Ring 6
PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
2021 Weekly Picks Winner
2022 Weekly Picks Winner
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
- Messages
- 63,761
- Reaction score
- 14,113
Andy, for a bright guy with a lot to contribute, sometimes you are just plain contrary.
Duh. Of course "every defensive call ever made assigns every eligible receiver or every place of the field to someone". But a guy with sub 4.3 speed who can blow by single man coverage and who is a home run threat presents a different challenge than a plodding receiver. Defenses would have to be aware of his potential to get open deep, and just that possibility could help open things up.
No one has suggested that Demps is more at this point than mainly a kick returner and perhaps an occasional threat on screens/reverses/trick plays and the occasional bomb. Matt Slater partcipated in 3.53% of the offensive snaps (40 plays) as a WR in 2011, about 2.5 snaps/game. I could see Demps taking over those snaps, which would be a good thing IMHO. Demps offers much more potential as a home run threat than Slater. Obviously Demps being a "legitimate threat" would be a huge asset, and I agree that that is TBD at this point, but based on his college tape the kid is enough of a threat to make defenses more conscious of the deep option than someone like Slater was.
The NFL has plenty of experience with track guys with great speed trying to make it as positional players. Renaldo Nehemiah never did much. Willie Gault had a respectable but not spectacular career as a "speed merchant" and deep threat. Demps has enough football experience and success as an all-purpose weapon to give some hope that he could be used effectively as more than a decoy. But even as just a decoy, I think he could be used to stretch the field a bit, and that could make a big difference given our other weapons.
I understand what you are saying, I just object to the 'look at these weapons, how can you defend it' posts. They imply that defenses come up with a plan on the fly based on who is on the field.
I'm not being contrary at all, just pointing out that the comments suggesting a fast guy outside takes a defender away, or implying sending a slower man deep leaves him ignored are naive.