Re: Mankins, Wendell, Welker land on CBS Sports' annual most overrated or underrated
First of that is actually not correct. For the last 3 years we ran primarily a 2WR 2TE 1RB offense, so there is not a slot WR.
Of course qualifying him as a slot receiver is a slight. It implies he is not a real receiver, but a very limited one with limits in his ability. Historically a 'slot receiver' is a guy who comes in on 3rd down. Of that adjective is demeaning to a guy who outproduces almost every reciever you don't put that limiting adjective on.
There is no arbitrary number on 'one of the best ever'.
Some of the players on your list are very, very debatable such as Moore, Monk, Reed, Ward, and Sharpe whos career was cut short.
He is a wide receiver. He is compared to wide recievers and he is one of the best of alltime. My comments that you responded to were directed at a post the demeaned him as a 'slot' receiver who was Bradys 'binkie' and apparently only produced because Tom Brady is such a poor QB he ignores wide open recievers to throw to a triple teamed Welker.
Even if he lined up exclusively outside for three seasons, which he did not, he only did so for three seasons. Semantics aside, Andy, for I do not wish to get in to a semantic match.
I don't demean the "slot". I think if you catch passes, and are not a running back or a tight end, you are a wide receiver. If others have demeaned the slot, that's on them, but never on me, for I am a big believer that in the modern NFL the slot receiver can and has been a dominant force (Cris Carter, Hines Ward, Wes Welker, Victor Cruz). Make first downs. Make touchdowns. Make big plays. I don't cares wheres you lines up.
That post that I responded to, that you responded to, was wrong. Brady did not throw to Welker because they were good pals. Or anything "binkie" related---I hate that phrase, and it to me implies a level of fandom that I cannot comprehend or relate to---which is irrational love for a player regardless of production. The only player I feel that for is Tom Mufuggin Brady---the best football player I have ever seen. He threw to Welker because he is/was f***** awesome, and f***** open.
If you think that being a slot receiver means he is "a limited one with limits in his ability" I do not agree. (that phrase hurts my brain, it is not particularly articulate. It also is rooted in things I did not say and in non-factual posts by other non Herc-Rock cats). I think he was/is someone who could dominate from the slot position. He was not as dominant from the outside position. I don't think that is up for debate. That does not limit what he has done. We will have to agree to disagree (somehow, even though it's clear to me that we agree).
I agree that Welker is a Hall of Famer. I feel that saying that Warren Moon is one of the best quarterbacks of all time is false, even though he is a Hall of Famer. We will have to agree to disagree (even though we clearly agree).
I ONLY objected to the "best receivers of all time" comment. Now that I see that your list is a country club, and not a finite list, I can agree that my man Wes belongs.
As for the people that you list as objectionable, I know people from the run-happy era would rank Monk favorably, I put Moore on the list because he had a run where no matter who threw him the ball he made crazy plays (Scott Mitchell and he set the catch record), same with Sharpe pre-injury. I'll concede Ward on the list, although I feel he belongs in the pantheon of greats for his all around play----that SOB was a G.D. playa no matter whether we like the Steelers (and I hate em) or not. He blocked like a Tasmanian Devil on roids. (which he likely was, as a Steeler. They looooooove roids).
"Of that adjective is demeaning to a guy who outproduces almost every reciever you don't put that limiting adjective on."
I will say that the sentence quoted hurts my brain, because it doesn't make even remote sense, even if I agree with your overall point. Please, review that sentence. Just wanted to make it clear that you should scroll back on that edit button and make sure that what you're saying doesn't jam up people's signals. Because that phrase is a real affront to the greatest language in the world. As a Hall of Fame type on Patsfans, I expect coherence, Andy! Hahahaha, just joshin, only joshin, don't take it personal, I don't have time to respond to taking that personal. I like both you and Deus as posters, and don't want to spend two days debating complete semantics with you. You both make great points that I agree with, and that you agree with, if we all agree to meet each other at the mesh point of facts and relevance and make a left turn at vitriol.
I ONLY objected to Wes' classification as a NON-slot receiver (he has spent the majority of his production as a slot guy) and to his inclusion as one of the best of all time (significantly covered in my reply, knowing there is no finite number I include him). I disagreed with what you said because I disagreed. I feel we can put this issue to bed now. I hope that you, who I replied to, and Deus, who jumped in, can agree with me.
