Re: nfl top 100 2012
 

[quote=Giantone;923294]Did think Eli and Victor Cruz would be in the top 15.[/quote]

Cruz had a huge year last season. But he has to do it consistently year after year for a while to even be considered within the top ten. There's too many wide receivers who are considered better than him right now.

[QUOTE=REDSKINS4ever;923338]Cruz had a huge year last season. But he has to do it consistently year after year for a while to even be considered within the top ten. There's too many wide receivers who are considered better than him right now.[/QUOTE]

CJ
Fitz
Aj
STEVE S
Nicks
Miles Austin
Welker

Are all better imo

Re: nfl top 100 2012
 

I just thought the list was for last year only,still don't understand Peyton being #50.

Re: nfl top 100 2012
 

[quote=Giantone;923356]I just thought the list was for last year only,still don't understand Peyton being #50.[/quote]

The players probably voted Peyton the 50th best player despite the neck injury simply because we all saw how valuable he is to the Colts just from him not playing. The whole "rank the best players of 2012" thing is subject to opinion, meaning some players voted based on lifetime achievement and others voted it as meaning the 100 best players of 2012.

Re: nfl top 100 2012
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;923339]CJ
Fitz
Aj
STEVE S
Nicks
Miles Austin
Welker

Are all better imo[/quote]

Miles Austin is not a top ten wide receiver. Brandon Marshall and Vincent Jackson should be on your list. Akeem Nicks is good, but he's not a top wide receiver.

[QUOTE=REDSKINS4ever;923488]Miles Austin is not a top ten wide receiver. Brandon Marshall and Vincent Jackson should be on your list. Akeem Nicks is good, but he's not a top wide receiver.[/QUOTE]

I was js he's better than cruz

Re: nfl top 100 2012
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;923491]I was js he's better than cruz[/quote]

....I respectfully disagree.

[QUOTE=Giantone;923494]....I respectfully disagree.[/QUOTE]

I understand

Re: nfl top 100 2012
 

Akeem Nicks is solid. He's just not a prolific, game changing type of receiver. Not yet anyway.

Re: nfl top 100 2012
 

Let's at least get the guy's name right, it's Hakeem.

Re: nfl top 100 2012
 

[quote=Mattyk;923523]Let's at least get the guy's name right, it's Hakeem.[/quote]

That's tough to expect considering some fans don't know how to spell some starters' names on our own team.

[QUOTE=mooby;923534]That's tough to expect considering some fans don't know how to spell some starters' names on our own team.[/QUOTE]

Yeah like our own Santa Moss.:)

Re: nfl top 100 2012
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;923508]Akeem Nicks is solid. He's just not a prolific, game changing type of receiver. Not yet anyway.[/quote]

kinda disagree. Cruz emerged big time this year, but Nicks played through injuries and still managed good numbers. In the playoffs, Nicks went crazy: 28 444 yards, 4 TDs. Cruz was still solid in the playoffs, but numbers were down: 21 269 1 TD.

I like both players, but if Nicks could stay injury free he'd be top 5 WR in the league.

Re: nfl top 100 2012
 

[quote=Chico23231;923536]kinda disagree. Cruz emerged big time this year, but Nicks played through injuries and still managed good numbers. In the playoffs, Nicks went crazy: 28 444 yards, 4 TDs. Cruz was still solid in the playoffs, but numbers were down: 21 269 1 TD.

I like both players, but if Nicks could stay injury free he'd be top 5 WR in the league.[/quote]

Maybe, maybe not. Nicks is good, but he's not Brandon Marshall, Vincent Jackson, Calvin Johnson good. One day he certainly will be. Yes, he does show production during the season at times. But he's not the caliber of WR as those mentioned above.

[QUOTE=REDSKINS4ever;923544]Maybe, maybe not. Nicks is good, but he's not Brandon Marshall, Vincent Jackson, Calvin Johnson good. One day he certainly will be. Yes, he does show production during the season at times. But he's not the caliber of WR as those mentioned above.[/QUOTE]

Your about to see vjax fall off in Tampa