The silliest debate around here...

[maryjanewatson]

Drafting Offense Vs. Drafting Defense.

We have people who preach "we need to score points" and people who preach "we need to rebuild the once mighty Buc D" and generally, they fight about it.

If you think about it, the whole thing is absurd.

If we draft Calvin Johnson (and we should, as he is the best player out there), can you honestly tell me he won't help the defense? He might not be sacking the quarterback, but if he's keeping drives alive, that means he'll be letting the defense rest. It means he'll be pushing the other team's offense back if we have to punt, giving them longer fields to work with. If he's scoring, it means we can make the other team one-dimensional on offense, which will only improve our defense.

On the flipside, you can say basically the same things about a defensive guy like Gaines Adams. He'll be sacking offenses, pushing them back, improving our field position. He'll force fumbles and hand the ball to our O deep in opposing territory. He'll force bad passes that'll get picked off also. He'll force three and outs that'll get the ball back into the hands of our offense. Etc.

I guess what I'm saying is, we need help everywhere, and help anywhere is good for everyone. The whole "Draft Offense" or "Draft Defense" schtick is downright silly. We don't need to rebuild the offense or the defense, we need to rebuild the football team.

That, by the way, is why I'm such a big Calvin Johnson guy - he's the best player in the draft, pure and simple. I really don't care which side of the ball he's on philosophically.

[Alpha Alpha 408]

[QUOTE=maryjanewatson]Drafting Offense Vs. Drafting Defense.

We have people who preach "we need to score points" and people who preach "we need to rebuild the once mighty Buc D" and generally, they fight about it.

If you think about it, the whole thing is absurd.

I guess what I'm saying is, we need help everywhere, and help anywhere is good for everyone. The whole "Draft Offense" or "Draft Defense" schtick is downright silly.

QUOTE]


Agreed.

We are a 4-12 team with 4-12 talent...on BOTH sides of the ball.

[Jaimie U.K]

Drafting Offense Vs. Drafting Defense.

We have people who preach "we need to score points" and people who preach "we need to rebuild the once mighty Buc D" and generally, they fight about it.

If you think about it, the whole thing is absurd.

If we draft Calvin Johnson (and we should, as he is the best player out there), can you honestly tell me he won't help the defense? He might not be sacking the quarterback, but if he's keeping drives alive, that means he'll be letting the defense rest. It means he'll be pushing the other team's offense back if we have to punt, giving them longer fields to work with. If he's scoring, it means we can make the other team one-dimensional on offense, which will only improve our defense.

On the flipside, you can say basically the same things about a defensive guy like Gaines Adams. He'll be sacking offenses, pushing them back, improving our field position. He'll force fumbles and hand the ball to our O deep in opposing territory. He'll force bad passes that'll get picked off also. He'll force three and outs that'll get the ball back into the hands of our offense. Etc.

I guess what I'm saying is, we need help everywhere, and help anywhere is good for everyone. The whole "Draft Offense" or "Draft Defense" schtick is downright silly. We don't need to rebuild the offense or the defense, we need to rebuild the football team.

That, by the way, is why I'm such a big Calvin Johnson guy - he's the best player in the draft, pure and simple. I really don't care which side of the ball he's on philosophically.Bump....I pointed out along time ago we need/will, address both sides of the ball, in the draft and FA.
I also like you point concerning the players impact on our teams offense and defense respectivly, nice post!

[maryjanewatson]

[QUOTE=maryjanewatson]Drafting Offense Vs. Drafting Defense.

We have people who preach "we need to score points" and people who preach "we need to rebuild the once mighty Buc D" and generally, they fight about it.

If you think about it, the whole thing is absurd.

I guess what I'm saying is, we need help everywhere, and help anywhere is good for everyone. The whole "Draft Offense" or "Draft Defense" schtick is downright silly.

QUOTE]


Agreed.

We are a 4-12 team with 4-12 talent...on BOTH sides of the ball.

I just don't get, like, this "I'm a defensive guy and we need to draft defense" or vice versa philosophical arguing. We need to get better as a football team. If the best player available is on offense take him. If he's on defense, take him. It's really that simple. The only exception I can think of is running back. Otherwise? Shoot. We need everything.

[UMiamiBucFan]

I agree for the most part, but since this is the 2nd time we've been drafting in the top 5 in the last 3 years, there is another factor in all this. Money. If we were to draft CJ, we will have invested 70+ million dollars in just 2 players on the offensive side of the ball. I know your point is that it doesn't matter what side they play on, both would help out the entire team. But this is a massive investment that absolutely will kill our cap if we mess it up. It would be nice to have some balance between the offense and defense.

I think one of the key reasons why our offense has been so bad is because of how young they are. They are going to get better with experience (not to mention if we ever get a decent QB). Our defense is not going to get better. They are going to get slower.

And while I'm okay with draft CJ, I do hate drafting a WR this high. If you look at the WRs drafted in the top 10 since 2000, we have:
2000
Peter Warrick - Out of league
Plaxico Burress - A malcontent on a playoff team
Travis Taylor - Backup for a bad team (Minnesota)
2001
David Terrell - Out of league
Koren Robinson - Suspension
2003
Charles Rogers - Out of league
Andre Johnson - Good player on a bad team
2004
Larry Fitzgerald - Good player on a bad team
Roy Williams - Good player on a bad team
Reggie Williams - Average player on an average team
2005
Braylon Edwards - Average player on a bad team
Troy Williamson - Average player on a bad team
Mike Williams - A backup on a bad team


Only one of these players is in the postseason this year...Burress. And he's probably going home this weekend.

In my opinion, WR just isn't a very important position. But the fans love them because they make big plays. I don't want to kill our cap for a WR that won't be able to do much without a QB that can get them the ball.

[maryjanewatson]

I agree for the most part, but since this is the 2nd time we've been drafting in the top 5 in the last 3 years, there is another factor in all this. Money. If we were to draft CJ, we will have invested 70+ million dollars in just 2 players on the offensive side of the ball. I know your point is that it doesn't matter what side they play on, both would help out the entire team. But this is a massive investment that absolutely will kill our cap if we mess it up. It would be nice to have some balance between the offense and defense.

I think one of the key reasons why our offense has been so bad is because of how young they are. They are going to get better with experience (not to mention if we ever get a decent QB). Our defense is not going to get better. They are going to get slower.

And while I'm okay with draft CJ, I do hate drafting a WR this high. If you look at the WRs drafted in the top 10 since 2000, we have:
2000
Peter Warrick - Out of league
Plaxico Burress - A malcontent on a playoff team
Travis Taylor - Backup for a bad team (Minnesota)
2001
David Terrell - Out of league
Koren Robinson - Suspension
2003
Charles Rogers - Out of league
Andre Johnson - Good player on a bad team
2004
Larry Fitzgerald - Good player on a bad team
Roy Williams - Good player on a bad team
Reggie Williams - Average player on an average team
2005
Braylon Edwards - Average player on a bad team
Troy Williamson - Average player on a bad team
Mike Williams - A backup on a bad team


Only one of these players is in the postseason this year...Burress. And he's probably going home this weekend.

In my opinion, WR just isn't a very important position. But the fans love them because they make big plays. I don't want to kill our cap for a WR that won't be able to do much without a QB that can get them the ball.

Points all taken...The thing is, and you can criticize my naivity if you choose...this kid is flat out special. There's no other way to put it. On that entire list, the only guys who were in his galaxy as prospects were Andre Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, and Roy Williams (if you're taking work ethic and character into the equation). And there's zero chance any of them would go ahead of him in a draft.

I guess what I'm saying is, I have no qualms with your conventional wisdom; I just think this kid breaks the rules.

[Alpha Alpha 408]

I agree for the most part, but since this is the 2nd time we've been drafting in the top 5 in the last 3 years, there is another factor in all this. Money. If we were to draft CJ, we will have invested 70+ million dollars in just 2 players on the offensive side of the ball. I know your point is that it doesn't matter what side they play on, both would help out the entire team. But this is a massive investment that absolutely will kill our cap if we mess it up. It would be nice to have some balance between the offense and defense.

I think one of the key reasons why our offense has been so bad is because of how young they are. They are going to get better with experience (not to mention if we ever get a decent QB). Our defense is not going to get better. They are going to get slower.

And while I'm okay with draft CJ, I do hate drafting a WR this high. If you look at the WRs drafted in the top 10 since 2000, we have:

Plaxico Burress - A malcontent on a playoff team
Andre Johnson - Good player on a bad team
2004
Larry Fitzgerald - Good player on a bad team
Roy Williams - Good player on a bad team



In my opinion, WR just isn't a very important position. But the fans love them because they make big plays. I don't want to kill our cap for a WR that won't be able to do much without a QB that can get them the ball.


My rebuttal would go something like this:

1) If those 4 are only "good" players, who would be an EXCELLENT player (WR)?

2) As far as the "cap" goes...it seems to be working out for the Colts ok.

3) Although I agree with the notion that "normally", you don't take a guy that touches the ball 10 times a game with the #3-4 pick, CJ is a much better talent than ANY of the WR's you've listed. A "game breaker" in every sense of the word.

4) You are correct, we do need some cap balance between the offense and defense. As of today, our cap is heavily weighted towards the defensive side...and that got us 4-12.

[SuperFly]

I wouldn't have a problem if the Bucs drafted an offensive player, but they have in the first round THREE years in a row, including WR Michael Clayton. He had a phenomenal rookie season, then went bust!

On the other hand, the defense, which this team was built on, has been neglected long enough. It clearly showed this past dismal season. They need to bring in fresh, young blood, especially to the front four.

Being an great college football player does not guarantee a successful NFL career period, including Calvin Johnson!

[maryjanewatson]

RE Johnson's impact, sure, he might only get the ball thrown to him a dozen plays a game out of 70...But on every single play, there'll be two or even three guys on him. All of a sudden, there's Galloway running one on one every play. There's Alex Smith exploiting a giant hole in the middle of the field. There's Caddy facing six men in the box instead of eight. There's a big hole every time we run the draw...

Receiver might not be the most important position, but it is the one that can open up your offense more than any other.

[Alpha Alpha 408]

[QUOTE=Feldmeister]I wouldn't have a problem if the Bucs drafted an offensive player, but they have in the first round THREE years in a row, including WR Michael Clayton. He had a phenomenal rookie season, then went bust!

On the other hand, the defense, which this team was built on, has been neglected long enough. It clearly showed this past dismal season. They need to bring in fresh, young blood, especially to the front four.

Being an great college football player does not guarantee a successful NFL career period, including any defensive player taken that high!"

Just putting the shoe on the other foot.

Listen, we're talking about that one pick. We can still use our first day picks on some defensive players.

And please come with something more substantial than, "we have neglected the defense in the draft. That is untrue.

[UMiamiBucFan]

Points all taken...The thing is, and you can criticize my naivity if you choose...this kid is flat out special. There's no other way to put it. On that entire list, the only guys who were in his galaxy as prospects were Andre Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, and Roy Williams (if you're taking work ethic and character into the equation). And there's zero chance any of them would go ahead of him in a draft.

I guess what I'm saying is, I have no qualms with your conventional wisdom; I just think this kid breaks the rules.
I'm not doubting he's special. Like I've said, I'm okay with the Bucs drafting him as he would be fun to watch. But I don't think he'll make a big impact in the W column. The three receivers you mentioned sure haven't made an impact in that column for their teams. Evidenced by all of their teams picking in the top 10 once again. Detroit's 3 top 10 WRs sure did them a lot of good...

WRs are only as good as the players you surround them with. Give them a QB that can place the ball near them. Give them a threat in the running game to open up the deep routes. Give them an offensive line that can give the QB time and open up holes for the RB. To me, its nothing more than a complementary position. Much like a TE that isn't very good at blocking...

[Alpha Alpha 408]

I'm not doubting he's special. Like I've said, I'm okay with the Bucs drafting him as he would be fun to watch. But I don't think he'll make a big impact in the W column. The three receivers you mentioned sure haven't made an impact in that column for their teams. Evidenced by all of their teams picking in the top 10 once again. Detroit's 3 top 10 WRs sure did them a lot of good...

WRs are only as good as the players you surround them with. Give them a QB that can place the ball near them. Give them a threat in the running game to open up the deep routes. Give them an offensive line that can give the QB time and open up holes for the RB. To me, its nothing more than a complementary position. Much like a TE that isn't very good at blocking...

I think you are underestimating the impact a guy like Johnson could bring to the ENTIRE offense (as MJW has pointed out) and it's over-all productivity.

Listen...I wouldn't have a problem taking Adams either. I think he could be a real difference maker on that side of the ball.

In a lot of aspects, this is the argument from last year; do you take Bush or Williams? We'll see how it plays out but it's looking pretty good for NO right now, even though Williams will be a fine player.

[UMiamiBucFan]

My rebuttal would go something like this:

1) If those 4 are only "good" players, who would be an EXCELLENT player (WR)?

I was simply using good, bad, and average. Those players would likely qualify as excellent, but their impact is not felt in the W column.

2) As far as the "cap" goes...it seems to be working out for the Colts ok.

Is it? They only have 4.1 million in cap room for 2007 with Dwight Freeney and Cato June hitting free agency. Their window is closing and their defense was never very good.

3) Although I agree with the notion that "normally", you don't take a guy that touches the ball 10 times a game with the #3-4 pick, CJ is a much better talent than ANY of the WR's you've listed. A "game breaker" in every sense of the word.

I agree that he is a better prospect than any of those other guys. However, the position he plays is still just a complementary role.

4) You are correct, we do need some cap balance between the offense and defense. As of today, our cap is heavily weighted towards the defensive side...and that got us 4-12.

Not entirely true. Sure the #1 guy is Simeon, but he's likely gone next year and the next 2 guys are Simms and Cadillac. Also, our cap has been heavily weighted towards the defensive side for the past 10 years, with quite a few more good years in there.


Anyone know the last time the Bucs drafted a defensive player in the first round? 1999. And he's no longer on the team.

[maryjanewatson]

Anyone know the last time the Bucs drafted a defensive player in the first round? 1999. And he's no longer on the team.

If a defensive guy isn't the best player on the board, I don't get why anyone would want him to be the pick. Why reach? There were years that we would have done better to go defense (Nate Clements in 2001 comes immediately to mind, as does DJ Williams). This is simply NOT a case where taking a defensive guy makes sense.

[UMiamiBucFan]

I think you are underestimating the impact a guy like Johnson could bring to the ENTIRE offense (as MJW has pointed out) and it's over-all productivity.

Listen...I wouldn't have a problem taking Adams either. I think he could be a real difference maker on that side of the ball.

In a lot of aspects, this is the argument from last year; do you take Bush or Williams? We'll see how it plays out but it's looking pretty good for NO right now, even though Williams will be a fine player.
You said so yourself, he's likely to only touch the ball 10 times per game. How big of impact is that really?

Also, CJ is not as good of a prospect as Bush was. Not to mention, if you removed Bush from that class, Mario would likely have been the clearcut #1 (with some votes for the hometown Vince Young). Remember, Mario is a 290lb DE that ran a 4.6. That is freakish speed. That's faster than some 190lb WRs.

[UMiamiBucFan]

If a defensive guy isn't the best player on the board, I don't get why anyone would want him to be the pick. Why reach? There were years that we would have done better to go defense (Nate Clements in 2001 comes immediately to mind, as does DJ Williams). This is simply NOT a case where taking a defensive guy makes sense.
I'm not saying you should reach, I'm just saying that the defense has not seen any love in quite awhile.

I imagine someone might want to trade up for CJ, if he's available at our pick.

[Alpha Alpha 408]

Anyone know the last time the Bucs drafted a defensive player in the first round? 1999. And he's no longer on the team.

Actually, it HAS worked out well for the Colts. Most people would consider being in the playoffs EVERY year and having a SHOT a winning the Super Bowl, as "working out well".

AS OF TODAY, our cap is STILL heavily weighted towards the defensive side of the ball. And it in fact, did contribute to a 4-12 record. I'm not in our organization and don't know what the future will hold. I only know how things ARE not how they WILL BE.

Anyone know how many 1st round piks we've HAD since 2000? Your last point is misleading at best and intellectually dishonest at worst.

WITH OUR HIGHEST AVAILABLE PICK would be a little closer to the truth, eh?

[Alpha Alpha 408]

You said so yourself, he's likely to only touch the ball 10 times per game. How big of impact is that really?

Also, CJ is not as good of a prospect as Bush was. Not to mention, if you removed Bush from that class, Mario would likely have been the clearcut #1 (with some votes for the hometown Vince Young). Remember, Mario is a 290lb DE that ran a 4.6. That is freakish speed. That's faster than some 190lb WRs.


You're ignoring the argument:

His impact will effect the OVERALL productivity of the ENTIRE offense. MJW has already explained how and MJW is correct.

I wasn't comparing CJ to Bush directly. My point was that the ARGUMENT for drafting an inpact offensive player or an impact defensive player is SIMILAR to last year. AND Gaines Adams is generally considered to be the "clear cut" best defensive player available in this draft.

Ummm...most NFL WR's run faster than a 4.6 40 and the BEST WR's in the NFL ALL do.

[UMiamiBucFan]

Actually, it HAS worked out well for the Colts. Most people would consider being in the playoffs EVERY year and having a SHOT a winning the Super Bowl, as "working out well".

AS OF TODAY, our cap is STILL heavily weighted towards the defensive side of the ball. And it in fact, did contribute to a 4-12 record. I'm not in our organization and don't know what the future will hold. I only know how things ARE not how they WILL BE.

Anyone know how many 1st round piks we've HAD since 2000? Your last point is misleading at best and intellectually dishonest at worst.

WITH OUR HIGHEST AVAILABLE PICK would be a little closer to the truth, eh?
Even that only adds Dewayne White to the mix and he's likely bolting as a free agent. I wasn't dishonest, we all know why the Bucs didn't have many first day picks. But we also know that despite those traded picks, we haven't had a rookie defensive playmaker in that long. We have had 3 first round picks over the past 3 years and all of them have been offensive players.

As for the Colts, you play to win a Super Bowl, and they haven't done it. Therefore, it hasn't worked out for them. As for their WRs, they actually have a QB that can throw the ball anywhere he wants to and neither of them were top 10 picks. Hell, Michael Clayton was drafted higher than either of them. But they are about to lose their best player on defense simply because they paid so much for those receivers.

I have a feeling that after this offseason, you won't see the cap usage pointed towards the defensive side.

[UMiamiBucFan]

You're ignoring the argument:

His impact will effect the OVERALL productivity of the ENTIRE offense. MJW has already explained how and MJW is correct.

I wasn't comparing CJ to Bush directly. My point was that the ARGUMENT for drafting an inpact offensive player or an impact defensive player is SIMILAR to last year. AND Gaines Adams is generally considered to be the "clear cut" best defensive player available in this draft.

Ummm...most NFL WR's run faster than a 4.6 40 and the BEST WR's in the NFL ALL do.
Funny, didn't Anquan Boldin run a 4.6? I think he's pretty good, don't you?

Calvin Johnson would be fun to watch. He'll make highlight reel catches and some big plays. I never denied that. I don't think adding a WR will make our offense much better overall. We still have an OL that can't run block and a QB that can't throw a ball past the DL.

My point is merely that a WR won't make a major impact on our W/L record.

[Alpha Alpha 408]

Even that only adds Dewayne White to the mix and he's likely bolting as a free agent. I wasn't dishonest, we all know why the Bucs didn't have many first day picks. But we also know that despite those traded picks, we haven't had a rookie defensive playmaker in that long. We have had 3 first round picks over the past 3 years and all of them have been offensive players.

As for the Colts, you play to win a Super Bowl, and they haven't done it. Therefore, it hasn't worked out for them. As for their WRs, they actually have a QB that can throw the ball anywhere he wants to and neither of them were top 10 picks. Hell, Michael Clayton was drafted higher than either of them. But they are about to lose their best player on defense simply because they paid so much for those receivers.

You have a feeling that after this offseason, you won't see the cap usage pointed towards the defensive side.


First...you're wrong. Barrett Ruud was our first pick as well.

Ahhhhh...so if a team doesn't win the Super Bowl, then it hasn't even worked out "well" or "ok" (the words that I used)? I think most rational people would disagree with that assesment.

And WHY are you still trying to see the future? Let's deal with what actually IS. Unless you work for the Bucs, in which case your fortune telling skills would hold a little more water. I am assuming you don't.

I actually think we re-sign White and Rice being gone is NOT a forgone conclusion.

And Harrison and Wayne were 1st and 2nd rounders respectively (I believe)

I wasn't saying YOU were being "dishonest". I said "intellectually dishonest". In other words, your ARGUMENT is intentionally misleading.

Read what is written, not what you want it to say.

[Alpha Alpha 408]

Funny, didn't Anquan Boldin run a 4.6? I think he's pretty good, don't you?

Calvin Johnson would be fun to watch. He'll make highlight reel catches and some big plays. I never denied that. I don't think adding a WR will make our offense much better overall. We still have an OL that can't run block and a QB that can't throw a ball past the DL.

My point is merely that a WR won't make a major impact on our W/L record.


Well...if Boldin did run a 4.6 at the combine, I'm sure you can provide me a link and prove me wrong.

HOW can you not see how having an impact WR can improve overall productivity? Re-read how MJW explained it. It is accurate and makes sense.

An INDIVIDUAL playing a TEAM sport, rarely has a DIRECT impact on a teams win-loss record. It goes without saying. He would have as much of a "direct" impact as Thomas, Adams or any other INDIVIDUAL.

[TomatoVSC]

Well...if Boldin did run a 4.6 at the combine, I'm sure you can provide me a link and prove me wrong.

He did. Boldin actually ran a 4.71. Boldin had a pretty poor combine, which resulted in him dropping farther than expected in the combine. No link, just common knowledge. Also, fyi, Emmitt Smith ran a 4.7, but speed never seemed to be a problem for him.

And for those of you who don't think a receiver can make a huge impact on a team...have you ever watched the Carolina Panthers?

