Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Saints Win Jimmy Graham TE/WR Grievance
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 6, 7, 8 ... 11, 12, 13  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
domepatrol91


Global Moderator
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 3584
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 9:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

WhackyPlague wrote:
Oh, I'm not saying that this formation invalidates it, I just think the potential implications are kind of funny.


Fair enough, and maybe in a future NFL new formations will create problems like this.

I thought you were trying to say that all those guys could be considered TEs, forgetting that it would have to make up a majority of their snaps.

My mistake. Embarassed
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
detfan782004


Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 48896
Location: Montana
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 9:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

domepatrol91 wrote:
detfan782004 wrote:
Justin Hoover82 wrote:
Btw, can we quit comparing Ebron to Graham seeing as how Ebron has never taken a single NFL snap????


Thank u! They are nothing alike


You're comparing them. Confused


sarcasm

i have said from day one they arent alike

I hated the pick and still hate it. Too many Lions fans said Detroit didnt draft a TE they drafted a WR and J Graham is a WR. THis ruling made my day
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IDOG_det


Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 22976
Location: Ron Paul 2012 #JDI
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

domepatrol91 wrote:
IDOG_det wrote:
The way this ruling was made is silly. The 4-yard rule this guy made up is stupid. If you play in the slot, off the line, you aren't a TE, you're a WR.


Someone earlier in this thread posted that Graham was 7th among TEs for snaps in the slot. You know how many TEs are actually WRs if we go by your rule?

Not saying you're wrong, but just know that your rule would have plenty of people disagreeing with it as well. I don't believe there is any one end all be all rule that determines WR vs TE.

Whenever there is a rule like this that takes something that isn't cut and dry and tries to make it that, people will disagree. There will be guys on the fringe, like Graham in this case, that will have strong arguments for both sides. Graham wanted an official ruling on something that maybe isn't suited for an official ruling and now he (and the entire NFL) are going to live with that until it can be addressed again during the next CBA.
Oh, I understand that it would make a few "TE's" finally considered WR's. A lot of them deserve to be. As a Lions fan, I want to save money on Ebrons contract later on, but as a football fan there's no way I can justify calling him a "TE" when, in how offensive skill positions should be defined, that is wrong.

"My" rule would be to create separate designations. Have separate franchise tags for traditional WR's (guys who play mostly on the boundary), slot WR's (guys who play in the slot the majority of the time while playing a non-traditional TE position 2nd most often), Big Slot WR's (guys who play in the slot the majority of the time while playing inline TE 2nd most often), and traditional TE's (guys who play mostly at inline TE). You could even take it further and separate the "traditional WR" into split end and flanker, though that's a little harder to prove, especially in formations that have no real "split end" (I personally separate the two for depth chart purposes, though I can understand not being able to always prove the designation based on in-game formations).

I can't defend the logic behind calling anyone who plays in the slot a TE for that play. It's just wrong. If it were up to me, guys like Calvin Johnson, Wes Welker, Jimmy Graham, and Rob Gronkowski would all be considered players that play separate positions (because they do).
_________________


R.I.P. Stylish
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
domepatrol91


Global Moderator
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 3584
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IDOG_det wrote:
I can't defend the logic behind calling anyone who plays in the slot a TE for that play. It's just wrong. If it were up to me, guys like Calvin Johnson, Wes Welker, Jimmy Graham, and Rob Gronkowski would all be considered players that play separate positions (because they do).


To complicated for me, personally. I don't want 6 or 7 different positions just to define guys who catch the ball. I think the position is fine how it is, although a hybrid TE/WR (with some super sweet name) position being created would be OK with me.

I would rather have 1 or 2 subjective rules that needs to be interpreted or reinterpreted every 4-6 years when the situation arises, rather than dozens of positions that would need to be defined in detail. Even then, you'd have fringe players and someone would have to make a call on what position they actually play.

IMO, it's not something that is a big enough deal to warrant the type of effort you're suggesting they put into it. There will certainly be others with you though, that prefer such a structure. I'm fine with things the way they are.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SwiftTexan


Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Posts: 3348
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not sure if this has been brought up already but since the ruling Jordan Cameron has changed his twitter bio from "Browns Tight End" to "Pro Bowl Pass Catcher".

More hilariously, and a great guy to follow on twitter, TJ Lang changed his bio to "Franchise QB" and then just to "NFL QB".

Guess those guys are already preparing for their arbitration.
_________________
The Ultimate Fantasy Football Challenge
FootballsFuture Fantasy Scrubs League
Discussion Thread Link
http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=550031
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
QcFootballFan


Joined: 17 Jan 2013
Posts: 91
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 10:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

While this judgement is a big deal for the Saints and Graham, I think this judgement wont have any impact if the market is correcting itself. TE is starting to be more important and Graham will be paid on FA one day. In my view, if the TE position get more paid in the near future, the tag will go up at the same time. If this happens we are just in some transition era.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Perfundle


Joined: 23 Jan 2011
Posts: 1356
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 12:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

IDOG_det wrote:
"My" rule would be to create separate designations. Have separate franchise tags for traditional WR's (guys who play mostly on the boundary), slot WR's (guys who play in the slot the majority of the time while playing a non-traditional TE position 2nd most often), Big Slot WR's (guys who play in the slot the majority of the time while playing inline TE 2nd most often), and traditional TE's (guys who play mostly at inline TE). You could even take it further and separate the "traditional WR" into split end and flanker, though that's a little harder to prove, especially in formations that have no real "split end" (I personally separate the two for depth chart purposes, though I can understand not being able to always prove the designation based on in-game formations).

