best WR receiver corps

#1
V

vol in dixie

pandemonia reigns
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
265
Likes
0
#1
We've had some really good corps over the years. i am listed the guys that i can remember contributing the most. i was too young to remember any groups pre 1994. if you know of any groups pre '94 that were as good or better, feel free to post em. go.

1995:
Joey Kent
Marcus Nash
Maurice Staley
Scott Pfeiffer (TE)

1997:
Joey Kent
Marcus Nash
Jeremaine Copeland
Andy McCullough
Antrone Peebles (TE)

1998:
Peerless Price
Cedrick Wilson
Jeremaine Copeland
Bobby Graham
John Finlayson (TE)
(this team was stacked with talent)

2001:
Kelly Washington
Donte Stallworth
Jason Witten (TE)
Leonard Scott
Bobby Graham

2004:
James Banks
Derrick Tinsley
Chris Brown (TE)
Tony Brown

2006:
Robert Meachem
Jayson Swain
Lucas Taylor
Brett Smith
Chris Brown (TE)

i also know we had some good ones in the early '90s with Pickens, Alvin Harper, & Craig Faulkner but i was too young to know if/when they played together.
 
#3
#3
Hey man you can add Eric Parker to the 2001 class. He was good for us and played several years in the NFL..That 2001 WR Corp was unreal.
 
#4
#4
The current WR corps definitely has the potential to be counted with the best. And now, with what seems like a pass oriented offense, this corps will probably end up having the best stats. JMO.
 
#7
#7
BigOrange15 said:
The current WR corps definitely has the potential to be counted with the best. And now, with what seems like a pass oriented offense, this corps will probably end up having the best stats. JMO.
Click to expand...

I agree and next years could be even better if we add Patterson,Croom,Bowles,Redding and if there is anymore. I mean this is what next years could look like and if these guys life up to their potential them damn, Bray will have plenty of options

Rogers (Think he will be the best of the group)
Hunter ( Unreal speed,jumping ability and hands, just needs to get stronger)
Arnett Should be the slot man this year)
Milton ( Hoping this is the year everything comes together for him.
Dallas (Could be sharing slot time)
Rogers (not sold on him yet)

Patterson( Possible future 1st rounder with Hunter and Rogers)
Bowles
Redding
Croom ( Another big target)

We will definately be WR U again..What QB wouldnt want to throw to these guys? And I left out Rivera and Clear at TE..rivera has good hands and hopefully Clear is the next Te who can catch. With his size it will be unfair for opposing Defenses.
 
#9
#9
Volman93 said:
The 2001 WRs were so stacked it's stupid.
Click to expand...

Man your not kidding.

Stallworth,Washington and Parker were all 3 NFL players and were solid at it. Witten is the best catching TE in the NFL. Not to mention we had Montrel Jones I think as a FR that year, but was a complete waste of talent. Cant remember who else we brought in that year.
 
#10
#10
VolNC2316 said:
Wasn't Anthony Morgan and J.J. McCleskey a part of that group as well ??...

No wonder the Vols have been known as Wide Receiver U...
Click to expand...

I couldn't find the full roster, I think morgan left in 89, I just remember Harper and Pickens
 
#11
#11
I think we have a decent group of receivers right now but it can't touch 1990 or 2001 groups listed.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#14
#14
Can also add Chris Hannon to the 2001 class and the 2004 class. That 2001 class just continues to look unreal. I had forgotten all about Hannon and had to google him and se what his exact years were. was a FR in 2001. Another guy who was drafted to the NFL.
 
#16
#16
jasonvol18 said:
Yes they were. Still amazes me how we were 17 PT underdogs to Florida that year.
Click to expand...

Because they knew Fulmer was the coach. If Spurrier had been at UT instead of Fulmer, we would've won 3 NCs. Could you imagine what he would've done with Peyton Manning and then our WR corps after Manning.
 
#17
#17
SandoVOL said:
I couldn't find the full roster, I think morgan left in 89, I just remember Harper and Pickens
Click to expand...

I found a website (fanbase.com) Not really sure how reliable it is but these were the receivers listed on the 90 squad...

Vincent Moore, Charlie Longmire, Jason Julian (also listed as a safety), Alvin Harper, Harlan Davis, Tommy Campbell (TE), Mark Adams (TE), J.J. McCleskey, Anthony Morgan, Cory Fleming, Mark Rapien (TE), Carl Pickens, Craig Faulkner....

Dale Carter was also on that team...Didn't he two-platoon a little at WR ??...
 
Last edited:
#18
#18
tvols75 said:
Because they knew Fulmer was the coach. If Spurrier had been at UT instead of Fulmer, we would've won 3 NCs. Could you imagine what he would've done with Peyton Manning and then our WR corps after Manning.
Click to expand...

Your exactly right. I made that exact point in another thread. Fulmer was a fantasic recruiter, but wasnt the best Coach. All the talent he had and only 1 NC was ridiculous. We definately should have had atleast 3 and possibly more. No way we shouldnt have had atleast 1 under Peyton.
 
#19
#19
jasonvol18 said:
Hey man you can add Eric Parker to the 2001 class. He was good for us and played several years in the NFL..That 2001 WR Corp was unreal.
Click to expand...

