Page 1 of 1
For every one who said we didn't need a wide receiver
Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 12:50 pm
by brad7686
The Titans game is exhibit A.
Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:46 pm
by HardDawg
Lloyd wasn't even there. And with an O-Line that was getting BLOWN UP...its hard to make that call!
Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 2:01 pm
by UK Skins Fan
Hmmm. Difficult to make the case that our glaring weakness in this game was the wide receiver position.
Actually, if we could just get two catches every game from our secondary, then that would make a heck of a lot bigger difference than another wide receiver.

Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 5:41 pm
by HEROHAMO
We have to give them more than just one pre season game to pass judgement. We just have to wait until the regular season, I guess the halfway point.
Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:11 pm
by Irn-Bru
For everyone who thought that THN posts required substance. . .this thread can be exhibit A. . .
Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 7:34 pm
by HardDawg
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 7:57 pm
by num1skinsfan
I did see the same old problem as last year, no respect to 2nd wide out, (whoever it was last night) and doubling of Moss. Now the running game was a non factor, so play action was nullified. The right side of the Titans line simply overpowered out left side (heyer & wade), leaving Cambell exposed... this problem has to be addressed very quickly... I would like to get a look at Corey Bradford with the first team....
Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 9:22 pm
by ike075
Did you know that

ey needed to block and help the offensive line and was unable to go down the middle? Really limits the effectiveness of getting the wide receivers open. Exhibit A is the need for serious O line help.
Ikester
Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 9:39 pm
by HailSkins2007
Irn-Bru wrote:For everyone who thought that THN posts required substance. . .this thread can be exhibit A. . .
I saw this post when nobody posted and it wasnt even worth my time replying . The WR were fine. The Left OL was the problem.
Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 10:36 pm
by Chris Luva Luva
HailSkins2007 wrote:Irn-Bru wrote:For everyone who thought that THN posts required substance. . .this thread can be exhibit A. . .
I saw this post when nobody posted and it wasnt even worth my time replying . The WR were fine. The Left OL was the problem.
Depending on what happens with Lloyd, WR could be an issue at some point. Nothing to worry about now but we did have some drops while JC was at the helm.
Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:45 am
by brad7686
the problem is that they need bigger receivers, or at least one. Nobody on the team is strong enough to win a friggin jump ball. Its the same thing as last year.
Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 8:12 am
by VetSkinsFan
Moss, ARE, and

ey are enough for our 3 primary receivers. If we can get JC the ability for the 5 step drop before he gets pummeled, I think we might be able to do something. I still am skeptical about Lloyd. Until he shows me something postive, I'm still not counting on him for much.
The running game was non-existent, as stated earlier. With that, as stated, the play action freezing the secondary was null and void. This let the secondary either proceed with their blitzes or fall into coverage.
Re: For every one who said we didn't need a wide receiver
Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 8:51 am
by BRAD44
Why don't you just put another piece of rock in that pipe of yours and get a little more paranoid!!!!! 1 pre-season game and your crying about we need another wide reciever and a guy that can out jump a defender to snag balls....great observation on your part Sat. night. Lets see........the line wasn't stellar.........and wait a minute, yeah that's right the line wasn't stellar! That's the main reason for the crappy production in the 1st pre-season game of the year....there were allot of good things to take out of this game though. such as the defense looked pretty damn good!!! Anyone who thought London wouldn't be worth spit should be taken out and beaten right now b/c this guy is a TACKLING MACHINE!!!! He is going to dominate in the middle and for everyone who doubted the pick of Landry can go ahead and join that guy in the street to be beaten, he gave everyone a glimpse of what is going to come this year....ask Kerry Collins!!!! True the team looked bad but, Jason looked decent throwing the ball.. How about the out patten to El? That ball was thrown on a rope and where only El could get to it not to mention the one over the middle behind the linebackers and infront of the safeties to El that was dropped but that was a difficult throw and he nailled it! The 39 yard loft to Moss was another glimpse of how accurate our QB can be as he grows w/our recievers and the offense...I just think it's alittle early to be crying already about we need recievers.....geeez...guy, chill out!
Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 9:25 am
by JansenFan
Did anyone else notice that the receivers ran A LOT of deep patterns when Campbell was in the game? I was surprised to see that many plays that required Campbell to hold on to the ball when the Titans were sending corners on blitzes all night. At some point I was expecting a wide receiver screen to Moss on the weakside.
Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 10:10 am
by REDEEMEDSKIN
Chris Luva Luva wrote:Nothing to worry about now but we did have some drops while JC was at the helm.
Let's also not worry about a couple of the patented Campbell overthrows-to-short-receivers, and his bad case of fumblitis.
In fairness, he threw some beautiful passes to Randle El and Santana Moss that were picture perfect. 
Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 10:16 am
by Chris Luva Luva
REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:Let's also not worry about a couple of the patented Campbell overthrows-to-short-receivers,
I believe this is one reason a tall WR would not hurt, if

ey is forced to stay in to block, it'll help JC to have a tall, big bodied WR to go up and get a jump ball to convert. ARE, and Moss definitely are willing to go up and snag the rock but it's not their strongest attribute.
JansenFan wrote:At some point I was expecting a wide receiver screen to Moss on the weakside.
That WR screen was our money play in 2005 and nobody wised up to it and even when they did, it was hard to stop. We got away from that play and I don't understand why, we need to get in back into the playbook and called once or twice a game. It'll definitely stop the DB's from cheating to far back to accommodate for our WR's speed.
Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 10:17 am
by Gibbs' Hog
REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:Let's also not worry about a couple of the patented Campbell overthrows-to-short-receivers, and his bad case of fumblitis.

