The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Orange Mane Discussion > Orange Mane Central Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-10-2009, 02:45 PM   #1
Bronco Rob
Ring of Famer
 
Bronco Rob's Avatar
 
The Alpha & The Omega

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,893

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Kush & Irsay
Default SI.com "Success of rookie wide receivers trending downward" aka Eddie Royal

The prototypical NFL receiver is big and fast, capable of making big plays down the field by either out-muscling or simply out-running the defenders. Think Randy Moss and Terrell Owens over the past 10 years, sans the baggage and the drama.


Teams are constantly trying to find such players, which is why in the first round of this year's draft the Raiders, 49ers, Giants and Titans took Darius Heyward-Bey, Michael Crabtree, Hakeem Nicks and Kenny Britt, respectively. Each is at least 6-foot-1 and all are over 210 pounds, so they fit the mold. But is bigger necessarily better when it comes to getting immediate production from these players? Recent history suggests otherwise.


Though there were no wide receivers taken in the first round in 2008, 10 went in Round 2, and a quick look at their first-year statistics paints an interesting picture. The success among the smaller guys was led by 5-10, 182-pound Eddie Royal of Denver, who embarrassed then-Oakland cornerback DeAngelo Hall in the season opener on Monday Night Football to the tune of nine catches for 146 yards and a touchdown. That was just the opening salvo in a season that saw Royal finish with 91 catches for 980 yards in 15 games.


Philadelphia's DeSean Jackson is another example of a small receiver having a big impact as a rookie. At 5-10, 175, he finished with 62 catches for 912 yards, but only two touchdowns. Even the surprise first receiver taken in 2008, 5-11, 184-pound Donnie Avery of St. Louis, had a stellar debut. He had 53 catches for 674 yards and three touchdowns, not too shabby for a 'rook.'


What about the big boys? They had virtually no impact. The biggest of the bunch, Buffalo's James Hardy (6-5, 212) and Pittsburgh's Limas Sweed (6-4, 220), were non-factors for their franchises. Washington's duo of Devin Thomas (6-2, 220) and Malcolm Kelly (6-4, 227) were doubly disappointing in their first seasons. Of the big wide receivers, Jordy Nelson (6-3, 217) of Green Bay had the best numbers, with just 33 catches for 366 yards.


So, what gives?

"I really don't know," said Royal when asked about the discrepancy between big and small. "I think we were fortunate to be in good situations with good offenses."


There is some truth to that sentiment given that Royal and Jackson caught balls from Jay Cutler and Donovan McNabb, respectively. But the Rams didn't have a very good offense and that didn't slow down Avery. Sweed, meanwhile, played for the Super Bowl champion Steelers and still managed only six catches from Ben Roethlisberger.


None of the receivers I spoke with had a good explanation, so I asked somebody on the other side of the ball, someone who has to cover these guys for a living -- Bills cornerback Terrence McGee. "Royal and Jackson are quick and fast and it is hard to stay with them in open space," he said. "For the most part it is harder for me to go against the shiftier, quicker guys. I can't even get a hand on [them] sometimes. The bigger guys usually just try to muscle you."


One school of thought, piggybacking off what gives McGee problems, is that it takes bigger receivers longer to learn how to fight off the jam at the line of scrimmage, whereas smaller guys use their quicks, which is more natural for a rookie or young player.


Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to intimate that the era of the dominant man-child receiver is over. Not even close. In fact, Arizona's Larry Fitzgerald (6-3, 220) and Houston's Andre Johnson (6-3, 223) are clearly the two best receivers in the world right now and both look like Tarzan and play like him. Maybe with the recent crop of rookie receivers it will simply take the more physically imposing guys longer to get their careers started and the smaller guys will find they have a ceiling and are somewhat limited as a result of their stature. It's possible.


But there has to be something to this when it comes to rookie wideouts in the modern NFL making an impact. What is that expression again? Once (Royal) is an accident, twice (Jackson) is a coincidence, but three (Avery) times is a trend. It certainly seems to be the case based on last season, especially when you consider how little their oversized counterparts did.


