how many rookie WRs do you think led their team in receptions in the past say, 5 seasons?

 

edit: im assuming this is another one of those posts that you will conveniently not have an answer for. 2 per 32 teams a year is about the average. that leaves about a 6% chance of that happening. 

 

Um, I never claimed that either Lee or Robinson would definitely lead the team in receptions....YOU ALSO added "BY A LARGE MARGIN"....at the end of it. THATS what I disagreed with. / took exception to. 

 

YOU are overrating Shorts. 

 

 

 

Calvin Williams/ Fred Barnett were a rookie tandem that led their teams in receptions by the way. 1 & 2 respectively. 

---

Um, I never claimed that either Lee or Robinson would definitely lead the team in receptions....YOU ALSO added "BY A LARGE MARGIN"....at the end of it. THATS what I disagreed with. / took exception to. 

 

YOU are overrating Shorts. 

 

 

 

Calvin Williams/ Fred Barnett were a rookie tandem that led their teams in receptions by the way. 1 & 2 respectively. 

 

last year shorts had 66 receptions in 13 games (5.07 per game). the top 5 rookies taken... tavon austin had 40 in 13 games (3.07 per game), deandre hopkins had 52 in 16 games (3.25 a game), cordarelle patterson 45 in 16 games (2.81 per game)   justin hunter 18 in 14 games (1.29 per game) AND robert woods at 40 receptions in 14 games giving him 2.85 receptions per game. 

 

2.65 is their average receptions per game so cecil logged 2.42 catches more per game than the top 5 rookies on average. if we assume everyone plays 16 games cecil gets 38.72 more catches over the season than the average rookie WR. 

 

now cecil's numbers last year were good and that was without much help. lee, robinson, and a better OL i think will only increase shorts' opportunity. 

 

so in closing, yes, i do think he will lead the team in receptions by a large number. thank you for playing. i know its always a pleasure when you get served by Achilles. 

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

last year shorts had 66 receptions in 13 games (5.07 per game). the top 5 rookies taken... tavon austin had 40 in 13 games (3.07 per game), deandre hopkins had 52 in 16 games (3.25 a game), cordarelle patterson 45 in 16 games (2.81 per game)   justin hunter 18 in 14 games (1.29 per game) AND robert woods at 40 receptions in 14 games giving him 2.85 receptions per game. 

 

2.65 is their average receptions per game so cecil logged 2.42 catches more per game than the top 5 rookies on average. if we assume everyone plays 16 games cecil gets 38.72 more catches over the season than the average rookie WR. 

 

now cecil's numbers last year were good and that was without much help. lee, robinson, and a better OL i think will only increase shorts' opportunity. 

 

so in closing, yes, i do think he will lead the team in receptions by a large number. thank you for playing. i know its always a pleasure when you get served by Achilles. 

 

IMNSHO, Lee and Robinson will be better pro's than any of that list from 2013. Much better. 

 

and also, Shorts has yet to play a full 16. So, its a reasonable assumption to knock down SHort's rec totals a bit based on the likelyhood of that trend continuing. 

---

YOU are overrating Shorts.

 

If you break down Shorts production per game started in his career, he's a 80 catch, 1100+ yard receiver over a 16 game span.    This is a 24-25 year old WR playing through sub-par QB play, no running attack to draw in the safeties to the box, no threat of play action and with no  2nd receiving option on the team to draw extra attention away from coverage.  

 

And you're claiming Tanden friggin Doss is going to step in and fill those shoes?   A guy who just got beat out of his job by an undrafted free agent rookie?  

 

I think rather than people overrating Shorts,  the far more likelihood is you have some sort of irrational bias against Shorts that is not based in any sort of reality or logic.    The Jaguars would be the laughing stock of every NFL Front Office if they just gave away a 26 year old, highly productive  player  because they didn't want to use a small fraction of their $30 million in current available cap space to retain him during his prime years. I don't believe you fully understand how much money the Jaguars are going to have to spend just to reach the CBA mandated cap floor as the cap ceiling raises 30-50% in the next 3-4 years while they simultaneously have their QB position cost controlled until 2019 for a pittance. 

---

If you break down Shorts production per game started in his career, he's a 80 catch, 1100+ yard receiver over a 16 game span.    This is a 24-25 year old WR playing through sub-par QB play, no running attack to draw in the safeties to the box, no threat of play action and with no  2nd receiving option on the team to draw extra attention away from coverage.  

 

And you're claiming Tanden friggin Doss is going to step in and fill those shoes?   A guy who just got beat out of his job by an undrafted free agent rookie?  

 

I think rather than people overrating Shorts,  the far more likelihood is you have some sort of irrational bias against Shorts that is not based in any sort of reality or logic.    The Jaguars would be the laughing stock of every NFL Front Office if they just gave away a 26 year old, highly productive  player  because they didn't want to use a small fraction of their $30 million in current available cap space to retain him during his prime years. I don't believe you fully understand how much money the Jaguars are going to have to spend just to reach the CBA mandated cap floor as the cap ceiling raises 30-50% in the next 3-4 years while they simultaneously have their QB position cost controlled until 2019 for a pittance. 

 

But, maybe we get an extra 4th rounder for him?  How can you turn that kind of value down?

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

But, maybe we get an extra 4th rounder for him?  How can you turn that kind of value down?

 

Which is probably less than the compensation pick  the Jags would receive if they just let him walk in free agency if Lee and Robinson   turn out to be the second coming of Rice and Taylor as rookies. 

---

Which is probably less than the compensation pick  the Jags would receive if they just let him walk in free agency if Lee and Robinson   turn out to be the second coming of Rice and Taylor as rookies. 

 

You're not looking at the big picture here.  Shorts might want to be compensated to play.  We can't have that.  If he's not willing to work for the veteran minimum, we need to trade him for a 2nd round pick at least.

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

If you break down Shorts production per game started in his career, he's a 80 catch, 1100+ yard receiver over a 16 game span.    This is a 24-25 year old WR playing through sub-par QB play, no running attack to draw in the safeties to the box, no threat of play action and with no  2nd receiving option on the team to draw extra attention away from coverage.  

 

And you're claiming Tanden friggin Doss is going to step in and fill those shoes?   A guy who just got beat out of his job by an undrafted free agent rookie?  

 

I think rather than people overrating Shorts,  the far more likelihood is you have some sort of irrational bias against Shorts that is not based in any sort of reality or logic.    The Jaguars would be the laughing stock of every NFL Front Office if they just gave away a 26 year old, highly productive  player  because they didn't want to use a small fraction of their $30 million in current available cap space to retain him during his prime years. I don't believe you fully understand how much money the Jaguars are going to have to spend just to reach the CBA mandated cap floor as the cap ceiling raises 30-50% in the next 3-4 years while they simultaneously have their QB position cost controlled until 2019 for a pittance. 

 

"gave away" ? Where am I suggesting they cut him? 

---

how many rookie WRs do you think led their team in receptions in the past say, 5 seasons?

 

edit: im assuming this is another one of those posts that you will conveniently not have an answer for. 2 per 32 teams a year is about the average. that leaves about a 6% chance of that happening. 

If Keenan Allen didn't lead the Chargers just last year, he easily led the WR's.  Gates might have had a few more than him.

 

Just looked.  He had 71, next best WR had 47.  Not a good question for your argument.

 

Shows a rookie can easily lead his team/WR's.

 

I think Shorts, Lee and Robinson will all be very close to each other at the least.  Shorts won't blow them out if he does lead.

---

If Keenan Allen didn't lead the Chargers just last year, he easily led the WR's.  Gates might have had a few more than him.

 

Funny you mention him, because when people try to find a comparison in the NFL for Allen Robinson, he's the first WR that comes to mind, for me. 

---

You're not looking at the big picture here.  Shorts might want to be compensated to play.  We can't have that.  If he's not willing to work for the veteran minimum, we need to trade him for a 2nd round pick at least.

Why are you still contibuting to such an "ignorant" thread, as you put it.

 

Can't resist huh?  I figured as much.

