Harvin tested positive for dope

[Chitownhustla]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft09/news/story?id=4087941

espn article

 

 

 

I wonder if it will affect the draft? How dumb are you???? Combine coming up and you can't stop smoking for a month!!

[Stinger226]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft09/news/story?id=4087941

espn article

 

 

 

I wonder if it will affect the draft? How dumb are you???? Combine coming up and you can't stop smoking for a month!!

Thats a big negitive just because it tells us there not to bright. Having said that if Havin falls to us at 49, I think we take him.

[azbearsfan]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft09/news/story?id=4087941

espn article

 

 

 

I wonder if it will affect the draft? How dumb are you???? Combine coming up and you can't stop smoking for a month!!

I was listening to the Dan Patrick show on the way to work and the draft guy from the NFL NEtwork said Harvin has top ten talent but UDFA character. I guess I didn't know that. It seems JA is big on character this year so maybe we pass even at 49.

[defiantgiant]

Thats a big negitive just because it tells us there not to bright. Having said that if Havin falls to us at 49, I think we take him.

 

If it were me, I'd take Harvin off my board entirely. In terms of his skill set, he's a poor-man's version of a player we already have on the roster, Devin Hester. He also comes from Urban Meyer's system, which has produced a huge number of busts at receiver (what's Chad Jackson doing these days?) He's also got pretty serious injury concerns and consistent, documented character problems going back to high school.

 

All that aside, though, my main concern is this: we need a receiver who can step in and immediately contribute in a specific role - split end. We've got Hester on the flank, now we need a split end who can beat the jam, run routes over the middle, and be a reliable target for Cutler. That's not what Harvin is. The way he was used at Florida, he'd basically be learning an entirely new position if we tried him at #2 receiver - he'd have a learning curve like Hester's for the past couple of seasons, and that's not what we need.

 

To really get the best out of Harvin, you'd need a team with two established receivers on the outside and a creative offensive coordinator who could put him in the slot, send him in motion in the backfield, use him in a lot of screens and let him work after the catch. That's what he's great at, and it's not even close to what the Bears need. We need a classic split end: a big, reliable target who's good on crossing routes and can secure the catch. Harvin's game isn't anything like that. He could do a lot of damage in a place like Kansas City, where they're likely going to be running a pass-heavy spread, plus they already have Dwayne Bowe and Bobby Engram on the outside. In Chicago, though, they need a big, reliable move-the-chains kind of receiver. Harvin would be a square peg in a round hole here.

[azbearsfan]

If it were me, I'd take Harvin off my board entirely. In terms of his skill set, he's a poor-man's version of a player we already have on the roster, Devin Hester. He also comes from Urban Meyer's system, which has produced a huge number of busts at receiver (what's Chad Jackson doing these days?) He's also got pretty serious injury concerns and consistent, documented character problems going back to high school.

 

All that aside, though, my main concern is this: we need a receiver who can step in and immediately contribute in a specific role - split end. We've got Hester on the flank, now we need a split end who can beat the jam, run routes over the middle, and be a reliable target for Cutler. That's not what Harvin is. The way he was used at Florida, he'd basically be learning an entirely new position if we tried him at #2 receiver - he'd have a learning curve like Hester's for the past couple of seasons, and that's not what we need.

 

To really get the best out of Harvin, you'd need a team with two established receivers on the outside and a creative offensive coordinator who could put him in the slot, send him in motion in the backfield, use him in a lot of screens and let him work after the catch. That's what he's great at, and it's not even close to what the Bears need. We need a classic split end: a big, reliable target who's good on crossing routes and can secure the catch. Harvin's game isn't anything like that. He could do a lot of damage in a place like Kansas City, where they're likely going to be running a pass-heavy spread, plus they already have Dwayne Bowe and Bobby Engram on the outside. In Chicago, though, they need a big, reliable move-the-chains kind of receiver. Harvin would be a square peg in a round hole here.

 

 

Agreed.

 

By listening to JA, I get the feeling that the pick is going to be the cat from Georgia. He has great character, is big, isn't too slow, can block, can go over the middle. The only ding is the drops and the rise after the season.