I don't see this helping. The more designations you create, the more players will find themselves between two of them. Right now we just have an issue with TEs who line up often at WR, which only includes about 20 players. Your idea in its most subdivided form would ensnare half the league's receiving core.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 45290
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 12:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have the answer right here...it's simple. A tight end plays inline. You tally up the plays that Graham played inline. That's how many he played at TE. If he played split off from the formation, he's a WR. You tally up those plays and that's what he played at WR. The higher number is the position you give him credit for being. Voila.
_________________
The LBC wrote:
Harper41 wrote:
Don't worry. Sean Payton would pass the ball in a Tornado.

But would he do it in a Sharknado?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IDOG_det


Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 22976
Location: Ron Paul 2012 #JDI
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 12:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:
I have the answer right here...it's simple. A tight end plays inline. You tally up the plays that Graham played inline. That's how many he played at TE. If he played split off from the formation, he's a WR. You tally up those plays and that's what he played at WR. The higher number is the position you give him credit for being. Voila.
no no no, that uses logic. We can't have that in the NFL. Go take that logic to sports like tennis or something.
_________________


R.I.P. Stylish
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JaguarCrazy2832


Joined: 28 Jun 2008
Posts: 82439
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 12:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Art_Vandalay wrote:
twslhs20 wrote:
Well I'm sure this won't bite the Saint's later when they try to resign him next year.

I'm really surprised too. PFF had a chart showing the amount of snaps he played was a WR, and it was pretty significant.

Any other team would have done the same thing. They would have went through the same exact process.

I think Graham had a pretty good argument but I'm not surprised the Saints won. If you come out of college as a TE, you're listed on the roster as a TE, you go to the Pro Bowl as a TE, you're listed in fantasy football as a TE, etc, then you're probably a TE.


Plus he referred to himself on twitter as a TE
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IDOG_det


Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 22976
Location: Ron Paul 2012 #JDI
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 12:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Perfundle wrote:
IDOG_det wrote:
"My" rule would be to create separate designations. Have separate franchise tags for traditional WR's (guys who play mostly on the boundary), slot WR's (guys who play in the slot the majority of the time while playing a non-traditional TE position 2nd most often), Big Slot WR's (guys who play in the slot the majority of the time while playing inline TE 2nd most often), and traditional TE's (guys who play mostly at inline TE). You could even take it further and separate the "traditional WR" into split end and flanker, though that's a little harder to prove, especially in formations that have no real "split end" (I personally separate the two for depth chart purposes, though I can understand not being able to always prove the designation based on in-game formations).

I don't see this helping. The more designations you create, the more players will find themselves between two of them. Right now we just have an issue with TEs who line up often at WR, which only includes about 20 players. Your idea in its most subdivided form would ensnare half the league's receiving core.
I'm not following. How would categorizing players into specific roles and an finding exact amount of times they played in each specific role cause more players caught "between" positions. If a player plays at position A 65% of the time, plays position B 30% of the time, and plays position C 5% of the time, then put him into the correct category (in this case position A).
_________________


R.I.P. Stylish
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NormSizedMidget


Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 1832
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 12:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

QcFootballFan wrote:
While this judgement is a big deal for the Saints and Graham, I think this judgement wont have any impact if the market is correcting itself. TE is starting to be more important and Graham will be paid on FA one day. In my view, if the TE position get more paid in the near future, the tag will go up at the same time. If this happens we are just in some transition era.


Exactly! Finally someone other than me saying this.
_________________
palmy50 wrote:
There are three types of football fans. Those that know football, those that want to know football, and those that think they know football!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Perfundle


Joined: 23 Jan 2011
Posts: 1356
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 1:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

IDOG_det wrote:
Perfundle wrote:
IDOG_det wrote:
"My" rule would be to create separate designations. Have separate franchise tags for traditional WR's (guys who play mostly on the boundary), slot WR's (guys who play in the slot the majority of the time while playing a non-traditional TE position 2nd most often), Big Slot WR's (guys who play in the slot the majority of the time while playing inline TE 2nd most often), and traditional TE's (guys who play mostly at inline TE). You could even take it further and separate the "traditional WR" into split end and flanker, though that's a little harder to prove, especially in formations that have no real "split end" (I personally separate the two for depth chart purposes, though I can understand not being able to always prove the designation based on in-game formations).

I don't see this helping. The more designations you create, the more players will find themselves between two of them. Right now we just have an issue with TEs who line up often at WR, which only includes about 20 players. Your idea in its most subdivided form would ensnare half the league's receiving core.
I'm not following. How would categorizing players into specific roles and an finding exact amount of times they played in each specific role cause more players caught "between" positions. If a player plays at position A 65% of the time, plays position B 30% of the time, and plays position C 5% of the time, then put him into the correct category (in this case position A).

Ah, I see. That makes perfect sense, along with jrry's post above. It was just that no one had used this logic in the thread for so long I had forgotten it was even an option.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
domepatrol91


Global Moderator
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 3584
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 1:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:
I have the answer right here...it's simple. A tight end plays inline. You tally up the plays that Graham played inline. That's how many he played at TE. If he played split off from the formation, he's a WR. You tally up those plays and that's what he played at WR. The higher number is the position you give him credit for being. Voila.


The NFL is going to lose a LOT of TEs then. Not saying it's a bad thing, but almost all the top TEs are WRs by that rule. If you're fine with it, so be it.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shaq


Joined: 04 Jul 2009
Posts: 4429
Location: USC
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 2:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't understand why he doesn't just get the midpoint of the two salaries, like when Suggs got tagged as a DE/OLB hybrid
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 6, 7, 8 ... 11, 12, 13  Next
Page 7 of 13

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group