Jerry Rice vs. Randy Moss (1 Viewer)

[Saints-Man]

....New offensive philosophy. Brian Billick went to the Ravens after the '98 season.

Ah...you mean someone besides Randy Moss had an influence into this?

 

[dgreen]

He has been very inconsistent in his career when he is and when he is not into the game.

I disagree. He's been very consistent. If the team is good and has a chance to win, he plays. If they are bad and are out of it, he "takes plays off." Now, I completely agree that damages his claim to be GOAT and is what will keep him from it. But, he's not inconsistent. In fact, it's pretty easy to figure out how to get the most out of him: Make him happy! If you have a talent like Moss, you should do everything you can to help him reach his full potential because that will help the team reach their full potential.

 

[dgreen]

Put Moss on Frisco in the mid 80's to mid 90's -- He has numbers that would at worst = Rice.

I don't think neccsarily think so. SF offense(at least then) was based on precise route-running, an aspect of Moss' game where he is below par.

I think Walsh would have adapted to use Moss' talents.

 

[dgreen]

....New offensive philosophy. Brian Billick went to the Ravens after the '98 season.

Ah...you mean someone besides Randy Moss had an influence into this?

Of course. Nobody is saying Moss did all that by himself. Football is the ultimate team game. There are many factors to why a team succeeds or fails. But, you can look at the offenses Moss was a member of and they tend to do well despite other things around him changing.The reason they dropped 150+ points in one season is because 556 is a lot of freakin' points. You're acting like 399 points in a season is bad.

 

[Sidewinder16]

....New offensive philosophy. Brian Billick went to the Ravens after the '98 season.

Ah...you mean someone besides Randy Moss had an influence into this?

You asked this...

What other reason for their low offensive output if everyone, including Moss, was healthy?

...and received an extremely legitimate answer. I'm not following your response. Despite the Vikings scoring 150 less points as a team, due to coaching changes, Moss improves upon his receptions and yards from '98 to '99. Are you trying to suggest that Moss is to blame for the reduction in offensive output and therefore not a good WR?And your repeated assertion that Moss was not the #1 receiver in Minnesota is a half-truth, at best. In their four years together, Moss averaged 75/1349/13 and Carter averaged 84/1099/10. Using just number of receptions to insinuate that Moss wasn't as, if not more, important to the team than Carter was, is extremely misleading.

 

[dgreen]

How can you cite stats that show Moss wasn't even the best on his own team and use them that he was one of the greatest of all time?

I don't know, but people have tried in Art Monk threads.

To be fair, David, I have never heard anyone argue that Art Monk was one of the GOAT. I have only read that he deserves to be in the HOF.

Plus, what we do in Art Monk threads is say that he WAS the best on his own team despite Clark's stats.

 

[gigantor]

I believe that Moss' play in NE is more a factor of Brady than Brady's numbers are a factor of Moss.

So the QB who never topped 28 TDs is the reason the WR who is already 5th in all time TD receptions is doing well?Moss has made many average QBs looked phenomenal.

This is why he gets my vote for MVP so far this year.

 

[azgroover]

I believe that Moss' play in NE is more a factor of Brady than Brady's numbers are a factor of Moss.

So the QB who never topped 28 TDs is the reason the WR who is already 5th in all time TD receptions is doing well?Moss has made many average QBs looked phenomenal.

This is why he gets my vote for MVP so far this year.

I'm in this camp as well. See my Moss For MVP thread.

 

[Saints-Man]

....New offensive philosophy. Brian Billick went to the Ravens after the '98 season.

Ah...you mean someone besides Randy Moss had an influence into this?

Of course. Nobody is saying Moss did all that by himself. Football is the ultimate team game. There are many factors to why a team succeeds or fails. But, you can look at the offenses Moss was a member of and they tend to do well despite other things around him changing.The reason they dropped 150+ points in one season is because 556 is a lot of freakin' points. You're acting like 399 points in a season is bad.

I am not. The season before Moss arrived they scored 354 points is not bad either. I was solely alluding to the fact that TANAC implied that the SOLE reason they jumped scored that many points is Randy Moss. You and I are agreeing on the same point. Yes, Moss is a player with great talent. I have no way attempted to deny that. But in this thread we are debating whether or not he is the 2nd greatest WR of all-time. I think when you combine all factors, he is in the 5-10 range. For a league that has been around 75+ years, that is not an insult. But the point of this thread is to split hairs.

