Hiding In Plain Sight

[Maxman]

By Chris Pine

http://www.jetnation.com/?p=2537

[bitonti]

If we look at championship teams over the years... very few of them actually had true #1 WR. Yes there were the great Montana/Rice teams and even the Manning/Harrison connection in 07 but by and large Super Bowls are won with a strong running game and a strong defense. #1 WR is a want for the Jets not a Need.

[faba]

Nice article Chris. I can not wait for us to use Dustin more. Everyone knows WR position is a big question mark for this team -with a rookie QB in there even more so.

[JiF]

If we look at championship teams over the years... very few of them actually had true #1 WR. Yes there were the great Montana/Rice teams and even the Manning/Harrison connection in 07 but by and large Super Bowls are won with a strong running game and a strong defense. #1 WR is a want for the Jets not a Need.

You keep saying this and it couldnt be further from the truth. Last year, Steelers vs. Cardinals. Hines Ward, Santonio Holmes, Larr Fitz and Boldin.

Year before, Randy Moss, Wes Welker and Palxico Burress.

Year before, Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne and Mushin Mohammed.

Year before, Hines Ward, Bobby Engram

Year before T.O and Deon Branch.

Year before Steve Smith and Deon Branch

Year before Keyshawn Johnson, Jerry Rice and Tim Brown.

Year before, Torry Holt and Issac Bruce.

I mean, where do you come up with this stuff? Championship teams have clearly had a true # 1 receiver. Is it the end all be all, No. But to act like it has no baring on the success of a "championship" team is completely and undeniably false.

[JiF]

BTW, nice read.

[Lady Jet]

I am having such a hard time getting optimistic about this season. You almost got me, as I agree, it should be pretty exciting to see Dustin Keller this year.

I still think we need another receiver. It doesn't have to be a Plaxico, (I don't him him either), but someone experienced, proven and reliable.

Oh, and I have no idea where the phrases originate, but I'm thinking about having a ham on rye for lunch now.

Nice article.

[Ghost]

Nice article.

[DMaynard]

I can understand everyone's concern about the lack of a true #1 WR. We were talking about this even before Coles left. And you can make fun of us foolish minority who think Keller can fill that role (as stated in this article) and that the combo of Stuckey/Clowney/Smith will more than suffice opposite Cotchery and playing the slot.

But I would like to know why, here on July 1, there is a reason to believe that the Jets organization do not agree with this foolish fan minority given that the draft and free agency have passed and the jets have shown little interest in the parade of free agents or potential trades to date (Bouldin, Harrison, Holt, Owens, Edwards, Marshall, Burress, etc.)???

I don't wish to upset anyone, just trying to use some common sense.

[#27TheDominator]

You keep saying this and it couldnt be further from the truth. Last year, Steelers vs. Cardinals. Hines Ward, Santonio Holmes, Larr Fitz and Boldin.

Year before, Randy Moss, Wes Welker and Palxico Burress.

Year before, Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne and Mushin Mohammed.

Year before, Hines Ward, Bobby Engram

Year before T.O and Deon Branch.

Year before Steve Smith and Deon Branch

Year before Keyshawn Johnson, Jerry Rice and Tim Brown.

Year before, Torry Holt and Issac Bruce.

I mean, where do you come up with this stuff? Championship teams have clearly had a true # 1 receiver. Is it the end all be all, No. But to act like it has no baring on the success of a "championship" team is completely and undeniably false.

It's not a bad point, but don't you think you're overstating it a bit?

Bobby Engram? A number 1? He wasn't a #1 in his prime, by the time they made the super bowl he was a 32 year old that had never had a 1,000 yard season. Jurevicius had a better year.

In '04 Deion Branch had 400 yards receiving. The Pats won in '03 and '04 and I don't think they had anybody over 900 yards either year.

Mushin Muhammad? C'mon.

Rice and Brown had a great year with Gannon, but they were a little long in the tooth.

Just look at your list and tell me how many of those guys you'd take over Cotchery. Most? Sure, but certainly not all. I'm more worried about our not having a #2 than a #1.

[bitonti]

Jif Look at last year shall we?

in the Super Bowl - the team with the better WR lost.

Maybe your definition of #1 WR differs from mine... the way I see it there are maybe 5 of these players in the league right now. There are alot of #2's playing like #1's but not true #1's (see Coles, Lavernaeus).

[PS17]

Jif Look at last year shall we?

in the Super Bowl - the team with the better WR lost.

