(03-09-2018, 04:01 PM)Etdavis2006 Wrote: I guess it comes down to production over winning. When was the last time we saw a truly dominant WR win in the Super Bowl. Maybe D Thomas with Peyton but I wouldn’t consider him top 5. A top wr helps to make your offense extremely productive but how important are they to actually winning? That to me is how you determine the importance of a ppsition.

Qb, De, Lt, Cb (in that order) are the most important positions in football because they all directly effect the qb. After that, it would depend on the team philosophy. So the steelers may value LB next where as the seahawks or jags would value safety or DT next. Wr much further down that list. The conversation only changes when you are discussing a Calvin Johnson type that literally dictates what the defense can do but then it goes back to the original question “how intergral is it to actually winning?”

Why do we have to use "dominant" as our value? Why not just use "very good". How many teams have won a super bowl without at least one very good WR?    

Yep. You know what also effects QB performance? Having really good receivers. Hence why they get paid what they do. NFL teams don't just do it for the sake of it.  

And yes Calvin Johnson was a HOF caliber reciever. They aren't the only WRs that are valuable. Just look at the contracts teams pay, that will tell you where they value each position.

---