Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

    Ive been reading frequently on this forum about the need for a "#1 Receiver". Really? First off as of now i believe we have a total of 7 receivers. Guys like Jordan Kent and Ruvell Martin will most likely go back to their practice squad roles next year or be released. That leaves us with 5 receivers.

    Laurent Robinson- showed flashes of his ability this past year before going down with a freak injury (deja vu) and ending his evaluation. Good size at 6'2 and good speed (ran a 4.38 40) and good leaping ability. Plays bigger than his size. Good hands, can pluck a ball out of the air after leaping over a smaller DB. Very possibly could emerge as a legit number 1 receiver. Need to see what he has after coming back from the injury this off-season.
    YouTube - laurent robinson

    Donnie Avery-Elite speed. Needs to improve on his route running ability. Can be a beast in the slot if he gets more physical, as linebackers wont be a match for his speed. Had an ok year even with the complete lack of quarterback production (and protection towards the end of the year). Would have gotten a lot more deep balls caught if there was a Quarterback that could hit him on them. Should be kept
    YouTube - Donnie Avery - University of Houston - Football Highlights

    Brandon Gibson- Possess above average hands verging on great hands. Not the fastest guy but has enough speed to get open and make the catch. Average route running, good size, and shows nice moves after the catch, always trying to make a play. Should be kept. Hard to find a vid.
    YouTube - Coug senior only has a few Saturdays left

    Keenan Burton-Good possesion receiver. Hasnt wow'ed us with his speed but still has more than enough to get the job done. Impressive vertical for a guy his size and can go up for the ball against smaller corners. Possibly a keeper but replaceable.
    YouTube - keenan burton mix

    Danny Amendola- Gave the Rams much to think about this season with his explosive kick returns. Has shown he can fit a Wes Welker type roll for this team in a slot position. Should be kept for Kick return skill alone. At this point not much more than a 3 or 4 receiver option however. Should be kept..
    YouTube - Danny Amendola Tribute Texas Tech

    Brooks Foster- Not much is none about this guy. Athlete. 6'1 build and carries every bit of it. Strong, out-repped linebackers and lineman with an impressive 27 reps at the combine. Can run through arm tackles. In the mold of an Anquan Boldin. Doesnt have great speed or explosiveness in and out of his cuts and breaks. Has the will to create plays and generate YAC. Apparently had a knee injury towards the end of his senior year that impacted his draft stock. We haven't seen much him because of another injury to his ankle that originally required 6-8 weeks but he was placed on IR due to roster cuts. Time will tell how he turns out. Personally i hope the rams keep him because he looks to be a playmaker.
    YouTube - Brooks Foster

    The fact is, we have plenty of good young talent at the position and i honestly think it is not one of our BIGGEST concerns. If we draft a receiver it should only be in rounds 3-7 and only as high as round 3 if you have a steal staring you in the face (*cough* Danario Alexander).
    Right Defensive End, Outside Linebacker, Quarterback, and Right Tackle are the biggest issues we will face this off-season. I think Adam Goldberg with be a nice starter at Right Guard for us as that is where he plays best at. He is not a Tackle and should not have been playing there in the first place.

    The other lesser issues are Tight End, Defensive Tackle, Cornerback, and Wide Receiver. The biggest of these probably being Defensive Tackle which will be rectified firmly, assuming the Rams grab Suh.

    All factual information was collected from various sources.

  • #2
    Re: Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

    The fact that you are only showing college highlights say something. They all haven't done anything in the NFL YET. Ton of potential 1 huge question can they stay healthy? IMO if Robinson stayed healthy the whole year he might have established himself as a number 1, but he didn't. Going into the offseason we will look for better options, if we can't find any (In this extremely deep class I don't see it).

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

      well i couldnt find any amendola, foster, robinson videos of them in the NFL first off. And i guess i could have placed a donnie avery and keenan burton highlight reel on here but thats beside the point. My purpose is to show what they are capable of and to show that although receiver is an issue it takes a backseat to other positions.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

        You know, they say that sometimes in the NFL having a lot of players at a position means you don't really have anything. We can talk all about the talent we supposedly have at the position, but I recall vividly the number of dropped passes and wrong routes we saw early in the season. As the season wore on, it just got harder to tell whether it was the quarterback's fault or the receiver's when things went awry.

