pirate Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 would you take T. O. as the first wideout, or do you stear clear of him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 would you take T. O. as the first wideout, or do you stear clear of him? I would take smith,Harrison,Holt,C.Johnson, R.Moss all in front of T.O. That being said, the top WR's are so close it really just depends on your own personal views. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 would you take T. O. as the first wideout, or do you stear clear of him? No freakin' way! His productivity is too erratic to pass on WRs like Holt, Harrison, Chad Johnson, or Steve Smith. At best, he ought to be the 5th WR off the board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 No freakin' way! His productivity is too erratic to pass on WRs like Holt, Harrison, Chad Johnson, or Steve Smith. At best, he ought to be the 5th WR off the board. Where are you getting that his numbers are erratic? Link His numbers have always been good. The only thing of course against him is his attitude. If that is fine, which for the most part I believe will be, he will be great. He is my No. 1 wide receiver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primetime9287 Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 Where are you getting that his numbers are erratic? Link His numbers have always been good. The only thing of course against him is his attitude. If that is fine, which for the most part I believe will be, he will be great. He is my No. 1 wide receiver. Agreed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pirate Posted July 24, 2006 Author Share Posted July 24, 2006 Where are you getting that his numbers are erratic? Link His numbers have always been good. The only thing of course against him is his attitude. If that is fine, which for the most part I believe will be, he will be great. He is my No. 1 wide receiver. Yeah, he played in 7 games in 2005, and scored 6 touchdowns, and that was with his bad attitude. What happens if he plays the whole 16 game schedule??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 (edited) Where are you getting that his numbers are erratic? Link His numbers have always been good. The only thing of course against him is his attitude. If that is fine, which for the most part I believe will be, he will be great. He is my No. 1 wide receiver. I calculated the numbers myself (look for a main page article in a week or two), dividing his overall fantasy production in each of the last three seasons by the number of times he was thrown the ball, plus those times he took off and ran with the ball. Owens productivity sort of went from "very good" in 2003 to "elite" in 2004 then back down to "very good" in 2005. Plus, it's been 5 full seasons since he's managed to play 16 games. And in each of his last four seasons his number of receptions have gone down. Given his penchant for off-field problems on top of all that, I'd much rather take a player whose average production per opportunity on offense is nice and level at an elite level (like Harrison and Holt) or on the rise (like Chad Johnson and Steve Smith). Granted, I like Owens more than WRs like Moss, Boldin, and Fitzgerald, so forgive me if I'm splitting hairs. But the hair I choose to split at this moment focuses on how productive each of these WRs are with the opportunities they are given. Owens is up and down, though still at a very high level. The other four I mentioned are either stable or climbing and at an elite level. See, you're looking at baseline NFL production. Nothing wrong with that at all; so do I. But that only tells part of the story. Looking at a player's production per opportunity can tell you a lot about whether they are getting better or worse in terms of their efficiency in producing for NFL and Fantasy terms. In TO's case, his efficiency is more erratic than the other elite WRs. Perhaps that would have been a better way to say it, rather than just saying TO's production is "too erratic." I shouldn't have been so glib: my bad. But I stand 100% behind my conclusion that TO is no better than the 5th overall WR, which makes him a solid 2nd round choice and a desirable #1 WR. Edited July 24, 2006 by yo mama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 What happens if he plays the whole 16 game schedule??? Then that will be the first time in 5 years he does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsman2806 Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 I calculated the numbers myself (look for a main page article in a week or two), dividing his overall fantasy production in each of the last three seasons by the number of times he was thrown the ball, plus those times he took off and ran with the ball. Owens productivity sort of went from "very good" in 2003 to "elite" in 2004 then back down to "very good" in 2005. Plus, it's