 

I think we get him and then a sleeper pick like Ogletree later in the draft.

 

i dont think JA likes the size of R. Johnson so I think we go FS later in the draft.

[defiantgiant]

Agreed.

 

By listening to JA, I get the feeling that the pick is going to be the cat from Georgia. He has great character, is big, isn't too slow, can block, can go over the middle. The only ding is the drops and the rise after the season.

 

I think we get him and then a sleeper pick like Ogletree later in the draft.

 

i dont think JA likes the size of R. Johnson so I think we go FS later in the draft.

 

Ugh, I think you're right: it sounds like Jerry's leaning toward Massaquoi, but I'm not a fan at all. The last thing we need is another receiver with a case of the drops. We've had Berrian, Moose, now Hester (although I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for another season) - all of them had great ability, but they all tend to drop key passes.

 

Drops for a receiver are a killer, regardless of talent. If DeSean Jackson didn't have those clutch drops, they'd be talking about him as the #1 receiver in Philly, not looking to acquire Boldin. I've said it before, but Massaquoi had the best QB in the draft, a potential #1 overall pick throwing to him, and he could never consistently bring the ball in. If a receiver's not able to consistently make the catch, he's not a weapon. Teams won't be afraid to single-cover him, so they'll be able roll coverage over to Hester, they'll be able to put another guy in the box to stop Forte, etc.

 

I've said it a bunch here, but I just really hope we don't draft Massaquoi. The guy has bust written all over him.

[azbearsfan]

Ugh, I think you're right: it sounds like Jerry's leaning toward Massaquoi, but I'm not a fan at all. The last thing we need is another receiver with a case of the drops. We've had Berrian, Moose, now Hester (although I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for another season) - all of them had great ability, but they all tend to drop key passes.

 

Drops for a receiver are a killer, regardless of talent. If DeSean Jackson didn't have those clutch drops, they'd be talking about him as the #1 receiver in Philly, not looking to acquire Boldin. I've said it before, but Massaquoi had the best QB in the draft, a potential #1 overall pick throwing to him, and he could never consistently bring the ball in. If a receiver's not able to consistently make the catch, he's not a weapon. Teams won't be afraid to single-cover him, so they'll be able roll coverage over to Hester, they'll be able to put another guy in the box to stop Forte, etc.

 

I've said it a bunch here, but I just really hope we don't draft Massaquoi. The guy has bust written all over him.

 

 

I disagree that they are a killer. Some of the best WR in the league have the drops. TO, chad Johnson, Boldin, Braylon Edwards, all are terrible at drops. I think you can drop some balls if you can make plays elsewhere.

At where we are picking its going to get a perfect receiver. There is going to be some downside to anyone we pick there and we should only hope that pick is as good as DeSean Jackson. I think your expectations are a bit high. What receiver can we take there that teams will have to double team?

 

There will be some smaller guys available, Tate, Derrick Williams, but it seems that JA will go with the bigger guys. Mass, etc.

 

This draft is a weird one. I think outside the top ten picks its really a crapshoot. There is just not alot of high end talent. So if JA goes with some character, leader, work ethic guys, I'll be good with it.

[selection7]

So if JA goes with some character, leader, work ethic guys, I'll be good with it.

Damian Vick should still be available in the 2nd.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ok, I admist I just made that up, hardy-har.

[Stinger226]

Ugh, I think you're right: it sounds like Jerry's leaning toward Massaquoi, but I'm not a fan at all. The last thing we need is another receiver with a case of the drops. We've had Berrian, Moose, now Hester (although I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for another season) - all of them had great ability, but they all tend to drop key passes.

 

Drops for a receiver are a killer, regardless of talent. If DeSean Jackson didn't have those clutch drops, they'd be talking about him as the #1 receiver in Philly, not looking to acquire Boldin. I've said it before, but Massaquoi had the best QB in the draft, a potential #1 overall pick throwing to him, and he could never consistently bring the ball in. If a receiver's not able to consistently make the catch, he's not a weapon. Teams won't be afraid to single-cover him, so they'll be able roll coverage over to Hester, they'll be able to put another guy in the box to stop Forte, etc.

 

I've said it a bunch here, but I just really hope we don't draft Massaquoi. The guy has bust written all over him.

