Honestly, BGN is one of the better sites out there for Eagles discussions, but half the site is absolutely retarded, especially whe it comes to the wide receiver position.

First, I get it, half of you have grown up with really bad WRs, some of you barely remember the T.O. 1.5 year extravaganza. We have a penchant for undersized, and often times underachieving WRs. It's to the point where guys who have way less production than FredEx, for example, like Riley Cooper are regarded as "an up and coming WR" basically because he's 6'4''. Hell, I'm guilty of being a Hank Baskett fan, though, to my credit, Hank did have a couple nice games early on in his career. Hell, I even liked Darienien McCants and I thought Billy McMullen was going to be a stud too. No lie I have seen SEVERAL, meaning, not one but MULTIPLE posts explaining how RILEY COOPER is going to be the #2 WR, MACLIN as the #1 WR and DeSean as the slot because he's "better suited," for the slot.

Now my bone to pick with BGN now that everyone sees McNabb for what he really is (sometimes it takes years to acknowledge my wisdom), is how everyone is claiming Maclin is better than Jackson BECAUSE he's more of a "complete" WR....

This is the most asinine, unintelligent argument I have heard that a large percentage of the BGN populace actually believes since the large # of McNabb apologist.

Now I normally don't do this, my eyes are my "stats," I can tell who's better. If you look at the #s through 40 games WITH each other, meaning they played side by side, the #s are pretty equal. Jackson obviously is the more explsoive player by a lot, and Maclin gets a few more catches per game which is a lot to be said for that too.

HOWEVER... If you actually know something about football, and realize that the best defenders are put on Jackson, and often time double coverage, then MAYBE, just MAYBE and I do mean MAYYYYBE that what Jackson does is a bit more impressive???? I mean think about this. If you were a wingman with your best friend..and your wingman only selected 8s or better, and you took everything including the fat bitches, don't you think YOUR success rate would be better too?

Why you ask.... As I did some research, which I NORMALLY don't do because like I said, I don't have to be a stat nerd to come up with conclusions. I watch the game like I have been for years and years, I see what's going on, and I don't need DVOAs to tell me who's good and who's not, etc...

But I did it anyway

When it was JUST JACKSON: JACKSONS #s IMPROVED ACROSS THE BOARD

WHEN IT WAS JUST MACLING: MACLIN'S # WENT DOWN

Hrmm... so evidence suggests that the better WR (Jackson) makes Maclin look better in the #s.. And when Maclin (the more "COMPLETE" WR WHATEVER THE FUCK THAT MEANS" was only in the line up his #s went DOWN across the board.....

God damn it, it's tough being the voice of reason around here, and presenting people with facts who's arguments are "Joe D you're an idiot, etc" but someone has got to do it I guess.

In both cases their pass targets went up by one — but that’s really the only similarity. In almost every other statistic, Jackson’s numbers actually improved without Maclin in the lineup. He had a higher catch rate and higher yards after the catch. Slightly fewer touchdowns, but that’s so hard to project over a limited number of games.

Meanwhile, things haven’t gone well in Maclin’s few tries without Jackson. While his targets went up, his catch rate dropped dramatically to less than 50 percent. He had fewer yards per catch, fewer yards after the catch, and no touchdowns. All in all, surprisingly poor results.

Once again, small sample size, but this is the only evidence we’re going to have before the Eagles make a long-term decision on their mercurial young star. And the evidence certainly suggests that Jackson’s not only a fine receiver himself, but his deep threat makes his running mate look better as well.