Big Turk Posted November 2, 2008 Share Posted November 2, 2008 The whole #1, #2, #3 thing is a pretty antiquated way of looking at it, imo. The way you should look at the receiving corps is this: A) Do you have an elite deep threat? B) Do you have an elite move-the-chains guy? C) Do you have one more reliable guy with good hands? Evans count as A, I think. Reed counts as C. We're still looking for B. Once you have all A B and C together, that's a great receiving corps and you can stand pat. Reed might be one of the NFL's best at converting on 3rd down even when catching the ball 2 or 3 yards short...I would say he is definitely a solid category B player....he also has one of the highest catch rates for a WR in the NFL as well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted November 2, 2008 Share Posted November 2, 2008 My definition of a #1 receiver is the person has to be unquestionably a top 15 receiver in the league. I would've thought a #1 reciever is anyone who lands in the top 32 in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted November 2, 2008 Share Posted November 2, 2008 I hate to preach, but...would you call someone you barely knew an idiot to their face during a conversation? I doubt you would, so why do it here? Well, people started calling me "idiot" as soon as I joined TSW, so I kinda saw it as the protocol. In essence, you are correct but hey, that seems to be the way things are done around here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted November 2, 2008 Share Posted November 2, 2008 Yes...Lee Evans is a legitimate #1 receiver in the NFL. My definition of a #1 receiver is the person has to be unquestionably a top 15 receiver in the league. There is no question that Evans fits that bill (pun intended). No he's not a top 5 receiver in the league, but it can be argued he falls somewhere between 6-15 in the league. Unfortunately, the Bills haven't had a legitimate #2 receiver since the Eric Moulds/Peerless Price (1st time around) combo about 5-6 years ago. Before that, the last time we had a legit 1-2 combo was the Reed/Lofton era. The Bills have the following receiving corp: #1. Evans #2 (None) #3 (Reed) #4 (Parrish) Unknown: Hardy, Jenkins & Johnson. Note: I personally believe Johnson could become a talented and dependable #3 in this league. I hate saying it...but Hardy doesn't have #1 or #2 written on him. He is a 3-4 at his best. Jenkins is at best a #5 and stud special teams player. What about Johnson makes you think that? His 1 catch for 7 yards? Simply put, we haven't seen nearly enough out of the guy to even come close to making a judgment. And while we're at it, what makes you say that about Hardy? I know he hasn't impressed anybody, but wide receivers are known as the position that takes the longest to develop. Give him a year and let's see where he's at. It is WAY too early to say that his upside is being a number 3 receiver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson from Gamehendge Posted November 2, 2008 Share Posted November 2, 2008 Just to add to the discussion... http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showtopic=75307 http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nf...l-insider_N.htm *My Opinion? YES, he is...without a doubt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circlingthewagons Posted November 2, 2008 Share Posted November 2, 2008 Dumb question. We would struggle without a deep threat. Whoever is concerned with this is in a different universe. Thank god for Lee Evans. Silly, foolish and childish person who poses such a question. j;lkfdsal;jkfdsqjaldsfk;jlfkdsajklf!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts