How do you feel about the Receiving corps?

[joeken24]

My only concern is whether this corp is able to gel quickly. Kirk is more "a machine" at QB in my opinion. That's a good thing if you have WRs that run precise routes. Kirk may find it difficult to improvise when the look isn't exactly the way its drawn up. He may also throw a few more picks caused by poor routes (but of course we'll blame him for it).

Case in point.....I recall last year when Terrell Pryor rounded off his square in against Josh Norman. Josh picked it off. Make no mistake, Cleveland's QB sucked But that play was not the QB's fault. That was a poorly run route by Terrell. 

I could see if Kirk only had one WR to gel with, but he's looking at upwards of three.

 

Hopefully, they gel and this passing offense progresses from last year.

 

We'll see...

 

 

[beachboy757]

I feel like a Ryan Grant cheerleader sometimes. Can someone point out any specific games where he played bad (other than the mistake in ATL)? 

 

 

[Koolblue13]

Perfect fade pattern around the one minute mark.

[Veryoldschool]

12 hours ago, joeken24 said:

My only concern is whether this corp is able to gel quickly. Kirk is more "a machine" at QB in my opinion. That's a good thing if you have WRs that run precise routes. Kirk may find it difficult to improvise when the look isn't exactly the way its drawn up. He may also throw a few more picks caused by poor routes (but of course we'll blame him for it).

Case in point.....I recall last year when Terrell Pryor rounded off his square in against Josh Norman. Josh picked it off. Make no mistake, Cleveland's QB sucked But that play was not the QB's fault. That was a poorly run route by Terrell. 

I could see if Kirk only had one WR to gel with, but he's looking at upwards of three.

 

Hopefully, they gel and this passing offense progresses from last year.

 

We'll see...

 

 

 

 

The WCO is predicated on precisely timed routes and the QB throwing to a spot on time.  Unless receivers perform predictabily they will become a liability.   Pryor and the others need to run disciplined routes or sit in the watch and learn section of the bench until the become more focused and run their routes properly.  Hopefully the coaches will call out and assign responsibility to receivers running sloppy routes.

[RandyHolt]

And hopefully Jay will adjust to his new players, if they cannot consistently run certain routes early on. Can't consistently run the slant to Pryor - try it to someone else. Pump fake to it.

 

re: Grant -  9 Receptions in 16 games.... somewhere within grading a WR, reception count needs to be factored in, as does snap count.  He is just not a threat in the passing game, yet plays WR,  And thrown to : fell down ratio.  That's all I got. 

 

 

[Veryoldschool]

On 5/31/2017 at 7:19 PM, The Hangman- C_Hanburger said:

To be fair, nobody tracked the ball in the air like Jackson!! Some of those over the shoulder catches were jaw dropping!  If Pryer can come CLOSE to that..it will be scary

 

Yes, Jackson's ability to track the ball is what makes him so dangerous.  Pryor will bring down some jump balls that would've been batted down against Jackson and misread some of the balls Jackson would've snagged.  The corner fad is going to be the difference maker.  Cousins will be able lob it high and drop it into the corner for Pryor.  I bet Kirk spend most of the summer dropping foot balls into a barrel getting ready.

[Darth Tater]

3 hours ago, RandyHolt said:

re: Grant -  9 Receptions in 16 games.... somewhere within grading a WR, reception count needs to be factored in, as does snap count.  He is just not a threat in the passing game, yet plays WR,  And thrown to : fell down ratio.  That's all I got. 

 

 

What should really make you go think is that Grant's third season was arguably worse than his first season. He was the 5 target at wr. In a season that the ball was thrown 48 more times, he was targeted over 50% fewer times.  Of the guys who received significant playing time, he had the worst catch rate by far.  As he still is on his rookie contract, however, he could still make the roster based on teams play.

[Koolblue13]

Grant has been a #4 for a while on a team with 4 other guys that are routinely around 1,000 yards. Theres only so many footballs. Hes great on ST and a solid blocker.

 

Maybe he sees more action this year if Quick or Doctson can't excel, but hes been okay for what he is.

 

I think because we're so use to nobodies thrashing us, we expect more from the back end of our roster, but for a guy in the bottom 15 or so of our roster, Grants pretty good.

[justice98]

16 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Grant has been a #4 for a while on a team with 4 other guys that are routinely around 1,000 yards. Theres only so many footballs. Hes great on ST and a solid blocker.

 

Maybe he sees more action this year if Quick or Doctson can't excel, but hes been okay for what he is.

 

I think because we're so use to nobodies thrashing us, we expect more from the back end of our roster, but for a guy in the bottom 15 or so of our roster, Grants pretty good.

 

The thing about Grant and any other WR 4 though whatever, you have to bring something else to the table, like ST or blocking as you allude to.  But he's also got to have the capability to play WR when called upon, and I just dont think Grant can really provide much relative to the others, including the rookies.