I think if we could get him in the 3rd round, we could go a little farther with his risk factor. The knock on Colston/NO was that he dropped the ball to much. Thats why he lasted till the 7th round that year. I think we would all jump at the chance to have him on our team. The fact is none of us really know, so if we draft him, hope it turns out.

[HoofHearted]

How freakin stupid does one have to be to test positive for herb during the biggest job interview of their life? I hate to agree with Casserly on anything, but anyone that dumb is off my board completely. I've got zero problem with chiefing, none at all, it would be naive to not realize the majority of the league probably smokes it at least occasionally. However, testing positive in Indy tells me that you are both stupid, and have a problem.

[ParkerBear7]

(what's Chad Jackson doing these days?)

 

I think the Broncos signed him last season? I thought this guy was going to be the next Chad Johnson based on the pre draft hype! Glad the Bears did not draft him now. We just need to be carefully and that is why I really like Brian Robiskie who has been coached by an NFL player / coach his whole life -- his dad Terry! I really like Brian's skill set and think he literally may be the safest character pick in the draft.

[ParkerBear7]

I disagree that they are a killer. Some of the best WR in the league have the drops. TO, chad Johnson, Boldin, Braylon Edwards, all are terrible at drops. I think you can drop some balls if you can make plays elsewhere.

At where we are picking its going to get a perfect receiver. There is going to be some downside to anyone we pick there and we should only hope that pick is as good as DeSean Jackson. I think your expectations are a bit high. What receiver can we take there that teams will have to double team?

 

There will be some smaller guys available, Tate, Derrick Williams, but it seems that JA will go with the bigger guys. Mass, etc.

 

This draft is a weird one. I think outside the top ten picks its really a crapshoot. There is just not alot of high end talent. So if JA goes with some character, leader, work ethic guys, I'll be good with it.

 

 

I would tend the agree that drops are inevitable star on non star WR. However, even when a reciever is able to beat his defender to get open deep he can still help the team by strecthing the field to open up the running game etc. The biggest probalem with the Bears old WR's no longer on the roster is that they were unable to get any sort of consistent separtion and combined with an inaccurate deep passing QB made it so when they dropped a catchable pass it hurt that much more since the Def did not respect anyone as a deep threat other than Devin.

[azbearsfan]

I would tend the agree that drops are inevitable star on non star WR. However, even when a reciever is able to beat his defender to get open deep he can still help the team by strecthing the field to open up the running game etc. The biggest probalem with the Bears old WR's no longer on the roster is that they were unable to get any sort of consistent separtion and combined with an inaccurate deep passing QB made it so when they dropped a catchable pass it hurt that much more since the Def did not respect anyone as a deep threat other than Devin.

 

 

Well two years ago we had Berrian and Hester that people had to respect. Moose was always open.

 

Last year teams had to respect Hester, Olsen, and Lloyd before he got hurt.

 

The biggest problem with the Bears old receivers was the Oline. Rushed throws are not easy to catch and a defense does not have to respect any deep threat if they can put the quarterback down.

[defiantgiant]

Well two years ago we had Berrian and Hester that people had to respect. Moose was always open.

 

Moose was always open, but how many clutch passes did he drop? Drops destroy an offense's rhythm; they keep a quarterback from being able to check down quickly and instinctively, like he can when he knows he has a safety valve. Look at Detroit's passing game when they had Calvin Johnson and Roy Williams. Johnson was the deep threat, and Williams was supposed to be the #2, the target on underneath/crossing routes. You would have expected them to be ridiculous, and they were when Williams was on his game. But just as often, they would implode. Why? Because if you're the #2 and the QB checks it down to you, he has to be confident that you're going to secure the catch. If he's not confident of that, then he's going to go further through his progression; the longer he waits, the more likely he gets sacked. Williams always dropped too many passes to be a reliable checkdown target, and when he started dropping passes, their passing game got completely disrupted.

