NFL Forum :: - Randy Moss...Just 2 full years with a HOF QB...Brady

Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

FAQ Register Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

FootballsFuture.com Home

Randy Moss...Just 2 full years with a HOF QB...Brady
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... , 10, 11, 12 Next

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL General

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Kikuchiyo

Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 1824

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 10:35 pm Post subject:

BBIB wrote:

l3lind golfer wrote:

All the QB's Moss has played with in his career haven't amounted to squat, except Tom Brady. He played with Cunningham at the very end of his career. At his best, Moss is the greatest WR to ever play the game. Worse case scenario; he's the 2nd all-time behind Rice.

It's amazing how many people thought Culpepper was a top 5 QB when he left Minnesota

It's too bad he got hurt for his sake, and because it leads people to make the excuse that his injury is why he was no longer elite.

He was NEVER elite. I know he played for the extended period of time without Moss in 2004 but what everyone forgets is the absolute HISTORIC pace he was on before Moss got hurt that year

Culpepper was on pace to break both the passing yardage and TD record that year. And given the points and yards that were left on the field that year despite how well he played without Moss, he could have easily had a chance to break both

Moss allowed Culpepper to just throw it up in double and triple coverage

I'll never forget the game he had against TO's 49ers when Moss had Gus Frerotte throwing him the ball. (That was of course the game of a TO meltdown yelling at Greg Knapp)

Really the only thing that could stop prime Moss was an offense that was too incompetent to throw the ball down the field (IE wasted years in Oakland)

And if he had a HOF caliber QB for 5-6 more years of his career, his numbers could be right up there with Jerry at least in the TD department

BUt even without the TDs he could still be the greatest even though he won't get the recognition. Because truth be told you dont have to have best stats to be the best player ever

No one considers Emmitt Smith the GOAT. Nor Brett Favre, etc

Neither of them dominated in their prime like Rice did. Rice wasn't just an accumulater of stats because he played so long. He posted up dominant stats in his first thirteen years in the league that no other receiver could touch in their entire careers.
_________________

A Big Thanks To PatsDynasty21

BBIB

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 7414

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 11:06 pm Post subject:

Kikuchiyo wrote:

Well the Vikings version of Randy Moss averaged more yards per game and touchdowns per game than Jerry Rice as a 49er

And Moss did so without HOF QBs and faced far less favorable coverage

So Rice numbers tower over Randy's not because he was more productive at his peak, but because of the LONGEVITY of his peak

lionslicer

Joined: 06 Nov 2010
Posts: 1762

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 11:17 pm Post subject:

NextBigThing wrote:

lionslicer wrote:

x0x wrote:

Just to throw some more wood on the fire.

Where was Moss ranked in that Top 100 list done by NN?

Actually it was done exclusively by NFL films.

Anyways he was #65, but what is surprising that he was the 3rd receiver behind Hudson and Rice.

3 receivers in the top 65 is absurd. all 3 should be top 40

There's only 6 on the whole list. Receivers get very little love, which is why guys like Cris Carter haven't been inducted into the HOF yet.
_________________
Kickers are people too

Kikuchiyo

Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 1824

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 11:17 pm Post subject:

BBIB wrote:

Kikuchiyo wrote:

Well the Vikings version of Randy Moss averaged more yards per game and touchdowns per game than Jerry Rice as a 49er

Probably because Jerry played with the 9ers twice as long (till he was 36) as Randy played with the Vikings.

Quote:

And Moss did so without HOF QBs and faced far less favorable coverage

So Rice numbers tower over Randy's not because he was more productive at his peak, but because of the LONGEVITY of his peak

Rice put up the same monster stats with Elvas Grbac throwing him the ball.
_________________

A Big Thanks To PatsDynasty21

BBIB

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 7414

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 11:33 pm Post subject:

Kikuchiyo wrote:

Probably because Jerry played with the 9ers twice as long (till he was 36) as Randy played with the Vikings.

Isn't that exactly what I said? His peak was LONGER. Who can argue that?

