What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

***Official Minnesota Vikings Draft Thread*** (2 Viewers)

P.S. How many of the league's all-time great WRs were speed demons? Rice? :no: Carter? :no: Largent? :no: Tim Brown? :no: Owens? :no: Irvin? :no: Moss and Harrison fit the bill, but it's pretty clear that sprinter speed ranks way down in the criteria for "How to Build A Great WR."
I am not talking about what it takes to be a great receiver. Mike Williams or Troy Williamson will not be an impact player for most likely three years anyway. I am talking about offensive potential, which a defense must respect on every play.While we wait a few years for one of this guys to develop, not even knowing if they will develop...Williamson at least adds the threat of a vertical attack; something safeties have to respect.

In addition, defenses are changing. The zone blitz, the 3-4, the 2-Deep zone...these are defenses that have arose in response to one thing; the 3-step, 5-step short to medium passing attacks (aka the West Coast Offense :rolleyes: ). These defenses are specifically designed to crowd the short ot medium zones of the passing game. The only real soft spot for these defenses is over the top; speed scares these defenses.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't care if the Vikings never score another 30yard+ TD.

The "deep threat" concept is the most fictitious thing in football.  Which Super Bowl winning teams had a "deep threat" again?
The first thing that popped into my mind was Young to Rice for 44 yards on the 3rd play of the game over San Diego in SB XXIX. I looked it up and Rice had 10 catches for 149 yards and 3 TDs. I would consider that a deep threat.
I call that bad defense.You're not seriously saying that Rice, at any time in his career, was considered a deep threat in the vein that we're talking about here, are you?
Ummm, Jerry Rice in his prime most certianly was a deep threat. Just because he had a lack luster 40 time doens't mean that the man was incapable of plays down the field. It was quite the opposite as a matter of fact IIRC. :confused:
THAT'S ENTIRELY THE POINT!Sure Rice made lots of deep plays, but not because he was a "deep threat" like we're talking about Williamson being.
No, Jerry Rice WAS a deep threat. He just never had TRADITIONAL deep speed.
Is English your first language? :wall:
 
I don't care if the Vikings never score another 30yard+ TD.

The "deep threat" concept is the most fictitious thing in football.  Which Super Bowl winning teams had a "deep threat" again?
The first thing that popped into my mind was Young to Rice for 44 yards on the 3rd play of the game over San Diego in SB XXIX. I looked it up and Rice had 10 catches for 149 yards and 3 TDs. I would consider that a deep threat.
I call that bad defense.You're not seriously saying that Rice, at any time in his career, was considered a deep threat in the vein that we're talking about here, are you?
You asked a simple question and I gave you an answer. A "Threat" means that the potential is there for a deep play. Rice was a complete WR and part of that was the "threat" that he could go deep. Any WR with any speed is a "threat" to go deep, thereby softening up the defense.Personaly I would be happy with either Williams or Williamson.

 
Hey Blueonion,

First, let me say kudos on a thoughtful and unique approach to the debate.

That said, I'm not sure I see the relevance.

Teams don't make a habit of throwing 50+ yard bombs for TDs on a regular basis.

When teams DO score on deep bombs, it's rarely because a WR literally blew by the CB/S coverage on sheer speed. When teams throw deep for a score, it's usually blown coverage...and that favors neither Williams or Williamson. But where you see the deep ball used most effectively these days, is to engender pass interference calls or through your WR winning a jump ball situation. In that situation, give me the WR with a rare combination of height, hands and STRENGTH. It's much easier to envision Williams getting downfield and winning a jump ball while fighting for position; which (if not caught) could also lead to a PI call.

Putting all that aside for a second. I want the COMPLETE receiver. Who's more likely to factor into the red zone? Who's more likely to take a quick hitch and turn it into a long gain after the catch? Who's more likely to find a soft spot in the middle and muscle by a linebacker to make the key 1st down catch? THAT'S what an elite 1st round receiver should bring to the table.

So, while I see your point in the specific instance you put forth, I still don't see how Williams isn't the better option for the entirety of the offense more often than not.

