https://www.fantasypros.com/2018/03/scou...in-ridley/


They give him top marks for route running, separation, game speed and awareness.

Slight dings for overall size, hands/drops and YAC ability.

---

'02

WHERE IS A WR GOING TO GET PLAYING TIME????? I'm completely dumbfounded at the insistence of a WR in the 1st round with our litany of WRs who deserve PT already. A 1st rd WR would be AT BEST the #4 WR on the team, likely #5 depending on your opinion of Dede Westbrook. It hurts my head to consider spending a 1st rd pick on a guy with 0 route to playing time at a position that has significantly less importance in our offense than probably any other in the entire league.

Is there a possible connection with the same guy who all offseason couldn't stop with MCCARRON MCCARRON MCCARRON now not being able to stop with RIDLEY RIDLEY RIDLEY? Hmm, I wonder...

Chark. Chark. Chark. Is my preference preference preference at WR WR WR. Thank Thank Thank You You You very very very much!?!?!?

---

Ridley reminds me of Amari Cooper but not as good

---

Ridley reminds me of Amari Cooper but not as good

If he's even close I'll take that.

I'm liking him the more I read. He's clearly an amazing route runner.

---

'02

Ridley would be a great pick if he fell, which I don't think he will. Great value meets a clear need and suddenly our WR group is a strength again.

I remembered this Bucky Brooks article https://www.google.com.mx/amp/s/amp.nfl....AEA&sr=amp.

" I believe craftsmen should be valued over explosive athletes despite the spectacle feel to the draft. Evaluators should look long and hard at the tape to see if the wide receivers win with skill over pure speed and explosiveness in routes. Moreover, scouts should pay close attention to how well they separate from defenders, particularly against press coverage. Artistry is required to win against some of the physical tactics employed by NFL defenders, which gives skilled receivers a nod over athletes in my mind."

Ridley seems to be a true technician and have the athleticism to match. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect he would quickly become our number 1 guy. Ironically, the main point Brooks is making there is how WRs can be found later in the draft, but at 29 Ridley makes too much sense.

From him NFL.com profile: "[font=sans-serif]Ridley has game-changing talent complete with blazing speed and rare route-running ability for a college prospect. He ran the full route tree at Alabama, has experience working in a pro-style attack and is a plug-and-play starter on day one. He must improve his ability to defeat press corners off the snap or he'll become a feast or famine target. Ridley's elite speed and separation talent gives him the potential to become one of the more productive and dangerous receivers in the league."[/font]

---

WHERE IS A WR GOING TO GET PLAYING TIME????? I'm completely dumbfounded at the insistence of a WR in the 1st round with our litany of WRs who deserve PT already. A 1st rd WR would be AT BEST the #4 WR on the team, likely #5 depending on your opinion of Dede Westbrook. It hurts my head to consider spending a 1st rd pick on a guy with 0 route to playing time at a position that has significantly less importance in our offense than probably any other in the entire league.

If he's good enough he'll get time. It's not like Marqise Lee isn't likely to be a total bust with his huge new contract. 

He was underwhelming before his new contract. I'm predicting he gets outplayed and won't make it here, the full length of his deal.

---

If he's good enough he'll get time. It's not like Marqise Lee isn't likely to be a total bust with his huge new contract. 

He was underwhelming before his new contract. I'm predicting he gets outplayed and won't make it here, the full length of his deal.

And Moncrief's deal means there's a real possibility he won't be here for longer than a year too.

Generally speaking I'm not a fan of WR in round 1, but if the value is there I wouldn't complain, there will be plenty of opportunity for a player to stake a claim.

---

Moore over Ridley all day every day.

---

I'm getting more and more sold on Ridley.

I keep noticing stuff like, "For one thing, it's pretty clear on tape that Ridley is fast. I mean really fast."

---

'02

It's impressive how they talk of his understanding of defenses. Ridley is truly a techniciain out there with his mastery of the entire route tree and its nuances.

Highlights...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryyU_8j0ay4

---

'02

I'm getting more and more sold on Ridley.

I keep noticing stuff like, "For one thing, it's pretty clear on tape that Ridley is fast. I mean really fast."

