Is enjoying? After his 2002 season, I thought the sky was the limit for Shockey. Unfortunately, he did not live up to the hype the NY media placed on him. He still was an excellent player for a few seasons, but he was placed on a pedestal of being a HOF lock after that rookie season. So who is to blame for Shockey not becoming what Gronkowski is? No as talented? Scheme? Injuries? Shockey's attitude? I just hope BeckhamThey are holding us here for an indefinite time lives up to the hype. He has been placed on the same pedestal that Shockey was placed on. A lot depends on him staying healthy, of course. Also intersting that th Giants have nit had a TE of Shockey's caliber since he was jettisoned to NO. This dispite the fact that h didn't live up to the hype. The Giants need an excellent TE again. I don't think that player is on the roster at the moment.
But yeah, I was thinking that he would bowl over the league after that initial performance.
I also have to wonder if Shockey would thrive in New England's supposedly complex offensive scheme? As much of a partier Gronkowski seems to be, there is no question of his ability to be on the same page as his QB. Is that because of the extra work in the film room, great coaching, or just great recognition skill?
The whole NE offense sometimes seems like it is flipped on its head. WRs running short possession routes over the middle and TEs running deeper routes. Belechick's genius is that he isn't stubborn in what he does. He adapts to the talent as opposed to adapting the talent to his system.
Shockey under Belechick - he would have been great. IMHO
Shockey was on the same tier as Witten talent-wise imo, maybe even slightly more impressive athletically because of how explosive he could be.
But beyond the nonsense, his ball skills just weren't that great imo. He struggled to catch the ball and stay on his feet. It was an infuriating flaw in his game. He left a ton of TDs on the field by not having good balance. Gronk on the otherhand is awesome at coming down with the ball with good balance and running over DBs on the way to another TD.
Quote:
The HOF injury always followed him afterwards from what I was told. Over time, his leg injuries accumulated.
In all honesty, I don't remember the injury in that game? Ankle?
Ankle or foot, I forget too.
The whole NE offense sometimes seems like it is flipped on its head. WRs running short possession routes over the middle and TEs running deeper routes. Belechick's genius is that he isn't stubborn in what he does. He adapts to the talent as opposed to adapting the talent to his system.
Shockey under Belechick - he would have been great. IMHO
Yeah, polar opposite scheme. Had Aaron Hernandez not been a psychopath, NE would basically live in two wide-TE and 3-TE sets, whereas TC firmly believed in WRs as playmakers
The whole NE offense sometimes seems like it is flipped on its head. WRs running short possession routes over the middle and TEs running deeper routes. Belechick's genius is that he isn't stubborn in what he does. He adapts to the talent as opposed to adapting the talent to his system.
Shockey under Belechick - he would have been great. IMHO
I'm calling BS
Shockey was on the same tier as Witten talent-wise imo, maybe even slightly more impressive athletically because of how explosive he could be.
Shockey was more talented than Witten everywhere except between the ears.
He was agreat YAC-wise when it was an easy short pass and he could truck a poor DB or outrun a LBer.
I think Witten had better hands and was a better blocker but Shockey was probably more talented overall.
The whole NE offense sometimes seems like it is flipped on its head. WRs running short possession routes over the middle and TEs running deeper routes. Belechick's genius is that he isn't stubborn in what he does. He adapts to the talent as opposed to adapting the talent to his system.
Shockey under Belechick - he would have been great. IMHO
Agreed - which is why the people who were constantly yelling for expensive TEs were off target.
Look, for all everyone's saying about how Shockey was physically cooked, a dope, a party animal - he was still effective when Payton got his hands on him.
And of course, since we're comparing (and I don't believe Shockey was on par with Gronk), it's not as if Gronk doesn't party or is some kind of rocket scientist.
No one expects a TE to do what Gronk is doing. It is ludicrously good. Staggering numbers on the TD's and YPC
1st 6 years:
Shockey 83 games 371 rec 4228 11.4 ypc 27 TD's
Gronk 80 games 380 rec 5555 14.6 ypc 65 TD's
His hands weren't spectacular.
His routes weren't spectacular.
He was an asshole.
He liked to party hard, mouth off, and be the star.
He lifted weights and worked out like an possessed man.
He was constantly injured.
I have no idea what kind of student of the game or teammate he was, but we all heard rumors.
I used to talk him up over Witten early in his career. In reality a guy like Witten is always the better option. Shockey never would have been like Gronkowski.
otherwise we was a talented, selfish, immature player
My nasty comment: "Off the 'roids?"
People talking about his hands on not staying on his feet? He had excellent hands. Could adjust for any ball and snatch it. He dropped a few memorable passes (SF playoff game) but the guy could really catch for a man his size.
Outstanding movement too. He was explosive out of his cuts and consistently got open.
He was a HOF talent. One of the best TE talents of the last 30 years. Not on Gronk's level but he was right there with anybody else.
This is the basis of my comment on his hands not being spectacular. He had good hands. But if he was second in targets every year why weren't his stats out of this world?
His catch percentage in some of his best years would seem to be pedestrian for a guy with such amazing talent (which I believe he had).
Running the right routes and not acting a fool are more important than physical talent.
Quote:
When he was #2 in targets every year?
This is the basis of my comment on his hands not being spectacular. He had good hands. But if he was second in targets every year why weren't his stats out of this world?
His catch percentage in some of his best years would seem to be pedestrian for a guy with such amazing talent (which I believe he had).
I think it had to do with not running the right routes, or making the correct reads more than his actual hands.
Shockey was on the same tier as Witten talent-wise imo, maybe even slightly more impressive athletically because of how explosive he could be.
But beyond the nonsense, his ball skills just weren't that great imo. He struggled to catch the ball and stay on his feet. It was an infuriating flaw in his game. He left a ton of TDs on the field by not having good balance. Gronk on the otherhand is awesome at coming down with the ball with good balance and running over DBs on the way to another TD.
Pretty much this ^^^^
On the flipside Beckham might be the best I've ever seen at having his feet set on downfield throws and exploding after those catches.
Jeremy Shockey would've fell down on the Boss/Harrison long catch at the Super Bowl.
SHockey was a great talent and a moron. He also broke down which probably was at least partially caused with him being a moron.
On the flipside Beckham might be the best I've ever seen at having his feet set on downfield throws and exploding after those catches.
Jeremy Shockey would've fell down on the Boss/Harrison long catch at the Super Bowl.
Agree 100%.
I really liked that offense in 2005 when it was Plaxico, Shockey, Toomer and Tiki, so many different weapons. Maybe that’s the reason he wasn’t putting up out of control numbers. I agree with the others saying he wasn’t really used the right way. The guy didn’t go to Miami to learn how to become a blocker. I think his biggest issue was he never played a full 16 game season and was hurt a bunch of times and his “attitude” wasn’t the best. OK, sure he wasn’t Gronk but to say his best moment was when he got traded to the Saints was absolute crap. You don’t think he wanted to win? He wasn’t the most conforming guy/player in the world but he won two Super Bowls and had a “good enough” career.
otherwise we was a talented, selfish, immature player
Wasn't it a 2nd rd pick?
funny because on his second play from scrimmmage I was comparing Beckham to Shockey.
The impact he had in those first years was dominating and I thought I was watching greatness. To me, the whole game seemed to revolve around him. I agree with all the praise for Witten and that he had a better career, but in one sense he never did what Shockey did.
On the flipside Beckham might be the best I've ever seen at having his feet set on downfield throws and exploding after those catches.
Jeremy Shockey would've fell down on the Boss/Harrison long catch at the Super Bowl.
It's like chewing gum and walking. His brain was only able to focus on one act at at time. Catching or continued placement of his feet.
Saints acquire Shockey for draft picks - ( New Window )
It wasn't a matter of targets, it was a matter of use - Shockey was used to being split wide more often, and blocking less. Coughlin's scheme used the TE differently than the way Fassel's had, and what Shockey had become accustomed to.
I don't think anyone can contend that the Saints didn't use Shockey differently, and even though it was the tail end of his career where he was physically a different player, he was still productive.
That doesn't write Shockey some sort of pass - he was still all the things mentioned in this thread, undisciplined, out of shape, a jackass towards Eli. His work ethic and his behavior towards his QB were the main differences between him and Gronk (who is also physically more talented).
Mike Strahan on line 1 for you.
Statistically, Shockey's best year wasn't his rookie season, it was 2005. He had only 9 fewer receptions and 3 fewer yards, had 7 touchdowns compared to 2, and had the highest yards per catch of his season at 13.7. That's despite working with a quarterback who was only in his first full year as a starter.
I think people arguing that Fassel used Shockey better than Coughlin are remembering incorrectly and ignoring how quickly Shockey's body broke down.
Meanwhile, he also was a destructive force within our offense. There was a card game a few years ago with one of the O-lineman at that time. This was after Shockey left and then Eli had a nice season. This player was asked (he was drunk) why Eli was doing so well and this player said..."Jeremy Shockey". Meaning, he was gone and that helped Eli. Said Shockey (after Eli may have missed a throw to him) would come back to the huddle and just rip into Eli. He said the best thing for the offense was getting rid of Shockey.
Shockey was good for a few brief years, but injuries/attitude really destroyed his career.
Meanwhile, he also was a destructive force within our offense. There was a card game a few years ago with one of the O-lineman at that time. This was after Shockey left and then Eli had a nice season. This player was asked (he was drunk) why Eli was doing so well and this player said..."Jeremy Shockey". Meaning, he was gone and that helped Eli. Said Shockey (after Eli may have missed a throw to him) would come back to the huddle and just rip into Eli. He said the best thing for the offense was getting rid of Shockey.
You'd think o-lineman would say something to shockey.