My $0.02

P.S. How many of the league's all-time great WRs were speed demons? Rice? :no: Carter? :no: Largent? :no: Tim Brown? :no: Owens? :no: Irvin? :no: Moss and Harrison fit the bill, but it's pretty clear that sprinter speed ranks way down in the criteria for "How to Build A Great WR."
I have to disagree with most of this. Just about EVERY single passing play in the world has at LEAST one deep option. 1 is enough to make ANY D in the NFL account for it! Several WRs who face man to man coverage simply run defenders off, or run DEEP. This is even on RUNNING plays! Plus on top of both of those things, the O does not know the play before it is in progress. Every single D is going to have at least a few palyers designed to have deep responsibitly. Only when they are SURE that they play is going elsewhere can they react and abandon that DEEP responsibility. This is why football is a team game. So while teams may not throw 50 yd bombs on every play, the D HAS GOT TO PLAN AS IF THEY WILL ON EVERY PLAY! THEY DON'T KNOW IF THEY WILL OR NOT UNTILL THE PLAY IS OVER.On top of that, speed is not the only prerequisite for being a good deep threat. Nearly all of the guys you listed did have sub par deep speed, but were able to recover from that with other aspects. Aspects that we can not say any WR in this draft has on an NFL level just yet.
What you're describing is a role that can be filled by any 3rd/4th receiver with downfield speed. Sure, teams use a downfield route in a great many pass formations, but a good many of those times it's to a tertiary option. Kelly Campbell fills that role in MIN. Again, this is about drafting the best player...the only thing people can point to that Williamson has over Williams is sprinter speed. Big whoop.Care to make a list of the fastest receivers in the league and compare that to the most productive? I'm willing to bet you won't find much overlap.

 
Hey Blueonion,

First, let me say kudos on a thoughtful and unique approach to the debate.

That said, I'm not sure I see the relevance.

Teams don't make a habit of throwing 50+ yard bombs for TDs on a regular basis.

When teams DO score on deep bombs, it's rarely because a WR literally blew by the CB/S coverage on sheer speed. When teams throw deep for a score, it's usually blown coverage...and that favors neither Williams or Williamson. But where you see the deep ball used most effectively these days, is to engender pass interference calls or through your WR winning a jump ball situation. In that situation, give me the WR with a rare combination of height, hands and STRENGTH. It's much easier to envision Williams getting downfield and winning a jump ball while fighting for position; which (if not caught) could also lead to a PI call.

Putting all that aside for a second. I want the COMPLETE receiver. Who's more likely to factor into the red zone? Who's more likely to take a quick hitch and turn it into a long gain after the catch? Who's more likely to find a soft spot in the middle and muscle by a linebacker to make the key 1st down catch? THAT'S what an elite 1st round receiver should bring to the table.

So, while I see your point in the specific instance you put forth, I still don't see how Williams isn't the better option for the entirety of the offense more often than not.

My $0.02

P.S. How many of the league's all-time great WRs were speed demons? Rice? :no: Carter? :no: Largent? :no: Tim Brown? :no: Owens? :no: Irvin? :no: Moss and Harrison fit the bill, but it's pretty clear that sprinter speed ranks way down in the criteria for "How to Build A Great WR."
I have to disagree with most of this. Just about EVERY single passing play in the world has at LEAST one deep option. 1 is enough to make ANY D in the NFL account for it! Several WRs who face man to man coverage simply run defenders off, or run DEEP. This is even on RUNNING plays! Plus on top of both of those things, the O does not know the play before it is in progress. Every single D is going to have at least a few palyers designed to have deep responsibitly. Only when they are SURE that they play is going elsewhere can they react and abandon that DEEP responsibility. This is why football is a team game. So while teams may not throw 50 yd bombs on every play, the D HAS GOT TO PLAN AS IF THEY WILL ON EVERY PLAY! THEY DON'T KNOW IF THEY WILL OR NOT UNTILL THE PLAY IS OVER.On top of that, speed is not the only prerequisite for being a good deep threat. Nearly all of the guys you listed did have sub par deep speed, but were able to recover from that with other aspects. Aspects that we can not say any WR in this draft has on an NFL level just yet.
What you're describing is a role that can be filled by any 3rd/4th receiver with downfield speed. Sure, teams use a downfield route in a great many pass formations, but a good many of those times it's to a tertiary option. Kelly Campbell fills that role in MIN. Again, this is about drafting the best player...the only thing people can point to that Williamson has over Williams is sprinter speed. Big whoop.Care to make a list of the fastest receivers in the league and compare that to the most productive? I'm willing to bet you won't find much overlap.
:goodposting:
 
