3rd year wr theory

[conehead116]

First of all, I said MAYBE and secondly, I recognized this trend long before there were articles written on it.  Learn how to read.  Did you read all my posts before showing the world how stupid you are?

 

Again, my whole point is that year number 3 is not the magic year, rather year 2,3,4 and sometimes 5 all have the same chance of being that breakout year for a given WR.  Take a reading comprehension class and get back to me.

 

1051065[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

You seem to be the only person who doesn't get it.

 

 

And get rid of that picture of your Mom.

[Avernus]

next year, the following in bold will be the breakout players...

 

[bold]L.Fitzgerald

Ro.Williams[/bold]

Re.Williams

L.Evans

[bold]M.Clayton[/bold]

M.Jenkins

R.Woods

D.Henderson

D.Watts

[bold]K.Kolbert[/bold]

B.Berrian

S.Parker

C.Moore

P.Crayton

[Swiss Cheezhead]

There is no rule or theory that states any WR in his 3rd year will break out.  Historically, however, if a given WR is gonna be a stud, he will usually breakout between his 2nd and 4th year.  That's it, nothing more, nothing less.

 

1050804[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

That's exactly right. I've crunched all the numbers over the last 5 years and that's the conclusion.

[Wild Wombat]

Nerd fight!

 

What reactions to what makes common sense to me: in general, it takes two full years for the average college wide reciever to master the nuances of playing the position professionallly. Supposedly, the learning curve at WR is greater than at say RB, but less than at QB. Factor in that all individuals have different levels of talent, preparedness and mental acuity and you have a rule of thumb.

 

Doesn't this make sense? There is a learning curve of some sort in almost any job. For this reason I am not threatened by some hot shot DBA that my company hires straight out of college... he just doesn't know how things work in the real world. I will be showing him the ropes for at least a year.

[MinneapolisPete]

Would you be more comfortable with a third year hypothesis than a third year theory?

 

I think we have a basic misunderstanding of what a 'theory' actually is.

[Chief Dick]

 

Again, my whole point is that year number 3 is not the magic year, rather year 2,3,4 and sometimes 5 all have the same chance of being that breakout year for a given WR.  Take a reading comprehension class and get back to me.

 

1051065[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I agree with this.

 

Let's face it: every one of us here could formulate a list of players to "prove our point".

[rovdog]

I think that this may have changed. If there is a third year potential, i think the reemphasis of the rules against DB contact (The Indy rule I guess from last year), may have helped some younger receivers breakout earlier. For instance, Fitz, Clayton, Roy Williams, Lee Evans, all had impressive rookie seasons.

 

I also think it has to do with getting used to the offense and getting confident with the quarterback. If high drafted reciever had no had a big statistical breakout into his third year and in the third year they change QBs on him, he probably won't do that well. In the offense is consistent however for several years, 3 years is about the right amount of time for the reciever to grow fully comfortable in the offense. It might take a bit longer, and sometimes, I think especially now, it can take less. One thing that seems true however, is that rarely do players break out after their fourth or fifth year. Maybe the opportunies stop coming. Who knows however... a change of team can help... maybe this is Burress's year or Santana Moss, I guy who everyone waited to break out, they finally thought he did, and then he regressed.

 

You also have to wonder if the quality of the athletes coming out of college is growing better, as training methods get better, closer to the NFL's, and so players break out younger.

 

What I think is assured and shouldn't be overlooked is that great players generally do "break out". They suddenly almost double their touchdowns and yardage. This may be a result of getting more opportunities but if they are good the offense does begin to rely on them. Very rarely, it seems is there a steady increase of stats over several years.