been 5 full seasons since he's managed to play 16 games. And in each of his last four seasons his number of receptions have gone down. Given his penchant for off-field problems on top of all that, I'd much rather take a players whose average production per opportunity on offense is nice and level at an elite level (like Harrison and Holt) or on the rise (like Chad Johnson and Steve Smith). Granted, I like Owens more than WRs like Moss, Boldin, and Fitzgerald, so forgive me if I'm splitting hairs. But the hair I choose to split at this moment focuses on how productive each of these WRs are with the opportunities they are given. Owens is up and down, though still at a very high level. The other four I mentioned are eiether stable or climbing, but at an elite level, which is part of the reason why I like them more than Owens. See, you're looking at baseline NFL production. Nothing wrong with that at all; so do I. But that only tells part of the story. Looking at a player's production per opportunity can tell you a lot about whether they are getting better or worse in terms of their efficiency in producing for NFL and Fantasy terms. In TO's case, his efficiency is more erratic than the other elite WRs. Perhaps that would have been a better way to say it, rather than just saying TO's production is "too erratic." I shouldn't have been so glib, my bad. But I still stand behind my conclusion 100% I wouldnt touch TO if he were the last reciever on the board.... I am almost 100% sure he will not last in Dallas before throwing a temper tantrum, there is no way Bill Parcells will take the %^ TO shuffles around to everyone. Parcells cut his kicker for making a excuse for missing a field goal last year... you think he will blink twice if TO starts to rant and rave.... no wayy!! I am sure he will be back in the locker room permantly by week 5 or 6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 (edited) I wouldnt touch TO if he were the last reciever on the board.... I am almost 100% sure he will not last in Dallas before throwing a temper tantrum, there is no way Bill Parcells will take the %^ TO shuffles around to everyone. Parcells cut his kicker for making a excuse for missing a field goal last year... you think he will blink twice if TO starts to rant and rave.... no wayy!! I am sure he will be back in the locker room permantly by week 5 or 6. That's certainly part of the reason I'd rather have Harrison, Johnson, Smith, and Holt. They don't carry that kind of risk. However, you can't totally dismiss TO's potential contributions. He's a high risk, high reward player who is in for good year if he can stay healthy and under control. But those are two big "ifs." Edited July 24, 2006 by yo mama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsman2806 Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 That's certainly part of the reason I'd rather have Harrison, Johnson, Smith, and Holt. They don't carry that kind of risk. However, you can't totally dismiss TO's potential contributions. He's a high risk, high reward player who is in for good year if he can stay healthy and under control. But those are two big "ifs." as big as a if I would prefer to go without him, I cannot see him fit into Parcells Offence which is run first not pass first, TO is the kind of player that wants the ball 10-15 times a game, he wont see that in Dallas under Parcells! he may get 6-8 looks a game, of which if he connects 70% is 5-6 catchs a game for maybe say 80-90 yrds and a shot at a TD, lets not forget Dallas has alot of options on that Offence TO isnt the only man! And look who is throwing the ball to him, Drew Bledsoe, not exactly the most mobile QB in the league, which means quick releases which means 10-15 yrd gains for TO or a quick dump off to Witten or Julius Jones! by far I see TO way down on my list of WRs. I would quicker take Andre Johnson or Roy Williams before TO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 by far I see TO way down on my list of WRs. I would quicker take Andre Johnson or Roy Williams before TO Kudos to you and good luck with that one. Again, I'll take my chances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asskickas Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 (edited) as big as a if I would prefer to go without him, I cannot see him fit into Parcells Offence which is run first not pass first, TO is the kind of player that wants the ball 10-15 times a game, he wont see that in Dallas under Parcells! he may get 6-8 looks a game, of which if he connects 70% is 5-6 catchs a game for maybe say 80-90 yrds and a shot at a TD, lets not forget Dallas has alot of options on that Offence TO isnt the only man! And look who is throwing the ball to him, Drew Bledsoe, not exactly the most mobile QB in the league, which means quick releases which means 10-15 yrd gains for TO or a quick dump off to Witten or Julius