How important is the WR position?

[Upnorth]

From looking at the link in the oline thread to PFF, I started to look at the PFF top 10 players article, as follows

http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/05/03/pff-top-101-of-2011-the-top-10/

Arod gets #1 as best player in football, with Justin Smith and Drew Brees being 2 and 3 respectively. This i'm okay with, however at 4th and 9th best player there are 2 pass catchers, Calvin Johnson (4) and Fitz(9).

I believe they are both dominant WR's and deserving of high praise, but to be considered the 4th and 9th best players in the league? I just don't think one WR has that large of an impact on the game.

We have arguably the best WR corp in the game, but they dropped 40 passes, or about 8% of all attemps, and they are still considered to be very good players.

Do you think any WR deserve to be in the top 10 players?

[smuggler]

Calvin Johnson makes Matt Stafford look like Aaron Rodgers. Almost. He's a top-10 player. Not Fitzie though.

[sharpe1027]

I think a hard rule that a WR cannot have a large impact on games is way to simplistic.

A WR is not going to carry a team without a decent QB throwing him the ball, so WR should not be in the top ten.
A QB is not going to carry a team without a decent line blocking for him, so QB should not be in the top ten.
A RB is not going to carry a team without a decent line blocking for him, so QB should not be in the top ten.
A OL is not going to carry a team without a QB throwing to a WR or RB that is going to take advantage of the blocking, so and OL should not be in the top ten.

Round and round we go...;)

[Cheesehead Craig]

First, teams ran the wishbone exclusively.

Then the WR came along and Air Coryell was born.

Football was expanded to places like Jacksonville and Germany.

Revenues, fan attendance and finger foam sales skyrocketed to the point where we enjoy the game today.

Thus, the discovery of the WR was indeed very important.

[Deputy Nutz]

wide receivers are really important to this pass happy league. They are paid extremely high and top wide receivers are now out producing top running backs.

[Joemailman]

Calvin Johnson makes Matt Stafford look like Aaron Rodgers. Almost. He's a top-10 player. Not Fitzie though.

Fitz had over 1400 yards last year with John Skelton and Kevin Kolb throwing to him. A top-10 player in my book.

[Smidgeon]

And only three other Packers made the top 100: Clay, Bulaga, and Sitton.

[hoosier]

The injury to Jennings is an argument in support of the importance of elite WRs. The passing game suffered a noticeable statistical decline for the first two games that Jennings missed (213 yards in the low-scoring loss to KC, 282 in a win against Chi). Consider also the difficulty they had adjusting in the games following the loss of Finley in 2010. Maybe my argument is partly about the importance of continuity (the offense looked out of sync during most of the first half of 2010), but take away Jennings in late 2011 and suddenly things were not coming nearly as easily for Nelson and Cobb. What they found was that they couldn't easily plug one of the other guys into Jennings's place and have things run smoothly.

In the top 10: Sure, why not? The difference between Calvin Johnson and Nate Burleson is every bit as big and important for the team as the difference between, say, Clay Matthews and Brad Jones.

[pbmax]

And only three other Packers made the top 100: Clay, Bulaga, and Sitton.

Man have people fallen in love with Bulaga fast. Is this a case of #1 pick, playing a spot he was projected to shine and then the expected decline in production when he missed a couple of games? Or the product of a great O?

I know his pass pro improved, but I was not wowed enough to think he would be in anyone's Top 100 list. Did I miss a meeting?

[Smidgeon]

Man have people fallen in love with Bulaga fast. Is this a case of #1 pick, playing a spot he was projected to shine and then the expected decline in production when he missed a couple of games? Or the product of a great O?

I know his pass pro improved, but I was not wowed enough to think he would be in anyone's Top 100 list. Did I miss a meeting?

I'm just as surprised as who wasn't on it. Jennings for one. I guess Raji and some other had down years, but I didn't think Jennings deserved to be off. Oh well, I'm an amateur at this.

[woodbuck27]

I think a hard rule that a WR cannot have a large impact on games is way to simplistic.

A WR is not going to carry a team without a decent QB throwing him the ball, so WR should not be in the top ten.
A QB is not going to carry a team without a decent line blocking for him, so QB should not be in the top ten.
A RB is not going to carry a team without a decent line blocking for him, so QB should not be in the top ten.
A OL is not going to carry a team without a QB throwing to a WR or RB that is going to take advantage of the blocking, so and OL should not be in the top ten.

Round and round we go...;)

What your implying is that it's a team game. Of course your correct; but it's generally accepted that GREAT teams have extremely solid QB's so to see a QB at the head of that BEST 100 NFL players seems logical.

So why do we see WR's in the TOP Ten?

To win games your need to put points up on the board and in todays game it's generally accepted that's through the air. Thus we see WR's enter the TOP TEN list. Those WR's have to be 'go to guys' and capable of making catch's over and over or more readily targeted and successful in helping to, or put points on the board.

Value to a team can be generally determined by a players $compensation?. We might take a look atv what certain NFL players are paid to assist in declaring a Top Ten List. Calvin Johnso and Larry Fitzerald are paid as TOP NFL players as dominant forces in terms of a games outcome.

Calvin Johnson and Larry Fitzerald are dominant players. Go to guys when a game is on the line.

Calvin Johnson makes his QB look better and places enormous pressure on opposing teams secondary. I've seen games when I wondered why the QB didn't target Larry Fitzerald on 60 % of the plays he was that dominant. What would Larry Fitzerald show us if he ever had a a TOP TEN QB getting the ball to him?

We then turn to the argument what makes what great? Get back to the point that sharpe1027 is making. The QB and WR are depended upon one another for domination. Taking that and adding a wrinkle; it follows when all is considered and (adding player grades into the equasion) that WR's deserve to be included in that list. **

** What impressed me was 'the Domination Factor' that added The NE Pat's TE Rob Gronkowski to 'the TOP TEN List'. Gronk's a player that causes opposing team 'D's' real concern as WR Calvin Johnson does. If Rob Gronkowski had been at 100% in the Super Bowl. Would The New York GIANTS be the current NFL Champions?

GO PACKERS !

[Pugger]

If you only list the top 10 WRs in the league, Jennings is on that list. I've seen lists of the top 10 WRs where Jennings is #5 overall. This list at profootball focus is comprised of the top players regardless of position. I'm sure some folks would dispute a couple of the players in this top 10.

[RashanGary]

I look at WR as a corp. You need one stud you can go to when the going gets tough and you just have to hope and pray. Then you need 3 other good ones to make the other team have to cover the whole field.

If you WR corp is great, that's a big friggin deal.


As far as one guy goes. . . . Agreed. Overrated.

[woodbuck27]

If you only list the top 10 WRs in the league, Jennings is on that list. I've seen lists of the top 10 WRs where Jennings is #5 overall. This list at profootball focus is comprised of the top players regardless of position. I'm sure some folks would dispute a couple of the players in this top 10.

and.... 'of course' you'd be correct in that assumption.

Some people argue when clearly white is white as white ... that it's BLACK. That's what makes the world spin like a top. There are all sorts of amazing discoveries. You'll often observe some people scratchin' their head over some of them.

Yup ... just before they take the sane approach and 'bust out laughing'. (-:

[woodbuck27]

I look at WR as a corp. You need one stud you can go to when the going gets tough and you just have to hope and pray. Then you need 3 other good ones to make the other team have to cover the whole field.

If you WR corp is great, that's a big friggin deal.


As far as one guy goes. . . . Agreed. Overrated.

I believe Calvin Johnson is a force. He makes ** his QB so much better.

** "Matthew Stafford had a QB rating of *** 125.8 *** when throwing at Calvin Johnson." Fr.Article

*** Note Aaron Rodgers set the all-time single season QB rating record of 122.5 in the 2011 season.


Good point here. When we have a healthy Greg Jennings and Jordy Nelson we're a BIG headache for DC's. Now add a TE that actually hangs onto the ball. SCARRY.

The thing is thisb is a list of the TOPP 100 active NFL players and as I recall it our FB John Kuhn is on this list. If this is the list off of 'The NFL Network' ...it's compiled by current NFL payers input alone. Peers selecting peers.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I look at WR as a corp. You need one stud you can go to when the going gets tough and you just have to hope and pray. Then you need 3 other good ones to make the other team have to cover the whole field.

If you WR corp is great, that's a big friggin deal.


I'd have to agree on this. If you only have the 1 stud, it's easier for the other team to neutralize him. But get 3 WRs out there that can produce mismatches and suddenly your offense is explosive. See: GB, NO, NE.

[Upnorth]

I'd have to agree on this. If you only have the 1 stud, it's easier for the other team to neutralize him. But get 3 WRs out there that can produce mismatches and suddenly your offense is explosive. See: GB, NO, NE.