I have to disagree with most of this. Just about EVERY single passing play in the world has at LEAST one deep option. 1 is enough to make ANY D in the NFL account for it! Several WRs who face man to man coverage simply run defenders off, or run DEEP. This is even on RUNNING plays! Plus on top of both of those things, the O does not know the play before it is in progress. Every single D is going to have at least a few palyers designed to have deep responsibitly. Only when they are SURE that they play is going elsewhere can they react and abandon that DEEP responsibility. This is why football is a team game. So while teams may not throw 50 yd bombs on every play, the D HAS GOT TO PLAN AS IF THEY WILL ON EVERY PLAY! THEY DON'T KNOW IF THEY WILL OR NOT UNTILL THE PLAY IS OVER.On top of that, speed is not the only prerequisite for being a good deep threat. Nearly all of the guys you listed did have sub par deep speed, but were able to recover from that with other aspects. Aspects that we can not say any WR in this draft has on an NFL level just yet.
Mike Williams is gonna be special, and already has many of those "other aspects" (size, leaping ability, great hands, etc.). Many experts (notice I'm not talking Merrill Hoge - :rolleyes: ) agree on this. I'll trust the opinions of guys like Pete Carroll and Cris Carter a LOT more than some talking-head wearing an ugly-*** suit on ESPN.I will agree wholeheartedly though that speed places tremendous pressure on a defense...as long as they respect/fear the player(s) who are bringing that speed to the table. Physical size and excellent route-running can make up for at least a few tenths of the "speed factor" though, and the Vikings would have no equal in the NFL if they were lining up Burleson, Williams, Robinson and Taylor, along with Kleinsasser and Wiggins leaking out off the line...ESPECIALLY inside the red zone. Williamson will probably be good too....but Williams seems like a MUCH smarter, safer pick unless he cannot lay off the junk food. :popcorn:
 
Is English your first language? :wall:
Maybe you should get a tutor yourself:
Maybe I'm not remembering correctly, but the winners on the SB list really don't seem to have that many WRs that could be considered deep threats.
THAT'S ENTIRELY THE POINT!

Sure Rice made lots of deep plays, but not because he was a "deep threat" like we're talking about Williamson being.
I call that bad defense.

You're not seriously saying that Rice, at any time in his career, was considered a deep threat in the vein that we're talking about here, are you?
1st you say there haven't been many deep threats on SB winning teams.Then several are sighted so you change your toon to having to have the same phisical attributes of Williamson. :confused:

Well which one is it? Guys who were good deep threats, or only guys with attributes that match Williamson's that are deep threats. Feel free to change your story again. :thumbdown:

 
Hey Blueonion,

First, let me say kudos on a thoughtful and unique approach to the debate.

That said, I'm not sure I see the relevance.

Teams don't make a habit of throwing 50+ yard bombs for TDs on a regular basis.

When teams DO score on deep bombs, it's rarely because a WR literally blew by the CB/S coverage on sheer speed. When teams throw deep for a score, it's usually blown coverage...and that favors neither Williams or Williamson. But where you see the deep ball used most effectively these days, is to engender pass interference calls or through your WR winning a jump ball situation. In that situation, give me the WR with a rare combination of height, hands and STRENGTH. It's much easier to envision Williams getting downfield and winning a jump ball while fighting for position; which (if not caught) could also lead to a PI call.

Putting all that aside for a second. I want the COMPLETE receiver. Who's more likely to factor into the red zone? Who's more likely to take a quick hitch and turn it into a long gain after the catch? Who's more likely to find a soft spot in the middle and muscle by a linebacker to make the key 1st down catch? THAT'S what an elite 1st round receiver should bring to the table.

