ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
1. New England Patriots (A+)
The Patriots head into 2012 with a receiving corps that is head and shoulders above all others in the NFL.
Not only do the Patriots have the best slot receiver in the league in Wes Welker and arguably the most dangerous tight end in Rob Gronkowski, they also have incredible depth. Perhaps the best way to understand their depth is just to consider out that they had to cut Chad Ochocinco. He’s not the player he once was, but there are very few teams out there that would cut him after taking a chance on him.
The Patriots had one of the toughest wideout groups to sort through in terms of who will be cut and who will stick around for the regular season. I really couldn’t narrow it down past six receivers, and I think it’s feasible that they head into the season with that number.
Even if Donte’ Stallworth and Deion Branch don’t contribute on special teams as much as Bill Belichick would normally look for out of his fourth and fifth wide receivers, I can’t see either of these players being cut.
The Patriots probably had the best receivers in football before the addition of Brandon Lloyd. Adding him was just overkill.
Tight Ends
1. Rob Gronkowski A+
2. Aaron Hernandez B+
3. Daniel Fells D
Interesting where Pittsburg is #4 on this list. SF is ranked above NYG and Lions, and that the power team rankings that are out, are not more reflective of WR core stats.
Seeing that QB ratings are all the rage.
Love the new term being used "pass catchers". Seen that used here before as well. Seems appropriate to the new age of football.
__________________
Time to make the DOMENuts!!!!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Last edited by pherein; 06-22-2012 at 11:35 AM..
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
I wish those ranking were true. Maybe they will be by the end of the year.
There's no way I'd put the Patriots above the Saints or Packers right now, though, just to look at the next two teams on the list.
__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius
I wish those ranking were true. Maybe they will be by the end of the year.
There's no way I'd put the Patriots above the Saints or Packers right now, though, just to look at the next two teams on the list.
I disagree. We are talking about receiving corp which excludes one of the best Saints receivers in Darren Sproles because he is a RB. The Pats' receiving corp is definitely better than the Saints' receiving corp without Sproles.
I wish those ranking were true. Maybe they will be by the end of the year.
There's no way I'd put the Patriots above the Saints or Packers right now, though, just to look at the next two teams on the list.
The Packers have a tremendous WR corps, but unless you accept Jermichael Finley's self-image, the Patriots have a legitimate claim to the top spot. They have two legitimate difference-makers in Welker and Gronk, and Lloyd and Hernandez are impressive as #3 and 4 options.
(Obviously, Lloyd's impact is yet to be seen, but I think it's a lot more reasonable to project from available evidence than to pretend he's not on the roster, or to just use last year's roster -- as the author clearly did in listing Jake Ballard as the Giants' #1 TE. )
I disagree. We are talking about receiving corp which excludes one of the best Saints receivers in Darren Sproles because he is a RB. The Pats' receiving corp is definitely better than the Saints' receiving corp without Sproles.
First, I think we can admit that the author rigged the game by excluding the RBs. Second, you're right. We disagree.
Until I see this Patriots group in action, there's no way I can put it above any team that was above it last year, and I'd even be tempted to lower the group in the face of other competition that's remained together. There are too many variables, as the Chad Johnson experiment should have taught us all.
Or, to put it in a way that's more Patfans.com specific, last year, people were talking about Welker being redundant because of the TEs (I disagreed, for the record), yet this year we shouldn't think about how all the new players will work together?
Further, that line
Quote:
The Patriots probably had the best receivers in football before the addition of Brandon Lloyd. Adding him was just overkill.
was really, really stupid, and demonstrates why we should be ignoring this article for the trash it is.
__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius
First, I think we can admit that the author rigged the game by excluding the RBs. Second, you're right. We disagree.
Until I see this Patriots group in action, there's no way I can put it above any team that was above it last year, and I'd even be tempted to lower the group in the face of other competition that's remained together. There are too many variables, as the Chad Johnson experiment should have taught us all.
Or, to put it in a way that's more Patfans.com specific, last year, people were talking about Welker being redundant because of the TEs (I disagreed, for the record), yet this year we shouldn't think about how all the new players will work together?
Further, that line
was really, really stupid, and demonstrates why we should be ignoring this article for the trash it is.
I don't think he rigged the game. RBs are not part of a receiving corp. Never will be even if you have an excellent receiving RB. Any team's receiving corp only consists of two groups - WRs and TEs.
Also, even with Sproles you can make a good argument for the Pats' receiving corp being better than the Saints especially with the Pats adding Lloyd and Gaffney and the Saints losing Meachum.
Lastly, I don't think the Ochocinco comparisons to Lloyd, Gaffney, and Stallworth is valid. Ochocinco failed because he couldn't grasp the Pats' system and read defenses. We know for a fact that Lloyd, Gaffney, and Stallworth all know the Pats' system intimately and can read defenses. Ochocinco failed because the Pats misjudge whether he would be able to grasp the Pats' system, not because his skills eroded. There is not a single receiver on the roster right now where the Pats have that worry.
Until I see this Patriots group in action, there's no way I can put it above any team that was above it last year, and I'd even be tempted to lower the group in the face of other competition that's remained together. There are too many variables, as the Chad Johnson experiment should have taught us all.
I can't get on board with that approach, because it creates a consistent bias of undervaluing teams that made additions. This is a PROJECTION, which requires making some guesses about the future. Given all available information, we can reasonably expect the Patriots' slot receiver, TE & H-back positions to be among the very best in the league, and their top two wideout slots to be at least respectable out of the group of Lloyd, Gaffney, Branch and Stallworth.
That said, I agree with you that leaving out RBs creates another kind of unacceptable bias, underrating offenses like NO's. But the Patriots' backfield stacks up pretty well there, too; Woodhead is no Sproles, but he's in the next tier.
I don't think he rigged the game. RBs are not part of a receiving corp. Never will be even if you have an excellent receiving RB. Any team's receiving corp only consists of two groups - WRs and TEs.
Of course he rigged the game. He took 86 catches out of the argument in the case of Sproles, and another 50 in the case of Thomas. That's 136 catches getting pulled out of the Saints passing game, right there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob0729
Also, even with Sproles you can make a good argument for the Pats' receiving corp being better than the Saints especially with the Pats adding Lloyd and Gaffney and the Saints losing Meachum.
No, you can't, because you're still ignoring Thomas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob0729
Lastly, I don't think the Ochocinco comparisons to Lloyd, Gaffney, and Stallworth is valid. Ochocinco failed because he couldn't grasp the Pats' system and read defenses. We know for a fact that Lloyd, Gaffney, and Stallworth all know the Pats' system intimately and can read defenses. Ochocinco failed because the Pats misjudge whether he would be able to grasp the Pats' system, not because his skills eroded. There is not a single receiver on the roster right now where the Pats have that worry.
Johnson failed. The reason is irrelevant to the point being made.
__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius
29Likes
NFL 2012 Receiving Corps Power Rankings
)
Linear Mode
