Cosell Talks: The Top 5 Wide Receivers

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

Anonymous

Guest
Cosell Talks: The Top 5 Wide Receivers

by Greg Cosell

http://nflfilms.nfl.com/2012/07/12/cose ... lms_cosell

If one thing has become clear in this age of social media, it’s this: everybody likes lists and rankings. For those who have followed me on Twitter or read my columns on TCIPF, you know that my personal inclination is to take lists for what they really are: a functional means by which to collate detailed and comprehensive material, and present it in an overly simplistic manner. You can’t argue that they are fun, and there’s no question they generate vigorous and energetic debate.

In that spirit, I have relented. I will rank my top five wide receivers entering the 2012 season. Again, and I know it’s become my mantra, please read my reasoning, and the substance behind my choices. As always, this is more a discussion of the players than a strict list.

Here my top five:

5. A.J. Green
4. Steve Smith
3. Larry Fitzgerald
2. Calvin Johnson
1. Andre Johnson

The first point to notice: the size of four of the top five receivers. Only Smith is shorter than 6-foot-3 and weighs less than 210 pounds. That speaks to the evolution of the wide receiver position in the NFL. Look at the majority of the first-round selections in the NFL draft the last number of years — A.J. Green, Michael Crabtree, Demaryius Thomas, Dez Bryant, Julio Jones, Jonathan Baldwin, Justin Blackmon, Michael Floyd. The big wide receiver is in demand. In 2011, the Falcons traded up 21 spots, in addition to surrendering numerous draft picks, to select Jones with the sixth overall pick. Jones is just shy of 6-foot-3 and comes in at 220 pounds. Size matters.

That leads to A.J. Green at No 5. He’s almost 6-foot-4 and 211 pounds. He does not look that big on film. He has elements of Randy Moss as a vertical receiver, with his long fluid stride, his excellent body control and leaping ability, and his soft hands. Green, much like Andre Johnson, moves like a smaller man. But he’s a smoother, more elegant athlete, a glider with deceptive separation and acceleration. His ease of movement belies his explosiveness. This year marks is his first real NFL offseason, and I would expect Green to improve significantly, particularly at the small details of the position, like beating press coverage. There’s no question Green has an elite skill set with his combination of size, movement and hands. So it’s no surprise that he’s already in the conversation regarding the league’s top wide receivers.

My inclusion of Steve Smith at No. 4 might surprise some, but I’ve studied him for a long time, and I always felt he had special attributes. There is no tougher wide receiver in the game; physicality and explosiveness define him. Smith might be short (he’s 5-foot-9) but he’s not small, and he plays with an edge that never relents. He has elements of finesse due to his dynamic quickness and short-area burst, and he’s strong and powerful as a result of his body type and his uncompromising desire. He’s always made tough catches in traffic. He’s elusive with the ball in his hands, with the run-after-catch ability of a punt returner, which he has been in his career. There might be no better route runner versus man coverage than Smith. He can run past corners vertically, and he can run away from them across the field. Vertical speed, lateral explosion, physical strength and mental toughness: you normally don’t see that combination of traits in one receiver. You could argue that not even the top three embody each of those characteristics in the all-inclusive way in which Smith does.

What always strikes me about Larry Fitzgerald is he’s much faster than people generally acknowledge. He’s the definition of the phrase, “he plays fast.” He caught a 73-yard touchdown early last season against the Redskins, and he ran away from DeAngelo Hall. I asked Steelers corner Ike Taylor about Fitzgerald in the spring, and the first thing he said was Fitzgerald’s speed is deceptive, that he plays like he runs a sub-4.4 40-yard dash.

Where Fitzgerald is truly special is his understanding of the subtle details of the position, the disciplines that separate merely talented receivers from becoming top receivers. Fitzgerald is a master of those nuances. He understands how to use pace, tempo and stride length with his vertical stem to set up off-coverage corners. He has a great feel for how different routes are run, and how alignments or splits impact how you run those routes. He’s physical off the ball versus press coverage. He disguises his routes very well. He’s adept at establishing inside position on in-breaking routes, and using his size and body position to shield defenders. There’s no one better at those finer points of receiving than Fitzgerald.

There are similarities between Fitzgerald and Calvin Johnson. Both have outstanding ability to go up and highpoint contested balls, both have the flexibility to contort their bodies to make tough catches, and both track the deep ball very well. The difference would be that Calvin Johnson does it more with length, whereas Fitzgerald does it with power and strength. And the given that needs no further discussion: Fitzgerald has the best hands in the NFL.

I understand that many, if not most, would have Calvin Johnson at the top of the list. In 2011, he joined Randy Moss as only the second receiver in NFL history to gain 1,600 yards and score 16 touchdowns in a single season. While Calvin Johnson was accomplishing that, Andre Johnson spent more than half of last season on the sideline with a hamstring injury. Out of sight, out of mind. It was easy to forget how special Andre Johnson is, at the same time being reminded weekly of Calvin Johnson’s outstanding play.

I’m splitting hairs here, but here’s why I give a healthy Andre Johnson the slight edge over Calvin Johnson. Andre Johnson is more purely athletic and explosive. When you watch him on film, you see the quickness, lateral agility and short-area burst of a much smaller man. You forget that he’s 6-foot-3 and 230 pounds. He’s built like a linebacker. Talk to many receivers and defensive backs in the league, and they will tell you that his combination of size, speed and sheer athleticism is off the charts. They have never seen another receiver like him.

What you immediately notice on film is how explosive he is off the line of scrimmage, whether it’s against press or off coverage. He puts instant pressure on the defense. His ability to stop and start, change direction and get in and out of breaks with instant acceleration is extraordinary. His play speed is the best of any receiver in the NFL. He can blow the top off of any coverage.

I have felt that Andre Johnson has been the best receiver in the NFL for a number of years. Playing in Houston, for a team that only made the playoffs for the first time last season, has not enhanced his national recognition.

Calvin Johnson is a bigger man than Andre Johnson, and looks it on film. At 6-foot-5 and 236 pounds, he has unique size, which helps in a number of ways. First, it creates an unusually wide catching radius. As a corollary, you could make the argument that Calvin Johnson has better and more consistent hands than Andre Johnson. He snatches the ball with very strong and powerful hands. The second way in which Calvin Johnson’s size is a major factor is stride length. That’s what allows him to be such an imposing vertical threat. If he has free access off the line of scrimmage, he eats up ground incredibly quickly. Sometimes he looks like he has taken two steps, and he’s covered 15 yards. I remember that 73-yard touchdown he caught against the Bears on “Monday Night Football” last season. It came against Cover 2 defense, a coverage specifically designed to prevent deep passes over the top. Calvin Johnson exploded past safety Chris Harris on his corner/post route. There’s a vertically explosive element to his game that is not the result of a timed 40 speed, but rather size and stride.

Like Andre Johnson, who has been doing it for years, Calvin Johnson has now become an effective slot receiver. I saw that more last year than in previous years. What Calvin Johnson also has is great body control and flexibility. He can make difficult and contested catches, which also augments his deep ability. He can both outmaneuver and outreach defensive backs. As I said, the difference between Calvin Johnson and Andre Johnson is microscopic. In the what-have-you-done-lately world in which we live, it’s easier to visually access Calvin Johnson’s greatness. It’s more recent and immediate.

One thing is certain in today’s NFL: it’s become more a game of pitch-and-catch than ever before, and that increasingly places a premium on the wide receiver position.
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
33,892
Name
Stu
Wish he was talking about OUR Steve Smith.
 

Warner4Prez

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
2,266
Name
Benny
Pretty sure we're about to witness the decline of Andre Johnson though. It's a shame too, because he really has flown under the radar while being one of the best in the game. But yeah, he's like 33 going into his 10th coming off of hammy problems and a knee scope...I don't think it bodes well for the guy.
 

Angry Ram

Captain RAmerica Original Rammer
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
17,856
You know I noticed something, as much as everyone praises these guys (and rightly so), the teams they have been bad more times than not.

Panthers- 3 winning seasons since 2001 (Smith's rookie year)
Cardinals- They had that 2 year thing including that SB run.
Lions- Well, we all know how that team was. Megatron was drafted in 2007 and went through an 0-16 season...
Texans- Last season was the 1st time they went 2 the playoffs, and 2nd winning season in team history.

Green doesn't really count b/c of his 1 year, but so far he's 1/1 for bein on good teams.

Its only now that these teams are gettin better and they are lucky they still have these guys still performing @ high levels, but its weird that they (the teams) weren't relevant earlier.
 

Anonymous

Guest
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
Angry Ram said:
You know I noticed something, as much as everyone praises these guys (and rightly so), the teams they have been on teams that have been bad more times than not.

Panthers- 3 winning seasons since 2001 (Smith's rookie year)
Cardinals- They had that 2 year thing including that SB run.
Lions- Well, we all know how that team was. Megatron was drafted in 2007 and went through an 0-16 season...
Texans- Last season was the 1st time they went 2 the playoffs, and 2nd winning season in team history. [/b]

Green doesn't really count b/c of his 1 year, but so far he's 1/1 for bein on good teams.

Its only now that these teams are gettin better and they are lucky they still have these guys still performing @ high levels, but its weird that they (the teams) weren't relevant earlier.

Why is it weird?

There's dozens of reasons teams lose and I think that particular list of teams might just cover all of them.
 

libertadrocks

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
2,224
I thought about this article for awhile after you posted it ZN. Mostly contemplating if Green is already a top 5 WR. After Thinking about it I pretty much agree with Cosell. I may even go a step further and peg him as the 4th best WR in the league. He's good, and while his stat didnt rank at the top of the league, he was physically dominant on a consistent basis despite being a rookie with a short offseason.

Steve Smith is questionable to me. He puts numbers up year in and year out, and is one of the most explosive players in the league. However I have preference for big bodied WRs the can run. Brandon Marshall is a head case but he's a guy i would most certainly consider over Smith.
 

Angry Ram

Captain RAmerica Original Rammer
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
17,856
zn said:
Angry Ram said:
You know I noticed something, as much as everyone praises these guys (and rightly so), the teams they have been on teams that have been bad more times than not.

Panthers- 3 winning seasons since 2001 (Smith's rookie year)
Cardinals- They had that 2 year thing including that SB run.
Lions- Well, we all know how that team was. Megatron was drafted in 2007 and went through an 0-16 season...
Texans- Last season was the 1st time they went 2 the playoffs, and 2nd winning season in team history. [/b]

Green doesn't really count b/c of his 1 year, but so far he's 1/1 for bein on good teams.

Its only now that these teams are gettin better and they are lucky they still have these guys still performing @ high levels, but its weird that they (the teams) weren't relevant earlier.

Why is it weird?

There's dozens of reasons teams lose and I think that particular list of teams might just cover all of them.

B/c of all the arguements of who is the best WR in the NFL, their teams weren't relevant or only now becoming so. IDK, its just weird that the elite guys' teams haven't been that great. While the Rams continue to be criticized for not gettin Sam "weapons" yet these teams prove that it takes more than that.

I like what the Giants have (Nicks/Cruz). Actually, if u throw in Amendola here it could be w/ the Packers type of WRs...

Driver = Quick
Jennings = Givens
Nelson = Amendola
 

Anonymous

Guest
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
Angry Ram said:
zn said:
Angry Ram said:
You know I noticed something, as much as everyone praises these guys (and rightly so), the teams they have been on teams that have been bad more times than not.

Panthers- 3 winning seasons since 2001 (Smith's rookie year)
Cardinals- They had that 2 year thing including that SB run.
Lions- Well, we all know how that team was. Megatron was drafted in 2007 and went through an 0-16 season...
Texans- Last season was the 1st time they went 2 the playoffs, and 2nd winning season in team history. [/b]

Green doesn't really count b/c of his 1 year, but so far he's 1/1 for bein on good teams.

Its only now that these teams are gettin better and they are lucky they still have these guys still performing @ high levels, but its weird that they (the teams) weren't relevant earlier.

Why is it weird?

There's dozens of reasons teams lose and I think that particular list of teams might just cover all of them.

B/c of all the arguements of who is the best WR in the NFL, their teams weren't relevant or only now becoming so. IDK, its just weird that the elite guys' teams haven't been that great. While the Rams continue to be criticized for not gettin Sam "weapons" yet these teams prove that it takes more than that.

I like what the Giants have (Nicks/Cruz). Actually, if u throw in Amendola here it could be w/ the Packers type of WRs...

Driver = Quick
Jennings = Givens
Nelson = Amendola

But the argument wasn't that having a great receiver makes you a winner. In fact it says nothing at all about the impact of top receivers.

It just went out and said "okay who are the best 5 receivers."

I hope he does a best 5 for every position.
 

Angry Ram

Captain RAmerica Original Rammer
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
17,856
zn said:
Angry Ram said:
zn said:
Angry Ram said:
You know I noticed something, as much as everyone praises these guys (and rightly so), the teams they have been on teams that have been bad more times than not.

Panthers- 3 winning seasons since 2001 (Smith's rookie year)
Cardinals- They had that 2 year thing including that SB run.
Lions- Well, we all know how that team was. Megatron was drafted in 2007 and went through an 0-16 season...
Texans- Last season was the 1st time they went 2 the playoffs, and 2nd winning season in team history. [/b]

Green doesn't really count b/c of his 1 year, but so far he's 1/1 for bein on good teams.

Its only now that these teams are gettin better and they are lucky they still have these guys still performing @ high levels, but its weird that they (the teams) weren't relevant earlier.

Why is it weird?

There's dozens of reasons teams lose and I think that particular list of teams might just cover all of them.

B/c of all the arguements of who is the best WR in the NFL, their teams weren't relevant or only now becoming so. IDK, its just weird that the elite guys' teams haven't been that great. While the Rams continue to be criticized for not gettin Sam "weapons" yet these teams prove that it takes more than that.

I like what the Giants have (Nicks/Cruz). Actually, if u throw in Amendola here it could be w/ the Packers type of WRs...

Driver = Quick
Jennings = Givens
Nelson = Amendola

But the argument wasn't that having a great receiver makes you a winner. In fact it says nothing at all about the impact of top receivers.

It just went out and said "okay who are the best 5 receivers."

I hope he does a best 5 for every position.

Not this arguement, everyone has their own opinion on who the top 5 of any posistion is. Those arguments. Its just somethin I noticed, the best in the biz haven't been on good teams.
 

Anonymous

Guest
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #10
Angry Ram said:
zn said:
Angry Ram said:
zn said:
Angry Ram said:
You know I noticed something, as much as everyone praises these guys (and rightly so), the teams they have been on teams that have been bad more times than not.

Panthers- 3 winning seasons since 2001 (Smith's rookie year)
Cardinals- They had that 2 year thing including that SB run.
Lions- Well, we all know how that team was. Megatron was drafted in 2007 and went through an 0-16 season...
Texans- Last season was the 1st time they went 2 the playoffs, and 2nd winning season in team history. [/b]

Green doesn't really count b/c of his 1 year, but so far he's 1/1 for bein on good teams.

Its only now that these teams are gettin better and they are lucky they still have these guys still performing @ high levels, but its weird that they (the teams) weren't relevant earlier.

Why is it weird?

There's dozens of reasons teams lose and I think that particular list of teams might just cover all of them.

B/c of all the arguements of who is the best WR in the NFL, their teams weren't relevant or only now becoming so. IDK, its just weird that the elite guys' teams haven't been that great. While the Rams continue to be criticized for not gettin Sam "weapons" yet these teams prove that it takes more than that.

I like what the Giants have (Nicks/Cruz). Actually, if u throw in Amendola here it could be w/ the Packers type of WRs...

Driver = Quick
Jennings = Givens
Nelson = Amendola

But the argument wasn't that having a great receiver makes you a winner. In fact it says nothing at all about the impact of top receivers.

It just went out and said "okay who are the best 5 receivers."

I hope he does a best 5 for every position.

Not this arguement, everyone has their own opinion on who the top 5 of any posistion is. Those arguments. Its just somethin I noticed, the best in the biz haven't been on good teams.

There's probably a good reason for that.

1. For one, Detroit IS a good team, it just took a while.

2. The Bengals go in and out but they're more in now than out.

3. Anyway, except for Smith, they're all high picks. That means you had to be bad in the first place to have a shot at a guy like that.
 

Memento

Your (Somewhat) Friendly Neighborhood Authoress.
Joined
Jul 30, 2010
Messages
17,022
Name
Jemma
libertadrocks said:
I thought about this article for awhile after you posted it ZN. Mostly contemplating if Green is already a top 5 WR. After Thinking about it I pretty much agree with Cosell. I may even go a step further and peg him as the 4th best WR in the league. He's good, and while his stat didnt rank at the top of the league, he was physically dominant on a consistent basis despite being a rookie with a short offseason.

Steve Smith is questionable to me. He puts numbers up year in and year out, and is one of the most explosive players in the league. However I have preference for big bodied WRs the can run. Brandon Marshall is a head case but he's a guy i would most certainly consider over Smith.

I'd place Roddy White before Green and Smith and would definitely rank him over Marshall. White can run every route, is one of the biggest deep threats in the NFL with fantastic speed, and even though he drops a few passes, his hands are better than most wideouts. And did I mention that he's led all wide receivers in receiving yards since 2007 while having no less than six touchdowns and 83 receptions per year? The guy is criminally underrated by just about everyone.

5. A.J. Green.

4. Roddy White.

3. Larry Fitzgerald.

2. Calvin Johnson.

1. Andre Johnson.
 

Anonymous

Guest
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #12
Memento said:
libertadrocks said:
I thought about this article for awhile after you posted it ZN. Mostly contemplating if Green is already a top 5 WR. After Thinking about it I pretty much agree with Cosell. I may even go a step further and peg him as the 4th best WR in the league. He's good, and while his stat didnt rank at the top of the league, he was physically dominant on a consistent basis despite being a rookie with a short offseason.

Steve Smith is questionable to me. He puts numbers up year in and year out, and is one of the most explosive players in the league. However I have preference for big bodied WRs the can run. Brandon Marshall is a head case but he's a guy i would most certainly consider over Smith.

I'd place Roddy White before Green and Smith and would definitely rank him over Marshall. White can run every route, is one of the biggest deep threats in the NFL with fantastic speed, and even though he drops a few passes, his hands are better than most wideouts. And did I mention that he's led all wide receivers in receiving yards since 2007 while having no less than six touchdowns and 83 receptions per year? The guy is criminally underrated by just about everyone.

5. A.J. Green.

4. Roddy White.

3. Larry Fitzgerald.

2. Calvin Johnson.

1. Andre Johnson.

I dunno about White and the long pass, frankly. In 2011 he had 16 targets over 21 yards and caught 3 (18%). Green in contrast was 9 of 18 (50%) and Smith was 6 of 13 (46%).
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
33,892
Name
Stu
zn said:
But the argument wasn't that having a great receiver makes you a winner. In fact it says nothing at all about the impact of top receivers.

It just went out and said "okay who are the best 5 receivers."

I hope he does a best 5 for every position.

I didn't see where Angry said there was an argument - period. Seemed to me he was just bringing up an observation. It would be like you responding to me with, "The point of the article wasn't that the Rams have one of the top 5 receivers in the NFL." I was just making a statement and I assume you took it as just that.

And you can look at things all sorts of ways but one aspect is that these receivers had to put up big numbers to be on this list. That means that they had someone throwing to them, a line capable of blocking for the QB, etc... In other words, there WERE some other pieces there. As you observed, most of these receivers went high in the draft. So a bad team took the elite receiver instead of building a team. How'd that work out for them?

Yet, there was a whole hell of a lot of griping (not by you that I can recall) over the Rams not going after the "elite" WR in this draft. Instead, the Rams went after more pieces to the puzzle most likely BECAUSE it takes more than that elite "weapon" in order to WIN.
 

Anonymous

Guest
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #14
RamFan503 said:
zn said:
But the argument wasn't that having a great receiver makes you a winner. In fact it says nothing at all about the impact of top receivers.

It just went out and said "okay who are the best 5 receivers."

I hope he does a best 5 for every position.

I didn't see where Angry said there was an argument - period. Seemed to me he was just bringing up an observation. It would be like you responding to me with, "The point of the article wasn't that the Rams have one of the top 5 receivers in the NFL." I was just making a statement and I assume you took it as just that.

And you can look at things all sorts of ways but one aspect is that these receivers had to put up big numbers to be on this list. That means that they had someone throwing to them, a line capable of blocking for the QB, etc... In other words, there WERE some other pieces there. As you observed, most of these receivers went high in the draft. So a bad team took the elite receiver instead of building a team. How'd that work out for them?

Yet, there was a whole hell of a lot of griping (not by you that I can recall) over the Rams not going after the "elite" WR in this draft. Instead, the Rams went after more pieces to the puzzle most likely BECAUSE it takes more than that elite "weapon" in order to WIN.

Well let's hope they're right about one thing. Snead, Fisher, Shottenheimer, and Boudreau all together decided that the OL does not need upgrading though either high picks or big FA signings.

With the exception of Wells of course, which was a no-brainer cause Brown tanked.

But if those 4 are not correct in their assessment of the OL?

That will look bad.

My bet (so far) is that the OL will be fine.
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
33,892
Name
Stu
zn said:
Well let's hope they're right about one thing. Snead, Fisher, Shottenheimer, and Boudreau all together decided that the OL does not need upgrading though either high picks or big FA signings.

With the exception of Wells of course, which was a no-brainer cause Brown tanked.

But if those 4 are not correct in their assessment of the OL?

That will look bad.

My bet (so far) is that the OL will be fine.

No argument there. I still think we may pull a cap casualty for our line. But that of course is just a guess. Wells should be a key upgrade IMO. And the scheme will help the line possibly as much as anything.
 

Anonymous

Guest
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #16
RamFan503 said:
zn said:
Well let's hope they're right about one thing. Snead, Fisher, Shottenheimer, and Boudreau all together decided that the OL does not need upgrading though either high picks or big FA signings.

With the exception of Wells of course, which was a no-brainer cause Brown tanked.

But if those 4 are not correct in their assessment of the OL?

That will look bad.

My bet (so far) is that the OL will be fine.

No argument there. I still think we may pull a cap casualty for our line. But that of course is just a guess. Wells should be a key upgrade IMO. And the scheme will help the line possibly as much as anything.

Yeah they watched 2010 film and said they did a good job with Bradford, which also of course must mean the line too cause otherwise Bradford woulda been less effective. Then a whole bunch of people (Snead, Devaney, Venturi, Softli, Frerotte---old and present NFL guys to the man) said the problem with the 2011 OL, before the injuries, was being out of sync and basically not knowing the scheme well enough to execute it effectively.

So, they are tailoring the scheme, I would think, to fit what works.
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
zn said:
Angry Ram said:
zn said:
Angry Ram said:
zn said:
Angry Ram said:
You know I noticed something, as much as everyone praises these guys (and rightly so), the teams they have been on teams that have been bad more times than not.

Panthers- 3 winning seasons since 2001 (Smith's rookie year)
Cardinals- They had that 2 year thing including that SB run.
Lions- Well, we all know how that team was. Megatron was drafted in 2007 and went through an 0-16 season...
Texans- Last season was the 1st time they went 2 the playoffs, and 2nd winning season in team history. [/b]

Green doesn't really count b/c of his 1 year, but so far he's 1/1 for bein on good teams.

Its only now that these teams are gettin better and they are lucky they still have these guys still performing @ high levels, but its weird that they (the teams) weren't relevant earlier.

Why is it weird?

There's dozens of reasons teams lose and I think that particular list of teams might just cover all of them.

B/c of all the arguements of who is the best WR in the NFL, their teams weren't relevant or only now becoming so. IDK, its just weird that the elite guys' teams haven't been that great. While the Rams continue to be criticized for not gettin Sam "weapons" yet these teams prove that it takes more than that.

I like what the Giants have (Nicks/Cruz). Actually, if u throw in Amendola here it could be w/ the Packers type of WRs...

Driver = Quick
Jennings = Givens
Nelson = Amendola

But the argument wasn't that having a great receiver makes you a winner. In fact it says nothing at all about the impact of top receivers.

It just went out and said "okay who are the best 5 receivers."

I hope he does a best 5 for every position.

Not this arguement, everyone has their own opinion on who the top 5 of any posistion is. Those arguments. Its just somethin I noticed, the best in the biz haven't been on good teams.

There's probably a good reason for that.

1. For one, Detroit IS a good team, it just took a while.

2. The Bengals go in and out but they're more in now than out.

3. Anyway, except for Smith, they're all high picks. That means you had to be bad in the first place to have a shot at a guy like that.

I don't know that anyone is really "arguing" but WHAT IT means to moi is, that
Johnson coulda used Arien Foster sooner in his career, Fitz was more a winner when Boldin was there,Meg could benefit from a healthy Javed Best, one trick ponies don't win,they may get other numbers but heck look at OJ Simpson and how dominant he was on a one dimensional team.
Teams shut everything else down but the star and beat you.
 

Angry Ram

Captain RAmerica Original Rammer
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
17,856
RamFan503 said:
zn said:
But the argument wasn't that having a great receiver makes you a winner. In fact it says nothing at all about the impact of top receivers.

It just went out and said "okay who are the best 5 receivers."

I hope he does a best 5 for every position.

I didn't see where Angry said there was an argument - period. Seemed to me he was just bringing up an observation. It would be like you responding to me with, "The point of the article wasn't that the Rams have one of the top 5 receivers in the NFL." I was just making a statement and I assume you took it as just that.

And you can look at things all sorts of ways but one aspect is that these receivers had to put up big numbers to be on this list. That means that they had someone throwing to them, a line capable of blocking for the QB, etc... In other words, there WERE some other pieces there. As you observed, most of these receivers went high in the draft. So a bad team took the elite receiver instead of building a team. How'd that work out for them?

Yet, there was a whole hell of a lot of griping (not by you that I can recall) over the Rams not going after the "elite" WR in this draft. Instead, the Rams went after more pieces to the puzzle most likely BECAUSE it takes more than that elite "weapon" in order to WIN.

Yeah that's exactly what I meant.

For all the praise these guys get (and again rightly so), their teams haven't been good. Whether it be D or QB or OL or anything else. Yet the Rams will always suck b/c they don't have 1 of these guys.
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
33,892
Name
Stu
Angry Ram said:
RamFan503 said:
zn said:
But the argument wasn't that having a great receiver makes you a winner. In fact it says nothing at all about the impact of top receivers.

It just went out and said "okay who are the best 5 receivers."

I hope he does a best 5 for every position.

I didn't see where Angry said there was an argument - period. Seemed to me he was just bringing up an observation. It would be like you responding to me with, "The point of the article wasn't that the Rams have one of the top 5 receivers in the NFL." I was just making a statement and I assume you took it as just that.

And you can look at things all sorts of ways but one aspect is that these receivers had to put up big numbers to be on this list. That means that they had someone throwing to them, a line capable of blocking for the QB, etc... In other words, there WERE some other pieces there. As you observed, most of these receivers went high in the draft. So a bad team took the elite receiver instead of building a team. How'd that work out for them?

Yet, there was a whole hell of a lot of griping (not by you that I can recall) over the Rams not going after the "elite" WR in this draft. Instead, the Rams went after more pieces to the puzzle most likely BECAUSE it takes more than that elite "weapon" in order to WIN.

Yeah that's exactly what I meant.

For all the praise these guys get (and again rightly so), their teams haven't been good. Whether it be D or QB or OL or anything else. Yet the Rams will always suck b/c they don't have 1 of these guys.

Yeah - I'm going to go out on a limb and say that even if Quick and Givens hit it big there will still be people (ahem... PD anyone?) whining about not having an "elite" receiver.
 

Anonymous

Guest
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #20
Angry Ram said:
RamFan503 said:
zn said:
But the argument wasn't that having a great receiver makes you a winner. In fact it says nothing at all about the impact of top receivers.

It just went out and said "okay who are the best 5 receivers."

I hope he does a best 5 for every position.

I didn't see where Angry said there was an argument - period. Seemed to me he was just bringing up an observation. It would be like you responding to me with, "The point of the article wasn't that the Rams have one of the top 5 receivers in the NFL." I was just making a statement and I assume you took it as just that.

And you can look at things all sorts of ways but one aspect is that these receivers had to put up big numbers to be on this list. That means that they had someone throwing to them, a line capable of blocking for the QB, etc... In other words, there WERE some other pieces there. As you observed, most of these receivers went high in the draft. So a bad team took the elite receiver instead of building a team. How'd that work out for them?

Yet, there was a whole hell of a lot of griping (not by you that I can recall) over the Rams not going after the "elite" WR in this draft. Instead, the Rams went after more pieces to the puzzle most likely BECAUSE it takes more than that elite "weapon" in order to WIN.

Yeah that's exactly what I meant.

For all the praise these guys get (and again rightly so), their teams haven't been good. Whether it be D or QB or OL or anything else. Yet the Rams will always suck b/c they don't have 1 of these guys.

Ah. I wondered where this came from. :cool: Anyway the Rams WRs are getting steadily better (though I still have doubts about Givens). They're already better than opening day 2011. Don't know what the ceiling is...but they're climbing out of the ashes at WR.