        With all of the injuries, how exactly does one evaluate the talent from 2009? I liked what little I saw of Robinson, but did I see enough to feel confident that teams would stop stacking the box against Jackson if he were in the lineup? No.

        I liked the flashes of big play potential Avery displayed in his rookie season, but we didn't see a lot of big plays from in 2009. Do I think teams will respect his speed enough to double up on him? Not really.

        Gibson and Burton developed a bit of a reputation this season as possession receivers, but were they so reliable that we knew we could move the chains on pivotal downs by throwing to either as a "go to" receiver? No. Our team was ranked 28th in converting third down possessions (according to NFL.com), and I'm going to go out on a limb and say that our redzone stats probably weren't too pretty either.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

          Agreed, college stats alone don't really prove their worth in the NFL. But I think our WR corps have the potential to develop. Avery didn't do great this season but I hope it's just a sophomore slump effect. I was impressed by Robinson in the first 3 weeks, lets hope he doesn't get injured again. We at least need a veteran WR to teach these guys how to make good plays or let Pat Shurmur recalibrate his ultra conservative offense and run better routes or he goes bye-bye.


          ♪ R.I.P. Nujabes ♫

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

            i agree a veteran presence on this team will help with our receivers learning the nuisances of route running and the receiver position in general.

            And a vast part of that bad redzone percentile had to do with imcompetent and inconsistent quarterback play. The constant rotation of Passers and Catchers and thus the lack of timing was a huge factor in the wrong routes being ran.

            im not argueing we dont need a receiver. im arguing that we ahve greater needs elsewhere and shouldnt be looking for a recevier in the first 2-3 rounds unless you have a steal there. We have talent, just no experience. Getting another rookie wont solve that problem.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

              If we could pick up a veteran FA i would definately agree with that.

              Using a draft pick is another story though.

              We need to use the draft for Suh, and OLB, a backup for Jax, future QB more important things like that.

              Our receivers have alot of potential and im sure they will show it in 2010.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

                Originally posted by Bralidore(RAMMODE) View Post
                im not argueing we dont need a receiver. im arguing that we ahve greater needs elsewhere and shouldnt be looking for a recevier in the first 2-3 rounds unless you have a steal there. We have talent, just no experience. Getting another rookie wont solve that problem.
                Maybe not, but we do have to consider what we can do to improve an offense that at no point during the season appeared particularly threatening. In theory, a west coast offense relies on the short passing game first and foremost to move the ball. If you can't complete a high percentage of your passes, it's the equivalent of trying to implement a power running game without a power runner.

                I basically agree, though, that receiver is more of a need when looking at free agency than the draft. We have youth; we need someone who has already learned the ropes.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

                  Laurent Robinson is the only one that has shown me anything of a #1 or #2 WR. NONE of the others appear to be anything better than a #3 at this point. In general, our guys cannot spell separation, let alone achieve it. Avery and Burton have been disappointing. Amendola (sp?) and Gibson have shown some heart and may be better in the future. Hell, I would almost sign TO at this point.

                  Linehan not only performed poorly, he gutted our team.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

                    Linehan not only performed poorly, he gutted our team. AGREED!
                    Bruce should be grooming our young recievers right now.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

                      The young guys have potential. Robinson, Avery, Gibson, Burton, Amendola and Foster all are young and have upsides that we only glimpsed.

                      So, how many WRs will be kept on the roster after training camp? 5 or 6?

                      I ask because those youngsters add up to six and I would rather have those young guys with their upside than an aged vet. Even if that vet can teach them something.

                      Now, what would make a heck of a lot more sense to me is bringing in a WR coach that can coach these guys up "on the field" during practices and help them focus during a game. Who can demonstrate route running and such. A guy like..............Isaac Bruce. Coach Bruce. If I were Spag's, I'd be at his house selling this idea to him as soon as he retires. St Louis would love it. Question is would Bruce.

                      That makes more sense than carrying seven WRs or cutting a young gun to keep an old dude.

