As previously mentioned, there are seven receivers that should be considered sure things. Since I don't think opponent quality matters to receivers as much I'm not going to do a schedule study. I'll also be brief, because these picks are fairly obvious. I've said before, these receivers should all be picked between the first tier backs and the second tier. They are all a fairly solid lock for a top 10 performance. Moreover, I am not confident in the order. There is no reason why any of them are necessarily at the top or the bottom of the tier. For that reason, there is no reason to take one in the first round. You should be able to get one of them in the second round, if your not particular about which.
Of course things change if Boldin is elsewhere but I think he puts up numbers anywhere. As the Johnsons have shown, top receivers put up numbers even on bad teams, even against tough schedules. There is really no reason why you would ever sit one of these guys. That certainty is gold in the second round.
There are two guys I'd classify as a 1-. Just enough uncertainty to take them down a notch, but enough ability to give them consideration. I'd consider them equal to the second tier running backs, and would make a good third round pick if, for example, it looks like there's enough good backs to last till your third rounder comes up.
Got the job done in 2008 and looks like a star, but Rodgers spreads it around too much, and the potential for more Packer rushing tds in 2009 slide him just a notch. Since I think his value is lower than most, the point may be moot, as he goes ahead of some first tier guys.
This ranking is likely more useful as he may not be drafted as high as he should. I was actually on the White bandwagon a few years too early. I think his value continues to rise, but he hasn't yet shown the consistency that the first tier receivers have.