Originally posted by Alkasquawlik:
Also, this is kind of a different topic, but it's related. I feel like the differences in peoples' opinion on who to take, Hill or Fleener, is a difference in how people think JH is going to run his offense. We haven't had a true #1 WR since TO left, and I feel like the people who want Hill, are of the mindset that a team needs a hierarchy of receivers, and as a result, we need to draft one since there weren't any in FA other than Vincent Jackson.
However, I feel like the people who want Fleener, sort of understand that JH wants to run a system based on solid playmaking from across the board. Look at Green Bay, New Orleans, and New England. None of those teams really have a true #1 WR, sure there may be players that are better than others on the team, but for the most part, Brees, Rodgers, and Brady can pick and choose their targets and have the confidence that whoever they are throwing the ball to, will make a play. They are solid from top to bottom with guys who can make plays. I don't think we need a #1 game breaking WR. Why would we when the defense knows that every single guy on the field is a threat to score on any given play?
Do we really need to explain why a legit #1 is necessary?