Taking a look at #2 WR's from 2007

[arync]

Crayton is a good player he just needs to shut up and catch the ball

 

[TellerMorrow34]

I don't know. I look at number by Housh, Jennings, Boldin, Welker, and wonder, why don't we want our #2 WR to be in that league?

Dude come one. Lets see what Welker does this year as an actual #2 instead of a #3 that got to play in the slot on linebackers all the time time.

People always lump him in as the #2 cause of his catch totals but he was the #3 WR. If Crayton got to do nothing but play at the 3 spot, with linebackers and safeties on him every play, he'd have had 90 catches also. Which, yes, is what I ultimately hope can happen for him, if we could upgrade the #2 spot, but if not I'm not at all upset about PC at #2.

 

[Stash]

Dude come one. Lets see what Welker does this year as an actual #2 instead of a #3 that got to play in the slot on linebackers all the time time.

People always lump him in as the #2 cause of his catch totals but he was the #3 WR. If Crayton got to do nothing but play at the 3 spot, with linebackers and safeties on him every play, he'd have had 90 catches also. Which, yes, is what I ultimately hope can happen for him, if we could upgrade the #2 spot, but if not I'm not at all upset about PC at #2.

Are you serious with this?

You're attributing Welker's succes to being covered by linebackers?

That's weak.

 

[DaBoys4Life]

Like I've said a couple times now...pretty basic concepts that you just either dont get, or dont want to get

And stop with this "agenda" b/s...I dont have any agenda other than proving to some really dimwitted people that Crayton actually compares well to other teams #2 WR's league wide...and it was obvious that was the case looking at the numbers

David

His stats sit at 16 and catches and total yards are at 16. There's 32 teams in the league so he average. He compares well to the bottom half of #2 WR in the NFL. Considering how you didn't even count Reggie Wayne in your stats that would push him down another spot in the rankings but it's cool.

I think your the person who doesn't get it.

 

[Angus]

The problem I have with Crayton is that he is nothing close to a #1 in the event that he is needed to fill that role.

He will work as a #2 and would dominate as a #3. To say hes good enough that he kills the desire for a true #2 receiver is false.

What are your definitions of #1, #2, and #3 receivers? Any of you?

Without them no one can make good sense of what you are contending.

 

[DFWJC]

Majority would mean 17 players. All your saying is that he is average compared to other #2 WR at his position.

I think that is about right...he's average...maybe slightly better than that given that Witten gets so many balls thrown his way and that Crayton is on a steady rise.

Ideally, he would be a #3, but he's not a bad #2 as long as Witten and TO are 1 and 1a.