I voted for Tate. I've seen Barnes play, and I'm not impressed. The gimmicky offense BG runs definitely showcases their best receiving weapon, who isn't even a top 30 WR in college football, IMO, and the routes he runs are terrible. Shipley I enjoy watching, but to me, he isn't the playmaker that Tate is. Certainly, he is the beneficiary of an accurate arm of Colt McCoy's, and their ability to spread the field really makes Shipley stand out. I just happen to think at the position of wide receiver, Golden Tate does more, and has the ability to do more than any other receiver in the nation. I've seen him catch passes short of the first down, with his back towards the first down line, and push his way through the defenders enough to get a first down. He is a drive extender. He outleaps defensive backs with ease, just seems that he wants the ball a lot more than anyone else does.

Steve Smith ala his prime vs. Wes Welker/Donald Driver, I don't think you can go wrong with either.

I agree that Barnes shouldnt win the Bilitnikoff...but not even a top 30 Wr???

gotta' go with Shipley--the kid's Wes Welker with size

Tate!

Shipley.

Not a Notre Dame fan by any stretch, but Tate is amazing. The end of the Pitt game (which ND lost) he took over. Every time I watch ND games, he stands out, and does it in a less-than-ideal build for a WR.

Shipley or Tate. I haven't watched much of Shipley. Saw a lot of Tate...so I'd go with him just based on watching him so much more.

Tate for me. The hail mary to end the half was what had me sold!

Shipley

jhay78 wrote: Not a Notre Dame fan by any stretch, but Tate is amazing. The end of the Pitt game (which ND lost) he took over. Every time I watch ND games, he stands out, and does it in a less-than-ideal build for a WR.

I share the same feelings. . . and I hate Notre Dame.

Barnes, he has a shot at the record.

I'd like to think it'd be Barnes, but I'm going with Tate.

I vote Barnes

sjmvsfscs08 wrote: Barnes' YPC is the worst of the three. The only thing the amount of catches means is that they throw to him a lot; that's neat and all, but it's the MAC and that's why it's possible to throw to one guy all of the time. This is between Golden Tate and Jordan Shipley, Barnes isn't even close to these two.

I voted Tate. I'm a Notre Dame fan, so I'm admittedly biased. But his numbers have been impressive against the competition and his average is a lot better than Shipley's, so come one. More yards on few catches? Have cognizance of that before voting media folks!

I love how you talk about this like it's some conference record Barnes is on the verge of breaking. This is an ALL-TIME NCAA RECORD BUDDY. You can't be just anybody and play Division 1 football, and decide, 'oh hey, I think I'll break an NCAA record this year'. Lol what a joke. If Tate had his numbers, there would be 45564868494765974 threads about how great he was, and how he should win the heisman, and the belitnekoff and the pulitzer and Nobel Peace Prize.

As I've said before, then why don't MAC receivers break this record almost every year, if it's so easy to do it? I love when ND fans talk down about other schools like going 6-6 and GIVEN a bowl game is anything noteworthy. You guys were basically served up a schedule on a silver platter this year to make a BCS game, and with all that talent, you are barely bowl eligible. And you would hope that Tate has good numbers; he's got an alleged "heisman contender" throwing him the ball. Barnes would have about 25 catches and 200+ yards on Notre Dame's mirage of a defense. Barnes is as good or better than Baldwin is, and we saw how that worked out for you guys. Hey, maybe we'll get to see them play each other in a bowl game, since all ND will be worthy of playing is a MAC/WAC/CUSA team.

