PDA

View Full Version : A year to get a WR



PhinFan0202
02-08-2007, 04:28 PM
Wide Receiver seems to have the most depth in the draft this year. Calvin Johnson, Ted Ginn jr., Dewaynne Jarrett, Dewanye Bowe, Anthony Gonzales, Robert Meachem, Sidney Rice, and Chauncey Stuckey. IMO it's one of our most pressing needs because we have no one that scares anyone on offense. Chambers is easily shut down against top notch corners and Booker is getting older. Hagan is a unknown and Wes Welker is good but not a main threat. McMike dosen't scare anyone except for maybe a highschool team and Brown is good not quite there yet. I say we pick up a WR this year and let him make some plays for us.

phins3454
02-08-2007, 04:32 PM
Sidney Rice is the 2nd round....but I see it pointless to draft another WR when we drafted one last year with our 2nd pick named....DEREK HAGN!

SR 7
02-08-2007, 04:35 PM
it isnt pontless when we DOTN have a WR sTILL to do anything on offense. I say we go for Stallworth in FA n save the pick for a player elsewhere.

phins3454
02-08-2007, 04:37 PM
it isnt pontless when we DOTN have a WR sTILL to do anything on offense. I say we go for Stallworth in FA n save the pick for a player elsewhere.

Stallworth gets hurt eating breakfast!

Motion
02-08-2007, 04:38 PM
I was really hoping Meachem would be around in the 2nd but I see his stock starting to soar already.

PhinFan0202
02-08-2007, 04:38 PM
Sidney Rice is the 2nd round....but I see it pointless to draft another WR when we drafted one last year with our 2nd pick named....DEREK HAGN!

Derek Hagan still drops passes so he isn't a sure thing and like i stated before we don't have a threat on offense.

phins3454
02-08-2007, 04:40 PM
Derek Hagan still drops passes so he isn't a sure thing and like i stated before we don't have a threat on offense.

Hagan didnt even play that much, give him a break its not like he was a rookie or anything :rolleyes2

fish fan 4 life
02-08-2007, 04:43 PM
Sidney Rice is the 2nd round....but I see it pointless to draft another WR when we drafted one last year with our 2nd pick named....DEREK HAGN!Hagan didnt impress much IMO.

PhinFan0202
02-08-2007, 04:43 PM
it isnt pontless when we DOTN have a WR sTILL to do anything on offense. I say we go for Stallworth in FA n save the pick for a player elsewhere.

Stallworth is good but gets hurt walking onto the field. I would rather draft a guy who can stay healthy and we can develop him into a long term player on our team.

fish fan 4 life
02-08-2007, 04:44 PM
Stallworth is good but gets hurt walking onto the field. I would rather draft a guy who can stay healthy and we can develop him into a long term player on our team.I 2nd that

Stitches
02-08-2007, 04:46 PM
Hagan was a 3rd round pick. Some of you people are so foolish. How can we draft someone in the 2nd round, when we had traded it for Culpepper. Oh, I guess we magically just acquired an extra 2nd round pick, and drafted Hagan with it, and decided not to use our 3rd round pick at all. :rollseyes:

Stitches
02-08-2007, 04:47 PM
I was really hoping Meachem would be around in the 2nd but I see his stock starting to soar already.

I was hoping the same thing, but it looks like some quality defensive players should be there at 39 when we pick.

phins3454
02-08-2007, 04:48 PM
Hagan was a 3rd round pick. Some of you people are so foolish. How can we draft someone in the 2nd round, when we had traded it for Culpepper. Oh, I guess we magically just acquired an extra 2nd round pick, and drafted Hagan with it, and decided not to use our 3rd round pick at all. :rollseyes:


show me where I said 2nd ROUND pick and i will give you 10$

I said our 2nd pick! and hagan was our 2nd pick

just in the 3rd round :D

there is a difference

fish fan 4 life
02-08-2007, 04:50 PM
Hagan didnt even play that much, give him a break its not like he was a rookie or anything :rolleyes2Hagan is only 22 years old and he didnt play much but I dont think he has the speed to be a top wr.

