Quote
laram
2016 season:
Mike Wallace - 72 recs 1,017yds
Kenny Britt - 68 recs 1,002yds
Tyrel Williams - 69 recs 1,059yds
Terrelle Pryor - 77 recs 1,077yds
Brandin Cooks - 78 recs 1.173yds
Emmanuel Sanders - 79 recs 1,032yds
Pierre Garcon - 79 recs 1,041
Larry Fitzgerald - 107 recs 1,023yds
Doug Baldwin - 94 recs 1,128yds
Golden Tate - 91 recs 1,077yds
Jarvis Landry - 94 recs 1,136yds
Who on this list would you consider a #1 receiver TODAY?
Different game...different criteria.
This is just a simple difference of definitions.
When you say "are these guys #1s?" you are asking "are they elite or special at the level of physical talent?" Or something like that. (When I say that it's pure surmise. You don't offer a definition, so I just read into what it looks like you're saying.)
My view is, you don't have to be an elite WR to be a #1---a #1 is someone who has enough skill and talent and tenacity to be consistently, reliably productive.
So when you ask "are all these guys #1s" given your own definition, the answer is no.
Given my definition, the answer is yes.The key for me is steady consistent production, I say 70 catches/1000 yards as a convenient cut-off point to measure that.
The question then becomes, to me anyway, what does a guy need to have and do as a player, mentally as well as physically, to be among the 20 or so WRs in the league with 160-200 or so active receivers who produces at that level at any given year? Because it doesn't just happen. Not every guy can be counted on to come through at that consistent level.
The difference will always get down to our definitions.For you #1 is elite, a gifted talent who stand above all the others and is capable of dominating. (Or so I assume based on what you're saying...again you don't state a definition so I am just extrapolating.)
For me a #1 is any guy, elite or not, who can come through in terms of production. As I put it, most elite WRs are #1s but not every #1 is elite.
So when you present your list, you're basically going, are all these guys truely elite players?
But to me, that list just names the guys, elite or not, who made the standard by being consistently productive week in and out.
So to me yes Woods can become one of those guys...I think it's possible. By my definition of a #1, that is.
...
,,
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 07/07/2017 06:01AM by zn.