Which players are more athletic: WRs or Dbs?

[RobBlake]

Yes, Wrs can catch..normally.. but i'm drunk so answer poll.. puhlease.

[RobBlake]

Originally Posted by Sorter

To play devil's advocate, there are quite a few things you can do as a team to make average players perform better in given situations based on film.

E.G. Team shows tendency to use slant-flat concept to the field in 3rd and 6+ out of 2X2. You install coverage beater (e.g. Thumbs) into your gameplan. Player jumps flat due to film breakdown. Announcers make it seem he has "exceptional closing speed and anticipation" when in reality, it might be the only play of the entire game said player remembered a ****ing thing from the last week.

so if it comes down to elite WR over an elite DB.. you'd choose WR?

[Sorter]

Originally Posted by RobBlake

so if it comes down to elite WR over an elite DB.. you'd choose WR?

First, define elite as opposed to other superlatives such as "excellent", "incredible", and other various ****ing useless descriptors.


Exactly what traits are the players "elite" at and how does the player fit into what "I" want to accomplish? Edit: How does this parlay into the best use of mine own philosophies and concepts?

E.G. If I'm a team that is primarily a 3 step drop/WC concept team, I'd likely value human beings that can get open quickly and hang onto the ball (see everyone who wanted Maclin).

[jonzie04]

Originally Posted by RobBlake

well, doesn't this highlight the attributes of a Db of being able to cover such players too? something that isn't measured in full?

Theres a lot more to this stuff than just being big, fast, athletic. I dont know all of the ins and outs of corner or WR but obviously there is a lot of technique, leverages, scheming etc involved. There are almost always more people defending the pass than there are eligible receivers. Just because you see a Corner cover a WR for 4 seconds doesn't mean he's as good of an athlete.....Nobody in their right mind would say Sean Smith is a better Athlete than Demaryius Thomas who he shut down today (yesterday)

[RobBlake]

Originally Posted by Sorter

First, define elite as opposed to other superlatives such as "excellent", "incredible", and other various ****ing useless descriptors.


Exactly what traits are the players "elite" at and how does the player fit into what "I" want to accomplish? Edit: How does this parlay into the best use of mine own philosophies and concepts?

E.G. If I'm a team that is primarily a 3 step drop/WC concept team, I'd likely value human beings that can get open quickly and hang onto the ball (see everyone who wanted Maclin).

so, you don't know the difference between average/medicore and elite/incredible/incredible Db/WR play.. nor the difference between adjectives and superlatives?

The question was, what would "YOU" choose between an elite WR and an elite DB.. that automatically encompasses your self definition for the positions and the theoretical scheme used.. funny how that should all be presumed within a singular question of you.

Do I really need to define if you want someone who is elite in man on man coverage or zone? elite in YAC or elite in taking the top off a coverage?

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by ThaVirus

Depends on how you define athleticism.

I think WRs are generally taller and heavier.

I think CBs are usually faster, quicker, and can jump higher.

Yeah, its definitely DBs. They are some of the most athletic specimens in the world. Just because you are taller, doesn't make you more athletic even though there are some very tall athletic WRs.

[jonzie04]

Out of Curiosity who are the best athletes at DB in the game right now? Peterson is in a class of his own at that position, and I can name 15 wide receivers off the top of my head that are more athletic than him.

I guess how we all define athletic is different though. To me being an athlete is a combination of size speed, power, and agility. To some an athlete is having great hand eye coordination.

[RobBlake]

Originally Posted by BWillie

Yeah, its definitely DBs. They are some of the most athletic specimens in the world. Just because you are taller, doesn't make you more athletic even though there are some very tall athletic WRs.

Which makes me wonder who effective some specimen from the nba would be in the nfl.. like the SGs and PGs positions

[jonzie04]

Originally Posted by BWillie

Yeah, its definitely DBs. They are some of the most athletic specimens in the world. Just because you are taller, doesn't make you more athletic even though there are some very tall athletic WRs.

You see thats just it... On average they're not just taller... They're bigger, taller, faster, stronger, jump higher, and are only slightly less agile.

[BWillie]

For some reason tall people get the benefit of the doubt when it comes to athleticism. Look at the NBA, people think NBA players are the best athletes in the world. This is a myth. I dont consider height athleticism, and the taller you are, the more rare you become in the male population. For example, a 6'9" person is 100s of times more rare than a 6ft tall person. What does this mean? It means that even if you are a great athlete for someone 6ft9, theres going to be tons of 5ft11 guys way athletic than you, but their smaller statue will hold them back from being successful at certain sports like basketball, WR, TE, DE etc.

In reality, Kevin Durant and many other NBA players arent actually elite athletes, at least compared to the overall male population, they are just great athletes FOR THEIR SIZE. They just have the fortune of being much much taller than avg

[RobBlake]

Originally Posted by jonzie04

Out of Curiosity who are the best athletes at DB in the game right now? Peterson is in a class of his own at that position, and I can name 15 wide receivers off the top of my head that are more athletic than him.

I guess how we all define athletic is different though. To me being an athlete is a combination of size speed, power, and agility. To some an athlete is having great hand eye coordination.

Thats honestly the question hidden within the initial theme.. what's the subjective view of athleticism in the nfl and of the mentioned positions.

[Sorter]

Originally Posted by RobBlake

so, you don't know the difference between average/medicore and elite/incredible/incredible Db/WR play.. nor the difference between adjectives and superlatives?

The question was, what did would "YOU" choose between an elite WR and an elite DB.. that automatically encompasses your self definition for the positions and the theoretical scheme used.. funny how that should all be presumed within a singular question of you.

I don't know how one would discern an "elite" DB from an "incredible" one.

As to your second paragraph, if you're using someone's self definition for each possible scheme available, then you're never going to get any sort relevant result. Some people like smaller, quicker receivers (NE), some people like using 6'2" and up in the slot (Chip/Saints with Colston, Keenan Allen), etc. People will always have different beliefs about what athletic trait is more beneficial.

Which is why this thread is silly, unless you're just going to base it on combine/pro day recordings.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by Sorter

To play devil's advocate, there are quite a few things you can do as a team to make average players perform better in given situations based on film.

E.G. Team shows tendency to use slant-flat concept to the field in 3rd and 6+ out of 2X2. You install coverage beater (e.g. Thumbs) into your gameplan. Player jumps flat due to film breakdown. Announcers make it seem he has "exceptional closing speed and anticipation" when in reality, it might be the only play of the entire game said player remembered a ****ing thing from the last week.

Shut up.

[RobBlake]

Originally Posted by Sorter

I don't know how one would discern an "elite" DB from an "incredible" one.

As to your second paragraph, if you're using someone's self definition for each possible scheme available, then you're never going to get any sort relevant result. Some people like smaller, quicker receivers (NE), some people like using 6'2" and up in the slot (Chip/Saints with Colston, Keenan Allen), etc. People will always have different beliefs about what athletic trait is more beneficial.

Which is why this thread is silly, unless you're just going to base it on combine/pro day recordings.

I'm not writing a dissertation on the topic or wanting to publish anything for pff sports or nbc sports. I'm just curious of what posters feel would be more athletic.. and perhaps some would disclose why a 5'11 guy is more athletic than a 6'3 one etc. Of course, it's a silly poll.

[RobBlake]

Originally Posted by BWillie

For some reason tall people get the benefit of the doubt when it comes to athleticism. Look at the NBA, people think NBA players are the best athletes in the world. This is a myth. I dont consider height athleticism, and the taller you are, the more rare you become in the male population. For example, a 6'9" person is 100s of times more rare than a 6ft tall person. What does this mean? It means that even if you are a great athlete for someone 6ft9, theres going to be tons of 5ft11 guys way athletic than you, but their smaller statue will hold them back from being successful at certain sports like basketball, WR, TE, DE etc.

In reality, Kevin Durant and many other NBA players arent actually elite athletes, at least compared to the overall male population, they are just great athletes FOR THEIR SIZE. They just have the fortune of being much much taller than avg

what about anthony davis?

[New World Order]

Jonzie is correct. It's WR