Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
That is a stupid stance, and it's one that has lessened the credibility of the MLB HOF voters.For those who missed the post-show discussion.
Jerry Rice got a "10" from 47 of the 48 experts. He got a 9 from Pat Summerall.
Steve Sabol called Summerall to ask him why Jerry only got a 9. Summerall said he didn't give anyone a 10.
Yep. You're not going to vote Albert Pujols in on the first ballot just because you've never voted ANYONE in on the first ballot?Good for you.... come and get a pat on the head.That is a stupid stance, and it's one that has lessened the credibility of the MLB HOF voters.For those who missed the post-show discussion.
Jerry Rice got a "10" from 47 of the 48 experts. He got a 9 from Pat Summerall.
Steve Sabol called Summerall to ask him why Jerry only got a 9. Summerall said he didn't give anyone a 10.
Check the opening post in this thread.
I'll have some more comments when I have more time, but wanted to start with WRs.1. This list ranks Michael Irvin as the 8th best WR of all time. That is laughable.2. I can only assume Harrison was left off for some combination of (a) voters thinking of him as being "made" by Manning and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.3. I can only assume Owens was left off for some combination of (a) voters not liking his character/attitude issues and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.4. It is absolutely unforgivable to have left Steve Largent off this list. IMO he should have been no worse than 6th among WRs.
If someone has time to reorder the list in Post #1, it would be fun to discuss the group of players at each position.RE: Irvin - I'm not sure what you are trying to say; I saw everyone except Crazy Legs and Hutson, and think he's certainly not better than anyone in the top four. I guess you could move him past Warfield and Moss.Is Largent sixth? Honestly I'm not sure, but I think WR is one fascinating list to discuss. I always thought of him as a steady compiler, never really the best at his position, but a perrenial pro bowler who was always in the top six in the league for any given year.Never led the league in receptions or TDsOnce All-ProTwice led the league in yardageHe caught something every week for 11+ years, and had all the career records when he was done. But honestly, he was NEVER the best at his position for any one season.I'll have some more comments when I have more time, but wanted to start with WRs.1. This list ranks Michael Irvin as the 8th best WR of all time. That is laughable.2. I can only assume Harrison was left off for some combination of (a) voters thinking of him as being "made" by Manning and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.3. I can only assume Owens was left off for some combination of (a) voters not liking his character/attitude issues and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.4. It is absolutely unforgivable to have left Steve Largent off this list. IMO he should have been no worse than 6th among WRs.
I meant to add that as well. Hard to believe, but it seems clear the list is skewed toward guys with lots of rings and/or post-season exploits.
I believe JWB is taking issue with Irvin being on the list, period.If someone has time to reorder the list in Post #1, it would be fun to discuss the group of players at each position.RE: Irvin - I'm not sure what you are trying to say; I saw everyone except Crazy Legs and Hutson, and think he's certainly not better than anyone in the top four. I guess you could move him past Warfield and Moss.I'll have some more comments when I have more time, but wanted to start with WRs.1. This list ranks Michael Irvin as the 8th best WR of all time. That is laughable.2. I can only assume Harrison was left off for some combination of (a) voters thinking of him as being "made" by Manning and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.3. I can only assume Owens was left off for some combination of (a) voters not liking his character/attitude issues and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.4. It is absolutely unforgivable to have left Steve Largent off this list. IMO he should have been no worse than 6th among WRs.
Seems like the fact that he led the league in receiving yards in two seasons is in conflict with your opinion. Name a better WR from 1978-1986 who had as many good years as Largent? No one is really close to his production.If someone has time to reorder the list in Post #1, it would be fun to discuss the group of players at each position.RE: Irvin - I'm not sure what you are trying to say; I saw everyone except Crazy Legs and Hutson, and think he's certainly not better than anyone in the top four. I guess you could move him past Warfield and Moss.I'll have some more comments when I have more time, but wanted to start with WRs.1. This list ranks Michael Irvin as the 8th best WR of all time. That is laughable.
2. I can only assume Harrison was left off for some combination of (a) voters thinking of him as being "made" by Manning and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.
3. I can only assume Owens was left off for some combination of (a) voters not liking his character/attitude issues and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.
4. It is absolutely unforgivable to have left Steve Largent off this list. IMO he should have been no worse than 6th among WRs.
