PDA

View Full Version : Leave Patrick Crayton Alone!!!


DMWSackMachine
08-19-2008, 12:43 AM
HE'S A HUUUMAAAAN!!!!!!


Its time to debunk a myth: that of the "Cowboys have no 2nd WR" aka "Patrick Crayton<trash".

I have no idea where this came from. Neither do I know how it gained so much steam. Maybe it was the crucial 3rd down (and likely TD) drop in the playoffs that is so often referred to by anti-Cowboys propagandists. Maybe it is all the loud trash he talks, or the way that--during games--his big eyes make him look like "Headlights" Caldwell right after a 10-car pile up.

Like I said, I. don't. know.

But its time to put a stop to it.

First of all, let's determine what exactly qualifies as a "good" 2nd reciever. Well, unfortunately this is not basketball or baseball, where an abundance of numbers allow us to approximate a player's impact on the game much more precisely. We only have catches, yards and tds, or if we are interested in bringing them into the debate, a few more advanced numbers based upon deeper analysis like DVOA (sp?) and YPA. But since those numbers are not readily available, we are left with the standard forms. Unfortunately, a players production can vary wildly based upon opportunity, so we must have context with which to examine these numbers.

Ideally, a 2nd WR fits into your scheme perfectly. That means, depending on the players you currently have, he is whatever you need to fill in around the edges of their abilities. Therefore, say you have a strong, big bodied #1 WR who doesn't have your prototypical deep speed, but excels over the middle and getting YAC, you then want your 2nd guy to be able to stretch the field vertically and get behind the defense, etc etc. Beyond that, you have your philosophy as a team, what your approach to winning is, and what other high profile players you have at which positions who need to have the ball in their hands, etc etc. So, a running team with two strong RBs, a great OL and a bus-driver QB with a "keep the defense honest" philosophy and a solid #1 WR doesn't need anything beyond a solid, reliable target who doesn't complain and blocks downfield well (in other words, what Minnesota is aiming for).

As you see, a lot of things must be considered when evaluating what would be considered a quality 2nd WR. So let's look at the factors in play in this particular scenario:

1) What kind of #1 option does the team possess?
TO. Simply put, the guy is as complete a WR as has ever played the game. He can stretch the field vertically, run every route in the game at an elite level, is big, strong, fast and has good leaping ability. After Jerry Rice, might be the best RAC WR in the history of the game.

2) What is the team philosophy?
Dallas runs a vertical passing game in the Coryell geneology that favors outside timing routes and deep passes set up from play action. A balanced team who favors the pass slightly (though not necessarily by design) with two good backs who require touches. An explosive offense who tries to put points on the board moreso than controlling the clock, though it certainly possesses the ability to do the latter as well.

3) What other offensive options require attention?
The #1 WR is an outspoken give-me-the-damn-ball type who requires regular attention, and has the ability to warrant it. Along with a Pro Bowl RB who excels at both running the ball and catching it out of the backfield, they also have a good 2nd option who needs to be involved to be productive. Finally, they possess one of the elite TEs in the league who is a lethal weapon over the middle and down the seam. In other words, the #2 WR is the 3rd passing option at best, and as low as #5 overall in the touches pecking order.



Now that the table is set, we can begin our evaluation.

Being as that TO can do everything well, any type of WR would be a good complement to him. Ideally, however, you want your other WR to be capable of making the big play, meaning having the ability to really stretch the field vertically. How does Crayton measure up? He possesses decent speed, and is capable of sneaking by a CB for a big gain, but won't ever be confused with Bob Hayes. However, as a strong character guy who won't complain about touches and always stays involved, he scores out fairly well in this category.

Given the fact that Dallas has a fairly pass heavy attack, there should be a lot of touches to go around in the passing game. However, this must be balanced out with the fact that the #1 WR demands plenty of looks, as well as the presence of a big time receiving threat at TE who also gets plenty. There should be some left over, just not too many.

Finally, what are the reciever's strengths and weaknesses? Crayton is a very detailed player who has gotten the nuances of the game down pat. He runs good routes, blocks well and has superb hands. In Parcells second to last season with the team, going into TC he dubbed Crayton as having the best hands on the team....a team which also boasted Keyshawn Johnson (some of the best hands in NFL history) and Terry Glenn (another soft handed wideout who has seen a lot of success). A solid player, but one who simply lacks the elite measurables to make himself into a star.





All told, Crayton is a good NFL player. But here is the part that most here need to pay attention to: the talk has been that Dallas is weak at their 2nd WR position, and that they need a stronger player there to be successful. Hmm. That's funny, the tale of the tape says something entirely different.