 

[Ilov80s]

The gap is Moss >>> Rice. HTH

Right now, you won't find one intelligent person who claims Jerry Rice was not the greatest WR of all time.

Jerry Rice is the healthiest great WR of all time. He also is the only WR and probably only NFL player that you could divide their career up into two distinct careers and both of them would be HOF worthy.

If Moss stays healthy and puts up a few more years like this in NE and wins some Super Bowls, he could make the same claim. The Minny years certainly qualified as HOF.

 

[Saints-Man]

....New offensive philosophy. Brian Billick went to the Ravens after the '98 season.

Ah...you mean someone besides Randy Moss had an influence into this?

You asked this...

What other reason for their low offensive output if everyone, including Moss, was healthy?

...and received an extremely legitimate answer. I'm not following your response. Despite the Vikings scoring 150 less points as a team, due to coaching changes, Moss improves upon his receptions and yards from '98 to '99. Are you trying to suggest that Moss is to blame for the reduction in offensive output and therefore not a good WR?And your repeated assertion that Moss was not the #1 receiver in Minnesota is a half-truth, at best. In their four years together, Moss averaged 75/1349/13 and Carter averaged 84/1099/10. Using just number of receptions to insinuate that Moss wasn't as, if not more, important to the team than Carter was, is extremely misleading.

I couldn't disagree more with your last point. Until Carter retired, he was the #1 WR on that team. He was the first option in the passing game even when Moss was there. The number of catches are the appropriate barometer for that. Moss was an outstanding WR, but still #2 to Carter in every conceivable means during those years. Carter was a team leader and the #1 option in the passing game. Yes, this team took advantage of Moss' talents(as well they should), but Carter was the straw that stirred the drink in the passing game.

 

[Assani Fisher]

...



I think you're vastly underestimating how good Moss is?

I am not. Is it possible that you are vastly overestimating how good Moss is.This is not about talent evaluation. This is about performance. One TD is worth 6 points,that is all. If Moss makes a great one-handed catch over 2 defenders, that is one TD. It counts the same when Harrison runs such a perfect route that he creates separation from the defense(w/o pushing off btw) and catches a pass with some breathing room. From your posts, I am inferring that in these two cases you see Moss as vastly superior. I see them as different levels of greatness.

Moss also regularly drops easy passes when going over the middle (2-3 examples of that in the Indy game), a factor which you seem to ignore.

He is a poor route runner, even though he has improved some this year. I think you are getting swayed by the 'wow' factor of some of his catches. Some are amazing, I agree. But being great is about playing with consistency, and Moss is severly lacking in that regard over the span of his career.

You are greatly underrating the impact that a QB has on his WR's numbers. Take look at the guys you mentioned: Rice(montana/young), Irvin(aikman), and Harrison(manning)....its not a coincidence that they all had such great QBs.

 

[Assani Fisher]

I have not included 2007 in these stats. If he continues at his current pace(definitely a great year) and plays this way for several more years, that would add more data to the argument. But, if he should decide to stop playing football tomorrow, I don't think his numbers would be HOF much less in the argument for GOAT.

What planet are you from?

The same planet that keeps Art Monk out of the HOF with better numbers.....w/ exception of TDs...

LOL, take a look at each stat per year played and its not close.

 

[Ghost Rider]

In 28 playoff games, Jerry Rice only caught 1 pass in one game. Moss has now caught only one pass into two straight playoff games.

And in 3 conference championship games, Moss now has a grand total of 9-111-1. Not very impressive, is it?

In other words, Moss has failed to made the huge gap between him and Jerry Rice any smaller. Rice always stepped it up in the postseason.

 

[massraider]

In 28 playoff games, Jerry Rice only caught 1 pass in one game. Moss has now caught only one pass into two straight playoff games. And in 3 conference championship games, Moss now has a grand total of 9-111-1. Not very impressive, is it? In other words, Moss has failed to made the huge gap between him and Jerry Rice any smaller. Rice always stepped it up in the postseason.

He just always stepped up, period.The difference to me, and the reason I'd take Rice, is that if the 49ers were looking for a big play from a wideout, they looked to Rice. Same with Moss' teams. But when the 49ers HAD to have a 1st down on 3rd and 3, they looked to Rice also. Moss' teams looked elsewhere.Rice was never the deep threat Moss was, but his abilities as a grinder are what separate him.

 

[TBIST]

If I could pick between the two, I'd take Randy Moss. His abilities are unmatched. I'll take an underacheiving (funny that he's this good for such a slouch) great over an overacheiving good player.

