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!

PFW: Receivers don't make as much difference as teams think (1 Viewer)

BigTex

Don't mess with Texas
Overvalued position

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

By Don Pierson

March 31, 2007

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.

Just ask Terrell Owens, who fired his publicist soon after his latest team was eliminated from the playoffs.

Owens was at the forefront of a receiver exchange that dominated offseason news yet didn’t seem to matter by the time the playoff games mattered.

At the current rate, more receivers are going to need publicists. Without offensive lines, running backs, accurate quarterbacks and decent defenses, wide receivers are no more important than expensive window dressing.

This was not the first year that rotating receivers ended up as little more than curiosities in new uniforms. Remember Randy Moss? He was the Terrell Owens of his day, the big news of the 2005 offseason after the Vikings traded him to the Raiders. Yes, he fell into a black hole in Oakland two years ago and now isn’t even the most famous receiver named Moss.

That would be Santana Moss of the Redskins, or is it the Jets? And if Laveranues Coles leaves the Jets for the second time, will anyone notice?

The Pro Football Hall of Fame has elected only three wide receivers in the last decade — Lynn Swann, John Stallworth and James Lofton. In 1985, when Rice was a rookie, only four receivers had 600 catches. Now there are 42. But as the numbers go up, is the impact going down?

Andre Johnson led the league in receptions this season with 103. He plays for the Texans, in case you didn’t know. They won six games.

The Lions drafted WRs Charles Rogers, Roy Williams and Mike Williams with their No. 1 picks in 2003, 2004, and 2005. They finally hit on one — free agent Mike Furrey, who happened to lead the NFC in receptions with 98. A year ago, he caught zero as a defensive back whom the Rams let go in free agency.

The Lions were 3-13, by the way, following 5-11, 6-10 and 5-11 seasons.

The playoff teams are not immune to receiver folly. Because he would have it no other way, Owens was the biggest-name receiver to move last season. The Cowboys were going to blossom with him, and the Eagles were going to fold without him.

Owens watched the Eagles play the Saints in the divisional round of last season's playoffs as the Eagles used one of the Saints’ former receivers, Donté Stallworth, to help them forget Owens. The Saints replaced Stallworth with seventh-round rookie Marques Colston, the most prolific wide receiver of the NFC’s final four teams.

If you can find a Colston or a T.J. Houshmandzadeh or a Donald Driver in the seventh round of the draft, or a Jerricho Cotchery in the fourth round or a Hines Ward in the third round, why would anybody need to worry about where the next crop is coming from?

The Bears paid big money to sign proven veteran Muhsin Muhammad before the 2005 season, filling a void after the 2004 trade of Marty Booker. Recent statistics indicate they might be the same person.

The Bears resisted the urge to overpay Pittsburgh’s Antwaan Randle El in free agency, sticking with unknowns Bernard Berrian and Mark Bradley and drafting Devin Hester to assume what would have been Randle El’s punt-returning role. Not a bad decision.

Likewise, the Steelers didn’t break their bank to keep Randle El, instead drafting Santonio Holmes, who caught more passes and posted a better punt-return average than Randle El did in Washington.

The Redskins not only sought Randle El, but they also overpaid San Francisco’s leading receiver, Brandon Lloyd. In Washington, Lloyd caught 23 passes for zero touchdowns. The Redskins won fewer games than they had won last season; the 49ers won more.

The Seahawks snapped up Deion Branch when the Patriots apparently weren’t overly impressed by his Super Bowl MVP credentials.

Besides losing their top receiver, Branch, the Patriots also lost their second-leading receiver, David Givens, to the Titans. So, the Patriots signed Reche Caldwell after the Chargers let him go in free agency. The Patriots also signed Jabar Gaffney, who was released by the Eagles after signing as a free agent from the Texans.

On his third team in 10 months, Gaffney just happened to lead all receivers (104 yards) in the wild-card round of the postseason.

The Seahawks also signed Nate Burleson from the Vikings and lost Joe Jurevicius to the Browns, who got all excited because Jurevicius has played in Super Bowls for the Giants, Buccaneers and Seahawks. Evidently, he wasn’t the reason those teams got there. The Browns ­didn’t mind when they let their leading receiver, Antonio Bryant, go to San Francisco, where the 49ers used him to replace Lloyd. (Bryant was released following the season, before the start of free agency.)

The Browns won four games, the 49ers seven and the Redskins five. Their receivers did little more than fill out the huddle.

Unless you’re the Colts, who live and die with the arm of Peyton Manning and the hands of WRs Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne, it appears you can find suitable receivers just about anywhere you look — free agency, high in the draft, low in the draft, practice squad, via trade or on the street.

The Broncos were going to take the next step by adding gifted Javon Walker from the Packers. Ex-Bronco Ashley Lelie was going to give Atlanta’s Michael Vick a “go-to guy.” The Broncos and Falcons won fewer games than they did last year, and the Packers won twice as many after replacing Walker with rookie Greg Jennings.

The Bills let go of leading WR Eric Moulds, who went to the Texans to complement Johnson. The Bills brought back Peerless Price, a failure in Atlanta, and the Bills won more games than they did with Moulds in ’05.

Four days before the Cowboys signed Owens, they released Keyshawn Johnson, who quickly joined the Panthers as the much-needed replacement for Muhammad, the former complement to Steve Smith. The Panthers went from 11-5 to 8-8, and even though it looks like Smith didn’t make any more difference this year than any other receiver, there are plenty of teams in the league that are glad they didn’t have to face him.

But is it any wonder that receivers enjoy those show-off endzone celebrations? If they didn’t go out of their way to be noticed, nobody could tell whether they were coming or going. By the way, did Chad Johnson play last year?

Don Pierson covers pro football for the Chicago Tribune.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seems like he's cherry picking his examples.

Take the Super Bowl winners from the last few years and tell me which had throw-away receivers on their rosters.

Picking over the hill and overrated receivers is not a good writing.

 
Seems like he's cherry picking his examples.Take the Super Bowl winners from the last few years and tell me which had throw-away receivers on their rosters.Picking over the hill and overrated receivers is not a good writing.
I know its not exactly what you're asking, but both the Patriots and the Eagles have been pretty successful despite a mishmash of mediocre WRs.
 
Seems like he's cherry picking his examples.Take the Super Bowl winners from the last few years and tell me which had throw-away receivers on their rosters.Picking over the hill and overrated receivers is not a good writing.
I know its not exactly what you're asking, but both the Patriots and the Eagles have been pretty successful despite a mishmash of mediocre WRs.
Yes and no. Deion Branch had 78 catches in 2005.And the Eagles weren't successful (well, Super Bowl successful anyway) until acquiring TO in his prime (which has passed now).I do think the position is a bit overrated as is the importance of ANY one position on the team. But that doesn't mean you can throw just anyone out there and succeed.
 
Seems like he's cherry picking his examples.Take the Super Bowl winners from the last few years and tell me which had throw-away receivers on their rosters.Picking over the hill and overrated receivers is not a good writing.
2005 PIT's leading reciever was Hines Ward 65-975-112004 NE's leading recievers were Givens 56-874-3 and Patten 44-800-72003 NE's leading reciever was Branch 57-803-32000 BAL's leading reciever was Ismail 49-655-5That's 4 of the last 7 Superbowl winners that didn't have a WR get 1000 yards. And I wouldn't exactly call Keyshawn Johnson's 2002: 78-1088-5 a difference making performance.
 
Seems like he's cherry picking his examples.Take the Super Bowl winners from the last few years and tell me which had throw-away receivers on their rosters.Picking over the hill and overrated receivers is not a good writing.
2005 PIT's leading reciever was Hines Ward 65-975-112004 NE's leading recievers were Givens 56-874-3 and Patten 44-800-72003 NE's leading reciever was Branch 57-803-32000 BAL's leading reciever was Ismail 49-655-5That's 4 of the last 7 Superbowl winners that didn't have a WR get 1000 yards. And I wouldn't exactly call Keyshawn Johnson's 2002: 78-1088-5 a difference making performance.
I'm just saying that the writer of the article cited makes it sound like you can throw any old group of pass catchers out there and be successful.If his intent was to say that the WR position is overrated, as I said previously, I agree with that.But then saying ANY one position is the most important is a bad argument anyway. I feel the same thing when people say their team has to have a stud Left Tackle. Or a "shutdown" corner. Any one stud is not going to make or break your team.
 
Seems like he's cherry picking his examples.Take the Super Bowl winners from the last few years and tell me which had throw-away receivers on their rosters.Picking over the hill and overrated receivers is not a good writing.
:rant: The author should have pointed out any statistical trends that support his claims. As a wise man once said, "The plural of anecdote is not data."
 
Seems like he's cherry picking his examples.

Take the Super Bowl winners from the last few years and tell me which had throw-away receivers on their rosters.

Picking over the hill and overrated receivers is not a good writing.
I know its not exactly what you're asking, but both the Patriots and the Eagles have been pretty successful despite a mishmash of mediocre WRs.
Yes and no. Deion Branch had 78 catches in 2005.And the Eagles weren't successful (well, Super Bowl successful anyway) until acquiring TO in his prime (which has passed now).

I do think the position is a bit overrated as is the importance of ANY one position on the team. But that doesn't mean you can throw just anyone out there and succeed.
True but remember that the Eagles made the playoffs before TO. And once they did reach the playoffs with TO on the team, they won the games to the Superbowl without him. The Pats this last year were very successful in the AFC with :rant: as their main guy. I guess my point is WR is the most overrated position on a team and if I was a team like the Raiders with the first pick in the draft, there's no way I would take a WR when you still need to work on the core of the team (OL,DL,QB).
 
Seems like he's cherry picking his examples.

Take the Super Bowl winners from the last few years and tell me which had throw-away receivers on their rosters.

Picking over the hill and overrated receivers is not a good writing.
I know its not exactly what you're asking, but both the Patriots and the Eagles have been pretty successful despite a mishmash of mediocre WRs.
Yes and no. Deion Branch had 78 catches in 2005.And the Eagles weren't successful (well, Super Bowl successful anyway) until acquiring TO in his prime (which has passed now).

I do think the position is a bit overrated as is the importance of ANY one position on the team. But that doesn't mean you can throw just anyone out there and succeed.
True but remember that the Eagles made the playoffs before TO. And once they did reach the playoffs with TO on the team, they won the games to the Superbowl without him. The Pats this last year were very successful in the AFC with :yucky: as their main guy. I guess my point is WR is the most overrated position on a team and if I was a team like the Raiders with the first pick in the draft, there's no way I would take a WR when you still need to work on the core of the team (OL,DL,QB).
:rant: I'd like to know when was the last time a top 5 or top 10 WR was part of a superbowl winning team.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seems like he's cherry picking his examples.

Take the Super Bowl winners from the last few years and tell me which had throw-away receivers on their rosters.

Picking over the hill and overrated receivers is not a good writing.
I know its not exactly what you're asking, but both the Patriots and the Eagles have been pretty successful despite a mishmash of mediocre WRs.
Yes and no. Deion Branch had 78 catches in 2005.And the Eagles weren't successful (well, Super Bowl successful anyway) until acquiring TO in his prime (which has passed now).

I do think the position is a bit overrated as is the importance of ANY one position on the team. But that doesn't mean you can throw just anyone out there and succeed.
True but remember that the Eagles made the playoffs before TO. And once they did reach the playoffs with TO on the team, they won the games to the Superbowl without him. The Pats this last year were very successful in the AFC with :lmao: as their main guy. I guess my point is WR is the most overrated position on a team and if I was a team like the Raiders with the first pick in the draft, there's no way I would take a WR when you still need to work on the core of the team (OL,DL,QB).
:lmao: I'd like to know when was the last time a top 5 or top 10 WR was part of a superbowl winning team.
I remember way back in 2006 there were TWO of them.
 
Seems like he's cherry picking his examples.

Take the Super Bowl winners from the last few years and tell me which had throw-away receivers on their rosters.

Picking over the hill and overrated receivers is not a good writing.
I know its not exactly what you're asking, but both the Patriots and the Eagles have been pretty successful despite a mishmash of mediocre WRs.
Yes and no. Deion Branch had 78 catches in 2005.And the Eagles weren't successful (well, Super Bowl successful anyway) until acquiring TO in his prime (which has passed now).