I looked at every WR in the NFL, ranked according to reception, yards and tds. I sought out which teams possesed 2nd WRs who out produced Patrick Crayton in these categories and calculated where PC ranked among NFL 2nd WRs based purely upon last season's production. Here's what I discovered:


Catches
Crayton comes in tied for 60th here with a number of players at 50 receptions on the year. That leaves 59 players with more rec than him. Of those 59, 9 were TEs and 6 were RBs. Breaking it down according to teams with one, two, or three WRs with more catches than him, it looks like this:

Teams w/3 more: 1
Teams w/2 more: 14
Teams w/1 more: 13
Teams w/0 more: 3

As you can see, Crayton placed in the middle of the league according to WRs. He outproduced 16 teams' #2 WR, and would have been the leading reciever on 3 teams.


YARDS
Crayton placed tied for 52nd in this cat, and of the 51 above him, 6 were TEs and one was a RB. Here is the breakdown:

Teams w/3 more: 1
Teams w/2 more: 14
Teams w/1 more: 12
Teams w/0 more: 4

Almost identical to the reception totals, Crayton out shone 16 NFL teams' 2nd WRs according to receiving yards, and would have led 4 teams in the category.

TOUCHDOWNS
Scoring 7 TDs, Pat was able to place tied for 20th in the league here, with 3 TEs and no RBs finishing ahead of him. Breakdown:

Teams w/3 more: 0
Teams w/2 more: 3
Teams w/1 more: 8
Teams w/0 more: 20

An impressive showing for Pat here, as he would have been the leading TD catcher on over half of all NFL teams, and outproduced all 2nd WRs but 3(Cincy, Ari, NE).

Add the numbers up and he finished, on average, as the 12th most productive 2nd WR in the league.

When factored in with all the other options, on a team that certainly didn't pass the ball excessively like Det, NE or NO did, and considering that he was waaaay down the totem poll in terms of opportunity on his own team, I think its fair to conclude that Patrick Crayton was one of the better 2nd options in the league, but certainly, unequivocally, and without argument he was at least a solid #2 WR.


Can we stop with the unfounded criticism now?

K

Thx

Bye

Brent
08-19-2008, 12:46 AM
but ESPN doesnt talk about him, so obviously he's garbage!

Shane P. Hallam
08-19-2008, 12:48 AM
This topic is highly unnecessary, lol.

Malaka
08-19-2008, 12:50 AM
Patrick Crayton can only be considered good once he becomes more consistent, because he is very inconsistent right now. He is decent right now, but we will se what happens when the season starts.

DMWSackMachine
08-19-2008, 12:52 AM
Patrick Crayton can only be considered good once he becomes more consistent, because he is very inconsistent right now. He is decent right now, but we will se what happens when the season starts.

Thank you for spewing the same lines that you have heard from one uninformed, blurb driven media outlet after another.

Crayton is extremely consistent. He is the same reliable guy every day in practice and in games. You do nothing but expose yourself by making an accusation like that. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

619
08-19-2008, 12:53 AM
I'd rather talk about Sam Hurd or Miles Austin. Pfffft .

Malaka
08-19-2008, 12:54 AM
Thank you for spewing the same lines that you have heard from one uninformed, blurb driven media outlet after another.

Crayton is extremely consistent. He is the same reliable guy every day in practice and in games. You do nothing but expose yourself by making an accusation like that. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Okay w/e you want, you are right, I know nothing :rolleyes:

Crayton is a decent #2, I never even said he is bad I just said he needs more consistency, Crayton might change all that in this season. But I am uniformed and brainless ESPN drone... my bad

DMWSackMachine
08-19-2008, 12:55 AM
This topic is highly unnecessary, lol.

Not true, go look at ScottyBoy in the preseason rankings thread, along with nearly every Giants poster on this site.

They have the image of Crayton dropping that pass in the playoffs last year and its the only thing that they can remember of him, so they feed the beast in putting him down.

Not just that, but nearly every MSM outlet lists #2 WR as the big "weak spot" on Dallas team when its clearly not one, unless we are now grading NFL teams based upon their inability to field Pro Bowlers at every position. Crayton is an above average player for his position.

DMWSackMachine
08-19-2008, 12:57 AM
Okay w/e you want, you are right, I know nothing :rolleyes:

Crayton is a decent #2, I never even said he is bad I just said he needs more consistency, Crayton might change all that in this season. But I am uniformed and brainless ESPN drone... my bad

Is it or is it not true that he is inconsistent? No, its not, and its not even close.

I'm not trying to put you down or anything, just saying that what you said was dead wrong and you should be aware of it. That's all :)

Malaka
08-19-2008, 01:03 AM
Look at his stats over the course of the season, there were games where Crayton had 8 receptions, and there were games where he had 0-2. In the end he racked up 50 receptions, and 700 yards and 7 TDs, and that is pretty average.

You are right about people thinking he is bad just because of the drop in the playoffs, but still he talked **** in that game and could not back it up.

Crayton is average, and IS inconsistent.

Shane P. Hallam
08-19-2008, 01:10 AM
Not true, go look at ScottyBoy in the preseason rankings thread, along with nearly every Giants poster on this site.

