Salisbury: "Colts have better recievers"

[The Predator]

Re: Salisbury " Colts have better recievers"

How does Watson not measure up to Clark? Last year's numbers:

Dallas Clark 12 games 30 catches 367 yards 12.2 avg. 4 tds
Ben Watson 13 games 49 catches 643 yards 13.1 avg. 3 tds


This year's numbers:

Dallas Clark 7 games 32 catches 388 yards 12.1 avg. 6 tds
Ben Watson 6 games 18 catches 222 yards 12.3 avg. 5 tds


Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see any convincing edge to Clark here.

Yes, I think you are missing something. Look at the stats again. How can you say that almost double the catches and + 166 yards is not an edge for a TE??? Over the whole seaon at that pace there is a huge difference.

Clark is on pace for 73 catches, 886 yards, and 13 tds
Watson is on pace for 48 catches, 592 yards, and 13 tds.

How can you not see a convincing edge??? Now here is the kicker. Watson may have the potential to be just as good as Clark if he could stay on the feild. At least Clark is playing football. The healthy guy always has the edge. The other factor is the hands of Ben Watson. He has been much improved this year, but last year was ugly. Let's hope that he is past the dropsies and fumbles. Watson fumbled 3 times last year while Clark has not fumbled in over 2 years. To me these are easy edges.

 

[boggleboggle]

Re: Salisbury " Colts have better recievers"

In my opinion, Wayne is the Colts' #1 wide receiver now and Clark is really a slot receiver, so the correct comparison of receivers (WR + TE) would be

Moss vs Wayne

Moss = 47 receptions, 779 yards, 16.6 ypc, 11 TDs
Wayne = 44 receptions, 668 yards, 15.2 ypc, 5 TDs

Edge to Moss

Stallworth vs Harrison

Stallworth = 26 rec, 411 yds, 15.8 ypc, 3 TDs
Harrison = 20 rec, 247 yds, 12.4 ypc, 1 TDs

Edge to Stallworth this season. Maybe you call it even in respect to Harrison's career, but he is 35 years old and not close to the player he used to be.

Welker vs Clark

Welker = 56 rec, 613 yds, 10.9 ypc, 6 TDs
Clark = 32 rec, 388 yds, 12.1 ypc, 6 TDs

Edge to Welker (even though Clark has a 1.2 ypc edge, Welker has almost double the receptions)

Watson vs Gonzalez

Watson = 18 rec, 222 yds, 12.3 ypc, 5 TDs
Gonzalez = 14 rec, 194 yds, 13.9 ypc, 0 TDs

Have to give the edge to Watson here - he has more receptions, more yards and 5 more touchdowns.

Both sets of receivers have great QBs throwing them the ball, so I think looking at the raw stats is a fair comparison. You could argue that Harrison's stats are depressed due to missing some games, but Watson's are also depressed by this. Also, Stallworth was basically a non factor in the first few games as he settled into the offense, so his season numbers underestimate his current impact.

It is true that the Pats have played one more game than the Colts, but even if you adjust for that, the Pats would still look better overall in my opinion.

For me, if you are generous to the Colts, you could call the Moss, Stallworth, Watson vs Wayne, Harrison, Gonzalez even, but the Pats have a huge advantage at slot receiver. People often talk about the problems Clark will give to the Pats, but the Colts face a much bigger problem facing Welker.

 

[Flying Fungi]

Re: Salisbury " Colts have better recievers"

Do you like Phil Collins? I've been a big Genesis fan ever since the release of their 1980 album, Duke. Before that, I really didn't understand any of their work. Too artsy, too intellectual. It was on Duke where Phil Collins' presence became more apparent. I think Invisible Touch was the group's undisputed masterpiece. It's an epic meditation on intangibility. At the same time, it deepens and enriches the meaning of the preceding three albums. Christy, take off your robe. Listen to the brilliant ensemble playing of Banks, Collins and Rutherford. You can practically hear every nuance of every instrument. Sabrina, remove your dress. In terms of lyrical craftsmanship, the sheer songwriting, this album hits a new peak of professionalism. Sabrina, why don't you, uh, dance a little. Take the lyrics to Land of Confusion. In this song, Phil Collins addresses the problems of abusive political authority. In Too Deep is the most moving pop song of the 1980s, about monogamy and commitment. The song is extremely uplifting. Their lyrics are as positive and affirmative as anything I've heard in rock. Christy, get down on your knees so Sabrina can see your *******. Phil Collins' solo career seems to be more commercial and therefore more satisfying, in a narrower way. Especially songs like In the Air Tonight and Against All Odds. Sabrina, don't just stare at it, eat it. But I also think Phil Collins works best within the confines of the group, than as a solo artist, and I stress the word artist. This is Sussudio, a great, great song, a personal favorite.

American Psycho

speak to us of Huey Lewis

 

[maverick4]

Re: Salisbury " Colts have better recievers"

Sean Salisbury was asked who he thought had the better recievers. The Patriots or the Colts. He gave the egde to the Colts.

Well if this is true then he HAS TO admit Brady is a better QB, with the stats he's putting up this season as well as in the past with his smurfs.

 

[The Predator]

Re: Salisbury " Colts have better recievers"

In my opinion, Wayne is the Colts' #1 wide receiver now and Clark is really a slot receiver, so the correct comparison of receivers (WR + TE) would be

Moss vs Wayne

Moss = 47 receptions, 779 yards, 16.6 ypc, 11 TDs
Wayne = 44 receptions, 668 yards, 15.2 ypc, 5 TDs

Edge to Moss

Stallworth vs Harrison

Stallworth = 26 rec, 411 yds, 15.8 ypc, 3 TDs
Harrison = 20 rec, 247 yds, 12.4 ypc, 1 TDs

Edge to Stallworth this season. Maybe you call it even in respect to Harrison's career, but he is 35 years old and not close to the player he used to be.

Welker vs Clark

Welker = 56 rec, 613 yds, 10.9 ypc, 6 TDs
Clark = 32 rec, 388 yds, 12.1 ypc, 6 TDs

Edge to Welker (even though Clark has a 1.2 ypc edge, Welker has almost double the receptions)

Watson vs Gonzalez

Watson = 18 rec, 222 yds, 12.3 ypc, 5 TDs
Gonzalez = 14 rec, 194 yds, 13.9 ypc, 0 TDs

Have to give the edge to Watson here - he has more receptions, more yards and 5 more touchdowns.

Both sets of receivers have great QBs throwing them the ball, so I think looking at the raw stats is a fair comparison. You could argue that Harrison's stats are depressed due to missing some games, but Watson's are also depressed by this. Also, Stallworth was basically a non factor in the first few games as he settled into the offense, so his season numbers underestimate his current impact.

It is true that the Pats have played one more game than the Colts, but even if you adjust for that, the Pats would still look better overall in my opinion.

For me, if you are generous to the Colts, you could call the Moss, Stallworth, Watson vs Wayne, Harrison, Gonzalez even, but the Pats have a huge advantage at slot receiver. People often talk about the problems Clark will give to the Pats, but the Colts face a much bigger problem facing Welker.

Imo you just cant take Clark vs Welker. That is comparing apples to bananas. Watson works in our slot as well and has lined up at WR many times this season.

In fact your comparison is based upon fantasy football instead of actual lineups. It should be as it is on paper and position played.

Moss vs Harrison as the #1. Moss
Stallworth vs Wayne as the #2. Wayne
Welker vs Gonzo as the #3. Welker
Clark vs Watson as the TE. Clark.

pats above listed 2222 yards and 25 tds.
colts above listed 1447 yards and and 12 tds.

 

[Coast2CoastPatsFan]

Re: Salisbury " Colts have better recievers"

Do you like Phil Collins? I've been a big Genesis fan ever since the release of their 1980 album, Duke. Before that, I really didn't understand any of their work. Too artsy, too intellectual. It was on Duke where Phil Collins' presence became more apparent. I think Invisible Touch was the group's undisputed masterpiece. It's an epic meditation on intangibility. At the same time, it deepens and enriches the meaning of the preceding three albums. Christy, take off your robe. Listen to the brilliant ensemble playing of Banks, Collins and Rutherford. You can practically hear every nuance of every instrument. Sabrina, remove your dress. In terms of lyrical craftsmanship, the sheer songwriting, this album hits a new peak of professionalism. Sabrina, why don't you, uh, dance a little. Take the lyrics to Land of Confusion. In this song, Phil Collins addresses the problems of abusive political authority. In Too Deep is the most moving pop song of the 1980s, about monogamy and commitment. The song is extremely uplifting. Their lyrics are as positive and affirmative as anything I've heard in rock. Christy, get down on your knees so Sabrina can see your *******. Phil Collins' solo career seems to be more commercial and therefore more satisfying, in a narrower way. Especially songs like In the Air Tonight and Against All Odds. Sabrina, don't just stare at it, eat it. But I also think Phil Collins works best within the confines of the group, than as a solo artist, and I stress the word artist. This is Sussudio, a great, great song, a personal favorite.

