Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
Maybe it's just me, but you don't beat big corners with even bigger WRs (that's the "arms race" mentality of most football teams). You beat big corners with smaller, quicker WRs by moving them around and playing them more in space (as opposed to traditional formations), thus taking away the big CBs advantage of playing physical at the line of scrimmage.
It's a game of chess, not checkers.
You won't get any disagreement with me there. You don't go strength vs strength, you go strength vs weakness. That is why I think all this focus on big wide receivers is misguided. Speed and quickness wins out. Its like playing rock, paper, scissors, if the other guy uses a rock all the time, you don't want to choose rock, that doesn't get you anywhere, you want to go with paper.
That said, I do think Rogers is especially physical for a wide receiver, I think he is strong enough to hold his own against the more physical defensive backs and really beat up on the weaker ones. He plays very violently, beats presses, shoves defensive backs out of the way with his body, I don't think he'd be a bad way to go.
However as a general rule, yeah, this team needs loads of quickness. If you want to beat a guy like a Brandon Browner of Seattle, you beat by using someone like a Tavon Austin or a Quinton Patton, someone with terrific quickness that makes it difficult for him to hold his coverage as he struggles to turn his hips and change direction frequently.
In my new mock draft, trying to be as open-minded as possible, I included both dimensions, speed/quickness in Austin and strength, physicality and red-zone prowess in Rogers. I think both add vital dimensions to this offense.
[ Edited by Phoenix49ers on Mar 3, 2013 at 12:18 PM ]