ntpou Posted May 5, 2004 Report Share Posted May 5, 2004 I just found out that Warrick and Washington are going to be battling it out for the #2 WR. I thought it was Warrick hands down :player: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyline Posted May 5, 2004 Report Share Posted May 5, 2004 i thought washington would make more sense as the #2. don't the 1 and 2 run most of the outside routes, while the #3 runs a lot of the inside/shorter routes? i may be way off there... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bourgeois_Rage Posted May 5, 2004 Report Share Posted May 5, 2004 If Washington pushes Warrick down to the three spot, the Bengals will probably have one of the best lineup of receivers in the League. If Warrick is your three, you're doing pretty well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjakq27 Posted May 5, 2004 Report Share Posted May 5, 2004 I just found out that Warrick and Washington are going to be battling it out for the #2 WR. I thought it was Warrick hands down :player: I think ML mentioned this yesterday during his chat. He said that KW was really working hard this offseason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BENGALBUCKEYES Posted May 5, 2004 Report Share Posted May 5, 2004 washington will be the number two reciever with warrick lining up in the slot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Brew Man Posted May 5, 2004 Report Share Posted May 5, 2004 I dont mind PDub being our slot guy, I think hes better suited for that role anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cincykent Posted May 5, 2004 Report Share Posted May 5, 2004 Potentially, Washington should be a better blocker because of his size. He is also more of a deep threat. Warrick is more suited to be a third down WR in the slot, plus a run threat on 1st and 2nd down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntpou Posted May 5, 2004 Author Report Share Posted May 5, 2004 Washington is the better 2 WR then is what I am hearing but what about the catches they get between the 2 & 3 WR. Don't want to piss them off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyline Posted May 5, 2004 Report Share Posted May 5, 2004 Washington is the better 2 WR then is what I am hearing but what about the catches they get between the 2 & 3 WR. Don't want to piss them off. i think the bengals use a fair amount of 3 receiver sets dont they?should give warrick plenty of opportunities. and im sure he could step in as the #2 on some series'... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Stripes Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 think of warrick's speed comin over the middle it will be great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jditty47 Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 i think warrick will be the #2 receiver but play the slot on 3 receiver sets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orange&Black4Life Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 I think Warrick would be great as a 3 WR. Has the moves to get away from LBS and still make the SS & FS keep a eye on him. In turn should free up the ground attack, and help Palmer to make faster reads of the D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottishbengal Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Warrick is more suited to be a third down WR wasn't this Washington's role last year - 3rd and long situautions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schweinhart Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Washington had his shot at #2 last year against the Rams when Warrick was out. Unless he makes great strides, there's no way Washington is #2.Frankly, he's more likely to be in a dogfight with Patrick Johnson for #3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbarian Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Washington had his shot at #2 last year against the Rams when Warrick was out. Unless he makes great strides, there's no way Washington is #2.Frankly, he's more likely to be in a dogfight with Patrick Johnson for #3. I agree totally. There's no way that a guy that hasn't had 20 receptions in a year (Washington) will beat out a WR on the rise (Warrick). Washington showed promise during the time he played, but there's no way he's beating out Warrick.However, I will agree that Warrick would be better in the slot position.I've got a solution for this though--play Warrick and Washington with Johnson in 3 WR sets, to spread the defense--unless in 3rd and short situations (of course).There you have a very good 1, 2, 3 WR punch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkendall Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 P-Dub had his best season to date and his best asset last season was his role as a third down receiver which compares to anyone in the league. He had great hands and ran great routes. Having him in the slot running underneth routes, will provide many options getting first downs on third down and 7-8; having him in the slot would provide the Bengals with more oppritunites for advancing the ball.However, P-Dub last season, earned his stripes as a veteran and should be treated as such. He should be the #2 reciever for the role he played and how important he was to the team last season. Look from his perspective, going to #3 would be a demotion and kind of insulting. Washington still has to earn his hits before I can see him as the #2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobcat Bengal Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Yeah, Im a big Warrick fan too, more versatile than Chad or Kelley, more elusive, he's a perfect fit for the slot....I whole heartedly agree....Squirrel Boy and Chad on the outside, P Dub in the middlefor 3rd down situations, it would be crazy to have Chris Perry and Rudi lined up in the backfield... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobcat Bengal Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Washington had his shot at #2 last year against the Rams when Warrick was out. Unless he makes great strides, there's no way Washington is #2.Frankly, he's more likely to be in a dogfight with Patrick Johnson for #3. I wouldnt say that, he DID score during that game, and Kitna botched it the second time resulting in a INT... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turningpoint Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Kelley is the #3 wr IMO. Warrick is losing 5 more pounds, and will be down to 187, i see him putting up #'s comparable to what Marvin Harrison did last year in 15 games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevnz Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Kelley is the #3 wr IMO. Warrick is losing 5 more pounds, and will be down to 187, i see him putting up #'s comparable to what Marvin Harrison did last year in 15 games. I'm sorry, all this weight Petey is losing is gonna hurt him when he get's clocked by a linebacker across the middle of the field...240lbs versus 187 Besides, he keeps losing weight he'll start losing muscle, and that ain't good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turningpoint Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 if he can lift the same amount at 192, i'm pretty sure he's losing something else then muscle. Not to mention he's never been hit hard by a LB at 192 or 197, calm down. 187 will be his perfect weight.Not to mention your arguement is worthless, because compare his weight to derrick Mason ( 5'10 : 190) and Marvin Harrison ( 6'0 : 175!!! ).warrick 5'11 187 would be wonderful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbarian Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Kelley is the #3 wr IMO. Warrick is losing 5 more pounds, and will be down to 187, i see him putting up #'s comparable to what Marvin Harrison did last year in 15 games. Uh...I hope you're joking about that Marvin Harrison bit, dude.Marvin Harrison is the best receiver in the league right now.Peter Warrick, until last year, is a total bust!!!I like your optimism, but that's ludicrous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turningpoint Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 i said he should have comparable stats to what harrison had last year, which was an off year for harrison, not to mention warrick wil have an extra game to get the #'s harrison had, since harrison played only 15 games. I never said warrick was as good as Harrison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbarian Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 i said he should have comparable stats to what harrison had last year, which was an off year for harrison, not to mention warrick wil have an extra game to get the #'s harrison had, since harrison played only 15 games. I never said warrick was as good as Harrison. I could be wrong--but didn't Harrison have over 100 catches last year???I'm too lazy to look that up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPW Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 F.... who is rated as the #2 receiver and all of that.There will be a lot of three receive sets. And the Bengal's offence will be outright Dangerous with Warrick in the slot.On two receive sets who knows, they may switch off on who is the second reciever, depending on the play.One thing is for Sure.ML: "Everybody will do what everybody is supposed to do all the time." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.