Jones! by far I see TO way down on my list of WRs. I would quicker take Andre Johnson or Roy Williams before TO I kinda ruffled a hornet's nest when I last spoke about T.O. on this forum. I can't resist... here we go again. This might sum it up. In 2002, 2003, and 2005, Mcnabb threw 17, 16, and 16 tds respectively. The missing year 2004 was when he got with TO who only caught 14 tds (in 14 games) to bring Mcnabbs 04 total to 31! Also went to the big dance where they lost largely due to Owens injury. But without an injured TO they wouldn't even have been in the game. No T.O = 16 or 17tds add TO and get almost double. This also worked for Jeff Garcia and will work for Bledsoe who had 23 tds without TO last year. T.O top 3 in 2006 Chad, Steve, T.O, Marvin, Holt in that order for me. Edited July 25, 2006 by Asskickas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 as big as a if I would prefer to go without him, I cannot see him fit into Parcells Offence which is run first not pass first, TO is the kind of player that wants the ball 10-15 times a game, he wont see that in Dallas under Parcells! he may get 6-8 looks a game, of which if he connects 70% is 5-6 catchs a game for maybe say 80-90 yrds and a shot at a TD, lets not forget Dallas has alot of options on that Offence TO isnt the only man! And look who is throwing the ball to him, Drew Bledsoe, not exactly the most mobile QB in the league, which means quick releases which means 10-15 yrd gains for TO or a quick dump off to Witten or Julius Jones! by far I see TO way down on my list of WRs. I would quicker take Andre Johnson or Roy Williams before TO A.J or R.W huh?I may have a spot for you in a league this year... Do the homework on your "run first not pass first".How many times did you see T.O take a 10-15 yd. "quick release" to the house? F'n Newb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asskickas Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 (edited) A.J or R.W huh?I may have a spot for you in a league this year... Do the homework on your "run first not pass first".How many times did you see T.O take a 10-15 yd. "quick release" to the house? F'n Newb. Edited July 25, 2006 by Asskickas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsman2806 Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 A.J or R.W huh?I may have a spot for you in a league this year... Do the homework on your "run first not pass first".How many times did you see T.O take a 10-15 yd. "quick release" to the house? F'n Newb. which defences did he take them back against......lets see all of the NFC west defences when he was with SF, the majority of his TDs in Philly were above 20-25 yrds .... but lets face it everyone has their own opinions on certain players and everyone has players that they would try to avoid choosing, TO happens to be one of those players in my book. For the simple reason that he is so tempermental and he isnt a team player. But everyone is entitled to their own opinion last I checked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 I truly believe for the most part TO has learned his lesson. If something goes bad, they are gonna fix the problem right away and not let it steam like in Philly. TO knows this is his last shot and he is motivated as anyone in the NFL. Parcells has never had a talent of TO's caliber, someone who can truly change the game and change your offense. Parcells is not going to sit around and not use him. He is going to use him to the fullest and I think TO is in line to have a monster year. They have some great weapons on Dallas and TO should benefit from that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt770 Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 TO is a very physical player and gets injured a lot as a result. That would be my top concern with him. Of course his tendency to shoot his mouth off and get himself into trouble is a valid concern also, but I think less so this year. He wants that ring, he has a chip on his shoulder and he feels he has something to prove. If I knew for sure he would play 16 games, I'd take him first in a heartbeat. He's that dominant and explosive when healthy. But since he seems to get injured every year, he drops a few notches. Guys like Holt and CJ who are more consistent have to rank higher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Where are you getting that his numbers are erratic? Link His numbers have always been good. The only thing of course against him is his attitude. If that is fine, which for the most part I believe will be, he will be great. He is my No. 1 wide receiver. Holt is a proven producer with Bulger. Johnson is a proven producer with Palmer. Smith is a proven producer with Delhomme. Harrison is a proven producer with Manning. T.O hasn't proven a thing with Bledsoe. Add in the fact that he has proven to be less-than a team-guy, let alone the idea that he is