What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Perloff's Top 10 WR Corps (1 Viewer)

burd

burd

Footballguy
I'd put Indy at #1 over Cincy only because Indy has two #1 WRs in Harrison and Wayne. In Cincy, CJohnson is the clear #1 WR while Housch is cleary #2.

I think Detroit is ranked a little high and NE got screwed.

Anyway, for what it's worth .. here's the link:

http://fannation.com/blogs/post/20099

 
I think Indy should be #1, and NE is too high - a good amount of talent, but it may not gel, and Moss & Stallworth seem similar in style to me.

 
burd said:
In Cincy, CJohnson is the clear #1 WR while Housch is cleary #2.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's clear at all. Last year, CJ finished 4th and Housh finished 11th in 14 games. Pro-rate Housh over 16 games and he ends up 4th and CJ is 5th.
 
Banger said:
burd said:
In Cincy, CJohnson is the clear #1 WR while Housch is cleary #2.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's clear at all. Last year, CJ finished 4th and Housh finished 11th in 14 games. Pro-rate Housh over 16 games and he ends up 4th and CJ is 5th.
Click to expand...
CJ would be productive in any offense he was in. he's a legit #1. i think TJ benefits from his system, carson palmer and having CJ on the other side.
 
I am a die hard Broncos fan and have to say that they are ranked too high. I need to see more consistency from Marshall and see how well Smith and Stokely fair after their injuries before I could rank the Broncos that high.

I agree with swapping Indy and Cincy.

NE is ranked too high. Their receivers aren't that special. The reason NE has good receiving #'s is because of Brady, not the receiving core. If Stallworth can stay healthy and Moss pulls his head out of his you know what, then maybe they can be ranked that high, but until they show me I don't believe it.

 
Carter_Can_Fly said:
The Steelers should not be in the top 10 WRing corps in the NFL at this point.
Click to expand...
:confused: As a corp...Jets?Dolphins?Bills?Browns?Ravens?Texans?Jaguars?Titans?Raiders?Chiefs?Chargers?Well thats all of the AFC and I dont feel like diving into the NFC. None of those are better then the Steelers. You certainly wouldnt trade out Ward/Holmes/Wilson/Washington for them in the real world.And the Steelers are #10. So you would be splitting hairs even if they were close.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BigSteelThrill said:
Carter_Can_Fly said:
The Steelers should not be in the top 10 WRing corps in the NFL at this point.
Click to expand...
:shrug: As a corp...Jets?Dolphins?Bills?Browns?Ravens?Texans?Jaguars?Titans?Raiders?Chiefs?Chargers?Well thats all of the AFC and I dont feel like diving into the NFC. None of those are better then the Steelers. You certainly wouldnt trade out Ward/Holmes/Wilson/Washington for them in the real world.And the Steelers are #10. So you would be splitting hairs even if they were close.
Click to expand...
The Steelers have a very mediocre WRing group at this point. If Holmes continues to grow this season then maybe you have an argument. The Steelers have not had a WR on their roster get to 1000 yards in the last 2 years. Their number 2 WR has a grand total of 49 receptions to his name. Sure Wilson and Washignton add some depth but at this point they are both very mediocre WR's.Let us look at the first team you have put a question mark beside and compare them to the Steelers.The Steelers top 3 WR's last season.1) Ward 74 receptions, 975 yards and 6 TD's2) S. Holmes 49 receptions 824 yards and 2 TD's3) N. Washignton 35 receptions 624 yards and 4 TD'sThe Jets top 3 WR's last season1) L. Coles 91 receptions 1098 yards and 6 TD's2) J. Cotchery 82 receptions 961 yards and 6 TD's3) J. McCareins 23 receptions 327 yards and 1 TD.Steelers Totals of top 3 WR's 158 receptions 2423 yards and 12 TD'svs Jets196 receptions 2386 yards and 13 TD'sThe Jets WR 1 (Coles) and WR 2 (Cotchery) where both better than the Steelers WR 1 (Ward), They also tied all 3 WR's of the Steelers in TD's (12 total) and caught 173 balls to the Steelers 158.I think the Jets could easily be ahead of the Steelers.
 
This isnt just a stat thing.

Its a real football thing - who is a better WR corp, who would the FOs take.

You seemed to have missed that along the way.

Stats are somewhat meaningless. There are way too many variables.

Its also why you cut it it off at the #3 WR instead of #4... to skew meaningless stats.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Outside of Ind, Cinn, and STL, there really aren't any other teams that STAND OUT as a top corp of WRs. There are a lot of other teams that have ONE stud. There are a lot of other teams that have a handful of GOOD WRs. But no team that has at least two STUDS.

 
BigSteelThrill said:
This isnt just a stat thing.

Its a real football thing - who is a better WR corp, who would the FOs take.

You seemed to have missed that along the way.

Stats are somewhat meaningless. There are way too many variables.

Its also why you cut it it off at the #3 WR instead of #4... to skew meaningless stats.
Click to expand...
:goodposting: How am I using meaningless stats? You are the one going to WR 4's to try and prove the Steelers belong on this list. Since when do WR 4's play a significant role ever? The truth is you don't need WR 4's to succeed in the NFL. Heck, having 2 top WRs is more than enough. All of the top teams on that list have an elite WR 1 and a good/great WR 2: Fitz and Boldin, Wayne and Harrison, Housh and C. Johnson, Owens and Glenn, Williams and Johnson, Walker and Smith. The Steelers have one proven WR and then nothing but potetinal at this point playing beside him. Unless you calll S. Holmes with a grand total of 49 receptions, with 2 TD's and 829 yards in his career proven I don't see how I am feeding anyone meaningless stats. And that top WR (Ward) the Steelers have has been good the last 2 years not great.

Like I said at this point the Steelers have the potential to be on this list, but I feel they are at least a year away. I guess you should say prove it to me first.

 
BigSteelThrill said:
Carter_Can_Fly said:
The Steelers should not be in the top 10 WRing corps in the NFL at this point.
Click to expand...
:pickle: As a corp...Jets?Dolphins?Bills?Browns?Ravens?Texans?Jaguars?Titans?Raiders?Chiefs?Chargers?Well thats all of the AFC and I dont feel like diving into the NFC. None of those are better then the Steelers. You certainly wouldnt trade out Ward/Holmes/Wilson/Washington for them in the real world.And the Steelers are #10. So you would be splitting hairs even if they were close.
Click to expand...
As a Steeler fan my homerism can't even get me to justify them top ten. Simply far to many unknowns at the moment for them to be placed that high.
 
Carter... the article included the 4th WR (and you removed it). Not me.

That less "significant" #4 had 504 yards and 14 more receptions then the Jets #3? :pickle:

The stats can be skewed all over the place.

The bottom line is the WR corp is better in Pittsburgh, even if the top 2 WR get more passes their way in NY. Take Mike Furry as an example.

 
kevinray said:
Jets?Dolphins?Bills?Browns?Ravens?Texans?Jaguars?Titans?Raiders?Chiefs?Chargers?
Click to expand...
As a Steeler fan my homerism can't even get me to justify them top ten. Simply far to many unknowns at the moment for them to be placed that high.
Click to expand...
I can agree with that. But of those teams listed above, as a GM would you trade the current Pit WRs straight across for any WR corp listed above? And not only make use of it this year on a playoff cailber team but also into the future. If so which would you trade it for... the Bills?!?!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BigSteelThrill said:
Carter... the article included the 4th WR (and you removed it). Not me. That less "significant" #4 had 504 yards and 14 more receptions then the Jets #3? :X The stats can be skewed all over the place. The bottom line is the WR corp is better in Pittsburgh, even if the top 2 WR get more passes their way in NY. Take Mike Furry as an example.
Click to expand...
I think the WR corp in Pittsburgh has a chance to be better than the Jets WR corps but at this point I would perfer to be lining up L. Coles and J. Cotchery to start games vs Ward and Holmes. If Holmes continues to grow from his rookie year then things could change.
 
shredhead said:
I am a die hard Broncos fan and have to say that they are ranked too high. I need to see more consistency from Marshall and see how well Smith and Stokely fair after their injuries before I could rank the Broncos that high.
Click to expand...
Javon Walker is an All Pro and carries the roster. After that you've got Smith and Marshall, neither of whom looks out of place as a WR2, and one of whom is going to be a standout WR3.
BigSteelThrill said:
This isnt just a stat thing.

Its a real football thing - who is a better WR corp, who would the FOs take.

You seemed to have missed that along the way.

Stats are somewhat meaningless. There are way too many variables.

Its also why you cut it it off at the #3 WR instead of #4... to skew meaningless stats.
Click to expand...
I agree here. Pittsburgh WRs are worth more than their stats alone. Pittsburgh's offensive system tends to suppress stats, and Pitt has some of the best blocking WRs in the league.
az_prof said:
Outside of Ind, Cinn, and STL, there really aren't any other teams that STAND OUT as a top corp of WRs. There are a lot of other teams that have ONE stud. There are a lot of other teams that have a handful of GOOD WRs. But no team that has at least two STUDS.
Click to expand...
Arizona down?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Travdogg's post FA 2 round mock draft
Replies
39
Views
1K
rockaction
rockaction
T
Travdogg's 3 round mock draft
2
Replies
84
Views
5K
travdogg
T
Ministry of Pain
Atlanta Falcons Offense '24- WR/RB/TE/QB and the OL
Replies
3
Views
1K
zamboni
zamboni

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top