I think it is a bit early to speculate at this point as their 2006 outlook will be greatly affected by what each team is able to do in FA and the draft.These guys were both young studs at their positions going into this year, and then both floundered with injuries on poor squads. Who do you think bounces back this year?
Getting coaches in place would help also.I think it is a bit early to speculate at this point as their 2006 outlook will be greatly affected by what each team is able to do in FA and the draft.These guys were both young studs at their positions going into this year, and then both floundered with injuries on poor squads. Who do you think bounces back this year?
I agree with these points, but I'll play and bite on the original posters question.I'd take Andre > Roy just because the Texans QB position is >>> than the mess in Detroit. Plus Roy theoretically has more challenges for targets from a far superior supporting cast at WR2-WR3 than does Andre.I think it is a bit early to speculate at this point as their 2006 outlook will be greatly affected by what each team is able to do in FA and the draft.These guys were both young studs at their positions going into this year, and then both floundered with injuries on poor squads. Who do you think bounces back this year?
I like Roy Williams, but no way is he way more talented. Andre Johnson has talent coming out of his pores. If there is a talent differential, it is minor. Both are studs, big time.I agree, too early right now to tell -- though I personally think Roy is way more talented.
There is a lot of Roy Williams love in this thread. Compare the 1st 2 years and other than TDs, Roy has not produced anywhere near the numbers of Andre. Roy has 99 for 1504 and 16TDs, Andre had 153 for 2118 and 10 TDs.TDs aren't always real consistent and since Roy had 3 of the 8 in one game, if he isn't in you lineup every week, you will miss his big game. In 4 of the other 5 games he had a TD in 2005, he had 3 or 4 catches and between 27 and 55 yards, which isn't very good. Even in 2004, Roy had three 2 TD games and only 2 TDs the rest of the year.I'll bite too.
I say R. Williams >>> A. Johnson. Roy has had 8 TD's each year with the mess of the quarterback situation. But I will add not by much. It really depends on the coaching changes and what they will do at quarterback and their respective offensive strategies.
The problem is that AJ has burned many of us two years in a row - he fell off in the 2nd half of 2004 and only had a couple good games in 2005. The talent is there but I'd prefer Roy Williams because he has a nose for the endzone regardless of the QB and offensive situation.It isn't that misleading. According to Sportsline Roy has played in 27 games, missing only 5. Anyway, I don't think TDs are as good for indicating future success. For example, I think if AJ plays 16 games in 2006, he is a lock for 80+ catches and 1100+ yards. I don't think the same can be said for Roy. Throw in a new offense and I would say that AJ has a chance to improve his TDs. I would say that Roy's TD numbers have a better chance of declining if he doesn't get more than 45 or 54 catches in 2006. I hope that makes sense.People keep talking talent saying Roy has way more talent even though AJ was the #3 overall pick in 2003. Roy has done nothing in the NFL to show that he is a stud yet. All I remember about Roy was his work ethics being questioned and based on his play so far and the utter disarray of the Detroit clubhouse, it wouldn't surprise me if Roy doesn't live up to his potential.Your stats are misleading. In the first two years, Roy has only played in 24 games due to injury. AJ played in every game his first two years so it's not fair to compare the numbers there. So Roy has missed 8 games total (in two years) and has still scored more touchdowns than AJ. Both have a lot of talent, but it's hard to know which one is in a better situation until we know coaches, qb, other wide receivers on their teams, etc.There is a lot of Roy Williams love in this thread. Compare the 1st 2 years and other than TDs, Roy has not produced anywhere near the numbers of Andre. Roy has 99 for 1504 and 16TDs, Andre had 153 for 2118 and 10 TDs.
TDs aren't always real consistent and since Roy had 3 of the 8 in one game, if he isn't in you lineup every week, you will miss his big game. In 4 of the other 5 games he had a TD in 2005, he had 3 or 4 catches and between 27 and 55 yards, which isn't very good. Even in 2004, Roy had three 2 TD games and only 2 TDs the rest of the year.
It isn't like Roy has really had any more competition for receptions than Andre has had either. Gaffney has outproduced all other Lions receivers the past 2 years. Add in DD and Andre has had a lot more competition than Roy.