someone I couldn't imagine wanting to root for on my fantasy team, and I would have a tough time picking him as the #5 WR if he was on the board and I needed a WR. He may end up with top-5 production, if everything is rosy in Dallas. But it would make for a less-than appetising Sunday if I had to be excited for my fantasy team because T.O did well. Guy is a schmuck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Holt is a proven producer with Bulger. Johnson is a proven producer with Palmer. Smith is a proven producer with Delhomme. Harrison is a proven producer with Manning. T.O hasn't proven a thing with Bledsoe. Add in the fact that he has proven to be less-than a team-guy, let alone the idea that he is someone I couldn't imagine wanting to root for on my fantasy team, and I would have a tough time picking him as the #5 WR if he was on the board and I needed a WR. He may end up with top-5 production, if everything is rosy in Dallas. But it would make for a less-than appetising Sunday if I had to be excited for my fantasy team because T.O did well. Guy is a schmuck. Well that is where you and I differ. I too dislike TO for the most part, but he is a helluva player and that is all that matters to me. Could he get in a scuffle with Bledsoe or Parcels? Surely, in fact, it probably will happen. However, I think this year he will learn to solve his probems sooner than later. I will root for him to do well on one of my teams but I won't have to like him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KUBJPO01 Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 I'd take a more stable pick like Smith, Holt, or CJ b4 him in spite of his huge upside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 (edited) Well that is where you and I differ. I too dislike TO for the most part, but he is a helluva player and that is all that matters to me. Surely, in fact, it probably will happen. However, I think this year he will learn to solve his probems sooner than later. I will root for him to do well on one of my teams but I won't have to like him. Yup, we definitely differ. Given T.O or another equally ranked, tier 1 WR, I'll take any of the others. And I will neer have to worry about rooting for him on one of my teams. I guess my thought is similar to the Falcons, Eagles (by not giving in) , and any other team that passed on him: why waste a roster space on a malcontent who could possibly do more harm than good? Could he (rather than any of the other top WRs) be the difference to get you to the Super BowlB?? Maybe....is he worth the risk? I bet if you ask any T.O owner from last year who wasted a low-#1/high-#2 draft pick on him, the answer would be no. Will this year be different? Wo knows? I guess the bigger question: is the upside he MIGHT provide over Smith, Johnson, Harrison, Boldin, Fitz, etc worth more than the downside that could ensue if he blows up and/or doesn't sync in the new offense? Not from where I sit. And one last item: Dallas needed a #1 WR to go to, and T.O was the best option out there. But suppose (for fun) that Dallas (like in fantasy football) could have the choice of any WR out there....any of the WRs mentioned above. Where would T.O come in? Due to his baggage, I bet you, if there was open season in the NFL, he is the 8-10th most desirable WR in the NFL. I am almost certain, given the choice, Parcells would rather have Smith, Johnson, Boldin, Fitz, Harrison, Holt, or any other high-producing, maintenance-free WR. So would I. Edited July 25, 2006 by i_am_the_swammi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Due to his baggage, I bet you, if there was open season in the NFL, he is the 8-10th most desirable WR in the NFL. But there is no way that he is the 8-10th most talented WR and that is what counts these days. He is a jerk but a talented jerk none the less. That said, I might take Chad Johnson over him but that is it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asskickas Posted July 26, 2006 Share Posted July 26, 2006 T.O hasn't proven a thing with Bledsoe. Add in the fact that he has proven to be less-than a team-guy, let alone the idea that he is someone I couldn't imagine wanting to root for on my fantasy team, and I would have a tough time picking him as the #5 WR if he was on the board and I needed a WR. Guy is a schmuck. T.O hadn't proven anything with McNabb either but still managed to grab 14 tds in 14 games and was a huge part of the Eagles 2004 Super Bowl appearance. He'll behave in Big D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psycho Posted July 26, 2006 Share Posted July 26, 2006 I maybe in the minority on this one, but TO is still the best WR in the game. With a pure passer like Bledsoe and his new role as a possesion type WR I believe 15-17 TD's is not out of the question. He is a gamble, but he is my #1 WR pick. 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.