detlef Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 (edited) Which of the WRs has the biggest body? Wouldn't that have a lot to do with whom they try to fill the void with? I have to assume that they've taken Colston's size into account when designing the offense with respect to his position. It would seem that they would be best served putting a guy of similar stature into that role provided there's not a massive drop-off talent wise to do that. Edit to add: At 6-2 210, that would appear to be Meacham with Henderson and Cooper not far behind at about 6' 200. Again, maybe not enough of a deal if NO has got major problems with Meachem right now but I think it merits thought. Edited September 10, 2008 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FishFreak Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 A Colston injury was the only thing preventing Brees from being this years no. 1 fantasy QB. I do think it will affect his stats a little even though the Saints spread the ball around a lot. Losing your no. 1 passing option is always going to sting a little..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myhousekey Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Which of the WRs has the biggest body? Colston is 6'4" 225 according to Saints website. Meachem 6'2" 210 Copper 6'0" 207 Henderson 5'11" 200 Patten 5'10" 190 Moore 5'9" 190 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LayLow Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 A Colston injury was the only thing preventing Brees from being this years no. 1 fantasy QB. I do think it will affect his stats a little even though the Saints spread the ball around a lot. Losing your no. 1 passing option is always going to sting a little..... You couldn't tell from week 1's matchup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Ernie McCracken Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 (edited) Apparently everyone has forgotten how horribly Brees started last season with Colston banged up and ineffective. When Colston was able to go full speed, it seemed to cure the offense and Brees went on to have a very good season. Anyone who thinks this doesn't effect that offense as a whole is mistaken IMO Edited September 10, 2008 by Big Ernie McCracken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Colston is 6'4" 225 according to Saints website. Meachem 6'2" 210 Copper 6'0" 207 Henderson 5'11" 200 Patten 5'10" 190 Moore 5'9" 190 As a homer, do you feel my logic is sound? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Robert Brooks? Sterling Sharpe? Brooks was there with Freeman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Sterling Sharpe? Brooks was there with Freeman. But I actually meant Brooks. He was the man in 95 before he shared the stage with Freeman. I was talking about the 96 Packers so I did mean Brooks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LayLow Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 (edited) Apparently everyone has forgotten how horribly Brees started last season with Colston banged up and ineffective. When Colston was able to go full speed, it seemed to cure the offense and Brees went on to have a very good season. Anyone who thinks this doesn't effect that offense as a whole is mistaken IMO Last year....I thought it was the gelling of the offensive line early on... Either way, Shockey gets more targets the next few weeks and defenses can't target any one WR since they don't know who will be getting the ball LOL. Edited September 10, 2008 by LayLow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Ernie McCracken Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Last year.... Shockey gets more targets. Shockey is not going to pull defenders with him on crossing routes and they won't be rolling a safety to help acornerback cover Shockey. His loss against defnses playing a two deep zone will probably be the most apparent, unless one of their receivers really steps up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Sterling Sharpe? Brooks was there with Freeman. wasn't it Brooks and Sharpe at the same time...and Freeman came in after Brooks to fill that spot...?...I could be wrong.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LayLow Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Shockey is not going to pull defenders with him on crossing routes and they won't be rolling a safety to help acornerback cover Shockey. His loss against defnses playing a two deep zone will probably be the most apparent, unless one of their receivers really steps up. True. Either way, saints be throwing, saints be throwing, who do you cover, who do you cover? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LayLow Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 wasn't it Brooks and Sharpe at the same time...and Freeman came in after Brooks to fill that spot...?...I could be wrong.. That sounds correct to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Ernie McCracken Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 True. Either way, saints be throwing, saints be throwing, who do you cover, who do you cover? If the receivers aren't running tight routes that offense won't run efficiently. Colston is a student of the position and a fantastic route runner. I'm surprised people underestimate his value so much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 wasn't it Brooks and Sharpe at the same time...and Freeman came in after Brooks to fill that spot...?...I could be wrong.. Freeman came in after Sharpe retired. Brooks and Freeman played together, along with Brooks and Sharpe playing together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LayLow Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 (edited) If the receivers aren't running tight routes that offense won't run efficiently. Colston is a student of the position and a fantastic route runner. I'm surprised people underestimate his value so much. We will see i guess. Brees seems to make due with whatever he has...people seem to be underestimating the saints passing weapons Edited September 10, 2008 by LayLow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Ernie McCracken Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 We will see i guess. Brees seems to make due with whatever he has...people seem to be underestimating the saints passing weapons I'd say he was hardly able to "make due" for the first 4 weeks of last season with an ineffective Colston. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LayLow Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 (edited) I'd say he was hardly able to "make due" for the first 4 weeks of last season with an ineffective Colston. We will see, we will see harrison went down for the colts last year..they found a way Curtis, Brown went down for the eagles this year..they found a way Edited September 10, 2008 by LayLow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myhousekey Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 As a homer, do you feel my logic is sound? I think there is some rationale to it, but I must say I'm in the minority when it comes to Meachem. People keep touting him as a guy who's going to step right in and take over for Colston. But this is a guy who has yet to play an NFL down and was again made inactive last week. Part of that was due to he doesn't play special teams but the other part is because he's still playing behind the other WR's in the group. I wouldn't be suprised if Meachem eventually becomes a bigger part of the offense but I think for the time being they are going to fill Colston's void with more passes to Bush, Shockey, Patten, Henderson and Moore. Payton will play the players that he thinks give him the best chance to win regardless of who they are or where they were drafted. I'd love for that guy to be Meachem as he has the most size of the group but I'm not convinced thats what will happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReturnToSender Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Shoot me now and put me out of my trade, waiver wire, who do I start, misery! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish247 Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 I think Meachem is the one to own here. He should at least be active now, correct? Colston didn't contribute anything to special teams. Sometimes all any player needs is an opportunity. As mentioned above, his ceiling is much higher than Patten/Henderson/Moore so it still seems he's worth stashing away if you have room. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaiderSteve Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 man...first I lose by 8 points in my keeper last week, I lost Burleson for the season, now I lose Colston for a month! I drafted Meachem with my last pick just in case this happened but I guess I should go get Patten now off of waivers...what luck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordFairlane Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 I do think you'll see Reggie Bush on the field more. When he's not in the backfield, he'll probably be moved out to a receiver spot more often now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxfactor Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 So Patton or Henderson? Who do you grab first? I have enough roster spots to accomodate one or the other, but not both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capostatus Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 (edited) man F this stupid ish. first burleson now colston, im gonna have to start tedd ginn as my WR2 or somethin. theres nothin on the waiver either so i dont know what the hell to do henderson is the only one available out of NO receivers.......patten & meachem gone. do i pick him up ? i cant believe this crap completely done in my league before i even got started Edited September 10, 2008 by capostatus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.