AJ had a horrible 2005 all because of our friend David Carr and because I think he was hurt at the beginning of the year. After he missed 3 games, he then had a nice stretch of 8 games in which he had 52 receptions, 609 yards and 2 TDs.
I think AJ just needs a little more team offense to move into stud territory, whereas Roy even before the draft had work ethics questions so even an improved Detroit offense may not move him into stud territory.
Michael ClaytonThese guys were both young studs at their positions going into this year, and then both floundered with injuries on poor squads. Who do you think bounces back this year?
I'm a Roy owner, but I'm not going to go out and say that he's more talented than CJ. That's just crazy talk!?!?!I'm back on the train with both of these guys, but I'll take "Martz's #1 WR for $1,000"
Houston's OL looks improved, better coach I think, Moulds as a #2 is great for any WR, but will he take too many of AJ's looks?
Roy - Martz, #1 WR, Kitna is better than Harrington, look what he did with Chad Johnson, and Roy is more talented.
I think both will have some huge games and cause some anger management issues for their owners, but overall I expect Roy to take his place among the elite this year.
I don't understand this. Kubiak has been pretty successful in Denver and has a pretty long track record with a successful offense.While Denver's offense wasn't the greatest show on earth like the Rams were, I definitely don't agree with your "relatively interchangeable pieces." I think Holt and Faulk are probably HOF locks and there is no one on the Lions roster that I would even give a shot at the HOF right now.I think Gary Kubiak can fashion a productive passing attack, I KNOW Mike Martz can do so with relatively interchangeable pieces. Early reports are hard to trust, but clearly Roy Williams is getting all the praise right now in Detroit (oh, and Eddie Drummond) whereas we haven't had the chance to see/hear much from the Texans one way or another.
I think AJ is quite capable of being a consistent 1,000+ yard receiver in the league, but if Roy's healthy I have a hard time seeing him fall short of that mark and then some in 2006.
Additionally...slight edge to Roy because a) his WR2 won't be as productive and b) his workhorse back isn't going to vulture 50-60 passes (as Dom Davis will).
What we don't know and will have to debate is how the Lions players will do AFTER Martz has them for awhile.Martz took completely off the radar QBs (Green, Warner, and Bulger) and made them elite fantasy QB. IIRC, he was the WR coach when Isaac Bruce went from an unknown to having the second highest yardage total ever for a WR (up from 21-272-3 to 119-1781-13 from one year to the next). He put Eddie Kennison on the map as a rookie. Sure, Holt has been an uber stud, but who knows how he would have done elsewhere. He got Amp Lee 60+ receptions and 800+ receiving yards at RB.I don't understand this. Kubiak has been pretty successful in Denver and has a pretty long track record with a successful offense.While Denver's offense wasn't the greatest show on earth like the Rams were, I definitely don't agree with your "relatively interchangeable pieces." I think Holt and Faulk are probably HOF locks and there is no one on the Lions roster that I would even give a shot at the HOF right now.I think Gary Kubiak can fashion a productive passing attack, I KNOW Mike Martz can do so with relatively interchangeable pieces. Early reports are hard to trust, but clearly Roy Williams is getting all the praise right now in Detroit (oh, and Eddie Drummond) whereas we haven't had the chance to see/hear much from the Texans one way or another.
I think AJ is quite capable of being a consistent 1,000+ yard receiver in the league, but if Roy's healthy I have a hard time seeing him fall short of that mark and then some in 2006.
Additionally...slight edge to Roy because a) his WR2 won't be as productive and b) his workhorse back isn't going to vulture 50-60 passes (as Dom Davis will).
Faulk, Holt and Bruce >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>KJ, Roy and ????
The 2006 Detroit Lions will not be comparable to the 1999 Rams.