[TomatoVSC]

To anyone who's interested...here's a profile on CJ when he was in high school.

http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?SID=1144&CID=195270

[Sailing2Smth]

A lot of great points are made here! Bottomline is that I would enjoy seeing this guy come to Tampa (especially if we get the #3 pick). Draft arguments can be made for quite a few folks coming out this year such as Gaines Adams, Joe Thomas, Brady Quinn, JeMarcus Russell (if he declares), Amobi Okoye etc etc. as we do have needs on both sides of the ball.

But if he is gone...IF he is gone by the time we pick (or not even declare for that matter) we should trade down to pick up more talent that might help us rebuild not only for next season, but beyond.

[tampabayfan]

What? Our defense took us to the Superbowl and won it big time. It has been our defense that has held us up over the last 10 years. The smartest thing this team can do it re-build the defense. I dont care what big name offense players we bring in, it will continue to be mediocre. If we can build back our D to its former standards, we once again can go back to winning.

People get stars in their eyes when they see some great offensive college star--you know what only about 50% ever amount to anything. Draft defense this year to add depth and strength to our defense.

[DeadEagle]

RE Johnson's impact, sure, he might only get the ball thrown to him a dozen plays a game out of 70...But on every single play, there'll be two or even three guys on him.

:rolleyes:

That's as much a pipe dream as anything I've ever read in my life. Teams still play man on the best WR's in the game. This kid will be no different. NFL CB's are galaxies better than the corners that play in the ACC.



Funny, didn't Anquan Boldin run a 4.6? I think he's pretty good, don't you?

Calvin Johnson would be fun to watch. He'll make highlight reel catches and some big plays. I never denied that. I don't think adding a WR will make our offense much better overall. We still have an OL that can't run block and a QB that can't throw a ball past the DL.

My point is merely that a WR won't make a major impact on our W/L record.

Solid post.

Case in point; Arizona and Detroit.

They both drafted 3 WR's (Detroit in 3 consecutive years, Arizona in 2), and all three prospects were held as top notch NFL talent. Look how well those WR's opened up their offenses. Both franchises used WR as a focus to a rebuild, and they are still rebuilding because that plan doesn't work.

Actually, it HAS worked out well for the Colts. Most people would consider being in the playoffs EVERY year and having a SHOT a winning the Super Bowl, as "working out well".

No... no it hasn't. Colts fans get to February year in, year out with a sour taste in their mouths..... wondering where they went wrong. Why? Because offense doesn't win championships.

[tampabayfan]

you know what if Johnson is the best guy in the draft, well he wont even be on the board when we pick. 2ndly we can trade down, pick up another 2nd rounder and still get a pretty good DT. We got to to do what is best for the long term goals of the team. We drafted a wr in the first round 2 years ago--what were he stats this past year?

[DeadEagle]

And for those of you who don't think a receiver can make a huge impact on a team...have you ever watched the Carolina Panthers?


Yeah.

They're right next to us watching the NFC playoffs. Why?

[DeadEagle]

To anyone who's interested...here's a profile on CJ when he was in high school.

http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?SID=1144&CID=195270



In that article, he basically says he chose GT for the degree he'd earn. He's staying in school.

[NOLASaint23]

If we draft Calvin Johnson (and we should, as he is the best player out there), can you honestly tell me he won't help the defense? He might not be sacking the quarterback, but if he's keeping drives alive, that means he'll be letting the defense rest.

For him to keep drives alive, He has to get the ball thrown to him, not over his head or batted down at the LOS.

:rotf:

[Sailing2Smth]

2ndly we can trade down, pick up another 2nd rounder and still get a pretty good DT. We got to to do what is best for the long term goals of the team. We drafted a wr in the first round 2 years ago--what were he stats this past year?

Again, I would not mind seeing a trade away with another team to pick up another 2nd rounder if it benefits us. And having 3 picks in the 2nd wouldn't be a bad decision by the Buc staff. But as to your point on selecting a WR in the 04 draft, well here are your college stats
Clayton: 182 receptions for 2,582 yards and 21 TDs
Johnson: 178 receptions for 2,927 yards and 28 TDs

So I see your point as to not selecting a WR this year b/c of the "slump" Clayton has been in since his rookie season with the Bucs. But I still will write the paycheck on CJ because this man has the ability and talent to remain a solid top 5 #1 WR throughout his NFL career.

[tampabayfan]

Again, I would not mind seeing a trade away with another team to pick up another 2nd rounder if it benefits us. And having 3 picks in the 2nd wouldn't be a bad decision by the Buc staff. But as to your point on selecting a WR in the 04 draft, well here are your college stats
Clayton: 182 receptions for 2,582 yards and 21 TDs
Johnson: 178 receptions for 2,927 yards and 28 TDs

So I see your point as to not selecting a WR this year b/c of the "slump" Clayton has been in since his rookie season with the Bucs. But I still will write the paycheck on CJ because this man has the ability and talent to remain a solid top 5 #1 WR throughout his NFL career.
If we have the crappy qbs we have and the lack of run game, will bringing in a wr really help us out? We have won plenty of games with a sorry offense, but the games where our D doesnt show up, we tend to lose. We are in a true re-building state and we have to start at the beginning and that beginning is on the D side of the ball.

[HighOnMtZion]

I agree for the most part, but since this is the 2nd time we've been drafting in the top 5 in the last 3 years, there is another factor in all this. Money. If we were to draft CJ, we will have invested 70+ million dollars in just 2 players on the offensive side of the ball. I know your point is that it doesn't matter what side they play on, both would help out the entire team. But this is a massive investment that absolutely will kill our cap if we mess it up. It would be nice to have some balance between the offense and defense.

I think one of the key reasons why our offense has been so bad is because of how young they are. They are going to get better with experience (not to mention if we ever get a decent QB). Our defense is not going to get better. They are going to get slower.

And while I'm okay with draft CJ, I do hate drafting a WR this high. If you look at the WRs drafted in the top 10 since 2000, we have:
2000
Peter Warrick - Out of league
Plaxico Burress - A malcontent on a playoff team
Travis Taylor - Backup for a bad team (Minnesota)
2001
David Terrell - Out of league
Koren Robinson - Suspension
2003
Charles Rogers - Out of league
Andre Johnson - Good player on a bad team
2004
Larry Fitzgerald - Good player on a bad team
Roy Williams - Good player on a bad team
Reggie Williams - Average player on an average team
2005
Braylon Edwards - Average player on a bad team
Troy Williamson - Average player on a bad team
Mike Williams - A backup on a bad team


Only one of these players is in the postseason this year...Burress. And he's probably going home this weekend.

In my opinion, WR just isn't a very important position. But the fans love them because they make big plays. I don't want to kill our cap for a WR that won't be able to do much without a QB that can get them the ball.


Check out the Balance on our Salary cap now..........the defense outweighs the offense heavily.

[Sailing2Smth]

If we have the crappy qbs we have and the lack of run game, will bringing in a wr really help us out? We have won plenty of games with a sorry offense, but the games where our D doesnt show up, we tend to lose. We are in a true re-building state and we have to start at the beginning and that beginning is on the D side of the ball.


AS I said before, if we draft D then thats fine by me. If we trade down then thats fine by me b/c as stated there is DT/DE talent out there that the Bucs can benefit from. Arguments are valid to draft CJ or any other slew of D talent. But still, all points considered, passing up on CJ would hurt. You can't deny that.

[Alpha Alpha 408]

People get stars in their eyes when they see some great offensive college star--you know what only about 50% ever amount to anything. Draft defense this year to add depth and strength to our defense.

What the...

And to think, this had turned into a pretty good debate and now...this.

If this isn't the most un-informed, un-insightful post today, I'll be amazed.

I don't think it's necessary to point this out but I will anyway:

You must be one helluva statistician to pull that 50% number out of your *** like that and even on the off chance that it is accurate, I don't suppose you see the contradiction in logic with it now, do ya?

Oh well...I guess there always has to be one of these in the crowd...

[Alpha Alpha 408]

:rolleyes:

No... no it hasn't. Colts fans get to February year in, year out with a sour taste in their mouths..... wondering where they went wrong. Why? Because offense doesn't win championships.


You say so kid.


Listen...there are no "locks" in the NFL. All you can do is give yourself a CHANCE to win it all. The Colts do that year in and year out. They have yet another chance this year.

Oh...and tell the St. Louis Rams that defense wins championships, sport.

[Alpha Alpha 408]

you know what if Johnson is the best guy in the draft, well he wont even be on the board when we pick.

Thank god you pointed that out. I guess it's common knowledge that the order in which players are drafted coincides with how good they are in relation to other players in the draft... :rolleyes:





2ndly we can trade down, pick up another 2nd rounder and still get a pretty good DT.

That's it! Why hasn't anyone thought of this! Call Allen immediately and make him aware of this! It takes 2 teams to trade sparky. Just because we want to doesn't mean it will or even can happen.


We got to to do what is best for the long term goals of the team. We drafted a wr in the first round 2 years ago--what were he stats this past year?


Thank god you're not in charge of determining "what is best for the long term goals of the team"

And using your logic, we shouldn't draft QB's any longer either. I mean, we did take Testaverde and Dilfer in the first round and they sucked. Come to think of it, Cadillac wasn't very good either last year, so no more RB's either.

:rolleyes:

[Alpha Alpha 408]

For him to keep drives alive, He has to get the ball thrown to him, not over his head or batted down at the LOS.

:rotf:

You've obviously never seen him play. He doesn't need the ball thrown anywhere near him to make the catch. His college career proved that.

His QB was Reggie-friggin-Ball for crying out loud! That guy couldn't hit water if he jumped out of a boat.

[Alpha Alpha 408]

Check out the Balance on our Salary cap now..........the defense outweighs the offense heavily.


Already tried that one.

They either don't want to believe it or just flat out ignore that fact because it doesn't support their argument.

[tampabayfan]

Thank god you're not in charge of determining "what is best for the long term goals of the team"

And using your logic, we shouldn't draft QB's any longer either. I mean, we did take Testaverde and Dilfer in the first round and they sucked. Come to think of it, Cadillac wasn't very good either last year, so no more RB's either.

:rolleyes:
Right now in the shape the team is in, we need defense. Geez its hard to understand, its not rocket science or anything. We have a young qgs, rb, and wr so why draft more when the defense so desparately needs young folks? I'm not talking about every draft go defense, but this one--yes we do. We can get some talent on the offense via FA, but teams normally build the defense from the draft.

[DeadEagle]

You say so kid.

Oh...and tell the St. Louis Rams that defense wins championships, sport.



The Rams?

You want me to tell that to the 1999 Rams #4 ranked defense? Also, what play clinched that Super Bowl victory? Wait.... wasn't it a goalline tackle made by a Ram defender on WR Kevin Dyson? Or was that the wrong Super Bowl?


Welcome to the big leagues, punk. You're playin' ball with the big cats now.... you gotta step up your game about 4 notches.

[BucJordan]

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCL/is_9_32/ai_99378821

Recent evidence may suggest that defense wins championships, but if you go a little further back, you find that this isn't really the case. The 1983 season provides a good starting point. That gives us 20 full years of data and also enables us to avoid the strike-shortened 1982 season and the era before the 1978 rules changes that opened up the passing game.

