Attributes that make #1WRs for the Hawks ?

[hawksurething]

It's not what you say, it's how you say it.. And with no allowance that any other views are valid to the point that you tell people they aren't fans if they don't follow you.
And when you come to a board of pretty knowledgable fans on the whole and instead of discuss presume to lecture, yes, you're then going to make yourself look bad. Credibility is earned not demanded.
If the play call that ended our Super Bowl hopes had been, say, a naked bootleg and Wilson had scored, would you still be beating this drum? You're now essentially admitting you want the Seahawks to throw more.. To be just like nearly every other team. We went to two Super Bowls back to back. Even with the play call we had if Butler doesn't sell out on that one play we still win. And yet this insistence we re do the entire philosophy of the team. To keep the defense as is, it needs to constantly reload with cheap , quality depth. That comes through the draft. Your other idea is to sign Marshall.. But again, there's a salary cap. Who don't you want to sign to pay that salary?
Couldn't I just as easily say we lost the Super Bowl because we ran out of CBs and so we need to get one of those? If the defense doesn't give up 14 in the 4th we would have won. Do I get to question your fan-hood if you disagree? Want to put your tangible fanhood stats up against mine, as you're fond of doing?
Id suggest if you want to be treated like a normal member of the forum perhaps you start by acting like one instead of trying to be our teacher.

And that's s my point. All I said was we need to fix our weaknesses. I used attributes of the position in Question. But some people were saying no,and that we should keep the same weakness.

Also yes you can question my fan- hood if I EVER say no to getting a elite player! ( unless he has off field drama,although Lynch has had drama,for elite talent I still make exceptions if they change).

I would not disagree with getting a slot CB.I pointed that out as a weakness too.

Yes I want use to throw more to keep Lynch fresh and defenses honest. I said this since Largent left & when we got Percy I was disappointed as he is not a WR,he is a move weapon who is hard to use and offers nothing in the rezone. Injury prone. Largent was destroying double coverage, yet he never got a elite RB to help him get a ring. Shame.

It ws the same back then people saying hawks dont need a good RB & they need is Largent...While Irvin got emmit & 3 rings.Makes me mad Largent could not get help.


Also yes please put your stats or data up against mine when debating a subject, instead of just say stuff without backing.

I said I came here to teach the 12th man...also said I want to be taught. I like growing since I don't know it all. But what little do know ,I always stay vigilant.

I don't want to be normal,I want to be extraordinary. I have been taught much be some people on here...as well I see that more people are saying a #1WR demands double teams,when before nobody on this site mentioned it. Let's all grow together,don't blow off good info with the phrase " we don't need". Learn from our mistakes with Largent.

Your posts are getting worse. Who said, EVER, that we only needed Largent? And, you might recall, during Largent did play with some great backs -- Curt Warner, John L. Williams, and Id even add Sherman Smith who put up decent numbers on an expansion team before free agency was around.

In any case, your whole premise is about changing the Seahawks fundamental approach to the game, an approach that has gotten the Seahawks to two straight Super Bowls, and has built a foundation of a long term powerhouse. So, I will say "no thank you". I will even say flat out I dont want a collection of elite players. I want a strong team. I want a run first team that spreads the ball around to decent to good receivers and maybe a great one if we happen to be able to get one..........

Under the guise of "fixing our weakness" what you really want to do is change the entire team dynamic. Change the offensive philosophy which also changes how the defense has to approach the game.

In the era of the salary cap you CANT be strong everywhere. You have to choose what you want to be really good at and then commit your limited resources to that. The genius of Seattles system is that it goes so far against the grain of what other teams do. As I mentioned previously, teams are gearing their defenses to stop the pass, even structuring their rosters that way. So when we play them, they have trouble containing us.

And finally, if Marshall and Jackson are so elite, they wont be available.. If they are available, it means they arent seen as elite............. And if you do pay them 9 million instead of getting 4 million dollar WRs, then youve taken 5 million dollars worth of talent away from an area we need it. and they wont want to sign in seattle unless we change our offense, like you want us to. Which isnt going to happen.. Carroll has a proven record with how he is doing things

No one likes to say it, but the actual value of Bevell is that he has created a good, strong (not elite) offense on a tiny budget. UDFA, cheap WRs. A 5th rounder and 2 guys off the street at TE. A street pick up playing FB and subbing on the D line. Its exactly because we pay so little there that we can afford our dominant defense.. If an elite WR falls to us in the draft in a mid round, cool. But spending big resoures on a WR doesnt fit the concept. A good receiver? Sure. Id take another Sydney Rice, his presence did a lot more than the numbers suggest.