So, while I see your point in the specific instance you put forth, I still don't see how Williams isn't the better option for the entirety of the offense more often than not.

My $0.02

P.S. How many of the league's all-time great WRs were speed demons? Rice? :no: Carter? :no: Largent? :no: Tim Brown? :no: Owens? :no: Irvin? :no: Moss and Harrison fit the bill, but it's pretty clear that sprinter speed ranks way down in the criteria for "How to Build A Great WR."
I have to disagree with most of this. Just about EVERY single passing play in the world has at LEAST one deep option. 1 is enough to make ANY D in the NFL account for it! Several WRs who face man to man coverage simply run defenders off, or run DEEP. This is even on RUNNING plays! Plus on top of both of those things, the O does not know the play before it is in progress. Every single D is going to have at least a few palyers designed to have deep responsibitly. Only when they are SURE that they play is going elsewhere can they react and abandon that DEEP responsibility. This is why football is a team game. So while teams may not throw 50 yd bombs on every play, the D HAS GOT TO PLAN AS IF THEY WILL ON EVERY PLAY! THEY DON'T KNOW IF THEY WILL OR NOT UNTILL THE PLAY IS OVER.On top of that, speed is not the only prerequisite for being a good deep threat. Nearly all of the guys you listed did have sub par deep speed, but were able to recover from that with other aspects. Aspects that we can not say any WR in this draft has on an NFL level just yet.
What you're describing is a role that can be filled by any 3rd/4th receiver with downfield speed. Sure, teams use a downfield route in a great many pass formations, but a good many of those times it's to a tertiary option. Kelly Campbell fills that role in MIN. Again, this is about drafting the best player...the only thing people can point to that Williamson has over Williams is sprinter speed. Big whoop.Care to make a list of the fastest receivers in the league and compare that to the most productive? I'm willing to bet you won't find much overlap.
:goodposting:
Umm again, no. Teams don't place their deep threat as a slot or 3rd WR guy. Often times that guy can be good at going deep, but still they will have a starter that is already better at it. I challange you to go through the list of teams and find any validity to that claim.
 
1st you say there haven't been many deep threats on SB winning teams.

Then several are sighted so you change your toon to having to have the same phisical attributes of Williamson. :confused:

Well which one is it? Guys who were good deep threats, or only guys with attributes that match Williamson's that are deep threats. Feel free to change your story again. :thumbdown:
There were more big plays cited than big play players.And thanks for answering my question. Second. Definitley second.

 
Care to make a list of the fastest receivers in the league and compare that to the most productive? I'm willing to bet you won't find much overlap.
Man you guys really need to stick with one story here. Are we talking only about deep speed and its relationship to D schemes or are we talking about PRODUCTIVE and ADEQUATE deep threats? There is a difference. :confused:
 
1st you say there haven't been many deep threats on SB winning teams.

Then several are sighted so you change your toon to having to have the same phisical attributes of Williamson.  :confused:

Well which one is it?  Guys who were good deep threats, or only guys with attributes that match Williamson's that are deep threats.  Feel free to change your story again. :thumbdown:
There were more big plays cited than big play players.And thanks for answering my question. Second. Definitley second.
Well if you guys are only talking about the speed factor, then I much moreso agree with you. Sorry to get edgy.
 
What you're describing is a role that can be filled by any 3rd/4th receiver with downfield speed. Sure, teams use a downfield route in a great many pass formations, but a good many of those times it's to a tertiary option. Kelly Campbell fills that role in MIN. Again, this is about drafting the best player...the only thing people can point to that Williamson has over Williams is sprinter speed. Big whoop.

Care to make a list of the fastest receivers in the league and compare that to the most productive? I'm willing to bet you won't find much overlap.
But that role would only be filled with a 3 or 4 wide receiver set. In a 2 wide receiver set you will be inviting the safeties to sneak up, crowd the intermediate and short routes and add run support.I don't necessarily feel Mike Williams is that much better, if at all. At best, he can be a solid #2 wide receiver and step into a Keyshawn Johnson role. I don't think he is worth the #7 pick.