I do think the position is a bit overrated as is the importance of ANY one position on the team. But that doesn't mean you can throw just anyone out there and succeed.
True but remember that the Eagles made the playoffs before TO. And once they did reach the playoffs with TO on the team, they won the games to the Superbowl without him. The Pats this last year were very successful in the AFC with :lmao: as their main guy. I guess my point is WR is the most overrated position on a team and if I was a team like the Raiders with the first pick in the draft, there's no way I would take a WR when you still need to work on the core of the team (OL,DL,QB).
:lmao: I'd like to know when was the last time a top 5 or top 10 WR was part of a superbowl winning team.
I remember way back in 2006 there were TWO of them.
This is what happens when you get old.
 
Seems like he's cherry picking his examples.
Ya think? The thing is LATELY most SB winners/great teams haven't had a WR be a huge part of their success so it would seem to back him, but you can punch some sizable holes in this if you go back a bit further. Also "most overrated" is a really vague and subjective term. Most overrated by who?
But then saying ANY one position is the most important is a bad argument anyway.
Hardly. Of course have been exceptions, but generally QB is the single most important position on a team. Easily.
Any one stud is not going to make or break your team.
Colt fans might disagree. :lmao: (although ironically it wasn't Manning who carried them to the title) Of course it's a team sport and you need talent at most if not all positions for consistent success, but a key "stud" player can be a difference-maker. Colts don't even make playoffs w/o Manning. Rams wouldn't have won it w/o Faulk. etc.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seems like he's cherry picking his examples.

Take the Super Bowl winners from the last few years and tell me which had throw-away receivers on their rosters.

Picking over the hill and overrated receivers is not a good writing.
I know its not exactly what you're asking, but both the Patriots and the Eagles have been pretty successful despite a mishmash of mediocre WRs.
Yes and no. Deion Branch had 78 catches in 2005.And the Eagles weren't successful (well, Super Bowl successful anyway) until acquiring TO in his prime (which has passed now).

I do think the position is a bit overrated as is the importance of ANY one position on the team. But that doesn't mean you can throw just anyone out there and succeed.
True but remember that the Eagles made the playoffs before TO. And once they did reach the playoffs with TO on the team, they won the games to the Superbowl without him. The Pats this last year were very successful in the AFC with :wall: as their main guy. I guess my point is WR is the most overrated position on a team and if I was a team like the Raiders with the first pick in the draft, there's no way I would take a WR when you still need to work on the core of the team (OL,DL,QB).
:wall: I'd like to know when was the last time a top 5 or top 10 WR was part of a superbowl winning team.
I remember way back in 2006 there were TWO of them.
This is what happens when you get old.
Hines Ward was also a top 10WR in '05 (as well as #6 & #3 two and three seasons before that.)
 
Seems like he's cherry picking his examples.

Take the Super Bowl winners from the last few years and tell me which had throw-away receivers on their rosters.

Picking over the hill and overrated receivers is not a good writing.
I know its not exactly what you're asking, but both the Patriots and the Eagles have been pretty successful despite a mishmash of mediocre WRs.
Yes and no. Deion Branch had 78 catches in 2005.And the Eagles weren't successful (well, Super Bowl successful anyway) until acquiring TO in his prime (which has passed now).

I do think the position is a bit overrated as is the importance of ANY one position on the team. But that doesn't mean you can throw just anyone out there and succeed.
True but remember that the Eagles made the playoffs before TO. And once they did reach the playoffs with TO on the team, they won the games to the Superbowl without him. The Pats this last year were very successful in the AFC with :shock: as their main guy. I guess my point is WR is the most overrated position on a team and if I was a team like the Raiders with the first pick in the draft, there's no way I would take a WR when you still need to work on the core of the team (OL,DL,QB).
:scared: I'd like to know when was the last time a top 5 or top 10 WR was part of a superbowl winning team.
I'm not going to look up where they ranked, but these guys had to be near the top of the league when their teams won:Marvin Harrison/Reggie Wayne (SB XLI)

95/1366/12 and 86/1310/9

Troy Brown (SB XXXVI)

101/1199/5

Isaac Bruce (SB XXXIV)

77/1165/12

Rod Smith (SB XXXII, XXXIII)

1997: 70/1180/12

1998: 86/1222/6

Antonio Freeman (SB XXXI)

56/933/9 in only 12 games

Jerry Rice (SB XXIX)

112/1499/13

Michael Irvin (SB XXVII. XXVIII, XXX)

1992: 78/1396/7

1993: 88/1330/7

1995: 111/1603/10

And even when they didn't have big seasons, they had big games IN the Super Bowl.