And finally, as I mentioned.. of the past 8 teams to play in the Super Bowl, only ONE had an elite WR. And they lost. The other 7, including all 4 winners didnt have an elite WR. Chasing and throwing money after elite receivers that actually make your offense more predictable , and is what teams are gearing towards facing is foolish... Its proven that teams that build that way..chasing a handful of elite players (Chicago, Washington) dont win. That is simply fact. Teams investing in balance (3 good WRs vs. 1 elite and 2 so so WRs) win super bowls. Teams tying money up in elite WRs (Denver, Detroit) win highlight reels.

Hawks had a collection of RBs like Sims who I liked a little & Sherman, not a good RB...which did not get them close to a superbowl. Largent got his 1st 1000 yard & Double digit Elite RB in 1983. Curt Warner. And guess what happened???

I will tell you...Conference championship game! Largent's closest sniff at the Superbowl. Which was an injustice to Largent.

If Largent had an elite QB like Russell Wilson he would have had a ring with that 1983 team. Russ's magic can win with undrafted WRs & just an elite RB. So we know he would win easy with a WR that destroys double coverage like Largent!

Anyways...you don't have to want both an Elite WR & RB on the field at the same time for defenses to have to play honest & pick their poison. But I do want defenses to have to pick their poison so they can't stop us next time.

 

[IndyHawk]

It's not what you say, it's how you say it.. And with no allowance that any other views are valid to the point that you tell people they aren't fans if they don't follow you.
And when you come to a board of pretty knowledgable fans on the whole and instead of discuss presume to lecture, yes, you're then going to make yourself look bad. Credibility is earned not demanded.
If the play call that ended our Super Bowl hopes had been, say, a naked bootleg and Wilson had scored, would you still be beating this drum? You're now essentially admitting you want the Seahawks to throw more.. To be just like nearly every other team. We went to two Super Bowls back to back. Even with the play call we had if Butler doesn't sell out on that one play we still win. And yet this insistence we re do the entire philosophy of the team. To keep the defense as is, it needs to constantly reload with cheap , quality depth. That comes through the draft. Your other idea is to sign Marshall.. But again, there's a salary cap. Who don't you want to sign to pay that salary?
Couldn't I just as easily say we lost the Super Bowl because we ran out of CBs and so we need to get one of those? If the defense doesn't give up 14 in the 4th we would have won. Do I get to question your fan-hood if you disagree? Want to put your tangible fanhood stats up against mine, as you're fond of doing?
Id suggest if you want to be treated like a normal member of the forum perhaps you start by acting like one instead of trying to be our teacher.

And that's s my point. All I said was we need to fix our weaknesses. I used attributes of the position in Question. But some people were saying no,and that we should keep the same weakness.

Also yes you can question my fan- hood if I EVER say no to getting a elite player! ( unless he has off field drama,although Lynch has had drama,for elite talent I still make exceptions if they change).

I would not disagree with getting a slot CB.I pointed that out as a weakness too.

Yes I want use to throw more to keep Lynch fresh and defenses honest. I said this since Largent left & when we got Percy I was disappointed as he is not a WR,he is a move weapon who is hard to use and offers nothing in the rezone. Injury prone. Largent was destroying double coverage, yet he never got a elite RB to help him get a ring. Shame.

It ws the same back then people saying hawks dont need a good RB & they need is Largent...While Irvin got emmit & 3 rings.Makes me mad Largent could not get help.


Also yes please put your stats or data up against mine when debating a subject, instead of just say stuff without backing.

I said I came here to teach the 12th man...also said I want to be taught. I like growing since I don't know it all. But what little do know ,I always stay vigilant.

I don't want to be normal,I want to be extraordinary. I have been taught much be some people on here...as well I see that more people are saying a #1WR demands double teams,when before nobody on this site mentioned it. Let's all grow together,don't blow off good info with the phrase " we don't need". Learn from our mistakes with Largent.

Your posts are getting worse. Who said, EVER, that we only needed Largent? And, you might recall, during Largent did play with some great backs -- Curt Warner, John L. Williams, and Id even add Sherman Smith who put up decent numbers on an expansion team before free agency was around.