You are also assuming that Williams or Williamson will be our most productive wide receiver; that will most definitely be Burleson for the next two seasons (at least). Burleson is a smooth, runs great routes and has great hands. He played four years at University of Neveda and holds the all-time NCAA Division I record for receptions (95% sure). At best, we can hope Mike Williams can replicate this role in two years.

Williamson does all this and offers speed.

 
Here's another thought/factor for you to think about, jurb26: How well each receiver will be able to get off the line within five yards of the line of scrimmage. When players were timed in their 40s, it was testing their ability to get down the field with no one in front of them. How many extra tenths of a second might be lost from a guy having a LOT of trouble getting off the line...rather than a guy who can get off the line with less difficulty?Just curious...as my assumption is that a bigger/stronger WR would have an easier time getting off the line, thereby negating a lot of the "pure speed" advantages presented by a smaller, quicker wide out.

 
Man you guys really need to stick with one story here. Are we talking only about deep speed and its relationship to D schemes or are we talking about PRODUCTIVE and ADEQUATE deep threats? There is a difference. :confused:
This is what I am arguing, and I think the rest of the packages (TW and MW) is almost a wash.
 
Man you guys really need to stick with one story here.  Are we talking only about deep speed and its relationship to D schemes or are we talking about PRODUCTIVE and ADEQUATE deep threats?  There is a difference. :confused:
This is what I am arguing, and I think the rest of the packages (TW and MW) is almost a wash.
That's at the heart of where we disagree. If you think Mike Williams and Troy Williamson are essentially equal in all aspects other than downfield speed, than I see why you would make the case for Williamson. But I see Williams as being superior in nearly every facet other than the speed. Only time will tell who's right; but it's always fun to debate the issue anyway. :banned:
 
Mike Williams is gonna be special, and already has many of those "other aspects" (size, leaping ability, great hands, etc.).  Many experts (notice I'm not talking Merrill Hoge -  :rolleyes: ) agree on this.  I'll trust the opinions of guys like Pete Carroll and Cris Carter a LOT more than some talking-head wearing an ugly-*** suit on ESPN.

I will agree wholeheartedly though that speed places tremendous pressure on a defense...as long as they respect/fear the player(s) who are bringing that speed to the table.  Physical size and excellent route-running can make up for at least a few tenths of the "speed factor" though, and the Vikings would have no equal in the NFL if they were lining up Burleson, Williams, Robinson and Taylor, along with Kleinsasser and Wiggins leaking out off the line...ESPECIALLY inside the red zone. 

Williamson will probably be good too....but Williams seems like a MUCH smarter, safer pick unless he cannot lay off the junk food.  :popcorn:
I agree with you datonn, MW will be a fine NFL player. I think really what we need to know (and what Minn does know) is what direction they are trying to head. If they want a deep stretch the field WR, I simply think Williamson is the best in this draft. Not just from his speed, which greatly helps, but from his on field play. Maybe though they don't feel they need that, which is very possible since the let go the best deep threat I think the NFL has ever seen in Moss. If s, I love the idea of them grabing MW. I don't know which direction tthey are planning to or want to go though and I dont' think anyone outside Minn staff does as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's another thought/factor for you to think about, jurb26: How well each receiver will be able to get off the line within five yards of the line of scrimmage. When players were timed in their 40s, it was testing their ability to get down the field with no one in front of them. How many extra tenths of a second might be lost from a guy having a LOT of trouble getting off the line...rather than a guy who can get off the line with less difficulty?

Just curious...as my assumption is that a bigger/stronger WR would have an easier time getting off the line, thereby negating a lot of the "pure speed" advantages presented by a smaller, quicker wide out.
Honestly, I don't think this is something anyone should realistically try to predict. I think the level jump is far to high. NFL players (and RULES) are far different in this aspect of the game and its like rolling dice as to who will be good at getting off the line. I will say this, I think both are good enough athletes as to where they should both be able to get off the line at the next level. What MW has over Williamson in size and stregth is made up for in quickness IMO. Both are nice starting points to beat jams, but its up to the player himself to learn how to best utilize his skills to maximise his ability to do so.