                      Dave626.........you posted just before I did. Great thought.
                      Last edited by Richbert88; -01-10-2010, 10:29 PM.
                      Semper Fi!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

                        bottom line is these guys need to get open more..unfortunately we were never really close to a full 5 healthy wide receivers, but robinson, gibson, avery, burton, amendola all showed some positives. if all 5 are healthy are they good enough? i don't know. again the list of needs is so long and this might be somewhere beneath a lot of other things, so unless the right guy falls to us that we really like or we acquire more picks i wouldn't expect a wide receiver in the first 4 rounds.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

                          I think it is a concern, but not a pressing, major need. IMO, a solid TE is more of a need. It would help get pressure off our young receivers. It would also give our QB a big reliable redzone target, something our WR's cannot consistently give.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

                            IMO I don't think there are too many spots on this roster that I would label "unconcerned" I agree with the original poster than these young WR's do have a level of potential that, if reached, would give the Rams a solid receiving corp. Where I disagree is that I just don't see a #1 on the roster(and hence the talk of a need for a #1 receiver) . Now, I could be wrong obviously, but when I look at these guys, I just don't see a Steve Smith, TO, Randy Moss, Reggie Wayne, Andre Johnson..heck, some of the other receivers in the division.

                            The FO has to prioritize with a 1-15 team, and WR I believe is somewhere in the middle. I think the Rams could benefit greatly by having a typical #1 receiver. I also think they can get by ok with what they have now too.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Is Receiver Really That Big a Need?

                              Two Words, TO!!!! Get Him!
                              sigpic

                              Comment

                              Related Topics

                              Collapse

                              • The Rammer
                                Has receiver become a strong spot?
                                by The Rammer
                                I know that the offense isn't producing, but I feel like the receiving corps isn't exactly awful anymore. Avery and Amendola are really producing. Gibson, and even Ruvell Martin are playing nicely. And next year with Robinson and Burton back, this won't exactly be a terrible corps like we thought early on in this season.
                                -12-25-2009, 11:47 AM
                              • r8rh8rmike
                                The Watercooler: Do The Rams Have Future No. 1 WR On Roster?
                                by r8rh8rmike
                                12.08.2009 1:23 pm
                                Do Rams have future No. 1 WR on roster?
                                By Roger Hensley


                                THE WATERCOOLER

                                QUESTION: Do you see any of the current Rams wide receivers developing into a No. 1 guy someday, or is this corps comprised of guys more suited for No. 2 or No. 3 roles?

                                JIM THOMAS
                                Don’t see it. Donnie Avery shows flashes, but can’t stay healthy, and needs to be more consistent catching the ball and getting open. Brandon Gibson’s production has dipped markedly since his first-game splash. Danny Amendola isn’t big enough to be anything more than a slot receiver in the NFL. Ruvell Martin? He can’t get on the field. Laurent Robinson — remember him? — looked like he was on pace for a big year before suffering his season-ending ankle and leg injuries in Week 3.

                                BERNIE MIKLASZ
                                They’re all secondary receivers; 3s. I suppose Avery has a shot at being a legit No. 2, but his lack of durability makes him more suitable for the slot. And there is nothing wrong with that; Avery could be a dynamic performer as a slot receiver. With the changes in the NFL passing game, there’s more of a premium on big, physical receivers and the Rams don’t have one. This is the league’s worst group of receivers, and it won’t be fixed until the Rams either (A) sign a top free agent wideout; (B) hit the jackpot by drafting a legit No. 1.

                                JEFF GORDON
                                We’ve seen Isaac Bruce. We’ve seen Torry Holt. We know what a No. 1 receiver looks like here in St. Louis. There isn’t a real No. 1 in this group. Perhaps Brandon Gibson can be a No. 2 someday. Perhaps Donnie Avery can use his speed to become a nice slot receiver. Maybe the injured Laurent Robinson can come back as a possession guy. Maybe Danny Amendola can be an extra slot guy to go with his kick returning. But that’s it. (All of this assumes that the Rams will someday run a legitimate passing game. In this timid scheme, the Rams have plenty.)