Maybe your definition of #1 WR differs from mine... the way I see it there are maybe 5 of these players in the league right now. There are alot of #2's playing like #1's but not true #1's (see Coles, Lavernaeus).

Hines Ward is about a steady a #1 WR you can have. Santonio could be a #1 on most teams too. IDK what you're talking about. WR's are huge.

[SoFlaJets]

I can understand everyone's concern about the lack of a true #1 WR. We were talking about this even before Coles left. And you can make fun of us foolish minority who think Keller can fill that role (as stated in this article) and that the combo of Stuckey/Clowney/Smith will more than suffice opposite Cotchery and playing the slot.

But I would like to know why, here on July 1, there is a reason to believe that the Jets organization do not agree with this foolish fan minority given that the draft and free agency have passed and the jets have shown little interest in the parade of free agents or potential trades to date (Bouldin, Harrison, Holt, Owens, Edwards, Marshall, Burress, etc.)???

I don't wish to upset anyone, just trying to use some common sense.

nice avatar pic there Dennis

[bitonti]

Hines Ward is about a steady a #1 WR you can have. Santonio could be a #1 on most teams too. IDK what you're talking about. WR's are huge.

neither of those guys are true #1's.

Here are my list of #1's:

Randy Moss

Larry Fitzgerald

Andre Johnson

Calvin Johnson

Steve Smith

... and that's about it. Burress isn't like Randy Moss. He's more like Keyshawn Johnson. Marshall and Colston are in there as well - slow big possession types that can't really stretch the field. Hines Ward's best skill is run blocking. Santonio Holmes made a nice catch, so did Hixon a year before, neither player is a #1 WR. Cotchery can make nice catches too. Being able to make a nice catch doesn't make a #1 Wr.

[JiF]

It's not a bad point, but don't you think you're overstating it a bit?

Bobby Engram? A number 1? He wasn't a #1 in his prime, by the time they made the super bowl he was a 32 year old that had never had a 1,000 yard season. Jurevicius had a better year.

In '04 Deion Branch had 400 yards receiving. The Pats won in '03 and '04 and I don't think they had anybody over 900 yards either year.

Mushin Muhammad? C'mon.

Rice and Brown had a great year with Gannon, but they were a little long in the tooth.

Just look at your list and tell me how many of those guys you'd take over Cotchery. Most? Sure, but certainly not all. I'm more worried about our not having a #2 than a #1.

Deon Branch was the SB MVP and he was heavily recruited during FA to be teams #1 WR. Mushin Muhammed is a #1 and he has led the league in receiving. Rice and Brown, I dont care what age, were 2 of the best ever.

Bobby Engram was a stretch.

The Pats and Ravens you can put in that category for the early 2000's. Im not saying its necessary, but it obviously helps...I mean you cant deny that 85% of th WR's that I posted are top 15/20 in the league...with 32 teams, that IMO constitues a #1 WR.

I would only take Cotch over maybe 3 of those names I listed comparing them at the time to Cotch now.

Jif Look at last year shall we?

in the Super Bowl - the team with the better WR lost.

Maybe your definition of #1 WR differs from mine... the way I see it there are maybe 5 of these players in the league right now. There are alot of #2's playing like #1's but not true #1's (see Coles, Lavernaeus).

You said Championship. The Cardinals won the NFC, I think most Jets fans would be elated with an AFC Championship. Bottom line, Ward and Holmes are studs and #1's on just about any team in the league. Wasnt Holmes the MVP of the SB?

And we obviously view #1 WR's differently. To say there are only 5, is insane. Maybe 5 ELITE, but plenty of WR's that I think are #1's.

[bitonti]

And we obviously view #1 WR's differently. To say there are only 5, is insane. Maybe 5 ELITE, but plenty of WR's that I think are #1's.

quick question

if we were having this convo last year would you say that Coles is a #1 WR?

if the answer is yes then ok maybe by your standards there are many more #1's in the league than I am listing.

But i remember Jets fans having the same convo last year, but Coles was on the roster.

When I look at how this team - the 2009 Jets - can win a Super Bowl... it's the recipe same as 1985 Bears, 1986 Giants, 1987 Skins and the Ravens whenever they won... strong defense, strong running, a manager type of QB and whoever at WR. these Jets are not built to win like last Years Cardinals or another "high powered" offense.

[StillerPaul]

Hines Ward is about a steady a #1 WR you can have. Santonio could be a #1 on most teams too. IDK what you're talking about. WR's are huge.

I read quite a few opposing teams message boards and can't believe the lack of respect Hines Ward and Santonio Holmes get from most fan bases. Sure they both have a damn good QB, but Hines has had meatball QB's his whole career before Ben.