We'll define great offensive and defensive teams as those that finished first in the NFL in yards gained and allowed, respectively. In our time frame, five Super Bowl champions have ranked No. 1 in defense. In addition to Tampa Bay last season, the 1985 Chicago Bears, the 1992 Cowboys, the 1996 Green Bay Packers, and the 2000 Ravens won it all. Meanwhile, four top offensive teams won championships (the 1989 and 1994 49ers, the 1997 Broncos, and the 1999 Rams). The defense gets a slight edge here with one more team. [The chart on page 27 summarizes the results].

There have been plenty of very good offensive and defensive teams, however, that haven't led the NFL in yards gained and allowed. So now we will identify all of the Super Bowl winners that ranked in the top five.

This time, offense and defense come out even. A total of 12 Super Bowl winners have placed among the top five in offense or defense. Six teams were in the top five in both categories: the 1988 and 1989 Niners, the 1991 Washington Redskins, the 1992 Cowboys, the 1996 Packers, and the 1997 Broncos.

To expand on this, we will examine all of the conference champions, leaving us with 40 teams since 1983. This time, offense rules. Nine conference champs led the NFL in yards gained vs. five that were tops in yards allowed (the same five that won Super Bowls). As for teams in the top five, offense holds a 21-17 advantage. Seven teams were in the top five in both categories, including the six Super Bowl winners we already mentioned and the 2001 Rams. Those Rams were first in the, league in yards gained and third in yards allowed, which makes New England's victory over them in the Super Bowl appear all the more remarkable.


Wonders what a little researching can do...


...punk.

EDIT: Found another article to make the point and shut this guy up.

http://www.ffmastermind.com/2004/articles/bc072804.php

[UMiamiBucFan]

Check out the Balance on our Salary cap now..........the defense outweighs the offense heavily.
Not as much as people think. Take away Simeon and the offense would be outweigh the defense. Simms, Caddy, Galloway and Clayton all have decent sized contracts.

[SuperFly]

Wonders what a little researching can do...


...punk.

EDIT: Found another article to make the point and shut this guy up.

http://www.ffmastermind.com/2004/articles/bc072804.php

What if he doesn't? Are you going to google more research, since you can't think for yourself?

[alstottrocks40]

I think this thread is a more appropriate place for this post...

Defense is often what separates the good from the great. It's easier to build a good offense, but having a dominant defense is a rare asset. An amazing defense can compensate for a below average offense, but in our case, it's not enough. Our offense is terrible...it's beyond compensation. You need to upgrade that side of the ball too if you want to be competitive.

When you have an efficient offense that's mistake-free, having an upper-tier defense will make you very competitive, but believing that defense alone wins championships is wrong. The defense-offense thing is relative. The better your offense is, the less spectacular your defense has to be to win and vice versa. For every Ravens or Bears championship D, there's a Cowboys or 49ers championship O. They all had some semblance of offense or defense (whichever was their "lesser" side)--Ravens and Bears had premier runners and adequate passers, the Cowboys and 49ers had plenty of playmakers on D.

It's all relative. To win, you have to score more points than the other team. Unless your defense is ridiculous and scores 2 TDs a game, your offense has to produce that. And even if your offense can score 49 a game, if your defense can't hold the other team below that, you can't win. Those are definitely extremes, but it's almost a ratio thing...it can't be totally imbalanced. To say we're built on defense and should ignore building the offense until our defense is amazing again is begging for mediocrity.

[TeeBeeFan]

I think this thread is a more appropriate place for this post...

Very eloquently put.

I recently read an interview in the Miami Herald w/ Nick Saban. He made some solid points. (Whether he's a hypocrite or not is another question, but the guy knows football). He said that a championship team needs playmakers on both sides of the ball. On offense, you need a playmaker at QB and WR. You also need a good RB (but not necessarily a big playmaker). On defense, you need one playmaker in each area of defense. You need a defensive lineman that can put pressure on the QB and create plays (i.e. strip balls, bat balls, tackle the runner for losses, can drop back in coverage, etc.). You need a linebacker that can fill the running lanes, make big tackles, and cover recievers and TE's in the middle. Lastly, you need a player in the secondary that can create turnovers and shut down (or slow down) opposing teams go-to reciever. Once you assemble this talent, it's about coaching the rest to fit together as a team which allows your play makers to win the games for you.

Currently, I see the Bucs having a good RB and a playmaking CB. You know whom I speak of. The rest of the pieces are missing (Brooks is too old to be this playmaker for long). In my estimation, the 2007 Draft has the possibility of at least 3 players filling the missing pieces. Two QB's (Quinn and Russell) and one WR (CJ). Gaines Adams is a good DE, but I don't see him as the next Jason Taylor. Unfortunately, there isn't the LB there this year (perhaps some good players but not the playmaker). That leaves the offensive players listed. With a #3-4 pick we have a real chance at getting one of these needed players. Let's hope this is the last year for a while that were in this position, but while we are here let's try to get one of the playmaker that can return us to the Super Bowl.

[NOLASaint23]

You've obviously never seen him play. He doesn't need the ball thrown anywhere near him to make the catch. His college career proved that.

His QB was Reggie-friggin-Ball for crying out loud! That guy couldn't hit water if he jumped out of a boat.

Sorry, but the QB DOES matter, he can't just go out there and make 10-15 catches a game without a decent QB, If that were the case, Randy Moss wouldn't have had a problem with Aaron Brooks or Andrew Walter.

[BisonBacker]

Defense is often what separates the good from the great. It's easier to build a good offense, but having a dominant defense is a rare asset. An amazing defense can compensate for a below average offense, but in our case, it's not enough. Our offense is terrible...it's beyond compensation. You need to upgrade that side of the ball too if you want to be competitive.

When you have an efficient offense that's mistake-free, having an upper-tier defense will make you very competitive, but believing that defense alone wins championships is wrong. The defense-offense thing is relative. The better your offense is, the less spectacular your defense has to be to win and vice versa. For every Ravens or Bears championship D, there's a Cowboys or 49ers championship O. They all had some semblance of offense or defense (whichever was their "lesser" side)--Ravens and Bears had premier runners and adequate passers, the Cowboys and 49ers had plenty of playmakers on D.

It's all relative. To win, you have to score more points than the other team. Unless your defense is ridiculous and scores 2 TDs a game, your offense has to produce that. And even if your offense can score 49 a game, if your defense can't hold the other team below that, you can't win. Those are definitely extremes, but it's almost a ratio thing...it can't be totally imbalanced. To say we're built on defense and should ignore building the offense until our defense is amazing again is begging for mediocrity.

Good post. But the Bucs still should focus more on D than O for the up coming draft.

[Pantera Canes]

First...you're wrong. Barrett Ruud was our first pick as well.

Ahhhhh...so if a team doesn't win the Super Bowl, then it hasn't even worked out "well" or "ok" (the words that I used)? I think most rational people would disagree with that assesment.

I actually think we re-sign White and Rice being gone is NOT a forgone conclusion.

And Harrison and Wayne were 1st and 2nd rounders respectively (I believe)

So Ruud was picked before Carnel Williams? I mean both were 2005 draft right?

Yes, if a team doesn't win a super bowl its a failure. You can package a mild success in they do better than they did last year. You play to be the champion at the end of the year. You play to grab the most championships. If you have players not playing for that you should get rid of them now.

I believe Rice is gone unless he cuts his salary drastically and gets younger. His game is speed and athleticism which you lose that as you get older.

You proved his point that Harrison and Wayne were taking after Clayton, and much after the guy you want.

You say so kid.


Listen...there are no "locks" in the NFL. All you can do is give yourself a CHANCE to win it all. The Colts do that year in and year out. They have yet another chance this year.

Oh...and tell the St. Louis Rams that defense wins championships, sport.

I was already beaten on how the Rams had a balance team. You need a balance team to win it all. I believe the year after they won the superbowl their defense declined and thus they lost and never made it back despite having a great offense.


This defense has been falling apart ever since the superbowl. See the late game comebacks starting that following year to prove my point. The stars on that defense are becoming shadows of what they once were. Particularly Brooks and Rice.

I also believe this offense needs help. Though if the play of your young o-line improves which it should especially from the right side 2 rookies that would big. Carnel should be used mixed with Pittman and one other back who should be brought in most likely as a FA. Hopefully Clayton can turn it around and finally catch a ball. Stoval looks good and athletic.

If you are optimistic then you have to believe that the young o-tallent when come around with maybe a few FA pickups.

I am not sold on either side of the ball needing players more than the other because this year both sides sucked equaly bad. I do know we need more turnovers from the defense. That would help the offense a lot too.

Will have to wait until after I see who comes in as a free agent. Hopefully we bring in a good ROLB like June or Briggs. That would help a ton. Also hope we can bring in the CB from buffalo. I know our system puts more on the linebackers and d-line so I doubt we get him. Though all are young players coming off of Rookie contracts and I think all are pro bowl players.

Really, the only position I can't justify that early is a WR. Maybe even RB I couldn't justify either, though Adrian Peterson would be nice to have. I think more pressing needs right now is everything on defense (and I mean everything) , a QB, and a franchise LT.

Why can't I justify a WR? We have a few young ones right now.

Seems like every year there is some great WR we need to get in the draft. I know I was on the Mike Williams band waggon a couple years ago. At this point I really wished we got any of those linebackers instead.

If these feels a little incoherent and jumpy its because thats how I am on this draft right now. Especially seeing we need everything. Looking at it logically you have to hope all these offense young players amount to something and thus we really desperatly need defense.

I will just have to wait to see free agiency and what players are actually in the draft before I make up who we should go after.

[DeadEagle]

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCL/is_9_32/ai_99378821

Recent evidence may suggest that defense wins championships, but if you go a little further back, you find that this isn't really the case. The 1983 season provides a good starting point. That gives us 20 full years of data and also enables us to avoid the strike-shortened 1982 season and the era before the 1978 rules changes that opened up the passing game.

We'll define great offensive and defensive teams as those that finished first in the NFL in yards gained and allowed, respectively. In our time frame, five Super Bowl champions have ranked No. 1 in defense. In addition to Tampa Bay last season, the 1985 Chicago Bears, the 1992 Cowboys, the 1996 Green Bay Packers, and the 2000 Ravens won it all. Meanwhile, four top offensive teams won championships (the 1989 and 1994 49ers, the 1997 Broncos, and the 1999 Rams). The defense gets a slight edge here with one more team. [The chart on page 27 summarizes the results].

There have been plenty of very good offensive and defensive teams, however, that haven't led the NFL in yards gained and allowed. So now we will identify all of the Super Bowl winners that ranked in the top five.

This time, offense and defense come out even. A total of 12 Super Bowl winners have placed among the top five in offense or defense. Six teams were in the top five in both categories: the 1988 and 1989 Niners, the 1991 Washington Redskins, the 1992 Cowboys, the 1996 Packers, and the 1997 Broncos.