 
Agreed jurb26.I guess I am coming from the position that the Vikings are shifting to more of a ball-control, knock you in the teeth kind of an offense....and MW would seem to be a much better fit within that type of a system.Loney will be a SERIOUS yes-man, doing whatever Tice wants to do, and Tice has said on many occasions how they want to shift to more of a "beat you up" style that places a heavier emphasis on the run (which is what Cottrell wants to see to, as it will make the defense look that much better). Williamson's speed would be nice if we were looking to try and replace Moss. However,1. We are not trying to replace Moss.2. See #13. See #2 :popcorn:

 
1st you say there haven't been many deep threats on SB winning teams.

Then several are sighted so you change your toon to having to have the same phisical attributes of Williamson.   :confused:

Well which one is it?  Guys who were good deep threats, or only guys with attributes that match Williamson's that are deep threats.  Feel free to change your story again. :thumbdown:
There were more big plays cited than big play players.And thanks for answering my question. Second. Definitley second.
Well if you guys are only talking about the speed factor, then I much moreso agree with you. Sorry to get edgy.
Me too. Sorry.How'd we get so excited anyway?

 
Won't it be funny when the Vikings draft Derrick Johnson when both Williams and Williamson are on the board. :lmao: (I hope they go WR but you NEVER know!!)

 
I haven't seen indication of this nor do I think Red would pay for it...but would they consider taking a great athlete - maybe defensive - with 1-7 and then trading up from 1-18 to somewhere above SD to take Williamson? That would seem to give more value. Am I way off?Thoughts? :confused:

 
Won't it be funny when the Vikings draft Derrick Johnson when both Williams and Williamson are on the board. :lmao:

(I hope they go WR but you NEVER know!!)
I would actually prefer this to any of the three wide receivers.
 
Put me in the "disappointed" camp if Williamson is taken and BMW is there.I get your point Blue Onion, but I have 2 words "Play Action". Let the safeties cheat up and bite on the run, they'll look pretty dumb when Mike Williams is wide open having just sent a 5-8 corner into the seats for trying to jam him.Deep speed is nice, but there's more than one way to skin a cat.Lab's wish list:7. Mike Williams18. PollackRound 2: Nugent (I demand "Free for All" on every kick off)

 
This whole Williamson vs. Mike Williams debate is bunk. In 2 years, Mike Williams amassed the following stats:176 receptions2,579 yards30 TDsThere is absolutely NO argument for taking anyone, based on any combine number, over that sort of proven production. I don't care if Williamson ran a 3.90 forty, the guy isn't running track.

 
Put me in the "disappointed" camp if Williamson is taken and BMW is there.

I get your point Blue Onion, but I have 2 words "Play Action". Let the safeties cheat up and bite on the run, they'll look pretty dumb when Mike Williams is wide open having just sent a 5-8 corner into the seats for trying to jam him.

Deep speed is nice, but there's more than one way to skin a cat.

Lab's wish list:

7. Mike Williams

18. Pollack

Round 2: Nugent (I demand "Free for All" on every kick off)
As much as I respect your wish list. I sure hope the Vikes don't burn a 2nd rounder on a kicker. And I don't think they will. The Vikes have a serious need at kicker, but I think they address that later in the draft or through FA.
 
This whole Williamson vs. Mike Williams debate is bunk. In 2 years, Mike Williams amassed the following stats:176 receptions2,579 yards30 TDsThere is absolutely NO argument for taking anyone, based on any combine number, over that sort of proven production. I don't care if Williamson ran a 3.90 forty, the guy isn't running track.
Agreed. 1000% AGREED! Williams was also able to put up those kind of numbers with Keary Colbert being around too...which is absolutely phenomenal (averaging 88 receptions, 1,290 yards and 15 TDs per year in a COLLEGE SCHEDULE).Williams at #7. Pollack at #18. BPA at #49 with some kind of hopeful move to pick up Nugent later in the 2nd or early in the 3rd...... :popcorn:
 
This whole Williamson vs. Mike Williams debate is bunk. In 2 years, Mike Williams amassed the following stats:

176 receptions

2,579 yards

30 TDs

There is absolutely NO argument for taking anyone, based on any combine number, over that sort of proven production. I don't care if Williamson ran a 3.90 forty, the guy isn't running track.
Agreed. 1000% AGREED! Williams was also able to put up those kind of numbers with Keary Colbert being around too...which is absolutely phenomenal (averaging 88 receptions, 1,290 yards and 15 TDs per year in a COLLEGE SCHEDULE).Williams at #7. Pollack at #18. BPA at #49 with some kind of hopeful move to pick up Nugent later in the 2nd or early in the 3rd...... :popcorn:
I'll just chalk this up to ignorance or lack of knowledge about Williamson I guess. :P The fact of the matter is he DID produce nice numbers and did so in an O and system that gave him a 1/3 of the ops to do it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
176 receptions

2,579 yards

30 TDs

There is absolutely NO argument for taking anyone, based on any combine number, over that sort of proven production. I don't care if Williamson ran a 3.90 forty, the guy isn't running track.
Don't buy the hype, ;) We'll see who the Vikings take tomorrow and we'll know who pans out better in a few seasons.
 
Put me in the camp that would trade up for Benson (not sold on Cadillac, who may fall to 7). Then deal Bennett to Denny. Denny loves his guys. Bennett is his Robert Smith. He'll take him if he doesn't overpay. I say Bennett is overvalued if they get Benson, and have Mwelde and Ontario, and Moe in the wings. Not sure if the Vikes so-called brain trust knows how to put together a deal. But I'd try hard to package the later 1st round pick and Bennett for AZs 2nd round pick and A. Boldin. Use the 2nd to get Nugent. We lose the pick for a D player later in the first, but with the off-season moves on D... score a stud RB, a WR with proven success in the pros, and fix the pathetic kicking game.

 
I'll just chalk this up to ignorance or lack of knowledge about Williamson I guess. :P The fact of the matter is he DID produce nice numbers and did so in an O and system that gave him a 1/3 of the ops to do it.
Either that, or other folks on this thread are buying the "anti-hype" about Williams from teams that just might like to see him fall (or boobs like Hoge who just wanted to hear themselves talk a bit to keep all of us eating what they are feeding us after 10-20+ hours of pre-draft coverage and them needing to find other stuff to talk about to keep us interested......) :rolleyes: It's gonna be tough to convince me that a guy that is averaging over 100 yards and a TD receiving in a top "pro-style" program against quality Division I opponents isn't the real deal (and worthy of being the WR1 or WR2 selected in the draft). If Williamson is the Vikings pick at #7 overall, I'll be very disappointed....UNLESS Williams, Edwards and all three "big three" RBs are off the board with us finding no trading partners. FWIW, KFAN 1130am just had Scott Studwell on the air talking to Dan Barreiro, and when Barreiro asked him about the top two WRs in the draft, 100% the talk was about Edwards and Williams, with Studwell saying that the Vikings are very impressed with Williams' superior hands....AND that, in their mind, the 40-times of Edwards and Williams are basically a wash given some of the other factors both guys bring to the table (aka Williams being bigger/stronger than Edwards. Williamson's name wasn't even mentioned...although that doesn't necessarily mean anything. :popcorn:
 
176 receptions

2,579 yards

30 TDs

There is absolutely NO argument for taking anyone, based on any combine number, over that sort of proven production. I don't care if Williamson ran a 3.90 forty, the guy isn't running track.
Don't buy the hype, ;) We'll see who the Vikings take tomorrow and we'll know who pans out better in a few seasons.
That's sort of an odd thing to say to someone who is presenting and relying on actual performance. If anyone is buying hype, it is Williamson proponents. There's nothing there, other than hype and a nice 40.
 
FWIW, KFAN 1130am just had Scott Studwell on the air talking to Dan Barreiro, and when Barreiro asked him about the top two WRs in the draft, 100% the talk was about Edwards and Williams, with Studwell saying that the Vikings are very impressed with Williams' superior hands....AND that, in their mind, the 40-times of Edwards and Williams are basically a wash given some of the other factors both guys bring to the table (aka Williams being bigger/stronger than Edwards. Williamson's name wasn't even mentioned...although that doesn't necessarily mean anything.

