Moss says he's Greatest WR Ever (2 Viewers)

[Englishteacher]

I think Randy Moss is the most talented wide receiver to ever play the game. It's too bad he didn't use that talent to become the best wide receiver to ever play the game.

This.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

Here are Moss' primary QBs in terms of number of seasons, excluding the past few years when he hasn't been a regular starter:

Daunte Culpepper (5)Averages while Moss was there = 14.6 games, 64% completion, 25.8 TD's & 3719 yards per season

Tom Brady (2)- I shouldnt have to

Randall Cunningham (1)-- 106 rating 3704 yards 34 TD's

Jeff George (1) 94.2 rating, 2816 yards, 23 TD's in 10 starts

Andrew Walter (1)

Kerry Collins (1) 3495 yards 21 TD's

Matt Cassell (1)

The difference is ridiculous. It's fairly easy for me to pick Rice in this topic, but other factors such as the above, along with era in which they played, etc. have to be considered in these debates.

The differance isnt what you think it is. While the names are not the same it will be a little difficult to say that Randy got poor QB play with the top starters he had throughout his career.

You're making the very odd deduction that those QBs just happened to play their best football when they were on Moss's team (what luck for Randy!). I think the far more logical deduction that Moss's presence made them much better QBs because Moss is so incredibly awesome.

Kind of like:

So for 5 seasons, Grbac (9), Kemp (6), Bono (6), Moroski (2) and Cavanugh (1) started 24 games for the 49ers. In exactly a year and a half’s worth of games, Rice caught 134 passes for 2,177 yards and 23 TDs, and ran for one score as well. That’s an average season of 89 catches, 1451 receiving yards and 16 touchdowns, or roughly the career best season for nearly every WR who has ever played the game.

Do you want to argue that Steve Bono and Elvis Grbac were superior to Daunte Culpepper and Randall Cunningham?

After reading this I think I should be allowed to vote for "NO" again.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Here's what I wrote if anyone wants to argue that Montana/Young is a reason to pick Moss: http://www.footballperspective.com/randy-moss-jerry-rice-had-two-hof-qbs-his-whole-career/

Great stuff. Although I think when people talk about the Montana/Young thing here they are also referring to the fact that he played in a revolutionary offensive system, perhaps the most significant shift to pro football offenses since the invention of the forward pass. Clearly it was effective even before he arrived, and some part of his incredible success is attributed to the West Coast Offense and the fact that no defensive coordinator had ever seen anything like it and wouldn't see anything like it from any other team for at least a while. Not that this means he's not the best ever- like I said I don't even like the question unless you elaborate on what you mean by best ever. But it should be part of the discussion at least.His 40 year old season is just a jaw-dropper. Maybe one of the most amazing seasons by any athlete once you account for age.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Here are Moss' primary QBs in terms of number of seasons, excluding the past few years when he hasn't been a regular starter:

Daunte Culpepper (5)Averages while Moss was there = 14.6 games, 64% completion, 25.8 TD's & 3719 yards per season

Tom Brady (2)- I shouldnt have to

Randall Cunningham (1)-- 106 rating 3704 yards 34 TD's

Jeff George (1) 94.2 rating, 2816 yards, 23 TD's in 10 starts

Andrew Walter (1)

Kerry Collins (1) 3495 yards 21 TD's

Matt Cassell (1)

The difference is ridiculous. It's fairly easy for me to pick Rice in this topic, but other factors such as the above, along with era in which they played, etc. have to be considered in these debates.

The differance isnt what you think it is. While the names are not the same it will be a little difficult to say that Randy got poor QB play with the top starters he had throughout his career.

You're making the very odd deduction that those QBs just happened to play their best football when they were on Moss's team (what luck for Randy!). I think the far more logical deduction that Moss's presence made them much better QBs because Moss is so incredibly awesome.

Kind of like:

So for 5 seasons, Grbac (9), Kemp (6), Bono (6), Moroski (2) and Cavanugh (1) started 24 games for the 49ers. In exactly a year and a half’s worth of games, Rice caught 134 passes for 2,177 yards and 23 TDs, and ran for one score as well. That’s an average season of 89 catches, 1451 receiving yards and 16 touchdowns, or roughly the career best season for nearly every WR who has ever played the game.

Do you want to argue that Steve Bono and Elvis Grbac were superior to Daunte Culpepper and Randall Cunningham?

