Santana Moss 41 receptions, 573 yards and 8TDs > LaFell's 44, 677, and 4 (and he's not even a starter).
Pierre Garcon who had a bad foot had numbers similar to LaFell, 44, 633 and 4.
The Leonard Hankerson, WR extraordinaire (sarcasm), even put up 38, 543 and 3 on 19 less targets.
Blame it on the read option all you want. That's really the only argument that you can cling onto at this point,. LaFell really had the the same or less impact of an old guy who was not a starter, and a guy on a bad foot can equal the production of your prized WR2. He was a little better than another guy who was not a starter, but who arguably was supposed to have his break out year also, but turned out to be a mediocre WR just like LaFell. Like I said, the stats really just prove what I've been saying all along. Moreover, if I had film of LaFell, I would have to bring my pillow because I'd probably fall asleep. It would be named The Disappearing Man.
Regarding Olsen and Tolbert, I already answered it, but let me make it simple: Good players rise to the occasion, so LaFell is not going to get a pass because he doesn't warrant more attention because of his inability to get open and make a great impact upon the game. Oh, he is a mediocre WR whose job is to catch the ball, but because he doesn't do his job as effectively as more than a few others, he loses touches to the TE and the FB. OK.
Smith's numbers were still decent, notwithstanding the fact that LaFell couldn't break out and command the attention of defenses.
Again those are not great numbers. That is still the same area as Lafell and Smith were. So you just made my point. The offense didn't give many opportunities for Smith or Lafell to put up numbers.
Smith numbers were well below his avg. He didn't score his 1st TD until half way thru the season. You're full of it lying to yourself like that to downgrade lafell.
Dude I understand you don't like the guy but don't deny the facts.