[RandyHolt]

He is the modern day James Thrash, who in his 4th year clearly took the next step and logged 50 catches.

[Koolblue13]

34 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

He is the modern day James Thrash, who in his 4th year clearly took the next step and logged 50 catches.

You need those guys on your team. I think some fans really believe he actually has dirty pics of Gruden, because it either that or he does something right.

[bowhunter]

I don't have any issues with Grant (with the only exception of a roster spot.) If Grants lovefest keeps a blossoming Mo Harris off of the 53, then many of the concerns expressed here carry more weight.

[Koolblue13]

1 hour ago, bowhunter said:

I don't have any issues with Grant (with the only exception of a roster spot.) If Grants lovefest keeps a blossoming Mo Harris off of the 53, then many of the concerns expressed here carry more weight.

Why would Gruden sabotage his team just to keep Grant on the roster?

 

Do you think its personal? 

 

Could it be that he actually is a decent WR4? Or A blossoming Harris isnt better than him?

 

Weve watched RG3, Matt Jones, A Robinson, D Hall, Breeland, Blackmon, Riley, Paul and others lose their position in recent years. Why would Grant of all people, not be allowed to lose his?

 

Only one thing makes sense. Grant is better than the guys he's ahead of.

[bowhunter]

1 hour ago, Koolblue13 said:

Why would Gruden sabotage his team just to keep Grant on the roster?

 

Do you think its personal? 

 

Could it be that he actually is a decent WR4? Or A blossoming Harris isnt better than him?

 

Weve watched RG3, Matt Jones, A Robinson, D Hall, Breeland, Blackmon, Riley, Paul and others lose their position in recent years. Why would Grant of all people, not be allowed to lose his?

 

Only one thing makes sense. Grant is better than the guys he's ahead of.

As a tribute to Califan, I submit a heartfelt LOL. I'm not submitting a possible conspiracy theory that Gruden is sabotaging the team. What I am submitting is the possibility that Harris is blossoming and Grant has reached his ceiling. If Grants wr4 ability knocks Harris potential wr2 ability to the PS, we would risk losing him to another team. But if Harris and Grant have been judged to be of equal ability, then again, I have no problem with Grant staying on the 53, especially with his teams ability. For simplicity, I will restate the heading of my initial post. "I don't have any issues with Grant."

[DC Lumber Co.]

So Gruden said we likely would only dress 5 WRs on gamedays. Does anyone remember if we typically keep 6 total on the 53-man roster and one just doesnt suit up?

 

Because even if the number is at 6, its easily going to be the most difficult of all the position-battle decisions for the coaching staff to make on offense.

 

Robert Davis likely wouldn't clear waivers to go on the Practice Squad. Does Mo Harris still have PS eligibility?

 

Brian Quick might be the least safe of them all, which kinda makes signing him in the first place a head scratcher.

 

My most confident prediction is that one other hold-over outside of Crowder is safe. So either Grant or Harris. I just can't see the coaching staff rolling with a depth chart nearly entirely made up of guys who are in year 1 of the offense. 

 

If I had to guess right now I'd go with:

1. Pryor

2. Doctson

3. Crowder

4. Grant

5. Quick

With Robert Davis the 6th man as a healthy gameday scratch. This gets even more interesting if we only keep 5 total instead of 6.

 

Grant being able to back up on the outside and the slot gives him a leg up because everyone else seem like perimeter-only guys.

[SkinsPassion4Life]

I'm willing to bet Grant's lowlight video would be much longer.....he's a terrible NFL player...does not belong on the roster....if he got cut, I doubt anybody picks him up.....This one decision makes me question Gruden.

[Koolblue13]

6 hours ago, bowhunter said:

As a tribute to Califan, I submit a heartfelt LOL. I'm not submitting a possible conspiracy theory that Gruden is sabotaging the team. What I am submitting is the possibility that Harris is blossoming and Grant has reached his ceiling. If Grants wr4 ability knocks Harris potential wr2 ability to the PS, we would risk losing him to another team. But if Harris and Grant have been judged to be of equal ability, then again, I have no problem with Grant staying on the 53, especially with his teams ability. For simplicity, I will restate the heading of my initial post. "I don't have any issues with Grant."

You can LoL all ya want, but it just doesnt make sense that we're keeping Grant on the roster, for any reason other than he is a better WR.

 

That may change and he may not end up on the team, but I can't imagine any scenario where Gruden would keep him if he wasn't better.

 

Im sure Harris will have all the chances in the world to prove what he can do, but Grant is not holding him down. That's lol worthy.

[bowhunter]

1 hour ago, Koolblue13 said:

You can LoL all ya want, but it just doesnt make sense that we're keeping Grant on the roster, for any reason other than he is a better WR.

 

That may change and he may not end up on the team, but I can't imagine any scenario where Gruden would keep him if he wasn't better.

 

Im sure Harris will have all the chances in the world to prove what he can do, but Grant is not holding him down. That's lol worthy.

My Califan tribute was only to the suggestion that I believed in any conspiracy theory. I like Grant, and I'm impressed with the potential that Harris has shown. Both receivers may looking for jobs if Davis shows so much during the preseason that it becomes difficult to place him on the PS. There will be plenty of gnashing of teeth when the turk walks through the locker room. I have a strong feeling that we won't be able to afford Pryor next year, and therefore hope that we have a strong replacement on our roster. At that point, ST play of our wr3 will be carry much less importance. 

[goskins10]

7 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

So Gruden said we likely would only dress 5 WRs on gamedays. Does anyone remember if we typically keep 6 total on the 53-man roster and one just doesnt suit up?

 

 

Brian Quick might be the least safe of them all, which kinda makes signing him in the first place a head scratcher.

 

 

 

Why would that be a "head scratcher?" He is signed for the veteran minimum. He provides a veteran presence during the offseason workouts and TC. But if he gets beat out how is that a problem? Just not following that at all. Low cost insurance that worst case gets beat out by young guys playing better.
 

7 hours ago, SkinsPassion4Life said:

I'm willing to bet Grant's lowlight video would be much longer.....he's a terrible NFL player...does not belong on the roster....if he got cut, I doubt anybody picks him up.....This one decision makes me question Gruden.

 

So all of what Jay has done the last 3 yrs is all down the tubes and becomes questionable because he keeps a guy that you don't see why? In your words "This one decision." Not to mention he would be WR #4 or 5 and is a very good STs player.

 

1 hour ago, Koolblue13 said:

You can LoL all ya want, but it just doesnt make sense that we're keeping Grant on the roster, for any reason other than he is a better WR.

 

That may change and he may not end up on the team, but I can't imagine any scenario where Gruden would keep him if he wasn't better.

 

Im sure Harris will have all the chances in the world to prove what he can do, but Grant is not holding him down. That's lol worthy.

 

I just could not agree with this any more. Every year during the offseason there are a few players that fans don't like but the coaches decide to keep (see Will Compton on a few other threads.) and it always devolves into either some type of nepotism or for some reason the HC is purposely sabotaging the team - the second has to be the most ridiculous.

 

While Grant is not my favorite guy the piling on and trashing of this guy is getting to absurd levels. If Jay and the other coaches (he does get input from the position coaches, kind of why they are there), decide to keep Grant then they must have a good reason - like in the coaches minds the other guys did not beat him out. Nothing else is valid.

 

Ok, rant over. Please continue the irrational hate fest on what has been our 4th or 5th WR - and before any actual decisions have been made.

[RandyHolt]

Grant has the trust of Gruden. He won't run the wrong route when asked to pitch hit. IMO Grant is not going to be getting as many run down snaps with 2 big bodies on the field, vs last year spelling DJax... which telegraphed our play calling far too much, and countered one of his strengths.

 

Here is my depth chart / analysis

1. Pryor

2. Doctson

3. Crowder

4. Quick (4 wide / RZ for Crowder / primary game day injury backup for 1 or 2)

5. Grant  (Teams Ace + slot backup)

6. Harris - Inactive to start the year / serves as non game day injury backup to any of the top 5.  In an ESPN article I linked to, he can play the slot and wants to play teams. If he can dominate on teams in camp/preseason, he may grab that #5 spot.

 

I always love the early camp concerns that Player X won't clear waivers

[Koolblue13]

2 hours ago, bowhunter said:

My Califan tribute was only to the suggestion that I believed in any conspiracy theory. I like Grant, and I'm impressed with the potential that Harris has shown. Both receivers may looking for jobs if Davis shows so much during the preseason that it becomes difficult to place him on the PS. There will be plenty of gnashing of teeth when the turk walks through the locker room. I have a strong feeling that we won't be able to afford Pryor next year, and therefore hope that we have a strong replacement on our roster. At that point, ST play of our wr3 will be carry much less importance. 

Agree completely. Cheers.

[SkinsPassion4Life]

I was exaggerating on Gruden, obviously......But it's ridiculous how much he loves him and goes out of his way to mention him.

[HTTRDynasty]

 

 

[XxSpearheadxX]

On 6/6/2017 at 7:49 AM, bowhunter said:

I have a strong feeling that we won't be able to afford Pryor next year, 

Why do you feel this way? As long as Cousins eventually signs a LTD I don't see why we won't be abke to sign all our 1yr audition guys - if we want to.

[Koolblue13]

2 hours ago, XxSpearheadxX said:

Why do you feel this way? As long as Cousins eventually signs a LTD I don't see why we won't be abke to sign all our 1yr audition guys - if we want to.

Im assuming Pryor balls the **** out and gets an incredible amount of money. I would have gone all in on him at a discount this year, instead of hedging my bet. Brown too.