Rosenthal: In reality, the Panthers have a roster full of No. 4 receivers

[cbarrier90]

The short answer is a receiving corps that is not on life support with the loss of its star receiver. 

Fair enough. The key is the performance of Funchess, but the additions of he and Ginn have (theoretically speaking, since it's week 2 of preseason) pushed Cotchery and Bersin further down on the depth chart. If Boykin plays well he may even supplant Bersin. Those two had far too prominent roles last season, and that was with Kelvin in tow.

Greg Olsen will still be doing Greg Olsen things.

Name a receiving corps that DOESN'T have issues if you take away the number one option...

[beastson52]

All we need is the same type of offense we had back in 2003. Nothing fancy, just power run then play action to ginn 

[Verge]

I'd rather have our receiving core right now over the following teams:

New Orleans

Ravens 

Browns

 

[tiger7_88]

The short answer is a receiving corps that is not on life support with the loss of its star receiver. 

So basically all you want is for every position on both sides of the field to be stacked with All-Pro talent and Pro Bowl depth.

If not, then there are give-and-takes when you're a GM.  Which position, under the salary cap regime, would you "give"?  Which would you "take"?  A given is you would obviously draft and sign in free agency more #1 WRs than the Atlanta Falc'ants have.

So... what position is going to suffer the "take" while you "give" to your fixation on talent at an edge position?

[top dawg]

Fair enough. The key is the performance of Funchess, but the additions of he and Ginn have (theoretically speaking, since it's week 2 of preseason) pushed Cotchery and Bersin further down on the depth chart. If Boykin plays well he may even supplant Bersin. Those two had far too prominent roles last season, and that was with Kelvin in tow.

Greg Olsen will still be doing Greg Olsen things.

Name a receiving corps that DOESN'T have issues if you take away the number one option...

The issue is not having "issues", it's not being on life support if your main WR goes down.

Since everyone likes to mention the Colts, let's start with them. First of all, who is their main receiver? Is it T.Y. Hilton or Andre Johnson? No matter, because they have either Donte Moncrief or Philip Dorsett as back-ups.  

How about the Green Bay Packers? Sure, Jordy Nelson is their WR1, but they also have Randall Cobb. And just for fun they have Davante Adams and TY Montgomery waiting in the wings. 

Let's talk the Steelers. They have the incomparable Antonio Brown, but they also have damned good depth in Martvis Bryant, Markus Wheaton, Sammie Coates, and Darrius Heyward-Bey.

How about the lowly Patriots? They basically suck anyway according to many on the Huddle. They have slot receiver extraordinaire, Julian Edelman, Brandon LaFell, Danny Amendola and Aaron Dobson.  Maybe not much, but the combined experience along with first class coaching makes them a world apart from our guys.  Similarly, the Seahawks have Doug Baldwin, Jermaine Kearse, Paul Richardson and Tyler Lockett. 

Now, I could go on and on, but suffice it to say that when comparing what some of these groups have proven,  just the potential according to scouts that is in many ways reflected by the position in which some of these guys were drafted, or the fact that they are in many ways coached better from an offensive standpoint, I think that most would say they could lose their WR1 without the situation being so dire. 

 

[top dawg]

 

So basically all you want is for every position on both sides of the field to be stacked with All-Pro talent and Pro Bowl depth.

If not, then there are give-and-takes when you're a GM.  Which position, under the salary cap regime, would you "give"?  Which would you "take"?  A given is you would obviously draft and sign in free agency more #1 WRs than the Atlanta Falc'ants have.

So... what position is going to suffer the "take" while you "give" to your fixation on talent at an edge position?

There you go with your extremes.  There were some fairly cheap options in Kenny Britt, Hakeem Nicks and Denarius Moore.  All are fairly young, all have played the main role before, and any one of them would have been great insurance for a WR corps in case calamity struck. Moreover, I suspect along the way during the draft that as opposed to picking up another DE or LB prospect that we could have used someone say like a Donte Moncrief, Jeff Janis, Michael Campanaro or John Brown. 

[Matthias]

Even if we had a roster full of number 4 receivers, which I obviously disagree, the Seahawks made it to two superbowls and won one with a roster full of number 5 receivers.

[beastson]

The onus is on the defense to carry us. Thats where we have the most talent and that's how our HC and GM constructed the team. If we fail, they should get most of the blame. Something they get too little of for a defense driven team. All the offense can do is not lose the game. They're too limited to lead us....

I think there's enough talent with the problem being LT on offense to the point where the defense doesn't need to "carry" the team. The onus is on the coaches to make adjustments and have the team prepared correctly every week to win on sunday's. 

[top dawg]

Even if we had a roster full of number 4 receivers, which I obviously disagree, the Seahawks made it to two superbowls and won one with a roster full of number 5 receivers.

I'll take any WR that we have not named Benjamin and Funchess and trade them for someone with the skills of Harvin, Baldwin, or Kearse right now. 

The Seahawks' WRs just do their thing when the game is on the line. Even Ricardo Lockette is probably better than what we have outside of our twin towers.

[top dawg]

And, furthermore, the Seahawks are a better coached team. People need to stop with that.

[Matthias]

I'll take any WR that we have not named Benjamin and Funchess and trade them for someone with the skills of Harvin, Baldwin, or Kearse right now. 

The Seahawks' WRs just do their thing when the game is on the line. Even Ricardo Lockette is probably better than what we have outside of our twin towers.

Cam and Ted Ginn have good big play chemistry.  Of course we got Olsen and now Ed Dickson who is coming on strong.  We have enough players in the passing game to get the job done.

[cbarrier90]

And, furthermore, the Seahawks are a better coached team. People need to stop with that.

NOW you're starting to put the blame in the right place, IMO...

[GRWatcher]

I'll take any WR that we have not named Benjamin and Funchess and trade them for someone with the skills of Harvin, Baldwin, or Kearse right now. 

The Seahawks' WRs just do their thing when the game is on the line. Even Ricardo Lockette is probably better than what we have outside of our twin towers.

You do realize, don't you, that Percy Harvin is now with the Buffalo Bills and Rex Ryan. He's been talking trash about the Seahawks' WR corps lately.

[top dawg]

NOW you're starting to put the blame in the right place, IMO...

Anyone that's been paying attention knows that neither Shula or even Rivera (mostly for keeping Shula) don't get a pass from me.  Gettleman doesn't get a pass either because the buck stops with him.  That being said. I like both Dave and Ron, and overall I think they have done a good job at lifting the franchise. But they have not been perfect. 

Bottom line is though, they don't run routes, and I believe that Ricky Proehl has definitely taught the guys that skill.