Great article on "Why rookie receivers struggle" (1 Viewer)

[madd futher]

Why Do Rookie Receivers Struggle?

Why do rookie wide receivers vanish over the course of their first NFL seasons, and why can we count on them in their second seasons? Today, I’ll discuss the topic and throw out a few names of guys who must produce in their sophomore seasons — because they have to.

The Struggles

Rookies just don’t get it, and rookie wide receivers really don’t get it when it comes to the NFL.

Why? Is there something that prevents them from showing us the same playmaking ability that got them drafted in the first place, or are they just overmatched, immature and unwilling to do what it takes to play at this level?

Well, it’s a combination of all of those things, and more.

Let’s look at a few and then get to some names that absolutely need to prove their worth this time around — because their teammates, and the owner, are counting on them.

1. Press coverage: Rookies don’t have experience with it and aren’t prepared for the size and strength of NFL cornerbacks. If you can’t get off a jam, you can’t get open in this league.

2. Reading coverages: Unlike the college game, the defenses that NFL teams run are complex, and they disguise their looks until the snap of the ball. Wide receivers have to adjust their routes based on the coverage, and if they don’t, QBs won’t throw them the ball. It’s as simple as that.

3. Size and speed: Rookies can’t run past everyone on the field like they did in college, so they struggle competing with the size and speed of NFL secondaries. They can’t separate, so they need to be polished route runners — and that takes time to develop.

4. Playbooks: In the NFL, playbooks can rival an encyclopedia in size, and a big issue with rookies is their unwillingness to study. You can’t get by just being a good athlete because everyone is up there. Don’t know the plays? Then you don’t see the field.

5. Physical demands: With the preseason, plus six weeks of training camp, the NFL consists of 20 games and 22 weeks of practice. It’s a long grind, and rookie wide receivers are built like track stars — and they don’t hold up when the calendar turns to December.

 

[Chase Stuart]

5. Physical demands: With the preseason, plus six weeks of training camp, the NFL consists of 20 games and 22 weeks of practice. It’s a long grind, and rookie wide receivers are built like track stars — and they don’t hold up when the calendar turns to December.

I'm not sure I'd agree with that without seeing some proof.FWIW, I believe (but you shouldn't, without seeing proof) that passing numbers in general decline in December. That said:I checked the last 10 rookie WRs to have >400 yards (Bowe, Royal, Jackson, Johnson, Avery, Jones, Gonzalez, Bess, Robinson and Ginn). The group averaged 9.3 FP/G on the season, but 9.7 FP/G in the last five weeks of the season (PPR scoring). On the season, those players averaged 3.5 receptions, 45.7 yards and 0.2 TD per game; over the last five weeks they averaged 3.9 receptions, 46.0 yards and 0.2 TD per game. Gonzalez was the biggest "late finisher", with Bess not far behind. Ginn and Robinson also had big finishes.Anyway, I'm not saying rookie WRs tend to play better at the end of the season. I certainly haven't shown that. But the statement that rookie WRs don't hold up when the calendar turns to December is an empirical one, and thus one that should be investigated before being believed.

 

[Da Guru]

Charles Rogers and Mike Williams are prime examples. From what I have heard from people close to the team is that Rogers nor Williams were willing to work on their route running ans watch the film needed to succeed in this league.

Both of those guys had horrible practice habits in college, WRS just can`t get away with not putting in the work in the NFL.

 

[Terps2002]

I agree all the reason the author listed play a factor, my personal opinion is the thing that makes rookie wr's struggle the most is route running . Even the best route runners in college don't run their routes as efficient as a NFL wr. The corners aren't as good and the windows to catch the ball are alot wider then they are in the NFL.

When the play dictates that you run a slant 6 1/2 yards down the field, you better not run it 6 yards or 7 yards or it is an interception in the NFL and you lose that quarterback's trust. If a quarterback doesn't trust you, you aren't gonna see the ball thrown your way. There is an art to running patterns and running those patterns in the most efficient way possible.

