A hypothetical

[emmitt01]

It is arguable that this might be the best collection of WR talent we’ve had.   There are guys with P5 offers, speedsters, and legit size.  So my question is, which receiving corps would you take, assuming all are in their college prime: 

1) This year’s receivers + Jaelon Darden and Casey Fitzerald, or 

2) Johnny Quinn, George Marshall, Brock McGrew (assuming he catches the balls), Jalen Guyton, Jamel Branch, and Brelan Chancellor

 

 

To keep it simple, stick to the given options and assume we aren’t considering players from the 50’s

Edited August 29, 2021 by emmitt01

[El Paso Eagle]

Number 1. We know the results of group number 2, but the potential of number 1 might be much higher

[ADLER]

Is Littrell's receiver recruiting so good that the players with eligibility remaining this year (including Darden and Bussey) are comparable to an all star receiving corps from the preceding 20 years? I hope so, but that's a pretty lofty speculation.

[UNTLifer]

1, no question.

[Udomann]

1 hour ago, ADLER said:

Is Littrell's receiver recruiting so good that the players with eligibility remaining this year (including Darden and Bussey) are comparable to an all star receiving corps from the preceding 20 years? I hope so, but that's a pretty lofty speculation.

To be fair, i'd pick most modern receivers over those 20 or 30+ years ago. Health science, conditioning, and play books keep advancing making sure that players are usually ahead of prior generations.

Exceptions occur, but stats and records always trend up, not down

Edited August 30, 2021 by Udomann

[emmitt01]

I won’t lie, I think I might take the #2 option.  That’s several proven speedsters, amazing possession receivers, and utility guys.  

[Travis]

I’d take the number two option. I wonder if McLain would be better pick than Marshall. 

[NorthTexasSportsNetwork]

1 for sure

[ttunt1970]

I’ll take # 2 

[Marty]

#2 group for me.

[ForneyGreen]

I'll take the #2 with a side of Mason Fine please    😎

[ADLER]

4 hours ago, Udomann said:

To be fair, i'd pick most modern receivers over those 20 or 30+ years ago. Health science, conditioning, and play books keep advancing making sure that players are usually ahead of prior generations.

Exceptions occur, but stats and records always trend up, not down

I think the measurement would be performance against their contemporaries, with the assumption that modern defensive backs have the same advancements. So, we'll have to watch this season in order to make that evaluation.

Would somebody please revisit this thread after the season so that we can have a fair comparison. I am curious what the opinions will be then, and how they will differ from now.

[KingDL1]

At this point it is #2 for sure. They are all proven.