Furthermore, size is a very over-rated factor used to judge players on these boards--the tall players are almost always over-hyped and when they put the pads on the smaller players are the ones that often out-perform their rankings.
and by NFL coaches, evidently, b/c it is almost always the taller receover who getsthe benefit of the doubt -size m,ake for a better jump ball candifdate, size makes a player more likely to outreach the 5'11"/6'0" CBs.
Size is not overrated, though a player might be.
I think the point BnB made was that Gardner has both size and equivelant or better athletic ability as Colbert.
Point of reference - BnB is probably the biggest Panther fan on these boards, yet is an extremely objective fantasy football player - when he speaks on his team, I listen.
i reread the thread because i thought i missed something...
maybe i missed it, but i didn't see anywhere where bnb qualified his support of gardner... point taken that gardner is bigger... but where is it said that in his opinion he has equivalent or better athletic ability. or even implied. even if he had, not sure on what basis that argument would be made. maybe it could, but it is not obvious from what direction that would take place, so i would be very interested in hearing the grounds. he is bigger. that is a statement of fact. he may or may not have equivalent or superior athleticism... but that is yet to be proven. colbert's lack of separation was alluded to (more will be said about this later)... but whether gardner is skilled at this is left unsaid... i would lean to think that it is not his strong suit, or it would have been noted, but we don't have that counterbalanced perspective, so we can't say for sure until this is addressed.
as to the homer reference... i didn't know bnb was a panthers homer... i do think there is something to this... i always pay close attention to what jason says about eagles, aaron about bills, bob henry about lions, norton about bengals, chase about jets, cracker about bay area teams, cecil about broncs, overton about steelers, i think i know a thing or two about the rams since i've been following them for over 25 years (about jackie slater's tenure
)... & so on & so forth.
but by this rationale, shouldn't we be NOT listening to bnb?
just kidding... but if are going to employ the homer heuristic, gardner has only been with the team a couple days. shouldn't we be asking redskins homers? i'm a big usc fan... doesn't my opinion count for something? i've watched colbert for longer than just the year he was at CAR.
so far i don't think there has been any bickering... lets think of it as an opportunity to clarify some matters that might even have some meaning & bearing that spills out beyond the narrow purview of colbert/gardner. an opportunity to learn some things of more general & widely applicable interst.
like i said, there is some merit in the position that those who follow team most closely would be expected to know the most about them. if you think about this kind of obvious point, it would be strange if it weren't true, when put like that.
but i am not sure that is the case here. bnb isn't (to my knowledge) relaying info about the depth chart... no links to headlines from local papers saying that colbert is plummetting down the depth chart, per the coaches. he was stating an opinion about how he sees a currently indeterminate situation resolving. while he is certainly in no worse a position to state such an opinion vis-a-vis "outsiders", for reasons cited above, he may not be any better... gardner has been panther for few days... hardly the body of work with CAR by which anybody could be "expert" on... & colbert does have a body of work that extends down below what he did as a rookie (& an impressive rookie year it was)... like the mass of an iceberg that lies below the surface... & it was THAT body of work that led CAR to draft colbert in round 2, in what many knowledgeable scouts said may have been the most talented WR class in the history of the draft. (yes, i know gardner was a high draft pick, too... higher, actually... 1.15 '01).
while i think it is good to know what teams others follow closely, the bottom line is that arguments have to stand on their own merit. i would hope that others wouldn't believe everything i say when disussing the rams, just because i am a supposed rams "expert". if you are seeing things clearly & have stated your case cogently, a consensus will form around you without the need to resort to labels of authority (bnb didn't do this BTW, but i find it important to discuss because it does go on)... if you didn't, no amount of resorting to homerism will amend the situation. the only remedy for this state of affairs is thinking about matters more clearly & deeply... i vow to not bring up USC homerism, expertise & authoritativeness in this post again, towards that goal.
what we are really talking about here is scouting sense... not homerism. my aunt might live in SF & seen them play for years... but i would implicitly trust bob henry's take on a 5 minute breakdown of a highlight package of a niner like kevan barlow or rashaun woods (two controversial current SF prospects) over her... because i have come to trust & respect his scouting sense. that TYPE of expertise to me is far more important & useful as it transcends where he grew up & where he may currently reside. bob SEES stuff that i miss... than he points it out in a way that i can see in retrospect. comedians use same raw material for their humor as we have access to (life)... but a guy like chappelle just seems to have (whether innate or acquired talent) a gift for noticing stuff we missed on first pass, highlighting it, & allowing us to see humor in the common place. some people are just better at it than others. chappelle has a demonstrable, repeatable gift for being funny... bob henry does for spotting sleepers. and it has nothing to do with homerism... otherwise bob would only report on DET.