 

Also, I know that deep threats can get the underneath receiver open, but the reverse can be true as well. Look at what Wes Welker does for New England's offense. He's just an underneath guy, he doesn't stretch the field, but he caught 75% of the passes thrown to him last season. He's Tom Brady's checkdown target, which helps the offense stay in rhythm, and offenses can't focus overmuch on Randy Moss, because Welker will kill them over the middle. The Bears have a less-than-reliable deep threat to stretch the defense out. We need a guy to make those clutch catches underneath.

 

Last year teams had to respect Hester, Olsen, and Lloyd before he got hurt.

 

The biggest problem with the Bears old receivers was the Oline. Rushed throws are not easy to catch and a defense does not have to respect any deep threat if they can put the quarterback down.

 

I disagree here. There was an anonymous quote on PFW a while back from a defensive coordinator who played the Bears in 2008. He said the only player they were scared of, the only guy they gameplanned for, was Matt Forte. People didn't start double-covering Hester until the very end of the season (I think the Saints game was the first time I ever saw two guys on him.)

[nfoligno]

To take your comments a step further.

 

So often I hear people talk about how a WR w/ speed opens up the field as defenses are forced to respect that speed. Sorry, I would disagree w/ this. Having a WR capable of running down the field is only part of it.

 

You have to prove that you not only have a WR that can run fast down the field, but you have a QB who can hit him downfield, that WR has the hands and sight adjustment to make the catch, and you can do it more than once a game.

 

For years I listened to fans talk about all the double coverage rolled Berrians way, but I just didn't see it. I am not saying he never saw double coverage, but I just would not agree he saw it nearly as often as some want to think.

 

The reality is, defenses would risk playing their CB on an island against Berrian, even if Berrian had the greater speed. The reason? Because defenses knew that putting that extra player in the box to attack Rex would work even better than double teaming Berrian.

 

Then we had Orton to Hester. Well, there is little question Hester could beat many/most DBs downfield, but (a) Orton was not exactly on target and ( even when Orton was on target, Hester was dropping the ball.

 

So I would argue that despite all the speedy WRs we have had over the years, that has not equaled secondaries respecting the deep play.

 

Now we have Cutler. It will be interesting to see if Cutler and Hester can begin to connect deep. If that happens, i think the happiest person on the team will be Forte.

 

'

Moose was always open, but how many clutch passes did he drop? Drops destroy an offense's rhythm; they keep a quarterback from being able to check down quickly and instinctively, like he can when he knows he has a safety valve. Look at Detroit's passing game when they had Calvin Johnson and Roy Williams. Johnson was the deep threat, and Williams was supposed to be the #2, the target on underneath/crossing routes. You would have expected them to be ridiculous, and they were when Williams was on his game. But just as often, they would implode. Why? Because if you're the #2 and the QB checks it down to you, he has to be confident that you're going to secure the catch. If he's not confident of that, then he's going to go further through his progression; the longer he waits, the more likely he gets sacked. Williams always dropped too many passes to be a reliable checkdown target, and when he started dropping passes, their passing game got completely disrupted.

 

Also, I know that deep threats can get the underneath receiver open, but the reverse can be true as well. Look at what Wes Welker does for New England's offense. He's just an underneath guy, he doesn't stretch the field, but he caught 75% of the passes thrown to him last season. He's Tom Brady's checkdown target, which helps the offense stay in rhythm, and offenses can't focus overmuch on Randy Moss, because Welker will kill them over the middle. The Bears have a less-than-reliable deep threat to stretch the defense out. We need a guy to make those clutch catches underneath.

 

 

 

I disagree here. There was an anonymous quote on PFW a while back from a defensive coordinator who played the Bears in 2008. He said the only player they were scared of, the only guy they gameplanned for, was Matt Forte. People didn't start double-covering Hester until the very end of the season (I think the Saints game was the first time I ever saw two guys on him.)

[azbearsfan]

Moose was always open, but how many clutch passes did he drop? Drops destroy an offense's rhythm; they keep a quarterback from being able to check down quickly and instinctively, like he can when he knows he has a safety valve. Look at Detroit's passing game when they had Calvin Johnson and Roy Williams. Johnson was the deep threat, and Williams was supposed to be the #2, the target on underneath/crossing routes. You would have expected them to be ridiculous, and they were when Williams was on his game. But just as often, they would implode. Why? Because if you're the #2 and the QB checks it down to you, he has to be confident that you're going to secure the catch. If he's not confident of that, then he's going to go further through his progression; the longer he waits, the more likely he gets sacked. Williams always dropped too many passes to be a reliable checkdown target, and when he started dropping passes, their passing game got completely disrupted.