In any case, your whole premise is about changing the Seahawks fundamental approach to the game, an approach that has gotten the Seahawks to two straight Super Bowls, and has built a foundation of a long term powerhouse. So, I will say "no thank you". I will even say flat out I dont want a collection of elite players. I want a strong team. I want a run first team that spreads the ball around to decent to good receivers and maybe a great one if we happen to be able to get one..........

Under the guise of "fixing our weakness" what you really want to do is change the entire team dynamic. Change the offensive philosophy which also changes how the defense has to approach the game.

In the era of the salary cap you CANT be strong everywhere. You have to choose what you want to be really good at and then commit your limited resources to that. The genius of Seattles system is that it goes so far against the grain of what other teams do. As I mentioned previously, teams are gearing their defenses to stop the pass, even structuring their rosters that way. So when we play them, they have trouble containing us.

And finally, if Marshall and Jackson are so elite, they wont be available.. If they are available, it means they arent seen as elite............. And if you do pay them 9 million instead of getting 4 million dollar WRs, then youve taken 5 million dollars worth of talent away from an area we need it. and they wont want to sign in seattle unless we change our offense, like you want us to. Which isnt going to happen.. Carroll has a proven record with how he is doing things

No one likes to say it, but the actual value of Bevell is that he has created a good, strong (not elite) offense on a tiny budget. UDFA, cheap WRs. A 5th rounder and 2 guys off the street at TE. A street pick up playing FB and subbing on the D line. Its exactly because we pay so little there that we can afford our dominant defense.. If an elite WR falls to us in the draft in a mid round, cool. But spending big resoures on a WR doesnt fit the concept. A good receiver? Sure. Id take another Sydney Rice, his presence did a lot more than the numbers suggest.

And finally, as I mentioned.. of the past 8 teams to play in the Super Bowl, only ONE had an elite WR. And they lost. The other 7, including all 4 winners didnt have an elite WR. Chasing and throwing money after elite receivers that actually make your offense more predictable , and is what teams are gearing towards facing is foolish... Its proven that teams that build that way..chasing a handful of elite players (Chicago, Washington) dont win. That is simply fact. Teams investing in balance (3 good WRs vs. 1 elite and 2 so so WRs) win super bowls. Teams tying money up in elite WRs (Denver, Detroit) win highlight reels.

Hawks had a collection of RBs like Sims who I liked a little & Sherman, not a good RB...which did not get them close to a superbowl. Largent got his 1st 1000 yard & Double digit Elite RB in 1983. Curt Warner. And guess what happened???

I will tell you...Conference championship game! Largent's closest sniff at the Superbowl. Which was an injustice to Largent.

If Largent had an elite QB like Russell Wilson he would have had a ring with that 1983 team. Russ's magic can win with undrafted WRs & just an elite RB. So we know he would win easy with a WR that destroys double coverage like Largent!

Anyways...you don't have to want both an Elite WR & RB on the field at the same time for defenses to have to play honest & pick their poison. But I do want defenses to have to pick their poison so they can't stop us next time.

You think we lost that AFC title game because of lack of elite QB?I don't think so.Krieg was an ALL PRO that year and others.We lost because the defense wasn't good in that game,if we'd had a defense like today we would have crushed the Raiders and anyone else.You need to understand Defense is a must to win Championships.A #1 superstar WR is not!

 

[hawksurething]

I never said kreig was not elite. I said a elite QB like Wilson. Who can run & pass and avoid pressure & has that magic of clutch.

Either way I'm correct about Largent having his most winning year when he finally got a elite RB.

That was the point ! Sidestep all you want.

Now back on the topic of WR attributes that make #1WRs for the Hawks...

We use trips formation the most,so a stud #1 pulling double coverage & a good #2 that can beat single coverage, with Baldwin in the slot will improve that formation.

 

[IndyHawk]

I never said kreig was not elite. I said a elite QB like Wilson. Who can run & pass and avoid pressure & has that magic of clutch.

Either way I'm correct about Largent having his most winning year when he finally got a elite RB.

That was the point ! Sidestep all you want.

Now back on the topic of WR attributes that make #1WRs for the Hawks...

We use trips formation the most,so a stud #1 pulling double coverage & a good #2 that can beat single coverage, with Baldwin in the slot will improve that formation.

:34853_doh: Stud WR?We are probaly going to have to develop one before your happy,you do understand that?

 

[hawksurething]

I never said kreig was not elite. I said a elite QB like Wilson. Who can run & pass and avoid pressure & has that magic of clutch.

Either way I'm correct about Largent having his most winning year when he finally got a elite RB.

That was the point ! Sidestep all you want.

