Could Stanley Morgan's greatness hampered Martinez's view of the offense?

Ulty said:
I'm a big fan of Stanley Morgan, but everything you said here is totally fair. The worst problem that I see is that fact that you appear to be friends with someone who works for the Raiders. 
Click to expand...
Lmao his younger brother went to UC Santa Cruz with me. 

 
Vince R. said:
Lmao his younger brother went to UC Santa Cruz with me. 
Click to expand...


Banana slugs!

pulp-fiction-tee-shirt_opt.jpg


Edit: damn @ColoradoHusk, you are fast

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I remember quite a few times when I felt AM forced it to Stanely when there were other guys wide open.  Some of those plays Stanely made the catch so not much was said.  I dont blame AM so much because he was a freshman and Stanely was probably "supposed" to get the ball on those plays.  Maybe not having a legit go to guy this year will help the offense... who knows.  Mayne he'll just force it to JD this year

 
Vince R. said:
I would never associate great with Stanley Morgan. I think he is a fine player, but thats it. 

A scout for the Raider's that I know personally told me this about Stanley: "Great amongst subpar competition, average to non-existent against the best in the conference" And I agree. He was hardly doubled-teamed. Teams did not fear him. He is slow in pads, and cannot beat a good DB one on one. He does have tremendous hands though. His routes were flat at times, and he struggled to sell them. Nebraska ran plays to isolate him, and he could not separate.  His last really good game against good competition was in 2017 against Oregon. Stanley worked well underneath but it was hardly game changing type play. So that sounds bleak considering that he had 1,000 yards last year. This Offense will work better with true WR's who have 500 yards receiving but have the ability to fly right by you, because that is what opens up the offense for the Duck R position. 
Click to expand...
Not that the NFL and scouts can't miss on a player, because it happens every year, but I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt. I think you sharing this is totally fair game. I think it's clear that his film and/or some aspect of his mental/physical abilities were questionable.

It's also important for us to keep a season like Stanley's in relative terms. 1,000 yards is nothing to scoff at in division one football. But, he also played on a 4-8 team, and I think Martinez targeted him a lot because Martinez was young in the offense and the team dealt with a lot of inconsistencies in the WR group. Scouts can pick up on that kind of stuff, and can easily compare/contrast how a player performs vs. different scales of competition.

 
Quite the opposite.   Nebraska actually won a few games once there was a concerted effort to get Stan the ball.

The question now is who is going to step up opposite JD.

 
Yeah, I'm of the opinion Stanley wasn't a game breaker or game changer. As already mentioned his separation against talented DBs was minimal. I'd take it one step further and say I wasn't always that impressed with his hands either. I think why he originally captured scouts attention is his overall athleticism. He was all around a good WR at the college level but didnt stand out in any one category. That being said I think he played a key leadership role for this team, and without him the season could've been even worse. 

Call me crazy but the tape for kanawai noa makes me think he's got better hand, is more physical, and runs better routes than stanley. I guess that's what highlight tapes are for though, haven't seen anything but highlights. 

 
I will agree that it was pretty obvious that Martinez made Stanley better because he was able to fit balls into the tight windows that Morgan was briefly open in.  Morgan is an above average college receiver, but probably wouldn't see the field at a place like Alabama or Clemson.  He is not fast enough or quick enough to lose defenders and this is why he made many catches that looked so difficult.  Those were the only places Adrian could put the ball where the defense wouldn't make a play on it.

The biggest reason for Stanley Morgan's success....Scott Frost's offensive design and play calling.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top