please, there are teams out there where Hartline wouldn't even make the roster.
We have the worst WR corps in the league
- Thread starter lbsfinest
- Start date
please, there are teams out there where Hartline wouldn't even make the roster.
Thats definitely a stretch. He's not as bad as some make him out to be. You really think Hartline wouldn't make an NFL team and be cut in favor of some other team's bottom of the roster? okay.
That's not true, I don't buy that notion. The WCO isn't a miracle system. The Cleveland Browns run it, no one over there is jumping for joy about Mohamed Massaquoi or Greg Little. Look at all the great West Coast Offenses throughout history, they all had good receivers. Jerry Rice and John Taylor in SF, Charlie Joiner and Kellen Winslow of the Chargers, Rod Smith and Shannon Sharpe for the Broncos, Greg Jennings, Jordy Nelson, Donald Driver, James Jones of the Packers were a formidable group; and so on and so forth.
Some people want to use Tom Brady and the Patriots as an example that you don't necessarily need all-star wideouts to win a Superbowl (though I'd contest that he had a pretty competent receiving core for all his Superbowl wins, certainly better than what we have). My problem with that though is we're talking about Tom flippin Brady, arguably one of the top 2 or 3 greatest quarterbacks of all time; if Tannehill ends up being that good, then fine, maybe I'll buy it.
Now, for whatever reason anyone who argues that we have a weak corps or that the west coast offense needs talented receivers is perceived to be criticizing the Marshall trade, I'm not, I'm over it, that's not the discussion I'm trying to have. Ireland said the value didn't match and didn't want to reach on a receiver, I understand that. When you go 6-10, hire a new coach, and ship away your best player for draft picks, you're essentially starting over, so I don't expect Ireland to fix all the needs in one year. But let's not everybody all act like we're copacetic with the idea of Brian Hartline as our number 1 receiver for the next 4-5 years. I like Hartline, I like Bess, but I think we need more around them, someone who actually puts a little bit of fear into a defensive coordinator and draws some double-teams and makes his teammates better in that way.
Gonzo had a great line about the WCO
Gonzo said:
would he have made the Saints roster last year? they had colston, henderson, meachem, lance moore. packers? jennings, nelson, cobb, driver, james jones.
hartline does nothing exceptionally well, he doesnt run great routes or have great hands or great size or great speed.
Many people believe every successful team needs a stud receiver (#1 receiver) to succeed, as for me....give me two or three good receivers instead of 1 elite receiver and 1 good receiver, because teams will try to get the ball to the elite player instead of spreading it out.
I'll qualify this by saying I like Hartline, but you could make the argument that he'd be the 4th or 5th receiver on either of those two teams last year.
That's just a ridiculous comment, at the worse, we Bess, Hartline, and Ocho would make good #2 on many teams.
NYinBostonFin
Playoffs Please!!
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2005
- Messages
- 4,604
- Reaction score
- 47
- Age
- 49
Less than half, and Im being nice.
Bess is a slot, Hartline is a #3 at best on most teams. We were the only ones on the market for Ocho, and even people that like him can't definitely say he will make the final cut.
I would prefer having three #1 WRs like Green Bay has...although Driver is a bit past his prime and would be more of a #2 right now but Jennings and Nelson can start for any team and Driver can still start for at least a third of the teams in this league. So if by "good" receivers you mean Jennings and Nelson then yes I agree.
You are deluded if you think Hartline couldn't at worse make most rosters in the NFL.
bess hartline reggie ocho naanne fasano clay are all capable of producing around that 500 yard mark. thats 7 players. which equals up to about 3500 yards which is around what this team usually passes for. as long as were scoring TD's and getting yards i dont care who has how many receptions or yards. there are plenty of threats to divy the ball out to, but do we have a deadly elite wideout group? no but we have pieces.
Here we go again?
For Petes sake let the coaches coach? Comments on team should be held until at least 3 games have been played. Why do you look for the Negatives?
For Petes sake let the coaches coach? Comments on team should be held until at least 3 games have been played. Why do you look for the Negatives?
Lloyd Heilbrunn
Starter
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2004
- Messages
- 535
- Reaction score
- 101
The problem, IMO,was that these same issues existed before free agency too, and could have been addressed there somewhat but were not.
Bess can play #2, and could do it pretty well for many teams. With 2nd rate Qbs, Hartine has been the best receiver on Miami for yards after catch, if Chad can be even half the receiver he was in Cincy, he is a quality #2. Chad did not get many balls because the QB was Brady, and as far as he is concerned, Chad needs Tom, not the other way around, and because Chad had so many problems with thier offense, Tom rarely looked for him, whether he got open or not.
