Allstarjim Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 Ok, here's the hypothetical... Hakeem Nicks goes out in the last preseason game and has another 100 yard performance with at least 1 TD. Say he beats the secondary deep again at least once. Going into Week 1, what should his role be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 it depends what manningham and the others do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted August 30, 2009 Author Share Posted August 30, 2009 it depends what manningham and the others do. Pretend that Manningham that every receiver has a near identical game as the did against the Jets, but erase the Smith deep drop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 well then i personally would nicks at x, smith at y, manningham no.3 and hixon 4 and returning. i think im higher on manningham than some people are though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted August 30, 2009 Author Share Posted August 30, 2009 well then i personally would nicks at x, smith at y, manningham no.3 and hixon 4 and returning. i think im higher on manningham than some people are though. I think I'm higher on Manningham than some people as well. I'm surprised that you would promote Nicks to the x receiver right away, though. I think I would put him in the slot and go from there, while still trying to keep him heavily involved in the offense. I want to see more from Manningham. One thing that may be troublesome is managing the ego of Hixon if Manningham, Nicks, and Barden all pass him on the depth chart, which I think is a possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 Ok, here's the hypothetical... Hakeem Nicks goes out in the last preseason game and has another 100 yard performance with at least 1 TD. Say he beats the secondary deep again at least once. Going into Week 1, what should his roll be? seeded kaiser or hoagie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigblue25 Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 Heres my red flag with Nicks,yes highly impressive but hes been doing it against third string defenses not to be mr. pessimistic but I am real worried about these recievers,Philly had a simple but effective plan to beat us and this is a copycat league I see alot of teams stacking the box and playing the wideouts man to man,lets hope one does step up, I have faith with Smith and Nicks. Hixon i've lost total faith and Manningnohands I have never liked,but all in all we should be a contender for the title Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted August 30, 2009 Author Share Posted August 30, 2009 seeded kaiser or hoagie LOL, ok, you got me. I used the wrong word. Fixed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 LOL, ok, you got me. I used the wrong word. Fixed it. i thought it was one of your trick questions. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 well then i personally would nicks at x, smith at y, manningham no.3 and hixon 4 and returning. i think im higher on manningham than some people are though. the dog's not trying to be obnoxious - just asking, isn't "Y" typically designated for tight ends? assuming nobody is suggesting that here, but wanted to be sure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted August 31, 2009 Author Share Posted August 31, 2009 the dog's not trying to be obnoxious - just asking, isn't "Y" typically designated for tight ends? assuming nobody is suggesting that here, but wanted to be sure... Yes, I think you are correct, dog. Somebody help me out. I thought the Z is the slot receiver, am I wrong? So if the X is on one side, what is the other side? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted August 31, 2009 Author Share Posted August 31, 2009 Yes, I think you are correct, dog. Somebody help me out. I thought the Z is the slot receiver, am I wrong? So if the X is on one side, what is the other side? OK, what I'm reading is that the Z receiver is the other side. The slot receiver is simply known as the slot receiver. Unless someone knows better. The Y is always TE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 ok well id like nicks at split end(burress' old spot) and smith at flanker(toomers old spot) and manningham as the 3rd, id call it slot but smith would move there alot when manningham come in. thats what id like to see assuming it plays out like allstarjim said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nas Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Yes, I think you are correct, dog. Somebody help me out. I thought the Z is the slot receiver, am I wrong? So if the X is on one side, what is the other side? Chicken Frie Rye? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Slot or 3rd WR. Hixon, Smith, Nicks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditto Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Heres my red flag with Nicks,yes highly impressive but hes been doing it against third string defenses not to be mr. pessimistic but I am real worried about these recievers,Philly had a simple but effective plan to beat us and this is a copycat league I see alot of teams stacking the box and playing the wideouts man to man,lets hope one does step up, I have faith with Smith and Nicks. Hixon i've lost total faith and Manningnohands I have never liked,but all in all we should be a contender for the title I don't think it matters what string D he plays against. It's the hands that make him eligible for 1st string IMHO. He had to reach for all 3 catches. One was a shoe string, one behind the defender, and the one down the right sideline, he practically caught in his finger tips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treehugger Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Hixon, Smith, Nicks will be the order at the start of the season. As Nicks gets more comfortable with the full playbook he'll switch with Hixon around midseason. Manningham is 4th at best IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gman329 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 The way people overreact to preseason, you probably could have made "Starter, Instant induction to Canton" as one of the choices and it would have garnered some votes! Lets not go crazy over one good outing against guys who will be back home by this time next week. Yes, it was good to see him finally show something but his move up the depth chart has as much to do with the underwhelming performance of the other WRs as his emergence. No way he starts - they aren't quitting on Hixon & Smith before Week One. NFL depth charts just aren't that volatile. Too much time & effort is invested in starters to throw them out based on one preseason game, especially by an otherwise untested rookie, #1 pick or not. He MIGHT have moved up enough to be the 3rd/slot guy.....but don't be surprised if Manningham gets that role, at least for the first few weeks. Nicks will get his opportunities as 3rd or 4th receiver and if he does well, he will get more opportunities but it doesn't happen as quickly as it would on our fantasy football teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigblue25 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 I don't think it matters what string D he plays against. It's the hands that make him eligible for 1st string IMHO. He had to reach for all 3 catches. One was a shoe string, one behind the defender, and the one down the right sideline, he practically caught in his finger tips. I know great catches but against Jets who won't have a job in the regular season,I am just saying lets see him make plays against Newman,Samuel and Hall. I have been very impressed but have reservations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 I like Nicks but he has not gone up against some very good DB's yet. I think he may lack the kind of speed that will set him apart from the burners of the NFL so I dont see him as a #1 guy ever but I could be total fuckin wrong. Manningham interests me as a #1 potential maybe I should lay off the juice. Barden looks real smooth but against lower level competition. Barden has huge upside. Harold Carmichael type of the old Eagles. (dating myself) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now