again, i am not disputing bnb's scouting sense (it isn't even relevant for the immediate point)... just be aware if a statement is made whether it is a public record type statement (on aug 15, the CAR bugle reported that HC john fox has installed garner at WR2, & dropped colbert to 4-5) where a homer might see things ahead of national media... i'm pretty sure i saw on rams homer board that terrell had assumed #1 LG on depth chart & was looking great... ahead of news about it in blogger. we than have to separate out opinions ventured not based on public record... ie - our own observations, which will stand (or fall) on their own merit... the acuity, insightfulness & depth.
the one scouting eye-type critique bnb levelled at colbert was that he didn't get separation. fair enough. failure to separate can be a death blow to an NFL WR... it is true that many who succeed at it spectacularly in college fail miserably in pros. but don't many rookies struggle with this crucial aspect? i don't sense that colbert is getting the benefit of the doubt. imo, it is possible he could get better at this... in fact, i expect him too based on his work ethic, pssion for the game & desire to be great. maybe gardner has these attributes too (here is case where WAS & clemson homers could help us
)... but even if he did, they don't seem to have helped much because i wasn't aware that gardner was renowned for his formidable separation ability. i think after four seasons, it is safe to say he will never have moss-like separation ability.
at least i think there is hope for colbert as he just has one year under his belt, & there is probably more that is unknown about his ceiling, relative to gardner... we know less about what colbert CAN'T do.
i agree with the school of thought that says gardner has not had the best of QB help. but this is distinct & separate from issue of whether he separates well. it is as possible to have a good QB & not be able to separate as it is to have converse case... a bad QB coupled with WR who can separate.
to return to earlier point that gardner is clearly bigger & has equal of better athleticism? if you go by stats, they had nearly identical rookie seasons (gardner's 46-741-4 remarkably, eerily even, similar to colbert). so since gardner is so much bigger & stronger... doesn't that suggest colbert did more with less, which might confer upon him superior athleticism? but of course we could forgive gardner for having appallingly bad QB play... so we have to dig a little deeper (almost there
). i just don't think that it has been at all close to demonstrated, or even attempted, that gardner is equal or superior in athleticism. i have just suggested the opposite, & given a reason to support it, as well as to discount it, so others can weigh the evidence & form their own conclusion... you won't get any easy answers or spoon fed judgements in this thread.
will gardner be better in red zone than colbert. this is very possible... but aren't we talking about a situational role, than? nobody racked up more yards receiving than torry holt (ram homer alert) in past five seasons... yet b4 previous two seasons, they didn't look to him much in the end zone. we wouldn't conclude on this basis that holt wasn't a good WR in 2000-'02, because he didn't score a lot of TDs.
the comparison to holt may seem like an absurd one, but i have a reason for making it. is holt too small? is he too slow? you may be anticipating where this is leading. holt is 6'0" 190 & used to run a 4.4... these are about as close as you can get to their triangle numbers... virtually identical. earlier in this thread (actually in a link to a tangential thread), colbert was called dimunitive. when did 6'0" 190 become dimunitive? and if it is, does that make holt dimunitive?
this all is reminiscent of when lincoln was informed that grant was a drunk... he promptly asked to have a barrell of the same whisky sent to all the other generals under his command.
if holt is dimunitive... i want a roster chock full & power packed with dimunitive WRs.
some WRs are tall, fast & excellent... moss, owens, chad johnson, javon walker, andre johnson are among best exemplars of this set of WRs.
harrison, holt, mason all are among WRs with most receptions in past 5 years... yet they are not physical specimens.
as to whether gardner would be beter on jump balls, i think there are not many times during game where this situation arises. manning & bulger don't move the ball down the field by throwing the ball up for grabs a lot (well, they couldn't as they don't have huge WRs, but that is a different story
)... they employ a downfield attack based on precision route running, timing routes, throwing the ball into small windows but where only your guy can get it, even if they aren't wide open, etc.
what makes a WR great is a complex issue... i don't think anybody here takes a simple minded approach & says X WR must be stud because they are tall... or fast. just as we should not conclude that a WR like isaac bruce (#5 in receiving yards last season), who is not blazing fast or a physical specimen, must surely be a failure, due to the fact that he didn't have eye-popping measurables.
i would venture to say that holt separates better now than he did as a rookie (i return to this point to tie up some loose ends about why we might give colbert benefit of doubt on his inability to do this consistently as a rookie, & maybe not with 4 year veteran gardner)... why? did he get faster? did he cut his 4.4 time to a 4.3? no. the answer is, he learned some key elements to route running from his mentor bruce, & perhaps figured out a few things on his own. just to list a few, they would include learning how to cut at full speed, fooling & cross up DBs by setting them up, not giving opponents poker-like "tells" or telegraphed body language about what route to expect next, etc.
note that these have nothing to do with being 6'4", having a 40" vertical, running a sub-4.4 40 & benching 500 lbs.
separation is great, but there are only a handful of WRs in the league who are so head & shoulders above everybody else that they are perpetually runnning crazy free... guys like moss & harrison. it would be nice if there were 64 guys like that so everybody could have two... but the reality is that most teams have one guy like that if they are lucky, & many have none.
the factor that is almost universally cited about why the pro game is so difficult for rookies (especially rookie WRs & QBs) to adjust to is the fact that there is so much parity... almost everybody is talented at NFL level... faster, stronger, more explosive... since the DBs are about as fast & talented as the WRs, QBs must throw into tighter windows, use timing routes, etc.