What? That has nothing to do with what you quoted from me. I was making the point that QBs posting their best seasons with Moss was actually a huge positive when evaluating Moss's career, not a negative as the previous poster suggested. I didn't compare them to anyone else. Your "response" to me didn't even include QB statistics.If you're gonna start calling out posts you should probably work on your reading comprehension.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Here's what I wrote if anyone wants to argue that Montana/Young is a reason to pick Moss: http://www.footballperspective.com/randy-moss-jerry-rice-had-two-hof-qbs-his-whole-career/

Great stuff. Although I think when people talk about the Montana/Young thing here they are also referring to the fact that he played in a revolutionary offensive system, perhaps the most significant shift to pro football offenses since the invention of the forward pass. Clearly it was effective even before he arrived, and some part of his incredible success is attributed to the West Coast Offense and the fact that no defensive coordinator had ever seen anything like it and wouldn't see anything like it from any other team for at least a while. Not that this means he's not the best ever- like I said I don't even like the question unless you elaborate on what you mean by best ever. But it should be part of the discussion at least.His 40 year old season is just a jaw-dropper. Maybe one of the most amazing seasons by any athlete once you account for age.

After about the first 5 seasons the 49ers ran it wouldn't they have had more than enough tape?Was Bill Walsh and offensive innovator and genius? Sure he was, but Jerry Rice's run after the catch abilities made the WCO that much more deadly.

By any possible meaning of "best ever", Jerry wins hands down over Randy Moss.

This isn't meant to disparage Moss. By the mere fact that there can even be a debate speaks volumes as to the player Moss was.

 

[FlapJacks]

Calvin is already better

 

[CalBear]

Here's what I wrote if anyone wants to argue that Montana/Young is a reason to pick Moss: http://www.footballp...s-whole-career/

Great stuff. Although I think when people talk about the Montana/Young thing here they are also referring to the fact that he played in a revolutionary offensive system, perhaps the most significant shift to pro football offenses since the invention of the forward pass. Clearly it was effective even before he arrived, and some part of his incredible success is attributed to the West Coast Offense and the fact that no defensive coordinator had ever seen anything like it and wouldn't see anything like it from any other team for at least a while.

This "revolutionary offensive system," which teams had had six years to look at and adjust to before Rice was drafted, had produced a grand total of one 1000-yard receiving season in those six years (Dwight Clark, 85/1105/4 in 1981).

 

[TobiasFunke]

Here's what I wrote if anyone wants to argue that Montana/Young is a reason to pick Moss: http://www.footballp...s-whole-career/

Great stuff. Although I think when people talk about the Montana/Young thing here they are also referring to the fact that he played in a revolutionary offensive system, perhaps the most significant shift to pro football offenses since the invention of the forward pass. Clearly it was effective even before he arrived, and some part of his incredible success is attributed to the West Coast Offense and the fact that no defensive coordinator had ever seen anything like it and wouldn't see anything like it from any other team for at least a while.

This "revolutionary offensive system," which teams had had six years to look at and adjust to before Rice was drafted, had produced a grand total of one 1000-yard receiving season in those six years (Dwight Clark, 85/1105/4 in 1981).

Really, more cherry-picking? Why talk about 1000 yard receivers instead of the productivity of the passing offense generally before he got there?I assume you know that SF was one of the best passing offenses in the league year after year after year once Walsh arrived, Rice or not. The fact that they hadn't had a single big producer is a product of the WR talent on hand pre-Rice. When a great talent arrives in an already incredibly productive system, amazing results might happen. Nobody's saying that Rice wasn't special- I'm not even saying that he's not the best ever. I'm just saying that context matters.

 

[dwarfboy]

Moss has to be considered one of the best ever at shoving the DB in the back at the most opportune moment without drawing a flag.

 

[SSOG]

Moss has to be considered one of the best ever at shoving the DB in the back at the most opportune moment without drawing a flag.

Michael Irvin says Moss ain't st.

 

[Simayi]

Here's what I wrote if anyone wants to argue that Montana/Young is a reason to pick Moss: http://www.footballp...s-whole-career/

Great stuff. Although I think when people talk about the Montana/Young thing here they are also referring to the fact that he played in a revolutionary offensive system, perhaps the most significant shift to pro football offenses since the invention of the forward pass. Clearly it was effective even before he arrived, and some part of his incredible success is attributed to the West Coast Offense and the fact that no defensive coordinator had ever seen anything like it and wouldn't see anything like it from any other team for at least a while.

This "revolutionary offensive system," which teams had had six years to look at and adjust to before Rice was drafted, had produced a grand total of one 1000-yard receiving season in those six years (Dwight Clark, 85/1105/4 in 1981).

Really, more cherry-picking? Why talk about 1000 yard receivers instead of the productivity of the passing offense generally before he got there?I assume you know that SF was one of the best passing offenses in the league year after year after year once Walsh arrived, Rice or not. The fact that they hadn't had a single big producer is a product of the WR talent on hand pre-Rice. When a great talent arrives in an already incredibly productive system, amazing results might happen. Nobody's saying that Rice wasn't special- I'm not even saying that he's not the best ever. I'm just saying that context matters.

