Quote:
Originally Posted by mooby
It's like Greg Cosell's article (which you can read here) says, the definition of a #1 wide receiver is overrated in this day and age of 3 wr sets designed to exploit mismatches (i.e. your #1 WR lining up in the slot against a linebacker/safety, etc.). But whomever is saying Hankerson won't contribute is someone who's opinion I wouldn't necessarily agree with. |
yeah, people get carried away almost as if #1 wr is a position, like if you don't have one it's like not having a true point guard! Just need decent playmakers, consistent routes & good hands. I'd rather three guys rack up 800+ yards each in a balanced attack than see one wr get 1400 himself.