Is Largent sixth? Honestly I'm not sure, but I think WR is one fascinating list to discuss. I always thought of him as a steady compiler, never really the best at his position, but a perrenial pro bowler who was always in the top six in the league for any given year.
Never led the league in receptions or TDs
Once All-Pro
Twice led the league in yardage
He caught something every week for 11+ years, and had all the career records when he was done. But honestly, he was NEVER the best at his position for any one season.
I said he was a compiler; at no time was he considered the best at his position, but he did rack up stats. He was always in the top 6-8 WRs in the league, but never in the discussion for best or 2nd best or top 3. But he broke the consecutive games with a catch record (Alworth had it...might have been Carmichaels briefly...anyway), got to the end, and HOLY COW this guy has every league career record.Rice was dominant. Don Hutson was Ruthian. Raymond Berry took it to a whole other level (that 631 stood for a long, long time). Bambi was surreal. All those guys in the top four were really, really special.Seems like the fact that he led the league in receiving yards in two seasons is in conflict with your opinion. Name a better WR from 1978-1986 who had as many good years as Largent? No one is really close to his production.If someone has time to reorder the list in Post #1, it would be fun to discuss the group of players at each position.RE: Irvin - I'm not sure what you are trying to say; I saw everyone except Crazy Legs and Hutson, and think he's certainly not better than anyone in the top four. I guess you could move him past Warfield and Moss.I'll have some more comments when I have more time, but wanted to start with WRs.1. This list ranks Michael Irvin as the 8th best WR of all time. That is laughable.
2. I can only assume Harrison was left off for some combination of (a) voters thinking of him as being "made" by Manning and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.
3. I can only assume Owens was left off for some combination of (a) voters not liking his character/attitude issues and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.
4. It is absolutely unforgivable to have left Steve Largent off this list. IMO he should have been no worse than 6th among WRs.
Is Largent sixth? Honestly I'm not sure, but I think WR is one fascinating list to discuss. I always thought of him as a steady compiler, never really the best at his position, but a perrenial pro bowler who was always in the top six in the league for any given year.
Never led the league in receptions or TDs
Once All-Pro
Twice led the league in yardage
He caught something every week for 11+ years, and had all the career records when he was done. But honestly, he was NEVER the best at his position for any one season.
spoken like a true fantasy football owner
The same Randy Moss who is on record as only playing when he wants to, and the same Randy Moss who just got dumped by two teams in the same season? That Randy Moss?
I didn't see Brown but for whatever reruns or old tapes that have popped up over the years.I did watch Barry.Few people have ever taken a football field and garnered as much attention in such an awe inspired way as Barry did. He was part of some decent offenses, but when the Lions stunk it was same ol' Barry. I once made fun of a NY radio announcer reusing a phrase he said about LT in regards to Barry-he's the guy that NFL players tune in to watch highlights of. In hindsight he's probably not wrong on either. Now, of course, I wasn't interviewing players back then it's just that's how it felt. That statement characterizes it well. It's not to say Montana or Rice or whomever didn't make their fair share of fabulous plays or that Barry did it every week-it did, though, seem like he would.Occasionally when I'm watching a poor OL failing play after play to open up a hole for their RB, I think of Barry running up and down the field like some schoolyard kid and somehow finding an opening to move the ball forward. For me there's something about Barry. Tomlinson can score 4 touchdowns or LJ n Priest can run for 200 behind that awesome line but no one has been so awe inspiring. Bringing up Barry....playing for bad teams isn't supposed to affect eligibility for anything but I think it does a little bit. Barry makes me think of Hardy Nickerson. When the Lions played the Bucs, there were 20 other players on the field but it seemed like Hardy versus Barry when the Lions had the ball and it was great to watch. I don't think Hardy gets the love he deserves.
I believe JWB is taking issue with Irvin being on the list, period.If someone has time to reorder the list in Post #1, it would be fun to discuss the group of players at each position.RE: Irvin - I'm not sure what you are trying to say; I saw everyone except Crazy Legs and Hutson, and think he's certainly not better than anyone in the top four. I guess you could move him past Warfield and Moss.I'll have some more comments when I have more time, but wanted to start with WRs.1. This list ranks Michael Irvin as the 8th best WR of all time. That is laughable.2. I can only assume Harrison was left off for some combination of (a) voters thinking of him as being "made" by Manning and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.3. I can only assume Owens was left off for some combination of (a) voters not liking his character/attitude issues and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.4. It is absolutely unforgivable to have left Steve Largent off this list. IMO he should have been no worse than 6th among WRs.
