Who Starts Week 1 at Wide Receiver?

[iLLmatiC]

Hey, I hope you're right. That would be huge for the eam.

If we already had an established vet #1, I'd feel a lot better rolling with Wilson as #2. Right now, however, we have Wilson #1 and Dortch #2 in the WR room. That's absolutely shambolic. We are in desperate need of a veteran presence on top of a top WR. Dortch as your veteran presence and guidance in that WR room just isn't good enough. I don't want to hear about Pascal and the bottom feeder vets either--they are roster fillers and nothing else.

That’s what the coaches get paid to do.

 

[BritCard]

This isn't even a serious question, right? Because rolling without solid leadership in the room is a good idea, right? Do better here, man. Please.

Did you feel this way when we had 2nd year Boldin, 2nd year Bryant Johnson and rookie Larry Fitzgerald?

While they didn't catch right away because Boldin was hurt that year in 2005 they both had 1400 yards.

 

[BritCard]

Zach Pascal pretty much fits your definition of a veteran presence, but you don’t want to hear about him so I’m confused here. Please name me a FA WR that Monti should bring here that would fit your definition.

tYlEr BoYd

 

[oaken1]

Zach Pascal pretty much fits your definition of a veteran presence, but you don’t want to hear about him so I’m confused here. Please name me a FA WR that Monti should bring here that would fit your definition.

Some folks don't understand that a guy doesn't have to be great at his position to provide good leadership.

I dunno if Pascal does that but I have never heard about him being a negative

 

[Cheesebeef]

Did you feel this way when we had 2nd year Boldin, 2nd year Bryant Johnson and rookie Larry Fitzgerald?

While they didn't catch right away because Boldin was hurt that year in 2005 they both had 1400 yards.

Who exactly on this year’s team is supposed to be the Anquan Boldin type player, who won Rookie Of The Year, made the Pro Bowl and had 1400 yards, showing himself not only to be a number 1 WR while establishing himself as a leader not just of the room, but of the entire team.

 

[BritCard]

Who exactly on this year’s team is supposed to be the Anquan Boldin type player, who won Rookie Of The Year, made the Pro Bowl and had 1400 yards, showing himself not only to be a number 1 WR while establishing himself as a leader not just of the room, but of the entire team.

The point is "VeT pReSeNcE" not talent.

Did you feel we needed a vet presence back then? Or does it matter more that they can play football?

We have vet presence in that room in Pascal and Moore, and Dortch is in his 4th year. Why does the vet have to be a starter?

 

[BritCard]

Some folks don't understand that a guy doesn't have to be great at his position to provide good leadership.

I dunno if Pascal does that but I have never heard about him being a negative

When we signed him all the talk was about his work rate, competitiveness and locker room presence.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

The point is "VeT pReSeNcE" not talent.

We need both, and lots of it.

Did you feel we needed a vet presence back then? Or does it matter more that they can play football?

Did you feel that team prioritized winning? Do you feel this team does?

We have vet presence in that room in Pascal and Moore, and Dortch is in his 4th year. Why does the vet have to be a starter?

Because if you aren't good, players don't listen to you!

 

[DVontel]

Because if you aren't good, players don't listen to you!

If they know you’ve been in the game for a while, they will definitely listen to you, regardless of ability.

 

[Cheesebeef]

The point is "VeT pReSeNcE" not talent.

Did you feel we needed a vet presence back then? Or does it matter more that they can play football?

We have vet presence in that room in Pascal and Moore, and Dortch is in his 4th year. Why does the vet have to be a starter?

Because usually a presence comes from someone who’s actually proven themselves very worthy on the field already… you know… like torching the league for 1400 yards as a rookie… as opposed to all of those guys who are lucky to still be in the league. If there are issues in that room, who are the young guys gonna look to for leadership? Pascal who’s bounced around the league and flat out sucked last year? Try hard Greg Dortch? Wilson who disappeared for the entire middle of the season whether he was on the field or in the training room?

Comparing any of those guys to Q as far as presence in the room is concerned is preposterous. Dude showed up a full grown man and star WR.

 

[Cheesebeef]

If they know you’ve been in the game for a while, they will definitely listen to you, regardless of ability.

They “definitely” will? Yeah… I don’t think this is true for all athletes especially at the WR position which is known to have big personalities and especially when our WR is as unaccomplished as this one currently is.

