Subjectivity? Hypocrisy? I use your standards to judge your wideouts, which is to say that they're bad. I use my own standards to judge other wideouts. I'm sure that's just how you want it too. Your guys get their own (sub)standard by which their performance will be judged. There are multiple ways of looking at WR play. So when you asked what standard I used to judge St. Louis' WRs as better than the not-quite-healthy Seachickens' WRs, I said potential.Screamin_Eagle174 wrote:How did you get pissy out of that? What you should have gathered is that I've stopped giving any credence to your posts because your subjectivity and hypocrisy in using the criteria for evaluating WRs is laughable.rkwittem wrote: You asked what standard I used to say they were better than Seattle. Then I answer the question and you get pissy. Half? Only 2 guys haven't played in the league yet. They carry 5- Givens, Quick, Austin, Bailey, Pettis. They have less production because they are far younger than any WR on Seattle's team and didn't get to play with Brett Favre early in their careers either.
Spare me the Taiwan Jones nonsense. He's never played CB in his life. Upside to me asks what his ceiling is. Are you actually suggesting that Taiwan Jones can be a top 3 CB on anyone's roster in a few years?
What's Sidney Rice's ceiling? He's already hit it, for my money. What's Harvin's ceiling? Already hit that too.
Baldwin's ceiling is what? Considering he's a #4 WR on a team that barely throws the ball, his ceiling is what...600 yards and some special teams work? What's Tate's? A thousand yards and 5ish TDs...when his teammates are injured?
Tavon Austin was a higher overall draft pick than any WR on Seattle's roster for a reason. There's a reason people compare him to Randall Cobb and Percy Harvin and Darren Sproles.First you argue that production without regard to offensive philosophy is why Seattle's WRs are "abysmal," then throw that out the window when evaluating STL's WRs who have less production than Seattle's WRs despite playing in a more pass-heavy offense. Instead, you say that STL's WRs are better because despite less production or no experience, they have more potential, while scoffing at Tate's potential. You're all over the place, because clearly you're a Lambs homer. It's okay, you don't have to admit it; anyone reading your posts can tell. For the record, I wasn't talking about production over their careers, I was talking about production from just last year. But I'm glad you saw the opportunity to come up with more excuses for them.
As for Taiwan Jones, he played CB and RB all throughout HS, and expected to be recruited as a college CB. He played CB his first year at EWU. EWU's coaches expected him to be drafted as a CB. A 6'0 natural athlete with 4.3 speed has a lot of "potential" to be a great CB, doesn't making him better than CBs who have been playing the position at the NFL level and still up and coming. http://www.raiders.com/news/article-1/T ... 45bbf47e4a" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I'm done with your drivel.
Their potential is their best asset, right now. If you look at them in terms of what they've done on the field, you only have 1 year to judge them on since most are 2nd-year guys or rookies. The problem with Seattle is that one guy (Tate) has potential anywhere near that of the Rams' younger guys. Except Golden Tate has had 3 years to show it and done marginally well...if you think 700 yard 7 TD season is exceptional for a 3rd year wideout who you compared to Percy Harvin. Except he can't return kicks or play RB at anywhere near the level of a Harvin.
Compare Chris Givens' rookie year and Tate's 3rd year. Tate had 3 more catches and less yards, but more TDs despite playing on a team with great balance and a better offensive line than St. Louis. Yet Golden Tate is better than anyone on St. Louis, even though it took him 3 years to show that he was actually worth playing on a regular basis. I'm sure you'll blame this on St. Louis' "pass-heavy" offense. Definitely not on future HOFer Golden Tate.
I did not know that about Jones. But I do know that the Raiders media contingent hasn't been particularly impressed from what I've read. What do they know. You saw him in college and clearly know him better as a player than those media types who see him every day, I'm sure.
