D. Newton: Rivera is right. We don't need a number 1 WR. / OK, OK...

[top dawg]

I am getting about tired of the "No. 1" receiver talk at this point.  The term "number 1" has become somewhat irrelevant at this point at worst, and just a lesson in semantics at best. 

 

LINK

So if you count the borderline players, only 19 of 32 teams had a No. 1 receiver in 2013. If you don't count them, only 12 did. 

Not among the 12 were Super Bowl champion Seattle, NFC South champion Carolina, AFC East champion New England, AFC South champion Indianapolis and NFC wild-card team New Orleans. 

Those teams were a collective 59-21 during the regular season. 

Of the 12 teams that had bona fide No. 1s, seven finished .500 or worse. Detroit, Houston, Cleveland, Atlanta and Tampa Bay were a collective 21-59. Of the four teams with true No. 1s that made the playoffs, two lost in the first round. 

So when Rivera says he's not worried, he really isn't. Neither should those following Carolina, although many of you have been since the Panthers released Steve Smith. 

 

Of course what actually defines a No. 1 receiver is up to debate, which has lessened the importance of the need for these receivers that are pretty much universally accepted as studs.

 

Successful offenses are more about successful schemes and balance. The teams that achieve balance typically don't need a true No. 1. 

"The thing that we had to look at is we have a good group of young guys that we feel need to get opportunities,'' Rivera said. "We’ve got the draft, and there’s no secret that at some point if we’ve got a chance to draft a wide receiver we are going to do it.” 

The bottom line, to be a top team you don't have to have a top receiver.

 

 

 

OK, Ok, I get that we don't need a true No. 1 receiver in regards to certain definitions. That being said, we do need what I refer to as legit threats at receiver to "take it to the house" on every down, or at least get big chunks of yardage on any given play. The Panthers, as well as every other team, needs play-makers.

 

T.Y. Hilton may not be considered a No. 1 WR right now, but he will burn you.  Golden Tate is another guy in that same vein.  Some don't consider Antonio Brown a true No. 1, but he will eat you alive if left alone, as will Torrey Smith, Marques Colston, Randall Cobb, etc.  So I don't care what you call these types of WRs, we need legitimate play-makers. And, not just one.  We need wide-outs who will rise to the occasion and make plays when the situation arises.  Call them a No.1, No. 2 or whatever. Adept play-makers and play calling is what will help get us to the top, and keep us there. 

[Harris Aballah]

They make it sound as if we're lining up with an empty slot. Like, " we don't need a #1 wr so we're figured we'd just line up with 10 guys." I wonder what would happen if all the recievers contributed equally? Maybe you wouldn't end up with a guy like megatron that dictates 60% of your salary?

[IamSoClutch]

I would be happy with two solid #2 receievers and a burner

[philp]

now i feel so much better about having mcnutt on the roster.

[Cyberjag]

We don't need a star receiver, all we need is someone who is a credible threat to get open.  A strong offensive line will mean far more than a burner on the outside.  Give Cam time, and we can move the ball even with Keary Colbert 2.0.

[davos]

The thing that people should actually be getting pumped about is that we have Ricky Proehl and Jerricho Cotchery here to groom a new generation of Panther wide receivers.  We haven't had much of this in past regimes to help mold some decent wideouts. 

 

From everything I've read, we targeted early and brought in Cotchery to not just produce on the field but be a mentor.  This says it all:

 

 

 

"Jerricho was somebody that we targeted early," Rivera said. "We signed Cotchery to be the veteran guy leading that group of receivers, helping to develop the young guys. We also signed him because we believe he has got a few really good years left.

 

http://www.panthers.com/news/article-2/Rivera-Headed-in-right-direction/372ba3b3-ba5a-4878-8896-18ec48c210fc

 

We're gonna be getting at least one WR in the draft at some point.  It's also clear Gettleman/Rivera see something in King and McNutt.  

 

They did well with White, Lester, and our rookies last season so I'm going with it again.  Add on the fact we brought in a good offensive mind in Ramsdell to a large capacity and it's not so doom and gloom.  Rather exciting.   

[Ruff]

Teams don't need a #1 receiver, yet every year teams chomp at the bit to get a guy like Watkins or Green in the draft. If not needing #1, game-breaking receiver is a real thing, then we should be able to et Sammy Watkins, because he'll fall to us.

[Cary Kollins]

"We’ve got the draft, and there’s no secret that at some point if we’ve got a chance to draft a wide receiver we are going to do it.” 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[The Huddler]

Hey look at me. I'm a fan who thinks he knows his poo. fug our stupid FO!

[The Huddler]

A good core that has a balance of skills is so much more valuable than a "1"

Give me 3 guys that compliment each other and play within the scheme than some presumed #1.

[Ruff]

A good core that has a balance of skills is so much more valuable than a "1"

Give me 3 guys that compliment each other and play within the scheme than some presumed #1.

So, you'd take McNutt, Cotchery, and underwood over megatron?

[The Huddler]

Did I say they were a good core?

And Megatron is #1 times 10. Teams have #1s that aren't superstars

Even then, I'd rather have 3 good, established, system WRs than one really good one. Spread the ball around

[fjblair]

#1 receiver is as stupid and meaningless as "deep threat". You don't hire a #1 but somebody will become the leading receiver, which was a TE last season. Every receiver is a deep threat.

 

 

[Ruff]

Did I say they were a good core?

And Megatron is #1 times 10. Teams have #1s that aren't superstars

Even then, I'd rather have 3 good, established, system WRs than one really good one. Spread the ball around

lol. ok.