EmbattleTheeHawks":4mtaewn4 said:
Just wondered why we need a Big WR?
Why does a #1 need to be big in the first place? Isn't that the same thinking that goes into why a QB needs to be 6'3 - 6'5.
I don't get it when reading all the topics saying "we need this cause... (its what everyone else has?)" yet we love our team for the exact opposite, finding fits for misfits, having tall DB's, having a short QB. With RW being a QB who doesn't really favour? a particular WR, is it necessary to need someone like everyone else has?
I mean correct me if in fact we do actually need one.
Good questions. I'm going to separate the #1 receiver component with the X (Split end) component. The two are not synonymous.
In short, a Split end WR needs to be able to beat physical play. They are lined up on the line of scrimmage. They cannot motion to create space to release off the line. They are susceptible to press coverage because the corner can line up tight on them. They have to be able to physically chuck a corner (usually the strongest corner for the opponent) and release cleanly. Good strong hands/limbs, quickness, balance and technique is required for this. Size helps, because the WR has more mass and is harder for a corner to disrupt because they are bigger and usually much stronger.
Occasionally, you see a smaller WR excel at the X. Steve Smith is a short X but he is freakishly strong despite his diminutive size. Tate is another smaller WR with outstanding strength, quickness and balance. He has the attributes one would need to excel at the SE position.
A #1 receiver not only will they be lined up with an opponents' best cover corner, but they will almost assuredly be getting help over the top. It's often termed 'rolling the coverage'. This allows corners to cheat in the press and to undercut routes as the safety rolls over to cover deep.
A #1 has to be able to cleanly beat the press and have characteristics to enable him to catch balls under very tight coverage. The QB has to deliver a ball between the corner and safety. It's a small window that is tightly contested. And usually results in a receiver getting blasted by a safety almost immediately following a catch. In order to do that, a WR must possess good length and ball skills because the delivery is not going to be optimal (QB trying to keep the ball away from corner). They must be able to absorb the expected contact almost at the time of reception.
This would be a scenario where Tate would struggle with. He doesn't have great length and while he can take a pounding -- the delivery window between a rolled safety and a corner playing a trail technique would be very very small.
Size and strength are natural advantages for a Split end (X) WR, because they increase the delivery window considerably and also give a much better chance that the WR maintains possession after a big hit. The size component really isn't impacted by a players' leaping ability in this regard -- something that many fans mistakenly associate or even substitute for natural size.
Receivers are taught to not jump for balls. That is not good receiving form. Receivers lose burst after the catch and can be ridden out of bounds easily. There is no force out rules in place any more. Additionally, it is much more difficult to get 2 feet in bounds even if they aren't pushed out. And finally, it really only applies on your 5, 6 and occasionally 9 routes (Hitch, curl and go). Routes that come back to the QB. Every other route (cross/slant/out/post/corner) is a lateral route where players are running through the route to catch up to a ball. Not gathering themselves and leaping for a high ball. On these route (and most go routes), the ball is delivered where the WR is not supposed to leave his feet. Whether dropping the ball in the bucket on a go, or on a rope on a cross/out. In those cases, leaping ability doesn't factor in at all. It's merely your generic reach (size and length of reach combined).
Seattle doesn't have a split end on it's roster if Rice is released. Kearse CAN play it because he has some size (6'1") and good strength. But he isn't a player who can excel at it for extended periods. He gives up opportunities that a bigger WR would provide. He's also not the same threat a bigger WR would be. He's a good utility WR not unlike a good utility infielder in baseball. He has versatility to play all our positions and that is incredibly valuable. He has developed extremely good WR skills. But he's not going to provide the kind of threat to force opponents to roll coverage to him, allowing Harvin or Tate to work underneath in single coverage in space.
A Split End does his damage in the deeper portion of the field. To do that, he can't be handled at the line of scrimmage. Release skills and strength are required to perform at that position. Catching balls with guys all over you is another requirement for the position. Fighting for the 50-50 ball is paramount -- as the coverage is generally tight and the small delivery windows are harder to execute and more commonly misthrown. A Split end has to be able to ensure that bad balls are incompletions, not interceptions. Because the coverage is going to be there to burn a QB who is off by just a couple inches.
Nowhere in the WR group is the term 'game of inches' more applicable.