---

If you break down Shorts production per game started in his career, he's a 80 catch, 1100+ yard receiver over a 16 game span.    This is a 24-25 year old WR playing through sub-par QB play, no running attack to draw in the safeties to the box, no threat of play action and with no  2nd receiving option on the team to draw extra attention away from coverage.  

 

And you're claiming Tanden friggin Doss is going to step in and fill those shoes?   A guy who just got beat out of his job by an undrafted free agent rookie?  

 

I think rather than people overrating Shorts,  the far more likelihood is you have some sort of irrational bias against Shorts that is not based in any sort of reality or logic.    The Jaguars would be the laughing stock of every NFL Front Office if they just gave away a 26 year old, highly productive  player  because they didn't want to use a small fraction of their $30 million in current available cap space to retain him during his prime years. I don't believe you fully understand how much money the Jaguars are going to have to spend just to reach the CBA mandated cap floor as the cap ceiling raises 30-50% in the next 3-4 years while they simultaneously have their QB position cost controlled until 2019 for a pittance. 

Why don't you do the same math for games in which he played, not just started?

 

Also include how many games he has missed due to injury the last 3 years while you are at it.

---

Why don't you do the same math for games in which he played, not just started?

 

 

Because that would be stupid and illogical and a huge waste of time.  

 

  What could I possibly glean other than it's hard to catch a lot of passes when you're not playing snaps. 

---

Funny you mention him, because when people try to find a comparison in the NFL for Allen Robinson, he's the first WR that comes to mind, for me. 

A slightly faster young Anquan Boldin might be a good comparison too.

---

Because that would be stupid and illogical and a huge waste of time.  

 

  What could I possibly glean other than it's hard to catch a lot of passes when you're not playing snaps. 

The point was you are padding his stats and cherry picking.

 

By the way, I think Anquan Boldin's 103 receptions and 1300 yards probably led his team as a rookie. 

 

Nevermind, that was Achilles acting like it was impossible for a rookie to lead their team in receiving.

---

The point was you are padding his stats and cherry picking.

 

By the way, I think Anquan Boldin's 103 receptions and 1300 yards probably led his team as a rookie. 

 

Nevermind, that was Achilles acting like it was impossible for a rookie to lead their team in receiving.

 

It's not impossible for a rookie to lead a team in receiving, but history shows the odds are that a rookie will hit a wall at some point, and they won't be nearly as dominant as YOU need them to be in order to justify trading away your most productive veteran receiver. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Anyone think of another case of a team with Rooks on both wings?  I would think it is not too common.

---

Anyone think of another case of a team with Rooks on both wings?  I would think it is not too common.

 

Its not very common, but not nearly unprecedented....as said before, the Eagles did it in 1990 with Fred Barnett aka the Jack-o-lantern, and Calvin Williams. 

 

Wasn't Jerry Rice and John Taylor also a pair of rookie wideout starters, too?....

---

Its not very common, but not nearly unprecedented....as said before, the Eagles did it in 1990 with Fred Barnett aka the Jack-o-lantern, and Calvin Williams. 

 

Wasn't Jerry Rice and John Taylor also a pair of rookie wideout starters, too?....

 

Hey, off-topic, but I was watching NFL network waiting for the Bradley interview last night and caught "A football life: Randall Cunningham".  What a fabulous program.  I had forgotten just how incredible his skills were.  Tons of fun watching the highlights of him making some of the best athletes in the NFL look absolutely ridiculous.  Not to mention him launching the ball what seemed like 85 yards to the deep receivers on the run.  Plus the 91 yd. punt...   Honestly, I'd vote HOF for the guy, especially considering his multi-contributions to where the NFL is today.  

 

Great show, great story.  

---

Its not very common, but not nearly unprecedented....as said before, the Eagles did it in 1990 with Fred Barnett aka the Jack-o-lantern, and Calvin Williams. 

 

 

 

 

That's because they played on an anomaly offense that threw almost exclusively to the TE and RBs.   

 

Unlike the 1990 Eagles, I'm pretty sure the Jags WRs are going to collectively account for more than 29% of the team's total receptions. 

---