 

[Stout]

Did you feel this way when we had 2nd year Boldin, 2nd year Bryant Johnson and rookie Larry Fitzgerald?

While they didn't catch right away because Boldin was hurt that year in 2005 they both had 1400 yards.

Another non-serious question, I see. Yes, 2nd year Boldin was a hell of a leader. Clearly. smh

 

[Stout]

Zach Pascal pretty much fits your definition of a veteran presence, but you don’t want to hear about him so I’m confused here. Please name me a FA WR that Monti should bring here that would fit your definition.

See @ASUCHRIS and his post below.

 

[Stout]

If they know you’ve been in the game for a while, they will definitely listen to you, regardless of ability.

See @Cheesebeef and his post directly below this one.

Man @Cheesebeef and @ASUCHRIS dropping knowledge bombs here.

 

[oaken1]

See @Cheesebeef and his post directly below this one.

Man @Cheesebeef and @ASUCHRIS dropping knowledge bombs here.

Erroneous knowledge. But yeah, knowledge none the less.

But screw it..let's all jump on board with the idea a guy has to be a great player in order to be a good leader. Propagating misinformation is so en Vogue these days

 

[DVontel]

See @ASUCHRIS and his post below.

Man, just drop some FA names. Forget his post.

You always preach about Monti needing to get certain type of players but you never name the players. You do this all the time. Regardless of the context. Name some players so we can analyze on why they would be a good or bad acquisition.

 

[Solar7]

I do agree that this team as a whole has been in need of better leaders for a while, and the WR room doesn't have it.

I don't think someone out there that's available in the WR room fits the bill, but conceptually I can't think of many leaders in this locker room. I feel like Budda tries his best.

 

[Stout]

Man, just drop some FA names. Forget his post.

You always preach about Monti needing to get certain type of players but you never name the players. You do this all the time. Regardless of the context. Name some players so we can analyze on why they would be a good or bad acquisition.

Clown take. I follow the Cardinals and not, largely, the NFL as a whole. I don't have to name specific players or be wrong. What a fallacy lol

 

[DVontel]

Clown take. I follow the Cardinals and not, largely, the NFL as a whole. I don't have to name specific players or be wrong. What a fallacy lol

Such a disappointing response. Lets just end the conversation here.

 

[Stout]

Such a disappointing response. Lets just end the conversation here.

I think that's best. The alternative is I can't name every NFL player so they clearly don't exist lol

 

[DVontel]

I think that's best. The alternative is I can't name every NFL player so they clearly don't exist lol

I didn’t ask you or even imply to name every NFL player, I just asked to name only players on FA. You can’t even do that. The bare minimum. That’s disappointing.

 

[Stout]

I didn’t ask you or even imply to name every NFL player, I just asked to name only players on FA. You can’t even do that. The bare minimum. That’s disappointing.

Your disappointment means nothing. You "demand" I name players as if by not doing so my opinion is wrong. False equivalency, my friend. Because I don't feel like listing FA WRs doesn't mean my opinion on needing a vet FA WR is invalid. Thanks for playing!

 

[WeBlitz]

Your disappointment means nothing. You "demand" I name players as if by not doing so my opinion is wrong. False equivalency, my friend. Because I don't feel like listing FA WRs doesn't mean my opinion on needing a vet FA WR is invalid. Thanks for playing!

How are you going to know what players fits best for us if you don’t even know who they are? Your point does not make any sense at all.

 

[Stout]

How are you going to know what players fits best for us if you don’t even know who they are? Your point does not make any sense at all.

Yeah, because I need to have an in-depth knowledge of the entire FA market to know that the Cards need help in the WR room. Your questioning of my point lacks logic. It's an age old fallacy on this board and a really lazy argument. "You didn't give me a list of 1,000 FAs so you don't know nothing!"

 

[Krangodnzr]

Yeah, because I need to have an in-depth knowledge of the entire FA market to know that the Cards need help in the WR room. Your questioning of my point lacks logic. It's an age old fallacy on this board and a really lazy argument. "You didn't give me a list of 1,000 FAs so you don't know nothing!"

I agree with you here.

Id much rather the Cardinals bring in a more sure thing. While I like Wilson and think that he might be a good #2 with more volume, that's not even close to a guaranteed proposition.

There are probably 8 different FA receivers that could be helpful.