Obviously some rookie wr's who have more then the normal amount of physical attributes can overcome this important ingredient. Calvin Johnson and Randy Moss stand out in this category with their height, speed and leaping ability. Alot of the plays that stand out for those that watched Moss and Johnson was them gliding down the sideines and out leaping the cornerbacks guarding them to make the catch.

 

[FUBAR]

Why Do Rookie Receivers Struggle?

Why do rookie wide receivers vanish over the course of their first NFL seasons, and why can we count on them in their second seasons? ...

FWIWnumber of rookie WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1

number of rookie WRs in the top 30 in receptions = 2; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 2

I don't disagree with the concept, but maybe 2008 was just a bad example

Route running is probably the biggest difference, it's worth noting that the top 2 rookie WRs were slot, very quick WRs.

Which is why, as a rookie, IMO Percy Harvin has the best chance to produce well, even better than Crabtree. Also watch out for Collie.

 

[ajopiela]

Despite this, i really think Nicks, Crabtree, and Heyward-Bey are all in really good situations.

I wouldnt count on these guys to be a WR1/2, but i'd take them as a 3-4. Maybe not Heyward-Bey if it looks like he's having trouble in camp.

 

[FUBAR]

Despite this, i really think Nicks, Crabtree, and Heyward-Bey are all in really good situations.

I wouldnt count on these guys to be a WR1/2, but i'd take them as a 3-4. Maybe not Heyward-Bey if it looks like he's having trouble in camp.

I must be missing something here.How is Crabtree in a really good situation? Talent, sure. But if going to a team with Alex Smith looking to start, or Shaun Hill, whose top WR netted 835 yards last year, is a really good situation, I must not understand football. If your point is that rookie WRs produce well when there's an absence of competition, I might agree if he had a really good QB.

Nicks, I like the situation more, but I wouldn't count on him to be a WR3. Maybe 4.

DHB in a really good situation? Must be lack of competition again, but unless you expect Russell to connect often with the speedster, I don't see it.

Doing a little research (and I do mean little), the rookie WRs who have value in redrafts have good QBs. Even Calvin Johnson was barely if at all startable as a rookie.

ETA: I realize this statement is at odds with my Harvin comment, for now. 4

 

[Chase Stuart]

Why Do Rookie Receivers Struggle?

Why do rookie wide receivers vanish over the course of their first NFL seasons, and why can we count on them in their second seasons? ...

FWIWnumber of rookie WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1

number of rookie WRs in the top 30 in receptions = 2; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 2

I don't disagree with the concept, but maybe 2008 was just a bad example

Route running is probably the biggest difference, it's worth noting that the top 2 rookie WRs were slot, very quick WRs.

Which is why, as a rookie, IMO Percy Harvin has the best chance to produce well, even better than Crabtree. Also watch out for Collie.

Crabtree's about 100x the better route runner than Harvin.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Despite this, i really think Nicks, Crabtree, and Heyward-Bey are all in really good situations.

I wouldnt count on these guys to be a WR1/2, but i'd take them as a 3-4. Maybe not Heyward-Bey if it looks like he's having trouble in camp.

I must be missing something here.How is Crabtree in a really good situation? Talent, sure. But if going to a team with Alex Smith looking to start, or Shaun Hill, whose top WR netted 835 yards last year, is a really good situation, I must not understand football. If your point is that rookie WRs produce well when there's an absence of competition, I might agree if he had a really good QB.

Nicks, I like the situation more, but I wouldn't count on him to be a WR3. Maybe 4.

DHB in a really good situation? Must be lack of competition again, but unless you expect Russell to connect often with the speedster, I don't see it.

Doing a little research (and I do mean little), the rookie WRs who have value in redrafts have good QBs. Even Calvin Johnson was barely if at all startable as a rookie.