What does all this mean for this year's rookies? I would keep my eyes on Minnesota's Percy Harvin (5-11, 192) and Philadelphia's Jeremy Maclin (6-0, 198). Though neither guy is as small as Royal, Jackson or Avery, they also aren't your standard physical specimens either. Most reports indicate both of those guys are already lighting it up in spring workouts while their bigger counterparts Heyward-Bey and Crabtree have been limited by injuries and are behind the eight-ball at the moment.


Given last year's trend among second-rounders, maybe this big vs. small debate is not just limited to the big-money picks. It will be interesting to see how undersized 2009 third-rounders like Seattle's Deon Butler (5-10, 182) and New England's Brandon Tate (6-1, 195) stack up in terms of production versus the likes of monster ball-catchers like the Giants' Ramses Barden (6-6, 229) and Miami's Patrick Turner (6-5, 223). Based upon recent precedent, my money is on the little guys.






http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...x.html?eref=T1



Bronco Rob is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 06-10-2009, 02:49 PM   #2
Gcver2ver3
Ring of Famer
 
Gcver2ver3's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Posts: 6,577

Adopt-a-Bronco:
replace hillman
Default

not that its a big deal, but i wish we could've gotten Royal those 20 more yards...
Gcver2ver3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 02:59 PM   #3
Paladin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 9,412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gcver2ver3 View Post
not that its a big deal, but i wish we could've gotten Royal those 20 more yards...
I believe they tried, but Quitler threw an interception.......
Paladin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 03:08 PM   #4
TheReverend
Permanent Facepalm
 
TheReverend's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 37,706

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Mike Shanahan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gcver2ver3 View Post
not that its a big deal, but i wish we could've gotten Royal those 20 more yards...
I had this argument a few years ago when Shaun Alexander was a few shy of the rushing title.

The person I argued with said, "out of that many carries, he could've lowered his shoulder a few times instead of going out of bounds, and he'd have had it".

He was exactly right.

Eddie's an awesome player, and I love how he plays bigger than his size. I'd be worried about him putting too much on his body.

But that being said... he had over NINETY opportunities. There also were several games where he could not get open. Maybe he was fighting through injury, if so, good on him. Regardless, not getting 1k is on him.
TheReverend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 03:13 PM   #5
Man-Goblin
One Gap Penetrator
 
Man-Goblin's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Huntersville, NC
Posts: 6,078

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Connor Barth
Default

Maybe Royal and Jackson were just the best two receivers of the draft class...
Man-Goblin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 03:21 PM   #6
gyldenlove
Ring of Famer
 
gyldenlove's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Nęstved, DK
Posts: 11,209

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Spencer Larsen
Default

I think it is generally easier for a small WR to transition to the pro game than for a big WR. A big WR can largely rely on size and strength while playing in the NCAA to beat cornerbacks to the ball and screen defenders for the catch, in the pro game that is much harder because defensive backs are bigger and stronger and the mismatch is not nearly as easy to exploit. A small guy on the other hand has learned early on how to jump for the ball and how to adjust to make catches and get open because they can't rely on just outmuscling the defense.
gyldenlove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 03:23 PM   #7
jayman_37
Seasoned Veteran
 
jayman_37's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 422
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gcver2ver3 View Post
not that its a big deal, but i wish we could've gotten Royal those 20 more yards...
Eddie also had a few drops in that game.
jayman_37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 03:23 PM   #8
Beantown Bronco
Athletic Supporter
 
Beantown Bronco's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Mass
Posts: 20,586

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Matt Prater
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gyldenlove View Post
in the pro game that is much harder because defensive backs are bigger and stronger and the mismatch is not nearly as easy to exploit.
Unless, of course, you are a #3 WR this year facing the Broncos defense.

Sorry.....had to do it.
Beantown Bronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 05:07 PM   #9
footstepsfrom#27
helmet to helmet hitter
 
footstepsfrom#27's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 16,138

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Joe Mays
Default

Keep an eye on Kenney McKinley, who I think may surprise as the next Brandon Stokley for this team. He's quick, runs tight routes, has good hands and he's savvy on how to get open. He might thrive in this offense.
footstepsfrom#27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 05:21 PM   #10
gyldenlove
Ring of Famer
 
gyldenlove's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Nęstved, DK
Posts: 11,209

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Spencer Larsen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beantown Bronco View Post
Unless, of course, you are a #3 WR this year facing the Broncos defense.