I hear ya, kind of a chicken and the egg thing with Holt, but he was the #6 overall draft pick in 1999 right behind McNabb, Edge and Ricky Williams, so he obviously had a lot of potential. I have had Holt on my teams a few times (and watched him quite a bit) and I think he is a very, very talented receiver and not just a product of the system.I guess I understand a WR coach helping Bruce become a better WR. I don't know if you can attribute his 1995 stats to anyone other than the OC/HC since they called the plays and in order to get 119 receptions (30 more than any other year), he had to have had close to 200 targets.What we don't know and will have to debate is how the Lions players will do AFTER Martz has them for awhile.Martz took completely off the radar QBs (Green, Warner, and Bulger) and made them elite fantasy QB. IIRC, he was the WR coach when Isaac Bruce went from an unknown to having the second highest yardage total ever for a WR (up from 21-272-3 to 119-1781-13 from one year to the next). He put Eddie Kennison on the map as a rookie. Sure, Holt has been an uber stud, but who knows how he would have done elsewhere. He got Amp Lee 60+ receptions and 800+ receiving yards at RB.I don't understand this. Kubiak has been pretty successful in Denver and has a pretty long track record with a successful offense.While Denver's offense wasn't the greatest show on earth like the Rams were, I definitely don't agree with your "relatively interchangeable pieces." I think Holt and Faulk are probably HOF locks and there is no one on the Lions roster that I would even give a shot at the HOF right now.I think Gary Kubiak can fashion a productive passing attack, I KNOW Mike Martz can do so with relatively interchangeable pieces. Early reports are hard to trust, but clearly Roy Williams is getting all the praise right now in Detroit (oh, and Eddie Drummond) whereas we haven't had the chance to see/hear much from the Texans one way or another.
I think AJ is quite capable of being a consistent 1,000+ yard receiver in the league, but if Roy's healthy I have a hard time seeing him fall short of that mark and then some in 2006.
Additionally...slight edge to Roy because a) his WR2 won't be as productive and b) his workhorse back isn't going to vulture 50-60 passes (as Dom Davis will).
Faulk, Holt and Bruce >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>KJ, Roy and ????
The 2006 Detroit Lions will not be comparable to the 1999 Rams.
The only really proven player that Martz started with was Faulk (who obviously was already a stud with the Colts). Beyond that Martz started with the same type of players as any other team does.
Keep his head on straight? I think you are confusing Roy W with C-Rogers. Roy Williams has been nothing but effective when healthy despite having Joey "erratica" as his QB and a leader on the team. Williams has had no off the field problems. Injuries are the only thing that have hampered his production.I agree, too early right now to tell -- though I personally think Roy is way more talented. If he can stay healthy, stop making dumb mistakes on the field and keep his head on straight, I believe he can be one of the most dominating WR in the league.
Hey stbugs, I should've clarified my "relatively interchangeable parts" comment to emphasize QB. There's no question Martz had a boatload of elite parts at his disposal, but none of his QBs were heralded until he got them into his system. In fact, most weren't viewed as career backups much less Pro Bowlers. As to the Kubiak vs. Martz comment...let me clarifyI don't understand this. Kubiak has been pretty successful in Denver and has a pretty long track record with a successful offense.While Denver's offense wasn't the greatest show on earth like the Rams were, I definitely don't agree with your "relatively interchangeable pieces." I think Holt and Faulk are probably HOF locks and there is no one on the Lions roster that I would even give a shot at the HOF right now.I think Gary Kubiak can fashion a productive passing attack, I KNOW Mike Martz can do so with relatively interchangeable pieces. Early reports are hard to trust, but clearly Roy Williams is getting all the praise right now in Detroit (oh, and Eddie Drummond) whereas we haven't had the chance to see/hear much from the Texans one way or another.
I think AJ is quite capable of being a consistent 1,000+ yard receiver in the league, but if Roy's healthy I have a hard time seeing him fall short of that mark and then some in 2006.
Additionally...slight edge to Roy because a) his WR2 won't be as productive and b) his workhorse back isn't going to vulture 50-60 passes (as Dom Davis will).
Faulk, Holt and Bruce >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>KJ, Roy and ????
The 2006 Detroit Lions will not be comparable to the 1999 Rams.
Edit to Add: Forgot to comment on your RB vulture, but in 2005 Jackson/Faulk/Other RB had a combined 87 receptions. They had 69 in 2004, 68 in 2003, 110 in 2002 and 100 in 2001. While KJ is not the receiving threat that DD is, Martz has quite a history of throwing to his RBs.
By the way, I am mainly just arguing to try and get into a sig/free subscription bet that I tried before and just saw a potential door open.
I'd love this to be true.... but they've individually got a ways to go to get here.Martz vs Kubick
Roy 1500 yds & more tds (pass is primary offensive weapon)
Andre 1100 yards (run is primary offensive weapon)
Yes and No.First off, Andre had 1142 yards in 2004 (same year that DD was the #5 RB) and in the last 9 games of 2005 (when he was healthy), he was on pace for 1088 yards. That includes a 3 target Week 17 against SF when it was clear that Houston tried to lose. AJ was averaging 11 targets a game in Week 9-16. For those 8 games his pace was 1218 yards.I'd love this to be true.... but they've individually got a ways to go to get here.Martz vs Kubick
Roy 1500 yds & more tds (pass is primary offensive weapon)
Andre 1100 yards (run is primary offensive weapon)
I can agree on Martz's QBs. Other than Green in Washington, none were heralded out of college or had had any solid NFL seasons prior to St. Louis.I definitely misunderstood your interchangeable parts, especially after David's quote.Hey stbugs, I should've clarified my "relatively interchangeable parts" comment to emphasize QB. There's no question Martz had a boatload of elite parts at his disposal, but none of his QBs were heralded until he got them into his system. In fact, most weren't viewed as career backups much less Pro Bowlers. As to the Kubiak vs. Martz comment...let me clarifyI don't understand this. Kubiak has been pretty successful in Denver and has a pretty long track record with a successful offense.While Denver's offense wasn't the greatest show on earth like the Rams were, I definitely don't agree with your "relatively interchangeable pieces." I think Holt and Faulk are probably HOF locks and there is no one on the Lions roster that I would even give a shot at the HOF right now.I think Gary Kubiak can fashion a productive passing attack, I KNOW Mike Martz can do so with relatively interchangeable pieces. Early reports are hard to trust, but clearly Roy Williams is getting all the praise right now in Detroit (oh, and Eddie Drummond) whereas we haven't had the chance to see/hear much from the Texans one way or another.
I think AJ is quite capable of being a consistent 1,000+ yard receiver in the league, but if Roy's healthy I have a hard time seeing him fall short of that mark and then some in 2006.
Additionally...slight edge to Roy because a) his WR2 won't be as productive and b) his workhorse back isn't going to vulture 50-60 passes (as Dom Davis will).
Faulk, Holt and Bruce >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>KJ, Roy and ????
The 2006 Detroit Lions will not be comparable to the 1999 Rams.
Edit to Add: Forgot to comment on your RB vulture, but in 2005 Jackson/Faulk/Other RB had a combined 87 receptions. They had 69 in 2004, 68 in 2003, 110 in 2002 and 100 in 2001. While KJ is not the receiving threat that DD is, Martz has quite a history of throwing to his RBs.
By the way, I am mainly just arguing to try and get into a sig/free subscription bet that I tried before and just saw a potential door open.
I loved the Kubiak hiring and think he'll be HIGHLY effective (witness my Spotlight of David Carr). But the reason I said I think Kubiak will be successful whereas I know Martz can be relates to their coaching history. Kubes has never been a head man, and Shanahan called the plays for most of Kubiak's tenure. We KNOW Martz can call plays for a potent offense, we can only suppose Kubiak is equipped to do so (until he proves himself one way or another).
A fair point vis-a-vis Martz throwing to his backs, but I also know that Martz is smart enough to play to his personnel's strengths. Kevin Jones isn't the receiver Domanick Davis is...and yet if we're to believe Martz, KJ is going to get every opportunity to be a 3-down back. For that reason, and the lack of an established WR2, I give Roy Williams a slight edge in opportunity (but not necessarily ability).
Having had Holt on my team quite a few years and watching many of his games, I think he would be a stud anywhere except Detroit. Anyway, I guess I am very skeptical because although Warner was a nobody, I think Martz got the benefit of having Faulk, Bruce and Holt in their primes. 2002 was the start of the decline of Faulk coincidentally, the start of the decline of the Rams offense. They were the #1 scoring offense in 1999 (the first year of Faulk), 2000 and 2001. They have been #23, #3, #19 and #11 since. Still good, but not as good.Sure, Holt has been an uber stud, but who knows how he would have done elsewhere.