Taylor on offense?!

TheMalcolmConnection · 09-12-2005, 09:19 AM

Exactly what I'm saying. Kind of like the whole "Deion-effect" of last year.

MTK · 09-12-2005, 09:24 AM

I say toss him a fade sometime and let him go up for it.

irish · 09-12-2005, 09:29 AM

Based on what I saw living in PGH when LA was a HS student there they should put him in as a spot RB. He was amazing in HS as a RB. Maybe they could even use him as a kick & punt returner as he was untouchable doing that in HS too.

jdlea · 09-12-2005, 09:51 AM

This is not a good idea putting him on offense. The reason they have to is because they cut every big reciever they ever had. I think it is a terrible idea. He didn't get off of a jam near the end zone and I don't want to see Sean Taylor taking big hits. It's a terrible idea. They should have kept someone that could actually be a red zone threat instead of wack ass Taylor Jacobs or Antonio Brown.

TheMalcolmConnection · 09-12-2005, 09:56 AM

People typically don't take huge hits in the end zone.

MTK · 09-12-2005, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

People typically don't take huge hits in the end zone.

I was going to say the same thing, how many big shots do people typically take in the endzone?

I see him being used primarily as a decoy, and if they do toss it to him it will probably be on some sort of jump ball/fade rather than a route that might expose him to a hit.

jdlea · 09-12-2005, 10:05 AM

My concern is that he can play WR. I don't want him to be exposed the way Champ was. I don't want him to start making plays and then the Skins bring him in and try to get him to make plays all over the field or run reverses to him. That's my main concern.

TheMalcolmConnection · 09-12-2005, 10:06 AM

Not only that, Taylor is an ANIMAL.

jdlea · 09-12-2005, 10:07 AM

Another reason I don't like it is because I don't take this as the coaching staff showing faith in Taylor, I think this is an indictment of the recieving corps. While I like Patten and Moss, they're not great red zone targets, niether is Thrash. I don't think Jacobs and Brown should even be on the team.

MTK · 09-12-2005, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdlea

Another reason I don't like it is because I don't take this as the coaching staff showing faith in Taylor, I think this is an indictment of the recieving corps. While I like Patten and Moss, they're not great red zone targets, niether is Thrash. I don't think Jacobs and Brown should even be on the team.

I guess that's one way of thinking about it, or you could say it's just another thing for defenses to think about.

The bottom line is Taylor is the most physically gifted player on the team regardless of position. Why not toss him in there inside the 5 and see what happens? All around the league we're seeing more of this kind of thing, teams putting their best athletes in different spots in certain situations. I don't think it's an indictment of that position, it's just taking advantage of using your most talented players.

TheMalcolmConnection · 09-12-2005, 10:14 AM

I truly don't think it's the Skins trying to find another receiving threat so much as it (just as Matty said) something else to give opposing defenses to think about and plan for. Not only that, I bet Taylor can throw a hell of a block on someone.

jdlea · 09-12-2005, 10:15 AM

You can look at it that way too. I'm not denying ST's talent. He's my favorite player on the team, next to Ramsey and maybe he's tied with LA, but I just don't like putting him in on the goal line because I'm afraid he'll start finding the field on offense a lot. If he's only a goal line reciever like Vrabel is to the Pats then that's fine, I still think it makes the other WRs look bad.

MTK · 09-12-2005, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdlea

You can look at it that way too. I'm not denying ST's talent. He's my favorite player on the team, next to Ramsey and maybe he's tied with LA, but I just don't like putting him in on the goal line because I'm afraid he'll start finding the field on offense a lot. If he's only a goal line reciever like Vrabel is to the Pats then that's fine, I still think it makes the other WRs look bad.

I don't see Taylor getting on the field on offense unless we're inside the 5.

You said it yourself with Vrabel and the Pats, is that an indictment on their WR corps?

People see the Patriots doing that and they say it's brilliant, we're doing it and you're saying it makes the WRs look bad? It it works I don't think anybody is going to care how it looks.

BrudLee · 09-12-2005, 10:26 AM

Defenses will treat Taylor one of two ways: He will get too much respect because no one wants to get beat by a part-timer, or he will be ingored as an obvious decoy. Either way, he makes D coordinators think too much.

jdlea · 09-12-2005, 10:28 AM

That's a good point. I don't think our WRs are anywhere near the class of the Pats, but I see what you're saying. I have a big issue with the WRs on this team after number 1 & 2 anyway. So, that's part of the reason I look it at that way. I still think if we had a big target he wouldn't be in there.