They have the image of Crayton dropping that pass in the playoffs last year and its the only thing that they can remember of him, so they feed the beast in putting him down.

Not just that, but nearly every MSM outlet lists #2 WR as the big "weak spot" on Dallas team when its clearly not one, unless we are now grading NFL teams based upon their inability to field Pro Bowlers at every position. Crayton is an above average player for his position.

Then PM the Giants fans. The whole board doesn't need to hear about this :P I think the above average fan knows about Crayton. Whether they consider it a weakness or not is their own prerogative.

Either way, it's not a strength by any means. You look at some of these WR tandems, and Crayton isn't lighting the world on fire yet. But, it is better than a lot of teams as well.

Flyboy
08-19-2008, 01:12 AM
...

LOL.

Seriously?

Patrick Crayton isn't even worthy of being talked about.

eaglesfan_45
08-19-2008, 01:15 AM
This Thread = Epic Fail.....

Crap, I tried to wing it but I don't have any argument, I just feel as if I should be involved in an NFC East argument seeing as I am the one who usually starts them. :D

Paul
08-19-2008, 01:22 AM
I am just as bothered when people say he's to "inconsistent", I don't understand that at all. Crayton has always been a sure handed guy for us, but one bad game and he gets killed for it. Understandably it was in the playoffs in front of a national audience, so people who haven't seen him play a lot will jump to the conclusion that he has hands of stone, but thats just wrong. He isn't spectacular and he isn't going to blow by anyone, but he has been a productive and reliable guy for us for sometime. I understand other people's concern about our depth at WR and Crayton's big play ability, that is fine, there could be improvements, but to call Crayton inconsistent I do have a problem with.

Malaka
08-19-2008, 01:38 AM
Okay look, he is not bad but he is inconsistent. I will not use anything about the playoffs.

Week 1 vs NYG 3 Rec
Week 2 vs MIA 0 Rec
Week 3 vs CHI 3 Rec

First 3 games... he has been below average with 0 TDs and 6 Recs, and disappeared in the Miami game. Now he gets hot.

Week 4 vs STL 7 Rec 2 TDs
Week 5 vs BUF 6 Rec 1 TD
Week 6 vs NE 5 Rec 1 TD

He got hot in the next few games, and got 4 out of his 7 season TDs in these 3 games. He slows down again now.

Week 7 vs MIN 2 Rec
Week 8 BYE
Week 9 vs PHI 0 Rec

He was shut down by the Eagles, and only had 2 rec against the Vikings.

Week 10 vs NYG 5 Rec 1 TD
Week 11 vs WAS 2 Rec
Week 12 DNP
Week 13 vs Green Bay 3 Rec 2 TDs

By week 13 he was done with TD receptions, and looked pretty good in this stretch especially against the Giants.

Week 14 vs DET 3 Rec
Week 15 vs PHI 2 Rec
Week 16 vs CAR 7 Rec
Week 17 vs WAS 2 Rec

Now he has a great game vs the Panthers, but before and after that game he was stalled.

End of Season

Final Stats

697 Yards 7 TDs 50 Rec = Average

Paul
08-19-2008, 01:56 AM
Are you solely using stats to make a judgment on the inconsistency of a player, or have you actually seen enough of Crayton to truly believe that. If so you might want to take into account that he isn't even the 2nd receiving option on our team. When you have two perennial pro bowlers in Witten and Owens in front of you, having career years, you are not going put up a 10 TD 1,000+ yard year, now are you?

CashmoneyDrew
08-19-2008, 01:59 AM
You make good points in your argument and I somewhat agree, however, this kind of came out of nowhere and probably more belongs in the Cowboys team thread.

Geo
08-19-2008, 02:08 AM
Crayton is a servicable at best #3 option behind Witten and TO, the only real bread-winners in that receiving core. All the fuss in the world can't change that.

Addict
08-19-2008, 02:21 AM
He's the definition of average. So yes, I will leave him alone.

yourfavestoner
08-19-2008, 03:06 AM
He's the definition of average. So yes, I will leave him alone.

Bingo. He's a receiver that is good at everything, but exceeds at nothing. When people talk about #2 WR being a weakness for Dallas, they mean it's a weakness compared to the other positions on their team. Like DMW said, he is very consistent. It's just that his consistent is not great. So yay for being consistently pretty good.

eaglesalltheway
08-19-2008, 06:42 AM
Crayton is a solid #2 option at WR. He isn't exactly consistent, but its hard to say he is inconsistent. WR are naturally not consistent. Any WR will have games where he makes fewer receptions than normal, and they will have games where they produce more than normal. But in terms of WRs in the NFL, he is not inconsistent. One thing about the games where he had less production (Stat wise, not always an indicator of how he played) I would also like to see how other players on the offense did. Some of those games may be TO or Witten really had a big game, or Sam Hurd really stepped it up, or maybe in some of those games Anthony Fasano stepped it up. There are lots of other factors that could lead to receptions being down in a game besides how well a player was doing. Perhaps the run game was very successful in some of those games and thus hadn't had as many opportunities to make plays. I've been saying for two years that the Cowboys will be fine with Crayton as the #2 when Glenn leaves. Well now he is gone (for good) and all we have seen from Crayton is a solid #2 WR in an offense that does have two high calibur weapons in front of him. Yes his numbers are average. But those are more than acceptable numbers for a #2 WR considering he has (arguably) the best WR in the NFL and (arguably, I think so) the best TE in the game. I'm going to go vomit now, having defended a Cowboy player.:)

bigbluedefense
08-19-2008, 08:16 AM
I think Patrick Crayton is a solid WR. I like him a lot more in the slot than on the edge though. I also think he highly benefits from the attention that TO and Witten get. He's more of a complimentary player.

But still, a very good complimentary player, who's at his best in the slot. He gets a lot of heat for that drop, but for the most part has had a pretty good career the past 2 seasons.


He does need to shut up though. Giving the opponents bulletin board material doesn't help your team in any way. Its dumb.


The depth behind TO and Crayton should be more of a concern than Crayton himself. Crayton is fine.

A Perfect Score
08-19-2008, 08:25 AM
I agree with what most people have said...he is an average reciever, nothing more, nothing less. I do think he plays his best ball in the slot, and it will be interesting to see how he translates to the #2 position. I know he got some time there last year with glenn out, but I want to see him play a full year there and put up solid numbers before im ready to call him anything more then average.

That said, you made a solid argument, and I am certainly not going to rag on Crayton when Baltimore's receivers are not that impressive themselves. Crayton is the #3 option down there in Dallas and rightfully so...TO and Witten are both probably top 5 at their respective positions.

And I think you are looking at this the wrong way. When people say #2 WR is your biggest need, and you have a player like Crayton there, doesnt that mean that the rest of your team is in pretty damn good shape? I mean if the worst player on your team is average, that means everyone else is above average or better and you are in damn good shape. Its a compliment man!

Bengalsrocket
08-19-2008, 10:30 AM
All receivers are inconsistent at some point in their careers. The receiver position relies heavily on the QB's performance, so if your QB is getting a lot of pressure, he's going to have less time to decide who to throw to and that may involve a certain receiver getting less looks.

That being said, Romo probably checks T.O. and then Witten before looking for Crayton on the majority of his passes.

I don't get to watch enough Dallas games to really evaluate him, but from the small sample size I do have, and the stats I can easily check I think Crayton is a fine receiver (though, I don't know anything about his secondary skills like blocking etc.).

smittyjs
08-19-2008, 10:50 AM
I would take Justin gage or roydell williams over crayton.....

DMWSackMachine
08-19-2008, 11:02 AM
My point sounds like it has been fairly well received. To the poster who claimed that #2 WR being our biggest need is a compliment, I would like to just say "Bravo", because that is my point. Some people don't understand that, though. Some people (like Scotty, who won't lay off Patrick to save his life) think that because they are always hearing our #2 WR being criticized and bagged on, then the guy who plays the position must be teh suck. Not so. He's an above average player as far as 2nd WRs go (though certainly not an elite guy, or even a game changer, certainly) and solid enough to get the job done....and that is our "team weakness". Definitely more of a reflection on the quality of the team--which is outstanding--than on the quality of the player--which is fair-to-good.

That's basically what I wanted to clarify, for all the kooks that keep saying "you have a thin WR corps" or "after TO, you have nobody" etc etc.

The Great Jonathan Vilma
08-19-2008, 11:06 AM
I would take Justin gage or roydell williams over crayton.....

that is your choice and you have a right to it. Wouldn't be my line of thinking, and i'm glad you aren't my GM

Jughead10
08-19-2008, 11:22 AM
The depth behind TO and Crayton should be more of a concern than Crayton himself. Crayton is fine.

I think that is the key.

Crayton is a fine player. He is very average. But when you put him on a team with an offense like the Cowboys, he is going to put up very nice numbers. He just has a big mouth and utterly failed to back it up in a big game. He is sort of the WR equivalent of his head coach. Haha.

Regardless I think the biggest key is TO to stay healthy. Which you have no reason to believe he wouldn't. An injury to your starting QB can cripple any team, but an injury to TO would cripple the Cowboys more than other teams losing their #1 WR.

It is no suprise the Cowboys are interested in Boldin.

LonghornsLegend
08-19-2008, 11:24 AM
If we had a Boldin or Roy as a WR2 it would be too much like a video game...In the NFL you have to spread your talent out and there is only so much to go around, I didn't see anyone complaining when the Chargers had no #2 WR for years, it was LT and Gates running that show...We have plenty of talent at other places, at some point you let young guys develop..We will employ 2 TE's with Witten in the slot and Felix Jones quite a bit, a good coordinator can make it work, you don't need a pro bowler as a #2 WR to win a super bowl and thats all that really matters...Granted I think we could make a move for another WR, but then somebody talented won't be resigned, so I would prefer to not go that route.


Vikings had one of the best WR cores in history back in 1998 but they lost to Atlanta, who had the likes of Terrance Mathis and Tim Dwight at WR...It's hardly that important, I'm more concerned about a great defense then I am a #2 WR.

bigbluedefense
08-19-2008, 12:22 PM
I think that is the key.

Crayton is a fine player. He is very average. But when you put him on a team with an offense like the Cowboys, he is going to put up very nice numbers. He just has a big mouth and utterly failed to back it up in a big game. He is sort of the WR equivalent of his head coach. Haha.

Regardless I think the biggest key is TO to stay healthy. Which you have no reason to believe he wouldn't. An injury to your starting QB can cripple any team, but an injury to TO would cripple the Cowboys more than other teams losing their #1 WR.

It is no suprise the Cowboys are interested in Boldin.

i definitely agree.

don't sleep on Felix Jones though. he's looking really good as a pass catcher, and could be another option for them either out of the backfield, or lined up at WR. I still think they shouldve nabbed Chris Johnson or Mendenhall, but i can't knock Jones either, he's doing well.

their offense will be fine as long as TO is healthy. that offense is built around TO.

Crickett
08-19-2008, 12:35 PM
They have the image of Crayton dropping that pass in the playoffs last year and its the only thing that they can remember of him, so they feed the beast in putting him down.



And Scott Norwood had a seven year career and according to wiki, went to the pro bowl once. But people only remember one play he was involved in.

D-Unit
08-19-2008, 01:08 PM
The thing about Crayton that I don't see in him that I used to see is breakaway speed. He used to excel burning down the sidelines for deep passes, but now has become a possession receiver. I do think that his hands are overly criticized, by a few highlight err lowlight clips of him, but for a long time now, he's been known as the receiver with the best hands on the team. I hope he can show the return of his deep speed this season. His injury fromt he prior year seemed to have altered his speed, which if that is the case, it's unfortunate. I like him in the slot as is though.

I'm 99% sure, Jerry will address WR through FA this offseason rather than the draft. But everyone right now is going to mock us going with a WR. I have my doubts. Between Stanback, Hurd and Austin, I think the team is fairly comfortable with young developing talent at WR.

Geo
08-19-2008, 01:14 PM
It might be too late at this point to develop a future #1 in time, TO will be 36 this December. Especially if the kid is somewhat raw and/or comes out as a junior.

I've always thought that the Cowboys should have let TO walk after this season and pursue Anquan Boldin or Roy Williams instead, but now that they've spent all of this money and still have Ware's contract extension looming, that probably won't happen.

Crickett
08-19-2008, 01:14 PM
I'm 99% sure, Jerry will address WR through FA this offseason rather than the draft. But everyone right now is going to mock us going with a WR. I have my doubts. Between Stanback, Hurd and Austin, I think the team is fairly comfortable with young developing talent at WR.

But what else other than safety would the Cowboys draft? I used to think they were going to have to eventually draft a LT to replace the aging Flozell Adams, but I've heard that Doug Free has looked good in camp.

Iamcanadian
08-19-2008, 01:35 PM
Face it, people watch TO end of story. Whitten is your team's second option and Crayton is your team's 3rd option. Unless you get to the Super Bowl or actually win it, nobody really cares about the 3rd option on a team. Make to the SB and that is when people start to know the players outside of TO and Whitten. It is the same for every team.
People know New England's 3rd and 4th option, why, because they watch them in the Super Bowl or at least well into the playoffs every year. Same with Indy's WR's, but if I ask you to quickly name the 3rd option on all the teams that made the playoffs, I don't think too many will role off your tongue without some thought so why in the h-ll would anybody care about Dallas's 3rd option. Nobody outside of Dallas fans know much if anything about Clayton and never will until Dallas actually does something in the playoffs.
This post is a waste of time and should be on the Dallas board not here on the main board.

D-Unit
08-19-2008, 01:44 PM
It might be too late at this point to develop a future #1 in time, TO will be 36 this December. Especially if the kid is somewhat raw and/or comes out as a junior.

I've always thought that the Cowboys should have let TO walk after this season and pursue Anquan Boldin or Roy Williams instead, but now that they've spent all of this money and still have Ware's contract extension looming, that probably won't happen.
Well, I'm really glad you're not the GM. Dropping TO would have been terrible. Age ain't nothin' but a number. The way he conditions himself, he can play effectively for a 2-3 more years. Dropping him now, would've drastically affected any SB talk. Boldin and Williams weren't even on the trade block. If they were, many other teams out there would've pursued them. Not only the Cowboys. Plus, why trade for them this year, and give up a high pick, when you can get them next year when they become UFAs. I doubt both of them get Franchised, if any. ...and Roy still has to prove that he can stay healthy.