And BTW, Bowling Green has a first year coach. Yeah, they throw the ball to Barnes a lot. He's one of the few returning weapons they have on offense. God forbid they'd give it to the guy that gives them their best chance to win game (like he did in 3 games this year). Maybe if the Guru would figure out someone or something they can consistently go to on their offense, their best win would be better than...Nevada? Maybe Michigan State? Nice. Both teams have 6 wins. One team has a first year coach, the other has one that's been there way too long, and Barnes has better numbers...FACE IT.

h2thaizzo wrote: I voted for Tate. I've seen Barnes play, and I'm not impressed. The gimmicky offense BG runs definitely showcases their best receiving weapon, who isn't even a top 30 WR in college football, IMO, and the routes he runs are terrible. Shipley I enjoy watching, but to me, he isn't the playmaker that Tate is. Certainly, he is the beneficiary of an accurate arm of Colt McCoy's, and their ability to spread the field really makes Shipley stand out. I just happen to think at the position of wide receiver, Golden Tate does more, and has the ability to do more than any other receiver in the nation. I've seen him catch passes short of the first down, with his back towards the first down line, and push his way through the defenders enough to get a first down. He is a drive extender. He outleaps defensive backs with ease, just seems that he wants the ball a lot more than anyone else does.

Steve Smith ala his prime vs. Wes Welker/Donald Driver, I don't think you can go wrong with either.

This statement discredits your whole paragraph. If his routes are terrible, how's he open enough to catch over 120 passes this year??? If there's logic behind that, I'd love to hear it.

Red_Skin_Pride wrote:

sjmvsfscs08 wrote: Barnes' YPC is the worst of the three. The only thing the amount of catches means is that they throw to him a lot; that's neat and all, but it's the MAC and that's why it's possible to throw to one guy all of the time. This is between Golden Tate and Jordan Shipley, Barnes isn't even close to these two.

I voted Tate. I'm a Notre Dame fan, so I'm admittedly biased. But his numbers have been impressive against the competition and his average is a lot better than Shipley's, so come one. More yards on few catches? Have cognizance of that before voting media folks!

I love how you talk about this like it's some conference record Barnes is on the verge of breaking. This is an ALL-TIME NCAA RECORD BUDDY. You can't be just anybody and play Division 1 football, and decide, 'oh hey, I think I'll break an NCAA record this year'. Lol what a joke. If Tate had his numbers, there would be 45564868494765974 threads about how great he was, and how he should win the heisman, and the belitnekoff and the pulitzer and Nobel Peace Prize.

As I've said before, then why don't MAC receivers break this record almost every year, if it's so easy to do it? I love when ND fans talk down about other schools like going 6-6 and GIVEN a bowl game is anything noteworthy. You guys were basically served up a schedule on a silver platter this year to make a BCS game, and with all that talent, you are barely bowl eligible. And you would hope that Tate has good numbers; he's got an alleged "heisman contender" throwing him the ball. Barnes would have about 25 catches and 200+ yards on Notre Dame's mirage of a defense. Barnes is as good or better than Baldwin is, and we saw how that worked out for you guys. Hey, maybe we'll get to see them play each other in a bowl game, since all ND will be worthy of playing is a MAC/WAC/CUSA team.

And BTW, Bowling Green has a first year coach. Yeah, they throw the ball to Barnes a lot. He's one of the few returning weapons they have on offense. God forbid they'd give it to the guy that gives them their best chance to win game (like he did in 3 games this year). Maybe if the Guru would figure out someone or something they can consistently go to on their offense, their best win would be better than...Nevada? Maybe Michigan State? Nice. Both teams have 6 wins. One team has a first year coach, the other has one that's been there way too long, and Barnes has better numbers...FACE IT.

Tate has had an AMAZING season that is comparable to Barnes' year. Factor in returns and rushing and it's better. And I haven't seen many threads about Tate, if any. In all honesty, your post comes off as nothing more than a Notre Dame hate-fest. My goodness. You drag their respective teams, coaches and QB's into the discussion. Basically whatever it took to discredit Tate.

Hey, at least sjmvsfscs08 admitted that he's somewhat biased.

Red_Skin_Pride wrote:

sjmvsfscs08 wrote: Barnes' YPC is the worst of the three. The only thing the amount of catches means is that they throw to him a lot; that's neat and all, but it's the MAC and that's why it's possible to throw to one guy all of the time. This is between Golden Tate and Jordan Shipley, Barnes isn't even close to these two.

I voted Tate. I'm a Notre Dame fan, so I'm admittedly biased. But his numbers have been impressive against the competition and his average is a lot better than Shipley's, so come one. More yards on few catches? Have cognizance of that before voting media folks!

