Jump to content
SportsWrath

Hakeem Nicks


Allstarjim
 Share

  

18 members have voted

  1. 1. To start the season, what is Hakeem Nicks' role?

    • Starting WR at X position, move Hixon down to slot.
    • Starting WR at Z position, move Smith down to slot.
    • Slot receiver or third WR
    • Either 4th, 5th, or 6th receiver, wait your turn, rook!
      0


Recommended Posts

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...