BTW, a smaller WRs can overcome lack of separation is by tricking the DB & not reaching for ball until the last instant... colbert also effectively plays taller by extending his arms UP & highpointing the ball better than some other WRs... this must be harder than it sounds... picture yourself sprinting down sidelines than at last second stick your hands up in the air... WITHOUT BREAKING STRIDE... maintain your speed, run under control & come down with ball... i saw colbert do this a lot at USC.
i think due to his work ethic (not saying gardner doesn't have one, but i don't remember hear WAS coaches raving about it... maybe he was miscast in spurrier & gibbs systems), it is at least possible that colbert may get better at those aspects of route running like leaning how to cut at full speed... this could be an acquired skill for him, as it were.
as to the dimunitive question... maybe some see gardner being better fit next to dimunitive smith (yes, he IS dimunitive
)... but we should at least consider the possibility that teams can succeed like the rams with a high octane passing attack without a physical, hulking "power" WR. fox has had muhammad to pair with smith in past, & maybe he likes having a big guy to start alongside the tiny smith for his run blocking prowess. but if this were the case, he might state at some point that gardner will be the man for this reason... until he does (& if he doesn't), we are speculating.
despite the fact that colbert is the size he is, fox did draft him with relatively high second round pick... maybe he was drafted to be a WR3 to complement muhammad & smith, & not as WR2? they certainly didn't know smith would be injured game one, prompting his insertion into starting lineup for most of season. they may have known whether they intended to keep muhammad or not... i suspect (bnb probably knows) they intended to re-sign him but he unexpectedly blew up & priced himself out of CAR market. that would suggest that colbert was thought of as a WR3... at least initially... with it being an open question whether colbert might than be groomed as WR2 some day? or if fox would be opposed to having two dimunitive WRs, & would insist on at least one big body for run blocking? i have no idea, but i am pretty sure i never heard fox say the latter, & i though i read things saying colbert was thought advanced & talented enuf to be WR2 that would complement smith as WR1... maybe with colbert as possession WR to complement deep threat smith.
if gardner was really a key piece to the puzzle, a future integral part of the offense, they sure didn't act like it. they played a game of chicken with SEA & NO... maybe they knew that gardner wanted to play close to home (advantage over SEA) & they did give him a one year contract whereas NO reportedly wanted two. but it seemed like they didn't care that much about whether they got him or not (they could have engineered trade with WAS much earlier if it was important), & were content to have SEA or NO steal him away if it wasn't on exactly the right terms for them.
plus giving him a one year deal isn't a huge vote of confidence?
some of the matters about colbert having imo greater chance of developing because we no less about what he CAN'T do... (many rookies struggle to separate than make marked, pronounced progress in year 2-3... gardner is in year 5... if he isn't great at separating yet...?) admittedly have more to do with dynasty concerns.
though i am still not convinced that gardner is more likely to be WR2 & colbert could drop to WR4-5 this season... barring injury of course.
sorry for the dissertation, but i thought there was more to be said than just... colbert is good. some of these matters intersect with important themes such as what makes a WR great?... is size or speed the most important element?... if not, what is?
stripping away the peripheral concerns, & tunnelling down to these more root matters, holds out the potential to broaden our fantasy acumen (not saying i have the answers... i expect to learn things from others on the thread) which we can leverage on better judgement about ALL & future skill position players, not just colbert/gardner in present context.
Bass, although you could've saved yourself a week of analysis if you'd just listened to what was said:
I don't know on what other planet Gardner played football, but here on Earth he has sucked most of his career. REALLY sucked. In fact sucked so bad that on the WR-starved Redskins, they wanted to trade him....and garnered all of a 6th round pick.
Carter actually was the better NFL WR prospect coming out of the draft last year (ref. Colbert), he was coming off an injury and only had limited experience at the position after playing some CB as I recall.Interesting thing is that for all the doom a gloom around here when Muhammy departed, the Panthers really have a lot of potential talent at the position.
46/741/4 in 16 games is pretty impressive? I will say I saw him a few times and thought "OK he's just a rook, next year could be the 'breakout' year....." but he has largely fizzled since. cstu does make a good point in that most of his QBs have sucked, but overall IMO it's a lot more than sucky QBs.