ETA: I realize this statement is at odds with my Harvin comment, for now. 4

Shaun Hill was on a roughly 4,000 yard pace last season in his 8 starts. And that was without Crabtree. SF is an attractive destination -- good running game, potentially good QB, not a lot of competition at WR, and SF should be throwing quite a bit.

DHB is in a good situation as well. I expect Russell to connect with him on some bombs for sure.

 

[FUBAR]

Why Do Rookie Receivers Struggle?

Why do rookie wide receivers vanish over the course of their first NFL seasons, and why can we count on them in their second seasons? ...

FWIWnumber of rookie WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1

number of rookie WRs in the top 30 in receptions = 2; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 2

I don't disagree with the concept, but maybe 2008 was just a bad example

Route running is probably the biggest difference, it's worth noting that the top 2 rookie WRs were slot, very quick WRs.

Which is why, as a rookie, IMO Percy Harvin has the best chance to produce well, even better than Crabtree. Also watch out for Collie.

Crabtree's about 100x the better route runner than Harvin.

I know, but he isn't as quick, won't be in the slot (most likely anyway) and I actually see Minnesota throwing more than SF this year. Maybe I'm wrong though.Do you really think Crabtree will run good enough routes to produce as a rookie? My premise could be flawed, the top 2 WR rookies lacked great QBs, but these are the rarity and Crabtree is not on the same level (even though the league slept on Boldin)

 

[FUBAR]

Despite this, i really think Nicks, Crabtree, and Heyward-Bey are all in really good situations.

I wouldnt count on these guys to be a WR1/2, but i'd take them as a 3-4. Maybe not Heyward-Bey if it looks like he's having trouble in camp.

I must be missing something here.How is Crabtree in a really good situation? Talent, sure. But if going to a team with Alex Smith looking to start, or Shaun Hill, whose top WR netted 835 yards last year, is a really good situation, I must not understand football. If your point is that rookie WRs produce well when there's an absence of competition, I might agree if he had a really good QB.

Nicks, I like the situation more, but I wouldn't count on him to be a WR3. Maybe 4.

DHB in a really good situation? Must be lack of competition again, but unless you expect Russell to connect often with the speedster, I don't see it.

Doing a little research (and I do mean little), the rookie WRs who have value in redrafts have good QBs. Even Calvin Johnson was barely if at all startable as a rookie.

ETA: I realize this statement is at odds with my Harvin comment, for now. 4

Shaun Hill was on a roughly 4,000 yard pace last season in his 8 starts. And that was without Crabtree. SF is an attractive destination -- good running game, potentially good QB, not a lot of competition at WR, and SF should be throwing quite a bit.

DHB is in a good situation as well. I expect Russell to connect with him on some bombs for sure.

I'd be shocked if most of us feel comfortable starting DHB at any point this year. He may put up some huge plays, but he won't be consistent.You really think Hill is a potentially good QB or SF throwing "quite a bit"? I guess we'll just agree to disagree here. Your 4,000 yard projection is inaccurate, he played a good amount in 9 games and was on pace for 3637/23/14. Decent I guess, but he's not a good enough QB to make a rookie WR productive. Crabtree could surprise me, but I'm not taking him in redrafts.

 

[FantasyTrader]

Why Do Rookie Receivers Struggle?

Why do rookie wide receivers vanish over the course of their first NFL seasons, and why can we count on them in their second seasons? ...

FWIWnumber of rookie WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1

number of rookie WRs in the top 30 in receptions = 2; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 2

I don't disagree with the concept, but maybe 2008 was just a bad example

Route running is probably the biggest difference, it's worth noting that the top 2 rookie WRs were slot, very quick WRs.

Which is why, as a rookie, IMO Percy Harvin has the best chance to produce well, even better than Crabtree. Also watch out for Collie.

Crabtree's about 100x the better route runner than Harvin.

I know, but he isn't as quick, won't be in the slot (most likely anyway) and I actually see Minnesota throwing more than SF this year. Maybe I'm wrong though.

