Magox Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 I keep reading from a number of posters the belief or direct implication that in order to have a successful football offense that you need a top tiered #1 WR. The last 1st team All Pro WR who was on a super bowl winning team was all the way back in 2006 with Marvin Harrison. Heck, even if you go back the last 10 years to see the top WR's on the winning team, you would be hard pressed to find a handful of pro bowl receivers. My belief is that if you can field 4 quality and complimentary WR's that are not considered "True #1's" that not only can you get by but thrive as long as there is a QB that can distribute it. If Foster can improve upon what he did last year you will have a really speedy and productive mid to deep threat. If John Brown can continue what he was beginning to show when Flacco was the QB last year, then you have another ultra fast effective deep threat. Beasley is an upper tiered slot receiver that has shown time and time again that he can get open. Zay improved markedly from his rookie year but I still have some doubts with him. He would need to continue to improve. And I still believe the Bills will draft a WR in this years draft, there are too many good prospects to not go after at least one of them. The speed of Foster and Brown should really help open up the field and lead to dynamic plays and I believe that Daboll will continue to install his vertical passing offense that should create lots of opportunities for Beasley/Kroft and running lanes for Josh to scramble. Yeah, we don't want him running too often but to not utilize his rushing skills would be insane. I'm excited, I think most of the receiving pieces are potentially here. Which is a far cry from where we were one year ago. 1 1 2
Rc2catch Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 Maybe it’s just me but the quarterbacks seem to thrive big time with these elite guys getting them the ball early on, But as time goes on they all seem to get worse. I think an argument can be made that the tunnel vision to lock on to these elite receivers seems to hurt some quarterbacks overall game of reading the field and finding other guys. 10 years ago maybe not such a big deal, just seems to be a growing trend of today’s quarterbacks. 1
eball Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 <ducks head and runs for cover pending ScottLaw's arrival to the thread> 6 1
PetermansRedemption Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 (edited) I guess we will find out this season. People are sleeping on John Brown though. 715 yards and 5TDS while playing with Lamar for half the year. Edited March 13, 2019 by Bills2ref 2
RyanC883 Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 Nope, see the Pats****. And even Rams to some extent. A top WR does not "carry" a team. Nice to have and makes winning easier, but not necessary. And, the WR's we have (Brown and Foster and Beasley, and Zay) play into Allen's strengths. They should perform better here than elsewhere if Allen progresses. I also think a WR in Rd. 2-3 has the potential to be a #1. 1 minute ago, Bills2ref said: I guess we will find out this season. People are sleeping on John Brown though. 715 yards and 5TDS while playing with Lamar for half the year. exactly. he could put up gigantic numbers here. Esp with Foster opposite. And Beasley working the middle. 2
loyal2dagame Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 Funny thing. The four teams with the consensus top 4 receivers in the NFL (Giants, Steelers, Bengals, Falcons) didn't make the playoffs. All had established QBs. I think it could help having a top tier WR, but isn't make or break. 5
CommonCents Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 16 minutes ago, Magox said: I keep reading from a number of posters the belief or direct implication that in order to have a successful football offense that you need a top tiered #1 WR. The last 1st team All Pro WR who was on a super bowl winning team was all the way back in 2006 with Marvin Harrison. Heck, even if you go back the last 10 years to see the top WR's on the winning team, you would be hard pressed to find a handful of pro bowl receivers. My belief is that if you can field 4 quality and complimentary WR's that are not considered "True #1's" that not only can you get by but thrive as long as there is a QB that can distribute it. If Foster can improve upon what he did last year you will have a really speedy and productive mid to deep threat. If John Brown can continue what he was beginning to show when Flacco was the QB last year, then you have another ultra fast effective deep threat. Beasley is an upper tiered slot receiver that has shown time and time again that he can get open. Zay improved markedly from his rookie year but I still have some doubts with him. He would need to continue to improve. And I still believe the Bills will draft a WR in this years draft, there are too many good prospects to not go after at least one of them. The speed of Foster and Brown should really help open up the field and lead to dynamic plays and I believe that Daboll will continue to install his vertical passing offense that should create lots of opportunities for Beasley/Kroft and running lanes for Josh to scramble. Yeah, we don't want him running too often but to not utilize his rushing skills would be insane. I'm excited, I think most of the receiving pieces are potentially here. Which is a far cry from where we were one year ago. Hard pressed to find pro bowlers? AFC playoffs just this year. Hilton Allen Hill Hopkins
HiddenInLight Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 A top reciever makes a less then stellar QB look a bit better. Generally a team has a great QB or a great WR. Not usually both. Great QBs are more likely to carry a team then great WRs as it is much easier defensively to take a WR out of the game then a QB.
foreboding Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 12 minutes ago, RyanC883 said: Nope, see the Pats****. And even Rams to some extent. Rams have pretty elite wr room. Cooks, Woods (sigh) and Cupp.
thebandit27 Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 20 minutes ago, Magox said: I keep reading from a number of posters the belief or direct implication that in order to have a successful football offense that you need a top tiered #1 WR. The last 1st team All Pro WR who was on a super bowl winning team was all the way back in 2006 with Marvin Harrison. Heck, even if you go back the last 10 years to see the top WR's on the winning team, you would be hard pressed to find a handful of pro bowl receivers. My belief is that if you can field 4 quality and complimentary WR's that are not considered "True #1's" that not only can you get by but thrive as long as there is a QB that can distribute it. If Foster can improve upon what he did last year you will have a really speedy and productive mid to deep threat. If John Brown can continue what he was beginning to show when Flacco was the QB last year, then you have another ultra fast effective deep threat. Beasley is an upper tiered slot receiver that has shown time and time again that he can get open. Zay improved markedly from his rookie year but I still have some doubts with him. He would need to continue to improve. And I still believe the Bills will draft a WR in this years draft, there are too many good prospects to not go after at least one of them. The speed of Foster and Brown should really help open up the field and lead to dynamic plays and I believe that Daboll will continue to install his vertical passing offense that should create lots of opportunities for Beasley/Kroft and running lanes for Josh to scramble. Yeah, we don't want him running too often but to not utilize his rushing skills would be insane. I'm excited, I think most of the receiving pieces are potentially here. Which is a far cry from where we were one year ago. Nice post. I don't think a team needs a WR1, but I do think that having such a player is extremely beneficial for the development of a young QB. I know I've said it already, but, IMO, the best thing about Buffalo's WR group is that they have multiple types of each style of WR with which Allen had success last year. They have Foster and John Brown to play the boundary speed role. They have Beasley and Zay to play the shiftier slot role. They have McKenzie and Victor Bolden to play the gadget role. What they're missing is the big-bodied, catch radius red-zone guy IMO. Maybe they feel like they can count on Kroft/Croom to be that guy, but I sure would like to see a N'Keal Harry type of 50/50 ball specialist with some downfield speed added in the draft to fill that role. Just my 1 cent. 3
Wayne Cubed Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Magox said: The last 1st team All Pro WR who was on a super bowl winning team was all the way back in 2006 with Marvin Harrison. Heck, even if you go back the last 10 years to see the top WR's on the winning team, you would be hard pressed to find a handful of pro bowl receivers. Not to pick nits but Julio Jones was 1st team all pro in 2016 and was on a Super Bowl losing team that lost in OT in the Super Bowl. In fact last year both 1st team All Pro QBs didn't play in the Super Bowl. The winning SB QB hasn't been a 1st team All Pro since 2016. I guess my point is, I'm not really sure that there's a point to be made there with regards to being 1st team All Pro. Plenty of 1st team All Pro WRs have played in the NFC/AFC Championship games, and have lost. Does that mean they aren't needed? Edited March 13, 2019 by Wayne Cubed
Magox Posted March 13, 2019 Author Posted March 13, 2019 17 minutes ago, CommonCents said: Hard pressed to find pro bowlers? AFC playoffs just this year. Hilton Allen Hill Hopkins "The last 1st team All Pro WR who was on a super bowl winning team was all the way back in 2006 with Marvin Harrison. Heck, even if you go back the last 10 years to see the top WR's on the winning team, you would be hard pressed to find a handful of pro bowl receivers. " 2 minutes ago, Wayne Cubed said: Not to pick nits but Julio Jones was 1st team all pro in 2016 and was on a Super Bowl losing team that lost in OT in the Super Bowl. In fact last year both 1st team All Pro QBs didn't play in the Super Bowl. That hasn't happened since 2016. I guess my point is, I'm not really sure that there's a point to be made there with regards to being 1st team All Pro. Plenty of 1st team All Pro WRs have played in the NFC/AFC Championship games, and have lost. Does that mean they aren't needed? I did say "winning" Superbowl team. Dont get me wrong, would love to have one but they arent needed.
