Formerly Allan in MD Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 I agree but why do we think that he is Welker? He is at best the 6th best possession option (Clay, Woods, Sammy, McCoy and Fred). He has no skills that differentiate him from the other guys. He is an NFL WR but he is "just a guy." I still think that he makes the team but Hogan isn't the next coming of Welker. He is Donald Jones v2.0. He's not Welker. I'm merely using him as an example of how a successful team like the Pats has a variety of weapons.
NoSaint Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 He's not Welker. I'm merely using him as an example of how a successful team like the Pats has a variety of weapons. as far as a variety of weapons, id venture they would kill for any of ours. we have an incredibly strong top 6-7 guys in the passing game that are all very versatile. its not like we assembled a bunch of specialists to fill out roles.
Kirby Jackson Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 He's not Welker. I'm merely using him as an example of how a successful team like the Pats has a variety of weapons. People just compare every white receiver that might be good to Welker. They don't even play the same style. Welker was a lightning quick slot guy, like Edelman or Andrew Hawkins. Hogan is a Donald Jones clone. If you were to rank the weapons on the two teams right now it isn't even close. Edeleman would probably be our #2 (but could be as low as 4). Gronk would be the TE. We have a bunch of RBs better than their best (up to 5). The Pats have Tom Brady so they maximize below average talent.
dave mcbride Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 The Welker comparisons are nothing but race. Hogan is simply NOT as quick as Welker or Edleman. Welker and Edleman have superb quickness that make them dangerous on the underneath routes, and that has been what separates them from being JAG. Hogan does not exhibit that same in-game speed. I don't think he's as quick as Welker was, but I do think he's about the same as Edelman.
Formerly Allan in MD Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 People just compare every white receiver that might be good to Welker. They don't even play the same style. Welker was a lightning quick slot guy, like Edelman or Andrew Hawkins. Hogan is a Donald Jones clone. If you were to rank the weapons on the two teams right now it isn't even close. Edeleman would probably be our #2 (but could be as low as 4). Gronk would be the TE. We have a bunch of RBs better than their best (up to 5). The Pats have Tom Brady so they maximize below average talent. This has nothing to do about race unless you make it. Since that's apparently your tack let's use Art Monk instead. He finally made the Hall but did it basically by running good routes and having great hands, not being mercury. It took so many years to get there because many voters said that a guy who basically ran 8 yard hooks shouldn't be in the Hall. But every Redskin receiver who played with him, and there were some very good ones on those Super Bowl-winning teams, said he made them and the team better and didn't necessarily have to be in the highlight reel to do so.
DrDawkinstein Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 This has nothing to do about race unless you make it. Since that's apparently your tack let's use Art Monk instead. He finally made the Hall but did it basically by running good routes and having great hands, not being mercury. It took so many years to get there because many voters said that a guy who basically ran 8 yard hooks shouldn't be in the Hall. But every Redskin receiver who played with him, and there were some very good ones on those Super Bowl-winning teams, said he made them and the team better and didn't necessarily have to be in the highlight reel to do so. So Hogan is now Art Monk? This thread is really going places.
NoSaint Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 (edited) So Hogan is now Art Monk? This thread is really going places. But the 8 yard hooks end up 7..... And they probably wouldn't pass as brothers either way. Edited August 24, 2015 by NoSaint
Kelly the Dog Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 So Hogan is now Art Monk? This thread is really going places. Chris Hogan is more Tony Shaloub than Art Monk.
eball Posted August 24, 2015 Posted August 24, 2015 Chris Hogan is more Tony Shaloub than Art Monk. I wonder how many got that.
Formerly Allan in MD Posted August 25, 2015 Posted August 25, 2015 So Hogan is now Art Monk? This thread is really going places. I give up. Talking to walls does that to you.
3rdand12 Posted August 25, 2015 Posted August 25, 2015 To reinvigorate a thread gone sour. So Hogan has been playin WR with the Big boys for how long? Has anyone considered Lal has not found the faults fans have noticed? The reliable hands the catch in traffic and getting open, but does not move the chains. The good blocking and the " not in the tub" aspect? Small radius good effort. Sure everyone has physical limitations. but is there a fit for him? depends on who is pushing him, not so much his lack of good work. he will get picked up asap if Bills cant fit him in. and i will wish him well> even though i do have no affinity for lacrosse players Maybe Chris has more upside then we fans can see. Sure he may be no gamebreaker like Harvin. But can he improve on what he does? sure he can! Everyone will be better with better coaching this year and when everyone is playing just a bit better the team is playing better. Give him a chance just like we are giving chance to Henderson and Kujo and Richardson etc. Let it play out. but if he remains injured : ( its gotta be tough this year. Good problem to have I wonder how many got that. I did not. some help for us sheltered folks please?