Stitches
02-08-2007, 04:52 PM
show me where I said 2nd ROUND pick and i will give you 10$

I said our 2nd pick! and hagan was our 2nd pick

just in the 3rd round :D

there is a difference

Touche.

Sorry, it kind of just came out. I'm so used to some people even saying we don't have a 2nd round pick this season. I read your post too quickly.

(And as much as I'd love Rice, I don't think he'll be there at 39)

Stitches
02-08-2007, 04:53 PM
Hagan is only 22 years old and he didnt play much but I dont think he has the speed to be a top wr.

I don't think he was drafted to be a top WR. I think he was drafted to be a top #2.

phins3454
02-08-2007, 04:53 PM
I am content with the WR's we have now

jdang307
02-08-2007, 04:57 PM
I don't think he was drafted to be a top WR. I think he was drafted to be a top #2.
Don't have his combine numbers but hagan was rated at the top until the senior bowl i believe.

http://www.dallascowboyfansunited.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25340

His Senior bowl and first year has me hoping he can show the brilliance he flashed in our 2nd to last game.

Motion
02-08-2007, 05:02 PM
Hagan will be Booker's replacement eventually, solid possession WR.

We need a speedster to stretch the field if anything at WR.

Maybe Andre Caldwell next year? :D

Stitches
02-08-2007, 05:09 PM
Hagan will be Booker's replacement eventually, solid possession WR.

We need a speedster to stretch the field if anything at WR.

Maybe Andre Caldwell next year? :D

David Harvey in 2009. :wink:

Stitches
02-08-2007, 05:11 PM
Don't have his combine numbers but hagan was rated at the top until the senior bowl i believe.

http://www.dallascowboyfansunited.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25340

His Senior bowl and first year has me hoping he can show the brilliance he flashed in our 2nd to last game.

I doubt he was rated ahead of Holmes prior to the senior bowl. it may have been close, but I'm pretty sure everyone had Holmes ahead of Hagan. That said, he wasn't supposed to be there in the 3rd. but Hagan is a big bodied possession reciever, who can use his body to shield the ball from defenders. While he can get good speration, he is not a deep threat. He is just like Booker. He can be a very good player. May even reach a pro bowl one day, but will never be considered an elite WR IMO.

PhinFan0202
02-08-2007, 05:30 PM
I am content with the WR's we have now

Not trying to blast your opinion or anything but why? Chambers has had one good season out of like 5. There's always the excuse about him not having the QB or the OC change everyyear but honestly playmakes make plays regardless of the offense. Randy Moss is the only person i can really think of that has an excuse because Oakland is that bad and even then he dosen't really try as hard as he should. Chambers has been in some decent to mediocre offenses but none as bad as Oakland. Booker is getting older and will probably start to decline pretty soon. Welker is a playmaker as a 3rd and Hagan while has shown some skills drops passes more often than not. I think the WR core needs some major work.

Stitches
02-08-2007, 05:32 PM
Not trying to blast your opinion or anything but why? Chambers has had one good season out of like 5. There's always the excuse about him not having the QB or the OC change everyyear but honestly playmakes make plays regardless of the offense. Randy Moss is the only person i can really think of that has an excuse because Oakland is that bad and even then he dosen't really try as hard as he should. Chambers has been in some decent to mediocre offenses but none as bad as Oakland. Booker is getting older and will probably start to decline pretty soon. Welker is a playmaker as a 3rd and Hagan while has shown some skills drops passes more often than not. I think the WR core needs some major work.

Actually, I'd say Chambers has had 2 great seasons (rookie and pro bowl), 3 good seasons, and one average(read mediocre) season.

PhinFan0202
02-08-2007, 06:02 PM
Actually, I'd say Chambers has had 2 great seasons (rookie and pro bowl), 3 good seasons, and one average(read mediocre) season.

Alright before the end of last season how many times did you really see Chambers take over a game? I can think of the Dallas game on Thanksgiving but that's about it. I'm not saying it's all his fault but for a #1 WR he has not produced as one should.

jdang307
02-08-2007, 06:06 PM
Alright before the end of last season how many times did you really see Chambers take over a game? I can think of the Dallas game on Thanksgiving but that's about it. I'm not saying it's all his fault but for a #1 WR he has not produced as one should.
We don't need a WR to take over a game. We need a QB and a RB to take over games.

Who was the last team before the Colts to win the bowl with elite receivers? I wouldn't consider Hines Ward elite either. And the colts won the bown but with how much contribution from Wayne and Harrison?

PhinFan0202
02-08-2007, 06:18 PM
We don't need a WR to take over a game. We need a QB and a RB to take over games.

Who was the last team before the Colts to win the bowl with elite receivers? I wouldn't consider Hines Ward elite either. And the colts won the bown but with how much contribution from Wayne and Harrison?

The Rams with Issac Bruce and Tori Holt. Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne are a big part of the reason they got there in the first place. You think that Deion Branch and David Givens wouldn't have made a difference in the AFC Championship game? IMO you need a guy who can make thing happen regardless of him being doubled or not. That type of receiver frees things up for everybody else. Marvin and Reggie basically kept the Bears defense back to open things up the middle and in the flats for Addai.

Stitches
02-08-2007, 06:18 PM
Alright before the end of last season how many times did you really see Chambers take over a game? I can think of the Dallas game on Thanksgiving but that's about it. I'm not saying it's all his fault but for a #1 WR he has not produced as one should.

Select dominating games alone do not determine how good a season you have.

Stitches
02-08-2007, 06:19 PM
The Rams with Issac Bruce and Tori Holt. Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne are a big part of the reason they got there in the first place. You think that Deion Branch and David Givens wouldn't have made a difference in the AFC Championship game? IMO you need a guy who can make thing happen regardless of him being doubled or not. That type of receiver frees things up for everybody else. Marvin and Reggie basically kept the Bears defense back to open things up the middle and in the flats for Addai.

lol, it's so funny you say the bolded statement, yet go on to name pairs of recievers.

Ozfin77
02-08-2007, 06:20 PM
We don't need a WR to take over a game. We need a QB and a RB to take over games.

Who was the last team before the Colts to win the bowl with elite receivers? I wouldn't consider Hines Ward elite either. And the colts won the bown but with how much contribution from Wayne and Harrison?

They may not have played HUGE games, but the fact is they were there and the defence knew what they are capable of. They therefore had to keep them in mind which allowed the Colts running game to open up.

WR dont have to win every game for you, they sometimes just need to be there to keep the D in two minds.

HEDAZHELAS24
02-08-2007, 06:29 PM
i think i burner would be nice if hagan can replace booker which is yet to be determined...i like sidney rice and meachem in the second but idk if they are what you call a "burner"....i want a WR in the second round if we dont draft a OLB there..so hopefully we fill that need via FA

PhinFan0202
02-08-2007, 06:33 PM
lol, it's so funny you say the bolded statement, yet go on to name pairs of recievers.

I started to name paris because you asked me what the last team with a pair of start receivers was to win a Super Bowl. The Colts are extremely lucky to have two receivers that are capable of being a #1. If you put Reggie Wayne on any other team he's got a shot at being a pretty good number 1. Same thing with the previous tandems i mentioned. All i'm saying is that IMO our receiving core needs some more talent and a #1 type receiver.

PhinFan0202
02-08-2007, 06:39 PM
Select dominating games alone do not determine how good a season you have.

I picked that particular game because it was one of the only times that cam to mind i can remember him taking over a game before the 06' season. He may have some solid seasons but nothing to make you think he was an elite WR.

Stitches
02-08-2007, 06:45 PM
I picked that particular game because it was one of the only times that cam to mind i can remember him taking over a game before the 06' season. He may have some solid seasons but nothing to make you think he was an elite WR.

I agree, I never said he was elite. I don't think he is elite, but I think he is a #1.

Stitches
02-08-2007, 06:46 PM
I started to name paris because you asked me what the last team with a pair of start receivers was to win a Super Bowl. The Colts are extremely lucky to have two receivers that are capable of being a #1. If you put Reggie Wayne on any other team he's got a shot at being a pretty good number 1. Same thing with the previous tandems i mentioned. All i'm saying is that IMO our receiving core needs some more talent and a #1 type receiver.

I never asked that.

Edit: I see someone did though.

PhinFan0202
02-08-2007, 06:50 PM
I never asked that.

Edit: I see someone did though.

Yep you're right, my bad.

phins3454
02-08-2007, 08:48 PM
Not trying to blast your opinion or anything but why? Chambers has had one good season out of like 5. There's always the excuse about him not having the QB or the OC change everyyear but honestly playmakes make plays regardless of the offense. Randy Moss is the only person i can really think of that has an excuse because Oakland is that bad and even then he dosen't really try as hard as he should. Chambers has been in some decent to mediocre offenses but none as bad as Oakland. Booker is getting older and will probably start to decline pretty soon. Welker is a playmaker as a 3rd and Hagan while has shown some skills drops passes more often than not. I think the WR core needs some major work.

Just Think about how much crap Chris Chambers and Marty Booker go through every year with a new QB, a new coach, a new offence, every year its changing, my question to is....how can any WR be consistant with all that? they can never find a rhythm.

dayoung1600
02-08-2007, 10:40 PM
Stallworth gets hurt eating breakfast!
:sidelol:

WestCKoastiN
02-09-2007, 01:10 AM
Indeed im in favor for DJ

HurriPhin
02-09-2007, 01:57 AM
Who was the last team before the Colts to win the bowl with elite receivers? I wouldn't consider Hines Ward elite either.

And you would be dead wrong on that one. Hines Ward is a top notch, all around, complete NFL reciever and teammate.

HurriPhin
02-09-2007, 02:01 AM
Alright before the end of last season how many times did you really see Chambers take over a game? I can think of the Dallas game on Thanksgiving but that's about it.

So that 15 catch 238 yrd performance against the Bills doesnt count to you as taking over the game?

PewterKrew
02-09-2007, 07:23 AM
Even though the draft looks deep at wide receiver that does not mean any of them will pan out, it would be best to go the proven route and sign one in FA

Alex44
02-09-2007, 07:26 AM
Every year is a good year for Wide Receivers IMO.

Anyone who gets to play WR at the college level is usually very athletic. They you figure there are 100+ teams and at least 2 WR on the field at a time for each and you're bound to have some good ones every year if you can find it.

This year does seem to be more stacked at the top as far as WR go though. Must be something in the water.

PewterKrew
02-09-2007, 07:32 AM
Could not have said it better Alex44

Stitches
02-09-2007, 08:28 AM
Every year is a good year for Wide Receivers IMO.

Anyone who gets to play WR at the college level is usually very athletic. They you figure there are 100+ teams and at least 2 WR on the field at a time for each and you're bound to have some good ones every year if you can find it.

This year does seem to be more stacked at the top as far as WR go though. Must be something in the water.

Not every year is a good year. Last year, draft-wise, was a very poor year for WRs.

Crowder52
02-09-2007, 11:36 AM
Not every year is a good year. Last year, draft-wise, was a very poor year for WRs.

Just for an example look at Colston from last year's class. I think that was his point, that because of their tendency to be some of the best athletes on their teams that there are bound to be a decent number of solid WRs in nearly every draft.

Stitches
02-09-2007, 12:28 PM
Just for an example look at Colston from last year's class. I think that was his point, that because of their tendency to be some of the best athletes on their teams that there are bound to be a decent number of solid WRs in nearly every draft.

Ok, I misunderstood. I thought he meant going into the draft there are always highly rated WRs, meaning you can get a good reciever in every draft.

PhinFan0202
02-11-2007, 02:17 AM
So that 15 catch 238 yrd performance against the Bills doesnt count to you as taking over the game?

Ok, i forgot about that one. Did he even have a game even close to that this year?