Cole Beasley Not Going To Make Same Camp Mistake Twice

[Genghis Khan]

As for stats over production, what exactly is this production you guys are arguing that isn't showing in his stats? A couple of five yard first downs? His zero touchdowns? The quite interesting allusion to Beasley now being somehow responsible for Dez's real, actual, demonstrative production? What?

Also, no one is asking him to be a "down the field threat." Let's be real. A WR who averages 11 or 12 yards a catch is "not a down the field threat." Nothing wrong with that.

If a WR averages less than a first down per catch, he's not all that good. Sorry but that's reality.

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

Of course he's a limited player. Has anyone said he isn't? That he's some beast about to explode?

No. It's that there's a place for a role player who can get open and convert first downs when it's 3rd and 6.

BTW, in 2010, Wes Welker averaged 9.9 YPC.

 

[Jon88]

I never knew Cole Beasley could evoke this much emotion from someone.

Every time he was put in, he made plays. That all disappeared once they put Ogletree in. Cut the guy some slack.

 

[marionbarberthe4th]

What a coincidence that the team holds him back from getting more yards. They don't do that to anyone else, mind you. Just poor Beasley. Couldn't be just that he's a limited player. Nah.

You're describing Jason written

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

 

[Genghis Khan]

You're describing Jason written

If you don't know the difference between a WR and a TE, there's nothing I can do to help you.

 

[Genghis Khan]

I never knew Cole Beasley could evoke this much emotion from someone.

Every time he was put in, he made plays. That all disappeared once they put Ogletree in. Cut the guy some slack.

So your standard for our WRs is "better than Ogletree?"

Quite a high bar you are setting there.

It's not emotion, it's just that I am being attacked because god forbid I see Beasley for what he is.

 

[Jon88]

So your standard for our WRs is "better than Ogletree?"

Quite a high bar you are setting there.

It's not emotion, it's just that I am being attacked because god forbid I see Beasley for what he is.

He made plays. What do you expect from a 4th wide reciever, 1500 yards and 25 touchdowns? I could go in and outperform Ogletree. It wouldn't take me 3 years to learn 50% of the playbook.

You're being condescending. That's why you're being attacked.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Of course he's a limited player. Has anyone said he isn't? That he's some beast about to explode?

No. It's that there's a place for a role player who can get open and convert first downs when it's 3rd and 6.

BTW, in 2010, Wes Welker averaged 9.9 YPC.

Why would you want him on your team if you acknowledge he is a limited player?

Maybe last year he made some sense but this season, we are in a much different place. He is our 5th best WR at best.

As for Welker, you are trying to use a logical fallacy. Your use of Welker's 9.9 ypc season to try to make your point is as if you are saying: Welker is a good player. He had a season with 9.9 ypc. Therefore, 9.9 ypc is an acceptable season (actually, you are more likely saying, therefore 8.5 ypc is an acceptable season, which is an even worse argument). The problem with that, and why your example is a fallacy, is because it assumes that Welker is considered a good player in part because of his 9.9 ypc season. The opposite is in fact true; he is considered a good player despite his 9.9 ypc season. He had a bad year that year. But Welker is a career 11.2 ypc player, with five seasons of over 100 catches and 5 seasons of at least 1000 yards (including 3 seasons over 1300 yards), things you conveniently left out of your argument. Note that even Welker's worst season, a season in which he averaged approximately a first down's worth of yardage per catch, was still 1.5 yards per catch better than Beasley put up.

 

[Genghis Khan]

He made plays. What do you expect from a 4th wide reciever, 1500 yards and 25 touchdowns? I could go in and outperform Ogletree. It wouldn't take me 3 years to learn 50% of the playbook.

You're being condescending. That's why you're being attacked.

I'm being condescending? Because I disagree with you? Interesting.

He caught fifteen balls, and zero touchdowns, and averaged 8.5 yards per catch, so your claim that he "made plays" doesn't hold water with me.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I think you're missing the point, superpunk, with the Welker comparison.