[MDL_JET]

Just look at your list and tell me how many of those guys you'd take over Cotchery. Most? Sure, but certainly not all. I'm more worried about our not having a #2 than a #1.

I think that is the most important for the Jets right now. Finding a #2 WR. Everyone after Cotchery seems to be more fitted for the #3 spot. I don't mind the guys we have now, as long as they can run good routes and catch the damn ball when needed.

A true "#1 WR" to me is someone that demands attention from the defense and has to draw double teams, always shifting people to their side. Unless you have a shutdown CB you can't leave them alone with one person. They are great to have obviously but I don't think its necessary. Especially if you are gearing toward having a strong defense and running game. After that just have a bunch of guys who can catch the ball when called upon.

[#27TheDominator]

Deon Branch was the SB MVP and he was heavily recruited during FA to be teams #1 WR. Mushin Muhammed is a #1 and he has led the league in receiving. Rice and Brown, I dont care what age, were 2 of the best ever.

Bobby Engram was a stretch.

The Pats and Ravens you can put in that category for the early 2000's. Im not saying its necessary, but it obviously helps...I mean you cant deny that 85% of th WR's that I posted are top 15/20 in the league...with 32 teams, that IMO constitues a #1 WR.

I would only take Cotch over maybe 3 of those names I listed comparing them at the time to Cotch now.

Going into the 2004 season Branch had one 800 yard season. Most people would have more faith in the 2009 Cotchery than the 2004 Branch. Muhammad led the league in receiving a couple of years prior, but he was 33 and probably expected to fall off a cliff. He certainly hasn't put up monster numbers since. My point is, if those guys are your #1s then Cotchery isn't such a bad #1.

we obviously view #1 WR's differently. To say there are only 5, is insane. Maybe 5 ELITE, but plenty of WR's that I think are #1's.

I'm with you there. 5 #1 WRs is insane. A #1 is a guy that is good enough to be the best WR on a team. Not every team (Jacksonville) has one, but you DON"T need an elite WR.

quick question

if we were having this convo last year would you say that Coles is a #1 WR?

if the answer is yes then ok maybe by your standards there are many more #1's in the league than I am listing.

But i remember Jets fans having the same convo last year, but Coles was on the roster.

When I look at how this team - the 2009 Jets - can win a Super Bowl... it's the recipe same as 1985 Bears, 1986 Giants, 1987 Skins and the Ravens whenever they won... strong defense, strong running, a manager type of QB and whoever at WR. these Jets are not built to win like last Years Cardinals or another "high powered" offense.

Coles and Cotchery are borderline #1 WRs IMO. They are capable of putting up 1,000 yard seasons, but they aren't the dominant type you'd prefer. Saying there are only 5 is a bit much. Chad Johnson was never a #1? TO? A #1 is like a QB. Every team has one, but some aren't deserving. You don't need an elite WR to win, but you need a couple of decent ones. Right now the Jets have one decent WR, but on the other side?

[DMaynard]

nice avatar pic there Dennis

somebody suggested it to me

[bitonti]

Chad Johnson was never a #1? TO? A #1 is like a QB. Every team has one, but some aren't deserving. You don't need an elite WR to win, but you need a couple of decent ones. Right now the Jets have one decent WR, but on the other side?

not talking about the past just the present WR... by my definition a true #1 WR should be reliably able to make big chain moving catches AND stretch the field as a deep threat. hands + speed. He should be able to take the other teams #1 CB and beat him... or at least make sure it is a long day for that great player. There aren't alot of those guys in the league.

I do agree tho either we consider Cotch a borderline #1 or we say there are only about 5 of these guys in the league. If Cotch is a borderline #1 (like Coles) then yeh we can include Ochocinco, TO and a bunch of others. If Cotch is clearly a #2 then these others guys are #2's too... we can't sit here and say every team in the league has a #1 but the Jets don't...

also there are guys like Roy Williams who have #1 WR skills but for whatever reason haven't put it together.

[Larz]

i'm really hoping and praying Brad Smith steps up this year, that would be huge for the JETS

[tparich]

Even though by deffinition a #1 receiver is just whoever the teams puts in that spot, to me a true #1 receiver is determined by several factors.

-Should be able to consistently beat single coverage, if the QB sees him in single covereage the ball should be going his way.