To expand on this, we will examine all of the conference champions, leaving us with 40 teams since 1983. This time, offense rules. Nine conference champs led the NFL in yards gained vs. five that were tops in yards allowed (the same five that won Super Bowls). As for teams in the top five, offense holds a 21-17 advantage. Seven teams were in the top five in both categories, including the six Super Bowl winners we already mentioned and the 2001 Rams. Those Rams were first in the, league in yards gained and third in yards allowed, which makes New England's victory over them in the Super Bowl appear all the more remarkable.


Wonders what a little researching can do...


...punk.

EDIT: Found another article to make the point and shut this guy up.

http://www.ffmastermind.com/2004/articles/bc072804.php


Your research is flawed. You do need upper echelon defense to claim Super Bowls in this league...... no matter which Stanford graduate with too much time on his hands you find to distort the statistics.

-------------------------------
2005 - Steelers - #3
2004 - Patriots - #2
2003 - Patriots - #1
2002 - Buccaneers - #1
2001 - Patriots - #6
2000 - Ravens - #1
1999 - Rams - #4
1998 - Broncos - #8
1997 - Broncos - #7
1996 - Packers - #1
1995 - Cowboys - #3
1994 - 49ers - #6
1993 - Cowboys - #2
1992 - Cowboys - #5
1991 - Redskins - #2
1990 - Giants - #1
1989 - 49ers - #3
1988 - 49ers - #8
1987 - Redskins - #6
1986 - Giants - #2
1985 - Bears - #1
1984 - 49ers - #1
-----------------------------

........CRIMONY!!!

Those there are the defensive ranks of the last 22 Super Bowl winners.

Top Ranked - 7
Top 3 - 14
Top 6 - 19

None ranked lower than #8. Of the last 6 Super Bowl winners, 4 of them had offenses ranked in double digits and 5 ranked in the top 3 defensively. So you tell me. If you have a team that protects the ball, runs well, and is ranked in the top 6 defensively.... chances are you have a great shot at winning the Lombardi Trophy.



I'll go ahead and use this information right now. Apply it to 2006.

Because of their defensive ranks, there's an 86% chance I can eliminate the Chiefs (#11), Saints (#13), Eagles (#15), Seahawks (#19), Cowboys (#20), Colts (#23) and Giants (#24) from the playoffs now. That leaves the Ravens (#1), Patriots (#2), Bears (#3), Jets (#6) and Chargers (#7).



When I say champions are built on defense, I didn't just pull that out of my *** and use to make my case. Defense and running backs are what makes champions tick in this league.

[Galloway#1]

We are a 4-12 team with 4-12 talent...on BOTH sides of the ball.[/QUOTE]

WE DONT HAVE 4-12 TALENT, WE HAVE ABOUT 9-7 TALENT.
(Derrick brooks, ronde barber, cadillac, mike alstott, buchanon, joey galloway)









Its the coaching

[DeadEagle]

Another interesting point.

Why waste a first round pick on a WR whos most important task will be to shift 4 time before the snap, then go back to the huddle after the penalty is announced.

I'm sure a 4th round WR can do that just fine.... thank you very much!

[BisonBacker]

Another interesting point.

Why waste a first round pick on a WR whos most important task will be to shift 4 time before the snap, then go back to the huddle after the penalty is announced.

I'm sure a 4th round WR can do that just fine.... thank you very much!

Seriously, why on earth does Carnell EVER line up at WR, he never runs a pass route from there, he always shifts back to the back field. We need to revamp the offense.

[DeadEagle]

Carnell Williams.... Field Inspector.

[tampabayfan]

Your research is flawed. You do need upper echelon defense to claim Super Bowls in this league...... no matter which Stanford graduate with too much time on his hands you find to distort the statistics.

-------------------------------
2005 - Steelers - #3
2004 - Patriots - #2
2003 - Patriots - #1
2002 - Buccaneers - #1
2001 - Patriots - #6
2000 - Ravens - #1
1999 - Rams - #4
1998 - Broncos - #8
1997 - Broncos - #7
1996 - Packers - #1
1995 - Cowboys - #3
1994 - 49ers - #6
1993 - Cowboys - #2
1992 - Cowboys - #5
1991 - Redskins - #2
1990 - Giants - #1
1989 - 49ers - #3
1988 - 49ers - #8
1987 - Redskins - #6
1986 - Giants - #2
1985 - Bears - #1
1984 - 49ers - #1
-----------------------------

........CRIMONY!!!

Those there are the defensive ranks of the last 22 Super Bowl winners.

Top Ranked - 7
Top 3 - 14
Top 6 - 19

None ranked lower than #8. Of the last 6 Super Bowl winners, 4 of them had offenses ranked in double digits and 5 ranked in the top 3 defensively. So you tell me. If you have a team that protects the ball, runs well, and is ranked in the top 6 defensively.... chances are you have a great shot at winning the Lombardi Trophy.



I'll go ahead and use this information right now. Apply it to 2006.

Because of their defensive ranks, there's an 86% chance I can eliminate the Chiefs (#11), Saints (#13), Eagles (#15), Seahawks (#19), Cowboys (#20), Colts (#23) and Giants (#24) from the playoffs now. That leaves the Ravens (#1), Patriots (#2), Bears (#3), Jets (#6) and Chargers (#7).



When I say champions are built on defense, I didn't just pull that out of my *** and use to make my case. Defense and running backs are what makes champions tick in this league.
I bow down to your greatness. Wonder if they will pay attention to facts. :confused:

[DeadEagle]

I'll keep it bumped anyhow.

I expect a cut and run.

[SuperFly]

DE- You can also add the 1972 Dolphins' No-Name defense. Only team in NFL history to have a perfect season.

[I'm an 0-26 Survivor]

I like Thomas, Calvin Johnson, and Gaines...










With that being said, I'm looking at us having serviceable people on the offensive line. A guy can be a Paul Gruber or a Kenyatta Walker. You never know.

I like Johnson, but with some of the young wide receivers we have now on board, I don't see a problem in the the future if we don't get him. Would he be grand? Sure, maybe......but I remember what they used to say about Mike Williams 2 years ago, before the draft.


Same things they say now about Johnson.

Both positions would be BPA, and just improve what we have, not what we need.

Rice is being overpaid. And he's not the dominant force he once was. One game, yes. One season, hardly.
Greg Spires will probably be released or retire. I don't think he's here next seaso.

White is probably leaving, unless he gets offered a boatload of cash. That would be foolish. (To overpay, though he deserves a raise).

If, we lose any 2 of the above, or, God forbid, all 3, then the position of defensive end becomes a position of need, and then we would need....






















Gaines Adams.






Defense, wins championships.............

[DeadEagle]

I would do all 40 SB's, but with the Steeler, Vike, Cowboy and Dolphin teams in the 1970's...... I'd only embarass these fools more.

I go gingerly at first.

[NevadaBucFan]

Your research is flawed. You do need upper echelon defense to claim Super Bowls in this league...... no matter which Stanford graduate with too much time on his hands you find to distort the statistics.

-------------------------------
2005 - Steelers - #3
2004 - Patriots - #2
2003 - Patriots - #1
2002 - Buccaneers - #1
2001 - Patriots - #6
2000 - Ravens - #1
1999 - Rams - #4
1998 - Broncos - #8
1997 - Broncos - #7
1996 - Packers - #1
1995 - Cowboys - #3
1994 - 49ers - #6
1993 - Cowboys - #2
1992 - Cowboys - #5
1991 - Redskins - #2
1990 - Giants - #1
1989 - 49ers - #3
1988 - 49ers - #8
1987 - Redskins - #6
1986 - Giants - #2
1985 - Bears - #1
1984 - 49ers - #1
-----------------------------

........CRIMONY!!!

Those there are the defensive ranks of the last 22 Super Bowl winners.

Top Ranked - 7
Top 3 - 14
Top 6 - 19

None ranked lower than #8. Of the last 6 Super Bowl winners, 4 of them had offenses ranked in double digits and 5 ranked in the top 3 defensively. So you tell me. If you have a team that protects the ball, runs well, and is ranked in the top 6 defensively.... chances are you have a great shot at winning the Lombardi Trophy.



I'll go ahead and use this information right now. Apply it to 2006.

Because of their defensive ranks, there's an 86% chance I can eliminate the Chiefs (#11), Saints (#13), Eagles (#15), Seahawks (#19), Cowboys (#20), Colts (#23) and Giants (#24) from the playoffs now. That leaves the Ravens (#1), Patriots (#2), Bears (#3), Jets (#6) and Chargers (#7).



When I say champions are built on defense, I didn't just pull that out of my *** and use to make my case. Defense and running backs are what makes champions tick in this league.



Good stuff, kudos

[Pantera Canes]

I like Thomas, Johnson, and Gaines...

With that being said, I'm looking at us having serviceable people on the offensive line. A guy can be a Paul Gruber or a Kenyatta Walker. You never know.

I like Johnson, but with some of the young wide receivers we have now on board, I don't see a problem in the the future if we don't get him. Would he be grand? Sure, maybe......but I remember what they used to say about Mike Williams last year before the draft.

Same things they say now about Johnson.

Both positions would be BPA, and just improve what we have, not what we need.

Rice is being overpaid. And he's not the dominant force he once was. One game, yes. One season, hardly.
Greg Spires will probably be released or retire. I don't think he's here next seaso.

White is probably leaving, unless he gets offered a boatload of cash. That would be foolish. (To overpay, though he deserves a raise).

If, we lose any 2 of the above, or, God forbid, all 3, then the position of defensive end becomes a position of need, and then we would need....

Gaines Adams.

Defense, wins championships.

Mike Williams was two drafts ago, same draft as Carnell. ;)

Hopefully we get a trade with Rice where we can get a 3rd. I'm pretty sure they shopped him around for a 1st or 2nd before trade deadline same time they got IR McFarland. Would be nice if we could get another 2nd but I won't hold my breath.

White is decent. Also Freeney might be available though that will be major dollars for him. If Freeney is a FA it only helps because less demand for White. Hopefully can resign him to a decent contract soon though. Wait, is he a UFA or RFA?

[KiffininCanton]

If we draft Calvin Johnson (and we should, as he is the best player out there), can you honestly tell me he won't help the defense? He might not be sacking the quarterback, but if he's keeping drives alive, that means he'll be letting the defense rest.

How is Calvin Johnson going to get on the field if our D can't get the other teams O off the field. And it is long drives of pounding the rock that controls the clock and keeps your D on the sidelines, not the passing game This is the first time I EVER heard of a WR helping a team control the clock.

[I'm an 0-26 Survivor]

Mike Williams was two drafts ago, same draft as Carnell. ;)

Wow....you're right.
But then, that makes the issue even more relevant, wouldn't you think? He was the next Superman receiver and has been relatively Clark Kent-ish for 2 years.

[FLA-ORGator666]

Wow....you're right.
But then, that makes the issue even more relevant, wouldn't you think? He was the next Superman receiver and has been relatively Clark Kent-ish for 2 years.
He's been more Jimmy Olsen than even Clark Kent for good ole Mike.

[maryjanewatson]

How is Calvin Johnson going to get on the field if our D can't get the other teams O off the field. And it is long drives of pounding the rock that controls the clock and keeps your D on the sidelines, not the passing game This is the first time I EVER heard of a WR helping a team control the clock.

So, the term "possession" receiver is new to you? What do you think that means, exactly? Demons and Priests?