Which was my reason for starting this thread. Look at Fitz with Boldin, vrs Fitz with no Boldin, huge difference. Hell look at Boldin, who was thought to be a impact player, he goes to Baltimore and what happens? Stud qb, rb, de, lb, cd and s all have huge impacts on the game. Even a stud kr/pr can have a bigger impact than one elite WR with no other decent WR in the group. THat is why I have trouble ranking them in the top 10.

[sharpe1027]

I'd have to agree on this. If you only have the 1 stud, it's easier for the other team to neutralize him. But get 3 WRs out there that can produce mismatches and suddenly your offense is explosive. See: GB, NO, NE.

Sure it is easier. That doesn't make him any less important. A QB is easier to neutralized if he doesn't have a good WR or if he doesn't have a good O-line or he he doesn't have a good RB.

[Upnorth]

Sure it is easier. That doesn't make him any less important. A QB is easier to neutralized if he doesn't have a good WR or if he doesn't have a good O-line or he he doesn't have a good RB.

But a good qb without a stud wr can still produce. look at mr Brady in the past. poor wr but great qb still great numbers and game.
Elite wr without a second option to draw coverage away and you have a pedestrian wr.

[Tony Oday]

You need another WR on the roster to make plays...but Steve Smith(midget one) was a stud with crap at the other positions.

[mmmdk]

Without wide receivers...who'd ya throw to? Gridiron dirt? :wink:

[Upnorth]

Without wide receivers...who'd ya throw to? Gridiron dirt? :wink:

If you have a good TE and pass catching RB having average WR's will still get you a good passing game.

[mmmdk]

If you have a good TE and pass catching RB having average WR's will still get you a good passing game.

That line won't cut it on SNL.

[Lurker64]

Super-elite franchise WRs are unnecessary, and overrated.

A great volume of B, B+, and A- WRs combined with a QB who can find the one who is open and spread the ball around is invaluable.

[woodbuck27]

But a good qb without a stud wr can still produce. look at mr Brady in the past. poor wr but great qb still great numbers and game.
Elite wr without a second option to draw coverage away and you have a pedestrian wr.

Generally I agree with you as well as the argument sharpe1027 has as to the real importance being team play or balance serving the whole, before any individual on the field.

Unless that WR is 'that man' in that Top Ten:

Calvin Johnson. That man is certainly SPECIAL as a WR. Extremely tough to defense.

[woodbuck27]

If you have a good TE and pass catching RB having average WR's will still get you a good passing game.

New England?

[Fritz]

Cold Hard Football Facts is a good site, in my opinion, and they have opined that paying a wide receiver top, top dollar is akin to spending all your money for your car on the hood ornament.

[smuggler]

Man have people fallen in love with Bulaga fast. Is this a case of #1 pick, playing a spot he was projected to shine and then the expected decline in production when he missed a couple of games? Or the product of a great O?

I know his pass pro improved, but I was not wowed enough to think he would be in anyone's Top 100 list. Did I miss a meeting?

Bulaga is the #2 ranked RT in the game according to Pro Football Focus and is top 5 on a lot of other lists done with metrics or subjective analysis. He's better than a lot of other young tackles in the league, such as Solder, Carimi, etc. Plus he has a cool name and is on twitter, so people like him.

[Pugger]

If you have a good TE and pass catching RB having average WR's will still get you a good passing game.

Just ask Tom Brady...

[sharpe1027]

If you have a good TE and pass catching RB having average WR's will still get you a good passing game.

I guess. If you have good offensive line and WRs, an average QB will still get you a good passing game.

[Upnorth]

Just ask Tom Brady...

Exactly. The only positions which may have less value gain by having one elite player would be long snapper and punter.
Keeping this in mind, why have two wr as the top nine players?

[sharpe1027]

But a good qb without a stud wr can still produce. look at mr Brady in the past. poor wr but great qb still great numbers and game.
Elite wr without a second option to draw coverage away and you have a pedestrian wr.

A good WR without a stud QB can still produce decent numbers. An elite WR makes a pedestrian second and third option look better much better than pedestrian. While a defense can roll their overages to a single WR, it is not without a cost in other areas. If you make your teammates look better than they really are, that has to be worth something. Individual numbers don't tell the whole story.

[Upnorth]

A good WR without a stud QB can still produce decent numbers. An elite WR makes a pedestrian second and third option look better much better than pedestrian. While a defense can roll their overages to a single WR, it is not without a cost in other areas. If you make your teammates look better than they really are, that has to be worth something. Individual numbers don't tell the whole story.

An elite wr still has value, but i would take an elite QB, RB, TE, DE, DT, CB or S over an elite wr any day of the week. Due to this how can you justify having 2 in the top 9 players?

[sharpe1027]

Exactly. The only positions which may have less value gain by having one elite player would be long snapper and punter.
Keeping this in mind, why have two wr as the top nine players?

Having one elite player at many different positions is arguably just as unclear of a benefit. In reality it is often very scheme and team specific which areas are critical.

Center - how many times have you thought of a center - wow he's so much better than other centers, that's why we won the game?
Offensive Guard - how many times have you thought of a guard - wow he's so much better than other guards, that's why we won the game?
Safety - An elite safety can make plays at take certain things away, but any DB is only as good as the pass rush.
LBer - An elite LBer can change the game, but any LBer will struggle of the DL can't do their job.
DL - especially for 3-4 teams looking for their DL to eat up blockers and not necessarily make huge plays in the backfield, average DL can certainly get the job done.
TE - hell, some teams barely use their TEs, and more importantly, a defense can shift its coverage to slow down a TE similar to a WR.

I'd even go so far as to say that under the analysis of the WR value that has been argued in this thread, I could argue that RBs are not that important. Let's be honest, the days of an elite RB carrying the team are behind us. Look at how many playoff teams have average RBs. How well did the Vikqueens do with Peterson last year? How far did MJD take his team? Michael Turner? Jamaal Charles? Chris Johnson? LeSean McCoy?

My man point is that an elite player and any position is only as good as the rest of the team. Trying to single out WRs because they rely on other players doesn't seem like a solid argument to me.

[sharpe1027]

An elite wr still has value, but i would take an elite QB, RB, TE, DE, DT, CB or S over an elite wr any day of the week. Due to this how can you justify having 2 in the top 9 players?

Ranking players at different positions is so subjective that I'd bet that the same person doing their ranking twice would come up with a different ranking for no good reason. :)

I'm not going to try to justify any ranking, but I don't agree that it is categorically incorrect to put a WR in the top ten.

[woodbuck27]

Cold Hard Football Facts is a good site, in my opinion, and they have opined that paying a wide receiver top, top dollar is akin to spending all your money for your car on the hood ornament.

Hi Fritz:

This site is also useful whenever considering anaysis.


http://www.footballoutsiders.com/

Have a great weekend.

[Smidgeon]

I thought the list wasn't a list of the "best value" or "most important" but simply "the most talented players who live up to their talent". Did I miss a nuance?

[sharpe1027]

I thought the list wasn't a list of the "best value" or "most important" but simply "the most talented players who live up to their talent". Did I miss a nuance?

No, but clearly I did: "It was based on an ethos of all positions created equal. This isn’t about the most valuable players, otherwise there would be a lot more quarterbacks. This is about looking what is expected from a position and who most exceeded that."

[Upnorth]

Ranking players at different positions is so subjective that I'd bet that the same person doing their ranking twice would come up with a different ranking for no good reason. :)

I'm not going to try to justify any ranking, but I don't agree that it is categorically incorrect to put a WR in the top ten.

I can understand putting a wr in the top ten sometimes like the year steve smith dominated with no one around, but dedicating 20% of the top ten to wr???

[Deputy Nutz]

Sterling Sharpe was an absolute monster with no other option opposite of him. I consider him a better receiver than Jerry Rice for this reason alone. 4 out of 7 seasons with over 90 catches, two of those record breaking seasons with over a hundred catches.

If he never got hurt and he had a viable QB prior to Favre he would have been considered the best receiver ever in the NFL.

It can be done, especially now in a league that favors the passing game, and flags tackling.

[woodbuck27]

Sterling Sharpe was an absolute monster with no other option opposite of him. I consider him a better receiver than Jerry Rice for this reason alone. 4 out of 7 seasons with over 90 catches, two of those record breaking seasons with over a hundred catches.

If he never got hurt and he had a viable QB prior to Favre he would have been considered the best receiver ever in the NFL.

It can be done, especially now in a league that favors the passing game, and flags tackling.

Yes Sterling Sharpe was then OUR Calvin Johnson.

The game that we saw him go down with that freaky sideline tackle and injury was the day any hope for us and a Super Bowl was washed away.

Stering Sharpe and Brett Favre . That was 'domination'.

GO PACKERS !

[pbmax]

If you have a good TE and pass catching RB having average WR's will still get you a good passing game.

Tell that to the Bears.

[pbmax]

Just ask Tom Brady...

Brady wasn't Brady until Moss and Welker. Before that he was a "winner" no matter how pedestrian the stats.