Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





View Poll Results: giants wideouts or patriots tight ends and welker

Voters
51. You may not vote on this poll
  • giants wideouts

    12 23.53%
  • patriots tight ends and welker

    39 76.47%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 34
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    559
    vCash
    1500

    who would u rather have? gmen wideouts or patriots tight ends n welker??

    im not sure if this question has been talked about already and if it was i apologize but i was just curious which u ppl would want?? i would choose the giants wideouts cuz theyre home run hitters. either one of nicks, cruz, n manningham could take a 5 yard slant and take it 70 yards for a touchdown. patriots tightends n welker are great but theyre not really gamebreakers. theyre awesome though. i have to go with the giants playmakers. thoughts?

    i dont know how to make a poll so if some1 could make a poll for my question i would appreciate it. thanks

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    411
    vCash
    1500
    Wideouts can be shut down because it enables the linebackers to focus more on the rush rather then the coverage, just look at the 07 patriots...there is a reason good tight ends draw matchup nightmares.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,894
    vCash
    1500
    Patriots

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Posts
    92,060
    vCash
    1777
    Pats, but I would take that over about anything so it's no disrespect
    Quote Originally Posted by surf and turf View Post
    And the guy has been quoted all over the place saying if he lunged for the end zone it would have been a football move.

    Blandino said Bryant lunging forward toward the goal line is not the kind of overt act a player needs to make in order to be seen as making a “football move.”

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    San Diego, California, United States
    Posts
    7,819
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by NormSizedMidget View Post
    Pats, but I would take that over about anything so it's no disrespect
    This is the correct answer.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,327
    vCash
    1500
    It depends on the offense. Most offenses I'd probably go with the Patriots. Run and Shoot (and variants) I'm definitely taking the WRs
    X's and O's Breakdown of each of Eli Manning's 27 Interceptions

    http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sho...-Interceptions

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    10,674
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by nyfinest4life View Post
    im not sure if this question has been talked about already and if it was i apologize but i was just curious which u ppl would want?? i would choose the giants wideouts cuz theyre home run hitters. either one of nicks, cruz, n manningham could take a 5 yard slant and take it 70 yards for a touchdown. patriots tightends n welker are great but theyre not really gamebreakers. theyre awesome though. i have to go with the giants playmakers. thoughts?

    i dont know how to make a poll so if some1 could make a poll for my question i would appreciate it. thanks
    2 te's that put up wr numbers... 1 being the biggest redzone threat in all football?

    ill take a TE all day....



    You forget that even though the Pats dont run, Gronk and Hernandez are very good blockers too. Gronk more so then Hernandez.

    The TE completes my team more. Gronk Hernandez and Welker all day!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Posts
    92,060
    vCash
    1777
    Hernandez can play RB
    Quote Originally Posted by surf and turf View Post
    And the guy has been quoted all over the place saying if he lunged for the end zone it would have been a football move.

    Blandino said Bryant lunging forward toward the goal line is not the kind of overt act a player needs to make in order to be seen as making a “football move.”

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    231
    vCash
    1500
    i take the pats. but, both wont be as effective if they didn't have the OL that let them get down the field, having the qb that could get it to them, and play calling. in my eye a team like cowboys got better weapons, but they have no OL and their play calling is garbage.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    52,937
    vCash
    1500
    this is not even a remotely fair comparison. its the patriots by a lot. tight end scause match up proiblems receivers simply can't. the best cover guys are normally corners and do not havce the size to cover a set of tight ends, where linebackers and safety's dont normally have the coverage skills to handle the tight ends. the giants wide recievers are very good, but no wide out can create the match up nightmares those New England tight ends can. its the patriots
    30 Team Stadium Checklist: 10 to go

    1) Yankees 2) Orioles 3) Rays 4) Red Sox 5) Mets 6) Braves 7) Phillies 8) Nationals 9) Marlins 10) Pirates 11) Padres 12) Astros 13) Mariners 14) Twins 15) Cubs 16) White Sox 17) Cardinals 18) Indians 19) Tigers 20) Royals


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    6,786
    vCash
    1500
    Gronk is the best TE on the planet right now, no disrespect go Jimmy Graham, and Hernandez is a top 5-8 TE in the game as well. It's impossible to neutralize that. The Giants WR are great, and could make a case for being a top unit in the league, but Gronknandez alone have to be taken over any other WR/TE tandem in football because of the matchup problems they cause.

    No disrespect to my WR because I love them, but those two are just insane
    “It's still a game and you'd rather win it than lose it.”



    There is An Angel in CitiField- LETS GO METS!


    Proud to be PSD's "The Kid"


    New York Giants-2012 World Champions

    SuperMann #10, Superman wears Eli Pajamas

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    559
    vCash
    1500
    im surprised how lopsided its been towards the pats. cant argue it though. cant go wrong. i understand that its harder to defend the tightends nowadays. points well taken

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,609
    vCash
    1585
    Quote Originally Posted by NormSizedMidget View Post
    Pats, but I would take that over about anything so it's no disrespect
    This, and I'm not a pats fan, but the mismatches that Gronk and Hernandez create give them the advantage over almost anyone.
    If I drive I'm going to have to have a lot of drinks because I am very self conscious about my driving.

    Quote Originally Posted by Warriors4lyfe12 View Post
    Samhan actually worked out with the warriors in 2010, but elected to go overseas instead of jumping into the NBA to make his game better. Actually i would compare him to a poor mans blake griffin
    Quote Originally Posted by lvdub2741 View Post
    We gave up Monta for a Bogut but we could have kept him gotten someone like Omar Samahan who is just like Bogut and kept Monta.
    Ah, some sports fans

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Beverly Hills, Calfornia
    Posts
    391
    vCash
    1500
    Think of it likes this.

    Switch up the QB. Brady with Nicks, Cruz, and Manningham/Eli with Gronk, Hernandez, and Welker.

    Brady would dominate offense with the Giant's WR group. He finally has a reliable deep threat WR and remember what he did with Randy Moss?

    Eli gets 2 very talented TE's and Mr. Reliable Wes Welker and its in question if he can utilize them as well as Tom Brady.

    Brady is making better players out of Gronk, Hernandez, and Welker. If any one of them switched teams, I guarantee their numbers fall.
    Last edited by BH-Sports; 02-01-2012 at 08:41 PM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Irvine, California
    Posts
    13,159
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Wade>Kobe View Post
    This is the correct answer.
    There is no right and wrong answer, this is opinion based.

    That being said, I'm taking Gronk Hernandez and Welker.

    There are pros and cons to both.

    The Pros to the Pats offense is that it's impossible to man up their weapons. DBs are too small and LBs are too slow. Welker is a 3rd down machine who can get open against anybody.

    The Con to the Pats offensive is that they have no big play ability. Their only chance at a big play is a catch and run because they have no deep threats at all. Welker can sometimes get loose but that's about it as far as their explosiveness.

    The Pros to the Giants offense is that it's almost impossible to man them up as well because you are not gonna even remotely contain Nicks and Cruz with single coverage. As they draw much attention, therein lies the matchup nightmare of putting a safety or nickel/dime back on Mario Manningham in single coverage.

    The Cons to the Giants offense is that their WRs don't physically pose a mismatch. They don't have a 6'6 240 lb WR who can simply out-jump and out muscle DBs. They don't have a WR who runs a sub 4.3 that is impossible to cover deep.

    The Pats are the choice for me if I want a chain moving offense. The Giants are the choice for me if I want an explosive offense.

    Don't get me wrong though, the Giants can very well move the chains and the Pats can be explosive.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •