Report: Dobson will be placed on IR (Now Official)

dales804 said:

Just going through the alphabet with whipping boys at WR:
Amendola
Bethel Johnson
Chad Jackson
Dobson

And so on...

Click to expand...

Bethel doesn't belong on that list. People should go watch the last couple 3GTGs.

ausbacker said:

Man, do I hope Dobson has a 1,500 yard, 12 TD season next year. I'm sick of the bust-chicklen little brigade.

Click to expand...

They've all moved on quietly about Edelman and "LaFail".

It's an inexact science. Sometimes it's chemistry, sometimes it's injury and bad medecine, sometimes it's bad performance.

The Fantasy Football crowd has never and will never understand it.

VJCPatriot said:

I'm sure Dobson is a good guy off the field and in practice..... but he's got to show it on the field and in games. A lost season for Dobson. Sorry, I've had my hopes pinned on him but he just looks like a bust thus far. Another in a long line of draft failures at the WR position. Hopefully he proves me wrong in 2015.

It's amazing though that our best Drafted WR to date, was a conversion project from QB to WR taken in the 7th round. All Hail Minitron!!

Click to expand...

.......and he didn't break out until his 5th year.


#irony.

mayoclinic said:

Again, name me a team whose "offensive potential against good teams" wouldn't be signficantly limited by losing one of their top 2 WRs? Imagine Denver without one of D. Thomas/Sanders, GB without one of Nelson/Cobb, etc. Top performers are hard to replace - that's what makes them valuable.

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure we just saw a team beat us with the production from their WR3-WR4-WR5 positions, as our defense totally took away the combo of Nelson/Cobb. In all reality, the Packers lost BOTH of their top receivers and didn't miss a beat.

Taking advantage of mismatches is the key to winning games. You obviously know that.

I'm not sure why it's so controversial to claim that we'll need to address the position of WR again next season? I thought it was fairly obvious to just about everyone, especially if Amendola leaves. I never claimed that we'd be going out and bringing in Dez Bryant, but yes--the depth needs improvement.

Nope. The irony is that the Pats do far better with 6th and 7th round picks on WRs than 2nd and 3rd round picks -- See Troy Brown, David Givens, and Minitron.

I would prefer that if the Pats are drafting a WR each year as usual that they trade their 2nd for 4 late round picks, they'd have a better chance on hitting on someone. There is some serious scouting FAIL on the WR position over the past decade. I've lost count on how many 2nd and 3rd rounders we've struck out on.

shmessy said:

.......and he didn't break out until his 5th year.


#irony.

Click to expand...

supafly said:

I'm pretty sure we just saw a team beat us with the production from their WR3-WR4-WR5 positions, as our defense totally took away the combo of Nelson/Cobb.

Click to expand...

Well, not totally. Cobb had 85 yds, and Nelson had 53 including the killer TD. Fully agree with your main point.

supafly said:

I'm pretty sure we just saw a team beat us with the production from their WR3-WR4-WR5 positions, as our defense totally took away the combo of Nelson/Cobb. In all reality, the Packers lost BOTH of their top receivers and didn't miss a beat.

Taking advantage of mismatches is the key to winning games. You obviously know that.

I'm not sure why it's so controversial to claim that we'll need to address the position of WR again next season? I thought it was fairly obvious to just about everyone, especially if Amendola leaves. I never claimed that we'd be going out and bringing in Dez Bryant, but yes--the depth needs improvement.

Click to expand...

Check again. The 2nd and 3rd receivers had the catches. Top receiver made one big play. After that 2 rbs and 2 TEs had a couple catches.

I'm pretty sure our 2 TEs and RB would bust out much more in a game like that. Would we have a 3rd receiver bust out with single coverage? Maybe, maybe not, but the 4th and 5th wide receivers killing us is a mirage.

supafly said:

I'm pretty sure we just saw a team beat us with the production from their WR3-WR4-WR5 positions, as our defense totally took away the combo of Nelson/Cobb. In all reality, the Packers lost BOTH of their top receivers and didn't miss a beat.

Taking advantage of mismatches is the key to winning games. You obviously know that.

I'm not sure why it's so controversial to claim that we'll need to address the position of WR again next season? I thought it was fairly obvious to just about everyone, especially if Amendola leaves. I never claimed that we'd be going out and bringing in Dez Bryant, but yes--the depth needs improvement.

Click to expand...

You missed Mayo's point. GB didn't get great production, but those players were on the field. The scenario you are rebutting is one where both top WRs are injured. Also, Mayo has already state that he expects the team to bring in some WR depth next year.

Patjew said:

Bethel doesn't belong on that list. People should go watch the last couple 3GTGs.

Click to expand...

They don't win in 2003 without him.

RayClay said:

Check again. The 2nd and 3rd receivers had the catches. Top receiver made one big play. After that 2 rbs and 2 TEs had a couple catches.

I'm pretty sure our 2 TEs and RB would bust out much more in a game like that. Would we have a 3rd receiver bust out with single coverage? Maybe, maybe not, but the 4th and 5th wide receivers killing us is a mirage.

Click to expand...

The bottom line is that we need the position of WR addressed in the offseason, and I don't know why anyone would argue to the contrary.

Thanks for pointing out that it wasn't the "4th and 5th options," but the point remains that their depth allowed them to take advantage of mismatches. That is something that we don't currently have, and would be an excellent tool to be able to utilize in the coming games, particularly if there is an injury.

Whether or not it will hold us back remains to be seen, but my point was that we'd be hurting if one of LaFell/Edelman went down. For someone to answer it with "any team would be hurting," doesn't solve the problem that we'd have, nor does it make anyone feel any better.

Oswlek said:

You missed Mayo's point. GB didn't get great production, but those players were on the field. The scenario you are rebutting is one where both top WRs are injured. Also, Mayo has already state that he expects the team to bring in some WR depth next year.

Click to expand...

Mayo responded that "any team would be hurting if they lost ONE of their two main options" which may be true on some level, but I don't really give a damn about any other team, and neither should you.

To take it one step further, I don't even buy that "any" team would be severely affected, since we just saw our opposition beat us with secondary options last week, whether someone wants to argue that they were the 3rd and 4th options, 4th and 5th, whatever...the point still stands.

supafly said:

Mayo responded that "any team would be hurting if they lost ONE of their two main options" which may be true on some level, but I don't really give a damn about any other team, and neither should you.

To take it one step further, I don't even buy that "any" team would be severely affected, since we just saw our opposition beat us with secondary options last week, whether someone wants to argue that they were the 3rd and 4th options, 4th and 5th, whatever...the point still stands.

Click to expand...

You are still missing the point. Obviously it would be better to have better depth WRs options, no one contests that at all. I'm not sure what you are arguing against.

A bit of an unknown is that because guys like Wright, Tyms and Amendola see so few targets, we can't be sure what they might do if suddenly thrust into a larger role. Presumably BB knows though, and if they could produce I have to think they would be getting more looks. So it may be fair to assume that if LaFell or Edelman went down we would be screwed. The main purpose of having depth is to minimize the drop in case of injury.

Oswlek said:

You are still missing the point. Obviously it would be better to have better depth WRs options, no one contests that at all. I'm not sure what you are arguing against.

Click to expand...

Apparently you haven't taken my original comments into context then. Maybe you should go back and see where I came in and how the flow of things went from there.

I think you jumped into the middle of the conversation by attempting to speak for someone else's thoughts, without going back and seeing how things started in the first place.

I disputed the notion that anyone thinking that we needed to address the WR position again was simply "wanting to chase a shiny new toy," and that our depth was perfectly fine. I came back by stating how wrong I thought that was, and said that we'd be screwed if one of LaFell or Edelman went down, which I think is obvious.

Mayo reminded me that any team would be affected if one of their top couple of guys went down, and that's where you came in.

Mack Herron said:

A bit of an unknown is that because guys like Wright, Tyms and Amendola see so few targets, we can't be sure what they might do if suddenly thrust into a larger role. Presumably BB knows though, and if they could produce I have to think they would be getting more looks. So it may be fair to assume that if LaFell or Edelman went down we would be screwed. The main purpose of having depth is to minimize the drop in case of injury.

Click to expand...

Very true.

I am not counting Wright as a WR though, and I'm also assuming a 50/50 (or better) shot that Amendola is gone and will need to be replaced.

Most importantly, I think the attempt to address the position with the 3 rookies last season has failed thus far, so we may need to take another draft pick again. At the very least, we'll need to bring in a middle/lower tiered free agent or two.

If one of Tyms, Dobson, or maybe even Boyce steps up in training camp---all the better. I think it's an ever-evolving position across the NFL from year to year, and even more so on this particular team due to several different variables, mostly the fact that we may be lacking in sufficient talent behind the top 2 options.

supafly said:

Very true.

I am not counting Wright as a WR though, and I'm also assuming a 50/50 (or better) shot that Amendola is gone and will need to be replaced.

Most importantly, I think the attempt to address the position with the 3 rookies last season has failed thus far, so we may need to take another draft pick again. At the very least, we'll need to bring in a middle/lower tiered free agent or two.

If one of Tyms, Dobson, or maybe even Boyce steps up in training camp---all the better.

Click to expand...

Yeah I have little doubt they will bring in help at WR. I think I even posted this thought way back, prompting the "shiny toy" comment.

Mack Herron said:

Yeah I have little doubt they will bring in help at WR. I think I even posted this thoughtway back, prompting the "shiny toy" comment.

Click to expand...

And it all comes full circle

VJCPatriot said:

Nope. The irony is that the Pats do far better with 6th and 7th round picks on WRs than 2nd and 3rd round picks -- See Troy Brown, David Givens, and Minitron.

I would prefer that if the Pats are drafting a WR each year as usual that they trade their 2nd for 4 late round picks, they'd have a better chance on hitting on someone. There is some serious scouting FAIL on the WR position over the past decade. I've lost count on how many 2nd and 3rd rounders we've struck out on.

Click to expand...

The last 2 7th round WR's the Pats have chosen (the 2 Jeremy's) are pumping gas somewhere, no?

shmessy said:

The last 2 7th round WR's the Pats have chosen (the 2 Jeremy's) are pumping gas somewhere, no?

Click to expand...

But they're pumping gas in some pretty nice warm up suits with a flying Elvis logo, so there's that..

supafly said:

The bottom line is that we need the position of WR addressed in the offseason, and I don't know why anyone would argue to the contrary.

Thanks for pointing out that it wasn't the "4th and 5th options," but the point remains that their depth allowed them to take advantage of mismatches. That is something that we don't currently have, and would be an excellent tool to be able to utilize in the coming games, particularly if there is an injury.

Whether or not it will hold us back remains to be seen, but my point was that we'd be hurting if one of LaFell/Edelman went down. For someone to answer it with "any team would be hurting," doesn't solve the problem that we'd have, nor does it make anyone feel any better.

Click to expand...

Their two tight ends had two carches each. Our two tight ends are much better. he practiced all week

supafly said:

Very true.

I am not counting Wright as a WR though, and I'm also assuming a 50/50 (or better) shot that Amendola is gone and will need to be replaced.

Most importantly, I think the attempt to address the position with the 3 rookies last season has failed thus far, so we may need to take another draft pick again. At the very least, we'll need to bring in a middle/lower tiered free agent or two.

If one of Tyms, Dobson, or maybe even Boyce steps up in training camp---all the better. I think it's an ever-evolving position across the NFL from year to year, and even more so on this particular team due to several different variables, mostly the fact that we may be lacking in sufficient talent behind the top 2 options.

Click to expand...

Wright, Gronk and Vareen aren't wide receivers, but they will get less targets if we insist on keeping 3-4 wide receivers fed. I don't think it's important. We're talking about backups, after all at a position we don't really value. as opposed to green bay, when we throw to our TEs and RB, we're trying to get some of our most explosive options off. Of course we'll try to stock the position, as we try to stock every position. Sometimes guys get injured ad sometimes players in front of them are playing better.