And if you think Ware is going to sign anywhere else besides in Dallas, then you are fooling only yourself. Really, you are.

scottyboy
08-19-2008, 01:47 PM
haha, so he's virtually calling out me saying I won't "lay off" Crayton.

I said I feel #2 WR is a weakness for Dallas. His lack of break away speed and his mouth don't scare me at all. He's consistant, but average. Dallas could do alot better at #2 WR, then again they could do worse. Crayton doesn't scare me one bit, and as the person who mentioned Norwood, he'll be remembered for his gorgeous drop in the playoffs. That's how it is. IMO I feel he's a weakness on that offense.

And you do have a thin WR corps. I love my boy Miles, but he's a return man and will most likely be nothing more than a speedy #4 WR. Hurd is a nice 3rd option, but if he or Crayton goes down, the Cowboys don't have all too much behind them...

and I'm pretty sure I said this once, but no, I can't lay off him to save my life. hah

D-Unit
08-19-2008, 01:48 PM
But what else other than safety would the Cowboys draft? I used to think they were going to have to eventually draft a LT to replace the aging Flozell Adams, but I've heard that Doug Free has looked good in camp.
The 1% chance that we do go WR, it'll be for a guy who can step in from Day 1, like Michael Crabtree or DHB. And if you think they'll be out of our range, just remember that Dallas has 2 3rd Rounders and 2 4th Rounders from moves Jerry made in this year's draft. So with 1, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7 round picks we have sufficient ammo to move up, especially when you consider our needs are few.

D-Unit
08-19-2008, 01:58 PM
Face it, people watch TO end of story. Whitten is your team's second option and Crayton is your team's 3rd option. Unless you get to the Super Bowl or actually win it, nobody really cares about the 3rd option on a team. Make to the SB and that is when people start to know the players outside of TO and Whitten. It is the same for every team.
People know New England's 3rd and 4th option, why, because they watch them in the Super Bowl or at least well into the playoffs every year. Same with Indy's WR's, but if I ask you to quickly name the 3rd option on all the teams that made the playoffs, I don't think too many will role off your tongue without some thought so why in the h-ll would anybody care about Dallas's 3rd option. Nobody outside of Dallas fans know much if anything about Clayton and never will until Dallas actually does something in the playoffs.
This post is a waste of time and should be on the Dallas board not here on the main board.
Well, uh... this is a message board where the more than common NFL fan flocks to. Therefore, conversation here can go beyond the common NFL fan talk. In fact, we welcome any in-depth conversation that anyone wants to bring up to the majority population of the board. You obviously didn't get the point of this thread, which was to dispel the notion that Crayton isn't as bad as even knowledgeable NFL fans believe. It would've been pointless for this conversation to occur in the Cowboys team forum where it wouldn't reach out to the people that DWM is trying to target in the first place.

If your point is that you don't want to care about it, then feel free to not post here. Your post was a much more waste of time than DWM's post.

BlindSite
08-19-2008, 05:08 PM
He raises a point though, without media exposure, a player won't be considered top whatever at their position or in some cases even known.

Shiver
08-19-2008, 05:23 PM
This topic is highly unnecessary, lol.


.. And overwrought. Did it really require 1,400 words to explain that Patrick Crayton is underrated? I didn't even bother to read that wall of text, even though I agree in principle with the assertion.

Geo
08-19-2008, 05:44 PM
Well, I'm really glad you're not the GM. Dropping TO would have been terrible. Age ain't nothin' but a number. The way he conditions himself, he can play effectively for a 2-3 more years. Dropping him now, would've drastically affected any SB talk. Boldin and Williams weren't even on the trade block. If they were, many other teams out there would've pursued them. Not only the Cowboys. Plus, why trade for them this year, and give up a high pick, when you can get them next year when they become UFAs. I doubt both of them get Franchised, if any. ...and Roy still has to prove that he can stay healthy.

And if you think Ware is going to sign anywhere else besides in Dallas, then you are fooling only yourself. Really, you are.
1. TO will play, sure, but how healthy will he be by the time the playoffs arrive? See '06 and '07.

2. Williams will be an UFA after '08, Boldin won't be for a few years.

3. I don't think Ware will sign elsewhere, I specifically said his extension is looming. No foolin', really.

DMWSackMachine
08-19-2008, 06:33 PM
1) Yeah, D, Geo was saying that us pursuing Boldin or Williams "probably won't happen", not re-signing D-Ware. Little mix up there.

2) As for some people's taste for this topic: if you aren't among the ones making Crayton out to be a detriment to the team, then feel free to move on. My post is aimed at those that think just because everyone tabs our secondary WRs as being the weakness of the team, then they must be bad players. Scotty's judgment is obviously being clouded by the fact that Crayton runs his mouth as well as his status as a Giants fan. Crayton will not hold our team back in any way. And if you want to make that point, then you must concede that Toomer will be a serious problem for the G-Men, since he was actually less productive than Crayton was and is also clearly on the decline physically. Can't have it both ways Scotty, my boy. So now do the Giants have a serious problem at WR? Hmmm.

scottyboy
08-19-2008, 06:46 PM
1) Yeah, D, Geo was saying that us pursuing Boldin or Williams "probably won't happen", not re-signing D-Ware. Little mix up there.