I'll take the 49er side of that action. I'd guess the 9er's are trailing by 8+ heading into the 4th quarter this year roughly double the number of times the Vikings are. Granted, I fully realize that's only a piece of the equation.

 

[FantasyTrader]

Despite this, i really think Nicks, Crabtree, and Heyward-Bey are all in really good situations.

I wouldnt count on these guys to be a WR1/2, but i'd take them as a 3-4. Maybe not Heyward-Bey if it looks like he's having trouble in camp.

I must be missing something here.How is Crabtree in a really good situation? Talent, sure. But if going to a team with Alex Smith looking to start, or Shaun Hill, whose top WR netted 835 yards last year, is a really good situation, I must not understand football. If your point is that rookie WRs produce well when there's an absence of competition, I might agree if he had a really good QB.

Nicks, I like the situation more, but I wouldn't count on him to be a WR3. Maybe 4.

DHB in a really good situation? Must be lack of competition again, but unless you expect Russell to connect often with the speedster, I don't see it.

Doing a little research (and I do mean little), the rookie WRs who have value in redrafts have good QBs. Even Calvin Johnson was barely if at all startable as a rookie.

ETA: I realize this statement is at odds with my Harvin comment, for now. 4

Shaun Hill was on a roughly 4,000 yard pace last season in his 8 starts. And that was without Crabtree. SF is an attractive destination -- good running game, potentially good QB, not a lot of competition at WR, and SF should be throwing quite a bit.

DHB is in a good situation as well. I expect Russell to connect with him on some bombs for sure.

Prorate Shaun Hill's number's over a full season and it seems like we should start mentioning his name without the dollop of sarcasm.

 

[Chase Stuart]

You really think Hill is a potentially good QB or SF throwing "quite a bit"? I guess we'll just agree to disagree here. Your 4,000 yard projection is inaccurate, he played a good amount in 9 games and was on pace for 3637/23/14. Decent I guess, but he's not a good enough QB to make a rookie WR productive. Crabtree could surprise me, but I'm not taking him in redrafts.

Hill played in 8.5 games last year, which put him on a 3851 yard pace.SF was 18th in pass attempts but 27th in team RB rush attempts. SF didn't run many plays last year, partially because the offense wasn't good. The defense isn't very good, either. Those two things tend to keep your plays down, but those things also change from year to year.With more plays this year -- which should happen as SF should be a better team -- that will lead to more passes. I'm not a believer at all in Glen Coffee, so I really think SF will be a team with a decent amount of pass attempts. I see the 509 attempts they had last year as the floor and probably expect 530 or so this year. Whether or not SF passes for 3500 yards or 3800 or 4100, Crabtree's in a good spot. They should at least be average as a passing offense, and considering the lack of competition for targets, what's not to like for Crabtree? Bruce is just about done and Johnson and Davis are complements, not threats.

 

[FUBAR]

You really think Hill is a potentially good QB or SF throwing "quite a bit"? I guess we'll just agree to disagree here. Your 4,000 yard projection is inaccurate, he played a good amount in 9 games and was on pace for 3637/23/14. Decent I guess, but he's not a good enough QB to make a rookie WR productive. Crabtree could surprise me, but I'm not taking him in redrafts.

Hill played in 8.5 games last year, which put him on a 3851 yard pace.SF was 18th in pass attempts but 27th in team RB rush attempts. SF didn't run many plays last year, partially because the offense wasn't good. The defense isn't very good, either. Those two things tend to keep your plays down, but those things also change from year to year.With more plays this year -- which should happen as SF should be a better team -- that will lead to more passes. I'm not a believer at all in Glen Coffee, so I really think SF will be a team with a decent amount of pass attempts. I see the 509 attempts they had last year as the floor and probably expect 530 or so this year. Whether or not SF passes for 3500 yards or 3800 or 4100, Crabtree's in a good spot. They should at least be average as a passing offense, and considering the lack of competition for targets, what's not to like for Crabtree? Bruce is just about done and Johnson and Davis are complements, not threats.