The 2001 WR group was good, but not "unreal." Stallworth was an edge receiver; Washington a great athlete who never developed true WR skills over time; and Parker, our most skilled WR, not the best athlete. Witten was the freak of the bunch. Of course, it was still less impressive than having 6 NFL wideouts, tight ends, and running backs to throw the ball, with 2 different all-SEC QBs doing the passing, like LSU had in 2001. That's what unreal talent looks like.
 
#20
#20
jasonvol18 said:
Your exactly right. I made that exact point in another thread. Fulmer was a fantasic recruiter, but wasnt the best Coach. All the talent he had and only 1 NC was ridiculous. We definately should have had atleast 3 and possibly more. No way we shouldnt have had atleast 1 under Peyton.
Click to expand...

:lolabove:
 
#21
#21
VegasVol said:
The 2001 WR group was good, but not "unreal." Stallworth was an edge receiver; Washington a great athlete who never developed true WR skills over time; and Parker, our most skilled WR, not the best athlete. Witten was the freak of the bunch. Of course, it was still less impressive than having 6 NFL wideouts, tight ends, and running backs to throw the ball, with 2 different all-SEC QBs doing the passing, like LSU had in 2001. That's what unreal talent looks like.
Click to expand...

LOL..Damn bro have I pissed you off about something. Your following all my posts and making some ****ty comments. Or are you an LSU fan, cause you sure are taking up for them a good bit. Its my opinion on the WR's and coaching. And i wasnt the only one who said it was unreal, but yet you only comment on mine. If you have a problem we can discuss it further but I cant recall ever having any discussions with you so i am kind of confused on it. But either way you have your opinion and I have mine. Plus your points make zero sense. Just the 2 QB's alone you were mentioning werent both all SEC QB's in 2001 I dont think. I could be wrong but that would be some kind accomplishment in having 2 Qb's do that from the same team in the same year.:eek:lol:
 
#22
#22
VegasVol said:
The 2001 WR group was good, but not "unreal." Stallworth was an edge receiver; Washington a great athlete who never developed true WR skills over time; and Parker, our most skilled WR, not the best athlete. Witten was the freak of the bunch. Of course, it was still less impressive than having 6 NFL wideouts, tight ends, and running backs to throw the ball, with 2 different all-SEC QBs doing the passing, like LSU had in 2001. That's what unreal talent looks like.
Click to expand...

Comparing 2001 UT to 2001 LSU is very dumb. Just face it, your boy got outcoached.
 
#23
#23
jasonvol18 said:
LOL..Damn bro have I pissed you off about something.
Click to expand...

Not so intended. Making the point that the 2001 team was an over-performing team, not an uber-talented team.

The larger point is that when a team plays well, fans can give it three attributions: first, claim their team has more natural talent; second, claim their team has the better development of talent; or third, claim their team is better coached. Whether to attribute performance to a coaching staff or to the natural talent of the player, or some division thereof, is one of the most common errors made by fans, with a proclivity to elevate certain styles of coaches and denigrated other styles of coaches. Hence, the utility and propriety of using third-party measuring methodologies for truly grading an individual's talent in assessing whether talent or coaching, or what combination thereof, created the outcome.

The 2001 team poses a particularly potent example. That LSU team was poorly coached, especially defensively, against several teams that year; the Tennessee team greatly over-performed it's talent all year. This is confirmed by the various third-party talent measurements that now exist. Yet, fans believed an LSU win was due to "great coaching" and the Tennessee loss due to "terrible coaching." Why? Because they mis-assesed the talent on the field, and mis-attributed performance concerning talent & coaching in both cases. It has ongoing importance in measuring coaches going forward...
 
#24
#24
tvols75 said:
Comparing 2001 UT to 2001 LSU is very dumb.
Click to expand...

Only uninformed Tennessee fans thought that then, or now.

Which roster had more all-SEC players?
Which roster had the higher recruited players?
Which roster had more NFL starters?
Which roster had more NFL players?

Answer? LSU. LSU. LSU. LSU.
 
#25
#25
VegasVol said:
Not so intended. Making the point that the 2001 team was an over-performing team, not an uber-talented team.

The larger point is that when a team plays well, fans can give it three attributions: first, claim their team has more natural talent; second, claim their team has the better development of talent; or third, claim their team is better coached. Whether to attribute performance to a coaching staff or to the natural talent of the player, or some division thereof, is one of the most common errors made by fans, with a proclivity to elevate certain styles of coaches and denigrated other styles of coaches. Hence, the utility and propriety of using third-party measuring methodologies for truly grading an individual's talent in assessing whether talent or coaching, or what combination thereof, created the outcome.

The 2001 team poses a particularly potent example. That LSU team was poorly coached, especially defensively, against several teams that year; the Tennessee team greatly over-performed it's talent all year. This is confirmed by the various third-party talent measurements that now exist. Yet, fans believed an LSU win was due to "great coaching" and the Tennessee loss due to "terrible coaching." Why? Because they mis-assesed the talent on the field, and mis-attributed performance concerning talent & coaching in both cases. It has ongoing importance in measuring coaches going forward...
Click to expand...

Well we will have to agree to disagree. We were outcoached by a lesser talented team. Now based over 4 years of each teams players they may or may not have been more talented, I truely dont have the time to go evaluate what every single player did, nor will I. But that year we had the better talent. LSU caught us at the right time and it was a terrible job of coaching by Fulmer. And I doubt Saban has ever been accused of bad coaching with a talented team. Just dont see it happening, and I cant stand him.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top