2) As for some people's taste for this topic: if you aren't among the ones making Crayton out to be a detriment to the team, then feel free to move on. My post is aimed at those that think just because everyone tabs our secondary WRs as being the weakness of the team, then they must be bad players. Scotty's judgment is obviously being clouded by the fact that Crayton runs his mouth as well as his status as a Giants fan. Crayton will not hold our team back in any way. And if you want to make that point, then you must concede that Toomer will be a serious problem for the G-Men, since he was actually less productive than Crayton was and is also clearly on the decline physically. Can't have it both ways Scotty, my boy. So now do the Giants have a serious problem at WR? Hmmm.

haha this whole post is really a shot at me? I'm honored...

Considering behind Toomer we've got plenty of depth with Smith, Hixon, and even Moss, Manningham, and Hall/Jennings/Thorpe(whoever wins that deathmatch at camp), we're pretty deep.

And I think the Giants could use another WR, always have. Amani is just average in the regular season, but his clutch factor and his uncanny perfection of dragging the toes makes him very important to this team.

Obviously the Giants could upgrade here, but Amani is Eli's security blanket and really his favorite target. Obviously I don't know Romo's tendencies only seeing him 3-5 times a year, so perhaps Crayton is one of his favorite targets and I'm 100% wrong. Crayton could easily be upgraded and the depth at WR for Dallas could be as well.

But now I'm going to make a thread copying off of a popular youtube video about how you're hating on Amani...

And when did I call Crayton a "serious" problem? I don't recall doing that. Stop pulling things out of your ass. It's a tad ridiculous.

Malaka
08-19-2008, 06:49 PM
1) Yeah, D, Geo was saying that us pursuing Boldin or Williams "probably won't happen", not re-signing D-Ware. Little mix up there.

2) As for some people's taste for this topic: if you aren't among the ones making Crayton out to be a detriment to the team, then feel free to move on. My post is aimed at those that think just because everyone tabs our secondary WRs as being the weakness of the team, then they must be bad players. Scotty's judgment is obviously being clouded by the fact that Crayton runs his mouth as well as his status as a Giants fan. Crayton will not hold our team back in any way. And if you want to make that point, then you must concede that Toomer will be a serious problem for the G-Men, since he was actually less productive than Crayton was and is also clearly on the decline physically. Can't have it both ways Scotty, my boy. So now do the Giants have a serious problem at WR? Hmmm.

There is a big difference, the Giants have depth behind their WR position, and even without it as you say Crayton did enough and in your eyes above average, so Toomer did a little worse and that would make him average. Crayton is 29 and Toomer is 34, so I would expect Crayton to do better than a WR, who is physically declining. Plus, if Toomer gets hurt, or doesn't play well the Giants have Steve Smith in the slot who looked great at the end of last season, and should eventually replace Toomer at the #2 spot anyway, and behind him we have people who can step up and play, we have rookie Mario Manningham who arguably could have been a first round pick if it weren't for character issues. Then after that their is Domenik Hixon who has looked great in the pre-season, then their is Sinorice Moss who hasn't lived up to expectations, but he is dangerous when he actually has the ball, and does have some potential, lastly their is DJ Hall who is UDFA who is 6'4 with very good speed. The Cowboys have T.O, excellent, Crayton, average, and then they have Sam Hurd and Isaiah Steinbach, who aren't exactly great receivers, or even great prospects.

EDIT: I was writing when Scottyboy posted. We basically said the same thing.

Burns336
08-19-2008, 07:45 PM
I like him better in the slot as well, which is why I was excited about the Mixture of Hurd/Austin on the outside with Crayton being moved back into the slot.

Now that Austin sprained him MCL i'll have to wait a few weeks.

The thing that Crayton excels at is finding holes in the zone. He always ends up wide open in the defense's pockets.

Burns336
08-19-2008, 07:46 PM
There is a big difference, the Giants have depth behind their WR position, and even without it as you say Crayton did enough and in your eyes above average, so Toomer did a little worse and that would make him average. Crayton is 29 and Toomer is 34, so I would expect Crayton to do better than a WR, who is physically declining. Plus, if Toomer gets hurt, or doesn't play well the Giants have Steve Smith in the slot who looked great at the end of last season, and should eventually replace Toomer at the #2 spot anyway, and behind him we have people who can step up and play, we have rookie Mario Manningham who arguably could have been a first round pick if it weren't for character issues. Then after that their is Domenik Hixon who has looked great in the pre-season, then their is Sinorice Moss who hasn't lived up to expectations, but he is dangerous when he actually has the ball, and does have some potential, lastly their is DJ Hall who is UDFA who is 6'4 with very good speed. The Cowboys have T.O, excellent, Crayton, average, and then they have Sam Hurd and Isaiah Steinbach, who aren't exactly great receivers, or even great prospects.