 

[jurb26]

I've never in my life have I seen opposing defenses pay so much attention to a WR as they do Moss. This playoff season is only a small sample of what Moss has put up with for 90% of his career. Moss has also played with several questionable QBs. Yet his numbers are still incredible. Moss is the best I've ever seen.

 

[jurb26]

But when the 49ers HAD to have a 1st down on 3rd and 3, they looked to Rice also. Moss' teams looked elsewhere.

It's funny how easy that can be when Moss is double and triple covered....

 

[Phurfur]

But when the 49ers HAD to have a 1st down on 3rd and 3, they looked to Rice also. Moss' teams looked elsewhere.

It's funny how easy that can be when Moss is double and triple covered....

Oh, I didn't know Rice had single coverage.

 

[jurb26]

But when the 49ers HAD to have a 1st down on 3rd and 3, they looked to Rice also. Moss' teams looked elsewhere.

It's funny how easy that can be when Moss is double and triple covered....

Oh, I didn't know Rice had single coverage.

Far more than Moss is.

 

[428143]

From a pure talent perspective, it's very, very close. I'd take Rice, but Moss is THE freak...

 

[jurb26]

From a pure talent perspective, it's very, very close. I'd take Rice, but Moss is THE freak...

I think most would disagree. Moss is vastly more talented in the eyes of most people. Rice was a better technician and had better work ethic to separate him from the field.

 

[massraider]

But when the 49ers HAD to have a 1st down on 3rd and 3, they looked to Rice also. Moss' teams looked elsewhere.

It's funny how easy that can be when Moss is double and triple covered....

Oh, I didn't know Rice had single coverage.

Far more than Moss is.

Doesn't change the fact that the guy is one-dimensional.

 

[Tau837]

From a pure talent perspective, it's very, very close. I'd take Rice, but Moss is THE freak...

I think most would disagree. Moss is vastly more talented in the eyes of most people. Rice was a better technician and had better work ethic to separate him from the field.

Moss is faster, taller, and can jump higher. There is more to talent than that. I think calling Moss *vastly* more talented is an overstatement.

 

[Rev]

I've never in my life have I seen opposing defenses pay so much attention to a WR as they do Moss. This playoff season is only a small sample of what Moss has put up with for 90% of his career. Moss has also played with several questionable QBs. Yet his numbers are still incredible. Moss is the best I've ever seen.

Not true. Before this season, Moss had several years with average QBs, and his stats were quite pedestrian for a 'superstar.' I actually would give Rice the nod on the talent scale. He had modest physical gifts compared to Moss, but he still dominated far more consistantly than Moss has. To me, that's talent, which includes all sorts of intangibles.

 

[J-Rock]

If you compare Moss' first 10 seasons (up to current) with Rice's first 10 the numbers are pretty close. Jerry leads by 7 td's and 482 yards.

The key for Randy will be wether he can maintain his pace for another 10 seasons. He will need to average 1,070.2 yards and 7.3 TD's for 10 years!!! Jerry averaged 962 yards and 6.6 TD's over his final 10 seasons (this includes 1997 where he missed virtually the entire year due to injury).

Could it happen? I suppose it is possible but I would say highly unlikely. Everyone seems to acknoledge that Moss' success comes primarily as a result of his athletic abilities (size, speed, leaping, etc.). We all know that these physical atributes start to fade as a player ages. I don't think Randy has the intangables Jerry had that will allow him to be productive through his late 30's and early 40's.

There is just no way IMO that Randy's body or will to play hold up long enough to challenge Rice's career records.

 

[Delusions Of Adequacy]

Moss broke Rice's season TD record this year with 23 TDs in 16 games.

Rice set the record with 22 TDs in a strike-shortened 12 game season.

Nuff said.

 

[jurb26]

But when the 49ers HAD to have a 1st down on 3rd and 3, they looked to Rice also. Moss' teams looked elsewhere.

It's funny how easy that can be when Moss is double and triple covered....

Oh, I didn't know Rice had single coverage.

Far more than Moss is.

Doesn't change the fact that the guy is one-dimensional.

Well, when people start throwing arguments like this around you know the debate is useless.

 

[jurb26]

There is just no way IMO that Randy's body or will to play hold up long enough to challenge Rice's career records.

That does not mean that he was/is not better.