[I'm an 0-26 Survivor]

So, the term "possession" receiver is new to you? What do you think that means, exactly? Demons and Priests?
I dunno. For me it means Maurice Stovall.

[KiffininCanton]

So, the term "possession" receiver is new to you? What do you think that means, exactly? Demons and Priests?

I think you are missing the point, yes possession WR move the chains sometimes, but if you want to control the clock you do it with your run game, not the passing game, your argument that a WR is going to make a big differance with our D because he will get some first downs for us is just arguing in circles, Hillard moves the chains for us on 3rd down, does that mean he is great for our D?

[KiffininCanton]

I dunno. For me it means Maurice Stovall.

That is another point, Stovall is going to be are possession WR, Johnson, if we got him, would be our big play maker.

[KiffininCanton]

I would say also, while controling the clock helps your D, ultimately you have to have good defensive players for your defense to be good enough to win a Super Bowl.

[maryjanewatson]

I think you are missing the point, yes possession WR move the chains sometimes, but if you want to control the clock you do it with your run game, not the passing game, your argument that a WR is going to make a big differance with our D because he will get some first downs for us is just arguing in circles, Hillard moves the chains for us on 3rd down, does that mean he is great for our D?

Are you comparing Ike Hilliard to Calvin Johnson?

Let me put this as simply as I can:

A + B = C

A - Calvin Johnson is a good offensive player.
B - Good offensive players keep the offense on the field. If the offense is on the field, the defense is off the field.

Okay, ready for the punchline?

C - Calvin Johnson will keep the defense off the field.

That's the long and short of the point I was making. We could have the '85 Bears defense, and if our offense is on the field for 17 minutes a game, the other team is going to score points and we will lose.

Conversely, we could have the 99 Rams offense, and if the defense can't get off the field, then our offense won't be on the field to score points and we will lose.

It's not that complicated.

[KiffininCanton]

Are you comparing Ike Hilliard to Calvin Johnson?


I'm saying possession WR are way down on the list of whats important to a D. The rankings of whats important to a D goes like this

1. the D-line
2. LB
3. CB
4. S
5. O-line
6. RB
7. Special Teams
8. possession WR

[maryjanewatson]

I'm saying possession WR are way down on the list of whats important to a D. The rankings of whats important to a D goes like this

1. the D-line
2. LB
3. CB
4. S
5. O-line
6. RB
7. Special Teams
8. possession WR

You're doing such a masterful job of missing the point I'm wondering if you're fishing.

The point is not "Calvin Johnson is the best way to fix the D."

The point is "Calvin Johnson is the best way to fix the team." Do you know why? Because ever single part of the team is broken, and he's the best player in the draft. The point is, there are a lot of people saying "we have to draft offense" or "we have to draft defense," AND THAT"S SILLY. If you commit to drafting a position or a side of the ball you're not going to necessarily get the value from your picks you need to fix a team as TERRIBLE as ours. The only reason I want CJ is because HE'S THE BEST PLAYER IN THE DRAFT. If Gaines Adams was the best player in the draft, I'd want him! The people who say "OMG we have to draft all defense" or vice versa are missing the forrest for the trees! We're terrible on both sides of the ball! We don't need offense or defense, we need football players, and CJ is the best one!

[KiffininCanton]

"Calvin Johnson is the best way to fix the team."

And thats where your wrong. Defense and the o-line wins championships, and Calvin Johnson does little to help either.

[TeeBeeFan]

HE'S THE BEST PLAYER IN THE DRAFT.

First, he's only potentially in the 2007 Draft. He still has to declare. From what I've heard, it's 50:50 that he enters.

Second, even if he enters, the jury is still out on that one. Nolo res ipsa loquitur. Some scouts have Thomas and Quinn rated higher.

I know your high on CJ, and I think he's great too. He would be the best WR in the draft (for sure), but I'm not sold that he is the best in the draft. If you want him in a Bucs uniform, like I know you do, then you'd better hope that Oakland, Detroit and potentially Cleveland disagree with you. Otherwise, CJ will most likely not be in Tampa come next season.

[DeadEagle]

Are you comparing Ike Hilliard to Calvin Johnson?

Let me put this as simply as I can:

A + B = C

A - Calvin Johnson is a good offensive player.
B - Good offensive players keep the offense on the field. If the offense is on the field, the defense is off the field.

Okay, ready for the punchline?

C - Calvin Johnson will keep the defense off the field.

That's the long and short of the point I was making. We could have the '85 Bears defense, and if our offense is on the field for 17 minutes a game, the other team is going to score points and we will lose.

Conversely, we could have the 99 Rams offense, and if the defense can't get off the field, then our offense won't be on the field to score points and we will lose.

It's not that complicated.



How does a quick strike, deep threat WR help our offense dominate time of possession..... keeping our crappy defense off the field so they don't get scored on?

[Pantera Canes]

Wow....you're right.
But then, that makes the issue even more relevant, wouldn't you think? He was the next Superman receiver and has been relatively Clark Kent-ish for 2 years.


Yes unfortunitly. He was that super star reciever I wanted that year instead of Carnel. :( Guss the Derrick Johnson crowd is winning that debate so far.

His first year he came in out of shape and just didn't put any effort into it.

This year supposedly he had worked his butt off but they didn't want to play him. Not sure if it is he was a complete bust or just doesn't fit Martz's system. Either way he will probably be released soon so we can really see at that point.

[bucsfan12687]

Thought this needed a bump.

[HighOnMtZion]

Yes unfortunitly. He was that super star reciever I wanted that year instead of Carnel. :( Guss the Derrick Johnson crowd is winning that debate so far.

His first year he came in out of shape and just didn't put any effort into it.

This year supposedly he had worked his butt off but they didn't want to play him. Not sure if it is he was a complete bust or just doesn't fit Martz's system. Either way he will probably be released soon so we can really see at that point.


He sat out one year of college ball before his rookie season.......i dont care who you are youre coming in off your game. and as for not fitting mike martz system thats the exact reason he didnt do much this year........martz is a control freak that wants WR's no more than 220 that are quick and can get down the field........he just doesnt fit the system.

[CPT_FEAR]

I guess what I'm saying is....

BUMP!

[CPT_FEAR]

I'm saying possession WR are way down on the list of whats important to a D. The rankings of whats important to a D goes like this

1. the D-line
2. LB
3. CB
4. S
5. O-line
6. RB
7. Special Teams
8. possession WR


CJ a possession receiver???

[maryjanewatson]

I'm glad this was bumped.

He's in the draft.
He's #1 on every single reputable draft board I've seen.
And how the logic of "Offense that can move the ball helps the defense too" escapes some people, I do not know. It doesn't matter if he's a possession receiver, a deep threat, or whatever. He's a guy who will help stop the 1:12 3 and out possessions of this past year.

[dawgland]

CJ a possession receiver???
well he's not a burner, so yeah, he's a possession WR

[OverseasBucFan]

Anyone that reduces the amount of three and outs our pathetic offense has must, by default, help our defense. I don't care if it's a 5 yard possession receiver catch or a 40 yard burner receiver catch, it's still a first down. I think the main point that must be made is that adding a player, with the potential CJ has, will open up running lanes and help spread out opposing defenses. If Cadillac gets going then and only then will the defense get the kind of rest they will need to return to dominance next year.

All that being said I think our defense is 2 years and many free agent/draft picks away from being remotely similar to what it previously was.

[Selmon Rules]

The Rams?

You want me to tell that to the 1999 Rams #4 ranked defense? Also, what play clinched that Super Bowl victory? Wait.... wasn't it a goalline tackle made by a Ram defender on WR Kevin Dyson? Or was that the wrong Super Bowl?


Welcome to the big leagues, punk. You're playin' ball with the big cats now.... you gotta step up your game about 4 notches.

Thought I would throw my 2 cents in here. The Rams defense that year was not good because of the talent they had, it was because the offense put up points fast and made the other team one-dimensional and easier to defend.

What happened to that same defense when the offense didn't produce at that same level the next year???? Just askin....

Hard to believe it but I really do love watching a good defense play the game, just not 40 minutes of it per game. Good offense helps the defense play at a higher level by keeping them off the field and well rested.

[maryjanewatson]

Thought I would throw my 2 cents in here. The Rams defense that year was not good because of the talent they had, it was because the offense put up points fast and made the other team one-dimensional and easier to defend.

What happened to that same defense when the offense didn't produce at that same level the next year???? Just askin....

Hard to believe it but I really do love watching a good defense play the game, just not 40 minutes of it per game. Good offense helps the defense play at a higher level by keeping them off the field and well rested.

Not to mention, it's a lot easier for a defense to prevent scores when the offense at least gets enough yardage that the other team doesn't start up by midfield half the time.

[Alpha Alpha 408]

well he's not a burner, so yeah, he's a possession WR

Glad this was bumped. In hindsight, there were some really good points made (both pro and con).

Everyone is going to have their opinion but C. Johnson is HARDLY a typical "possession" WR. He is a "burner". He'll run a 4.4 at the combine (or his pro-day). Is he running a 4.3? No. The guy is 2 scoops of fast and to compare him to an "Ike Hilliard" type is just incorrect.

There are a lot of good ways to go with the #3 or 4 pick. Again...we are a 4-12 team with 4-12 talent. We need a LOT of help. Across the board.

[dawgland]

Glad this was bumped. In hindsight, there were some really good points made (both pro and con).

Everyone is going to have their opinion but C. Johnson is HARDLY a typical "possession" WR. He is a "burner". He'll run a 4.4 at the combine (or his pro-day). Is he running a 4.3? No. The guy is 2 scoops of fast and to compare him to an "Ike Hilliard" type is just incorrect.

There are a lot of good ways to go with the #3 or 4 pick. Again...we are a 4-12 team with 4-12 talent. We need a LOT of help. Across the board.
i'd imagine johnson would run around a 4.47+ if he ran at the combine, but i highly doubt he does run

calvin is a possession WR, just not quite a typical one, he's a WR that will work on a DB short all day, then hit him with a homerun ball when the DB is expecting another short

[Alpha Alpha 408]

i'd imagine johnson would run around a 4.47+ if he ran at the combine, but i highly doubt he does run

calvin is a possession WR, just not quite a typical one, he's a WR that will work on a DB short all day, then hit him with a homerun ball when the DB is expecting another short

I can only assume that you've never seen him play. I've watched him smoke coverage for 3 years. I have NEVER seen him get caught from behind.

Look at what scouts have to say about him and link me to a reputable source that questions his speed.

I doubt you'll find one that says his speed is "pedestrian" (or words to that effect).

[maryjanewatson]

If he were 6'1 instead of 6'5, he'd be considered a burner. I think most people see him at 6'5 230 and can't comprehend that he's actually as fast as almost any receiver in the league right now - but he is.

He reminds me of Larry Fitzgerald. A bigger, stronger, more explosive Larry Fitzgerald...So, I guess if you consider him a possession receiver...

[Crash22384]

He still reminds me of the Randy Moss that used to show up everyweek.

[DeadEagle]

Thought I would throw my 2 cents in here. The Rams defense that year was not good because of the talent they had, it was because the offense put up points fast and made the other team one-dimensional and easier to defend.