 

Dont get me wrong, I hate dropped balls too. But to say that they cripple an offense is a bit much. If drops crippled offenses so bad, why do teams want Boldin, Edwards, TO, Berrian, etc. Why did the Cowboys give up three picks for Roy Williams?

 

If a guy is a playmaker, you can live with the drops.

So if the only knock on Mass. is the drops, and he can potentially give you Boldin or TO production, do you pass on that?

 

Again, at our pick, you are not going to get a 5 star, "blue" prospect, anyone that is there is going to have some flag to them. Its what you are willing to live with.

 

 

Also, I know that deep threats can get the underneath receiver open, but the reverse can be true as well. Look at what Wes Welker does for New England's offense. He's just an underneath guy, he doesn't stretch the field, but he caught 75% of the passes thrown to him last season. He's Tom Brady's checkdown target, which helps the offense stay in rhythm, and offenses can't focus overmuch on Randy Moss, because Welker will kill them over the middle. The Bears have a less-than-reliable deep threat to stretch the defense out. We need a guy to make those clutch catches underneath.

 

Yeah, but what did Welker do before NE? The NE system makes alot of receivers look good.

Mike Furrey is the same type of receiver but nobody is beating down his door.

Mike Hass could catch everything and what happened to him?

 

 

I disagree here. There was an anonymous quote on PFW a while back from a defensive coordinator who played the Bears in 2008. He said the only player they were scared of, the only guy they gameplanned for, was Matt Forte. People didn't start double-covering Hester until the very end of the season (I think the Saints game was the first time I ever saw two guys on him.)

 

Well scared of and respecting are two different things to me. Not respecting someone to me is barely covering them, leaving them open, etc.

And that quote is crap to me, it totally depends on the defense. So if it isthe Vikings then I get it. If its the Lions DC, how did that work out for ya?

[defiantgiant]

Dont get me wrong, I hate dropped balls too. But to say that they cripple an offense is a bit much. If drops crippled offenses so bad, why do teams want Boldin, Edwards, TO, Berrian, etc. Why did the Cowboys give up three picks for Roy Williams?

 

If a guy is a playmaker, you can live with the drops.

So if the only knock on Mass. is the drops, and he can potentially give you Boldin or TO production, do you pass on that?

 

Again, at our pick, you are not going to get a 5 star, "blue" prospect, anyone that is there is going to have some flag to them. Its what you are willing to live with.

 

You're misreading me here - I said drops are a killer if it's your #2 receiver. Boldin's the only #2 on that list, and he doesn't tend to drop passes. The rest of those receivers are all #1 on their respective teams: T.O., Edwards, and Berrian. Look at it this way: passing is a risk/reward calculation. A pass play is much riskier than a running play is, but it has the potential to go for a long gain, too. Smart Football had an article breaking this down. The upshot is this, you need to figure out how to gauge the risk against the reward, and the bigger the potential reward, the more risk you can accept.

 

Your #1 guy provides the potential for a long play, so you can live with a higher risk that he drops the ball and the play goes for nothing. Your #2 guy, though, is there to provide a lower-risk/lower-reward option in the form of more consistent, shorter receptions. Whoever's going over the middle on intermediate routes (that offer less of a potential gain) needs to be dependable, or else your quarterback is choosing between high-risk/high-reward and high-risk/low-reward. The whole reason that you check down for a shorter gain is that it's more likely to work than the first option. If your checkdown target isn't reliable, that defeats the entire purpose.

 

I'm not saying that no receiver can drop the ball and be good. I'm saying that the Bears already have a guy who's a threat in spite of his drops in Hester; now they need someone for Cutler to check it down to. Again, if you need to see the difference, look at the difference between Roy Williams' yards-per-target as a #1 versus as a #2. Yards per target are a great stat for this kind of thing, because they combine the potential for a long gain with the potential for a dropped pass. Reliable unspectacular receivers should have comparable YPT to less-reliable big-play threats.

 

When Roy was Detroit's deep threat, he was pretty good. From 2004-2006, he caught between 45% and 55% of the passes thrown to him. That's a poor catch rate, and a lot of it was from drops. His yards-per-catch was very high, though: between 15.1 and 16 yards per. During that period, his YPT went from 7 to 8.6: meaning in 2006, throwing it to Williams was good for (on average) 8.6 yards, even after taking into account the drops.

 

You can compare Williams' YPT as a deep threat to that of a good possession receiver. During that same three-year period, T.J. Houshmandzadeh had a YPT between 8.3 and 8.9, even though he was only averaging 12 or 13 yards a catch. That's because Housh doesn't drop passes, and he caught between 66% and 69% of the passes thrown to him. So even though Williams is less reliable and Housh doesn't make big plays, they're comparably worth throwing to, in terms of the average reward for targeting them.

 

Williams was totally ill-suited for the #2 role, though, because he was just as unreliable on short throws as on long ones. Midway through 2007, Calvin Johnson emerged as the #1 wideout. In 2008, as a #2 (first to CJ, then to TO) receiver, he caught 44% of the passes thrown to him. That's about what he'd been doing before. However, since he was running short-to-intermediate routes, he only got 11.9 yards per catch, instead of 15 or 16. That adds up to a measly 5.24 yards per target. It's pretty obvious that Williams is only worth throwing to if he's going deep: if the reward gets lower but the risk stays just as high, he's not as good a receiver in that role.

 

My worry about Massaquoi is that we'd be getting Housh's big-play potential (not much) with Williams' drops. That doesn't add up to a good #2 receiver.

[azbearsfan]

You're misreading me here - I said drops are a killer if it's your #2 receiver. Boldin's the only #2 on that list, and he doesn't tend to drop passes. The rest of those receivers are all #1 on their respective teams: T.O., Edwards, and Berrian. Look at it this way: passing is a risk/reward calculation. A pass play is much riskier than a running play is, but it has the potential to go for a long gain, too. Smart Football had an article breaking this down. The upshot is this, you need to figure out how to gauge the risk against the reward, and the bigger the potential reward, the more risk you can accept.

 

Your #1 guy provides the potential for a long play, so you can live with a higher risk that he drops the ball and the play goes for nothing. Your #2 guy, though, is there to provide a lower-risk/lower-reward option in the form of more consistent, shorter receptions. Whoever's going over the middle on intermediate routes (that offer less of a potential gain) needs to be dependable, or else your quarterback is choosing between high-risk/high-reward and high-risk/low-reward. The whole reason that you check down for a shorter gain is that it's more likely to work than the first option. If your checkdown target isn't reliable, that defeats the entire purpose.

 

I'm not saying that no receiver can drop the ball and be good. I'm saying that the Bears already have a guy who's a threat in spite of his drops in Hester; now they need someone for Cutler to check it down to. Again, if you need to see the difference, look at the difference between Roy Williams' yards-per-target as a #1 versus as a #2. Yards per target are a great stat for this kind of thing, because they combine the potential for a long gain with the potential for a dropped pass. Reliable unspectacular receivers should have comparable YPT to less-reliable big-play threats.

 

When Roy was Detroit's deep threat, he was pretty good. From 2004-2006, he caught between 45% and 55% of the passes thrown to him. That's a poor catch rate, and a lot of it was from drops. His yards-per-catch was very high, though: between 15.1 and 16 yards per. During that period, his YPT went from 7 to 8.6: meaning in 2006, throwing it to Williams was good for (on average) 8.6 yards, even after taking into account the drops.

 

You can compare Williams' YPT as a deep threat to that of a good possession receiver. During that same three-year period, T.J. Houshmandzadeh had a YPT between 8.3 and 8.9, even though he was only averaging 12 or 13 yards a catch. That's because Housh doesn't drop passes, and he caught between 66% and 69% of the passes thrown to him. So even though Williams is less reliable and Housh doesn't make big plays, they're comparably worth throwing to, in terms of the average reward for targeting them.

 

Williams was totally ill-suited for the #2 role, though, because he was just as unreliable on short throws as on long ones. Midway through 2007, Calvin Johnson emerged as the #1 wideout. In 2008, as a #2 (first to CJ, then to TO) receiver, he caught 44% of the passes thrown to him. That's about what he'd been doing before. However, since he was running short-to-intermediate routes, he only got 11.9 yards per catch, instead of 15 or 16. That adds up to a measly 5.24 yards per target. It's pretty obvious that Williams is only worth throwing to if he's going deep: if the reward gets lower but the risk stays just as high, he's not as good a receiver in that role.

 

My worry about Massaquoi is that we'd be getting Housh's big-play potential (not much) with Williams' drops. That doesn't add up to a good #2 receiver.

 

I think we are kind of saying the same thing here. Drops are alright(somewhat) if you can make the big play.

 

I dont think the # of the receiver has as much to do with it than you do.

 

I think the thing with Mass. is that he is big, runs a good 40 time for his size, is a physical blocker, is a leader in the locker room, and has improved himself every year. Drops are an issue, but less and less as he has gotten older. I think he has a chance to provide some big plays like a Bolden. Not really burning anyone on a go pattern like Hester, but something like coming on a crossing route and then turning it upfield and maybe chucking a tackler.

 

And at our position I dont see guys that are very much better. Sure, guys on this board have their favorites, but if you are trying to say that Barden is tons better than Mass., I just dont buy it.

 

I think we take two WR anyway.

 

Maybe a Mass. or Iglesias with the 2nd rounder and a Knox, Tate, or Ogletree later.

 

There have been interesting news articles on Rideau too. Hopefully he can step up. Cause he is that bigger "hands" type too.

[bowlingtwig]

I think we are kind of saying the same thing here. Drops are alright(somewhat) if you can make the big play.

 

I dont think the # of the receiver has as much to do with it than you do.

 

I think the thing with Mass. is that he is big, runs a good 40 time for his size, is a physical blocker, is a leader in the locker room, and has improved himself every year. Drops are an issue, but less and less as he has gotten older. I think he has a chance to provide some big plays like a Bolden. Not really burning anyone on a go pattern like Hester, but something like coming on a crossing route and then turning it upfield and maybe chucking a tackler.

 

And at our position I dont see guys that are very much better. Sure, guys on this board have their favorites, but if you are trying to say that Barden is tons better than Mass., I just dont buy it.

 

I think we take two WR anyway.

 

Maybe a Mass. or Iglesias with the 2nd rounder and a Knox, Tate, or Ogletree later.

 

There have been interesting news articles on Rideau too. Hopefully he can step up. Cause he is that bigger "hands" type too.

I would love to see Rideau be able to at least show case himself during the season. For a couple of years now he does so well in the preseason and then just becomes an after thought. The guy has great hands and because of that and his good route running I think he could be a very solid #3 or #4

[Connorbear]

How freakin stupid does one have to be to test positive for herb during the biggest job interview of their life? I hate to agree with Casserly on anything, but anyone that dumb is off my board completely. I've got zero problem with chiefing, none at all, it would be naive to not realize the majority of the league probably smokes it at least occasionally. However, testing positive in Indy tells me that you are both stupid, and have a problem.

I don't know if I would take him off the board completely. It would depend on his history. Is this a pattern? If so, then he would be dropped.

 

Peace

[balta1701-A]

I don't know if I would take him off the board completely. It would depend on his history. Is this a pattern? If so, then he would be dropped.

He doesn't have any other public positive test results, but he certainly has a negative behavioral reputation before this.

[Connorbear]

He doesn't have any other public positive test results, but he certainly has a negative behavioral reputation before this.

Then he's gone. Once a tool, always a tool.

 

Peace

[clnr]

One of the writers on walterfootball compares Harvin to Pacman Jones.

http://walterfootball.com/mattblog090419.php

[azbearsfan]

One of the writers on walterfootball compares Harvin to Pacman Jones.

http://walterfootball.com/mattblog090419.php

 

 

The more and more I hear, then more and more I pass at 49.

[ChileBear]

The more and more I hear, then more and more I pass at 49.

He'll be gone by the time we pick, anyway. And I'll be glad to see it, too.