I love how you talk about this like it's some conference record Barnes is on the verge of breaking. This is an ALL-TIME NCAA RECORD BUDDY. You can't be just anybody and play Division 1 football, and decide, 'oh hey, I think I'll break an NCAA record this year'. Lol what a joke. If Tate had his numbers, there would be 45564868494765974 threads about how great he was, and how he should win the heisman, and the belitnekoff and the pulitzer and Nobel Peace Prize.

As I've said before, then why don't MAC receivers break this record almost every year, if it's so easy to do it? I love when ND fans talk down about other schools like going 6-6 and GIVEN a bowl game is anything noteworthy. You guys were basically served up a schedule on a silver platter this year to make a BCS game, and with all that talent, you are barely bowl eligible. And you would hope that Tate has good numbers; he's got an alleged "heisman contender" throwing him the ball. Barnes would have about 25 catches and 200+ yards on Notre Dame's mirage of a defense. Barnes is as good or better than Baldwin is, and we saw how that worked out for you guys. Hey, maybe we'll get to see them play each other in a bowl game, since all ND will be worthy of playing is a MAC/WAC/CUSA team.

And BTW, Bowling Green has a first year coach. Yeah, they throw the ball to Barnes a lot. He's one of the few returning weapons they have on offense. God forbid they'd give it to the guy that gives them their best chance to win game (like he did in 3 games this year). Maybe if the Guru would figure out someone or something they can consistently go to on their offense, their best win would be better than...Nevada? Maybe Michigan State? Nice. Both teams have 6 wins. One team has a first year coach, the other has one that's been there way too long, and Barnes has better numbers...FACE IT.

good post Mr Barnes

Danario Alexander, a WR that plays in an ACTUAL college football conference, is known as being a "good" receiver that doesn't run routes. http://www.walterfootball.com/draft2010WR.php
"Danario Alexander will be a good fit for a team that doesn't require its receivers to run routes. "
Danario Alexander has 92 receptions for 1,411 yards on the season, but using your logic that a WR with good numbers automatically means they run good routes, which you say "discredits your whole paragraph", I guess even the guys who get paid to scout and analyze potential NFL talent have no credibility either. They list their top 50 NFL WR prospects, guess who ISN'T one of them? Freddie Barnes. However, Stephen Williams of Toledo, Bryan Anderson of Central Michigan, Naaman Roosevelt (solid MAC WR that ACTUALLY does run routes well) of Buffalo, and Taylor Price of Ohio did manage to crack the top 50.

Do you remember Andre Ware as a college QB? Danny Wuerffel? Chris Weinke? All put up solid numbers in college, and because of one thing or another, didn't do anything at the next level.

I'm sorry, but playing in a spread offense, with 4-5 WR's in the formation 90% of your plays, jogging off the line for 5 yards downfield then doing a sloppy slant or post against a defensive back that likely wouldn't see the field in a BCS conference doesn't make you the best WR in football. The numbers are gawdy, no doubt, but so is your sentence responding to my post.

I guess anybody that puts up big numbers, the biggest in the country, should automatically be called the best. I guess if Donald Buckram finishes his season where he is now, atop the NCAA FBS individual rushing yardage rankings, he should get the Doak Walker award. I guess if he ends up breaking Manny Hazard's (who the f*** is he you may ask?) all time record for receptions in a year, that means he is the best WR ever. Better than Crabtree was, hell, he only had 134 in his best year. Hell, the MAC conference has 4 WR's in the top 15 rankings in receiving yards this season, 4 in top 20 when it comes to receptions, so I guess that means all of these guys are in the top 20 in the nation as overall wide receivers too. They must be better players than any of the guys with lesser numbers than they have. Timmy Chang is an All-Time NCAA record holder as well, last I remember he didn't win an award for it.