EDIT: I was writing when Scottyboy posted. We basically said the same thing.

dont forget Austin, our top prospect.

scottyboy
08-19-2008, 07:49 PM
dont forget Austin, our top prospect.

i remembered Miles. Love the kid. I've watched him since he was at Monmouth. He's got wheels , but I don't think he'll become more than a nice slot reciever and return man

Jughead10
08-19-2008, 08:13 PM
1) Yeah, D, Geo was saying that us pursuing Boldin or Williams "probably won't happen", not re-signing D-Ware. Little mix up there.

2) As for some people's taste for this topic: if you aren't among the ones making Crayton out to be a detriment to the team, then feel free to move on. My post is aimed at those that think just because everyone tabs our secondary WRs as being the weakness of the team, then they must be bad players. Scotty's judgment is obviously being clouded by the fact that Crayton runs his mouth as well as his status as a Giants fan. Crayton will not hold our team back in any way. And if you want to make that point, then you must concede that Toomer will be a serious problem for the G-Men, since he was actually less productive than Crayton was and is also clearly on the decline physically. Can't have it both ways Scotty, my boy. So now do the Giants have a serious problem at WR? Hmmm.

Toomer wasn't really less productive at all. He just had less TDs which is probably more to due to the fact that the Cowboys had an overall better offense in general during the regular season. I'd say they are pretty much on par except Toomer is likely to decline like you said. However he is much more reliable (see the playoffsgame where we know what Crayton did, and Toomer did his best Superman impression in the first quarter).

Dr. Gonzo
08-19-2008, 08:15 PM
Leave Patrick Crayton alone!!!!! Leave her alone!!!!!

Geo
08-19-2008, 10:30 PM
I didn't have time to check it before, but Boldin's contract currently runs through 2010. The Cardinals will assuredly trade him before then however.

eaglesalltheway
08-20-2008, 07:28 AM
Leave Patrick Crayton alone!!!!! Leave her alone!!!!!
I <3 u for that Gonzo.

scottyboy
12-30-2008, 02:34 PM
Crayton is so good, the Cowboys sold the farm for Roy Williams!

BigDawg819
12-30-2008, 02:35 PM
Crayton is so good, the Cowboys sold the farm for Roy Williams!

I condone this! :D

That and Rutgers won.

bored of education
12-30-2008, 02:35 PM
Did Crayton play this year?

tjsunstein
12-30-2008, 02:38 PM
I think he might have changed his name to Miles Austin.

TimD
12-30-2008, 02:41 PM
okay so parcells is gonna come to ny and get crayton and he is going to be an elite number 1. thats how good he is :D

BigDawg819
12-30-2008, 02:41 PM
Did Crayton play this year?

Did any of the Cowboys? :D

Flyboy
12-30-2008, 05:36 PM
Lance Moore > Patrick Crayton

D-Unit
12-30-2008, 06:54 PM
Patrick Crayton is an average receiver. Nothing more.

scottyboy
12-30-2008, 06:57 PM
Patrick Crayton is an average receiver. Nothing more.

but this thread told me he was a good NFL player and that #2 WR was not a weakness for the Cowboys!

The trade with the Lions means Jerrah tells me other wise...

bigbluedefense
12-30-2008, 06:57 PM
but this thread told me he was a good NFL player and that #2 WR was not a weakness for the Cowboys!

The trade with the Lions means Jerrah tells me other wise...

youre just salivating for DMW to come back so you can rip him like no tomorrow lmaooo. i know you too well my friend.

scottyboy
12-30-2008, 06:58 PM
youre just salivating for DMW to come back so you can rip him like no tomorrow lmaooo. i know you too well my friend.

who...me? :)

that and I'm a bit giddy over Rutgers comeback win and that Courtney Greene shot himself possibly to the 3rd round again with a nasty finish to the season!

D-Unit
12-30-2008, 07:04 PM
but this thread told me he was a good NFL player and that #2 WR was not a weakness for the Cowboys!

The trade with the Lions means Jerrah tells me other wise...
Really? He's been playing in the slot for a while now. ..even before Roy got here. Crayton was never a permanent fixture as the future #2 WR in many Cowboys fans minds. He only got playing time there while Terry Glenn was down. WR has been a draft need in every draft that I've been posting here as far as I can remember.

scottyboy
12-30-2008, 07:06 PM
Really? He's been playing in the slot for a while now. ..even before Roy got here. Crayton was never a permanent fixture as the future #2 WR in many Cowboys fans minds. He only got playing time there while Terry Glenn was down. WR has been a draft need in every draft that I've been posting here as far as I can remember.

where were you when DMW was adement about telling me otherwise?

I stated at the beginning of the year #2 WR was a need/hole for you guys coming into the season, then this thread came about!