I happen to think they run more, Gore missed 2 games and only ran 240 times. You may not like Coffee, but IMO he's better than Foster was. I hope you're right, I just don't see it.

 

[Matt Waldman]

Crabtree's about 100x the better route runner than Harvin.

Really? Are you sure? Because I'd be more inclined to say Graham Harrell with all the jokes about Mike Leach and him aside, is a better passer than Tim Tebow and the offense didn't demand Harvin to run those routes. I would agree Crabtree is a better route runner, but not by so great a margin that Harvin will be a useless draft pick based on his skills. The route running is more of an indictment against Urban Meyer and the UF offense and Tebow than Harvin's skills.Harvin reportedly demonstrated good intermediate routes during his pro day; routes he never had to run in the UF offense, not because he couldn't but because Tebow is noticeably weak at throwing those type of routes.BTW - Jason Hill isn't a stiff and he's only three years into his gig. I think the starting duo in SF will eventually be Crabtree-Hill. Hill has skill sets more like Bruce than any receiver I've seen in recent years.

 

[5Rings]

You really think Hill is a potentially good QB or SF throwing "quite a bit"? I guess we'll just agree to disagree here. Your 4,000 yard projection is inaccurate, he played a good amount in 9 games and was on pace for 3637/23/14. Decent I guess, but he's not a good enough QB to make a rookie WR productive. Crabtree could surprise me, but I'm not taking him in redrafts.

Hill played in 8.5 games last year, which put him on a 3851 yard pace.SF was 18th in pass attempts but 27th in team RB rush attempts. SF didn't run many plays last year, partially because the offense wasn't good. The defense isn't very good, either. Those two things tend to keep your plays down, but those things also change from year to year.With more plays this year -- which should happen as SF should be a better team -- that will lead to more passes. I'm not a believer at all in Glen Coffee, so I really think SF will be a team with a decent amount of pass attempts. I see the 509 attempts they had last year as the floor and probably expect 530 or so this year. Whether or not SF passes for 3500 yards or 3800 or 4100, Crabtree's in a good spot. They should at least be average as a passing offense, and considering the lack of competition for targets, what's not to like for Crabtree? Bruce is just about done and Johnson and Davis are complements, not threats.

I happen to think they run more, Gore missed 2 games and only ran 240 times. You may not like Coffee, but IMO he's better than Foster was. I hope you're right, I just don't see it.

Chase is pretty much 180 degrees on everything here. You can learn much more watching a game vs reading the statbook

 

[Chase Stuart]

You really think Hill is a potentially good QB or SF throwing "quite a bit"? I guess we'll just agree to disagree here. Your 4,000 yard projection is inaccurate, he played a good amount in 9 games and was on pace for 3637/23/14. Decent I guess, but he's not a good enough QB to make a rookie WR productive. Crabtree could surprise me, but I'm not taking him in redrafts.

Hill played in 8.5 games last year, which put him on a 3851 yard pace.SF was 18th in pass attempts but 27th in team RB rush attempts. SF didn't run many plays last year, partially because the offense wasn't good. The defense isn't very good, either. Those two things tend to keep your plays down, but those things also change from year to year.With more plays this year -- which should happen as SF should be a better team -- that will lead to more passes. I'm not a believer at all in Glen Coffee, so I really think SF will be a team with a decent amount of pass attempts. I see the 509 attempts they had last year as the floor and probably expect 530 or so this year. Whether or not SF passes for 3500 yards or 3800 or 4100, Crabtree's in a good spot. They should at least be average as a passing offense, and considering the lack of competition for targets, what's not to like for Crabtree? Bruce is just about done and Johnson and Davis are complements, not threats.

I happen to think they run more, Gore missed 2 games and only ran 240 times. You may not like Coffee, but IMO he's better than Foster was. I hope you're right, I just don't see it.

They can run more and pass more.