:popcorn:
Can you believe anything at this point? :popcorn:

 
This whole Williamson vs. Mike Williams debate is bunk. In 2 years, Mike Williams amassed the following stats:

176 receptions

2,579 yards

30 TDs
You have to give credit where credit is due. I have not seen USC numbers like this since Keyshawn Johnson came out of the draft.This guy is going to be an exceptional #2 possession wide receiver. :thumbup:

 
This whole Williamson vs. Mike Williams debate is bunk. In 2 years, Mike Williams amassed the following stats:

176 receptions

2,579 yards

30 TDs
You have to give credit where credit is due. I have not seen USC numbers like this since Keyshawn Johnson came out of the draft.This guy is going to be an exceptional #2 possession wide receiver. :thumbup:
:lmao:
 
This whole Williamson vs. Mike Williams debate is bunk. In 2 years, Mike Williams amassed the following stats:

176 receptions

2,579 yards

30 TDs
You have to give credit where credit is due. I have not seen USC numbers like this since Keyshawn Johnson came out of the draft.This guy is going to be an exceptional #2 possession wide receiver. :thumbup:
Well, you're the authority on #2 WRs since the guy you're pimping has the numbers of every #2 WR in playing NCAA football. :lmao: 9 TDs in 2 seasons? :lmao: Make that #3 WRs. Talk about hype, you've been eating it for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
 
Well, you're the authority on #2 WRs since the guy you're pimping has the numbers of every #2 WR in playing NCAA football. :lmao: 9 TDs in 2 seasons? :lmao: Make that #3 WRs. Talk about hype, you've been eating it for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
I am not sure who I have been pimping (Robinson???), but every team needs a solid #2 wide receiver, I just don't think the 7th overall pick in the draft should be used for it.
 
Well, you're the authority on #2 WRs since the guy you're pimping has the numbers of every #2 WR in playing NCAA football.  :lmao:   9 TDs in 2 seasons?  :lmao: Make that #3 WRs. Talk about hype, you've been eating it for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
I am not sure who I have been pimping (Robinson???), but every team needs a solid #2 wide receiver, I just don't think the 7th overall pick in the draft should be used for it.
Are you suggesting you aren't pimping Williamson?
 
Are you suggesting you aren't pimping Williamson?
Williamson is a #1 :excited:
Of course he is. Which of those 9 TDs over a 2 year span convinced you of it? Like I said, his numbers are on par with every #2 WR playing in the NCAA.
If Williams would have played at South Carolina, he would have been lucky to score 6 TDs in 2 years.... from the TE position. :excited: You do know the the only reason the Mia native ended up at good old USC is because none of the East coast teams wanted him as a WR. :boxing: :P

 
You have to consider Mike Williams had Carson Palmer throwing him the ball, playing for a National Championship team and getting to play in the PAC-10 instead of the SEC?I still acknowledge Mike Williams is a more refined product, but I don't think he is that much more refined and his ceiling is much higher than Williams.

 
Are you suggesting you aren't pimping Williamson?
Williamson is a #1 :excited:
Of course he is. Which of those 9 TDs over a 2 year span convinced you of it? Like I said, his numbers are on par with every #2 WR playing in the NCAA.
If Williams would have played at South Carolina, he would have been lucky to score 6 TDs in 2 years.... from the TE position. :excited: You do know the the only reason the Mia native ended up at good old USC is because none of the East coast teams wanted him as a WR. :boxing: :P
Oh I'm sure Mike Williams would have been lucky to score 4 TDs in South Carolina. Heck, Jerry Rice would have probably been shut out in 2 years. That Williamson is quite a player. Well, you've convinced me. Say, are there any other ultra conservative NCAA programs we can steal a player from with our #18 pick? Maybe some RB who ran for 400 yards in his collegiate career but is a certified stud who merely wasn't given the opportunity to show it? I'd be all over that. What this Viking team really needs is to take fliers with 1st round picks.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top