More context: I would argue part of Moss' statistical success is attributed to the NE adoption of the spread offense - perfect system for a vertical burner like him and something that NFL defenses had to adjust for. The spread was a significant shift in NFL passing philosophy brought about by the changing rules which favored WRs and resulted in its adoption across the league and the explosion in passing stats.Re my personal opinion on Rice/Moss: I didn't agree with Rice being ranked the greatest player of all time on that NFL top 100 list but I can't say I was shocked by the decision and definitely felt he deserved to be in the top 5. In the same vein, I would have been shocked if Moss had cracked the top 30, let alone top 10.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Here's what I wrote if anyone wants to argue that Montana/Young is a reason to pick Moss: http://www.footballp...s-whole-career/

Great stuff. Although I think when people talk about the Montana/Young thing here they are also referring to the fact that he played in a revolutionary offensive system, perhaps the most significant shift to pro football offenses since the invention of the forward pass. Clearly it was effective even before he arrived, and some part of his incredible success is attributed to the West Coast Offense and the fact that no defensive coordinator had ever seen anything like it and wouldn't see anything like it from any other team for at least a while.

This "revolutionary offensive system," which teams had had six years to look at and adjust to before Rice was drafted, had produced a grand total of one 1000-yard receiving season in those six years (Dwight Clark, 85/1105/4 in 1981).

Really, more cherry-picking? Why talk about 1000 yard receivers instead of the productivity of the passing offense generally before he got there?I assume you know that SF was one of the best passing offenses in the league year after year after year once Walsh arrived, Rice or not. The fact that they hadn't had a single big producer is a product of the WR talent on hand pre-Rice. When a great talent arrives in an already incredibly productive system, amazing results might happen. Nobody's saying that Rice wasn't special- I'm not even saying that he's not the best ever. I'm just saying that context matters.

More context: I would argue part of Moss' statistical success is attributed to the NE adoption of the spread offense - perfect system for a vertical burner like him and something that NFL defenses had to adjust for. The spread was a significant shift in NFL passing philosophy brought about by the changing rules which favored WRs and resulted in its adoption across the league and the explosion in passing stats.Re my personal opinion on Rice/Moss: I didn't agree with Rice being ranked the greatest player of all time on that NFL top 100 list but I can't say I was shocked by the decision and definitely felt he deserved to be in the top 5. In the same vein, I would have been shocked if Moss had cracked the top 30, let alone top 10.

Absolutely true. And while none of the other guys Moss played with were close to the Brady/Montana/Young level, a couple of them were good deep ball guys, which obviously plays into Moss's skills.Like I said I wasn't making the case for one guy or another. I was just pointing out that you can't throw two sets of numbers up and call it a day. And you certainly can't do that if the numbers are cherry-picked.

 

[CalBear]

Here's what I wrote if anyone wants to argue that Montana/Young is a reason to pick Moss: http://www.footballp...s-whole-career/

Great stuff. Although I think when people talk about the Montana/Young thing here they are also referring to the fact that he played in a revolutionary offensive system, perhaps the most significant shift to pro football offenses since the invention of the forward pass. Clearly it was effective even before he arrived, and some part of his incredible success is attributed to the West Coast Offense and the fact that no defensive coordinator had ever seen anything like it and wouldn't see anything like it from any other team for at least a while.

This "revolutionary offensive system," which teams had had six years to look at and adjust to before Rice was drafted, had produced a grand total of one 1000-yard receiving season in those six years (Dwight Clark, 85/1105/4 in 1981).

Really, more cherry-picking? Why talk about 1000 yard receivers instead of the productivity of the passing offense generally before he got there?

It is not at all cherry-picking to look at the other receivers who played in that same system, on that same team for six years prior to his arrival. Using 100% of the data available, none of the receivers performed remarkably. None finished in the top 5 in receiving TDs. Only one finished in the top five in receiving yardage (Dwight Clark, 913 yards in 1982, strike year). If your hypothesis is that Rice produced as much as he did because he was in Walsh's WCO system, the first thing you would test is how other receivers performed in the same system. The answer is, middle of the road at best.

I assume you know that SF was one of the best passing offenses in the league year after year after year once Walsh arrived, Rice or not. The fact that they hadn't had a single big producer is a product of the WR talent on hand pre-Rice. When a great talent arrives in an already incredibly productive system, amazing results might happen. Nobody's saying that Rice wasn't special- I'm not even saying that he's not the best ever. I'm just saying that context matters.

Sure, context matters, and the context is that Rice stepped into a system designed to spread the ball around, and dominated it so thoroughly that he broke every NFL passing record.

 

[Shanahanigans]

Moss has to be considered one of the best ever at shoving the DB in the back at the most opportune moment without drawing a flag.

Michael Irvin says Moss ain't st.