Red_Skin_Pride wrote:
I love how you talk about this like it's some conference record Barnes is on the verge of breaking. This is an ALL-TIME NCAA RECORD BUDDY. You can't be just anybody and play Division 1 football, and decide, 'oh hey, I think I'll break an NCAA record this year'. Lol what a joke. If Tate had his numbers, there would be 45564868494765974 threads about how great he was, and how he should win the heisman, and the belitnekoff and the pulitzer and Nobel Peace Prize.

As I've said before, then why don't MAC receivers break this record almost every year, if it's so easy to do it? I love when ND fans talk down about other schools like going 6-6 and GIVEN a bowl game is anything noteworthy. You guys were basically served up a schedule on a silver platter this year to make a BCS game, and with all that talent, you are barely bowl eligible. And you would hope that Tate has good numbers; he's got an alleged "heisman contender" throwing him the ball. Barnes would have about 25 catches and 200+ yards on Notre Dame's mirage of a defense. Barnes is as good or better than Baldwin is, and we saw how that worked out for you guys. Hey, maybe we'll get to see them play each other in a bowl game, since all ND will be worthy of playing is a MAC/WAC/CUSA team.

And BTW, Bowling Green has a first year coach. Yeah, they throw the ball to Barnes a lot. He's one of the few returning weapons they have on offense. God forbid they'd give it to the guy that gives them their best chance to win game (like he did in 3 games this year). Maybe if the Guru would figure out someone or something they can consistently go to on their offense, their best win would be better than...Nevada? Maybe Michigan State? Nice. Both teams have 6 wins. One team has a first year coach, the other has one that's been there way too long, and Barnes has better numbers...FACE IT.

Cuz they don't get thrown to enough to catch the ball 130+ times a year?

Put Golden Tate on BG and throw to him that much and he may have 2500 yards and 35 TD's.

Tate averages one catch for every 5 pass attempts of ND's, roughly. Give ND the 100 extra pass attempts that BG has thrown this season, that would add, based on the law of averages, 21 more receptions to Golden Tate's numbers on the season, and over 300 more receiving yards in addition. Same reasoning can be used with Barnes. Take away the extra 100 passes BG has thrown this year, and use the same, common number of 417 pass attempts, and his catch to pass attempts number, which is about 1 out of every four, and he has 104 receptions this year for about 1150 yards.

I love John Hollinger of ESPN for this reason. Where PER stats may not reflect everything needed to evaluate a players ability, or value, it does average out their numbers and give a somewhat accurate figure to how good some players really are. If Allen Iverson averages 35 points on 30 shot attempts a night, and Kobe Bryant averages 30 points on 20 shots a night, because Iverson had a higher PPG average, does that automatically make him the best scorer in the NBA?

1. Tate-not a Notre Dame fan, but he is a great playmaker that can do it all.

2. Shipley- can also do it all, but I just don't feel he is as dangerous.







3. Barnes- obviously the best stats but is a product of the system in a bad conference. That is not to take away from his season, but it does not help his cause for the award.

h2thaizzo wrote: Tate averages one catch for every 5 pass attempts of ND's, roughly. Give ND the 100 extra pass attempts that BG has thrown this season, that would add, based on the law of averages, 21 more receptions to Golden Tate's numbers on the season, and over 300 more receiving yards in addition. Same reasoning can be used with Barnes. Take away the extra 100 passes BG has thrown this year, and use the same, common number of 417 pass attempts, and his catch to pass attempts number, which is about 1 out of every four, and he has 104 receptions this year for about 1150 yards.

I love John Hollinger of ESPN for this reason. Where PER stats may not reflect everything needed to evaluate a players ability, or value, it does average out their numbers and give a somewhat accurate figure to how good some players really are. If Allen Iverson averages 35 points on 30 shot attempts a night, and Kobe Bryant averages 30 points on 20 shots a night, because Iverson had a higher PPG average, does that automatically make him the best scorer in the NBA?

And if my aunt had a dick, she'd be my uncle. What's your point?

You can 'what if' the situation to death.

STATS ARE WHAT THEY ARE. No matter how much ND fans and lovers try and twist the facts and the stats, they'll still be the same.

^^^^^No what if's here, Barnes couldn't hold Tate's jock.........end of story!

Golden Tate