Put down the Berrian kool-aid man.But seriously, whi do you have Chad Johnson and Randy Moss in the poll??The best receiver is Tory Holt. Everyone knows it. Steve Smith is a close second. Then you can toss probably 15 guys around and get different opinions on who is 3-10 or so. (harrison, owens, CJ, housh, a johnson, r williams, harrison, wayne, jackson, walker, driver, moss, berrian, etc...)If anyone list anyone but Tory Holt as the best wr in football, they have some sort of mental deficiency that doesn't let them see beyond their own biases.Berrian
How can you even have a discussion beyond Tory Holt?? Serioiusly.Boldin is an excellent WR, he is no Tory Holt.I think it has gotten to the point where asking who the best WR is like asking who the best RB is. Holt and LT. He is that good.How can you even have this discussion without Anquan Boldin?
Wrong. Torry Holt has fantastic hands, speed, route running, and big play ability. Boldin has the same, aside from speed, and adds on top of that blocking ability, youth & is one of the hardest WRs to bring down in the league. I won't say Boldin is BETTER than Holt or vice versa -- but to completely dismiss him (or any other WR) from the argument is ridiculous.How can you even have a discussion beyond Tory Holt?? Serioiusly.Boldin is an excellent WR, he is no Tory Holt.I think it has gotten to the point where asking who the best WR is like asking who the best RB is. Holt and LT. He is that good.How can you even have this discussion without Anquan Boldin?
Exactly.Also consider that Boldin leads the league in receptions, and has been a lock for 100+ catches since he entered the league (has anyone else done this? Even in his half-season he roped in over 50 catches).Wrong. Torry Holt has fantastic hands, speed, route running, and big play ability. Boldin has the same, aside from speed, and adds on top of that blocking ability, youth & is one of the hardest WRs to bring down in the league. I won't say Boldin is BETTER than Holt or vice versa -- but to completely dismiss him (or any other WR) from the argument is ridiculous.How can you even have a discussion beyond Tory Holt?? Serioiusly.Boldin is an excellent WR, he is no Tory Holt.I think it has gotten to the point where asking who the best WR is like asking who the best RB is. Holt and LT. He is that good.How can you even have this discussion without Anquan Boldin?
I voted other because my vote is for BOLDIN! Hands Down!How can you even have this discussion without Anquan Boldin?
Boldin is a fantastic wr, no doubt. But seriously, he is not as good as Tory Holt, sorry.Fantasy-wise, maybe you could make a case, mainly because his team has zero running game, and throws the ball a real lot. In real life, I doubt you would find any GM that would take him over Tory Holt (for this year only).I also think Boldin should be in this conversation
Define "best".Holt is the best right now....and NFL-record 6 straight 1300-yard seasons and he is in his prime.Smith is electric, but hasn't done it consistently enough to be on par with Holt.Bolden and Roy are young and will be better for the long haul, but they don't have Holt's experience, savy, and proven clutch performances.Wrong. Torry Holt has fantastic hands, speed, route running, and big play ability. Boldin has the same, aside from speed, and adds on top of that blocking ability, youth & is one of the hardest WRs to bring down in the league. I won't say Boldin is BETTER than Holt or vice versa -- but to completely dismiss him (or any other WR) from the argument is ridiculous.How can you even have a discussion beyond Tory Holt?? Serioiusly.Boldin is an excellent WR, he is no Tory Holt.I think it has gotten to the point where asking who the best WR is like asking who the best RB is. Holt and LT. He is that good.How can you even have this discussion without Anquan Boldin?
I like Boldin, but he is not even the best receiver on his team...1. Holt - Total package2. S. Smith - Carolina does win a game without him, and does lose a game with him, says a lot.I voted other because my vote is for BOLDIN! Hands Down!How can you even have this discussion without Anquan Boldin?
Hines Ward does not belong in the same category as Tory Holt and Steve Smith.Are you just a raging Steelers fan, or do you own Ward in your big money league? Because otherwise, there is no reason he should be mentioned in this thread.21 posts before we get to Hines Ward?No worse than #3 overall, arguably the best all-around.
I think your insulting people's intelligence. It's also arrogant and closeminded to dismiss other's opinions, because they differ from your own. I think Steve Smith is the best receiver playing in the NFL right now. He changes the whole dynamics of the game. Teams have to game plan on how to stop him. I watched the Ravens/Panthers game this past weekend, and it just amazes me how outstanding Smith is.Just to reemphasize my point about Boldin.There was a post Sunday, maybe Saturday asking to list the top 10 RB and top 10 WR.I dont think anyone, not 1 had Boldin as number 1. That tells me that this one game last night is sticking in people's heads. i would imagine, by the same token, if he had 3 catches for 50 yards last night, nobody would be chiming in with "Boldin is the best wr in football".One game does not make, or kill a wr.
I'm no Steelers fan, although I did trade for Ward this past off-season. He isn't near the FF WR the others are, but I appreciate his blocking ability and he (first 5 games this year notwithstanding) tends to make the difficult catches. He simply isn't flashy, which I respect.FWIW, I am a huge Lions fan and don't think Roy belongs in this discussion, yet. (and I happen to have him in the same league)Hines Ward does not belong in the same category as Tory Holt and Steve Smith.Are you just a raging Steelers fan, or do you own Ward in your big money league? Because otherwise, there is no reason he should be mentioned in this thread.21 posts before we get to Hines Ward?No worse than #3 overall, arguably the best all-around.
Completely agree. If Holt doesn't make that spectacular catch yesterday, he has two touchdowns but less than a hundred yards, which is still excellent, but in a similar fashion I think that spectacular catch is also bumping him up. I'm not saying it's because of that catch that people regard him as the best, because, to be honest, he's definitely in the top 2 or 3, irrefutably, but to say it's a shut and closed case that he's the best with Smith out there simply isn't true. Talk about selective memories? Remember what Smith did last year? He was a one man wrecking crew that singlehandedly fueled that offense, and tore the Chicago defense to shreds in the post-season. Only when Seattle TRIPLE TEAMED him was he held in check. What he did to Baltimore yesterday was SICK. Holt feasts on Zona, SF and Seattle (which is a solid defense but their secondary leaves a lot to be desired).And count me in on the Boldin train. The guy is flat-out better than Fitzgerald and the definition of "beast". His talent puts him in the top five at the position without a doubt.I think your insulting people's intelligence. It's also arrogant and closeminded to dismiss other's opinions, because they differ from your own. I think Steve Smith is the best receiver playing in the NFL right now. He changes the whole dynamics of the game. Teams have to game plan on how to stop him. I watched the Ravens/Panthers game this past weekend, and it just amazes me how outstanding Smith is.Just to reemphasize my point about Boldin.There was a post Sunday, maybe Saturday asking to list the top 10 RB and top 10 WR.I dont think anyone, not 1 had Boldin as number 1. That tells me that this one game last night is sticking in people's heads. i would imagine, by the same token, if he had 3 catches for 50 yards last night, nobody would be chiming in with "Boldin is the best wr in football".One game does not make, or kill a wr.
He sure was unstoppable last night.How can you even have this discussion without Anquan Boldin?
I agree with your thoughts on Boldin...I see him somewhere in the top 10ish??And a case can be made for Smith and/or Holt I believe. I just dont see any other wrs coming close to the 2 of them right now. if Smith has another few games with no injury questions, then he very well could be the best wr.Tory Holt has put up numbers every week this year. He is amazaingly consistent. That is why i put him up at #1.Completely agree. If Holt doesn't make that spectacular catch yesterday, he has two touchdowns but less than a hundred yards, which is still excellent, but in a similar fashion I think that spectacular catch is also bumping him up. I'm not saying it's because of that catch that people regard him as the best, because, to be honest, he's definitely in the top 2 or 3, irrefutably, but to say it's a shut and closed case that he's the best with Smith out there simply isn't true. Talk about selective memories? Remember what Smith did last year? He was a one man wrecking crew that singlehandedly fueled that offense, and tore the Chicago defense to shreds in the post-season. Only when Seattle TRIPLE TEAMED him was he held in check. What he did to Baltimore yesterday was SICK. Holt feasts on Zona, SF and Seattle (which is a solid defense but their secondary leaves a lot to be desired).And count me in on the Boldin train. The guy is flat-out better than Fitzgerald and the definition of "beast". His talent puts him in the top five at the position without a doubt.I think your insulting people's intelligence. It's also arrogant and closeminded to dismiss other's opinions, because they differ from your own. I think Steve Smith is the best receiver playing in the NFL right now. He changes the whole dynamics of the game. Teams have to game plan on how to stop him. I watched the Ravens/Panthers game this past weekend, and it just amazes me how outstanding Smith is.Just to reemphasize my point about Boldin.There was a post Sunday, maybe Saturday asking to list the top 10 RB and top 10 WR.I dont think anyone, not 1 had Boldin as number 1. That tells me that this one game last night is sticking in people's heads. i would imagine, by the same token, if he had 3 catches for 50 yards last night, nobody would be chiming in with "Boldin is the best wr in football".One game does not make, or kill a wr.
