Loomis: No deadline for Graham deal

Utah_Saint · 04-10-2014, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by TheOak

What you are missing about lee's post is that "slot receiver" is not a Wide Receiver position, it is not a position of any sort, it is a role that multiple positions line up in TE, RB, WR.

Similar to holder for the place kicker... Scat back is not a position either.

Graham didnt line up as a tackle which is a position, he lined up in a role.

The CBA outlines the positions, if a guard plays tackle then that is a position, not a role.

I didn't miss it. As a matter of fact, that's the whole point.

Graham lined up as a wide out more than any of those players. Why would they be any more of a wideout than Graham.

TheOak · 04-10-2014, 02:20 PM

Originally Posted by Utah_Saint

I didn't miss it. As a matter of fact, that's the whole point.

Graham lined up as a wide out more than any of those players. Why would they be any more of a wideout than Graham.

You are still missing it. "Slot Receiver" is not a Wide Receiver owned role. He didn't line up as a Wide Receiver, he lined up as a slot...

Just because traditionally a Wide Receiver lines up in the slot doesn't make it a Wide Receiver position... Just line a kick returner is not a Wide Receiver even though that role is normally played by Wide Receivers.
2013 NFL Player Returning Stats - National Football League - ESPN

In the strict language of the CBA there is no such position as a "wide out" or a "slot receiver".

BTW Jimmy Graham has the right to challenge and has chosen not to.

Utah_Saint · 04-10-2014, 02:46 PM

Originally Posted by TheOak

You are still missing it. "Slot Receiver" is not a Wide Receiver owned role. He didn't line up as a Wide Receiver, he lined up as a slot...

Just because traditionally a Wide Receiver lines up in the slot doesn't make it a Wide Receiver position... Just line a kick returner is not a Wide Receiver even though that role is normally played by Wide Receivers.
2013 NFL Player Returning Stats - National Football League - ESPN

In the strict language of the CBA there is no such position as a "wide out" or a "slot receiver".

BTW Jimmy Graham has the right to challenge and has chosen not to.

No, once again, I'm not missing it. Maybe if I put it this way.

Try not to think about the time at slot receiver.

Why would player A that only lines up wide 20% of the time be a wide receiver and player B that lines up at the wide receiver spot 25% not be a wide receiver?

Yes, I realize Graham hasn't filed a grievance. I don't think he will. Losing the appeal would cost him more in the negotiations than winning it could gain him. This is purely theoretical.

TheOak · 04-10-2014, 03:17 PM

Originally Posted by Utah_Saint

No, once again, I'm not missing it. Maybe if I put it this way.

Try not to think about the time at slot receiver.

Why would player A that only lines up wide 20% of the time be a wide receiver and player B that lines up at the wide receiver spot 25% not be a wide receiver?

Yes, I realize Graham hasn't filed a grievance. I don't think he will. Losing the appeal would cost him more in the negotiations than winning it could gain him. This is purely theoretical.

Correct me if I an wrong but the % are not in favor of Graham being a WR based on him lining up at the Z/X/WR, they are only for the Y/Slot Receiver.

Slot is between the Tackle and Wide Receiver.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slotback

So is TE
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tight_end

Most of the talking heads are lumping Slot and WR snap counts together. Jimmy's true WR snap count is lower than 50%.

Look at how it is framed in the header.. "Slot is *traditionally* a WR, but they do make the distinction of the two.

http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/b...43&src=desktop

This may be clearer.... Lance Moore and Jimmy Graham both play a lot of slot; one is a WR, the other is a TE.

The difference between Tight End and Slot is only whether he is on or off the line.... The difference between WR and Slot is 5-8 yards is say.

If Jimmy line up in the slot/Y more than 50% he is a TE, if he was an X/Z/WR more than 50% then he has an argument.