 

[Chase Stuart]

You really think Hill is a potentially good QB or SF throwing "quite a bit"? I guess we'll just agree to disagree here. Your 4,000 yard projection is inaccurate, he played a good amount in 9 games and was on pace for 3637/23/14. Decent I guess, but he's not a good enough QB to make a rookie WR productive. Crabtree could surprise me, but I'm not taking him in redrafts.

Hill played in 8.5 games last year, which put him on a 3851 yard pace.SF was 18th in pass attempts but 27th in team RB rush attempts. SF didn't run many plays last year, partially because the offense wasn't good. The defense isn't very good, either. Those two things tend to keep your plays down, but those things also change from year to year.With more plays this year -- which should happen as SF should be a better team -- that will lead to more passes. I'm not a believer at all in Glen Coffee, so I really think SF will be a team with a decent amount of pass attempts. I see the 509 attempts they had last year as the floor and probably expect 530 or so this year. Whether or not SF passes for 3500 yards or 3800 or 4100, Crabtree's in a good spot. They should at least be average as a passing offense, and considering the lack of competition for targets, what's not to like for Crabtree? Bruce is just about done and Johnson and Davis are complements, not threats.

I happen to think they run more, Gore missed 2 games and only ran 240 times. You may not like Coffee, but IMO he's better than Foster was. I hope you're right, I just don't see it.

Chase is pretty much 180 degrees on everything here. You can learn much more watching a game vs reading the statbook

SF had 509 passes last year. How many do you project for this year?

 

[The Fog Of War]

You really think Hill is a potentially good QB or SF throwing "quite a bit"? I guess we'll just agree to disagree here. Your 4,000 yard projection is inaccurate, he played a good amount in 9 games and was on pace for 3637/23/14. Decent I guess, but he's not a good enough QB to make a rookie WR productive. Crabtree could surprise me, but I'm not taking him in redrafts.

Hill played in 8.5 games last year, which put him on a 3851 yard pace.SF was 18th in pass attempts but 27th in team RB rush attempts. SF didn't run many plays last year, partially because the offense wasn't good. The defense isn't very good, either. Those two things tend to keep your plays down, but those things also change from year to year.

With more plays this year -- which should happen as SF should be a better team -- that will lead to more passes. I'm not a believer at all in Glen Coffee, so I really think SF will be a team with a decent amount of pass attempts. I see the 509 attempts they had last year as the floor and probably expect 530 or so this year. Whether or not SF passes for 3500 yards or 3800 or 4100, Crabtree's in a good spot. They should at least be average as a passing offense, and considering the lack of competition for targets, what's not to like for Crabtree? Bruce is just about done and Johnson and Davis are complements, not threats.

Who is Johnson? If you mean Bryant Johnson, he went to DetroitJosh Morgan, Jason Hill, Brandon Jones & Arnaz Battle round out the 49ers receivers.

The numbers generated by the 49ers passing game in 2008 are an anomaly. Mike Martz is gone.

 

[Chase Stuart]

You really think Hill is a potentially good QB or SF throwing "quite a bit"? I guess we'll just agree to disagree here. Your 4,000 yard projection is inaccurate, he played a good amount in 9 games and was on pace for 3637/23/14. Decent I guess, but he's not a good enough QB to make a rookie WR productive. Crabtree could surprise me, but I'm not taking him in redrafts.

Hill played in 8.5 games last year, which put him on a 3851 yard pace.SF was 18th in pass attempts but 27th in team RB rush attempts. SF didn't run many plays last year, partially because the offense wasn't good. The defense isn't very good, either. Those two things tend to keep your plays down, but those things also change from year to year.

With more plays this year -- which should happen as SF should be a better team -- that will lead to more passes. I'm not a believer at all in Glen Coffee, so I really think SF will be a team with a decent amount of pass attempts. I see the 509 attempts they had last year as the floor and probably expect 530 or so this year. Whether or not SF passes for 3500 yards or 3800 or 4100, Crabtree's in a good spot. They should at least be average as a passing offense, and considering the lack of competition for targets, what's not to like for Crabtree? Bruce is just about done and Johnson and Davis are complements, not threats.

Who is Johnson? If you mean Bryant Johnson, he went to DetroitJosh Morgan, Jason Hill, Brandon Jones & Arnaz Battle round out the 49ers receivers.

The numbers generated by the 49ers passing game in 2008 are an anomaly. Mike Martz is gone.

Good catch on Johnson. I forgot about that.

What numbers are an anomaly? SF didn't pass frequently in '08. They ranked 18th in attempts.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

Why Do Rookie Receivers Struggle?

Why do rookie wide receivers vanish over the course of their first NFL seasons, and why can we count on them in their second seasons? ...

FWIWnumber of rookie WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1

number of rookie WRs in the top 30 in receptions = 2; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 2

I don't disagree with the concept, but maybe 2008 was just a bad example

Route running is probably the biggest difference, it's worth noting that the top 2 rookie WRs were slot, very quick WRs.

Which is why, as a rookie, IMO Percy Harvin has the best chance to produce well, even better than Crabtree. Also watch out for Collie.

I agree with you about Harvin, but Peyton Manning doesn't exactly endear himself to rookies. You have to earn your stripes with Manning in order to get many looks. Don't look for Collie to make much of an impact at all his rookie year. It was that way with Wayne, Clark, and Gonzalez. Also, the Colts are very high on Garcon to make a huge leap this year.

 

[lyon812]

Why Do Rookie Receivers Struggle?

Why do rookie wide receivers vanish over the course of their first NFL seasons, and why can we count on them in their second seasons? ...

FWIWnumber of rookie WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1

number of rookie WRs in the top 30 in receptions = 2; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 2

I don't disagree with the concept, but maybe 2008 was just a bad example

Route running is probably the biggest difference, it's worth noting that the top 2 rookie WRs were slot, very quick WRs.

Which is why, as a rookie, IMO Percy Harvin has the best chance to produce well, even better than Crabtree. Also watch out for Collie.

I agree with you about Harvin, but Peyton Manning doesn't exactly endear himself to rookies. You have to earn your stripes with Manning in order to get many looks. Don't look for Collie to make much of an impact at all his rookie year. It was that way with Wayne, Clark, and Gonzalez. Also, the Colts are very high on Garcon to make a huge leap this year.

I'm a big Garcon fan myself. He'd have to fall flat on his face--which he's shown no indication of doing--for Collie to overtake him.

 

[Joe Bryant]

FWIW, I believe (but you shouldn't, without seeing proof)...

Master Drinen puts his hand on his chin and says, "The Force is strong in this one"...J

 

[Jail]

Good catch on Johnson. I forgot about that.What numbers are an anomaly? SF didn't pass frequently in '08. They ranked 18th in attempts.

But they only ran it 397 times, which ranked them 27th in rushing attempts. I just don't see that type of pass/run ration happening without Martz.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Good catch on Johnson. I forgot about that.What numbers are an anomaly? SF didn't pass frequently in '08. They ranked 18th in attempts.

But they only ran it 397 times, which ranked them 27th in rushing attempts. I just don't see that type of pass/run ration happening without Martz.

The ratio may change but the gross number of pass attempts should increase, and that's the key part. SF should be a better passing team this year, with Shaun Hill as the QB all year and Crabtree on the team. Those things make me think they'll be passing more.

 

[Terps2002]

Why Do Rookie Receivers Struggle?

Why do rookie wide receivers vanish over the course of their first NFL seasons, and why can we count on them in their second seasons? ...

FWIWnumber of rookie WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1

number of rookie WRs in the top 30 in receptions = 2; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 2

I don't disagree with the concept, but maybe 2008 was just a bad example

Route running is probably the biggest difference, it's worth noting that the top 2 rookie WRs were slot, very quick WRs.

