do you or dont you

[Skin'EmAll]

How cool would it be to have a player who's able make P. Garcon more dangerous?

DeSean is visiting Monday. Please realize that while his stats may decrease, Garcon, Reed and Morris ALL become more dangerous. I'm not sure what else you want out of Garcon? 100+ catches, excellent run blocker, vocal, physical against competition. That's back to back years when Garcon has torched the NFL in his role as a #1. His first year with Griffin the only defense that could stop him was his ailing feet.

 

[Stymietee]

DeSean is visiting Monday. Please realize that while his stats may decrease, Garcon, Reed and Morris ALL become more dangerous. I'm not sure what else you want out of Garcon? 100+ catches, excellent run blocker, vocal, physical against competition. That's back to back years when Garcon has torched the NFL in his role as a #1. His first year with Griffin the only defense that could stop him was his ailing feet.

I've never asked or remotely suggested more from Garcon, just that his supporters see him for what he is and not for what they want him to be based on his numbers. I personally expect his numbers to go way up and NOT down, if as is rumored Washington is set to get D. Jackson. While Jackson (a type of player that DC has lacked for a very long time) stretches the field that leaves Garcon to work one on one on routes that gave him the numbers in the first place, break the singular tackler and add more YAC.

I cannot explain this in more simplistic terms than I have. I have always understood others position that they saw him as a number one. This is what I haven't read yet...........That with the addition of Jackson or a player like him the passing game is going to suffer.

To me the choice has always been one of potent (getting a competent #2) vs. Lethal (getting a #1 type to go with an already dangerous Garcon).

 

[skinsdad62]

I've never asked or remotely suggested more from Garcon, just that his supporters see him for what he is and not for what they want him to be based on his numbers. I personally expect his numbers to go way up and NOT down, if as is rumored Washington is set to get D. Jackson. While Jackson (a type of player that DC has lacked for a very long time) stretches the field that leaves Garcon to work one on one on routes that gave him the numbers in the first place, break the singular tackler and add more YAC.

I cannot explain this in more simplistic terms than I have. I have always understood others position that they saw him as a number one. This is what I haven't read yet...........That with the addition of Jackson or a player like him the passing game is going to suffer.

To me the choice has always been one of potent (getting a competent #2) vs. Lethal (getting a #1 type to go with an already dangerous Garcon).

sty , this whole debate stems from your inabilty to understand the difference between a top end number one wr and the garden variety number one wr . garcon , at this point in his career , has developed into a number one wr . is he a johnson ? no but he is a number one none the less

 

[JDM]

He'd be far more effective as a two. He's good, no denying it, but with a threat like Johnson opposite him he'd be far better, numbers or not.

 

[Stymietee]

sty , this whole debate stems from your inabilty to understand the difference between a top end number one wr and the garden variety number one wr . garcon , at this point in his career , has developed into a number one wr . is he a johnson ? no but he is a number one none the less

So it turns out that it is not my inability to understand, but your insistence and inability to understand that he is and has been only a number one here. Not a Johnson nor a top tier type WR. There would be a lot less interest in Jackson if he (Garcon) was a top tier type WR.

..........And before you and others go nuts displaying his numbers, understand the difference between a highly productive WR and one who is both that and stretches the field.

 

[Stymietee]

To me the choice has always been one of potent (getting a competent #2) vs. Lethal (getting a #1 type to go with an already dangerous Garcon).

 

[gkekoa]

Sty...by your own admission, DeSean Jackson is not a #1 any more than Garcon is. Only 5 or so #1s exist in football...by your definition.

 

[skinsdad62]

So it turns out that it is not my inability to understand, but your insistence and inability to understand that he is and has been only a number one here. Not a Johnson nor a top tier type WR. There would be a lot less interest in Jackson if he (Garcon) was a top tier type WR.

..........And before you and others go nuts displaying his numbers, understand the difference between a highly productive WR and one who is both that and stretches the field.

he has been on only 2 teams sty

 

[Stymietee]

Sty...by your own admission, DeSean Jackson is not a #1 any more than Garcon is. Only 5 or so #1s exist in football...by your definition.

Marvin Harrison was the #1 to who? Reggie Wayne. See what I did there?

There is more to the WR position than size and speed. I do believe that those are two major factors to what I call a true #1...a guy who is going to get his unless you triple team him like they do Megatron on the goal line. The only "true #1s" in my book, guys no matter what team you put them on and in what system, are Megatron, Josh Gordon, Dez Bryant (to an extent), AJ Green (to an extent), and Julio Jones (to an extent).

I believe that it was you that posted the above...........Not me!!!, Disagreement is part of the fun here, but please don't ask me to support your positions in disagreement with you.

 

[Stymietee]

he has been on only 2 teams sty

Had plenty of opportunity to do then what he's done here! Evidently, his previous coaches thought him better suited to be their #2 as well, that is , of course based on what they had on their rosters at the time. He came here and was made/earned/ deemed (whichever term you prefer) the #1. Why is it so hard for you (and others) to understand that contrary to your view of him, His historical determination by other coaches and my view of him do not match? I'll say it again................P. GARCON IS A NUMBER ONE RECEIVER ON THIS TEAM!!! He would, IMO, be much better if he were the #2.

 

[Stymietee]

To me the choice has always been one of potent (getting a competent #2) vs. Lethal (getting a #1 type to go with an already dangerous Garcon).

 

[gkekoa]

How about this.............A guy who not only consistent in his ability to catch the ball, but because of his size and speed commands extra special attention, opens the field for others to flourish, and is able to go up an get the ball over shorter and taller DB's. Who is this guy? In a more pass friendly offense that Mr. Gruden promises, it has to be any of the bigger wide-outs that Coach wishes to have.

This was your exact statement on #1s when I asked what your definition was.

So by your definition, DeSean Jackson is not a #1 and only about 5 exist in the game.

 

[JDM]

I would find it hard to consider someone a bona fide number one without either near elite size or above average size and near elite speed, with near elite hands either way. You need to scare defenses with some type of mismatch. Garcon is good but he doesn't scare you as a game planner.

 

[gkekoa]

I would find it hard to consider someone a bona fide number one without either near elite size or above average size and near elite speed, with near elite hands either way. You need to scare defenses with some type of mismatch. Garcon is good but he doesn't scare you as a game planner.

I agree and that's why there are really only 5 true #1s in the league.

Garcon and Jackson are both #1's but they aren't in that category.

Oh, Larry Fitzgerald does not meet your criteria of a bona fide number one.

 

[JDM]

Yes he does. 6'3" is big enough to be a number one, especially with the best hands and extension in the league.

 

[gkekoa]

Yes he does. 6'3" is big enough to be a number one, especially with the best hands and extension in the league.

You said elite size...that's above average but not elite...and he doesn't have above average speed...your other qualifier if they were just above average in size.

Messing with you a bit.

That being said, I stick with what I say about Fitz no longer being a #1.

 

[JDM]

I said near elite size.


Fitz is the best receiver in the game.

 

[Stymietee]

This was your exact statement on #1s when I asked what your definition was.

So by your definition, DeSean Jackson is not a #1 and only about 5 exist in the game.

He would be here in relation to Garcon!! Ok, so only about 5 are currently in the game today I don't see where we disagree on this point. I'll stick to my definition as previously stated and you've reposted. Just to be clear.........P. Garcon is currently the #1 here.........Add Jackson and Garcon becomes the #2.........Add Megatron...... Jackson becomes the #2 and Garcon the #3. See how that works??

 

[gkekoa]

I said near elite size.


Fitz is the best receiver in the game.

There is no supporting evidence to back up your claim.

I guess "near" is an open issue.

 

[gkekoa]

He would be here in relation to Garcon!! Ok, so only about 5 are currently in the game today I don't see where we disagree on this point. I'll stick to my definition as previously stated and you've reposted. Just to be clear.........P. Garcon is currently the #1 here.........Add Jackson and Garcon becomes the #2.........Add Megatron...... Jackson becomes the #2 and Garcon the #3. See how that works??

Then I'll disagree with you a bit here. Garcon is better than Jackson IMO but I can see either side...just depends on what you like.

One thing we can both agree on, it's a very nice combo that defenses are not going to like...at all. We now have two guys with run after the catch ability and speed at QB, WR, and TE. Have fun defenses...as long as RG3 delivers the ball.