He's a solid prospect. He is very fast, but looks much faster with the way he runs routes. He generates so much separation by the way he manipulates defenders hips it's truly impressive. From what I've seen he really needs to strengthen his hands. He catches the ball well, but needs to be stronger because defenders are much quicker in NFL and he won't always get so much seperation. He is like the perfect #2 receiver with upside to be a midtier #1. I don't see him being good against elite physical CBs like Ramsey or Rhodes.

---

If Ridley fell to us in the real draft, that would be....serious Kung Fu power. Jags would be like...

---

If he's good enough he'll get time. It's not like Marqise Lee isn't likely to be a total bust with his huge new contract. 

He was underwhelming before his new contract. I'm predicting he gets outplayed and won't make it here, the full length of his deal.

So you believe the front office will allow the guy they paid $16.5 million guaranteed to be benched? Much less in enough time to make Ridley or any 1st rd WR a worthwhile pick? Lets also consider this WR class is one of the weakest in awhile and Ridley is now the 3rd WR to come off the board. Then add to that we are a run heavy offense who would love to run the ball every single play if they could. Continuing, we drafted the Biletnikoff Award winner and added a UDFA who finished 3rd in rookie WR yardage last year in our aforementioned run heavy offense. IT's simply utter non-sense to consider a WR in the 1st round. We are NOT going to burn a 1st rd pick to go 5 deep at WR. I would a million times rather grab an OL or TE than pick someone who would suppress the development of our younger guys we got last year, because with the money invested in them, Moncrief and Lee are the #1 and #2 whether any of you like it or not.

---

By mid season Cloe and Westbrook will be 1 and 2. Doug went care about the money they make when Cole and Westbrook will be outplaying them both

---

By mid season Cloe and Westbrook will be 1 and 2.  Doug went care about the money they make when Cole and Westbrook will be outplaying them both

Its always about money.

---

By mid season Cloe and Westbrook will be 1 and 2.  Doug went care about the money they make when Cole and Westbrook will be outplaying them both

Its always about money.

It's about production.

---

Its always about money.

It's about production.

Maybe in fantasyland, not reality

---

It's about production.

Maybe in fantasyland, not reality

The two (money and production) have to correlate. Ask Allen Hurns. He didn't play up to his contract and was offered a lesser deal and ended up being released. 

If Lee or Moncreif don't live up to their deals they'll be looking to sign elsewhere before long as well. 

I think that Marrone certainly won't hesitate long to start a Cole or Westbrook over those guys if the starters aren't getting it done. He may be patient about it, but the pressure is on these coaches to win games.  Not to appease anyone by starting the higher salaried players. 

Personally, I think that this group of receivers is diverse in skill set enough that Hackett's playbook will include some very specific stuff for them individually.  Who's "starting over whom" won't matter nearly as much as each week's game-plan and how they intend to attack the opponent's defense.

---

He was underwhelming before his new contract. I'm predicting he gets outplayed and won't make it here, the full length of his deal.

So you believe the front office will allow the guy they paid $16.5 million guaranteed to be benched? Much less in enough time to make Ridley or any 1st rd WR a worthwhile pick? Lets also consider this WR class is one of the weakest in awhile and Ridley is now the 3rd WR to come off the board. Then add to that we are a run heavy offense who would love to run the ball every single play if they could. Continuing, we drafted the Biletnikoff Award winner and added a UDFA who finished 3rd in rookie WR yardage last year in our aforementioned run heavy offense. IT's simply utter non-sense to consider a WR in the 1st round. We are NOT going to burn a 1st rd pick to go 5 deep at WR. I would a million times rather grab an OL or TE than pick someone who would suppress the development of our younger guys we got last year, because with the money invested in them, Moncrief and Lee are the #1 and #2 whether any of you like it or not.

Wow... you don't know Doug Marrone at all.

Doug couldn't give a flip how much anyone on the team makes. He's going to let them compete, and he's going to pick the guys doing the best job. If you think I'm wrong, you need a serious sit down with the man so he can set you straight.

---

'02

...Moncrief and Lee are the #1 and #2 whether any of you like it or not.

You made some good points.        Then you said this.  ^ 

It's likely to start that way, and it may end that way come January, but Marrone and Hackett will play to their players' strengths at the receiver position. The depth chart doesn't mean as much as you seem to think it does. Cole and Westbrook will get looks whether a new receiver is drafted or not.

---