What's more important: Great receivers or quarterbacks?

[B1GBLUE]

Well...... based upon Tom Bradys rotisserie of average WRs playing way above their heads, you have to go with the QB position

"The clothes" do not make the man....never believed that old saying

for sure...but he also had a good to great oline most of his career, and the perfect system for him to work in. think about how many guys they were able to swap out like edelman and welker over the years basically seamlessly. the system you are in can be just as important as the people executing it. save for the randy moss years, tom was never exactly airing it out. he was hitting guys underneath that could pick up YAC.

[B1GBLUE]

I agree, although some will point to the Bengals SB run as proof you don't need a line.  I would counter by saying they haven't sniffed the SB since, and their QB is frequently injured.

An elite qb and elite receiver can certainly help circumvent line issues. but as you pointed out, dont expect it to last

[B1GBLUE]

The second you use the word "great" the answer is quarterback.  I could see a real argument around good/very good WR vs. good/very good QB- but the great QBs are definitely much more important to their teams than great WRs. 

Rodgers comes to mind. he had some decent wr's at times (nelson, adams), but for the most part he was playing with guys that you couldn't remember a few years later.

[MightyGiants]

I am going to add an observation I think is reasonably on topic. What is a really great driver of an offense is a long-time pairing of a receiver (WR or TE) with a quarterback. I think the longer the pair works together, the better they get.

[TONKA56]

And both times the Giants beat Brady-led teams in the SB they did it by breaking down his OL.

A-Gap pressure is the great equalizer.