McClellin could return to practice this week.

[Kontradiction]

Do you honestly think 59/653/4 production means you are just as good as 75/997/12 because you randomly got targeted less?
The bigger numbers come from the ability to get open.

Sanu has been that same guy his whole career.

Again, this is a straw man. No comparisons were made. Further, for the sake of this discussion (as I'm about to show you), they are irrelevant. Let's go back and remind everyone of what you originally claimed and I'll underline for emphasis...

You are also misusing targets. A starting WR getting fewer targets means he isn't getting open.

You either:

A) Misspoke, which is understandable. Or...

B) You believed that the only reason why Sanu was getting fewer targets was because he wasn't getting open.

Like I said, you've already invalidated your own argument without much help from me by admitting outright that there were other reasons re: Cooks' production dip in the target category through six games this year vs. six games last year. Therefore, the only other conclusion one can draw as that you misspoke. So let's just admit that and move on. No need to dig your heels in here and die on this street corner.

 

[Kontradiction]

Wrong.
The fact that there is more than one factor dorsnt invalidate the primary factor.

You're moving the goal posts now. You went from "not getting open" being the ONLY factor to it now being a "primary" factor. Give me examples of Sanu being unable to get open, please, and then show me why it was the "primary" factor since you're making the claim.

As for the rest of your post, outside of what you've already given, other possible reasons for targets dip would include:

1. Game plan.

2. Other options in the passing game (such as one of the best receivers in the NFL and two pass catching RBs).

Among others. Again, you've already invalidated your own argument. Digging your heels in will only get you clobbered in this thread.

 

[Ring 6]

Again, this is a straw man. No comparisons were made.

You need to read the post my post responded to. It literally compared sanu to Adams and concluded they were about the same.

Further, for the sake of this discussion (as I'm about to show you), they are irrelevant. Let's go back and remind everyone of what you originally claimed and I'll underline for emphasis...

It doesn't say only reason. Your argument fails because you choose to assume that. It certainly is the primary reason.

You either:

A) Misspoke, which is understandable. Or...

B) You believed that the only reason why Sanu was getting fewer targets was because he wasn't getting open.

Nope. You read something into it that isn't there.

Like I said, you've already invalidated your own argument without much help from me by admitting outright that there were other reasons re: Cooks' production dip in the target category through six games this year vs. six games last year. Therefore, the only other conclusion one can draw as that you misspoke. So let's just admit that and move on. No need to dig your heels in here and die on this street corner.

Your mistake here is that because you want to argue you choose to assign a meaning to my comment that is not accurate and is the only way you can argue.

Are you telling me that targets are random and unrelated to a receivers ability to get open?

 

[Kontradiction]

You need to read the post my post responded to. It literally compared sanu to Adams and concluded they were about the same.

That's not what I was responding to. I was responding to this...

You are also misusing targets. A starting WR getting fewer targets means he isn't getting open.

It doesn't say only reason. Your argument fails because you choose to assume that. It certainly is the primary reason.

So then you misspoke. Next time you might want to include "primary" in there somewhere instead of inferring it's the only reason a starting WR would get fewer targets. Also, next time you may just want to admit that you misspoke in the first place and that you made a wording error that led to confusion.

Now that we've acknowledged that you misspoke originally and are aware that there are other important factors in a WR not getting as many targets as other receiving options in his offense, please give me me examples of Sanu being unable to get open and then show me why it was the "primary" factor. Much appreciated.

 

[Ring 6]

You're moving the goal posts now. You went from "not getting open" being the ONLY factor to it now being a "primary" factor.

No you move the goalposts because I never said it was the only factor. To assume that is beyond ridiculous.

[quoye]Give me examples of Sanu being unable to get open, please, and then show me why it was the "primary" factor since you're making the claim.[/quote]

Go watch film if you want to. The guy is playing lots of snaps and producing little. You don't have a #2 wr out on the field to get less than 60 receiving yards 17 of his 22 games. If he was getting open he would get the ball.

As for the rest of your post, outside of what you've already given, other possible reasons for targets dip would include:

1. Game plan.

If you throw for 5000 yards and gameplan your #2 down to 653 yards you don't do that because he is getting open and you would just rather not throw to him.

2. Other options in the passing game (such as one of the best receivers in the NFL and two pass catching RBs).

Every WR2 has a WR1 in front of them.
If sanu earned targets he would get them. Atlanta isn't saying wow we can get that wr open but let's not throw the ball to him.



'

Among others. Again, you've already invalidated your own argument. Digging your heels in will only get you clobbered in this thread.

I have not invalidated my argument at all. You changed my argument to fit your narrative because you are getting clobbered so you need to find something else that is not my argument to argue against.

 

[Ring 6]

That's not what I was responding to. I was responding to this...

Which is a response to a post that compared them

So then you misspoke. Next time you might want to include "primary" in there somewhere instead of inferring it's the only reason a starting WR would get fewer targets.

Nope didn't misspeak. Didn't say only.

Also, next time you may just want to admit that you misspoke in the first place and that you made a wording error that led to confusion.

Next time you may want to discuss what is said not change it to what you can create an argument against.

Now that we've acknowledged that you misspoke originally

No we have acknowledged your reading comprehension sucked

and are aware that there are other important factors in a WR not getting as many targets as other receiving options in his offense, please give me me examples of Sanu being unable to get open and then show me why it was the "primary" factor. Much appreciated.

Go watch whatever film you want.
The proof is in the production. Receivers who excel at getting open get the ball and produce.

If you want you can give me examples of him getting open and not getting the ball but we both know that is a lame request miles beyond the level of discussion in a message board and simply a tactic that you already know is silly.

 

[Ring 6]

But let's do this.

Do you think good WRs produce a career high of 59 catches by year 5?
11.5 ypc? 653 receiving yards, zero 100 yards games, less than 60 yards in 17/22 games as the #2 wr on the top passing offense in the league?

Do you think anyone designs an offense so WR2 playing 72% of the snaps (most of all WRs) gets 16% of the catches 13% of the yards and 10% of the TDs and is happy with his ability to get open and produce?

 

[Ring 6]

You're moving the goal posts now. You went from "not getting open" being the ONLY factor to it now being a "primary" factor. Give me examples of Sanu being unable to get open, please, and then show me why it was the "primary" factor since you're making the claim.

As for the rest of your post, outside of what you've already given, other possible reasons for targets dip would include:

1. Game plan.

2. Other options in the passing game (such as one of the best receivers in the NFL and two pass catching RBs).

Among others. Again, you've already invalidated your own argument. Digging your heels in will only get you clobbered in this thread.

Also how did I invalidate my answer by saying yes cooks is getting open less?

 

[Kontradiction]

Go watch film if you want to. The guy is playing lots of snaps and producing little. You don't have a #2 wr out on the field to get less than 60 receiving yards 17 of his 22 games. If he was getting open he would get the ball.

Could you share that film with me please? Since you're telling me to "go watch film", that leads me to believe that you have it and can share the wealth. You've obviously seen it if you're making the claim that (now) the PRIMARY reason why he's not getting targets is because he wasn't open. I've never seen the claim made about Sanu specifically outside of you which leads me to believe that you've seen something and can point it out to me.

If you want you can give me examples of him getting open and not getting the ball but we both know that is a lame request miles beyond the level of discussion in a message board and simply a tactic that you already know is silly.

Asking someone to back up their claim is ridiculous now?

 

[Ring 6]

Could you share that film with me please? Since you're telling me to "go watch film", that leads me to believe that you have it and can share the wealth. You've obviously seen it if you're making the claim that (now) the PRIMARY reason why he's not getting targets is because he wasn't open. I've never seen the claim made about Sanu specifically outside of you which leads me to believe that you've seen something and can point it out to me.

His production is proof and I have shown you that. If you want to see it in film go for it.

Asking someone to back up their claim is ridiculous now?

No. my claim is backed up by fact. Jumping into a discussion, altering what I say so you can make an argument, sticking to that wrong argument and then requesting an exhaustive film study to prove what is obvious is ridiculous.

 

[Kontradiction]

But let's do this.

Do you think good WRs produce a career high of 59 catches by year 5?
11.5 ypc? 653 receiving yards, zero 100 yards games, less than 60 yards in 17/22 games as the #2 wr on the top passing offense in the league?

Do you think anyone designs an offense so WR2 playing 72% of the snaps (most of all WRs) gets 16% of the catches 13% of the yards and 10% of the TDs and is happy with his ability to get open and produce?

Yes. As has been admitted by both of us in this thread, there are multiple reasons why a WR would see his targets dip. Especially in an offense with two pass catching backs.

 

[Kontradiction]

His production is proof and I have shown you that. If you want to see it in film go for it.

Not really. We've both already admitted here that there are multiple reasons why his targets would dip. Your claim is that the primary reason is because he isn't getting open. You then cited film when I was honestly expected you to cite an article of film review. This leads me to believe you have some film of him not getting open and can use that to explain to me, the person asking you to back up your claim, why it's the primary reason of a drop in targets. So please show me this film that I don't have.

No. my claim is backed up by fact. Jumping into a discussion, altering what I say so you can make an argument, sticking to that wrong argument and then requesting an exhaustive film study to prove what is obvious is ridiculous.

Nobody altered what you said. I quoted your post multiple times. You simply left out a very important qualifier. It's no big deal. It happens. I'm very happy that we've gotten past that and have now gotten to the point of the discussion where I can be educated on the primary why Sanu's targets have dropped from someone that has quite clearly reviewed his film.

 

[Ring 6]

Yes. As has been admitted by both of us in this thread, there are multiple reasons why a WR would see his targets dip. Especially in an offense with two pass catching backs.

His targets didn't "dip. He has never produced at a good level.

If you want to clown yourself into arguing that you have a really good WR2 who gets open easily but you choose to limit him to moribund production of 653 yards zero 100 yard games and less than 60 in 17/22 games (and by the way his average game is a whopping 43 yards) in order to throw the ball to the running backs and after they get their 55 yards a game there is no need for a WR2 be my guest.
You will be the only person I have ever heard make the argument that when you design a 5000 yard passing offense your WR2 is an afterthought and you choose not to throw to him when he does a superb job of getting open.

 

[Ring 6]

Not really. We've both already admitted here that there are multiple reasons why his targets would dip.

No we haven't. We have discussed reason that a receiver may not be getting open. (Deeper routes unfamiliar with QB-- meaning QB still learning what open means and developing trust)
We have not at all agreed there are reasons to throw the ball to a WR2 who gets open.

Your claim is that the primary reason is because he isn't getting open.

Because it's a fact.

You then cited film when I was honestly expected you to cite an article of film review. This leads me to believe you have some film of him not getting open and can use that to explain to me, the person asking you to back up your claim, why it's the primary reason of a drop in targets. So please show me this film that I don't have.

You are free to watch film of his games if you do choose.

Nobody altered what you said. I quoted your post multiple times. You simply left out a very important qualifier.

Wrong. You added a nonexistent qualifier.

It's no big deal. It happens. I'm very happy that we've gotten past that and have now gotten to the point of the discussion where I can be educated on the primary why Sanu's targets have dropped from someone that has quite clearly reviewed his film.

They have not DROPPED. They have been at a weak level his entire career.
There is not a change happening, it's who he is. QBs don't throw the ball yo him as much as an effective WR2. It is quite obvious to anyone who understands how you design an offense that this only happens when the WR2 just isn't very good.
A good WR2 is the second most valuable target in your offense. In his career he has played 86 games and been targeted 354 times. That is barely 4 times a game.
Do you think there is some kind of conspiracy that sanu is out there toasting corners and no one wants to throw him the ball?
At his 11.5 ypc if he caught every single pass thrown to him he would have averaged less that 800 yards a season. You think THAT guy isn't having a hard time getting open?
Last year if he caught every single target at his 11.1 he would have had 899 receiving yards. That is less yards than the guy we are comparing him to (Adams) actually had.
Do you seriously think the Falcons designed an offense to say he perfect #2 Wr will get less than 900 yards if he does a good job getting open and catches every single throw?

 

[Ring 6]

I will clarify one comment. When I said a wr getting less targets is because he isn't getting open I was referring to the comparison so less meant less than a receiver who doesn't struggle to get open not less than he used to get.
Sanu has always struggled to get open and always struggled to get targets on 2 different teams with quite a few different offensive coordinators.

 

[Kontradiction]

No we haven't. We have discussed reason that a receiver may not be getting open. (Deeper routes unfamiliar with QB-- meaning QB still learning what open means and developing trust)
We have not at all agreed there are reasons to throw the ball to a WR2 who gets open.



Because it's a fact.




You are free to watch film of his games if you do choose.






Wrong. You added a nonexistent qualifier.


They have not DROPPED. They have been at a weak level his entire career.
There is not a change happening, it's who he is. QBs don't throw the ball yo him as much as an effective WR2. It is quite obvious to anyone who understands how you design an offense that this only happens when the WR2 just isn't very good.
A good WR2 is the second most valuable target in your offense. In his career he has played 86 games and been targeted 354 times. That is barely 4 times a game.
Do you think there is some kind of conspiracy that sanu is out there toasting corners and no one wants to throw him the ball?
At his 11.5 ypc if he caught every single pass thrown to him he would have averaged less that 800 yards a season. You think THAT guy isn't having a hard time getting open?
Last year if he caught every single target at his 11.1 he would have had 899 receiving yards. That is less yards than the guy we are comparing him to (Adams) actually had.
Do you seriously think the Falcons designed an offense to say he perfect #2 Wr will get less than 900 yards if he does a good job getting open and catches every single throw?

.

We've (as in both of us) already admitted there are multiple reasons why targets would be down for a WR (Sanu in this case). You included one related to the Patriots, quarterback transition. With the Falcons, you could also include game plan, two pass-catching backs, and the fact that the primary read is probably the best WR in the NFL who is almost always open. We're past that.

You're claim is that the PRIMARY reason why his targets are not higher is because he isn't getting open. Again, your claim. The problem with not backing this claim up with some other form of evidence is that it's easily rebutted. See the paragraph above and other reasons you gave in your first response to me.

Now the onus is on you to bear the proof of your claim. Again, I was expecting a link. I even went to Google and typed in "Mohamed Sanu not getting open", as a means to facilitate confirmation bias for a claim that I wasn't making, and still couldn't find anything. But, instead of a link, you cited film that you watched. This tells me that you have access to such film and can use it to show me, definitively, that he's not getting appropriate WR2 targets because he's not getting open. I now eagerly await that film.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Another thread gone to Hell
Thread Ignore ON!

 

[Kontradiction]

.

 

[Ring 6]

Andy, you're wasting my time with this. Most of this is useless word salad and you're beating around the bush.

Exactly how I view your posts.

We've (as in both of us) already admitted there are multiple reasons why targets would be down for a WR (Sanu in this case).

No we have not. I gave reasons a receiver would not be getting open.

Also sanu's targets DID NOT DROP they have always been low.

You included one related to the Patriots, quarterback transition.

A reason he is not considered open as often as he would be with more trust not a reason to not throw himbthe ball when he is.

With the Falcons, you could also include game plan, two pass-catching backs, and the fact that the primary read is probably the best WR in the NFL who is almost always open. We're past that.

Not to the level he is ignored. Not even close.

You're claim is that the PRIMARY reason why his targets are not higher is because he isn't getting open. Again, your claim. The problem with not backing this claim up with some other form of evidence is that it's easily rebutted. See the paragraph above and other reasons you gave in your first response to me.

If your WR2 is adept at getting open he is a big part of your offense not an afterthought. That's just common football knowledge.

Now the onus is on you to bear the proof of your claim.

The numbers prove my view. The onus is on you to prove the excuses why a WR2 doesn't get the ball.

Again, I was expecting a link. I even went to Google and typed in "Mohamed Sanu not getting open", as a means to facilitate confirmation bias for a claim that I wasn't making, and still couldn't find anything. But, instead of a link, you cited film that you watched.

I did not cite film I watched I told you that if you want to see it feel free to watch the film. You will see it if you do.

This tells me that you have access to such film and can use it to show me, definitively, that he's not getting appropriate WR2 targets because he's not getting open. I now eagerly await that film.

He is not getting appropriate targets. That is a fact.

Look this is turning into a stupid thread ruining back and forth evidently because you are trying to use debate tactics to look like you are winning an argument that is silly.

If you want to believe Mohammed sanu doesn't struggle to get open and his team just doesn't want to throw the call to him because a WR2 who can get open easily is not important to them and they would rather ignore him that is fine. If you want to believe that had happened for 6 years with 2 teams and numerous offensive coordinators because people just don't like to throw sanu the ball when he is open be my guest.

I have nothing more to say about this. It's over.

 

[Kontradiction]

.