A true #1 WR is a player who everytime he touches the ball is a threat to take it to the house. Coles proved that he wasn't #1 WR when he was in Washington. Now Moss on the other hand is that threat. I thought at 1st when we made that trade to get Coles back we got the better of that deal. After one season we didn't even come close to that and even if we had a starting QB all year Coles still wouldn't have put close to those numbers. Plus Washington OF sucked and Moss still put up big numbers.
I agree, we need a true threat at WR, but not this year. We can wait a year until we have QB, OL, and RB in place. Then add a big-time WR as the final piece to the Offense. We're in no rush, mainly because, at this point, it's pretty much impossible to make a SB run (considering the state of our team, rebuilding, etc.) Waiting a year on WR won't hurt us. cheers
Guys, we are not going to get this thing fixed in one year. The pile of crap is too big. We can get by with what we have as receivers just fine, IMO. There are so many other areas that I think take a priority. In the 2007 draft, if there is a need, that is when we make our move there.
Aren't you contradicting yourself? You spent the first half of this thread saying a #1 receiver had to be tall........
the only prob with coles is that he's working alone. jmac , it appears, isn't very good. only T.O. can work alone. any team can get by with two good,dependable receivers.(coles and a similar quality receiver.) ....a super-star and a super-dud is not a good combo.
Coles is definitely a number 1 receive. You can't go by his 2005 numbers. He had Brooks Bollinger, running for his life, throwing hime the ball, but still managed 73 receptions, with no other legitimate threat beside him. The year before in DC, again with a bad quarterback situation he had 90 receptions for 950 yards. In 2003 he had 82 receptions for 1204 yards. In 2005, the top 10 receivers in terms of receptions (one of those "receivers" was a tight end, Gates) ranged from 103 at #1 (steve Smith/Fitgerald) to 84 receptions at number 10 (S. Moss). In terms of reception yards in 2005, the top receivers range from #1 S. Smith (1,563 yards) to #10 M. Harrison (1,146). If you look at Coles numbers over the last three years (again, excluding the Bollinger-biased 2005 numbers) and I think he compares pretty well with the top 10 receivers in the league. Unless of course you think guys like Boldon, Holt, Driver and Harrison are second receiver type guys...
I thank the D will be ok. What we need to do going into this offseason is think offense,offense and more offense.
I like big and fast #1's too but coles is a 1, he played really good when he was here first. And had good numbers in washington with spurrier. He just lacked a certain playbook and a strong armed QB, he played with ramsey and did what he could do. Its also vice versa about the wr being as good as his QB can throw to him. If they are both good they become great. If they are both great they become hall of famers.
Agreed. The Pats haven't exactly surrounded Tom Brady with Game Breaking recievers. They've got guys that go out, play well together, and get the job done. Coles is a good #1. Eventually (if J-mac doesn't come around this season), EM and MR.T will look to grab someone to compliment him.
One good year? 2002-89 catches, 1264 yards 2003-82 catches 1204 yards 2004-90 catches 950 yards Last year wasn't even such a bad year, he managed 78 catches with Brooks Bollinger throwing it to him.
Totally agree. Last year doesn't even count as an aberation; it has to be thrown out in its entirety. 78 catches with what we were dealing with last year speaks volumes about the guy. I am glad he is here.
The Jets need an offensive line above ALL. I don't give a shit what anyone says. If you think that anything is a need above the line you are completely oblivious. Teams can get by without a number one. Teams can't get by with good lineman.
Wow, so you don't think marvin harrison, torry holt, and steve smith are number 1s because of their height?
How many of the recent superbowl winners have had big 6'2" , gamebreaking wide recievers ? 3 solid wide recievers who will make the tough catches, block and do all the little important things is better than having one big gamebreaking reciever that will make a big play once in awhile.
Very few teams have a true #1 receiver so to me the whole #1 receiver thing is overrated. There are very few receivers in the league that have game changing ability and if you look at the teams that one the SB the past few years they were teams the sure didn't truly meet the #1 receiver criteria. The Bucs best receiver in the SB was their #3 guy I believe. The Pats have no one stand out receiver, and while Hines Ward is a #1 receiver, he's not a guy that can do it alone and the Steelers are far from a pass first offense. What we need is balance. I actually believe we have that right now (other then maybe a true deep threat but I'll get to that later) though there is probably room for improvement. Coles - Good possession receiver. Can beat you deep from time to time. JMac - Similar to Coles with a bit more height. Coles may have better skills overall though JMac once looked to have potential to surpass Coles. Cotchery - Young, up and coming possesion receiver who again has enough speed to get deep. That to me is more dangerous then having a #1 receiver because anyone of them (if used properly) can go deep, anyone of them can go across the middle, and anyone of them can break off some big gains if they can shake a tackle or two and/or have open field. As for the deep threat, I think if you have a guy who's a one-trick pony like that (i.e. J. Carter) it is rather useless since teams know that when he's in that's about all he's good for. Give me three solid receivers and some decent TEs with a healthy QB and I think you have a much more potent offense then one where if the defense shuts down the main guy you're in for a long day.
