Receivers don't make as much difference as teams think they will

[DraconisRex]

There is a reason no wide receiver ever has won the Associated Press MVP award since its inception 50 years ago, not even Jerry Rice. In the grand scheme of things, wide receivers don’t matter as much as wide receivers think they do.

The 2006 season confirmed a notion that although receivers certainly are necessary, they also can be pretty much interchangeable. With some exceptions, and Rice would top the list, receivers seem to be sliding down the list of true difference-makers.

Full Article: http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/Commentary/Columns/2007/pierson2128.htm

[SF1981bornfan]

Good article! Now can we back off picking a WR in the first day and beef up this D(ok maybe 3rd rd comp). Im sold on the fact that we have our #1 target on the team now. Click Clack LETS GO! :sf49:

[ftn49]

Sorry, but the last thing I am worried about is if a WR wins the MVP award, if going by the fact that a postion has never won the MVP award was important to the draft, then I guess that you would have to say the same thing about the O-line, a postion that hasn't won it in over 50 years. A kicker has won it more recently than a O-lineman

[Wisco N9ner]

Full Article: http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/Commentary/Columns/2007/pierson2128.htm

That's because these days, over 50% of the receivers cannot catch the ball consistently. Or, to rephrase, over 50% of the receivers today cannot do their job.

[49erfanatic]

This article was terrible. It was apparently written for the less than casual fan. It posed questions such as; waht team does Andre Johnson play for, and Did Chad Johnson even play last year.

It even went as far as to say that Colston was the most prolific WR in the final four... What about Harrisson and Wayne??? :falldownlaugh:

[Fez]

It even went as far as to say that Colston was the most prolific WR in the final four... What about Harrisson and Wayne??? :falldownlaugh:

rookie Marques Colston, the most prolific wide receiver of the NFC’s final four teams.

[Wisco N9ner]

rookie Marques Colston, the most prolific wide receiver of the NFC’s final four teams.

Schooled.

[BrentJones84]

In theorey, you could say that about any position.

The teams that win games are the best TEAMS, and not always the best players at any given position.

[jmichura]

It's funny how they mention how Branch got replaced by Caldwell. Maybe they should look at the drops he had that may have cost them a trip to the big game.

As for finding a receiver in the 7th round, how often does this really happen? Why don't they list all of the receiver drafted in the 7th rounds of every draft and see how many of them are still playing?

As for the MVP, it's very hard for a recevier to win the thing because of the situation he must be in to win it.

1) You must be on a decent or winning team. So there goes about half the teams right there.
2) You must be the only good receiver on your team, otherwise, your QB will have a better shot than you because he can spread the ball around.
3) You must not have an elite rusher on your team or else it will will cut too much into your stats.
4) Your QB must at least be competent without being too good. He has to be able to get you the ball without stealing your spotlight.

[SB49er4life]

Sorry, but the last thing I am worried about is if a WR wins the MVP award, if going by the fact that a postion has never won the MVP award was important to the draft, then I guess that you would have to say the same thing about the O-line, a postion that hasn't won it in over 50 years. A kicker has won it more recently than a O-lineman

For real, man, its just one guys opinion expressed in an article ! People sure are swayed easily these days...

I don't remember when a 3-4 DE won the MVP, so why would we bother drafting one early ?

[Ness]

Football is a team sport though. So this article doesn't really make sense. One position will never win a game for you every single week.

And I don't really care what that article says. It's not common to find a great receiver in the later rounds of the draft. So you can't always get a Donald Driver or a Marques Colston.

[Eaglesfandan]

I don't give a ish what this article says. In the playoffs from 2001-2004 McNabb had Thrash, Pinkston and Mitchell. Replace any of those guys with Harrison and Wayne and the Eagles might have actually won a Super Bowl. End of arguement........

[Ness]

I don't give a ish what this article says. In the playoffs from 2001-2004 McNabb had Thrash, Pinkston and Mitchell. Replace any of those guys with Harrison and Wayne and the Eagles might have actually won a Super Bowl. End of arguement........

Yeah I was just about to bring up Eagles fans and Ravens fans.

[krnbanguboi]

Anyone else remember how horrible the Panthers played without Steve Smith?

[NJNiner]

In theorey, you could say that about any position.



exactly. receivers really arent more important than anyone else, but rather they are just as important, in my opinion there is just an overly mediocre crop of WR in the NFL today. if youve ever played QB (i am in NO WAY trying to brag or just wanting to tell people I did, it is just how I know how important it truly is) you would know that WR will make or break you. you need a WR who will fight for the ball, a WR that will practice with you, a WR that will get seperation and have speed, and most importantly a WR who will run good routes and withhold good timing with the QB.

football is such a team sport and it takes the WR, the QB, and everyone blocking (which is EVERYONE else) in order to even make a positive play. Its kind of like the saying in a band..your only as good as your drummer..same goes for a QB only being as good as your recievers. Its also fairly difficult to guage how good a receiever is until you actually work with them

[NJNiner]

there is also always the decoy factor. having a good number one receiever always leaves another good route runner (who doesnt drop balls hopefully) in single coverage.

its true. if you dont believe that, then your probably one of the people that would take calvin johnosn over a good O-line and take a terrible offensive line.....if you understand what im saying....

[Eaglesfandan]

there is also always the decoy factor. having a good number one receiever always leaves another good route runner (who doesnt drop balls hopefully) in single coverage.

its true. if you dont believe that, then your probably one of the people that would take calvin johnosn over a good O-line and take a terrible offensive line.....if you understand what im saying....

I understand exactly what you're saying........

[UCBLaxPlayer]

there is also always the decoy factor. having a good number one receiever always leaves another good route runner (who doesnt drop balls hopefully) in single coverage.

its true. if you dont believe that, then your probably one of the people that would take calvin johnosn over a good O-line and take a terrible offensive line.....if you understand what im saying....

word. also decoy in the running game or a downfield blocker

a good receiver, even if he's not catching the ball can neutralize 3/11th of the defense, which doesn't seem like much until you realize he could be doing absolutely nothing in the play.

it's the threat a good receiver poses that makes him valuable, not just his stats which is what MVP is about

this kind of goes with the idea that running backs are interchangeable in a good system. but come on... who wouldn't want LT, LJ, or Gore on their team as opposed to Kevan Barlow, Michael Robinson...

[SB49er4life]

I don't give a ish what this article says. In the playoffs from 2001-2004 McNabb had Thrash, Pinkston and Mitchell. Replace any of those guys with Harrison and Wayne and the Eagles might have actually won a Super Bowl. End of arguement........

Stop it, your making points, the thread starter might get pissed.

[TheWiz]

I think this article falls into a deep logical pit from the beginning.

No WR has won the league MVP since its inception. So? There is a very logical explanation for all of this. You can't be a 100 reception, 1,500 yard, 15 TD WR without someone throwing to you. If you also get that open chance are you are on an offense that can run the ball to keep safeties honest. Any great WR gets caught in this trap. A great WR could make a QB look great, open up other WRs, and help open a running game. However, it's more often that people see a great QB and a solid running game and supporting cast leading to 1 great year. So any great WR either looks only good in his offense but more often than not he gets downplayed. Voters see the All-American QB throwing for 3,800 yards and 32 TDs, not his star go to WR. The first pitfall is to forget that voters pick the team QB more than the star WR.

Secondly, not being an MVP proves nothing. The games greatest OL have never had a shot at the title despite often single handedly creating a running game AND giving their QB time to throw. It doesn't mean that they are not important players. Especially to claim that they are interchangeable is a joke. If they want to write about anything, it should be about the uncertainty of drafting WRs.

Transitioning from college to pro is a real crap shoot for a WR. So many of them simply out run and outplay in college that they never learn the real game. When they get to the pros they're inundated with fine points of the game. If speed and size were all that were needed and route running, hands, and separation were easy to learn, olympic sprinters would be WRs. Yet plenty of lightning fast WRs never get the specifics down and then comes along a Colston whose mind and game adapt overnight and he's a sensation. Talking about that would be more interesting.

[DraconisRex]

Stop it, your making points, the thread starter might get pissed.

Dude. I posted the article. Nothing more. Nothing less. Made no comment to the pro or con of the article. Presented it for informational purposes only.

So no need for you to publicly wet your pants. Really, man up. It's a football message board. If it's too tough for you, try Yahoo! kids or something.

[SB49er4life]

Dude. I posted the article. Nothing more. Nothing less. Made no comment to the pro or con of the article. Presented it for informational purposes only.

So no need for you to publicly wet your pants. Really, man up. It's a football message board. If it's too tough for you, try Yahoo! kids or something.

I wasn't even talking to you, so I don't know why your getting offended. Sorry if it came off that way. I was merely making a joke with EaglesFanDan. I didn't even realize you weren't saying most of those things.