Utah John Posted August 25, 2015 Posted August 25, 2015 The winning entry is ... Adrian. Ask Kelly the Dog.
rstencel Posted August 25, 2015 Posted August 25, 2015 Hogan fits because he is the best blocking WR the Bills have; if you look at offense last year many of the WR plays were made with Hogan blocking for WRs and unlike some of the TEs/WRs he was scoring as well. His down line awareness needs to be better and it hopefully he will be able to break single tackles better but that hopefully will come with better WR coaching/ He is a descent blocker, but IMO I would say is 3rd or 4th best blocking receiver on team honestly. He is better than Harvin and Goodwin though, which would be who most likely would be fighting for time on field with.
Kirby Jackson Posted August 25, 2015 Posted August 25, 2015 He is a descent blocker, but IMO I would say is 3rd or 4th best blocking receiver on team honestly. He is better than Harvin and Goodwin though, which would be who most likely would be fighting for time on field with.I don't think so. Harvin is a great blocker. Goodwin has a good reputation as a blocker as well but I never take that seriously because he is so little (that's a me problem though). Woods and Watkins are both better as well. This is the Chris Hogan narrative that is frustrating. Why do we think that he is a great blocker? Is it because physically he probably should be? Earlier in the thread someone talked about what an amazing ST player he is before being corrected that he had 1 assist last year or something like that.
scribo Posted August 25, 2015 Posted August 25, 2015 If Hogan is going to lose his roster spot to one of the new WRs, it may be smart to stash Hogan on the Injured Reserve with Return Designation list. They could then keep him under contract in case they need him for depth reasons later in the season. If they end up needing the spot for someone else, they could come up with a settlement with Hogan.
LB3 Posted August 25, 2015 Posted August 25, 2015 In case anyone is wondering, Da'Rick is still on the free agent scrap heap. It's funny that Da'Rick, after all the arguing, is the guy that you can just pick up off the street. He's a dime a dozen athlete with little actual football skill outside being able to catch. JAG.
NoSaint Posted August 25, 2015 Posted August 25, 2015 (edited) I don't think so. Harvin is a great blocker. Goodwin has a good reputation as a blocker as well but I never take that seriously because he is so little (that's a me problem though). Woods and Watkins are both better as well. This is the Chris Hogan narrative that is frustrating. Why do we think that he is a great blocker? Is it because physically he probably should be? Earlier in the thread someone talked about what an amazing ST player he is before being corrected that he had 1 assist last year or something like that. yup. remember when he was big on that unit and we were AWFUL at special teams? but to bring it full circle i guess, the argument right now isnt that hes trash or itd be ridiculous that he makes the team -- simply that he is a JAG type player, that can be replaced by guys without substantial dropoff. If we took a chance on a specialist or a high risk high reward guy -- say goodwin, and possible injury being the worry -- players like him arent hard to come by even if we only kept 5 and he wasnt one. a lot of teams cut very similar caliber players. heck, we will certainly be cutting a couple serviceable receivers, just a matter of how many. all that said, i think he makes the team barring the injury trouble growing, but i thought we strayed pretty far from what set off the argument which was simply that we have tough decisions at that spot, which underscores how interchangeable with other fringe guys he was from the get go. Edited August 25, 2015 by NoSaint
DrDawkinstein Posted August 25, 2015 Posted August 25, 2015 I give up. Talking to walls does that to you. Hahaha, I was just messing with you.
Kirby Jackson Posted August 25, 2015 Posted August 25, 2015 (edited) In case anyone is wondering, Da'Rick is still on the free agent scrap heap. It's funny that Da'Rick, after all the arguing, is the guy that you can just pick up off the street. He's a dime a dozen athlete with little actual football skill outside being able to catch. JAG.Yes and no. Da'Rick is on the street with at least 1 (and I believe 2) more arrests under his belt. He isn't worth the trouble. The point remains (same as always) that if he didn't work you replace him with an Andre Davis type. You don't need to protect the type of talent that you can find out on the street. You take shots on the bottom of the roster on guys that can potentially become starters. You can always find bottom of the roster guys similar to the ones that you already have. In training camp alone the Bills have found the 2 young receivers and added Red Bryant, IK and Buchanon all of whom may make the team. I think Mulligan as well. They are guys that were just kind of there but maybe as good as the last guys that you have at that spot. You don't need to say "we need to save a spot for Mulligan" because if you lose him you just go find the next Mulligan. You don't do that with guys like Marcus Lattimore for example. You take a shot and if it works great and if it doesn't you go get a Bronson Hill. I'm done on the topic though as the dead horse has been beaten. Edited August 25, 2015 by Kirby Jackson
Recommended Posts