Nice list!I was thinking George Webster should be on there (made the all-time AFL team), but then I remembered he tailed off after his first 3 seasons because of injuries.
I disagree, I think a lot of people, probably a majority considered Steve Largent the best WR in the NFL in that time period. I think you're giving too much stock to single seasons, and need to look at groups of 2, 3, or 4 seasons and like I said Largent was the best. Best route running, best catching, most productive consistently and most famous WR in his time, in my opinion.I said he was a compiler; at no time was he considered the best at his position, but he did rack up stats. He was always in the top 6-8 WRs in the league, but never in the discussion for best or 2nd best or top 3. But he broke the consecutive games with a catch record (Alworth had it...might have been Carmichaels briefly...anyway), got to the end, and HOLY COW this guy has every league career record.Rice was dominant. Don Hutson was Ruthian. Raymond Berry took it to a whole other level (that 631 stood for a long, long time). Bambi was surreal. All those guys in the top four were really, really special.Seems like the fact that he led the league in receiving yards in two seasons is in conflict with your opinion. Name a better WR from 1978-1986 who had as many good years as Largent? No one is really close to his production.If someone has time to reorder the list in Post #1, it would be fun to discuss the group of players at each position.RE: Irvin - I'm not sure what you are trying to say; I saw everyone except Crazy Legs and Hutson, and think he's certainly not better than anyone in the top four. I guess you could move him past Warfield and Moss.I'll have some more comments when I have more time, but wanted to start with WRs.1. This list ranks Michael Irvin as the 8th best WR of all time. That is laughable.
2. I can only assume Harrison was left off for some combination of (a) voters thinking of him as being "made" by Manning and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.
3. I can only assume Owens was left off for some combination of (a) voters not liking his character/attitude issues and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.
4. It is absolutely unforgivable to have left Steve Largent off this list. IMO he should have been no worse than 6th among WRs.
Is Largent sixth? Honestly I'm not sure, but I think WR is one fascinating list to discuss. I always thought of him as a steady compiler, never really the best at his position, but a perrenial pro bowler who was always in the top six in the league for any given year.
Never led the league in receptions or TDs
Once All-Pro
Twice led the league in yardage
He caught something every week for 11+ years, and had all the career records when he was done. But honestly, he was NEVER the best at his position for any one season.
Steve Largent was a great player, and he racked up a ton of impressive stats, steady, durable, et al. But if you look at any one season during his prime, somebody was always considered better. John Jefferson, James Lofton, Wes Chandler, Steve Watson (!), Roy Green, Art Monk, John Stallworth, Stanley Morgan, Mark Clayton, Mark Duper, Jerry Rice, et al.
He had a better career than every one of those guys except the last one on the list. He outlasted everyone. That counts for something.
Have at it:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1978/allpro.htm
That's the 1978 All Pro team, with stats. At the top is a link to "Previous Season / Next Season". Go through every year. Largent is always one of the best, but honestly, he was never considered the best. But he was consistently good for like 11-12 years, and that is impressive in a different way.
Yep, that Randy Moss. Are you really telling me that this season invalidates his entire body of work? He will be probably be 2nd in every receiving category when he is done (providing no major injuries) and he was part of 2 NFL record scoring offenses. Individually and statistically the guy makes a far greater impact on a team than anyone on that list other than Hutson and Rice.
I agree that Largent should have been on this list somewhere as he was steady and dependable every week (but then it leads to who would get bumped for him)I also agree that if TO was left off for his attitude (and he has mostly better numbers than Moss) then why wasn't moss left off for the same reasonMarvin Harrison is another head scratcher as he had two years in Indy before Peyton got there (1702 yds 14 td's without a franchise QB) so he always had the talentI'll have some more comments when I have more time, but wanted to start with WRs.1. This list ranks Michael Irvin as the 8th best WR of all time. That is laughable.2. I can only assume Harrison was left off for some combination of (a) voters thinking of him as being "made" by Manning and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.3. I can only assume Owens was left off for some combination of (a) voters not liking his character/attitude issues and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.4. It is absolutely unforgivable to have left Steve Largent off this list. IMO he should have been no worse than 6th among WRs.