Not sure why this is in a discussion regarding which team has the better group of receivers, so I won't comment on that, but this has to be the most ignorant post I've ever seen. Any true Genesis fan knows that Peter Gabriel-led Genesis is far superior to anything in the Phil Collins era, especially the 80s material. Gabriel Genesis is some of the greatest progressive rock ever made, whereas the Collins-fronted version for the most part is overly-commercialized boring pop at its worst. There's just no comparison. It would be akin to preferring Rosie O'Donnell to Jessica Alba, but hey whatever blows your skirt up. And your Christy/Sabrina comments are disturbing to say the least.

As far as the original topic is concerned, I'll take the current group of Patriots receivers over the Colts receiver corps any day of the week, fully healthy or not. The Colts have an outstanding group, but the Pats starters man-for-man are better (a healthy Harrison would make it more even) and they have more depth, but that's JMO.

 

[Flying Fungi]

Re: Salisbury " Colts have better recievers"

Not sure why this is in a discussion regarding which team has the better group of receivers...

As far as the original topic is concerned.

it is a quote from the movie American Psycho

and it refers to the lunacy of the original topic

 

[Nordy]

Re: Salisbury " Colts have better recievers"

Not sure why this is in a discussion regarding which team has the better group of receivers, so I won't comment on that, but this has to be the most ignorant post I've ever seen. Any true Genesis fan knows that Peter Gabriel-led Genesis is far superior to anything in the Phil Collins era, especially the 80s material. Gabriel Genesis is some of the greatest progressive rock ever made, whereas the Collins-fronted version for the most part is overly-commercialized boring pop at its worst. There's just no comparison. It would be akin to preferring Rosie O'Donnell to Jessica Alba, but hey whatever blows your skirt up. And your Christy/Sabrina comments are disturbing to say the least.

As far as the original topic is concerned, I'll take the current group of Patriots receivers over the Colts receiver corps any day of the week, fully healthy or not. The Colts have an outstanding group, but the Pats starters man-for-man are better (a healthy Harrison would make it more even) and they have more depth, but that's JMO.

Hahaha. American Psycho, buddy.



Oh and btw, Ben Watson has caught 90% of the balls thrown his way this year.

 

[FrontSeven]

We have the most dominant WR in the game.
We have the most dominant slot receiver in the game.
We have the most dominant third-down-back receiver in the game.

TE is too close to bother nitpicking. OK, edge to Clark. Big deal.

 

[The Predator]

We have the most dominant WR in the game.
We have the most dominant slot receiver in the game.
We have the most dominant third-down-back receiver in the game.

TE is too close to bother nitpicking. OK, edge to Clark. Big deal.

TE isn't really that close at all if you look at the tracking stats.

I assume you are talking about Faulk as the most dominant 3rd down back. While he is consistent and reliable, I just don't think it is accurate to call him dominant anymore. It is not as if teams are scared of him and need to gameplan to stop him. They may watch for him, but thats about it.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Re: Salisbury " Colts have better recievers"

I don't think so. I don't want to think about Moss being a Colt, or Welker. How can anyone think Harrison-Wayne-Gonzalez is better than Moss-Stallworth-Welker? Would you like to swap WRs with them for the rest of the season? Not me!

I think you are letting your fan bias get the better of you. I'm a HUGE Pat's fan, have been since 1975, but as an NFL fan, I would take a healthy Harrison over Moss, Wayne over Stallworth any day of the week, Clark over Watson. The only receiver I see being better than the Colts receivers is Welker over Gonzales. Harrison and Wayne have proven themselves time and time again, whereas Moss has had some off years recently, and Stallworth's career is nowhere as accomplished as Wayne's. Of course, I am basing my thoughts on the WR comparison on the careers of the receivers. This year Moss has been the better receiver, but on a whole, I rather have Harrison, maybe one of the top 5 receivers of all time.

That being said, I love what Moss, Welker and Stallworth have done this year, what an incredible difference they've made, and I can't believe Brady has been so successful with his stable of receivers he had in the past. Now that he has a comparable stable to Manning's, Brady is just tearing it up. Brady was a first ballot Hall of Famer before this season, now there should be no question in anyone's mind.

 

[Nordy]

Re: Salisbury " Colts have better recievers"

I would take a healthy Harrison over Moss

Sorry but that's ridiculous. Moss is a much more feared WR than Harrison. Moss is probably the most feared WR in the history of the league.

 

[Fixit]

I assume you are talking about Faulk as the most dominant 3rd down back. While he is consistent and reliable, I just don't think it is accurate to call him dominant anymore. It is not as if teams are scared of him and need to gameplan to stop him. They may watch for him, but thats about it.

Not true. They also watch him whiz by for first downs.

 

[Fixit]

What's with the 1-to-1 comparisons at receiver? The "this receiver is better than this one, but this receiver is better than..." thing is pointless.

The only thing that counts is that Moss/Stallworth/Welker/Watson have way more receptions, way more yards, and more than double the touchdowns of Harrison/Wayne/Clark/Gonzalez.

And they've only been playing together for eight weeks.

 

[mgcolby]

We have to be the whiniest 8-0 fan base in the history of the NFL. :bricks:

Seriously just smile and enjoy the ride. People's opinions will vary. I understand being defensive over some of the extreme comments or articles about running up the score. But we are becoming the boy that cried wolf.

 

[Patsguy05]

Re: Salisbury " Colts have better recievers"

Nobody in their right mind would have picked the Patriots as having the best receivers before this season started.

I think that with a healthy Harrison, the Colts would still deserve the edge.

Keep in mind that the Patriots receivers have Tom Brady throwing to them while the Colts receivers have Manning. Brady makes his receivers look better than they really are. Anyone remember Reche Caldwell?

Yes I remember Reche Caldwell. I had actually almost forgetten until I happened to flip past the NFL Network last night and they were showing last years AFCCG and it was the play where Caldwell dropped the pass that would have gotten us a first down and eventually another touchdown. Yes I remember.

 

[frankiesfly]

Re: Salisbury " Colts have better recievers"

I don't think so. I don't want to think about Moss being a Colt, or Welker. How can anyone think Harrison-Wayne-Gonzalez is better than Moss-Stallworth-Welker? Would you like to swap WRs with them for the rest of the season? Not me!

In my original post I disagreed with Salisbury. Swap recievers? LOL. Yeah right

 

[ATippett56]

Anyone hear the expression ...... the whole is greater than the sum of its parts?

Patriots offense >>>>>>>>>> Colts offense

That's the bottom line.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Moss>Wayne>Harrison>Welker

At this point, I think it's pretty clear that Wayne is the #1 guy in Indy atm(though that may be because of injury, Harrison is 35, so I guess we'll see for sure once he gets healthy). Either way, Moss is the best receiver on either team, by a wide margin. Meanwhile, while Harrison is still better than Stallworth or Welker, the gap between them isn't as large as that between Moss and Wayne. While I'd say that the Pats' top 2 is better, I can certainly see where the debate comes from. Either way, I think the real difference is in Stallworth vs. Gonzalez. That one just isn't even close.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Re: Salisbury " Colts have better recievers"

I think you are letting your fan bias get the better of you. I'm a HUGE Pat's fan, have been since 1975, but as an NFL fan, I would take a healthy Harrison over Moss, Wayne over Stallworth any day of the week, Clark over Watson. The only receiver I see being better than the Colts receivers is Welker over Gonzales. Harrison and Wayne have proven themselves time and time again, whereas Moss has had some off years recently, and Stallworth's career is nowhere as accomplished as Wayne's. Of course, I am basing my thoughts on the WR comparison on the careers of the receivers. This year Moss has been the better receiver, but on a whole, I rather have Harrison, maybe one of the top 5 receivers of all time.

That being said, I love what Moss, Welker and Stallworth have done this year, what an incredible difference they've made, and I can't believe Brady has been so successful with his stable of receivers he had in the past. Now that he has a comparable stable to Manning's, Brady is just tearing it up. Brady was a first ballot Hall of Famer before this season, now there should be no question in anyone's mind.

Yes, Harrison has had an amazing career. The downside of that is that he's now 35. This isn't about careers, it's about who has the best group now, and I really don't see how anyone can say that a 35 year old Harrison is better than the Randy Moss who just got 11 touchdowns in 8 games.