 

[pats3in4]

I am so glad I got to watch Rice's career from the get-go. Amazing possession receiver who could double as a deep threat. While I'd give the edge to Moss in the deep threat category, Moss cannot hold a candle to Rice in the keep-the-chains-moving category. Rice was a master at all routes and the best at setting up a CB for failure.Moss is such a physical freak and has made plays in his career that get the "Only Randy Moss makes that play" label...until another freak like Megatron starts copying them. This is why he stands out and I think the biggest reason he's received as many votes as he has.While Megatron is Moss's closest contemporary, I'd like to imagine Rice's closest contemporary...Larry Fitzgerald (best combination of possession receiving + deep threat)...would have done with Montana/Young throwing to him.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

This is absurd.

 

[Daywalker]

I am so glad I got to watch Rice's career from the get-go. Amazing possession receiver who could double as a deep threat. While I'd give the edge to Moss in the deep threat category, Moss cannot hold a candle to Rice in the keep-the-chains-moving category. Rice was a master at all routes and the best at setting up a CB for failure.

Moss is such a physical freak and has made plays in his career that get the "Only Randy Moss makes that play" label...until another freak like Megatron starts copying them. This is why he stands out and I think the biggest reason he's received as many votes as he has.

While Megatron is Moss's closest contemporary, I'd like to imagine Rice's closest contemporary...Larry Fitzgerald (best combination of possession receiving + deep threat)...would have done with Montana/Young throwing to him.

Or Rich Gannon for that matter. When Larry is 40.

 

[Ernol]

Everyone voting no here would take prime Randy over anyone else if given the choice of having any WR suit up for their team at the start of the playoffs.

Can you blame them? Moss was clutch! Sure, Rice went 11/215/1 in one Superbowl, 7/148/3 in another, 8/123/1 in a third and 10/149/3 in a fourth (not to mention 5/77/1 in a 5th at age 40). But who cares about stats? Moss, man that guy was talented, and in any case he did manage a 5/62/1 in his lone Superbowl.

 

[spider321]

1. This is absurd.2. There is no 2nd best WR of all-time. Jerry is the top 5 all by himself.3. Daunte Culpepper would be in the HOF if he had a few seasons with Jerry at WR.

 

[spider321]

Everyone voting no here would take prime Randy over anyone else if given the choice of having any WR suit up for their team at the start of the playoffs.

Can you blame them? Moss was clutch! Sure, Rice went 11/215/1 in one Superbowl, 7/148/3 in another, 8/123/1 in a third and 10/149/3 in a fourth (not to mention 5/77/1 in a 5th at age 40). But who cares about stats? Moss, man that guy was talented, and in any case he did manage a 5/62/1 in his lone Superbowl.

LMAO.These kids have no ****ing clue how great Jerry Rice was.

 

[Gawain]

1. This is absurd.2. There is no 2nd best WR of all-time. Jerry is the top 5 all by himself.3. Daunte Culpepper would be in the HOF if he had a few seasons with Jerry at WR.

Jerry Rice is the 2nd best WR of all-time. Hope that helps

 

[spider321]

1. This is absurd.2. There is no 2nd best WR of all-time. Jerry is the top 5 all by himself.3. Daunte Culpepper would be in the HOF if he had a few seasons with Jerry at WR.

Jerry Rice is the 2nd best WR of all-time. Hope that helps

I respect your right to be wrong.Jerry Rice is the best football player of all-time.

 

[drummer]

1. This is absurd.

2. There is no 2nd best WR of all-time. Jerry is the top 5 all by himself.

3. Daunte Culpepper would be in the HOF if he had a few seasons with Jerry at WR.

Jerry Rice is the 2nd best WR of all-time. Hope that helps

This thread?

 

[Gawain]

1. This is absurd.

2. There is no 2nd best WR of all-time. Jerry is the top 5 all by himself.

3. Daunte Culpepper would be in the HOF if he had a few seasons with Jerry at WR.

Jerry Rice is the 2nd best WR of all-time. Hope that helps

This thread?

No, trying to help spider. I'm not sure he realizes people not named Jerry Rice can also play in the NFL. I will admit that my Hutson championing is a contrarian viewpoint. The game changed so much between the 40's and the 80's that it is tough to compare the two, but I think almost everyone would agree that Rice isn't #1 at all positions.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

1. This is absurd.

2. There is no 2nd best WR of all-time. Jerry is the top 5 all by himself.

3. Daunte Culpepper would be in the HOF if he had a few seasons with Jerry at WR.

Jerry Rice is the 2nd best WR of all-time. Hope that helps

This thread?

No, trying to help spider. I'm not sure he realizes people not named Jerry Rice can also play in the NFL. I will admit that my Hutson championing is a contrarian viewpoint. The game changed so much between the 40's and the 80's that it is tough to compare the two, but I think almost everyone would agree that Rice isn't #1 at all positions.

Even if you didn't think that, the very fact that it's debatable speaks volumes for a WR

 

[matuski]

The stats people keep using certainly back that Rice obviously had the better career. It supports he produced, and that he was on better teams. Nobody will touch his numbers imo. I haven't seen anyone argue against this.It is not as helpful arguing he is the better player. As in who gives me the biggest mismatch or commands more attention from the other team? It is Moss imo. Scratch Moss and put Calvin here soon.This is where people are getting sideways.. we haven't defined what we are debating.

 

[sho nuff]

I think Randy Moss is the most talented wide receiver to ever play the game. It's too bad he didn't use that talent to become the best wide receiver to ever play the game.

This.

Pretty much.The best ever does not do what he did in Oakland...or how he left NE, then MN, then the little he did with TN.

 

[sho nuff]

The stats people keep using certainly back that Rice obviously had the better career. It supports he produced, and that he was on better teams. Nobody will touch his numbers imo. I haven't seen anyone argue against this.It is not as helpful arguing he is the better player. As in who gives me the biggest mismatch or commands more attention from the other team? It is Moss imo. Scratch Moss and put Calvin here soon.This is where people are getting sideways.. we haven't defined what we are debating.

The best WR is not always the one that creates the biggest mismatch.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

The stats people keep using certainly back that Rice obviously had the better career. It supports he produced, and that he was on better teams. Nobody will touch his numbers imo. I haven't seen anyone argue against this.It is not as helpful arguing he is the better player. As in who gives me the biggest mismatch or commands more attention from the other team? It is Moss imo. Scratch Moss and put Calvin here soon.This is where people are getting sideways.. we haven't defined what we are debating.

The best WR is not always the one that creates the biggest mismatch.

And how can a guy as good as Rice NOT create a similar mismatch?

 

[sho nuff]

The stats people keep using certainly back that Rice obviously had the better career. It supports he produced, and that he was on better teams. Nobody will touch his numbers imo. I haven't seen anyone argue against this.It is not as helpful arguing he is the better player. As in who gives me the biggest mismatch or commands more attention from the other team? It is Moss imo. Scratch Moss and put Calvin here soon.This is where people are getting sideways.. we haven't defined what we are debating.

The best WR is not always the one that creates the biggest mismatch.

And how can a guy as good as Rice NOT create a similar mismatch?

I think its a different type of mismatch.Moss's was mostly physical (size and speed).Rice's was his route running and mentally how he set up the DB.Id liken it in a way to how people talk about a guy like Greg Jennings today (now, Im obviously not comparing him or his career in a way saying he needs to be anywhere near the conversation...but hear me out).His teammates and some DBs who have covered him talk about how he runs routes. He is not the most physically talented guy...but his route running is so precise and he makes several routes look alike so that you just don't know what is coming.IMO...that is like Rice who just ran such great routes that it made up for his other limitations (in that he is not as big and fast and such as a guy like Moss or Megatron).

 

[CalBear]

It is not as helpful arguing he is the better player. As in who gives me the biggest mismatch or commands more attention from the other team? It is Moss imo. Scratch Moss and put Calvin here soon.

The word is "greatest." Some people would argue that Bo Jackson was the best RB ever in terms of physical talent, but he's clearly not the greatest RB ever. Greatness requires more than talent. The literal definition is "the quality of being great, distinguished, or eminent." Eminent: "Famous and respected within a particular sphere or profession." Distinguished: "Successful, authoritative, and commanding great respect."Moss may have been harder to cover than Rice, but he wasn't greater than Rice. Ever. Nothing he accomplished measures up to what Rice accomplished. League MVP and Super Bowl MVP aren't stats, they're accomplishments which measure how successful and respected a player is.

 

[Warpig]

Moss has to be considered one of the best ever at shoving the DB in the back at the most opportune moment without drawing a flag.

Michael Irvin says Moss ain't st.

Michael Irvin thinks HE'S the best WR ever.

 

[matuski]

It is not as helpful arguing he is the better player. As in who gives me the biggest mismatch or commands more attention from the other team? It is Moss imo. Scratch Moss and put Calvin here soon.

The word is "greatest." Some people would argue that Bo Jackson was the best RB ever in terms of physical talent, but he's clearly not the greatest RB ever. Greatness requires more than talent. The literal definition is "the quality of being great, distinguished, or eminent." Eminent: "Famous and respected within a particular sphere or profession." Distinguished: "Successful, authoritative, and commanding great respect."Moss may have been harder to cover than Rice, but he wasn't greater than Rice. Ever. Nothing he accomplished measures up to what Rice accomplished. League MVP and Super Bowl MVP aren't stats, they're accomplishments which measure how successful and respected a player is.