He's only pointing out that Welker's career started off slowly and uninspiring too.

Frankly, I think Beasley's size will prohibit him from seeing much success in the NFL. But I understand what TE was reaching for.

 

[Jon88]

I'm being condescending? Because I disagree with you? Interesting.

He caught fifteen balls, and zero touchdowns, and averaged 8.5 yards per catch, so your claim that he "made plays" doesn't hold water with me.

Do you have anything else to do today?

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

Why would you want him on your team if you acknowledge he is a limited player?

You don't think all fourth and fifth WRs are limited in some way?

As for Welker, you are trying to use a logical fallacy. Your use of Welker's 9.9 ypc season to try to make your point is as if you are saying: Welker is a good player. He had a season with 9.9 ypc. Therefore, 9.9 ypc is an acceptable season (actually, you are more likely saying, therefore 8.5 ypc is an acceptable season, which is an even worse argument). The problem with that, and why your example is a fallacy, is because it assumes that Welker is considered a good player in part because of his 9.9 ypc season. The opposite is in fact true; he is considered a good player despite his 9.9 ypc season. He had a bad year that year. But Welker is a career 11.2 ypc player, with five seasons of over 100 catches and 5 seasons of at least 1000 yards (including 3 seasons over 1300 yards), things you conveniently left out of your argument. Note that even Welker's worst season, a season in which he averaged approximately a first down's worth of yardage per catch, was still 1.5 yards per catch better than Beasley put up.

I didn't do any of that. I didn't even make an argument. You're the one who earlier said if a WR averages less than 10 yards per catch, he's not that good. I just pointed out that Welker had a year like that.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Note that if I've been at all condescending, it started after I was attacked for my opinion.

My first post was "He simply is not very good. A WR who doesn't even average 10 ypc is not worth much IMO. "

There is nothing condescending that I said in that first page in fact.

Even after I was accused of being a stat lover and basically not knowing what I was talking about.

Sorry but I return in kind. I began this discussion respectfully. I've continued to be respectful throughout.

For someone to call me condescending when I'm simply reacting to being called out for my opinion is a bit much. Look in the mirror.

 

[Jon88]

Wierd

 

[Genghis Khan]

You don't think all fourth and fifth WRs are limited in some way?




I didn't do any of that. I didn't even make an argument. You're the one who earlier said if a WR averages less than 10 yards per catch, he's not that good. I just pointed out that Welker had a year like that.

That's exactly what you did. I'm merely pointing out the flaw in your example. Nothing about bringing up Welker helps you.

Let me spell it out for you: Welker wasn't good when he averaged 9.9 yards per catch. That doesn't negate all the other great things Welker has done.

When Beasley does those other things Welker has done, you might have a point.

Until then, you have a bottom of the barrel WR who for some odd reason had a reputation for making plays. No one can point to any of them, mind you, but he just makes plays.

As far as him being a 4th or 5th WR (5th btw), as I pointed out before, he offers almost no upside and almost no help on special teams, so he should be replaced.

 

[Genghis Khan]

All this consternation over my opinion of Cole frigging Beasley. Good lord.

 

[Genghis Khan]

I think you're missing the point, superpunk, with the Welker comparison.

He's only pointing out that Welker's career started off slowly and uninspiring too.

Frankly, I think Beasley's size will prohibit him from seeing much success in the NFL. But I understand what TE was reaching for.

Actually, that's not what he's saying. The 9.9ypc he pointed out was not part of Welker's slow start to his career, but rather came after several seasons of 100 rec/1000yds.

When Welker played, he was never as bad as Beasley. In fact, Welker's "Beasley season" (for lack of a better term), Welker averaged 15 yards per catch.

When Welker was younger, he had speed that Beasley couldn't dream of having.

Why are you calling me Superpunk? Is that some reference I'm supposed to understand?

 

[Genghis Khan]

Do you have anything else to do today?

I'm taking care of my 6 week old son, so no, not really.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Don't play coy with me.