05-11-2021, 07:44 AM
(05-08-2021, 06:06 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: The problem with discussing #1's and #2's and #3's is that everyone has a different definition of what that means.
Do you mean #1 in production? Do you mean #1 in the type of role (outside deep threat)?
When you're discussing roles (1, 2 and 3) that's entirely changed too. With teams forgoing the use of a fullback and running 3 WR's, or 2 WR's + 2 TE's, it all gets a little murky.
Remember, at one time TJ was easily considered our #2. Chris Henry was our #3. This was largely due to snap counts and the fact TJ started and Henry did not. He also outproduced Henry. I think that would be a different conversation nowadays. At least for some of us. TJ would be considered a "slot receier" or a #3 because of the underneath work. And Henry's numbers would balloon due to more playing time (Jeremiah Johnson wouldn't exist now)
To each their own, but because of all of the above I largely avoid this conversations now. It just ends up being that we're all talking about different things while using the same terms.
But to answer your question from a pure numbers stand point? I think any of the 3 could lead the team in yards (good problem to have). And even if one does that's not even necessarily because they're the "best" of the bunch. A lot of that has to do with the system, playcalling, and how the defense chooses to defend. So yeah, I think there's a decent change Tee Higgins is our #1 (in production). And if he's not I still expect him to be close. I expect all 3 to be relatively close (if Zac uses them correctly).
I was Basically asking if Tee could be the best WR in this team all around. I still think he can and it is a good problem to have...