Deion Branch

XXXIX: 11/133

XXXVIII: 10/143

Hines Ward

XL: 5/123/1

The only two Super Bowl winners where the team didn't have a WR that made an impact over the last nearly 15 years were the two that had historic defenses.

XXXVII Jan. 26, 2003 Tampa Bay 48, Oakland 21

XXXV Jan. 28, 2001 Baltimore 34, N.Y. Giants 7

 
Last edited by a moderator:
But then saying ANY one position is the most important is a bad argument anyway.
Hardly. Of course have been exceptions, but generally QB is the single most important position on a team. Easily.
Genrally, I agree. I think QB is normally by far the most important position.But even that can be made up for if you're strong enough in other areas - See: Tampa Bay with Brad Johnson and Baltimore with Trent Dilfer. But those were aberrations.
 
That article is pretty bad. In addition to some bad anecdotal arguments, there are some outright falsehoods or misrepresentations.

e.g.

The Lions finally hit on a receiver in 2006 with Mike Furrey, after drafting Roy Williams, who is painted as a bust here.

The Eric Moulds / Peerless Price example is pretty bad as well - Moulds was aging and no longer considered Buffalo's #1. It's not like they traded a star and added a spare part. I don't think he's on the Houston roster right now either, although I'm not sure.

"Did Chad Johnson play last year?" - This is bizarre.

Maybe WR is an overrated position, but this article does virtually nothing to support that position. The use of hand-picked examples and some outright misrepresentations doesn't show anything.

I could make a case that cornerbacks don't make that much of a difference by pointing out that Champ Bailey doesn't have a ring, that none of the teams that selected an "elite" CB prospects in 2005 (Adam Jones, Antrelle Rolle, or Carlos Rogers) has won a playoff game since, or that the emergence of Asante Samuel didn't get the Patriots a championship in 2006. It's obvious that those examples don't show anything. Or do it with MLB. Or LT.

 
And even when they didn't have big seasons, they had big games IN the Super Bowl.Deion Branch XXXIX: 11/133XXXVIII: 10/143 Hines Ward XL: 5/123/1
Talk about cherry picking.
Deion Branch2003: 57/803/3 (only started 11 games)2004: 35/454/4 (in 9 games)Hines Ward2005: 69/975/11 (15 games)I only separated them out because they weren't the ridiculous numbers posted by the other guys. Even so, those guys had solid, if not spectacular, years. So my "proof" still holds. I'm willing to wager that if those guys had been able to play a full 16 game schedule as the starter that they'd have been over 1000 yards each season.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And the Eagles weren't successful (well, Super Bowl successful anyway) until acquiring TO in his prime (which has passed now).
Owens that year was a great example of just how overrated this position truly is. Before he got injured, he was having one the best seasons for a wide receiver EVER. His team was winning and he was being credited as the primary reason for that success. After he went down, the Eagles kept on winning (until after they sealed up home field and began benching their starters). In the playoffs, they won every game that Terrell sat out of and lost every game that he played. If a WR with that much talent having that kind of a season has that little impact on the outcome of a game, you have to figure the position is overvalued.
 
If you can find a Colston or a T.J. Houshmandzadeh or a Donald Driver in the seventh round of the draft, or a Jerricho Cotchery in the fourth round or a Hines Ward in the third round, why would anybody need to worry about where the next crop is coming from?
Although I agree with his overall point, this is a TERRIBLE argument. You can make the same case for absolutely every position on the field.
 
Apparently it is a slow day for NFL writers. This whole article is meaningless because it all depends on the team. Some teams win because they draft good WR's others draft defense to win. Some that ignore the WR position fail miserably (any Herminator team). Some don't.

 
Here's a better argument - consider everything that has to happen well before the receiver even gets a chance to make a play: Center needs to make a clean snap to QB, linemen (and sometimes backs) need to make sure QB doesn't get creamed, QB has to time the routes and check the coverage, QB has to make a precise throw at the right time. And this is a simplified look at any generic play.

No other player on the field is as dependent on so many other players for their success, and yet they have a tendency to be the most "look-at-me" guys on the field.

BTW, I primarily played WR in high school (switched positions later in my playing career), and if I listed my all-time favorite players, there would probably be more WRs than any other position.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top