Riddickulous
"That" Guy
- Messages
- 16,866
- Reaction score
- 8,325
The unanswerable question will be answered.
Both of them have their strengths, and both of them have their weaknesses.
Golden Tate is the dynamic, electric player, a threat to take it to the house every down. He has blazing speed, makes quick, precise cuts, and can leave a corner trailing in his wake (i:e, Hawaii). He has great hands (he's made many catches right in-between his defender's hands) and rarely drops the ball. For a relatively little guy (5'11"), he can get very high off the ground. However, Tate still hasn't shown much of a variety as far as route-running is concerned (though this may be a result of the playcalling) and is hit-or-miss when one-on-one in the open field. Clausen does make things easier for Tate, because most of his really good throws end up in Tate's hands.
Michael Floyd is big, strong, and can come down with ANY pass, even with a defender or two hanging all over him (which happens often). He runs clean routes, specifically the out route (one of the most effective plays of 2008), and has deceptive speed. He's one of the best jump ball receivers I've seen in a while. Floyd is also a physical freak, he's completely ripped and his strength shows on the football field, where he often rips through a tackler or two. However, Floyd has trouble holding on to the ball after he rips a ball down from a jump battle, and doesn't have the freak athleticism of Golden Tate (he seems reluctant to lay out for an overthrown pass). Also, Floyd is very often underthrown by Clausen (possibly because Floyd isn't as fast as other receivers and Clausen is under more pressure when he throws the football) and he often has to stop, come back to the ball and battle for the tough catch.
So, who's better?
Both of them have their strengths, and both of them have their weaknesses.
Golden Tate is the dynamic, electric player, a threat to take it to the house every down. He has blazing speed, makes quick, precise cuts, and can leave a corner trailing in his wake (i:e, Hawaii). He has great hands (he's made many catches right in-between his defender's hands) and rarely drops the ball. For a relatively little guy (5'11"), he can get very high off the ground. However, Tate still hasn't shown much of a variety as far as route-running is concerned (though this may be a result of the playcalling) and is hit-or-miss when one-on-one in the open field. Clausen does make things easier for Tate, because most of his really good throws end up in Tate's hands.
Michael Floyd is big, strong, and can come down with ANY pass, even with a defender or two hanging all over him (which happens often). He runs clean routes, specifically the out route (one of the most effective plays of 2008), and has deceptive speed. He's one of the best jump ball receivers I've seen in a while. Floyd is also a physical freak, he's completely ripped and his strength shows on the football field, where he often rips through a tackler or two. However, Floyd has trouble holding on to the ball after he rips a ball down from a jump battle, and doesn't have the freak athleticism of Golden Tate (he seems reluctant to lay out for an overthrown pass). Also, Floyd is very often underthrown by Clausen (possibly because Floyd isn't as fast as other receivers and Clausen is under more pressure when he throws the football) and he often has to stop, come back to the ball and battle for the tough catch.
So, who's better?