No one. But if the argument is who's peak was HIGHEST there is more of a debate than many people want to admit

Kikuchiyo

Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 1824

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 11:36 pm Post subject:

BBIB wrote:

Kikuchiyo wrote:

Probably because Jerry played with the 9ers twice as long (till he was 36) as Randy played with the Vikings.

Isn't that exactly what I said? His peak was LONGER. Who can argue that?

You really don't get how playing for the 9ers until he was 36 might have skewed the per game stats while Moss played with the Vikings till he was... what? 28?
_________________

A Big Thanks To PatsDynasty21

diehardlionfan

Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 22016
Location: Ottawa

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 12:24 am Post subject:

x0x wrote:

Worm Guts wrote:

Quote:

He's effectively done as a WR threat at age 35 and had already declined significantly by age 33. He couldn't sniff Sterling Sharpe's jock.

Lol. No doubt he declined by the time he was 33, but that doesn't make overrated. The idea that Sharpe was better is ridiculous and baseless.

Settle down child.

Sterling was a freak and it's too bad his career ended so early. Would have been a great playoff receiver as well as GOAT, definitively.

From what I saw, he was physically the best up there with Rice. Calvin and Fitz are in that window too.

Moss a fantastic physical receiver? Absolutely. But his work ethic and plain idiocy should be counted against him as well.

That's the type of statement that simply undermines your credibility. Putting out hypothetical statements and saying he would be GOAT is unsupportable.
_________________

Sig by LionsFTW

To know what is right and not do it is the worst cowardice.

Vikefan79

Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 25462
Location: Atlanta

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 1:06 am Post subject:

x0x wrote:

Moss a fantastic physical receiver? Absolutely. But his work ethic and plain idiocy should be counted against him as well.

Where do people come up with this work ethic crap?
_________________

NextBigThing

Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 15895
Location: Tuck Rule FTW

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 2:21 am Post subject:

^His obvious weight gain and constantly being out of shape, obviously.
_________________

The King Does As He Pleases

NFLfan511 wrote:

NBT, I made an account here just because of you.

jrry32

Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 32812

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 4:12 am Post subject:

BBIB wrote:

Kikuchiyo wrote:

Quote:

Rice's first 10 years:
156 games
820 receptions
13,275 yards
16.2 YPC
139 Total TDs

Per 16 game season:
84 receptions
1361 yards
16.2 YPC
14 TDs

Rice's second 10 years:
147 games
731 receptions
9620 yards
13.2 YPC
66 TDs

Per 16 game season:
80 receptions
1047 yards
13.2 YPC
7 TDs

If you guarantee a WR in the 3rd round that can put up those numbers then you should be a NFL GM because finding a WR who can put up an average of 80 catches for 1000 yards over 10 years isn't what anyone would call a piece of cake.

But great job showing your bias again on this subject.

Oh and if you remove the final 2 years of those 10 years where he was 41 and 42 years old, his per 16 game numbers are:
89 receptions
1168 yards
13.1 YPC
9 TDs

Pretty damn good numbers for any WR over an 8 year period...especially a guy who was 33 to 40 years old at that time.

Now then, lets, for comparison sake, compare Jerry Rice's first 11 years against Randy Moss's first 11 years:
Jerry Rice:
172 games
942 receptions
15,123 receiving yards
16.1 YPC
154 Total TDs

Randy Moss:
170 games
843 receptions
13,201 yards
15.7 YPC
135 Total TDs

Looks like to me that Rice blows him out in every category. But you know what, maybe it was just easier to accumulate stats when Rice played as a WR? So lets compare them to their best peers over a 16 game season during each player's first 11 years(in terms of YPG):
Rice:
88 receptions
1407 yards
16.1 YPC
14 TDs

vs.

Sterling Sharpe:
85 receptions
1162 yards
13.7 YPC
9 TDs

vs.

Michael Irvin:
75 receptions
1219 yards
16.2 YPC
7 TDs

vs.

Henry Ellard:
67 receptions
1120 yards
16.8 YPC
5 TDs

While here's Randy Moss against his top competition:
Moss:
79 receptions
1243 yards
15.7 YPC
13 TDs

vs.

Marvin Harrison:
98 receptions
1304 yards
13.4 YPC
12 TDs

vs.