Now back on the topic of WR attributes that make #1WRs for the Hawks...

We use trips formation the most,so a stud #1 pulling double coverage & a good #2 that can beat single coverage, with Baldwin in the slot will improve that formation.

:34853_doh: Stud WR?We are probaly going to have to develop one before your happy,you do understand that?

The team is built to win now. There is only a small window left with Lynch .

Marshall & Vjackson can be had for low contracts due to having a down year.

Plus draft a stud WR to develope for the future like you say. i do understand that yes.

Go Hawks !

 

[Anonymous]

I still say numbering wide receivers is a stupid concept.

It serves only as something for people to argue about.

Let's call them what we all really mean: a tall wide receiver that can catch when they are covered.

:les:

 

[Vetamur]

I never said kreig was not elite. I said a elite QB like Wilson. Who can run & pass and avoid pressure & has that magic of clutch.

Either way I'm correct about Largent having his most winning year when he finally got a elite RB.

That was the point ! Sidestep all you want.

Now back on the topic of WR attributes that make #1WRs for the Hawks...

We use trips formation the most,so a stud #1 pulling double coverage & a good #2 that can beat single coverage, with Baldwin in the slot will improve that formation.

How were you correct? You said when Largent was playing he never played with an elite RB. Its right there for everyone to see. THEN suddenly when its pointed out he DID play with an elite RB...you still claim you are right? I see the pattern.

And again, youre ignoring the fact that 7 out of the last 8 Super Bowl teams didnt have an elite receiver, and the only one that did lost badly. So why is it that we somehow need one?

And why the obsession with V. Jackson whom apparently the Bucs havent even asked to take a pay cut yet, much less thought of cutting him?

The Seahawks arent going to change their offensive philosophy to accomodate your fascination with a receiver that gets and beats double covered. And while we are discussing that, youre almost surely mis-using that phrase. Its pretty rare that even Megatron pulls true double coverage, eg, two CBs on him. The cornerback may get safety help if the play looks like its going that way, buts it not true double coverage. On top of that, tons of zone is played now, or hybrid.

We didnt lose the Super Bowl for want of an elite receiver. Its sort of an ironic statement to make since the only reason they were in a situation to possibly win at all was a play made by Kearse a couple plays earlier and a few great plays by Matthews earlier in the game.

You can play fantasy football in your mind all you want..but an expensive FA WR would hurt the team more than help.

 

[HawkFan72]

I still say numbering wide receivers is a stupid concept.

It serves only as something for people to argue about.

Let's call them what we all really mean: a tall wide receiver that can catch when they are covered.

:les:

Exactly.

This arguing over the number rank is ridiculous. We can all agree we need a tall receiver who can go up and make plays.

 

[Vetamur]

I still say numbering wide receivers is a stupid concept.

It serves only as something for people to argue about.

Let's call them what we all really mean: a tall wide receiver that can catch when they are covered.

:les:

Exactly.

This arguing over the number rank is ridiculous. We can all agree we need a tall receiver who can go up and make plays.

If you guys arent careful and dont start taking better notes youre going to have to take this whole Number One Wide Receivers 101 course all over again. We need to totally redo our offense, save Lynch's back, and win the next super bowl by getting elite V. Jackson!

 

[OkieHawk]

I know I'm entering this late, but I don't care. With the current wide receivers out there, how many have rings? How much do their mega contracts detract from the talent around them? Combine this with the fact that their QB's generally make around $20M a year and you have a recipe for something that can be good, but is too reliant on one person getting the ball. How many elite defenses did the Packers play last year, or Dallas, or the Donkey's? And if you think Dallas playing us we were elite at that time, you would be wrong.

We spread the ball around with the receivers we have, and it works. Could we have some better talent, of course. But is it a true need? No. O-line, TE and finally depth in the secondary are our current needs IMO.

 

[Throwdown]

I just want Jaelen Strong, bruh...

 

[hawksurething]

I never said kreig was not elite. I said a elite QB like Wilson. Who can run & pass and avoid pressure & has that magic of clutch.

Either way I'm correct about Largent having his most winning year when he finally got a elite RB.

That was the point ! Sidestep all you want.

Now back on the topic of WR attributes that make #1WRs for the Hawks...

We use trips formation the most,so a stud #1 pulling double coverage & a good #2 that can beat single coverage, with Baldwin in the slot will improve that formation.

How were you correct? You said when Largent was playing he never played with an elite RB. Its right there for everyone to see. THEN suddenly when its pointed out he DID play with an elite RB...you still claim you are right? I see the pattern.

