If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
All: The new Billszone site with the updated software is scheduled to be turned on Tuesday, May 21, 2024. The company that built it, Dynascale, estimates a FOUR HOUR shut down, from 8pm Pacific, (5pm Eastern) while they get it up and running. Nobody will be able to post in any forum until they are done. Afterwards, you may need to do a web search for the site, as old links will not work, because the site is getting a new IP address. Please be patient. If there are bugs, we will tackle them one at a time. Remember the goal is to be up and running with no glitches by camp. Doing this now assures us of that, because it gives us all summer to get our ducks in a row. Thank you!
There is work to be done and things to be learned. We are going to try to get the old look back - or something close to it. We also know there are bugs. A thread will be started to report bugs and then we can pass those onto the host.
Thank you for all the patience and support with this - hopefully this will greatly reduce the crashes and other site issues we have had lately.
Please use this thread to report any issues you come across
http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/forum/feedback-forums/billszone-q-a/6521455-upgrade-report-bugs-here
Several WRs are projected first-rounders. However, will they be major contributors as rookies?
"For whatever reason," allowed Buffalo Bills rookie coach Mike Mularkey at the recent combine sessions in Indianapolis, "(wide receiver) is a more difficult position to project than most people might think. I mean, it's a skill position, one where you think guys are going to come in and be ready to play quickly. But it's tough. It often takes those guys two or three years to get over the hump. Just look at the first-year numbers, even for the (wide receivers) taken in the first round, and they're pretty interesting."
"All hockey players are bilingual. They know English and profanity." ~ Gordie Howe
True , but in alot of cases the teams that draft a reciever early are the teams that don't have a #1 reciever. I think that if we can draft the right reciever he would be able to mature easier due to the fact the double teams would still be on Moulds and he would be able to learn from Moulds aswell. I dont think we need a 1000 yard reciever on the other side, we NEED a reciever with size and speed who can be usefull one the other side. Josh and Bobby are not the answer,their more like slot recievers.
"For whatever reason," allowed Buffalo Bills rookie coach Mike Mularkey at the recent combine sessions in Indianapolis, "(wide receiver) is a more difficult position to project than most people might think. I mean, it's a skill position, one where you think guys are going to come in and be ready to play quickly. But it's tough. It often takes those guys two or three years to get over the hump. Just look at the first-year numbers, even for the (wide receivers) taken in the first round, and they're pretty interesting."
The same is generally true of FA WR's during their 1st year with a new team. I try to stay away from them in fantasy football.
But there are exceptions (Bolden last year for one)
A DT wouldn't have much impact either with Williams and Adams infront.
The success of first year DE's, in general, isn't very good either, there are always execeptions, though.
Despite the fact that WR still generally need time to develop. I think that Roy/Reggie Williams could help this team next year more than anyone else expected to be there at #13. We can still pick up a contributing G/C in the 2nd round.
Just because the draft is "deep" doesnt mean we are guaranteed a quality reciever in the later rounds. The top recievers is were the quality is at. We will need to groom a great reciever after Moulds slows down abit. Considering it takes a reciever 3-4 years to fully develope I dont think we should pass up on that opportunity since hopefully we wont be drafting this low for awhile.
It depends. Last years top WR was Charles Rogers. Now IMO there are four, possibly five of the receivers in this years draft that are better prospects than him, and if not better, as good or very close. It also depends on the team that they go to. This is what happened with last years crop:
Charles Rogers - only played in five games. 22 catches - 243 yards - 3 tds
Andre Johnson - 66 catches - 976 yards - 4 tds
Bryant Johnson - Got overshadowed by Bolden and adds to the argument with only 35 catches - 438 yds - 1 td
Originally posted by Hermanator21 Just because the draft is "deep" doesnt mean we are guaranteed a quality reciever in the later rounds. The top recievers is were the quality is at. We will need to groom a great reciever after Moulds slows down abit. Considering it takes a reciever 3-4 years to fully develope I dont think we should pass up on that opportunity since hopefully we wont be drafting this low for awhile.
there are alot of receivers that are not in the top tear this year that would be in, say last years draft.. like clayton, moore, jenkins, henderson, ect.. that could just as easily be studs.
"All hockey players are bilingual. They know English and profanity." ~ Gordie Howe
I think the general lack of immediate success experienced with WR's is related to the systems they play in.
More than any other position, WR's are reliant on the systems they play in. Routes are often very similar, but the particular routes they excelled in while in one system may not offer them success in another system. A WR finds his new teamates are now running routes that put defenders in the way instead of opening that subtle whole he had learned to exploit. It takes time to determine new ways to beat people consistently. New Offenses on the same team would tend to bring out the same problem - I'm somewhat concerned here. Run, baby, run. Although, Mularky will most likely have a similar system with better pieces and smarter play calling. So, hopefully, the impact on our WR's will be positive.
Furthermore, WR's are nearly 100% reliant upon their QB's. How often do WR's get a ball put in their hands that hasn't been tossed by the QB? This brings in a timing issue - both that of the QB and receiver and that of the overall offensive system. More margin for error, therefore more time is required to get it down pat.
Rookies have to adjust to the overall game speed on top of this.
Speed WR's that just outrun their cover man seem to do better than possession guys who have to time their routes properly. Kind of makes sense, does it not? Less precision required. Randy Moss pretty much just used his speed and jumping ability his rookie year. I don't remember too many huge possession routes from him in the highlights.
LOG, I take it you've come to many of the same conclusions based upon your FF philosophy concerning WR's.
Tweet
Comment