He has also put up the numbers every year for the last 7. Consistency is so rare for a WR, especially to that degree.Tory Holt has put up numbers every week this year. He is amazaingly consistent. That is why i put him up at #1.
Its a 2 horse race between Holt and Smith. Arguments can be made either way I think and be valid. The other guys, well, thats just people picking their favorite guy or guys on their team or something.
Based on what?The facts (per game):I vote Steve Smith. I have Holt in my league but as far as real life is concerned, Smith is far and away the best wr in the league right now.
So a big year following by a dud, a big game followed by a dud, etc...is "better" than 6 straight 1300 yard seasons, 5 straight games with a TD, etc?It is what it is said:Terrell Owens. Even with a slow start, a possible overdose, a foreign offensive system, and virtually no preseason time with his new QB...Owens is still on pace for 70+ catches for close to 1,000 yards and 13 touchdowns. Owens still gains seperation easily from DB's, is a top 3 yac guy and a top 3 jump ball receiver from where I sit. This guy is still the best there is at the position in the NFL.
So Smith catches more passes for more yards?Panthers have gone 4-0 since Smith has returned. I feel he has a bigger impact on his team than Holt has on the Rams. They're both great wr's and you can't go wrong with either one.Based on what?The facts (per game):I vote Steve Smith. I have Holt in my league but as far as real life is concerned, Smith is far and away the best wr in the league right now.
Holt 6 games: 6.17 receptions, 87.67 yds, 1.17 td's
Smith 4 games: 7.75 receptions, 112.5 yds, 0.5 td's
I overstated a little, but my point was consistency. Goes back to my question of the definition of "best". Owens is bigger, faster, and stronger....but he's gotten injured, suspended, and cut. TO's floor is MUCH lower, and his ceiling is no longer higher.It is what it is said:You are incorrect in applying the good year (game), bad year (game) label on Owens. Check the stats again.If you prefer to look at the last three years, Owens has 29 touchdowns in 36 games, while Holt has 31 touchdowns in 46 games. And this three year look ignores Holt's past inconsistancies in scoring touchdowns, in missing double digit touchdowns in all three previous years from 2000-2002. Where as Owens has proven to be able to score his touchdowns in any situation and with several different quarterbacks. Over the past six years, Owens has scored 72 touchdowns in 80 games, while Holt has just 48 touchdowns in 96 games.Holt has shown a steady decline over the past three season in touchdowns, receiving yards and YPC. While Owens has shown a steady increase in receiving yards, YPC and an increase in touchdowns from '03 to '04...while also maintaining that torrid touchdown pace of basically one touchdown per game from '04 to '05, that we have all come to expect from him. As Owens has shown the ability to do this touchdown a game average for 5 out of 6 years now, and under three different QBs.Holt may go for 100/1 a small percentage (6%) of the time more than Owens, but this doesn't make him a better Football player than Owens. The overall numbers don't lie...Owens| 2000 sfo | 14 | 97 1451 15.0 13 || 2001 sfo | 16 | 93 1412 15.2 16 || 2002 sfo | 14 | 100 1300 13.0 13 | 7 79 11.3 1 (Ru stats)! 2003 sfo | 15 | 80 1102 13.8 9 || 2004 phi | 14 | 77 1200 15.6 14 || 2005 phi | 7 | 47 763 16.2 6 |Holt| 2000 stl | 16 | 82 1635 19.9 6 || 2001 stl | 16 | 81 1363 16.8 7 || 2002 stl | 16 | 91 1302 14.3 4 || 2003 stl | 16 | 117 1696 14.5 12 || 2004 stl | 16 | 94 1372 14.6 10 || 2005 stl | 14 | 102 1331 13.0 9 |So a big year following by a dud, a big game followed by a dud, etc...is "better" than 6 straight 1300 yard seasons, 5 straight games with a TD, etc?It is what it is said:Terrell Owens. Even with a slow start, a possible overdose, a foreign offensive system, and virtually no preseason time with his new QB...Owens is still on pace for 70+ catches for close to 1,000 yards and 13 touchdowns. Owens still gains seperation easily from DB's, is a top 3 yac guy and a top 3 jump ball receiver from where I sit. This guy is still the best there is at the position in the NFL.
I think this is it right now....and i'd add:4. Boldin5. Chad JohnsonRoy is leading the league in yards...and that's with missing a game. He looks unstoppable out there, and Kitna has figured it out. He's going to continue to put up monster numbers. Boldin is a friggin Machine.1. Holt 2. Smith 3. RoyThey can not be covered right now. Impossible.
Steady decline the last 3 years for Holt? I guess you ignore that Holt's receptions were up and yardage and TD were barely off his 2004 totals in spite of missing 2 games. I will concede the point that TO is much more of a red zone threat and Holt will not have as many double digit TD years as TO.It is what it is said:You are incorrect in applying the good year (game), bad year (game) label on Owens. Check the stats again.If you prefer to look at the last three years, Owens has 29 touchdowns in 36 games, while Holt has 31 touchdowns in 46 games. And this three year look ignores Holt's past inconsistancies in scoring touchdowns, in missing double digit touchdowns in all three previous years from 2000-2002. Where as Owens has proven to be able to score his touchdowns in any situation and with several different quarterbacks. Over the past six years, Owens has scored 72 touchdowns in 80 games, while Holt has just 48 touchdowns in 96 games.Holt has shown a steady decline over the past three season in touchdowns, receiving yards and YPC. While Owens has shown a steady increase in receiving yards, YPC and an increase in touchdowns from '03 to '04...while also maintaining that torrid touchdown pace of basically one touchdown per game from '04 to '05, that we have all come to expect from him. As Owens has shown the ability to do this touchdown a game average for 5 out of 6 years now, and under three different QBs.Holt may go for 100/1 a small percentage (6%) of the time more than Owens, but this doesn't make him a better Football player than Owens. The overall numbers don't lie...Owens| 2000 sfo | 14 | 97 1451 15.0 13 || 2001 sfo | 16 | 93 1412 15.2 16 || 2002 sfo | 14 | 100 1300 13.0 13 | 7 79 11.3 1 (Ru stats)! 2003 sfo | 15 | 80 1102 13.8 9 || 2004 phi | 14 | 77 1200 15.6 14 || 2005 phi | 7 | 47 763 16.2 6 |Holt| 2000 stl | 16 | 82 1635 19.9 6 || 2001 stl | 16 | 81 1363 16.8 7 || 2002 stl | 16 | 91 1302 14.3 4 || 2003 stl | 16 | 117 1696 14.5 12 || 2004 stl | 16 | 94 1372 14.6 10 || 2005 stl | 14 | 102 1331 13.0 9 |So a big year following by a dud, a big game followed by a dud, etc...is "better" than 6 straight 1300 yard seasons, 5 straight games with a TD, etc?It is what it is said:Terrell Owens. Even with a slow start, a possible overdose, a foreign offensive system, and virtually no preseason time with his new QB...Owens is still on pace for 70+ catches for close to 1,000 yards and 13 touchdowns. Owens still gains seperation easily from DB's, is a top 3 yac guy and a top 3 jump ball receiver from where I sit. This guy is still the best there is at the position in the NFL.
1. Holt 2. Smith 3. RoyThey can not be covered right now. Impossible.