We could also not worry about Brunell's patented overthrows-to-players-on-the-sidelines, and his bad case of callalotoftimeoutsitis...

Re: For every one who said we didn't need a wide receiver
Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 11:39 am
by brad7686
BRAD44 wrote:Why don't you just put another piece of rock in that pipe of yours and get a little more paranoid!!!!! 1 pre-season game and your crying about we need another wide reciever and a guy that can out jump a defender to snag balls....great observation on your part Sat. night. Lets see........the line wasn't stellar.........and wait a minute, yeah that's right the line wasn't stellar! That's the main reason for the crappy production in the 1st pre-season game of the year....there were allot of good things to take out of this game though. such as the defense looked pretty damn good!!! Anyone who thought London wouldn't be worth spit should be taken out and beaten right now b/c this guy is a TACKLING MACHINE!!!! He is going to dominate in the middle and for everyone who doubted the pick of Landry can go ahead and join that guy in the street to be beaten, he gave everyone a glimpse of what is going to come this year....ask Kerry Collins!!!! True the team looked bad but, Jason looked decent throwing the ball.. How about the out patten to El? That ball was thrown on a rope and where only El could get to it not to mention the one over the middle behind the linebackers and infront of the safeties to El that was dropped but that was a difficult throw and he nailled it! The 39 yard loft to Moss was another glimpse of how accurate our QB can be as he grows w/our recievers and the offense...I just think it's alittle early to be crying already about we need recievers.....geeez...guy, chill out!
If you'll notice, I made a reference to the fact that it is the same as last year in my later post. So, I'll put another rock in my pipe when you learn to read. Also, I made no reference to campbell, just the wr's. Even if the line gets better (which it should, hopefully) The wr's are still gonna have to man up a bit.
Re: For every one who said we didn't need a wide receiver
Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 11:42 am
by Fios
brad7686 wrote:BRAD44 wrote:Why don't you just put another piece of rock in that pipe of yours and get a little more paranoid!!!!! 1 pre-season game and your crying about we need another wide reciever and a guy that can out jump a defender to snag balls....great observation on your part Sat. night. Lets see........the line wasn't stellar.........and wait a minute, yeah that's right the line wasn't stellar! That's the main reason for the crappy production in the 1st pre-season game of the year....there were allot of good things to take out of this game though. such as the defense looked pretty damn good!!! Anyone who thought London wouldn't be worth spit should be taken out and beaten right now b/c this guy is a TACKLING MACHINE!!!! He is going to dominate in the middle and for everyone who doubted the pick of Landry can go ahead and join that guy in the street to be beaten, he gave everyone a glimpse of what is going to come this year....ask Kerry Collins!!!! True the team looked bad but, Jason looked decent throwing the ball.. How about the out patten to El? That ball was thrown on a rope and where only El could get to it not to mention the one over the middle behind the linebackers and infront of the safeties to El that was dropped but that was a difficult throw and he nailled it! The 39 yard loft to Moss was another glimpse of how accurate our QB can be as he grows w/our recievers and the offense...I just think it's alittle early to be crying already about we need recievers.....geeez...guy, chill out!
If you'll notice, I made a reference to the fact that it is the same as last year in my later post. So, I'll put another rock in my pipe when you learn to read. Also, I made no reference to campbell, just the wr's. Even if the line gets better (which it should, hopefully) The wr's are still gonna have to man up a bit.
Both Brads, please avoid the personal attacks, thank you
Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:33 pm
by VetSkinsFan
On the same note you tell people NOT to get worried b/c it's ONE preseason game, you get crazy on a single hit that Landry put out on Collins (it was nice, though) and one game for Fletcher. How about taking your own advice and pacing yourself.
I've not seen anyone say anything derogatory towards Fletcher; I'm probably the most negative about him and it wasn't against him, it was against the FO benching a performer to pick him up. Any more cliches you wanna throw out that are overused besides tackling machine? Let's see how the preseason pans out before you buy tickets for the Super Bowl.
Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:35 pm
by Irn-Bru
VetSkinsFan wrote:I've not seen anyone say anything derogatory towards Fletcher; I'm probably the most negative about him and it wasn't against him, it was against the FO benching a performer to pick him up.
I've been disputing this in a different thread too, but this is an unwarranted attack on our FO.
Any more cliches you wanna throw out that are overused besides tackling machine? Let's see how the preseason pans out before you buy tickets for the Super Bowl.
Sorry, but those sentences back to back were a little ironic.

Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 1:23 pm
by Secondary_Chaos
Listen guys, i know that we totally blew it this year and we didnt fill the holes at WR and on the O-Line, but hey, there's always next year...
its called the PREseason for a reason...
Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 6:44 am
by sch1977
Secondary_Chaos wrote:Listen guys, i know that we totally blew it this year and we didnt fill the holes at WR and on the O-Line, but hey, there's always next year...
its called the PREseason for a reason...
Always next year?

Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 7:08 am
by Fios
sch1977 wrote:Secondary_Chaos wrote:Listen guys, i know that we totally blew it this year and we didnt fill the holes at WR and on the O-Line, but hey, there's always next year...
its called the PREseason for a reason...
Always next year?

It's a joke, read carefully