALLY helped him as he ran alot of slants and short routes not necesarily needed a qb with a great arm. Moss wouldnt be the same type of player if he was stuck with garcia or a weak armed qb throwing him the ball b/c it would greatly affect moss's best part of his game... the long ball. Chambers is more of a moss player meaning that he needs to make big plays down the field and NEEDS someone to throw the ball downfield to him. All the qb's moss has played with could throw a great longball (cunningham,daunte, george...just a few off the top of my head). Chambers will make a qb that has a good arm look alot better. With fieldler a 30 yard wobbly duck is a 30 yard wobbly duck no matter who is cathing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom