Please Define A "True Number One" Receiver

[celts32]

A #1 WR is someone that makes the defense shift it's coverages. If you don't have a WR that requires a double team then the defense can play it straight up and they have the advantage. All the yardage, pro bowls and TD's requirements are nonsense...basically the defenses decide who is really a #1 WR based on how they play you. Moss was probably a #1 briefly in 2005 but other then that I would guess you have to go all the way back to Gary Clark to find a true #1 WR on the Redskins.

[joethiesmanfan]

Okay, committ to cover Moss one on one and guess what's gonna win that game.

[MTK]

I think what most are defining qualifies more as a "star WR" vs. a #1.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I think what most are defining qualifies more as a "star WR" vs. a #1.

probably

of course you can argue "true number one" vs "number one" too and the lines blur through each

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

With so much draft chat going on, I wanted to shift gears just a bit and discuss something more generic, yet relevant to where the 'Skins are headed this year.

I've found that in the heat of a game day thread we're all guilty of throwing around certain buzz words, but the definition may vary depending on which fellow Warpather you're actually talking to. For instance, the words "change of pace back" comes to mind and is often used when referring to the different running styles of two different running backs for the same team. Clinton Portis is pounding the rock, we bring in Betts or Rock for a few downs and like clockwork someone will say, Betts is a good change of pace back. Fine. No problem. Now this isn't a critique nor a criticism, just an observation.

So I want to get some consensus, at least around here, on what's considered a number one wide receiver. Now that Randel El is gone, the recent emergence of Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly and the likelihood that Santana Moss' role, at a minimum, will be changing there isn't a clear cut number one wide receiver on this roster in my opinion.

I understand the temptation is to say it's unequivocally Santana because, well, for a lot of reasons quite frankly. But I think it's helpful to get this out in the open and sort of say what it is and what it isn't.

12th are you looking at the same games that I'm looking at? These guys haven't done shit in two years....except steal from Snyder. Well, at least Thomas plays teams so he has value. But Thomas has had only one big game. Big deal. He's got to do it week in and week out. IMO Kelly just can't play in the NFL. The definition of a true #1 wr is Brandon Marshall and he's available. And I know everyone is going to bitch and moan about his character but IMO he's what our offense needs. Give up the #1 and try and make a deal w/ Denver, draft a linemen in the 2nd, try and trade Cooley for a draft pick and pick up another linemen and we're halfway in business.

[Trample the Elderly]

He's the dude they throw to all the time.

[joethiesmanfan]

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

He's the dude they throw to all the time.

That my friend is the number one answer.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

He's the dude they throw to all the time.

No point entering the discussion after this one.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

12th are you looking at the same games that I'm looking at? These guys haven't done shit in two years....except steal from Snyder. Well, at least Thomas plays teams so he has value. But Thomas has had only one big game. Big deal. He's got to do it week in and week out. IMO Kelly just can't play in the NFL. The definition of a true #1 wr is Brandon Marshall and he's available. And I know everyone is going to bitch and moan about his character but IMO he's what our offense needs. Give up the #1 and try and make a deal w/ Denver, draft a linemen in the 2nd, try and trade Cooley for a draft pick and pick up another linemen and we're halfway in business.

Kelly looked pretty good against SD, just sayin'.

I'm eager to see how he and Thomas look in Shanny's offense.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Kelly looked pretty good against SD, just sayin'.

I'm eager to see how he and Thomas look in Shanny's offense.

I'm eager too. But chances are we're not looking at guys we can count on week in and week out. Thomas seems to have more upside. And Kelly played against San Diego's freakin' back ups. lol.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I'm eager too. But chances are we're not looking at guys we can count on week in and week out. Thomas seems to have more upside. And Kelly played against San Diego's freakin' back ups. lol.

Didn't he have that 80 yard catch early in the game when they had their starters in?

It's year 3 for both guys so it's the ol "make or break" time. I have confidence Shanahan will get more out of them than Zorn did.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

I think Thomas as our "#1" with the better of Kelly/Mitchell at "#2" and Moss is the would make the best use of the personnel we have, for 3WR sets, atleast. if Shanny wants to really take advantage of having two stud TEs by putting them on the field at the same time, we may see alot more 2WR sets.

[KLHJ2]

A guy that can get you 60+ catches and 1000+ yards year in and year out.

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by Angry

A guy that can get you 60+ catches and 1000+ yards year in and year out.

So we don't have one then . . .

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by Angry

A guy who can get you 60 catches and 1,000 yards year in and year out.

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

So we don't have one then . . .

How about a guy who averaged 70 catches and 1,005 yards over the past 5 years? Allow me to introduce you to Santana Moss: Career Stats

Jaws said it best last year, the offense doesn't determine a team's #1 receiver..the opposing defensive coordinator does.