Sorry.....had to do it.
Ooooh a zinger!
gyldenlove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 05:22 PM   #11
Killericon
Front 7, Please
 
Killericon's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Alberta
Posts: 7,650

Adopt-a-Bronco:
watermock
Default

Remember the days when Micheal Clayton was an aberration, and it took receivers 3 years to get up to speed? Ahhh...Good times.
Killericon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 05:28 PM   #12
Gcver2ver3
Ring of Famer
 
Gcver2ver3's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Posts: 6,577

Adopt-a-Bronco:
replace hillman
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
I had this argument a few years ago when Shaun Alexander was a few shy of the rushing title.

The person I argued with said, "out of that many carries, he could've lowered his shoulder a few times instead of going out of bounds, and he'd have had it".

He was exactly right.

Eddie's an awesome player, and I love how he plays bigger than his size. I'd be worried about him putting too much on his body.

But that being said... he had over NINETY opportunities. There also were several games where he could not get open. Maybe he was fighting through injury, if so, good on him. Regardless, not getting 1k is on him.

fair enough...

my intentions weren't to lay blame on Shanny and or Cutler for Eddie missing 1,000 yds...really, i was just wishing he had gotten to 1,000 yds...

Eddie had his opportunities and he just missed it...no big deal...
Gcver2ver3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 08:54 PM   #13
TheReverend
Permanent Facepalm
 
TheReverend's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 37,706

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Mike Shanahan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gcver2ver3 View Post
fair enough...

my intentions weren't to lay blame on Shanny and or Cutler for Eddie missing 1,000 yds...really, i was just wishing he had gotten to 1,000 yds...

Eddie had his opportunities and he just missed it...no big deal...
Never said you were. Great year for a rookie, just wished he would've been able to make more of some of his opportunities.
TheReverend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 09:05 PM   #14
tsiguy96
Ring of Famer
 
tsiguy96's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 12,747

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
Never said you were. Great year for a rookie, just wished he would've been able to make more of some of his opportunities.
you can say taht about every player in the NFL. for a first year player, eddie royal made the most of a LOT of opportunities, a special talent. there should really be no complaining or criticism about his rookie year.
tsiguy96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 10:27 PM   #15
maher_tyler
Ring of Famer
 
maher_tyler's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 6,723

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Von Miller
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tsiguy96 View Post
you can say taht about every player in the NFL. for a first year player, eddie royal made the most of a LOT of opportunities, a special talent. there should really be no complaining or criticism about his rookie year.
No...he definitely played better than i thought he was going to going into last season thats for sure!
maher_tyler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 10:38 PM   #16
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gcver2ver3 View Post
not that its a big deal, but i wish we could've gotten Royal those 20 more yards...
Meh it doesn't matter except the fact Royal need to get his yards per recpetion better. Look at Jackson in Philly, 30 less balls and pretty much the same yardage.

He dropped a few but also was missed a couple times wide open deep. Hopefully Cutlers ability to get the ball to the wr quickly wasn't the only reason he was good. I'm thinking Royals yrdage goes down to about 700 this yr, but he does it on about 60 balls not 90.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 10:41 PM   #17
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by maher_tyler View Post
No...he definitely played better than i thought he was going to going into last season thats for sure!
Basically the board was in consensus that Royal a stupid pick. Then after a few days people warmed to the good reports on him. Then he ripped raiders in first game and that made him an instant star.

I mean how many WR for Broncos have ripped Oakland for 160 yrds? We hate Oakland, Royal plays well against them= Denver will love him.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2009, 10:47 PM   #18
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

Also I remember talking on the board with a couple other guys about WR that are small coming back in vogue. The reason is simple. The NFL started cracking down on helmet to helmet hits, leading with crown of helmet. Let's be honest there is a good chance Eddie Royal would have ended up like Nate Lewis if he had a head hunter like Dennis Smith gunning for him.

The biggest thing though is NFL cut down and how much the let CBS and FS/SS grab, clutch etc etc. As they make Dbacks keep hands off small and fast will work better and better.

Still a physical game though and players like Fitz and Marshall needed on one side.

I think big at on WR, small fast on the other, big TE, and a fast TE is a pretty combo.

Oh yeah and one huge Rb/fb along with some smaller shiftier ones also pretty good idea.

Broncos should be able to go small and fast, or big and powerfull in many different formations.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2009, 12:29 AM   #19
broncocalijohn
Famer of Rings
 
broncocalijohn's Avatar
 
I said Do It!

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lake Forest, Orange County, Calif.
Posts: 23,374

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Simon Fletcher
Default

Royal wont be called on for the fade pass in the corner endzone like TO or Moss (and even our own reformed? flava clown) but his job is to catch in the open field and sprint to the endzone. We have a great combo package.
broncocalijohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2009, 06:03 AM   #20
HILife
Ring of Famer
 
HILife's Avatar
 
Mrs. Alicia Hilife

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: DC - NOVA - DMV - VA - Take your pick
Posts: 4,599
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gcver2ver3 View Post
not that its a big deal, but i wish we could've gotten Royal those 20 more yards...
and 9 catches.
HILife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2009, 07:13 AM   #21
alkemical
Guerrilla Ontologist
 
alkemical's Avatar
 
rorrim|mirror

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Future
Posts: 43,095

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Prima Materia
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by broncocalijohn View Post
Royal wont be called on for the fade pass in the corner endzone like TO or Moss (and even our own reformed? flava clown) but his job is to catch in the open field and sprint to the endzone. We have a great combo package.
No, but he seems to have a knack for finding spots in the zone. Not to mention with his quicks he could be a good 'utility' player for redzone packages.
alkemical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2009, 07:16 AM   #22
FireFly
Ring of Famer
 
FireFly's Avatar
 
The window is open!

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,788
Default

Well concerning the difference between big and smaller recievers, I agree that there is definitely a place for the smaller WR in the modern game, but I still think that finding that big, physically dominating WR is more important and if you can get one your offense is going to be moving in the right direction!
FireFly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2009, 07:19 AM   #23
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FireFly View Post
Well concerning the difference between big and smaller recievers, I agree that there is definitely a place for the smaller WR in the modern game, but I still think that finding that big, physically dominating WR is more important and if you can get one your offense is going to be moving in the right direction!
I agree. Small quick players IMO are role players and need the big physical ones to help them make plays.

Let's face it if your a safety you watch Marshall more because you know he can overpower people. Corners can tackle Royal 1 on 1 if they catch him. Marshal often just straight arms corners.

They compliment each other very well. As do Graham and Scheff.

Mcdaniels should have the versatility to go big, or go small.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2009, 09:50 AM   #24
LonghornBronco
Ring of Famer
 
LonghornBronco's Avatar
 
Hook'em Horns

Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 1,427

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Rahim Moore
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by broncocalijohn View Post
Royal wont be called on for the fade pass in the corner endzone like TO or Moss (and even our own reformed? flava clown) but his job is to catch in the open field and sprint to the endzone. We have a great combo package.
Don't forget the two endzone catches to win the game (Can't recall the opponent), this play seems just as deadly as the fade.
LonghornBronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2009, 09:59 AM   #25
Gcver2ver3
Ring of Famer
 
Gcver2ver3's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Posts: 6,577

Adopt-a-Bronco:
replace hillman
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
Meh it doesn't matter except the fact Royal need to get his yards per recpetion better. Look at Jackson in Philly, 30 less balls and pretty much the same yardage.

He dropped a few but also was missed a couple times wide open deep. Hopefully Cutlers ability to get the ball to the wr quickly wasn't the only reason he was good. I'm thinking Royals yrdage goes down to about 700 this yr, but he does it on about 60 balls not 90.
i don't see that happening at all...

i see him having over 1,000yds for sure and maybe even 100 grabs...his ypc may not be much better if he's playing welker's role in the offense...and that's what i expect...
Gcver2ver3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:11 PM.


Denver Broncos