 

[Jercules]

The best thing going for supporters of Moss in this argument, IMO, is the fact that the two highest scoring offenses in football history featured him. You could come up with some reasons for that that don't necessarily put him above Rice - my personal opinion is that Moss is the greatest deep threat to ever play the game. Safeties need to stay back because the guy is automatic covered 1-1, especially deep downfield. It's ridiculous how easy that can make things for an offense (how many times have you seen Maroney leisurely catch a screen pass, as if it were a kickoff, and proceed to run 30 yards because Moss took 2 guys completely out of the play? What can you do?)

That being said, nobody busted his a** like Jerry Rice. He had plenty of talent, but he had a heart like no one else, and I for one admire the guy for playing until nobody wanted him anymore (screw that Elway, "going out on top" BS - the fact that Jerry Rice had such a complete addiction to football that he'd lower himself to fighting for roster spots despite being football royalty... it shows you what made him so great to begin with. You've gotta love him for staying away from the announcing booth too, and coaching - all the guy ever cared about was PLAYING). People say he had Montana - hell no, Montana had HIM. As did Steve Young. Neither of those guys did anything in the brief periods of their careers that they were Riceless.

I'm a Pats fan, and I honestly think Moss has been given a bad rap (why would anybody care, playing for Oakland that year? Not even the owner cared, he hired ART SHELL for chrissakes!) That being said, in the long run, he isn't a pimple on the a** of Jerry Rice.

 

[thecatch]

People say he had Montana - hell no, Montana had HIM. As did Steve Young. Neither of those guys did anything in the brief periods of their careers that they were Riceless.

Completely agree with the gist of your post, but Montana did win a super bowl without him

 

[thecatch]

But when the 49ers HAD to have a 1st down on 3rd and 3, they looked to Rice also. Moss' teams looked elsewhere.

It's funny how easy that can be when Moss is double and triple covered....

Oh, I didn't know Rice had single coverage.

Far more than Moss is.

really?

 

[Tau837]

People say he had Montana - hell no, Montana had HIM. As did Steve Young. Neither of those guys did anything in the brief periods of their careers that they were Riceless.

Before Rice joined the 49ers, Montana did these things:- Won 2 Super Bowls- Was 2 Super Bowl MVPs- Made All Pro 3 times- Made 3 Pro Bowls- Led the league in TD passes once and finished in the top 4 two other times- Finished in the top 8 in passing yards 4 timesYeah, he was definitely nothing without Rice.

 

[dgreen]

People say he had Montana - hell no, Montana had HIM. As did Steve Young. Neither of those guys did anything in the brief periods of their careers that they were Riceless.

Completely agree with the gist of your post, but Montana did win a super bowl without him

2 Super Bowls w/o Rice.

 

[delusional]

...I would put M. Harrison over him as of today......

I would do so also, and by a large margin. I was attempting to stick to someone who was retired.

I don't know. I watch Harrison and think, "Nice play. He's good." I watch Moss and think, "Wow! That was awesome!"

Thing is you can say that about almost every play with Marvin. With Moss, maybe once every 2 games.

 

[Jercules]

People say he had Montana - hell no, Montana had HIM. As did Steve Young. Neither of those guys did anything in the brief periods of their careers that they were Riceless.

Before Rice joined the 49ers, Montana did these things:- Won a Super Bowl- Was Super Bowl MVP- Made All Pro 3 times- Made 3 Pro Bowls- Led the league in TD passes once and finished in the top 4 two other times- Finished in the top 8 in passing yards 4 timesYeah, he was definitely nothing without Rice.

I exaggerated with my post, and I apologize. Nonetheless, these stats you mention describe a lot of decent to good QBs that haven't come close to the profile of Joe Montana. In another thread on this board he his being vehemently argued as the greatest ever - my contention remains that wouldn't be possible without Jerry Rice.

 

[David Yudkin]

If you compare Moss' first 10 seasons (up to current) with Rice's first 10 the numbers are pretty close. Jerry leads by 7 td's and 482 yards. The key for Randy will be wether he can maintain his pace for another 10 seasons. He will need to average 1,070.2 yards and 7.3 TD's for 10 years!!! Jerry averaged 962 yards and 6.6 TD's over his final 10 seasons (this includes 1997 where he missed virtually the entire year due to injury). Could it happen? I suppose it is possible but I would say highly unlikely. Everyone seems to acknoledge that Moss' success comes primarily as a result of his athletic abilities (size, speed, leaping, etc.). We all know that these physical atributes start to fade as a player ages. I don't think Randy has the intangables Jerry had that will allow him to be productive through his late 30's and early 40's.There is just no way IMO that Randy's body or will to play hold up long enough to challenge Rice's career records.