Your definition is the dictionary... I am not sure we all are on the same page.Rice's accomplishments are certainly the greatest in all of football... but if we are talking about picking teams, I think Moss goes off the board first.

 

[CalBear]

It is not as helpful arguing he is the better player. As in who gives me the biggest mismatch or commands more attention from the other team? It is Moss imo. Scratch Moss and put Calvin here soon.

The word is "greatest." Some people would argue that Bo Jackson was the best RB ever in terms of physical talent, but he's clearly not the greatest RB ever. Greatness requires more than talent. The literal definition is "the quality of being great, distinguished, or eminent." Eminent: "Famous and respected within a particular sphere or profession." Distinguished: "Successful, authoritative, and commanding great respect."Moss may have been harder to cover than Rice, but he wasn't greater than Rice. Ever. Nothing he accomplished measures up to what Rice accomplished. League MVP and Super Bowl MVP aren't stats, they're accomplishments which measure how successful and respected a player is.

Your definition is the dictionary... I am not sure we all are on the same page.Rice's accomplishments are certainly the greatest in all of football... but if we are talking about picking teams, I think Moss goes off the board first.

1) I disagree,2) That's not the definition of greatness.

 

[finito]

Rice's accomplishments are certainly the greatest in all of football... but if we are talking about picking teams, I think Moss goes off the board first.

I'd find that hard to believe that anyone would choose Moss over Rice knowing how both their careers would turn out. If you're talking about who would be drafted first out of college, sure, but other than that I'd think every GM in the league would take Rice over Moss.

 

[matuski]

Rice's accomplishments are certainly the greatest in all of football... but if we are talking about picking teams, I think Moss goes off the board first.

I'd find that hard to believe that anyone would choose Moss over Rice knowing how both their careers would turn out. If you're talking about who would be drafted first out of college, sure, but other than that I'd think every GM in the league would take Rice over Moss.

And again.. nobody is saying they would take Moss's career over Rice's (at least not that I've seen) - but if I want a weapon, a mismatch, a guy to completely rotate the defense to whichever side of the field I put him... I'm taking Moss over Rice.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Let's look at some other stats to shed some light on problems we face when ranking WRs:WR A:

Years Games Rec Yds TD Y/G10 156 820 13275 131 85.1---- ---- 21st 12th 4th 2ndWR B:

Years	Games	Rec	Yds	TD	Y/G10	147	729	9620	66	65.4----	----	39th	43rd	42nd	28th

Two WRs, each played 10 years and a comparable number of games. The bottom row in each table show's the player's all-time rank for that category. Clearly, based just on the numbers, it looks like WR A is better than WR B, right? Can you guess who these receivers are? (ETA: Had to fix WR B's stats.)

Spoiler

WR A is Jerry Rice from age 23-32. WR B is Jerry Rice from age 33-42. Shut the #### up Randy Moss.

 

[TobiasFunke]

The wonderful thing about this thread is that the Moss quote that triggered it was trolling, most if not all of the Moss votes in the poll are trolling votes, and as far as I can tell not one person has tried to actually argue that Moss is/was better than Rice in the thread itself. Yet there are literally dozens of people in here totally outraged about this position that no one is actually taking.

 

[matuski]

The wonderful thing about this thread is that the Moss quote that triggered it was trolling, most if not all of the Moss votes in the poll are trolling votes, and as far as I can tell not one person has tried to actually argue that Moss is/was better than Rice in the thread itself. Yet there are literally dozens of people in here totally outraged about this position that no one is actually taking.

 

[Yenrub]

I’m not sure what all the debate is about in the 1st place.So what Moss thinks he is the greatest WR of all time? I am not surprised he that he thinks he is. No one should be.Hell I bet if you asked Freddie Mitchell who he thought was the greatest WR of all time I bet he would say something like “of course it’s me FredEx that’s a silly question”

 

[GregR]

The stats people keep using certainly back that Rice obviously had the better career. It supports he produced, and that he was on better teams. Nobody will touch his numbers imo. I haven't seen anyone argue against this.It is not as helpful arguing he is the better player. As in who gives me the biggest mismatch or commands more attention from the other team? It is Moss imo. Scratch Moss and put Calvin here soon.This is where people are getting sideways.. we haven't defined what we are debating.

If I had to choose 1 WR for a deep route where he's going to have to out jump a DB to make the catch, I'll choose Moss over Rice easily.If I had to choose a WR for the impact he makes on every play of the entire game and my chances to win, I'm choosing Rice over Moss easily.I think people get caught up too much in those jaw-dropping displays of athleticism that Moss had and don't focus on what happens on all 60-70 snaps. I think Rice would cause more match up headaches throughout the game for a defense.

 

[tipsy mcstagger]

Show me one play where Rice quit before the play ended. I dare you.