I never said that this season invalidates his entire body of work. Yes, at his best, Moss was an unstoppable force, but when he loafs it, which he has done over the years many times, he is easily stoppable...simply because he never gets started. I am sorry, but the 2nd best player of all-time at his position is not someone who has pulled a lot of the crap that Moss has. It is an insult to a guy like Marvin Harrison, who was as prolific and good as Moss in the same era, but always worked his butt off, that he is not even on this list, while a malcontent like Moss is.
Dude -
George Webster, Tom Jackson, Lee Roy Jordan, Clay Matthews, Wayne Walker, Jack Reynolds, Greg Lloyd, Cornelius Bennett, Joe Fortunato, Phil Villapiano, and Chris Spielman would be my next 11. We just did a top 50 (51) all time linebacker list..lol
From Wikipedia:I said he was a compiler; at no time was he considered the best at his position, but he did rack up stats. He was always in the top 6-8 WRs in the league, but never in the discussion for best or 2nd best or top 3. But he broke the consecutive games with a catch record (Alworth had it...might have been Carmichaels briefly...anyway), got to the end, and HOLY COW this guy has every league career record.Rice was dominant. Don Hutson was Ruthian. Raymond Berry took it to a whole other level (that 631 stood for a long, long time). Bambi was surreal. All those guys in the top four were really, really special.Seems like the fact that he led the league in receiving yards in two seasons is in conflict with your opinion. Name a better WR from 1978-1986 who had as many good years as Largent? No one is really close to his production.If someone has time to reorder the list in Post #1, it would be fun to discuss the group of players at each position.RE: Irvin - I'm not sure what you are trying to say; I saw everyone except Crazy Legs and Hutson, and think he's certainly not better than anyone in the top four. I guess you could move him past Warfield and Moss.I'll have some more comments when I have more time, but wanted to start with WRs.
1. This list ranks Michael Irvin as the 8th best WR of all time. That is laughable.
2. I can only assume Harrison was left off for some combination of (a) voters thinking of him as being "made" by Manning and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.
3. I can only assume Owens was left off for some combination of (a) voters not liking his character/attitude issues and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.
4. It is absolutely unforgivable to have left Steve Largent off this list. IMO he should have been no worse than 6th among WRs.
Is Largent sixth? Honestly I'm not sure, but I think WR is one fascinating list to discuss. I always thought of him as a steady compiler, never really the best at his position, but a perrenial pro bowler who was always in the top six in the league for any given year.
Never led the league in receptions or TDs
Once All-Pro
Twice led the league in yardage
He caught something every week for 11+ years, and had all the career records when he was done. But honestly, he was NEVER the best at his position for any one season.
Steve Largent was a great player, and he racked up a ton of impressive stats, steady, durable, et al. But if you look at any one season during his prime, somebody was always considered better. John Jefferson, James Lofton, Wes Chandler, Steve Watson (!), Roy Green, Art Monk, John Stallworth, Stanley Morgan, Mark Clayton, Mark Duper, Jerry Rice, et al.
He had a better career than every one of those guys except the last one on the list. He outlasted everyone. That counts for something.
Have at it:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1978/allpro.htm
That's the 1978 All Pro team, with stats. At the top is a link to "Previous Season / Next Season". Go through every year. Largent is always one of the best, but honestly, he was never considered the best. But he was consistently good for like 11-12 years, and that is impressive in a different way.
And you have to put that into context. He played his entire career for Seahawks, and his first season coincided with the Seahawks' first season as an expansion team. They were terrible for much of his career, which negatively impacted Largent's recognition and honors/awards. For example, his QB for the first 7 1/2 seasons of his career was Jim Zorn... who made 0 Pro Bowls in his career and had a career 67 QB rating. Dave Krieg did make the Pro Bowl once in Largent's career, though... that's it. Meanwhile, the guys you named above played with much better QBs in general.
I agree Marvin Harrison not being on this list is a crying shame (2nd in receptions(Behind Only Rice)/6th in yards (Moss And TO are the only active players above him as are Tim Brown,Isaac Bruce And Jerry Rice)/5th in receiving TD's (Rice/Moss/TO/C.Carter)
I would remove Dorsett, Allen, and Nevers from the RB list and add in Harrison, Owens, and Largent. Allen had *1* great season and about 20 seasons playing like a 30 year old LT2 limping his way along with the Chargers. Dorsett never led the league in anything and is the only RB with any significant number of carries to have as many fumbles as he has TDs. Nevers played a grand total of 5 seasons in the 1920s even if it was both ways.I agree that Largent should have been on this list somewhere as he was steady and dependable every week (but then it leads to who would get bumped for him)I also agree that if TO was left off for his attitude (and he has mostly better numbers than Moss) then why wasn't moss left off for the same reasonMarvin Harrison is another head scratcher as he had two years in Indy before Peyton got there (1702 yds 14 td's without a franchise QB) so he always had the talentI'll have some more comments when I have more time, but wanted to start with WRs.1. This list ranks Michael Irvin as the 8th best WR of all time. That is laughable.2. I can only assume Harrison was left off for some combination of (a) voters thinking of him as being "made" by Manning and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.3. I can only assume Owens was left off for some combination of (a) voters not liking his character/attitude issues and (b) lack of compelling postseason performances.4. It is absolutely unforgivable to have left Steve Largent off this list. IMO he should have been no worse than 6th among WRs.
Yes, you are underrating him. I am not from the Pacific Northwest and never lived there, but I thought he was the best WR in the NFL for several years.
The majority of NFL fans didn't even know he was. Dead serious. They were West Coast pre-ESPN dominance never on MNF and rarely good. Nobody played FF back then so nobody scoured stats like they were Bill James.
Every year the Honolulu would roll around and we'd be like, "Oh yeah, that cat in Seattle...he's good, right?"
Guess its a perception thing, and I am underrating him. But please, I promise you, nobody outside of the pacific northwest thought he was the best contemporaneously.
You're just way off on this. I'm 37 and grew up in the midwest. There was Steve Largent and the Seahawks were good and on TV plenty, then there was Art Monk, and then there was Jerry Rice. No one knew or cared about John Jefferson or Stanley Morgan or anyone else you listed (except maybe James Lofton but not thought of as better than Largent). Largent was the best in his day and that's just how it was. Doesn't have to do with scouring stats.
The majority of NFL fans didn't even know he was. Dead serious. They were West Coast pre-ESPN dominance never on MNF and rarely good. Nobody played FF back then so nobody scoured stats like they were Bill James.
Every year the Honolulu would roll around and we'd be like, "Oh yeah, that cat in Seattle...he's good, right?"
Guess its a perception thing, and I am underrating him. But please, I promise you, nobody outside of the pacific northwest thought he was the best contemporaneously.
Separated the LB's and the OLOLB3 Lawrence Taylor 35 Chuck Bednarik 60 Jack Ham 69 Bobby Bell 82 Ted Hendricks 97 Derrick Brooks MLB10 **** Butkus 18 Ray Lewis 29 Jack Lambert 47 Ray Nitschke 53 Willie Lanier 57 Mike Singletary 84 Joe Schmidt 93 Sam Huff Centers63 Jim Otto 68 Mike Webster 96 Mel Hein Guards24 John Hannah 56 Gene Upshaw 78 Bruce Matthews 95 Larry Allen Tackles12 Anthony Munoz 32 Jim Parker 54 Forrest Gregg 72 Jonathan Ogden 76 Art Shell
A loafing Moss is an offensive supercharger and still most likely going to be 2nd in every major receiving category. Harrison was good but not nearly as good as Moss. Give Moss Manning through the prime of his career and I am pretty sure there would be zero debate between Moss and everyone not named Rice.
I completely agree. *Everyone* who followed football knew Largent was great.
The second half of his career, sure. But not the first half (at least as I remember it).Too bad Zorn coached the Redskins, now everybody just remembers him as a dufus. He was a pretty fun QB back in the day. They weren't that good (well, they were A LOT better than Tampa Bay under McKay), but Zorn scrambled around and was always chucking deep balls. He may not have been a pro bowler, but he was competent (top 10-15ish).Yes, you are underrating him. I am not from the Pacific Northwest and never lived there, but I thought he was the best WR in the NFL for several years.
The majority of NFL fans didn't even know he was. Dead serious. They were West Coast pre-ESPN dominance never on MNF and rarely good. Nobody played FF back then so nobody scoured stats like they were Bill James.
Every year the Honolulu would roll around and we'd be like, "Oh yeah, that cat in Seattle...he's good, right?"
Guess its a perception thing, and I am underrating him. But please, I promise you, nobody outside of the pacific northwest thought he was the best contemporaneously.
In Largent's first seven years, he made 3 pro bowls (0 All Pro). He made four straight after he hit 30. Def was a late bloomer recognition wise, yet his production years 2-6 is slightly better than years 8-12.Anyway, should be on the list, but I still don't see a compelling argument to have him very high up.
Biggest problem with moss is the Me Me Me attitude he has (How many rings does he have) Harrison was always TEAM First (How many rings does he have)
So you were 3 years old when Largent was a rookie...and 5 when he made his first pro bowl.OK, you're right, he was really, really famous back in the late 70s.
Their attitudes have zero bearing on how many rings they had. Are you really arguing that the Pats lost the SB because Moss had a me me me attitude? They lost due to one of the luckiest throws in NFL history combined with a ton of extra clock stoppages.
early and mid 80's. He broke all sorts of records and announcers would rave about him every game he played.
Ha! That's awesome, thanks.Nobody remembers Wayne Walker, he started the year after Detroit won its last NFL Championship *(1958-72). Never missed a game. Used to be their FG kicker for years. Anyway, I met him at a charity basketball game. Hard to believe now, but back then the Lions would barnstorm across the state playing exhibition basketball games. It was a lot of Globetrotters type schtick. They played a group of townies (ex- local jocks and teachers), and he pulled me out of the stands during the first half to shoot a free throw. I made it, and they won by a single point.
Yep.Sorry, I was being a bit obtuse. His best years (1977-81) he wasn't that well known. After the strike season, he def got a lot of recognition (1983-87). Right around the time Zorn got phased out for Kreig.
That is a great story. That WOULD NEVER happen in today's NFL. You can hardly get some players to interact with fans!Ha! That's awesome, thanks.Nobody remembers Wayne Walker, he started the year after Detroit won its last NFL Championship *(1958-72). Never missed a game. Used to be their FG kicker for years. Anyway, I met him at a charity basketball game. Hard to believe now, but back then the Lions would barnstorm across the state playing exhibition basketball games. It was a lot of Globetrotters type schtick. They played a group of townies (ex- local jocks and teachers), and he pulled me out of the stands during the first half to shoot a free throw. I made it, and they won by a single point.
That was back in the day when guys all had off season jobs. Can you imagine an NFL team putting together a charity basketball team that spent months traveling around by bus playing in high school gyms?
It doesn't matter where Moss might end up some day; since this list was made now, it matters what his numbers are right now. As for the Moss/Manning thing, Manning would never put up with a guy who loafs as much as Moss does. Heck, he gets made at WRs who run the wrong routes; can you imagine what he would do with a guy who loafs it as much as Moss does. Brady and Moss lasted a little over two full seasons together ('08 doesn't count since Brady missed almost the entire season); Manning and Moss would not have lasted that long. Besides, this is pure speculation on both our parts, so it doesn't really matter. Players are ultimately judged on what they did do, not what they could have done.
His numbers *right now* put him ahead of Harrison in both yardage and TDs.
Harrison would never make any list of elite WR's I made because he was a wimp. His routinely running out of bounds was a total joke. Factor in that Manning and the elite Colts offense MADE HIM, and he had no business sniffing the company of Moss, TO, Rice, et al.Watching the Don Hutson footage had me HOWLING, though! Yeah, Don Hutson was probably pretty fast. But my GOD can anyone imagine what Randy Moss would have done to those lead footed ALL WHITE DB's? Watching Hutson made me think about Grisham's book about Playing for Pizza about how somebody with talent stood out amongs the average rec league guy. Not sure how anyone would project these people into an argument amongst modern players who are the elite athletes in the history of the human race...
Bobby Layne had three rings. WTF??!!!!
ETA: head scratcher
The same could be said of Rice having both Montana And Young throwing to him/Berry - Unitas/Irvin - Aikman Then