IMO, it's not how many seasons you've played that should be used by comparison but age, as in theory that would be a better way to evaluate how many seasons player might have left. Through age 30 . . .Moss: 774-12193-124Rice: 610-10273-103However, AFTER age 30, Rice went on to compile 939-12622-94 (which is absolutely statistical insanity). By comparion, the second best totasl for 31+ year old WRs 599-7754-45.I certainly do not expect Moss to play into his early 40s, so if he is to catch Rice statistically in any of these categories, he will have to have more seasons like he did this year.

 

[Marc Levin]

If I could pick between the two, I'd take Randy Moss. His abilities are unmatched. I'll take an underacheiving (funny that he's this good for such a slouch) great over an overacheiving good player.

If this is your description of Jerry Rice, it might be the most unintentionally funny thing I've read in the Shark Pool.

 

[Marc Levin]

But when the 49ers HAD to have a 1st down on 3rd and 3, they looked to Rice also. Moss' teams looked elsewhere.

It's funny how easy that can be when Moss is double and triple covered....

Oh, I didn't know Rice had single coverage.

Far more than Moss is.

You need to break down old film - Rice is what Harrison tries to be. The guy split more double teams and ran away from coverage after the catch more often than I can count. There is no clear "better" between the two because they are different kinds of WRs. Moss is a physical freak - no doubt one of the most talented athletically to ever play the game. But, as an NFL wide receiver, Jerry Rice is the best the game has ever seen. Moss has a little ways to go, including showing Rice's desire for the game, before he can sniff the legend.

 

[Marc Levin]

- Won a Super Bowl- Was Super Bowl MVP- Made All Pro 3 times- Made 3 Pro Bowls- Led the league in TD passes once and finished in the top 4 two other times- Finished in the top 8 in passing yards 4 times

these stats you mention describe a lot of decent to good QBs

Really? Name 10 with all these stats. "a lot of decent to good" QBs? You should have no problem finding a bunch with ALL these stats, right?

 

[thecatch]

But when the 49ers HAD to have a 1st down on 3rd and 3, they looked to Rice also. Moss' teams looked elsewhere.

It's funny how easy that can be when Moss is double and triple covered....

Oh, I didn't know Rice had single coverage.

Far more than Moss is.

You need to break down old film - Rice is what Harrison tries to be. The guy split more double teams and ran away from coverage after the catch more often than I can count. There is no clear "better" between the two because they are different kinds of WRs. Moss is a physical freak - no doubt one of the most talented athletically to ever play the game. But, as an NFL wide receiver, Jerry Rice is the best the game has ever seen. Moss has a little ways to go, including showing Rice's desire for the game, before he can sniff the legend.

IMO it might seem like Moss is double teamed more because, if you do double team him and keep him from getting those long passes, he completely disapears. Rice made plays all over the field, you couldn't just shut him down by having another guy shadow him deep.

 

[Maroney=Speed]

- Won a Super Bowl- Was Super Bowl MVP- Made All Pro 3 times- Made 3 Pro Bowls- Led the league in TD passes once and finished in the top 4 two other times- Finished in the top 8 in passing yards 4 times

these stats you mention describe a lot of decent to good QBs

Really? Name 10 with all these stats. "a lot of decent to good" QBs? You should have no problem finding a bunch with ALL these stats, right?

Dan Marino, Never won a Super Bowl.P.Manning.B.Favrejercules I think thats it. Jercules there may be more, but all of the above are locks for the HOF.Even that Marino got in without winning the Super Bowl. I guess they let anybody in now. Yes, this was a silly statement, my guess is you wanted someone to lookup these things for you.Sorry I can't help there.

 

[FUBAR]

- Won a Super Bowl

- Was Super Bowl MVP

- Made All Pro 3 times

- Made 3 Pro Bowls

- Led the league in TD passes once and finished in the top 4 two other times

- Finished in the top 8 in passing yards 4 times

these stats you mention describe a lot of decent to good QBs

Really? Name 10 with all these stats. "a lot of decent to good" QBs? You should have no problem finding a bunch with ALL these stats, right?

The first limiting factor has to be SB MVP.

I can't seem to format this properly, so a link

There's only 16, how many of these had the other stats?