 

[Banger]

Moss has to be considered one of the best ever at shoving the DB in the back at the most opportune moment without drawing a flag.

Michael Irvin says Moss ain't st.

Michael Irvin thinks HE'S the best WR ever.

his opinion doesn't count....he's obviously still high

 

[GregR]

Show me one play where Rice quit before the play ended. I dare you.

I actually have a framed picture of that hanging on my wall, right next to my photo of Norman Rockwell beating a child.

 

[matuski]

The stats people keep using certainly back that Rice obviously had the better career. It supports he produced, and that he was on better teams. Nobody will touch his numbers imo. I haven't seen anyone argue against this.It is not as helpful arguing he is the better player. As in who gives me the biggest mismatch or commands more attention from the other team? It is Moss imo. Scratch Moss and put Calvin here soon.This is where people are getting sideways.. we haven't defined what we are debating.

If I had to choose 1 WR for a deep route where he's going to have to out jump a DB to make the catch, I'll choose Moss over Rice easily.If I had to choose a WR for the impact he makes on every play of the entire game and my chances to win, I'm choosing Rice over Moss easily.I think people get caught up too much in those jaw-dropping displays of athleticism that Moss had and don't focus on what happens on all 60-70 snaps. I think Rice would cause more match up headaches throughout the game for a defense.

I guess we disagree. If Moss was on the field, the whole defense shifted to him.I never saw (don't recall seeing) this with Rice.. certainly extra attention and the best corner on him, but not a visible effect on the whole scheme. This may say as much about the quality surrounding each player as it does about them... I don't know. You stick with Rice, and that is a great choice - I'm going to stick with Moss and be happy as well.

 

[GregR]

The stats people keep using certainly back that Rice obviously had the better career. It supports he produced, and that he was on better teams. Nobody will touch his numbers imo. I haven't seen anyone argue against this.

It is not as helpful arguing he is the better player. As in who gives me the biggest mismatch or commands more attention from the other team? It is Moss imo. Scratch Moss and put Calvin here soon.

This is where people are getting sideways.. we haven't defined what we are debating.

If I had to choose 1 WR for a deep route where he's going to have to out jump a DB to make the catch, I'll choose Moss over Rice easily.If I had to choose a WR for the impact he makes on every play of the entire game and my chances to win, I'm choosing Rice over Moss easily.

I think people get caught up too much in those jaw-dropping displays of athleticism that Moss had and don't focus on what happens on all 60-70 snaps. I think Rice would cause more match up headaches throughout the game for a defense.

I guess we disagree. If Moss was on the field, the whole defense shifted to him.I never saw (don't recall seeing) this with Rice.. certainly extra attention and the best corner on him, but not a visible effect on the whole scheme.

This may say as much about the quality surrounding each player as it does about them... I don't know.

You stick with Rice, and that is a great choice - I'm going to stick with Moss and be happy as well.

It's very easy to see the adjustments that people make for Moss, because what you had to stop with him was the deep ball and that means moving a safety to double him up.But with Rice you had to defend the entire field from him. In other words you didn't see entire defenses shifting to stop Rice because there wasn't a simple shift like that which would suffice. He was more difficult to defense than Moss in that regard. Some quotes from players who had to cover both:

Cornerback Ray Buchanan, who played against both Rice and Moss on multiple occasions during his 12-year career. "And with all due respect to Randy Moss, I had to do a lot more film study to get ready for Jerry because I had to get ready for every route. He ran every route available, to perfection, and he ran them all the same, so it was almost impossible to stop. With Randy, I didn't even have to watch film, because it was all about the 'Go' route."

Former NFL cornerback Eric Davis, a teammate of Rice's in San Francisco from 1990-95 and a man who covered both receivers during his 13-year career, agrees that work ethic, drive and attention to detail helped set Rice apart.

"Jerry is the greatest receiver, period," Davis said. "You had to defend the entire field, because he ran every route. Randy, with his size and speed and hands, is the greatest deep threat we've ever seen. There's a reason we called him a 'freak.' There are very few that have ever had that type of impact. But he would still fall short of Jerry Rice, the greatest impact player the game has ever seen."

"He [Moss] could have gotten more out of his ability," Davis said. "How many big plays did he leave on the field by not going across the middle? You played Randy outside-in, so you would be in position to see the deep ball. You knew he wasn't going to run in-routes and run away from you. With Jerry, it was a chess match, because he ran every route – curl, deep dig, slant, go, post, out, you name it – and they all looked the same."

