Maybe you aren't getting my point.
First of all, what actually happens is not necessarily relevent to what I'm saying. Ramses Barden could be the new Marques Colston, Steve Smith could become Steve Smith and Hixon could turn into Torry Holt, and what I'm trying to say would still be perfectly true.
My point is that the Giants have the receiving corps with the least amount of proven success in the league. Period. They don't have a single player who has done it before, and we saw the majority of these players struggle last year in the same situation.
All they've added to that are two (albeit promsing, but still) rookies at a position that is notorious for being one of the slowest developing positions in the NFL.
We're talking about prospects here, much like the NFL draft is about prospects. Chances of success. Given the information we have, they have the worst prospects for success in the league...or at least right there at the bottom. Is Tom Brady a great NFL QB? Yes. Does that mean he was a great prospect? Hell no.
I am in no way saying the Giants are screwed for sure. What I'm saying is that there is plenty of evidence to suggest that they could be. Whatever your personal feelings on Nicks and Barden are, that is neither here nor there.
And comparing this group to last year's Eagles group is faulty in two ways: 1) the Eagles had a returning 1000 yard receiver as well as the best recieving back in the game and a QB who had proven time and time again that, somehow, he was able to make do with crappy targets if it came to that and 2) no one could have known that Desean Jackson was going to have the season he had. I don't care how much you thought of him as a prospect or how great he looked in camp, if you make a habit of relying on rookie 2nd round picks to anchor your pass offense you are not going to have a job for long.
And not just that, but the Eagles weren't that great a passing team, either. They may have gone for 4000 yards, but they threw the ball 600 times. Their YPA was among the worst in the league.