Dri 2.0

[Steelerfan]

everything about dri comes up short.

Bazinga!!!!!!

 

[Drink IRON City]

Maybe with a year and injury under his belt, he will stand taller. OOppps I meant with the experience and injury under his shoe, he'll be more rounded. Well, pending on how you look at it, his plight might be longer than one thought.



Salute the nation

 

[antdrewjosh]

http://www.Invalid Link - Check SN ...or-blocking-aides-in-dri-archers-return-woes/

Didn't want to start a new thread so I dug this one up. Steelers Depot breaks down the Steelers lack of blocking contributing to Archers woes on kickoffs

 

[Vader]

http://www.Invalid Link - Check SN ...or-blocking-aides-in-dri-archers-return-woes/

Didn't want to start a new thread so I dug this one up. Steelers Depot breaks down the Steelers lack of blocking contributing to Archers woes on kickoffs

He also says that Archer made a ton of mistakes as well. He said he ran too much laterally and that he wouldn't catch the ball with his momentum going forward. So, bad blocking on two plays isn't the entire issue. When the blocking was good he still made mistakes. He didn't get it done. A fatbody in Blount did just as good and he wasn't bringing the ball out from 8 yards deep in the endzone. I'm sure they didn't block well for him on every play either. But he did better than Archer who was suppose to be some great returner that couldn't be caught because of his great speed. Remember this was something he did in college and was said multiple times on here about how great he was at it.

 

[Steelerfan81]

The blocking was terrible on kick offs for most of the season. Dri wasn't good either but I didn't think he was getting much help.

 

[antdrewjosh]

He also says that Archer made a ton of mistakes as well. He said he ran too much laterally and that he wouldn't catch the ball with his momentum going forward. So, bad blocking on two plays isn't the entire issue. When the blocking was good he still made mistakes. He didn't get it done. A fatbody in Blount did just as good and he wasn't bringing the ball out from 8 yards deep in the endzone. I'm sure they didn't block well for him on every play either. But he did better than Archer who was suppose to be some great returner that couldn't be caught because of his great speed. Remember this was something he did in college and was said multiple times on here about how great he was at it.

Key word was contributing vader.... I didn't say sole reason.

 

[Vader]

Key word was contributing vader.... I didn't say sole reason.

I never said it was the "sole" reason. I said the article suggested it "contributed" on 2 plays. The rest of the bad returns were "solely" on Archer not getting it done.

 

[Superman]

I never said it was the "sole" reason. I said the article suggested it "contributed" on 2 plays. The rest of the bad returns were "solely" on Archer not getting it done.

is that your opinion? it doesnt specifically state that in the article. In fact, the article, as you previously stated, focuses on just two plays.
whereas we've previously been told that you can't make a determination on just two plays - or even a handful of plays - we can emphatically make a concrete, water-tight assessment on this guy, even if this was not what he'd previously done in college. I mean, here's a rookie, already the smallest guy on the field, with his head spinning in terminology, performing at a position he had no prior experience. He absolutely should have returned every kick to mid-field or beyond, as he has world-class speed and that's all it takes, so we've been told.

IMO, the jury is out on Dri. hell, he's a ******* late third round pick as it is. It's not like we spent a first on the dude.

 

[Vader]

is that your opinion? it doesnt specifically state that in the article. In fact, the article, as you previously stated, focuses on just two plays.
whereas we've previously been told that you can't make a determination on just two plays - or even a handful of plays - we can emphatically make a concrete, water-tight assessment on this guy, even if this was not what he'd previously done in college. I mean, here's a rookie, already the smallest guy on the field, with his head spinning in terminology, performing at a position he had no prior experience. He absolutely should have returned every kick to mid-field or beyond, as he has world-class speed and that's all it takes, so we've been told.

IMO, the jury is out on Dri. hell, he's a ******* late third round pick as it is. It's not like we spent a first on the dude.

One article isn't the end all be all of everything either. He picked out two returns. He then says that Archer was at fault as well. So why is it difficult to assume that if he had found other bad blocking plays he wouldn't have used them as well. He found two. So he used those. That's what I got from the article. He could have easily said "There were more but these were the best two." He doesn't say that. He gives the two then suggests that Archer was at fault on the others. He only had a handful of returns so it isn't like he is finding 2 out of a hundred.

Also another article posted that Archer should be at least starting since he was a 3rd round pick. Why is that article any less valid than this one?

 

[SteelBuckeye]

Quick question on the article that stated that Archer should be starting since he was a 3rd round pick. Did they mention where? I don't see Bell giving up that starting RB position. Nor do I see him starting over Brown, Wheaton, or Bryant. I mean if they had said he should at least be seeing significant playing time, I could agree with that. But starting? On THIS offense? Seems like someone was tipping the bottle when they wrote that.

 

[Superman]

by that logic, Sammie Coates is a starter.

 

[Vader]

Quick question on the article that stated that Archer should be starting since he was a 3rd round pick. Did they mention where? I don't see Bell giving up that starting RB position. Nor do I see him starting over Brown, Wheaton, or Bryant. I mean if they had said he should at least be seeing significant playing time, I could agree with that. But starting? On THIS offense? Seems like someone was tipping the bottle when they wrote that.

Which was my entire issue with the pick. He has no where to start. He can't play RB or WR. When Bell went down last year they picked a guy off the garbage heap rather than start Archer. They know he can't handle it. He was always going to be a part time player. Tombert said as much. Then they came up with that "Well special teams is kind of starting" BS.

I disagreed with that article as well because he has no position in the NFL. WTF is he going to start? The only part I agreed with is that you should expect a 3rd round pick to contribute somewhere. But I'd never draft a guy knowing that he can never start no matter what. That nuts to me. Especially when the team is in desperate need of defensive talent and the offense is stacked. It seemed like a luxury pick for a team that couldn't afford the luxury.

 

[bermudasteel]

Quick question on the article that stated that Archer should be starting since he was a 3rd round pick. Did they mention where? I don't see Bell giving up that starting RB position. Nor do I see him starting over Brown, Wheaton, or Bryant. I mean if they had said he should at least be seeing significant playing time, I could agree with that. But starting? On THIS offense? Seems like someone was tipping the bottle when they wrote that.

Exactly. Apparently all 3rd round picks are heroes...

 

[Vader]

by that logic, Sammie Coates is a starter.

If Wheaton stumbles Coates could be a starter next year. But Archer is never going to start at any position no matter what he does or anyone else does.

 

[Superman]

well, no. prior to last year, our WRs were AB, Wheaton and Heyward-Bey. Everyone knew we'd be taking a WR in the draft.
I still don't see where ANYONE is outright thrilled with Dri as our pick last year. Seems the overwhelming view is that we should have spent that pick elsewhere OR that Dri might turn out. But the ones who absolutely hate the pick are vilifying those who are indifferent towards him.

You just said you expected a draft pick to contribute somewhere. Wouldn't returning kicks be contributing somewhere? Wasn't that how we used to do under Cowher - rookies contribute on special teams until they're acclimated to the NFL?

 

[Vader]

well, no. prior to last year, our WRs were AB, Wheaton and Heyward-Bey. Everyone knew we'd be taking a WR in the draft.
I still don't see where ANYONE is outright thrilled with Dri as our pick last year. Seems the overwhelming view is that we should have spent that pick elsewhere OR that Dri might turn out. But the ones who absolutely hate the pick are vilifying those who are indifferent towards him.

You just said you expected a draft pick to contribute somewhere. Wouldn't returning kicks be contributing somewhere? Wasn't that how we used to do under Cowher - rookies contribute on special teams until they're acclimated to the NFL?

I have no idea what you are talking about with Coates. He's a WR and can start at WR if he is good enough. Archer has no position in the NFL other than KR or PR. That isn't worth a 3rd round pick IMHO.

I'm not vilifying anyone. If you go back and read the entire Archer thread you'll see you guys continually raving about him during pre-season and keeping the thread alive while others said absolutely nothing. So if anyone is being vilified it's those that don't hold the company line.

Also Archer contributed nowhere... not PR, not KR... nowhere. I also expect 3rd rounders to have a real position. Archer has none. Cowher used rookies on STs all the time. So does Tomlin. But they don't expect them to stay there forever. With Archer that's all he has. He is never going to be a full time starter at WR or RB. Even they admit that.

 

[antdrewjosh]

I have no idea what you are talking about with Coates. He's a WR and can start at WR if he is good enough. Archer has no position in the NFL other than KR or PR. That isn't worth a 3rd round pick IMHO.

I'm not vilifying anyone. If you go back and read the entire Archer thread you'll see you guys continually raving about him during pre-season and keeping the thread alive while others said absolutely nothing. So if anyone is being vilified it's those that don't hold the company line.

Also Archer contributed nowhere... not PR, not KR... nowhere. I also expect 3rd rounders to have a real position. Archer has none. Cowher used rookies on STs all the time. So does Tomlin. But they don't expect them to stay there forever. With Archer that's all he has. He is never going to be a full time starter at WR or RB. Even they admit that.

So the only way Archer can ever justify his 3rd round status in your eyes is to start? What if he becomes a dangerous kick and punt returner and a weapon on offense? That's not enough?

Also to say the naysayers said "absolutely nothing" in the preseason or after in the Archer thread is a little much don't you think. Both sides had their say in that thread.

 

[Vader]

So the only way Archer can ever justify his 3rd round status in your eyes is to start? What if he becomes a dangerous kick and punt returner and a weapon on offense? That's not enough?

Also to say the naysayers said "absolutely nothing" in the preseason or after in the Archer thread is a little much don't you think. Both sides had their say in that thread.

The thread would have been dead except for those on your side keeping it alive. I remember all the pictures and stupid saying. I remember all the gloating after his big game against the Giants. I remember posting something about how pre-season means little when it comes to the regular season. But 90% of the posters, pictures, and keeping it alive was your side.

Also the only way Archer will ever be a good draft pick is if he becomes a great PR and KR and be able to do something on offense. KRs are almost a thing of the past. That's why Tomlin was having him bring them out of the end zone even though he was almost 9 yards deep. So that leaves PR and offense. He wasn't good enough to do PRs in college. I highly doubt he can do it at the NFL level. So that leaves offense right? Who are you going to take off of the offense to play him? Bell, Bryant, Brown, Miller, Wheaton and now Coates?

Again, they needed defense or at least a better value on offense with that pick. It was too high for a gimmick offensive player that has no real position.

 

[antdrewjosh]

The thread would have been dead except for those on your side keeping it alive. I remember all the pictures and stupid saying. I remember all the gloating after his big game against the Giants. I remember posting something about how pre-season means little when it comes to the regular season. But 90% of the posters, pictures, and keeping it alive was your side.

Also the only way Archer will ever be a good draft pick is if he becomes a great PR and KR and be able to do something on offense. KRs are almost a thing of the past. That's why Tomlin was having him bring them out of the end zone even though he was almost 9 yards deep. So that leaves PR and offense. He wasn't good enough to do PRs in college. I highly doubt he can do it at the NFL level. So that leaves offense right? Who are you going to take off of the offense to play him? Bell, Bryant, Brown, Miller, Wheaton and now Coates?

Again, they needed defense or at least a better value on offense with that pick. It was too high for a gimmick offensive player that has no real position.

Not going to get into it about the thread. agree to disagree

Saying he wasn't good enough to return punts in college is misleading. He wasn't asked to return punts in college. Big difference. He was their best player.

As for who I would take off the field if Archer begins to emerge I would cut into MIller's snaps without looking back. If he emerges.. if he begins to become a weapon.

 

[Vader]

Not going to get into it about the thread. agree to disagree

Saying he wasn't good enough to return punts in college is misleading. He wasn't asked to return punts in college. Big difference. He was their best player.

As for who I would take off the field if Archer begins to emerge I would cut into MIller's snaps without looking back. If he emerges.. if he begins to become a weapon.

It isn't misleading at all. He returned 6 punts for around 8 yards if memory serves me correct. Hell the coach said it was a mistake to even play him at WR. But somehow he is going to be a good enough WR to take snaps away from one of the best TEs in the game in Miller? Ok...

 

[antdrewjosh]

It isn't misleading at all. He returned 6 punts for around 8 yards if memory serves me correct. Hell the coach said it was a mistake to even play him at WR. But somehow he is going to be a good enough WR to take snaps away from one of the best TEs in the game in Miller? Ok...

Who said anything about playing him at WR? Miller was great but we aren't talking about Heath from 5-7 years ago, He provides nothing after the catch anymore.

 

[Hineswardkickedurpanzyass]

I still don't understand why we cannot develop him into a kick returner. Catch the ball - run fast. It's not like he has never been hit before, and if he gets snapped in two then what does it really matter?

Running him in our offense just doesn't make any sense unless he proves in pre season that he can be a big play guy.

 

[hamster]

Wheaton was a big time upgrade over Archer as a the kickoff return man. Archer is fast, but he has zero moves, shaky hands to catch the ball, and IMO is a little risk adverse when it comes to being hit.

Good argument for him not being in the NFL.

 

[Stryker]

Slap backs aren't starters, but do have value. I can remember Metcalf single handedly beating us with a couple explosive plays. DRI has the potential to be explosive as well.

 

[Coach]

Steelers OC Todd Haley suggested RB/WR Dri Archer could see "five and six touches a game" next season.
Archer is one of the smallest players in the NFL at 5'8" and 173 pounds, but he's also one of the fastest. He's not big enough to be an every down back, or maybe a running back at all, but Archer can certainly be used as a gadget player in the mold of Percy Harvin. A workload of 5-6 touches a game won't assure Archer fantasy relevance, but it's certainly a step in the right direction. Archer only saw 17 touches across 12 games last season.

It seems a bit quiet in here..

I doubt that. Archer is too small to pass block, and too small / has shaky hands ( I saw him drop easy ones ) to be featured as a receviers. When he's in the game teams are going to think, screen, or reverse.

Yes he has track speed, but I didn't see many football moves once he has the ball in his hands and he's rather easy to bring down once contact is initiated.

We'll see what happens in year two. Year one was a failed experiment.