Top 10 WRs in the NFL

So Ronald curry when he healthy is the raiders best WR. Last year Raiders just brought Curry along slowly coming back from back to back achilles tears . If Curry started early in the season he easily surpasses cotchery numbers. Cotchery caught Twenty more balls than Curry( on field alot more than Curry) at same 11.7 avg per catch.
http://www.ibabuzz.com/raidersblog/ little exerpt from article.
Bringing Curry along slowly and gradually, as if the receiver were inching toward a finish line in a marathon, was the right thing to do.

When the season ended, Curry was the Raiders leading receiver with 62 receptions for 727 yards. He had 33 of those receptions in the final 14 quarters _ his big finish starting at the precise moment Moss left for the remainder of the season with an ankle injury.

again alot of Fan just don't know how good R curry is as a WR(just has had some bad breaks)

Again my main Point you look at raiders depth at WR ,and Jets team that has none. you hyave to say raiders Wr corp is better.

 

IF Raiders starting Wr's and Jets starting Wr's, both play/ stay healthy and Play sixteen games, than expect Raiders Wr's, will be the better duo.
History has shown that to be the case.

 

Than you should have just ignored the discussion. Once you put you comments in the discussion, than you should ready to defend your position. But you weren't. When I showed you by the stats how wrong you were, Suddenly you had no answers. Listen I had alot of debates with alot of Posters on this board, and I don't remember every having a discussion with you.

 

What a terrible argument. What does anything that ever happened in the past with either of these two teams or any other recievers have to do with this current debate of Coles/Cotchery vs. Porter/Curry?

 

maybe you should stop debating with so many posters on here. what does it say when you say that you cant remember me since you argue with so many people on this messageboard, it means your always spewing nonsense out your ass, which most likely you get crucified for... I guess some people never learn their lesson:shit:

As for not responding to your google on the stat comparison, I think Cakes handled the grunt work of having to explain to you why Cotch & Coles > Porter & Curry ( haha)...i found no reason to waste my energy to contradict your incessant ignorance...making fun of it by adding it to my sig was another thing...call me an asshole if you want, but such comments deserved to be publicy ridiculed

to help you out with remembering me, I'll give you a hint...Im the one from San Jose who told you that most Raider fans dont know shit about football, my judgement coming from the fact that I talk to many of them daily...

and since you like statistics, here are some stats for your ass...

On Coles 2 WORST YEARS...he had ( 16 games)

YEAR TEAM G REC YDS AVG LNG TD FD FUM LOST
2001 NYJ 16 59 868 14.7 40 7 42 0 0
2003 WAS 16 82 1204 14.7 64 6 54 0 0
Career 109 506 6599 13.0 64 31 335 4 1

compared to Porter's 2 BEST YEARS he had ( 16 games)

Receiving Stats
YEAR TEAM G REC YDS AVG LNG TD FD FUM LOST
2002 OAK 16 51 688 13.5 36 9 36 0 0
2004 OAK 16 64 998 15.6 52 9 47 2 2
Career 89 240 3234 13.5 52 24 164 4 3

and a career of 504 rec....thats more then twice as many as Porter's 240 in only 20 games more...unless Porter can catch more then 264 balls in 20 games...not in the same league...OH YEA...pretty sure they got drafted the same year...

 

Hey sonny, we'll have none of that in this forum!!:smile:

 

I can honestly say that I am more stupid after reading Jeaux's reasoning on why Curry and Porter are better.