What happened to that same defense when the offense didn't produce at that same level the next year???? Just askin....

Hard to believe it but I really do love watching a good defense play the game, just not 40 minutes of it per game. Good offense helps the defense play at a higher level by keeping them off the field and well rested.


You're about to bring up another point anout our defense in '06. Were they tired right out of the gate in the first quarter? Look at the very first drive in the very first game in September. What was it? About 9 minutes plus, 80 yards and a TD? That happenned alot. It also happenned alot that if we scored first, and we needed a stop on the next defensive possiesion, a team would march right back down the field and score.

And I don't need to get into how panicky Gruden gets when he's down in a ballgame. He starts throwing it around and completely abandonning the run. If the defense would have been making stops (like '05) I'm almost sure we'd have had more comitment to the run.


Some people just don't get it.

[CADILLAC!!!05]

This has been a very good discussion. I want to just add that CJ or Gaines Adams should be our first pick this year. I would perfer CJ just because i see him coming and immediately starting for us. Gaines Adams isn't the next Julius Peppers so I wouldn't pick him over CJ.

The discussion has been about defense and build the defense why didn't we at least get our young guys more experience this year when the season was over. I know we had a CB that could have benefited....Ruud played ok most of the year. We have young talent on defense we just don't play them....we need a CB, DL, and LB! If everything works out we could possibly fill our LB spot with Lance Briggs....keep White and let him start on the D-Line and continue to let our other D-lineman improve like Bradley, and Wyms! All we would really need then is a CB or a ball-hawk Safety because our secondary sucked this past year except for Barber.

Overall, CJ is projected to be the Best player coming out this draft and I think we shouldn't be foolish and pass on someone of this caliber if he's there. Either way I think we're in a good spot to bring in someone that's going to help....we can always pick up Adams and find a decent WR the only thing with that is I haven't seen improvement or developement in our present young talent recievers so maybe we need a better WR coach someone who knows how to develope raw talent because we have talent.

[dawgland]

I can only assume that you've never seen him play. I've watched him smoke coverage for 3 years. I have NEVER seen him get caught from behind.

Look at what scouts have to say about him and link me to a reputable source that questions his speed.

I doubt you'll find one that says his speed is "pedestrian" (or words to that effect).
i'm telling you, if calvin johnson doesn't run at the combine its because he's not as fast as he claims

if he does run, he'll prove my point

and yes, i've seen him play quite a few times, but thanks for asking

[Alpha Alpha 408]

yes, i've seen him play quite a few times, but thanks for asking



See...here's the thing...if you had, you wouldn't lay your yam-sack out there and make such an un-informed statement (we'll ignore my un-informed statements for the time being...I expect more from you people).

I'll say it one more time and then I'm through with you:


Show me one reputable scouting report on Johnson, that describes his speed as pedestrian or "average" in some way. If you really, REALLY want to go down this road, I can link you to 2 or 3 SOLID scouting services that say nothing of the sort.

This guy has ALL of the measureables that teams look for and the "intangibles" as well (work ethic, etc). If you want to argue that we don't need to take a WR with our first pick, that's one thing but Johnson is a once-in-a-decade talent at WR.

[dawgland]

See...here's the thing...if you had, you wouldn't lay your yam-sack out there and make such an un-informed statement (we'll ignore my un-informed statements for the time being...I expect more from you people).

I'll say it one more time and then I'm through with you:


Show me one reputable scouting report on Johnson, that describes his speed as pedestrian or "average" in some way. If you really, REALLY want to go down this road, I can link you to 2 or 3 SOLID scouting services that say nothing of the sort.

This guy has ALL of the measureables that teams look for and the "intangibles" as well (work ethic, etc). If you want to argue that we don't need to take a WR with our first pick, that's one thing but Johnson is a once-in-a-decade talent at WR.
sorry to point this out, but larry fitzgerald was a better prospect than calvin johnson is, so unless you want to start the decade the year after fitz was drafted, then he's not this "once in a decade" WR

not once did i say his speed was pedestrian, but by no means will he run anything in the 4.3 range, and i'd expect him to run in the 4.5-4.7 range, which is still fast for a guy that size

you watched him play in a run and gun offense, he's not going to be able to run past defenders in the NFL, he may get a deep ball or 2 every two games, but he's not going to be a guy who just runs past people, he's going to be a guy who beats you from the 10 - 15 yard range, and maybe once or twice he'll get a shot to get behind a safety and get a deep ball

I've watched Calvin play for tech, i watched fitz play at pitt, mirror images

larry doesn't run deep routes in the NFL, but he sure as hell did it a lot at pitt., as did johnson at Tech

however he's not going to be the type of WR in the NFL that he was in college, if you knew anything about college to pro translations, you'd know that

Andre Johnson is a rare athlete, he's a big guy who can run in the 4.3s, calvin isn't as good of an athlete as andre, and even andre doesn't play as a burner style WR in the NFL, and he's more geared towards that style.

Calvin will be a possession WR in the NFL

[Alpha Alpha 408]

sorry to point this out, but larry fitzgerald was a better prospect than calvin johnson is, so unless you want to start the decade the year after fitz was drafted, then he's not this "once in a decade" WR

not once did i say his speed was pedestrian, but by no means will he run anything in the 4.3 range, and i'd expect him to run in the 4.5-4.7 range, which is still fast for a guy that size

you watched him play in a run and gun offense, he's not going to be able to run past defenders in the NFL, he may get a deep ball or 2 every two games, but he's not going to be a guy who just runs past people, he's going to be a guy who beats you from the 10 - 15 yard range, and maybe once or twice he'll get a shot to get behind a safety and get a deep ball

I've watched Calvin play for tech, i watched fitz play at pitt, mirror images

larry doesn't run deep routes in the NFL, but he sure as hell did it a lot at pitt., as did johnson at Tech

however he's not going to be the type of WR in the NFL that he was in college, if you knew anything about college to pro translations, you'd know that

Andre Johnson is a rare athlete, he's a big guy who can run in the 4.3s, calvin isn't as good of an athlete as andre, and even andre doesn't play as a burner style WR in the NFL, and he's more geared towards that style.

Calvin will be a possession WR in the NFL


Friend...you are so mis-informed, it is laughable.

I'll leave you with one. Frankly, you were so incorrect, I didn't bother reading further because you had lost all credibility by that point:

At no time in the past 3 years has GA Tech run a "run and shoot", "fun and gun" or any other type of similar offense. Under Gailey (yes...the former Dallas Cowboy's head coach) they have run a conventional, vanilla, pro-style offense.

Just admit you're wrong about this and we can all get along with our day.

[dawgland]

Friend...you are so mis-informed, it is laughable.

I'll leave you with one. Frankly, you were so incorrect, I didn't bother reading further because you had lost all credibility by that point:

At no time in the past 3 years has GA Tech run a "run and shoot", "fun and gun" or any other type of similar offense. Under Gailey (yes...the former Dallas Cowboy's head coach) they have run a conventional, vanilla, pro-style offense.

Just admit you're wrong about this and we can all get along with our day.
what the hell kind of offense do you think they run?

reggie ball isn't exactly good QB material, pro style offense is way out of the question

if they don't run the run and gun, what would you call it

considering reggie ball has 304 passes to tashard choices 297 carries, that is balanced, however ball has 122 rushes as well, and keep in mind that sacks count towards rushing attempts in college football. so 426 times ball dropped back and either passed, ran, or was sacked

when you're offense drops back over a 100 times more to pass than hand off, you're considering a pass first offense, and its usually deep passing since reggie ball isn't exactly what you'd call an accurate QB but he throws a pretty good deep ball. there was a reason calvin was feast or famine this year, when you put a possession WR in an air it out offense, you're going to see huge numbers, and numbers like 2 catches for 13 yards

i will never say reggie ball ran a pro-style offense, because thats not what they ran

[Alpha Alpha 408]

what the hell kind of offense do you think they run?

reggie ball isn't exactly good QB material, pro style offense is way out of the question

if they don't run the run and gun, what would you call it

considering reggie ball has 304 passes to tashard choices 297 carries, that is balanced, however ball has 122 rushes as well, and keep in mind that sacks count towards rushing attempts in college football. so 426 times ball dropped back and either passed, ran, or was sacked

when you're offense drops back over a 100 times more to pass than hand off, you're considering a pass first offense, and its usually deep passing since reggie ball isn't exactly what you'd call an accurate QB but he throws a pretty good deep ball. there was a reason calvin was feast or famine this year, when you put a possession WR in an air it out offense, you're going to see huge numbers, and numbers like 2 catches for 13 yards

i will never say reggie ball ran a pro-style offense, because thats not what they ran


:smirk:

So then I was correct when I said that you have never actually seen them play.

*sigh*

Kid...you're out of your depth here. You don't know what in the hell you are talking about and you've taken 4 or 5 posts to prove it. Furthermore, you're not bright enough to know what you don't know. Now...please step aside and let the other, more knowledgeable posters continue.

And thanks for playing!

[NoAlibi]

What? Our defense took us to the Superbowl and won it big time. It has been our defense that has held us up over the last 10 years. The smartest thing this team can do it re-build the defense. I dont care what big name offense players we bring in, it will continue to be mediocre. If we can build back our D to its former standards, we once again can go back to winning.

People get stars in their eyes when they see some great offensive college star--you know what only about 50% ever amount to anything. Draft defense this year to add depth and strength to our defense.


for every offensive player that was a bust, you can name one on the other side....Broderick Thomas? Eric Curry? MArcus Jones? Booger McFarland?

[dawgland]

:smirk:

So then I was correct when I said that you have never actually seen them play.

*sigh*

Kid...you're out of your depth here. You don't know what in the hell you are talking about and you've taken 4 or 5 posts to prove it. Furthermore, you're not bright enough to know what you don't know. Now...please step aside and let the other, more knowledgeable posters continue.

And thanks for playing!
no sunshine, you weren't, i've seen calvin johnson play quite a few times, apparently reading isn't your strong point

reggie ball can't run a real offense, so even if there may be a hint of pro style, the offense is still a pass heavy offense that hardly would be considered anything other than a run and gun offense

this offense relies on simple routes and simple reads for the QB, very basic stuff. like if you've actually watched ga tech play, which i'm not sure you actually have, you'd see what i'm talking about

so put your smirks in and try and say what you want, fact is you can't deny its a pass heavy offense, and you can't say the routes were complex and the reads where hard. when the balance between pass+qb keeps is 100 more touches than the rushing touches, that is not balance. I've seen tech play quite a few times, and am very confident in saying this.

but thanks for playing, so think you know what you're talking about, but everything you say, is far from the truth

[Alpha Alpha 408]

no sunshine, you weren't, i've seen calvin johnson play quite a few times, apparently reading isn't your strong point Reading comprehension is pretty good. We'll take this post for example...

reggie ball can't run a real offense, so even if there may be a hint of pro style, the offense is still a pass heavy offense that hardly would be considered anything other than a run and gun offense I'm not posting the link for you but I'm sure you can access ESPN.com. Chew on these numbers:

Passing attempts (team): 369
Rushing attempts (team): 526

Uh oh.

this offense relies on simple routes and simple reads for the QB, very basic stuff. like if you've actually watched ga tech play, which i'm not sure you actually have, you'd see what i'm talking aboutAgreed. I said as much in a prior post when I mentioned that they run a very "vanilla" pro-style offense.

so put your smirks in and try and say what you want, fact is you can't deny its a pass heavy offense Don't have to. The numbers back me up. , and you can't say the routes were complex and the reads where hardNever did. That's ok though, your reading comprehension skills aren't up to snuff. It's never too late to get help kid. Stay in school. . when the balance between pass+qb keeps is 100 more touches than the rushing touches, that is not balance. I've seen tech play quite a few times, and am very confident in saying this.

Let's (for arguments sake) say that ALL of Reggie's 122 carries were designed pass plays; they weren't, they ran a lot of QB draws and the like but let's say they are. That gives you...491 passing plays to...404 running plays. That's fairly balanced I'd say...

but thanks for playing, so think you know what you're talking about, but everything you say, is far from the truth

I'm not at all certain that you know what a "run and shoot" style offense is but they ran one here in Atlanta years ago when June Jones was the coach of the Falcons. If you want to look at the run/pass ratio of that team, you may find out just how wrong you are. If you want me to, I will but kid...you have better fights to fight than this one.

[JamesWilder32]

He did. Boldin actually ran a 4.71. Boldin had a pretty poor combine, which resulted in him dropping farther than expected in the combine. No link, just common knowledge. Also, fyi, Emmitt Smith ran a 4.7, but speed never seemed to be a problem for him.

And for those of you who don't think a receiver can make a huge impact on a team...have you ever watched the Carolina Panthers?

I recall Boldin putting in a 4.67 but either way (I have no link either) it killed his stock (not really, he was still picked pretty high, the Cards loved him and supposedly had to force themselves not to pick him higher.

You know who else ran slow was Ronde Barber who had a 4.63, he sure doesn't play like it though this season he sure played down to his 5'10 height.

[JamesWilder32]

sorry to point this out, but larry fitzgerald was a better prospect than calvin johnson is, so unless you want to start the decade the year after fitz was drafted, then he's not this "once in a decade" WR

not once did i say his speed was pedestrian, but by no means will he run anything in the 4.3 range, and i'd expect him to run in the 4.5-4.7 range, which is still fast for a guy that size



Andre Johnson is a rare athlete, he's a big guy who can run in the 4.3s, calvin isn't as good of an athlete as andre, and even andre doesn't play as a burner style WR in the NFL, and he's more geared towards that style.

Calvin will be a possession WR in the NFL

He probably will be a possession WR in the NFL, but he will run far better than 4.7... If he didn't post a sub 4.5 I would be shocked. but regardless, with his size and hands he will be able to win battles all the way down the field but he can do anything but considering he CAN do anything he will probably be the possession guy, not an insult to him, more of a compliment. He definitely won't be stuck only catching short passes. He is far faster than Plaxico Burress who is not much of a possession WR but like CJ can create mismatches downfield due to his size and ball skills.

Catching short to intermediate passes is a big deal too... But like most good WRs, he will be adept at doing many things. Technically, Marvin Harrison, Torrie Holt, Jerry Rice, were possession receivers, they can/could all take it all the way but they ran all the routes and were complete players, CJ has a shot at being a complete WR, much more so than any other WR in the draft.

[dawgland]

I'm not at all certain that you know what a "run and shoot" style offense is but they ran one here in Atlanta years ago when June Jones was the coach of the Falcons. If you want to look at the run/pass ratio of that team, you may find out just how wrong you are. If you want me to, I will but kid...you have better fights to fight than this one.
i'm not sure you understand college football, but i noticed you counted reggie balls rushing totals for rushing, not passing

first of all, moron, sacks count as rushing attempts in college football, so you have to count those as drop backs to pass since they're pass plays, plus since reggie was athletic, he turned a lot of pass plays into QB scrambles, so you again have to count those as pass plays. notice i made a point of saying that earlier, i'll type it more in plain text next time for you

GT doesn't run a balanced offense, they run a pass heavy offense that relies on down the field passing in a spread offense

and if you want a real stat breakdown, since like i said a lot of reggie ball plays are scrambles, and when you play in a spread offense like tech runs, you have some qb option pass/draw plays

so ball threw for 304, bennett threw for 58, then 5 others combined for 6 passes. so right there is 368. now add in balls 122 rushing attempts since those are generally based out of pass plays where in one way or another he runs is 490, then add the 6 rushes for bennett because those are likely sacks and you're at 496

now rushing, tashard choice had 297 carries, evans had 41, grant had 36, CJ had 7, davis and garner combined for 3 gives you 384 carries

when a team rushes for 384 plays and passes for 496, that means you don't run a balanced offense, you run a pass heavy offense

thanks for playing


as for wilder, i mean i see him running in the 4.45-4.47, not 4.5 - 4.7

[Alpha Alpha 408]

i'm not sure you understand college football, but i noticed you counted reggie balls rushing totals for rushing, not passing

first of all, moron, sacks count as rushing attempts in college football, so you have to count those as drop backs to pass since they're pass plays, plus since reggie was athletic, he turned a lot of pass plays into QB scrambles, so you again have to count those as pass plays. notice i made a point of saying that earlier, i'll type it more in plain text next time for you

GT doesn't run a balanced offense, they run a pass heavy offense that relies on down the field passing in a spread offense

and if you want a real stat breakdown, since like i said a lot of reggie ball plays are scrambles, and when you play in a spread offense like tech runs, you have some qb option pass/draw plays

so ball threw for 304, bennett threw for 58, then 5 others combined for 6 passes. so right there is 368. now add in balls 122 rushing attempts since those are generally based out of pass plays where in one way or another he runs is 490, then add the 6 rushes for bennett because those are likely sacks and you're at 496



So now they run a "spread" offense?

Tell you what sport; since you would prefer to NOT read what I said, go take a look at a team that actually does run a "run and shoot" offense. Say...Hawaii. They run the SAME offense under June Jones that the Vick's ran when he was their coach. A "pass heavy", "run and shoot" offense.

Pass/run ratio of almost 3:1.

Again... please let the more "informed" members post. This really isn't your day kid.

[DeadEagle]

Pass/run ratio of almost 3:1.


In what textbook did you find that a "run and shoot" offense has a 3 to 1 ratio?

[JamesWilder32]

Hey guys, I haven't read in detail either of your posts... but the thing is that the pass/run ratio of an offense means nothing when determining the type of sets the offense runs. A run and shoot team can conceivably have more run than passes, and many spread offenses (WVU) run a great deal more than they throw...

Also, the 84 Dolphins were a very pass heavy team, Marino threw for 5084 (I believe) and 48 TDs and they executed most of their plays with two back sets, 3 WR and one back sets... But what they ran can never be confused with the spread, run and shoot, option, T-formation, etc. It was what it was, two pro sets, and the ratio of passes to runs doesn't change that.

[maryjanewatson]

sorry to point this out, but larry fitzgerald was a better prospect than calvin johnson is, so unless you want to start the decade the year after fitz was drafted, then he's not this "once in a decade" WR



I stopped reading after this.

No he wasn't.

I was there. I scouted them both. I read what was written about both of them. Pretty much EVERYTHING I could. I still am. Fitzgerald is not a superior prospect to Johnson. If they were in the same draft, CJ would have been the first receiver off the board, not Fitzgerald. In terms of hands, strength, concentration, and character, they're pretty even. On film, CJ could run step for step with Fitzgerald. The difference is explosiveness. How many times at Pitt did you ever see Fitzgerald work the WR screen, or the swing pass? Not often; he doesn't have the deceptive burst CJ does. Watch GT, they threw him the quick screen all the time, and it always worked, because CJ has freakish burst. Fitzgerald doesn't; that was the knock on him coming out of college and it's the one flaw in his armour. Plus, CJ is an inch and a half taller and has better hops.

I'm sorry, CJ will not run in the 4.3 range, but 4.45 is possible. And he's one of those guys who's faster in pads. Calling him a possession receiver is like calling Randy Moss a possession receiver.

[Alpha Alpha 408]

In what textbook did you find that a "run and shoot" offense has a 3 to 1 ratio?

Awwww...isn't that cute.

Now instead of taking one sentence out of the post, go back and read the whole thing. I was talking specifically about Hawaii; a team that actually runs the "run and shoot" offense as opposed to Ga. Tech...a team that doesn't.

And yes...the ratio is a little less than 3:1...but it is close.

It really isn't that hard to find, I just refuse to do the work for you and link you to it.

Again...my argument isn't whether or not to take Johnson (if available), there ARE valid reasons not to. My problem is the fact that this guy (Dawg) is so off base about Johnson that it isn't even funny.

[Alpha Alpha 408]

Calling him a possession receiver is like calling Randy Moss a possession receiver.


Oh...Moss isn't? :rolleyes:

Don't worry...I'm sure The guy is going to make an argument to the contrary...

[dawgland]

I stopped reading after this.

No he wasn't.

I was there. I scouted them both. I read what was written about both of them. Pretty much EVERYTHING I could. I still am. Fitzgerald is not a superior prospect to Johnson. If they were in the same draft, CJ would have been the first receiver off the board, not Fitzgerald. In terms of hands, strength, concentration, and character, they're pretty even. On film, CJ could run step for step with Fitzgerald. The difference is explosiveness. How many times at Pitt did you ever see Fitzgerald work the WR screen, or the swing pass? Not often; he doesn't have the deceptive burst CJ does. Watch GT, they threw him the quick screen all the time, and it always worked, because CJ has freakish burst. Fitzgerald doesn't; that was the knock on him coming out of college and it's the one flaw in his armour. Plus, CJ is an inch and a half taller and has better hops.

I'm sorry, CJ will not run in the 4.3 range, but 4.45 is possible. And he's one of those guys who's faster in pads. Calling him a possession receiver is like calling Randy Moss a possession receiver.
he doesn't compare to moss in any way, randy moss did run in the 4.3 range

andre johnson did run in the 4.3 range

fitzgerald draft profile (http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/larry_fitzgerald)

they're actually pretty close, i'm still giving the edge to fitzgerald because i've seen him play against great corners in college, and i can't say the same for CJ

and also all the prospect profiles i've seen for CJ expect him to be closer to 4.50 then 4.40

and besides, even if you give a slight edge to johnson, still doesn't make him an all-decade type player because there still was fitz

and you want to talk about fitzgeralds first step?, if anything CJ could beat him in a footrace but i'm giving the explosiveness to fitz because he was able to create seperation out of cuts due to his fast 1st step. you've got your arguement all wrong. fitz is more explosive, johnson would probably win the 40 yard dash

and you say CJ has better hops? thats nice, fitzgerald was best known for his body control when he goes up for the ball, so CJ can jump higher in a gymnasium but if i had to throw a jump ball to either, i'm taking the guy whose got the better body control when he's in the air, and fitzgerald had great hands

and there's becoming a slight knock on CJ about his concentration, when that was another strong point fitzgerald had, everybody said his concentration was amazing while there's some people saying CJ loses focus at times