Freddie Boston wrote
Can someone explain to me why there has to be a WR1 receiver? I think most great teams mix it up and on any given play or situation, there is no Number 1...especially without an Adams, Cupp, etc. Is it a ego thing? I think its dumb...like saying "XXXX is our number 1 offensive linemen." The designation is superfluous.
ALL RECEIVERS SHOULD BE CAPABLE OF GETTING OPEN, CATCHING THE BALL, AND BLOCKING. So why does the "Number 1" matter?
It seems to me that you should design plays/schemes where you believe certain players are likely to be open, but that by trying to force throws into "the guy", as doing so makes the offense become more predictable and stoppable. I believe this was a major issue for the Packers offense in big games over the last few years...stop Adams, stop the Packers.
I think the team's mentality should be to design plays which could get different guys open, but NOT in proportion to their 'ranking'. AR12 should throw it to the open guy and not worry about who the Number 1,2,or 3 is.
MC
Originally Posted by: Martha Careful