Welcome to PatsFans.com

Why Steelers take Holmes over Jackson?

Discussion in 'NFL Football Forum' started by JR4, May 3, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JR4

    JR4 In the Starting Line-up PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,821
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +38 / 3 / -2

    They even traded up I think. After seeing Chads videos
    and stats, I would have thought Steelers would have take the bigger,
    heavier but just as fast Jackson.
    Some reports seem to indicate Holes will have a hard time with jams at this
    level.
    It seems Jackson's hands are superb ... I doubt Holmes could be any better.

    Not complaining but just wondering. Maybe BB has an angel up there helping
    him. He sure seems blessed.
     
  2. zippo59

    zippo59 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    5,072
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    The only thing I can think of is the general consensus that Holmes runs better routes.
     
  3. Hok

    Hok Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    714
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Same reason we took Maroney over Williams. Holmes was rated higher on their board.
     
  4. zippo59

    zippo59 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    5,072
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Clearly, but the question is why was he rated higher on their board?
     
  5. Ahriman

    Ahriman Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    The only thing that comes to mind is route running. Holmes is allegedy a superb route runner; whereas C-Jack's routes aren't the crispest. Virtually every other measurable goes to Jackson though.
     
  6. JJDChE

    JJDChE 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,846
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Impossible to speculate. They just liked him better.
     
  7. Johnny Z

    Johnny Z Practice Squad Player

    Joined:
    May 2, 2006
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I guess I'm just stunned to see this on a Pats board. The Pats have won 3 Super Bowls with a lot of tiny WR's on their roster. The Pittsburgh Steelers just won a SB with Cedric Wilson and Randle EL and Hines - 5'11" - Ward.

    Getting rid of Pepsico Burden opened the way to the promised land.

    Who did they draft? Santanio Holmes and Willie Reid - think they're worried about small WR's beating the jam? Watch some football. Small WR's usually slide through the jam like it's not there.

    Tampa Bay had big receivers in 2003. They're history.

    St Louis had skinny Bruce and "I'm 6' with my fingers crossed" Holt.

    Baltimore's leading SB WR was Brandon Stokley.

    When is this big WR insanity going to go away, because it's largely balogna. The first round of the NFL is a garbage bag stuffed full of failed big WR's. Most of them suck.

    If Chad Jackson ends up able to escape the jam as well as Santonio Holmes does, it will be because he can make the same athletic moves that Holmes can make. It will have very little to do with his bench press, or his pounds, or his height.

    Somebody in NE had better wake up because big WR's, which the Pats have shown a recent bent toward having, have been watching Deion Branch play football from their big WR couches. They've been Watching Troy Brown play football. What happens when Randy Moss and Troy Brown compare rings?

    Your flirtations with David Terrell, Donald Hayes, Andre Davis, etc. are disturbing. Forget those losers. Right now, I have my doubts Chad Jackson will be any better than Jabar Gaffney.
     
  8. kierkegaard

    kierkegaard Practice Squad Player

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Jabar Gaffney? *shudders*
     
  9. D-cleater

    D-cleater Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Messages:
    882
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    not a bad post, Steeler fan, but I hope you're wrong about Jackson.

    Also, I don't think the Pats look for the bigger reciever at all. Givens was the biggest starter we've had during the run . Tim Dwight, David Patten.... all small guys.

    Even going back before that with Terry Glenn (she was short), Shawn Jefferson were both under 6'. not sure who else is worth mentioning, but they were commonly small recievers
     
  10. zippo59

    zippo59 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    5,072
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Size is overrated for WR but it is good to have both because Deion isn't going to outjump anyone for balls.
     
  11. Joker

    Joker PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2004
    Messages:
    17,508
    Likes Received:
    753
    Ratings:
    +2,154 / 19 / -26

    Yeah...uh Johnny Z...we'll keep Ben Watson and make sure to send him down the seams on Polamalu...Chad Jackson won't be any good because he's too big?....well, actually ...that's just STANDARD Steeler fan moronic...nice to see the fanbase is so in tune with the coaching staff/
     
  12. sarge

    sarge Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,382
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Real good post even though my bias towards the Pats causes me pain typing that.

    I sure hope you are wrong about Jackson. But you may not be.

    I just hope NE fans in general give this guy a few seasons to develop, which is the norm for even most of the great receivers to develop.
     
  13. sarge

    sarge Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,382
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I will just add that I dopn't think getting rid of Buress did anything to help the Steelers.

    I think the 2004 Steelers were actually better then the 2005 Steelers.

    It's just the 2004 Steelers played there asses off when they needed to, and the 2005 Patriots weren't near the 2004 Patriots.
     
  14. fgssand

    fgssand PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,782
    Likes Received:
    26
    Ratings:
    +35 / 0 / -1

    #17 Jersey

    Yo Steeler fan, why can't you just admit you blew it with Holmes over Jackson - just as you did picking Randal El over Branch.
     
  15. marty

    marty In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Messages:
    2,484
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0


    Agreed. Could be something a simple as liking a guy from the midwest over a FL player!:p
     
  16. PATSNUTme

    PATSNUTme Paranoid Homer Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2005
    Messages:
    15,289
    Likes Received:
    90
    Ratings:
    +193 / 2 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    Pro Football Weekly's write up on Holmes said that he was Terry Glenn, both physically and mentally.

    Which means he could have a big year before he starts to sulk and disappear.
     
  17. spacecrime

    spacecrime Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    8,329
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -0

    Of course it isn't. Fan forums are for speculation. It is what we do, and what we enjoy.
     
  18. Johnny Z

    Johnny Z Practice Squad Player

    Joined:
    May 2, 2006
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0


    I agree. I'm not a NE fan, but I am a fan of what NE has been doing. They have been a bright shinning light of open mindedness when it comes to letting talented WR's play, and they've reaped the reward. Good hunting in replacing David Givens.
     
  19. patchick

    patchick Moderatrix Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    11,801
    Likes Received:
    414
    Ratings:
    +1,134 / 9 / -2

    #11 Jersey

    Solid post -- there's no question that size isn't everything in a WR, and this draft shows that most teams know it. By and large, the little guys with skills (Holmes, Moss, Jennings) went high, and a lot of the big guys slipped. The irony of this thread is that even Jackson isn't really very big, maybe a smidgen bigger than Hines Ward.

    To me, the worry with guys like Branch and Holmes is not production but injury risk, which is about their slight builds rather than their height. In fact, a skinny 6'4" receiver would be a tremendous injury risk. The Patriots have to go to some lengths to protect Branch, even leaving him out of exhibition play altogether.

    But none of this invalidates the original post, which asks a good question: why did the Steelers prefer Holmes? Maybe one answer is found in the teams' respective #1 receivers. Ward + Holmes looks like a nice combination, as does Branch + Jackson.
     
  20. Amnorix

    Amnorix On the Game Day Roster

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Route running is really, REALLY important. It's why Donald Hayes failed here, and it's why Bethel Johnson has continued to suck.

    There are two things that are important for receivers, ultimately -- to be able to get open, and to be able to catch the ball. That's per BB. But route-running is the thing that ties the WR into the rest of the offense, so without it, all you have is sandlot football, which isn't going to work in the NFL.

    Johnny Z is 90% right, but 10% wrong. He's right when he says that the Patriots have won with shorter receivers, and that people IN GENERAL are too enamored of big receivers. But he's wrong when he suggests that smaller receivers are better BECAUSE they are smaller. That's just flat wrong.

    The best receivers in the game over the last 5 of so years are Moss, Harrison and Owens. Moss is 6'4, Owens is 6'3" and Harrison is listed at 6 feet, but I'm doubtful.

    Bigger receivers have different ways of getting open than smaller receivers, and I think most would agree that ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL, it's better to be tall than short. But, clearly, being short will usually give you an advantage in quickness, lateral movement, etc.

    Being tall would generally be better in the red zone, to say the least.

    The Patriots have tried, and failed, to get a good bigger receiver, partly because they aren't willing to "pay the price" -- i.e. spend a very high 1st round pick etc. They just don't value them quite as much as some other teams, so they've tried to get them the cheaper/easier way -- free agency, but it hasn't worked out.

    To say that the Pats are moving aggressive towards taller receivers, and this means their downfall, is silly.

    To say that the Steelers won the SB because they got rid of Burress is also silly.
     
    Last edited: May 3, 2006
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>