09-12-2005, 09:19 AM	#16
TheMalcolmConnection I like big (_\|_)s. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Charlottesville, Virginia Age: 43 Posts: 19,264	Re: Taylor on offense?! Exactly what I'm saying. Kind of like the whole "Deion-effect" of last year. __________________ Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

09-12-2005, 09:24 AM	#17
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 52 Posts: 99,832	Re: Taylor on offense?! I say toss him a fade sometime and let him go up for it.

09-12-2005, 09:29 AM	#18
irish Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 4,575	Re: Taylor on offense?! Based on what I saw living in PGH when LA was a HS student there they should put him in as a spot RB. He was amazing in HS as a RB. Maybe they could even use him as a kick & punt returner as he was untouchable doing that in HS too.

09-12-2005, 09:51 AM	#19
jdlea Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, VA Age: 41 Posts: 3,109	Re: Taylor on offense?! This is not a good idea putting him on offense. The reason they have to is because they cut every big reciever they ever had. I think it is a terrible idea. He didn't get off of a jam near the end zone and I don't want to see Sean Taylor taking big hits. It's a terrible idea. They should have kept someone that could actually be a red zone threat instead of wack ass Taylor Jacobs or Antonio Brown.

09-12-2005, 09:56 AM	#20
TheMalcolmConnection I like big (_\|_)s. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Charlottesville, Virginia Age: 43 Posts: 19,264	Re: Taylor on offense?! People typically don't take huge hits in the end zone. __________________ Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

09-12-2005, 10:05 AM	#22
jdlea Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, VA Age: 41 Posts: 3,109	Re: Taylor on offense?! My concern is that he can play WR. I don't want him to be exposed the way Champ was. I don't want him to start making plays and then the Skins bring him in and try to get him to make plays all over the field or run reverses to him. That's my main concern.

09-12-2005, 10:06 AM	#23
TheMalcolmConnection I like big (_\|_)s. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Charlottesville, Virginia Age: 43 Posts: 19,264	Re: Taylor on offense?! Not only that, Taylor is an ANIMAL. __________________ Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

09-12-2005, 10:07 AM	#24
jdlea Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, VA Age: 41 Posts: 3,109	Re: Taylor on offense?! Another reason I don't like it is because I don't take this as the coaching staff showing faith in Taylor, I think this is an indictment of the recieving corps. While I like Patten and Moss, they're not great red zone targets, niether is Thrash. I don't think Jacobs and Brown should even be on the team.

09-12-2005, 10:14 AM	#26
TheMalcolmConnection I like big (_\|_)s. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Charlottesville, Virginia Age: 43 Posts: 19,264	Re: Taylor on offense?! I truly don't think it's the Skins trying to find another receiving threat so much as it (just as Matty said) something else to give opposing defenses to think about and plan for. Not only that, I bet Taylor can throw a hell of a block on someone. __________________ Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

09-12-2005, 10:15 AM	#27
jdlea Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, VA Age: 41 Posts: 3,109	Re: Taylor on offense?! You can look at it that way too. I'm not denying ST's talent. He's my favorite player on the team, next to Ramsey and maybe he's tied with LA, but I just don't like putting him in on the goal line because I'm afraid he'll start finding the field on offense a lot. If he's only a goal line reciever like Vrabel is to the Pats then that's fine, I still think it makes the other WRs look bad.

09-12-2005, 10:26 AM	#29
BrudLee Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Rehoboth Beach, DE Posts: 3,494	Re: Taylor on offense?! Defenses will treat Taylor one of two ways: He will get too much respect because no one wants to get beat by a part-timer, or he will be ingored as an obvious decoy. Either way, he makes D coordinators think too much. __________________ There's nowhere to go but up. Or down. I guess we could stay where we are, too.

09-12-2005, 10:28 AM	#30
jdlea Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, VA Age: 41 Posts: 3,109	Re: Taylor on offense?! That's a good point. I don't think our WRs are anywhere near the class of the Pats, but I see what you're saying. I have a big issue with the WRs on this team after number 1 & 2 anyway. So, that's part of the reason I look it at that way. I still think if we had a big target he wouldn't be in there.

Taylor on offense?!

Locker Room Main Forum