And again, youre ignoring the fact that 7 out of the last 8 Super Bowl teams didnt have an elite receiver, and the only one that did lost badly. So why is it that we somehow need one?

And why the obsession with V. Jackson whom apparently the Bucs havent even asked to take a pay cut yet, much less thought of cutting him?

The Seahawks arent going to change their offensive philosophy to accomodate your fascination with a receiver that gets and beats double covered. And while we are discussing that, youre almost surely mis-using that phrase. Its pretty rare that even Megatron pulls true double coverage, eg, two CBs on him. The cornerback may get safety help if the play looks like its going that way, buts it not true double coverage. On top of that, tons of zone is played now, or hybrid.

We didnt lose the Super Bowl for want of an elite receiver. Its sort of an ironic statement to make since the only reason they were in a situation to possibly win at all was a play made by Kearse a couple plays earlier and a few great plays by Matthews earlier in the game.

You can play fantasy football in your mind all you want..but an expensive FA WR would hurt the team more than help.

Warner was only elite for 1 year ! I wanted to have an elite RB for atleast 3 years production. So yes I'm still correct. Largent needed a consistent RB putting up elite numbers because he is a elite talent & heart. You understood what I mean.

No matter what you say hawks lost the Superbowl at the 1 yard line by throwing to LOCKETT for the game winner ! Freaking Lockett !!!

You can like lockett. But I want to like Marshall & Vincent. Blue chip players.

 

[OkieHawk]

Warner was only elite for 1 year ! I wanted to have an elite RB for atleast 3 years production. So yes I'm still correct. Largent needed a consistent RB putting up elite numbers because he is a elite talent & heart. You understood what I mean.

No matter what you say hawks lost the Superbowl at the 1 yard line by throwing to LOCKETT for the game winner ! Freaking Lockett !!!

You can like lockett. But I want to like Marshall & Vincent. Blue chip players.

You want Vincent fricking Jackson!? The last decent year he had was 2012, look at his production lately:

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/320 ... nt-jackson

Now I know you are smoking some crazy shit up in here.

 

[Vetamur]

I never said kreig was not elite. I said a elite QB like Wilson. Who can run & pass and avoid pressure & has that magic of clutch.

Either way I'm correct about Largent having his most winning year when he finally got a elite RB.

That was the point ! Sidestep all you want.

Now back on the topic of WR attributes that make #1WRs for the Hawks...

We use trips formation the most,so a stud #1 pulling double coverage & a good #2 that can beat single coverage, with Baldwin in the slot will improve that formation.

How were you correct? You said when Largent was playing he never played with an elite RB. Its right there for everyone to see. THEN suddenly when its pointed out he DID play with an elite RB...you still claim you are right? I see the pattern.

And again, youre ignoring the fact that 7 out of the last 8 Super Bowl teams didnt have an elite receiver, and the only one that did lost badly. So why is it that we somehow need one?

And why the obsession with V. Jackson whom apparently the Bucs havent even asked to take a pay cut yet, much less thought of cutting him?

The Seahawks arent going to change their offensive philosophy to accomodate your fascination with a receiver that gets and beats double covered. And while we are discussing that, youre almost surely mis-using that phrase. Its pretty rare that even Megatron pulls true double coverage, eg, two CBs on him. The cornerback may get safety help if the play looks like its going that way, buts it not true double coverage. On top of that, tons of zone is played now, or hybrid.

We didnt lose the Super Bowl for want of an elite receiver. Its sort of an ironic statement to make since the only reason they were in a situation to possibly win at all was a play made by Kearse a couple plays earlier and a few great plays by Matthews earlier in the game.

You can play fantasy football in your mind all you want..but an expensive FA WR would hurt the team more than help.

Warner was only elite for 1 year ! I wanted to have an elite RB for atleast 3 years production. So yes I'm still correct. Largent needed a consistent RB putting up elite numbers because he is a elite talent & heart. You understood what I mean.

No matter what you say hawks lost the Superbowl at the 1 yard line by throwing to LOCKETT for the game winner ! Freaking Lockett !!!

You can like lockett. But I want to like Marshall & Vincent. Blue chip players.

Warner was elite for 3 years: 1983, 1986, and 1987. In 88 he wasnt elite, but the Seahawks had an elite running game with Warner going over 1000 yards and duel threat John L Williams adding over 800 yards. You do remember the offensive theory was called "Ground Chuck", right?

