Crayton as a Legitimate #2

[aikemirv]

I was really impressed with Crayton in the NY game. I have not been sure if he could really be a real #2 but he really runs good routes and can get open pretty well. I really think this offense is just not designed to get him the ball. If we did not have TO I think he could be a target and do pretty well.

He had one out route in the NY game that was a thing of beauty and reminded me of the footwork of Glenn.

The only problem with him is the speed and not really being a deep threat. He is an ideal #3 but with our current weapons he is a good #2 IMO

 

[dmq]

He is really tough as a #3, but is serviceable as a #2. Especially since TO is an elite #1.

 

[dcowboysfan76]

I was really impressed with Crayton in the NY game. I have not been sure if he could really be a real #2 but he really runs good routes and can get open pretty well. I really think this offense is just not designed to get him the ball. If we did not have TO I think he could be a target and do pretty well.

He had one out route in the NY game that was a thing of beauty and reminded me of the footwork of Glenn.

The only problem with him is the speed and not really being a deep threat. He is an ideal #3 but with our current weapons he is a good #2 IMO

IMO, Crayton will always be a #3 on this team. If he goes to another team as a #2 he will disappear like Alvin Harper.

 

[StanleySpadowski]

Crayton's a quality zone WR. He really does have a talent for finding softspots.

That makes him a perfect compliment to this team. Play man to man, Owens wins those battles most of the time, play zone to stop Owens and Crayton and Witten make them pay. When teams throw some exotic man/zone combo, the running game and backs out of the backfield are hurting them.

 

[McCordsville Cowboy]

Crayton is a serviceable #3 who can work the middle of the field from the slot and find holes in zone coverage. He is almost 30 , has average speed and above average hands. But as a #2 you would hope that he could stretch the field, he can not.

 

[malbis030347]

Crayton = Drew Pearson

 

[dcowboysfan76]

Crayton = Drew Pearson

WOW!!!
:shoot1: This is what Artie Spanier used to do with these types of comments....

 

[aikemirv]

IMO, Crayton will always be a #3 on this team. If he goes to another team as a #2 he will disappear like Alvin Harper.

He is a completely different receiver than Harper IMO and I am not sure he would dissapear in the same way. If he has a talented #1 beside him anywhere he will do fine. When Harper left they signed him to be a #1 and he was never that, thus with not having a true #1 guy on the team he went to, he was easily contained.

 

[theogt]

I really don't think he has a future as a #2.

 

[superpunk]

I really don't think he has a future as a #2.

Why?

I don't think he can be Terry Glenn, but I definitely think he has proved a bit of quality as the #2 focus in the offense. (I guess technically he's the #3 focus).

Here's something about Crayton that I suspected, and looked up - 23 of his 31 receptions have come out of a 3-wide set. He's a guy that's good when we stretch the defense out and let him find the open zones.

 

[dcowboysfan76]

He is a completely different receiver than Harper IMO and I am not sure he would dissapear in the same way. If he has a talented #1 beside him anywhere he will do fine. When Harper left they signed him to be a #1 and he was never that, thus with not having a true #1 guy on the team he went to, he was easily contained.

Maybe I should've clarified my remark. What I was implying is that Harper thought he was better than what he was. When he left the Cowboys he sucked. He disappeared. If Crayton went to another team as a #2 he would not be as successful as he is in Dallas IMO....I also think that it takes more than just having a talented #1 beside him, I think that he would need a good TE as well.

 

[CATCH17]

I really don't think he has a future as a #2.

A lot of teams could use him as their #2.

 

[theogt]

Why?

I don't think he can be Terry Glenn, but I definitely think he has proved a bit of quality as the #2 focus in the offense. (I guess technically he's the #3 focus).

Terry Glenn is what you should want in a #2. If he can't be that, then he can't be a #2. Man, what'd I'd give to have Terry and TO at age 25. They're the perfect complement to each other.

Here's something about Crayton that I suspected, and looked up - 23 of his 31 receptions have come out of a 3-wide set. He's a guy that's good when we stretch the defense out and let him find the open zones.

Oh, he's fantastic as a #3 option. Playing in the slot plays to his ability to find those zone soft spots. He's got the smarts, but he's not just not physically gifted enough to go out and produce in a 2 receiver set on a consistent basis.

 

[zrinkill]

Crayton can be a good number 2 WR if the number 2 WR is not the second option on offense.

On our Offense Crayton is the 3rd or 4th option even though he plays the 2nd WR position.

If we did not have so many weapons on Offense and had to rely on him more .... I believe he would not do as well.

But I still love the guy.

 

[theogt]

A lot of teams could use him as their #2.

They'll pay him the money (if Jerry doesn't lock him up as a 3rd receiver). And then he'll fall to the 3rd receiver spot after a year or so.

 

[superpunk]

Terry Glenn is what you should want in a #2. If he can't be that, then he can't be a #2. Man, what'd I'd give to have Terry and TO at age 25. They're the perfect complement to each other.

There are very few teams that have the luxury of a guy like Terry Glenn at #2. Here, maybe we're used to it and could use better. But in places like Oakland, Minnesota, SF, on and on...Crayton is a great option as #2 in comparison with what they currently have, and that's probably where his future lies.

 

[theogt]

There are very few teams that have the luxury of a guy like Terry Glenn at #2. Here, maybe we're used to it and could use better. But in places like Oakland, Minnesota, SF, on and on...Crayton is a great option as #2 in comparison with what they currently have, and that's probably where his future lies.

Oh, yeah, he could go be a mediocre #2 on a bad team for sure. For a while, at least.

So could Hurd. But I don't want either as a #2 for the future.

 

[superpunk]

So basically....he's Brandon Stokley.

 

[Maxmadden]

But are they going to pay him what he's worth or what HE thinks he's worth?. This will likely be his last contract and I can see him going where the money is.

 

[theogt]

So basically....he's Brandon Stokley.

Yup. A good #3 slot receiver. Nothing wrong with that.