texaspackerbacker
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2004
- Messages
- 385
- Reaction score
- 27
No, you said they seem a lot better than they are, which is about the same thing.
If that's the case, then there are actually very, very few NFL-quality receivers in the NFL. The fact is that, more often than not, WRs don't beat coverage the majority of the time. The average WR probably only beats the coverage about 25-35% of the time and I would say that NO NFL WR catches anywhere near 100% of catchable balls. You're essentially saying that in your mind all NFL WRs should be Pro Bowl caliber. But Jones and Nelson both have pretty routinely made some spectacular catches over the last 2 or 3 seasons. So I would say they are both just as good as they seem to be.
Why? Nelson was near the top of the NFL in TD catches last year and Jones was this year. You can give the credit to Rodgers if you want, but that makes no sense because the WRs still have to get open and make a lot of difficult catches to get to that level. If that's the case then you have to give most of the credit for C.Johnson's success to Stafford.
hahaha some real passion there. Megatron and a small handfull of others around the league I would consider great - and yes, Stafford does get some credit, but not much because unlike Rodgers, he hasn't managed to turn his other receivers into anything special - not to mention the matters of winning games and the lack of interceptions. I would be interested in hearing where you got that 25-35% figure; also the idea that most NFL receivers don't catch nearly 100% of catchable balls - hell, Finley probably catches 80-90% hahaha.