Its not a matter of Lockette vs. Marshall. If the cap hit were the same anyone would choose Marshall. But if its put realistically: Lockette, Wagner, and depth at CB or Marshall, then I dont want Marshall.

You clearly dont understand what PC and JS are trying to do. I get the sense youd be a lot happier at the Lions message boards. I bet youll find lots of people happily discussing their awesome receivers and how amazing Megatron is, while they watch the Super Bowl from their couch again.

 

[SomersetHawk]

Warner was only elite for 1 year ! I wanted to have an elite RB for atleast 3 years production. So yes I'm still correct. Largent needed a consistent RB putting up elite numbers because he is a elite talent & heart. You understood what I mean.

No matter what you say hawks lost the Superbowl at the 1 yard line by throwing to LOCKETT for the game winner ! Freaking Lockett !!!

You can like lockett. But I want to like Marshall & Vincent. Blue chip players.

You want Vincent fricking Jackson!? The last decent year he had was 2012, look at his production lately:

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/320 ... nt-jackson

Now I know you are smoking some crazy shit up in here.

Buccs are picking #1. I'd have loved a guy like Larry Fitz but if we're judging on stats here, over the last three seasons Jackson has put up more TDs and 1000 more yards. I want Vincent Jackson, I think he'd be really useful here.

 

[OkieHawk]

Buccs are picking #1. I'd have loved a guy like Larry Fitz but if we're judging on stats here, over the last three seasons Jackson has put up more TDs and 1000 more yards. I want Vincent Jackson, I think he'd be really useful here.

I want nothing to do with Jackson, I still think that he's not worth the money he would want to come here. Maybe I'm just gun shy as our WR acquisitions in free agency haven't been the greatest.

 

[scutterhawk]

We need a guy that can get open deep. That is really the only receiver that Russell looks for before the play breaks down and he starts creating.

You are correct, Wilson does need another Sidney Rice type Receiver.
With Russell Wilson throwing the ball to Chris Mathews so frequently in XLIX, proves what we've been missing since Rice called it quits.
IF the Seahawks can find a big Receiver to help take pressure off of Wilson, it will open it up for the running game, TE's and other Receivers as well, BUT whoever it is, he will have to accept & agree that he won't be getting the ball on every other play.

 

[HawkFan72]

We need a guy that can get open deep. That is really the only receiver that Russell looks for before the play breaks down and he starts creating.

You are correct, Wilson does need another Sidney Rice type Receiver.
With Russell Wilson throwing the ball to Chris Mathews so frequently in XLIX, proves what we've been missing since Rice called it quits.
IF the Seahawks can find a big Receiver to help take pressure off of Wilson, it will open it up for the running game, TE's and other Receivers as well, BUT whoever it is, he will have to accept & agree that he won't be getting the ball on every other play.

Exactly. I think people forget just how good our offense was when we had a good, tall receiver in Sidney Rice. When he was fully healthy for a full season, in 2012, our Offense was dominant.

In 2013, our Offense was really good until Rice got hurt. Then the Offense had some struggles in the 2nd half of the year (remember people questioning if we had a good enough Offense to win the Super Bowl because they were struggling over the last few weeks of the season)? They won the Super Bowl anyway, so it was mostly forgotten.

Then last year was the first year we didn't have Rice at all, and we were complaining about struggles in the Red Zone and the need for a big receiver.

I don't think we need an "elite" WR. We just need a good, big one like Sidney Rice. He was a borderline #1, really good #2 (if we are going to assign numbers).

 

[hawksurething]

Andre Johnson is open to get right now !

He is amazing !

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-top100-20 ... y-Mercilus

NFL players voted him #21 out of the TOP 100 of 2014 !

He is still fast & big great routes,can block and amazing hands. He is a good locker room guy too. I have him 2nd to the complete Marshall at 6'5 & above Vjackson & Dez. since Dez has family drama so much.

Here is Brandon Marshall 2014. So you could argue AJ is even better than marshall. The players rank AJ that much higher.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0QcZ5kXQFJM

Yall who say he is not still amazing... Watch video of this season

 

[hawksurething]

We did it ! We got 1 reciever that demands a double team like I taught & spread on every hawks website. It is now part of hawks consciouness. Yay! So TE is fixed.

Now its time to fix the wideouts...

Schneider says "no finishline". Which is what I teach never stop improving your weak positions with top notch upgrades

Hawks front office is reading & learning from us now. Must demand a double team. no more subpar talent as starters. Yay !