                                KEVIN WHEELER (Host of “Sports Open Line” on KMOX)
                                No, none of these guys are No. 1’s. Not even close. Avery and Robinson strike me as being the same player. They’re both speed guys who can stretch the field but neither has the size or hands to be a No. 1. Gibson looks like he could be a decent possession receiver as a No. 3 or No 4. They need someone who combines the elements of size, speed and hands and none of the players on the current roster fit that bill.
                                -12-08-2009, 01:34 PM
                              • Bralidore(RAMMODE)
                                Are the Rams really that "Devoid of Talent"?
                                by Bralidore(RAMMODE)
                                Before and after this year's NFL draft, I, and Im sure just about all of you, have been getting the "devoid of talent" in regards to the Ram's roster force fed down our throats. Even after the draft it seems that it has remained a mainstay in in Ram 2010 prospects.

                                So my question is, are we really devoid of talent, or experience?

                                QB: Before the addition of Sam Bradford we definitively were short on perceived talent. A.J Feeley, Keith Null, and (at the time) Mike Reilly, left much to be desired. With the addition of Bradford, who has been called one of the best QB prospects of the 2000s (behind only Carson Palmer and Eli Manning according to Casserly), the talent question mark has been erased and instead replaced with the experience one.

                                RB: Everyone knows Sjax is one of the best backs in the league. Behind him is only a bunch of question marks like Ogbonnaya, Toston, and Darby. None have done anything to say if they have talent or not, and one (Darby) doesn't look to have anything special based on what we've seen of him.

                                WR: Here's one of the biggest question marks on the team. What do we really have here? Laurent Robinson has flashed "go-to-guy" ability in a Ram's uniform but has been consistently bitten by the injury bug in one form of another. If he can remain healthy he has the talent to be a number one guy it would seem. He has talent, just not experience

                                Donnie Avery is a bit of an enigma. He definitely has talent. With his special speed, he can stretch the field and make big plays. However he seems more fit to be utilized in this role rather than the reliable possession guy. His hands are suspect and so far he has not been reliable enough to be counted on to make the catch. He has talent, just not experience

                                Brandon Gibson could be a compliment to Avery. He has great looking hands, something Avery has not shown. He also shows an ability to make YAC with his quick hips and moves. He does not possess considerable speed however. If he can stay healthy, he could be a very effective role player or starter. He has talent, just not experience

                                Mardy Gilyard was a steal in the fourth by all indications. He is the classic case of a guy not being flashy on paper (unless you look at his production ) but just flat out MAKES PLAYS. He is just at 6 feet, if that, and his 40 time isn't eye opening with a 4.5 average, but his agility and quicker than normal change of direction ability makes him a slippery guy after the catch. This also gives him an advantage in route running and returning as it allows him to stop on a dime and make a cut without losing too much momentum. His hands are also fairly reliable, rarely will you see him drop a pass watching the tape. Above all however, the guys is simply a playmaker. He gets behind the defender despite his perceived lack of speed and he is a pain in the open field with his quick hips...
                                -06-07-2010, 12:39 PM
                              • Goldenfleece
                                Impressions: General Observations on Top Rams Prospects
                                by Goldenfleece
                                These are just general impressions I've been getting of players we might draft. Mostly, I've just been making note of comments that tend to keep coming up at different draft websites or particularly interesting nuggets of information about the players. I figured I'd post some of it and see if people had anything to add or correct...

                                Round 1

                                Chris Long, DE - A defensive end who does all the little things right from reading the offensive formation before the snap to getting his hand up after the ball is in the air. Gil Brandt at one point mused that every player in the draft had his flaws...except Chris Long. In an SI article, Lawrence Taylor's agent is quoted as saying Long is the closest thing he has seen to LT since LT was playing. Some people will say he isn't fast enough, but he had the 8th fastest 40 time for a defensive lineman at the Combine. That's not terrible, but keep in mind that Howard, Crable, C. Johnson, and Gatewood are 240-pounders that project as linebackers. That means Gholston, Groves, and Chris Ellis are the only true DE prospects who ran faster than Long. So he doesn't put on the workout perfomance that Gholston does, but he was in the top 4 on the broad jump, vertical jump, 3-cone drill, and 20-yard shuttle. He's just a really impressive all-around prospect.

                                Vernon Gholston, DE - A physical freak of nature who also had good production in college. He can outmuscle or outrun his opponent as necessary. The downside is that he doesn't seem like the greatest technician, nor does he have the greatest reportoire of moves, nor the greatest football awareness. Some of the anecdotes from his high school years raise questions, too. When he first started football, one of the coaches kicked him off the team because he said something to the effect that he didn't want to kill anybody, he just wanted to play football. The coach thought he wasn't tough enough for football. When Gholston got back into football, they supposedly tried him on defense, but he was overwhelmed by the playbook, so they moved him to offensive guard where there was less to memorize. If you're looking for things to nitpick about, these examples might raise questions about his intensity, toughness, or ability to be coached. Overall, he seems like a guy who is already a very, very good football player but has extraordinary upside because of his physical tools and all the aspects of his game that could still get better.


                                Glenn Dorsey, DT - A defensive tackle with a great first step. He is strong, quick, gets good penetration, plays the run well, etc., etc. His injury history has been closely scrutinized, but I am more concerned by his stat line. In 51 games, he managed just 13 sacks, 7 QB pressures, and 23 stops for loss. Fifty-one games is the equivalent of more than 3 NFL seasons. Do we really expect him to get more sacks against tougher competition? If not, would we be okay with a guy who would average say 4 sacks...
                                -03-31-2008, 11:29 PM
                              • Nick
                                Greg Cosell talks 2013 NFL Draft wide receivers
                                by Nick
                                The ‘Cosell Doctorine,’ Pt. 2: Ranking the receivers is an impossible task
                                By Greg Cosell | Shutdown Corner
                                Mon, Apr 15, 2013 11:23 AM EDT

                                At this time of year, leading up to the NFL Draft, everyone wants lists. Who are the top five quarterbacks? The top five running backs? The top five wide receivers? I get asked those questions all the time. They’re difficult to answer, for the simple reason there are far too many variables to categorize individual and distinctive players with the same set of standards and criteria. Part of the equation, as well, is that different teams, based on schemes and utilization, have divergent visions of how best to deploy those players. For instance, how can you possibly compare Matt Barkley and Mike Glennon? If your offense features intermediate and downfield passing as a foundational element, you would not evaluate Barkley very highly. Maybe you have him as a fourth-round pick, if that. Glennon, on the other hand, fits your approach. You might well grade him as a late first, or early second round option.

                                There’s no question every team in the league puts together a draft board, both overall, without regard to position, and more specifically, by position. But they do that with their particular systems and concepts in mind. Certainly there are players who are scheme transcendent. Andrew Luck immediately comes to mind. Two years ago, at the wide receiver position, A.J. Green and Julio Jones fit that template.

                                Let’s focus on wide receiver. In my last column, I spoke of what I believe will be the evolving trend in the NFL: multiple receivers, at least three and ideally four or even all five eligibles, capable of aligning anywhere in the formation. As I postulated, it will not be relevant as to the traditional positional designations as long as they are “Jokers”, chess pieces that can be arranged anywhere on the board. I remember watching the Falcons-Redskins game last season, and seeing Roddy White shift from the slot to an offset position in the backfield, next to Matt Ryan in the shotgun. From that backfield alignment, White ran an angle route, a common route almost always run by backs. The conventional defensive matchup is a linebacker playing that route, due to the location of the receiver, and the strong percentage likelihood that it’s a back, not a wide receiver. That’s what the Redskins did with London Fletcher. In this case, it was not a matchup, but a mismatch. 20 yards later, it was "First down, Atlanta."

                                White simply reinforces the point I made in my previous article, that there are more wide receivers capable of being multi-dimensional “move” players, as long as coaches are not confined and restrained by the more conventional definitions and limits that have persisted for years, and allow themselves to think outside the box. Don’t get wrapped up in the conformist classifications: he’s an “x” receiver, he’s a “z”, he’s a slot. That just...
                                -04-16-2013, 05:45 PM
                              Working...
                              X