Terrell Owens:
87 receptions
1291 yards
14.8 YPC
13 TDs

vs.

Torry Holt:
88 receptions
1282 yards
14.6 YPC
8 TDs

So wait a minute...Rice was more dominant than every WR on the list including Moss's peers while Moss arguably isn't even the most dominant over 11 years of his peers? WHAT?

But wait, I thought Moss was better than Rice? I thought he was more dominant? I thought Rice was just a guy who played a bunch more years. How is it that Rice was more dominant than Moss over his first 10 and 11 years?

So when exactly was Moss more dominant than Rice? What was this supposed prime that Moss had that was better than Rice's prime?

Oh right, the numbers don't matter(unless, of course, they're important to Moss's argument).

But you know what, 11 years is a long time. So why don't we just take the best 5 consecutive years of Rice's career vs. the best 5 consecutive years of Moss's career to get a better understanding of their prime:

Moss(98 to 02):
80 games
414 receptions
6743 yards(84.3 YPG)
16.3 YPC
62 total TDs

Rice(86 to 90):
76 games
397 receptions
6939 yards(91.3 YPG)
17.5 YPC
79 total TDs

Looks like Rice was better during his peak too...golly gosh.

Oh and you want to hear something humorous? During Moss's best 5 years, he was outproduced during that period of time by MARVIN HARRISON and Terrell Owens matched his production. Whereas, nobody was within 10 yards per game or 30 total TDs of Rice during his 5 year period.

So not only was Rice more productive than Moss head to head, he was VASTLY more productive when comparing each to their respective peers.

So that argument of yours...consider it dead.
_________________

mitchconnor

Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 1006

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 12:09 pm Post subject:

lionslicer wrote:

Anyways he was #65, but what is surprising that he was the 3rd receiver behind Hudson and Rice.

I think the rankings did a pretty accurate job conveying just how tall Hutson and Rice tower over all other wrs.

fortdetroit

Joined: 27 Dec 2011
Posts: 654

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 1:37 pm Post subject:

Vikefan79 wrote:

x0x wrote:

Moss a fantastic physical receiver? Absolutely. But his work ethic and plain idiocy should be counted against him as well.

Where do people come up with this work ethic crap?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6825249/randy-moss-worn-welcome-nfl-missed

Quote:

As it turned out, Patriots quarterback Tom Brady was one of the first to notice his decline last summer. A league source said Brady was so concerned about Moss' lagging work ethic that he discussed it with Patriots head coach Bill Belichick in training camp. When Belichick decided that Moss would be fine, Brady became even more agitated after Moss dogged it on a couple routes during an early-season win over Miami.

According to the source, Brady told Belichick during that contest that the team could keep Moss but the receiver wasn't going to be seeing any passes again. Moss was working in Minnesota within days of that conversation.

Idk...where does Tom Brady come up with this crap?

Worm Guts

Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 562

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 4:39 pm Post subject:

I love Moss but there's no good argument for him over Rice. The argument for #2 could be interesting.

reckless123

Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 5602

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 5:52 pm Post subject:

Worm Guts wrote:

I love Moss but there's no good argument for him over Rice. The argument for #2 could be interesting.

According to Viking fans and a minority of Pats fans, there is a good argument.

I guess being the greatest deep threat of all time is not good for some people. At his peak, he was the greatest deep threat of all time, he could not touch Jerry in other areas.
_________________

lionslicer

Joined: 06 Nov 2010
Posts: 1762

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 6:06 pm Post subject:

Vikefan79 wrote:

x0x wrote:

Moss a fantastic physical receiver? Absolutely. But his work ethic and plain idiocy should be counted against him as well.

Where do people come up with this work ethic crap?

Media. Former players and writers used to constantly comment on his work ethic. We tend to believe these people because they see behind the scenes what we can't see. But we also tend to forget that these people aren't always that smart.

Also, Moss has had a tendency throughout his career to give up on plays. I don't think that's a work ethic problem. No reason to go 100% if you know you aren't getting the ball.
_________________
Kickers are people too

Display posts from previous:

       FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL General All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 10, 11, 12  Next

Page 11 of 12

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum