truth on hold Posted October 6, 2014 Author Posted October 6, 2014 (edited) I'd like to hear who else is "average" too. does is matter to you since you don't know how to calculate a simple average? Posted Today, 07:55 PM FireChan, on 05 October 2014 - 07:54 PM, said: SWAT's YPG is less than 40. Average receiver? Edited October 6, 2014 by Joe_the_6_pack
FireChan Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 does is matter to you since you don't know how to calculate a simple average? Posted Today, 07:55 PM FireChan, on 05 October 2014 - 07:54 PM, said: SWAT's YPG is less than 40. Average receiver? On ESPN it has the Detroit numbers on there, but it didn't add them to the totals, that's my bad. http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/16725/sammy-watkins
Formerly Allan in MD Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 Give the kid a break. If the number of catchable balls thrown to Woods were thrown to you, you'd appear average as well (perhaps that would be an upgrade). Woods made one of the best catches of the season in game 1 despite not seeing many balls from Manuel (talk about average; how about mediocre manny).
BaaadThingsMan Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 Robert Woods will be our Hines Ward when all is said and done with his career. Hes a honey badger, he don't give a f$ he's not physical....that's ridiculous
jester43 Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 (edited) That's not how this works. YOU called him average. So provide a baseline of "average." Woods has solid hands, runs good routes, and makes big plays. Saying his lack of numbers is an indictment on his talent completely disregards the context. It disregards the dog **** carousel of QB's the Bills have trotted out. Demariyus had average numbers with Tebow. So did Decker. Welker had way below average numbers for YEARS. Are all of those guys average? Reggie Wayne had garbage numbers with Kerry Collins. It goes on and on and on. How good were Brandon Marshall's numbers in Miami? Trust me when I say this, you're wrong. bull ****. You're giving me a bunch of subjectives because you like him and he plays for the Bills... "solid" hands, "good" routes, "big" plays (so many big plays, in fact, that the bills are all of 9-12 since he was drafted). You can shake a tree outside any NFL stadium and out drops half a dozen guys whose fans say the same things about them. none of that makes you special n the NFL. It's pretty much what you need just to get on a roster...but until you produce, you're just a guy. I am hoping you're right and he is an all-pro waiting to blossom.. And i don't care what those other guys' numbers were...if you're so anxious to prove a point, you look up their first 20 starts and tell me. Meanwhile, for every star whose career had a slow start, there are a boatload who start mediocre and stay that way. Until you do it, you haven't done it, and don't expect me to heap praise on a guy just because he plays the Bills. i am dying for the guy to prove me wrong, but it is no great insult to say he's average when he hasn't produced much. i'm not saying he can't ever be a standout. i AM saying he doesn't look like one now, and he's not done anything that would make you predict it. Other than make a few plays here and there for crappy QBs, which I agree with you about. Edited October 6, 2014 by jester43
FireChan Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 (edited) bull ****. You're giving me a bunch of subjectives because you like him and he plays for the Bills... "solid" hands, "good" routes, "big" plays (so many big plays, in fact, that the bills are all of 9-12 since he was drafted). You can shake a tree outside any NFL stadium and out drops half a dozen guys whose fans say the same things about them. none of that makes you special n the NFL. It's pretty much what you need just to get on a roster...but until you produce, you're just a guy. I am hoping you're right and he is an all-pro waiting to blossom.. And i don't care what those other guys' numbers were...if you're so anxious to prove a point, you look up their first 20 starts and tell me. Meanwhile, for every star whose career had a slow start, there are a boatload who start mediocre and stay that way. Until you do it, you haven't done it, and don't expect me to heap praise on a guy just because he plays the Bills. i am dying for the guy to prove me wrong, but it is no great insult to say he's average when he hasn't produced much. i'm not saying