Originally Posted by Utah_Saint (Post 580182)

If Pierre lines up at wide receiver twice as often as he lines up in the backfield then yes, he has a legit claim at the designation. Espcially if it means an extra $5 million a year.

Originally Posted by Utah_Saint (Post 580165)

Just curious, who would you consider elite wide receivers?

Dez Bryant? Over the last three years, Graham has 36 less yards and 2 more touchdowns?
Andre Johnson? Graham has 10 more yards and 25 more touchdowns
Demaryius Thomas? Graham has 92 more yards and 8 more touchdowns.

And the list goes on and on. Since his rookie season, Graham has better numbers than;
Antonio Brown
Roddy White
Jordy Nelson
DeSean Jackson
Pierre Garcon
Julio Jones....

Truth is, over the last 3 years there are only 7 wide receivers have more yards that Graham and none have more touchdowns.

I think its pretty safe to say that every receiver would benefit from playing with a great quarterback and a pass first offensive mastermind.

And Payton tries to get Graham lined up against most corners. That's why he lines up wide over a quarter of the time he's in the game. He's too big for most corners to cover and it becomes an easy game of pitch and catch. There are only a few corners in the league that can cover him.

Just my opinion, but I think the stats show that he definitely deserves to be listed among the top receivers in the NFL.

Solely based his stats, PFF values him at $12.3mil/year.

Whether the Saints can afford him is a completely different question all together.

Originally Posted by TheOak (Post 580186)

Then you should probably refer to JG as WR from now on. I hope Jimmy Graham gets WR pay and what you think he is worth somewhere else. His name will be removed from all Tight End records, including the Saints record books. You no longer have the best TE in the game, you have got your self a bonafied top 20 WR.

But it doesn't work that way, if it did Luke McCown would have H by his name.

"Lining up" means nothing.

Originally Posted by blackangold (Post 580190)

Your missing the entire point of my post. If Jimmy was lining up as a WR 100% of the time then he would be slightly above average. He is a mis-match nightmare because he is a TE...

Comparing player vs player with stats is useless. If Dez was in Payton's offense and had Drew throwing to him... you get my point?

Systemic players aren't worth huge contracts.

Originally Posted by TheOak (Post 580186)

Then you should probably refer to JG as WR from now on. I hope Jimmy Graham gets WR pay and what you think he is worth somewhere else. His name will be removed from all Tight End records, including the Saints record books. You no longer have the best TE in the game, you have got your self a bonafied top 20 WR.

But it doesn't work that way, if it did Luke McCown would have H by his name.

"Lining up" means nothing.

Originally Posted by rezburna (Post 580167)

Lets line him up at receiver for 100% of the plays and see if the production remains the same. That we he can always face the teams number one corner like most elite receivers do. Matter fact, whats Gronks numbers? He can play receiver too I guess.

Originally Posted by Utah_Saint (Post 580252)

I hope Jimmy Graham stays with the Saints what ever designation he gets. It doesn't look like the Saints will be able to afford it though because of their cap situation and the money he's likely to be offered based on his production. I'm hoping that his desire to stay with Drew and the Saints out weighs his greed. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen much, so I'm not going to hold my breath.



Article 10, Section 9 says the position a player is tagged at is determined by"...the position above at which he participated in the most plays during the prior league year."



So it sounds like "Lining up" means just about everything.

Originally Posted by lee909 (Post 580257)

It would be interesting to see other TE stats of lining up over the past two years.
Vernon Davis, Gronk,Hernandez, Gonzalez, Jordan Cameron, Thomas at Denver all played a major part in receiving.

Originally Posted by lee909 (Post 580257)

It would be interesting to see other TE stats of lining up over the past two years.
Vernon Davis, Gronk,Hernandez, Gonzalez, Jordan Cameron, Thomas at Denver all played a major part in receiving.

Originally Posted by TheOak (Post 580256)

Nope, that is exactly what a modern-day tight end looks like.

Cue "The Autumn Wind", and James Earl Jones goes on to explain the evolution of the game and it's players.

Then I go on to explain that I am the arbitrator and that this has nothing to do with what Jimmy Graham is but what the Modern-Day definition of a Tight End is. I will also go on about precedent and that JG set that when he allowed himself to be Drafted, Put in record books, play, draw a pay check, and go to a pro-bowl as a Tight End. In today's NFL many positions are dual roll and Jimmy is no more a wide receiver than Darren Sproles is, even though both spent more time receiving.


Did you pull that reference out of thin air?
It's Article 10, Section 2(a)(i) and it doesn't say "lined up", it says "at which the Franchise Player participated in the most plays during the prior League Year.” Things change between line-up and snap.

Originally Posted by lee909 (Post 580267)

Just shows the evolution of the position.It might explain Loomis confidence in the TE tag.

One third of TE lining up in slot, pro bowl at TE, drafted as a TE.


When I see a bird that*walks like a duck*and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck. ”*

Originally Posted by Utah_Saint (Post 580264)

I've read a couple sports writers reference the "modern day tight end" designation as a possibility but it will require that the arbitrator makes a kind of new position. One in which tight end doesn't mean the player lines up tight on the end of the line. Who knows, could happen.

And no, I didn't pull it out of thin air. It's in the NFL CBA. You can read it here. Kinda dry though.

http://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/...-2011-2020.pdf

Article 10 section 9 is on page 49. The section I quoted is right about the middle of the page. "...above at which he participated in the most plays during the prior League Year"

Article 10 section 2 also says "... at which the Franchise Player participated in the most plays during the prior League Year,

Looks like it says it twice.

I don't know man, saying things change between line up and snap seems like a pretty big reach to me.

Originally Posted by ScottF (Post 580283)

I could see a clearer distinction made for a few positions DE-LB, running vs receiving RB's, NT-DT. Take the gray area out of the Tag

Originally Posted by Danno (Post 580287)

Not a bad idea. LT's, OG's, OC's, RT's, DE's, DT's DE/OLB's, MLB, OLB, FS, and SS's should all be separated.



Here's how it is now...



Quarterback - $16,912,000

Offensive Linemen (includes Offensive Tackle, Offensive Guard, Center) -$11,654,000

Wide Receiver -$12,312,000

Running Back (includes all Fullbacks and Halfbacks) - $9,540,000

Tight End - $7,035,000

Defensive End - $13,116,000

Defensive Tackle - $9,654,000

Linebacker - $11,455,000

Cornerback - $11,834,000

Safety - $8,433,000

Kicker or Punter $3,556,000

Originally Posted by TheOak (Post 580272)

Is my math incorrect or does he actually not take more snaps at slot than TE? He ran 538 routes only 268 in the slot. 134 targets 67 @ slot.