TPS Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 The Duke is an interesting prospect that has what the current group lacks, size. I expect they will also address this type of wr in the draft as well. I agree with your premise.
mannc Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 54 minutes ago, Magox said: I keep reading from a number of posters the belief or direct implication that in order to have a successful football offense that you need a top tiered #1 WR. The last 1st team All Pro WR who was on a super bowl winning team was all the way back in 2006 with Marvin Harrison. Heck, even if you go back the last 10 years to see the top WR's on the winning team, you would be hard pressed to find a handful of pro bowl receivers. My belief is that if you can field 4 quality and complimentary WR's that are not considered "True #1's" that not only can you get by but thrive as long as there is a QB that can distribute it. If Foster can improve upon what he did last year you will have a really speedy and productive mid to deep threat. If John Brown can continue what he was beginning to show when Flacco was the QB last year, then you have another ultra fast effective deep threat. Beasley is an upper tiered slot receiver that has shown time and time again that he can get open. Zay improved markedly from his rookie year but I still have some doubts with him. He would need to continue to improve. And I still believe the Bills will draft a WR in this years draft, there are too many good prospects to not go after at least one of them. The speed of Foster and Brown should really help open up the field and lead to dynamic plays and I believe that Daboll will continue to install his vertical passing offense that should create lots of opportunities for Beasley/Kroft and running lanes for Josh to scramble. Yeah, we don't want him running too often but to not utilize his rushing skills would be insane. I'm excited, I think most of the receiving pieces are potentially here. Which is a far cry from where we were one year ago. I think people are overthinking this. Obviously, you don't absolutely have to have a top three receiver to be successful. But the better your receivers (including TE and RB, by the way), the better chance your QB has to be successful. A great wideout with elite speed like Tyreek Hill opens up the entire offense for the Chiefs and creates opportunities for other receivers and the running game. It's not really debatable. That doesn't guaranty your team is going to the Super Bowl (you still need a QB, and lots of other parts, including a defense), but having a top wideout definitely helps. But if the argument is that you shouldn't trade multiple number 1 picks for someone you hope will become an elite WR, then I wouldn't disagree. 26 minutes ago, Wayne Cubed said: Not to pick nits but Julio Jones was 1st team all pro in 2016 and was on a Super Bowl losing team that lost in OT in the Super Bowl. In fact last year both 1st team All Pro QBs didn't play in the Super Bowl. That hasn't happened since 2016. I guess my point is, I'm not really sure that there's a point to be made there with regards to being 1st team All Pro. Plenty of 1st team All Pro WRs have played in the NFC/AFC Championship games, and have lost. Does that mean they aren't needed? FWIW, I seem to recall that a WR was the Super Bowl MVP this year.
John from Riverside Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 56 minutes ago, WhyteDwarf said: Yes, and the Bills don't have one. The good QBs dont need one 1
CardinalScotts Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 Not once your QB has established himself - but playing a guy in year 1-2-3-4 without once stunts his growth or stops it all together 6 minutes ago, Rufridr101 said: Who was the patriots number one last year Pats are different you have Brady who has been in the same offense for 18 years-- they have a gronk. Players like gronk--graham-kelce-ertz- delaney walker or witten tyoes you can run your normal offense if it goes great if not you can always throw it to the TE who is open even when he is covered. Great hands put it up high....always in qb vision around the hash marks. These guys let a qb take chances knowing if i miss it I can come right back for the first down
BaaadThingsMan Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 I don't know if a number one is needed, per say, but someone who can consistently get open, move the chains and catches most of the balls he sees would be nice. The team has had 1 100 catch receiver ever, Eric Moulds. With the new NFL throwing the ball all over the place, they need more than Zay Jones 56 catches to lead them.
Alphadawg7 Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 1 hour ago, loyal2dagame said: Funny thing. The four teams with the consensus top 4 receivers in the NFL (Giants, Steelers, Bengals, Falcons) didn't make the playoffs. All had established QBs. I think it could help having a top tier WR, but isn't make or break. While I agree with you about not needing a top WR, Hopkins is a top 4 WR and made the playoffs.
Recommended Posts