he can't ever be a standout. i AM saying he doesn't look like one now, and he's not done anything that would make you predict it. Other than make a few plays here and there for crappy QBs, which I agree with you about. I already told you that the numbers don't mean ****. That's my argument. I've given examples. You haven't given me one example of anyone else who is average by the numbers. But fine. You want numbers to prove that numbers suck in this case? I'm game. D. Thomas ended his first season having played in 10 games, with 22 receptions for 283 yards and 2 touchdowns. Welker, 16 games in his SECOND season, 29 REC 434 YDS, 0 TD's Decker finished his rookie season with 6 catches that went for 106 yards and one touchdown in 14 games. Brandon Marshall, 15 games his rookie year, 309 YDS, 2 TD's Calvin Johnson, rookie season, 15 games, 756 YDS, 4 TD's Do you know how GM's can usually tell who is going to be good and who isn't? It's not the stats, it's their talent. That's what separates the bums from the guys I listed above. Naaman Roosevelt made plays, but he wasn't talented enough to be a Marshall or a D. Thomas. TJ Graham may have had a couple big plays, but he was never going to be great. Route-running and hands may be a minutely subjective but that doesn't make them invalid. Put 30 scouts in a room with film and they'll all be crystal clear on who runs good-routes and who doesn't. Clearly, you are trapped in a sad land where numbers mean everything in terms of how good of a football player you are. I bet you think Mario stinks because he doesn't get a lot of sacks. Edited October 6, 2014 by FireChan
reddogblitz Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 he's not physical, and not particularly fast in pads ... as a result he doesn't create separation,. It's not QB-specific. With Orton throwing for 300+ today, Woods still only got 3 catches for 37 Did you miss the big catch and YAC he got on the last drive?
Deranged Rhino Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 bull ****. You're giving me a bunch of subjectives because you like him and he plays for the Bills... "solid" hands, "good" routes, "big" plays (so many big plays, in fact, that the bills are all of 9-12 since he was drafted). You can shake a tree outside any NFL stadium and out drops half a dozen guys whose fans say the same things about them. none of that makes you special n the NFL. It's pretty much what you need just to get on a roster...but until you produce, you're just a guy. I am hoping you're right and he is an all-pro waiting to blossom.. And i don't care what those other guys' numbers were...if you're so anxious to prove a point, you look up their first 20 starts and tell me. Meanwhile, for every star whose career had a slow start, there are a boatload who start mediocre and stay that way. Until you do it, you haven't done it, and don't expect me to heap praise on a guy just because he plays the Bills. i am dying for the guy to prove me wrong, but it is no great insult to say he's average when he hasn't produced much. i'm not saying he can't ever be a standout. i AM saying he doesn't look like one now, and he's not done anything that would make you predict it. Other than make a few plays here and there for crappy QBs, which I agree with you about. Woods might be the best blocking WR on the roster, he's also a former safety who likes contact and has made multiple plays this season on special teams. He's also a Biletnikoff award winning WR who was highly recruited as a high school player and -- had he not gotten injured -- was a sure thing first round talent. You can't just shake any tree and find a guy who has those accolades and skills. Those aren't fan inventions, those are real accomplishments that Woody brings to the Bills. No one has said he's an all-pro, that's you shifting the goalposts to suit JTPS trolling thread. All people have done is point out that Joe's initial comment and observation about Woods is demonstrably false at best -- straight up trolling at worst. Woods played a hell of a game today, he might not have put up eye popping numbers, but his contributions was noticeable on multiple plays. If you doubt that, watch the game again and you'll see. Or go watch any of the games so far this season and you'll see Woody out there straight up mauling dudes and making plays. Calling him out for not being physical, or "fast in pads" (another laughable observation) is why JTSP and his thoughts are being taken to task in this thread. That's all.