-On the slower higher arcing chad passes the receiver should be able to establish position and be able to make a good play on the ball

-Catch 100% of on target passes when open (exaggerated here for effect)

-Has enough speed to potentially score on any given play

[Greenseed3]

I think you guys are batting around the differences in definition of a "#1 WR" and a "true #1 WR". The difference is simple. Every team has a #1 WR; it is the best wideout on their roster.

Very few teams have a "true" #1 WR; they are players that have to be planned for defensively. True #1 WRs affect the defensive gameplan, often resulting in double coverage and/or rolled coverage.

In the sense that not every team has a "true #1 WR", neither does every team have a "shutdown" CB... and if I had a choice of the two... I would take a shutdown CB any day of the week. Having a player that can single-handedly eliminate an offense's true WR1, makes up for not having an offensive player like that of our own.

Viva la Revis!

[124]

There is no such thing as a shutdown Corner in the NFL and one year doesn't mean greatness forever.

Give me the Wide Receiver any day, especially when the defense is Rex Ryan's, the Corner's don't matter nearly as much. Guys like Fabian Washington were able to change their careers around his scheme and the 90 year old Samari Rolle was able to look younger.

[SoFlaJets]

too bad Dark Lady Jets isn't around today-she could have Tweeted Dustin Keller to read this article by Piney....anyone have a Twitter account that could send a link overe to Dustin @ http://twitter.com/DUSTINKELLER81

[Irish Jet]

Is 124 talking about CB's again? Quick, change the subject before this becomes a Cortland Finnegan thread!

[Greenseed3]

There is no such thing as a shutdown Corner in the NFL and one year doesn't mean greatness forever.

Give me the Wide Receiver any day, especially when the defense is Rex Ryan's, the Corner's don't matter nearly as much. Guys like Fabian Washington were able to change their careers around his scheme and the 90 year old Samari Rolle was able to look younger.

I don't know brother, I think his defense is predicated on being able to leave his top CB on an island with the teams WR1. This year we face Andre Johnson, Chad Johnson, TO (twice), Moss (twice), Reggie Wayne, Roddy White, Marques Colston and Steve Smith. Sure Ryan's pass rush is going to make life easier for lesser CBs, but having a Revis that can hang with those big boys will actually make the pass rush play better.

We can debate offense vs. defense, though... I'm a defense guy.

[124]

I am a Defensive guy as well. A front 7 and Safety guy. I could care less about Corners since the NFL made their rule changes after the 2001 season and in Ryan's defense, we could make do with Lowery and Sheppard if need be. Revis is a nice piece, but he isn't a need. If it took Revis to get Brandon Marshall, I'd do it.

[Greenseed3]

Revis is easily the best CB in the AFC east, and his highly regarded as a top-five at his position in the entire league.

I don't think playing the guys we face(Owens, Moss etc. ), it would be wise to trade away one of our two stallwarth probowl players (Revis and Jenkins) to get a WR for a running team.

[124]

Revis is easily the best CB in the AFC east, and his highly regarded as a top-five at his position in the entire league.

I don't think playing the guys we face(Owens, Moss etc. ), it would be wise to trade away one of our two stallwarth probowl players (Revis and Jenkins) to get a WR for a running team.

A Top 5 young stud WR could only help the further development of our Quarterback, the most important part to the future of this team. Yes we are going to face Randy Moss and Terrell Owens, but Lito Sheppard can more than hold his own against those two, especially, once again, in Rex Ryan's defense.

If we can pressure the QB somewhat or as well as they did in Baltimore, even Drew Coleman could shine.

[Greenseed3]

I just looked at the Ravens' losses last year.

Steelers (3 times), Titans (lost by 3 pts; Flacco threw 2 ints), the Giants (blow them up on the ground), the Colts (blew them up through the air).

So maybe you have something in the sense that Ryan doesn't need all-stars at CB. Then again, can you imagine what he can do with one?

If we're going to look at the Ravens to generalize our team's needs and abilities, then we I guess we don't need a shutdown CB, but we don't need a top-flight WR either. The closest thing Baltimore has to a "young top-flight WR" is 35 year old Derrick Mason (5'10- 192) who combined 80 catches for 1,037 yards and 5 tds.

The next closest WR in terms of production wasn't even close; Mark Clayton had 41 catches for 695 yards and 3 tds; Heap had 35, 403 for 3 tds

However, they also ended the season boasting the league's second best pass defense, and did so with scrubs like Samari Rolle, Fabian Washington and Corey Ivy.

[JiF]

quick question

if we were having this convo last year would you say that Coles is a #1 WR?

if the answer is yes then ok maybe by your standards there are many more #1's in the league than I am listing.

But i remember Jets fans having the same convo last year, but Coles was on the roster.

When I look at how this team - the 2009 Jets - can win a Super Bowl... it's the recipe same as 1985 Bears, 1986 Giants, 1987 Skins and the Ravens whenever they won... strong defense, strong running, a manager type of QB and whoever at WR. these Jets are not built to win like last Years Cardinals or another "high powered" offense.

I think Coles and Cotch are borderline #1's. I actually like Cotch a lot. He is a play maker IMO.

And I see your point. This team might be more out of that mold. And I dont neccessarily think we need, you're right we want, but IMO and history definitely supports me, a big play #1 WR, helps in a major way.

Going into the 2004 season Branch had one 800 yard season. Most people would have more faith in the 2009 Cotchery than the 2004 Branch. Muhammad led the league in receiving a couple of years prior, but he was 33 and probably expected to fall off a cliff. He certainly hasn't put up monster numbers since. My point is, if those guys are your #1s then Cotchery isn't such a bad #1.

I'm with you there. 5 #1 WRs is insane. A #1 is a guy that is good enough to be the best WR on a team. Not every team (Jacksonville) has one, but you DON"T need an elite WR.

Coles and Cotchery are borderline #1 WRs IMO. They are capable of putting up 1,000 yard seasons, but they aren't the dominant type you'd prefer. Saying there are only 5 is a bit much. Chad Johnson was never a #1? TO? A #1 is like a QB. Every team has one, but some aren't deserving. You don't need an elite WR to win, but you need a couple of decent ones. Right now the Jets have one decent WR, but on the other side?

I agree with most of this but I think T.O. and Chad Johnson was definitely a #1 at one point in his career.

[#27TheDominator]

Even though by deffinition a #1 receiver is just whoever the teams puts in that spot, to me a true #1 receiver is determined by several factors.

I think you guys are batting around the differences in definition of a "#1 WR" and a "true #1 WR". The difference is simple. Every team has a #1 WR; it is the best wideout on their roster.

Very few teams have a "true" #1 WR; they are players that have to be planned for defensively. True #1 WRs affect the defensive gameplan, often resulting in double coverage and/or rolled coverage.

I think the problem is simple: You guys are making up your own definition. The term has a definition, don't change it just to **** around. A #1 WR is by definition the best WR on the team. If you want to get picky maybe you could claim he's a top 32 WR. I can see saying Matt Jones wasn't a legit #1 last year even though he was best on his team, but claiming TO or Plaxico aren't #1 WRs is flat out ridiculous. If you want to make all these other claims, you are talking about something else. Make a new term: Elite WR, Superstar WR, Franchise WR, but they are more than simply #1s.

It's amusing that you guys want to limit "#1 WR" to five guys when the board wants to annoint every starting QB and 1st round pick a franchise QB and IMO those are much less common than top flight WRs.

[Greenseed3]

what the hell.

According to my post their are 32 #1 WRs in the league...by default.

A "true" WR1 cannot be found on every team.

For example, lets say that Cotch, Stuckey, Smith and Clowney all get injured in the preseason. If we went into the season with our current roster, that would make Wallace Wright or Marcus Henry our week-1 starters. The Jets WR1, then, would not be a "true" WR1, just the best reciever on the team.

I would say the league has 10 or so "true" WR1s... including TO and Burress. Here's another term for ya, "playmaker".

A "true" WR1 is a playmaker at his position.

[tparich]

I think the problem is simple: You guys are making up your own definition. The term has a definition, don't change it just to **** around. A #1 WR is by definition the best WR on the team. If you want to get picky maybe you could claim he's a top 32 WR. I can see saying Matt Jones wasn't a legit #1 last year even though he was best on his team, but claiming TO or Plaxico aren't #1 WRs is flat out ridiculous. If you want to make all these other claims, you are talking about something else. Make a new term: Elite WR, Superstar WR, Franchise WR, but they are more than simply #1s.

It's amusing that you guys want to limit "#1 WR" to five guys when the board wants to annoint every starting QB and 1st round pick a franchise QB and IMO those are much less common than top flight WRs.

This is just a natural progression that happens over time. There are plenty of words or phrases that have shifted meaning over time and eventually the new meaning will become the actual meaning.

The term #1 for most things comes with expectations. When those expectations are not met then people will naturally start to look elsewhere for someone else that can meet them and the person let go or demotes would then of been determined to not of had the skills to of been a true #1.

ie: anyone can be put into a position of leadership but it does not make them true leaders.

I never said that there were only 5 #1s out there, IMO there is a good 20 legit guys out there.