04-10-2014, 01:58 PM	#1
Utah_Saint Site Donor 2019 Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Salt Lake City, Utah Posts: 3,521	Re: Loomis: No deadline for Graham deal Originally Posted by TheOak What you are missing about lee's post is that "slot receiver" is not a Wide Receiver position, it is not a position of any sort, it is a role that multiple positions line up in TE, RB, WR. Similar to holder for the place kicker... Scat back is not a position either. Graham didnt line up as a tackle which is a position, he lined up in a role. The CBA outlines the positions, if a guard plays tackle then that is a position, not a role. I didn't miss it. As a matter of fact, that's the whole point. Graham lined up as a wide out more than any of those players. Why would they be any more of a wideout than Graham.

04-10-2014, 02:20 PM	#2
TheOak 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Cypress Tx. Posts: 19,050	Re: Loomis: No deadline for Graham deal Originally Posted by Utah_Saint I didn't miss it. As a matter of fact, that's the whole point. Graham lined up as a wide out more than any of those players. Why would they be any more of a wideout than Graham. You are still missing it. "Slot Receiver" is not a Wide Receiver owned role. He didn't line up as a Wide Receiver, he lined up as a slot... Just because traditionally a Wide Receiver lines up in the slot doesn't make it a Wide Receiver position... Just line a kick returner is not a Wide Receiver even though that role is normally played by Wide Receivers. 2013 NFL Player Returning Stats - National Football League - ESPN In the strict language of the CBA there is no such position as a "wide out" or a "slot receiver". BTW Jimmy Graham has the right to challenge and has chosen not to. Joker likes this.
	It's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see. ~ Henry David Thoreau Last edited by TheOak; 04-10-2014 at 02:25 PM..

04-10-2014, 02:46 PM	#3
Utah_Saint Site Donor 2019 Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Salt Lake City, Utah Posts: 3,521	Re: Loomis: No deadline for Graham deal Originally Posted by TheOak You are still missing it. "Slot Receiver" is not a Wide Receiver owned role. He didn't line up as a Wide Receiver, he lined up as a slot... Just because traditionally a Wide Receiver lines up in the slot doesn't make it a Wide Receiver position... Just line a kick returner is not a Wide Receiver even though that role is normally played by Wide Receivers. 2013 NFL Player Returning Stats - National Football League - ESPN In the strict language of the CBA there is no such position as a "wide out" or a "slot receiver". BTW Jimmy Graham has the right to challenge and has chosen not to. No, once again, I'm not missing it. Maybe if I put it this way. Try not to think about the time at slot receiver. Why would player A that only lines up wide 20% of the time be a wide receiver and player B that lines up at the wide receiver spot 25% not be a wide receiver? Yes, I realize Graham hasn't filed a grievance. I don't think he will. Losing the appeal would cost him more in the negotiations than winning it could gain him. This is purely theoretical.

04-10-2014, 03:17 PM	#4
TheOak 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Cypress Tx. Posts: 19,050	Loomis: No deadline for Graham deal Originally Posted by Utah_Saint No, once again, I'm not missing it. Maybe if I put it this way. Try not to think about the time at slot receiver. Why would player A that only lines up wide 20% of the time be a wide receiver and player B that lines up at the wide receiver spot 25% not be a wide receiver? Yes, I realize Graham hasn't filed a grievance. I don't think he will. Losing the appeal would cost him more in the negotiations than winning it could gain him. This is purely theoretical. Correct me if I an wrong but the % are not in favor of Graham being a WR based on him lining up at the Z/X/WR, they are only for the Y/Slot Receiver. Slot is between the Tackle and Wide Receiver. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slotback So is TE http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tight_end Most of the talking heads are lumping Slot and WR snap counts together. Jimmy's true WR snap count is lower than 50%. Look at how it is framed in the header.. "Slot is traditionally a WR, but they do make the distinction of the two. http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/b...43&src=desktop This may be clearer.... Lance Moore and Jimmy Graham both play a lot of slot; one is a WR, the other is a TE. The difference between Tight End and Slot is only whether he is on or off the line.... The difference between WR and Slot is 5-8 yards is say. If Jimmy line up in the slot/Y more than 50% he is a TE, if he was an X/Z/WR more than 50% then he has an argument.
	It's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see. ~ Henry David Thoreau

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/65424-loomis-no-deadline-graham-deal.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
Loomis: No deadline for Graham deal	This thread	Refback	04-10-2014 10:15 AM	5