 

[GregR]

Let me put it another way to draw a distinction about defending them.Don Hutson often gets regarded as at least 1b to Rice's 1a as greatest wide receiver of all time. (It was dissapointing it took 37 posts for his name to even get mentioned in this thread.) Hutson had speed that made him a premier downfield threat, but he also had the most complete receiving game the NFL had seen. His route running made him a weapon anywhere on the field.Did teams defend against Hutson by moving a safety overtop of him like they did with Moss? No, doing so wouldn't have been enough to stop him because he was dangerous in more than just the deep routes. In order to stop him, coaches had to turn to changing responsibilities for the entire defense and invent zone coverage. Because no single (or even double) man coverage was going to be stay with him.I'm saying that's the kind of impact that Rice had on a game. Yes you can see Moss getting double covered easily, but to defend Rice you have to do more than shift one player and then have everyone else adjust. To defend Rice the whole defense had to be aware of him and what he can do. He might not have been as scary to some because giving up a home run is scary to defenses and that is what Moss did best. But overall Rice was harder to defend.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

Let me put it another way to draw a distinction about defending them.

Don Hutson often gets regarded as at least 1b to Rice's 1a as greatest wide receiver of all time. (It was dissapointing it took 37 posts for his name to even get mentioned in this thread.) Hutson had speed that made him a premier downfield threat, but he also had the most complete receiving game the NFL had seen. His route running made him a weapon anywhere on the field.

Did teams defend against Hutson by moving a safety overtop of him like they did with Moss? No, doing so wouldn't have been enough to stop him because he was dangerous in more than just the deep routes. In order to stop him, coaches had to turn to changing responsibilities for the entire defense and invent zone coverage. Because no single (or even double) man coverage was going to be stay with him.

I'm saying that's the kind of impact that Rice had on a game. Yes you can see Moss getting double covered easily, but to defend Rice you have to do more than shift one player and then have everyone else adjust. To defend Rice the whole defense had to be aware of him and what he can do. He might not have been as scary to some because giving up a home run is scary to defenses and that is what Moss did best. But overall Rice was harder to defend.

It's really not. The guy played like whatm 70 years ago? Also a revolutionary also does not equat to greatness. Some one was going to do it. I also think we can all agree that football when he played isnt football now. I don't mind bringing up the older guys but some times it gets a bit out of control, IMHO. If you had to pick WR's to play for your team right now Don Hutson wouldnt be in the top 1,000 selections

 

[Tau837]

The stats people keep using certainly back that Rice obviously had the better career. It supports he produced, and that he was on better teams. Nobody will touch his numbers imo. I haven't seen anyone argue against this.It is not as helpful arguing he is the better player. As in who gives me the biggest mismatch or commands more attention from the other team? It is Moss imo. Scratch Moss and put Calvin here soon.This is where people are getting sideways.. we haven't defined what we are debating.

If I had to choose 1 WR for a deep route where he's going to have to out jump a DB to make the catch, I'll choose Moss over Rice easily.If I had to choose a WR for the impact he makes on every play of the entire game and my chances to win, I'm choosing Rice over Moss easily.I think people get caught up too much in those jaw-dropping displays of athleticism that Moss had and don't focus on what happens on all 60-70 snaps. I think Rice would cause more match up headaches throughout the game for a defense.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Let me put it another way to draw a distinction about defending them.

Don Hutson often gets regarded as at least 1b to Rice's 1a as greatest wide receiver of all time. (It was dissapointing it took 37 posts for his name to even get mentioned in this thread.) Hutson had speed that made him a premier downfield threat, but he also had the most complete receiving game the NFL had seen. His route running made him a weapon anywhere on the field.

Did teams defend against Hutson by moving a safety overtop of him like they did with Moss? No, doing so wouldn't have been enough to stop him because he was dangerous in more than just the deep routes. In order to stop him, coaches had to turn to changing responsibilities for the entire defense and invent zone coverage. Because no single (or even double) man coverage was going to be stay with him.

I'm saying that's the kind of impact that Rice had on a game. Yes you can see Moss getting double covered easily, but to defend Rice you have to do more than shift one player and then have everyone else adjust. To defend Rice the whole defense had to be aware of him and what he can do. He might not have been as scary to some because giving up a home run is scary to defenses and that is what Moss did best. But overall Rice was harder to defend.

It's really not. The guy played like whatm 70 years ago? Also a revolutionary also does not equat to greatness. Some one was going to do it. I also think we can all agree that football when he played isnt football now. I don't mind bringing up the older guys but some times it gets a bit out of control, IMHO. If you had to pick WR's to play for your team right now Don Hutson wouldnt be in the top 1,000 selections

Jerry Rice wouldn't be in my top 25. Maybe not my top 100. Not the version of Jerry Rice that played in the NFL, anyway. If Jerry Rice had been born 15 years later and able to benefit from all the advances in the game and at the position and with conditioning and whatnot, sure. In fact he might be my first pick. But then I might say the same thing about Don Hutson if he had been born 75 years later too.