In nearly every thread there is the discussion as to what is a #1 wide receiver vs. #2's and #3's. What is a #1? Is it a guy that can get deep? Catch the ball in traffic? Get up high? Is it just a receiver that you can close your eyes and throw the ball to and you bet he will make the play?
Let's discuss who is currently a #1, who has been a #1, and their qualities. We must also define what is a #2 and #3 and so on and so forth. In the most basic sense, a #1 is your top dog, #2 is your second best, #3 is your third. Too simple? It is. So then you say that a #1 would be the best on any team. That severely limits your options and there would only be around five #1s in the league.
I think that this is a waste of numbering players. The point is to have talented players that play well with each other and compliment the offense as a whole. The best passing teams in terms of yardage do not have a clear #1 unless you consider Jimmy Graham, Wes Welker, and Jordy Nelson elites. So if you can't give the quarterback credit you have the Raiders at eleventh for passing yardage without solid and consistent quarterback play. Do we consider Darius Heyward-Bey a true #1? He had double the receptions of his next best receiver.
The way the NFL is playing out, the goal is to have multiple threats that have their own unique ability they can bring to the table.