rfk Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 I hate to be a Debbie Downer but this is the dumbest topic and I posted to it duh
jester43 Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 I already told you that the numbers don't mean ****. That's my argument. I've given examples. You haven't given me one example of anyone else who is average by the numbers. But fine. You want numbers to prove that numbers suck in this case? I'm game. D. Thomas ended his first season having played in 10 games, with 22 receptions for 283 yards and 2 touchdowns. Welker, 16 games in his SECOND season, 29 REC 434 YDS, 0 TD's Decker finished his rookie season with 6 catches that went for 106 yards and one touchdown in 14 games. Brandon Marshall, 15 games his rookie year, 309 YDS, 2 TD's Calvin Johnson, rookie season, 15 games, 756 YDS, 4 TD's Do you know how GM's can usually tell who is going to be good and who isn't? It's not the stats, it's their talent. That's what separates the bums from the guys I listed above. Naaman Roosevelt made plays, but he wasn't talented enough to be a Marshall or a D. Thomas. TJ Graham may have had a couple big plays, but he was never going to be great. Route-running and hands may be a minutely subjective but that doesn't make them invalid. Put 30 scouts in a room with film and they'll all be crystal clear on who runs good-routes and who doesn't. Clearly, you are trapped in a sad land where numbers mean everything in terms of how good of a football player you are. I bet you think Mario stinks because he doesn't get a lot of sacks. you are trapped in a world where you see what you want to see despite the lack of evidence. Cherry picking a few guys who had slow starts and great careers doesn't prove woods is anything special. I know Gms get paid to figure this out but I'm supposed to say Robert Woods is a future star because you say so and you know talent. Ok.
Kirby Jackson Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 I'll just reiterate my thoughts from last week because they aren't changing anytime soon. Woods is a nice player and a tough guy but Watkins is, was and will be the better player. I'm still shocked at how many people on here disagreed with that. He's a star. Woods is the perfect complimentary guy. The Bills should be set there for a long time.
FireChan Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 (edited) you are trapped in a world where you see what you want to see despite the lack of evidence. Cherry picking a few guys who had slow starts and great careers doesn't prove woods is anything special. I know Gms get paid to figure this out but I'm supposed to say Robert Woods is a future star because you say so and you know talent. Ok. I never said star, I said not average. And yes, you're supposed to submit, thank you. Tell me you were one of those guys who thinks Mario sucks. Please. Edited October 6, 2014 by FireChan
GG Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 ........... No one has said he's an all-pro, that's you shifting the goalposts to suit JTPS trolling thread. All people have done is point out that Joe's initial comment and observation about Woods is demonstrably false at best -- straight up trolling at worst. That is so unlike him. I'm frankly surprised.
Dorkington Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 Eric Moulds year 1: 20 receptions 279 yards 2 touchdowns year 2: 29 receptions 294 yards 0 touchdowns year 3: 67 receptions 1368 yards 9 touchdowns I use this example as most receivers don't do a lot in their first two seasons. If they aren't AJ Green right away, they are a bust, and they suck.
Homey D. Clown Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 he's not physical, and not particularly fast in pads ... as a result he doesn't create separation,. It's not QB-specific. With Orton throwing for 300+ today, Woods still only got 3 catches for 37 Sorry, who are you watching? Woods is one of the better downfield blockers at the WR position.
Kelly the Dog Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 If they aren't AJ Green right away, they are a bust, and they suck. Agree with you but Moulds is always a bad choice to use as an example like that. Marv had an antiquated attitude toward starting and playing rookies and almost any young guy. Moulds wasn't given much of a chance his first two years but it wasn't like he couldn't have produced or put up better numbers. He was on the bench a lot for what was nothing more than age discrimination.
jester43 Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 And yes, you're supposed to submit, thank you. i submit that you're a blockhead. how's that.
FireChan Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 i submit that you're a blockhead. how's that. White Flag. SEEEEEEEEEEE YA.
Kelly the Dog Posted October 6, 2014 Posted October 6, 2014 http://vimeo.com/108161182 I loved that play. They still couldn't wrestle him down. And he always plays like that, and blocks hard downfield. I can possibly understand how a fan can say he is not great or not even that good (I disagree), but to say he is not physical is just flat wrong on so any levels.
Recommended Posts