Which is why, as a rookie, IMO Percy Harvin has the best chance to produce well, even better than Crabtree. Also watch out for Collie.

I agree with you about Harvin, but Peyton Manning doesn't exactly endear himself to rookies. You have to earn your stripes with Manning in order to get many looks. Don't look for Collie to make much of an impact at all his rookie year. It was that way with Wayne, Clark, and Gonzalez. Also, the Colts are very high on Garcon to make a huge leap this year.

When Dallas Clark was a rookie the Colts still had Marcus Pollard. Despite Pollard's presence he still lead the team in fantasy scoring at the TE position for the Colts six times. He averaged 2.9 catches for the games he played. Marvin Harrison had 94 catches that year and Edge had 51 that yearReggie Wayne averaged 2.4 catches a game as a rook, Harrison had 109 and Gonzales was a hair under 3 catches a game as a rook when Harrison was hurt but Wayne had 104 catches that year.

Peyton doesn't have the safety blanket of Edge, Marvin anymore and Reggie is on the downside of his career. He might wanna endear himself to the rookie rb and wr they drafted this year.

 

[FUBAR]

Why Do Rookie Receivers Struggle?

Why do rookie wide receivers vanish over the course of their first NFL seasons, and why can we count on them in their second seasons? ...

FWIWnumber of rookie WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 1

number of rookie WRs in the top 30 in receptions = 2; number of 2nd year WRs in the top 10 in receptions = 2

I don't disagree with the concept, but maybe 2008 was just a bad example

Route running is probably the biggest difference, it's worth noting that the top 2 rookie WRs were slot, very quick WRs.

Which is why, as a rookie, IMO Percy Harvin has the best chance to produce well, even better than Crabtree. Also watch out for Collie.

I agree with you about Harvin, but Peyton Manning doesn't exactly endear himself to rookies. You have to earn your stripes with Manning in order to get many looks. Don't look for Collie to make much of an impact at all his rookie year. It was that way with Wayne, Clark, and Gonzalez. Also, the Colts are very high on Garcon to make a huge leap this year.

I'm a big Garcon fan myself. He'd have to fall flat on his face--which he's shown no indication of doing--for Collie to overtake him.

I'm hoping you're right on Garcon. AG did alright as a rookie, 37.574.3 not all-world, but solid for a rookie.

 

[cstu]

Old thread but thought it would be topical given the number of WR's drafted early this year.

 

[FUBAR]

Old thread but thought it would be topical given the number of WR's drafted early this year.

Always good to look back at some of these comments.

"Shaun Hill is a great QB"

"Crabtree will do better as a rookie than Harvin"

"San Fran will throw more than Minnesota"

etc.

 

[mr roboto]

Despite this, i really think Nicks, Crabtree, and Heyward-Bey are all in really good situations.

I wouldnt count on these guys to be a WR1/2, but i'd take them as a 3-4. Maybe not Heyward-Bey if it looks like he's having trouble in camp.

I must be missing something here.How is Crabtree in a really good situation? Talent, sure. But if going to a team with Alex Smith looking to start, or Shaun Hill, whose top WR netted 835 yards last year, is a really good situation, I must not understand football. If your point is that rookie WRs produce well when there's an absence of competition, I might agree if he had a really good QB.

Nicks, I like the situation more, but I wouldn't count on him to be a WR3. Maybe 4.

DHB in a really good situation? Must be lack of competition again, but unless you expect Russell to connect often with the speedster, I don't see it.

Doing a little research (and I do mean little), the rookie WRs who have value in redrafts have good QBs. Even Calvin Johnson was barely if at all startable as a rookie.

ETA: I realize this statement is at odds with my Harvin comment, for now. 4

Shaun Hill was on a roughly 4,000 yard pace last season in his 8 starts. And that was without Crabtree. SF is an attractive destination -- good running game, potentially good QB, not a lot of competition at WR, and SF should be throwing quite a bit.

DHB is in a good situation as well. I expect Russell to connect with him on some bombs for sure.