All-Pro 3x:

Montana, Starr, Namath, Bradshaw, Staubach, Dawson, Elway, Young, and Peyton. That's 9.

Warner was only all-pro 2x, Rypien, Brady and Simms 1x, Williams and Plunkett never.

Seems most of those 9 led the league in TD passes at least once, I am guessing (too lazy to look) the top 4 and top 8 stats are also there.

Sorry, can't do 10. Only 9 with Desi over Favre in XXXI, we'll have to wait until Brady plays a few more years.

He did say "a lot of decent to good" QBs, these 10 are among the best to ever play the position. Aside from Marino's absence of a SB win, Brady's lack of all-pro appearances so far, and Favre, these are probably 10 of the best 13 QBs ever.

 

[Marc Levin]

- Won a Super Bowl- Was Super Bowl MVP- Made All Pro 3 times- Made 3 Pro Bowls- Led the league in TD passes once and finished in the top 4 two other times- Finished in the top 8 in passing yards 4 times

these stats you mention describe a lot of decent to good QBs

Really? Name 10 with all these stats. "a lot of decent to good" QBs? You should have no problem finding a bunch with ALL these stats, right?

Dan Marino, Never won a Super Bowl.P.Manning.B.Favrejercules I think thats it. Jercules there may be more, but all of the above are locks for the HOF.Even that Marino got in without winning the Super Bowl. I guess they let anybody in now. Yes, this was a silly statement, my guess is you wanted someone to lookup these things for you.Sorry I can't help there.

Add Tom Brady, right?

 

[FUBAR]

- Won a Super Bowl- Was Super Bowl MVP- Made All Pro 3 times- Made 3 Pro Bowls- Led the league in TD passes once and finished in the top 4 two other times- Finished in the top 8 in passing yards 4 times

these stats you mention describe a lot of decent to good QBs

Really? Name 10 with all these stats. "a lot of decent to good" QBs? You should have no problem finding a bunch with ALL these stats, right?

Dan Marino, Never won a Super Bowl.P.Manning.B.Favrejercules I think thats it. Jercules there may be more, but all of the above are locks for the HOF.Even that Marino got in without winning the Super Bowl. I guess they let anybody in now. Yes, this was a silly statement, my guess is you wanted someone to lookup these things for you.Sorry I can't help there.

don't worry, I got you started. (yes, I'm kind of a with this stuff)

 

[Marc Levin]

- Won a Super Bowl

- Was Super Bowl MVP

- Made All Pro 3 times

- Made 3 Pro Bowls

- Led the league in TD passes once and finished in the top 4 two other times

- Finished in the top 8 in passing yards 4 times

these stats you mention describe a lot of decent to good QBs

Really? Name 10 with all these stats. "a lot of decent to good" QBs? You should have no problem finding a bunch with ALL these stats, right?

The first limiting factor has to be SB MVP.

I can't seem to format this properly, so a link

There's only 16, how many of these had the other stats?

All-Pro 3x:

Montana, Starr, Namath, Bradshaw, Staubach, Dawson, Elway, Young, and Peyton. That's 9.

Warner was only all-pro 2x, Rypien, Brady and Simms 1x, Williams and Plunkett never.

Seems most of those 9 led the league in TD passes at least once, I am guessing (too lazy to look) the top 4 and top 8 stats are also there.

Sorry, can't do 10. Only 9 with Desi over Favre in XXXI, we'll have to wait until Brady plays a few more years.

He did say "a lot of decent to good" QBs, these 10 are among the best to ever play the position. Aside from Marino's absence of a SB win, Brady's lack of all-pro appearances so far, and Favre, these are probably 10 of the best 13 QBs ever.

Let's make it easier and remove the S.B. MVP requirement. Winning a Super Bowl is a requirement, though (in fact, pre-Rice, Montana won TWO Super Bowls - '81/'84, so I think two S.B. appearances is a minimum with one win).

 

[Marc Levin]

- Won a Super Bowl

- Was Super Bowl MVP

- Made All Pro 3 times

- Made 3 Pro Bowls

- Led the league in TD passes once and finished in the top 4 two other times

- Finished in the top 8 in passing yards 4 times

these stats you mention describe a lot of decent to good QBs

Really? Name 10 with all these stats. "a lot of decent to good" QBs? You should have no problem finding a bunch with ALL these stats, right?

Dan Marino, Never won a Super Bowl.P.Manning.

B.Favre

jercules I think thats it. Jercules there may be more, but all of the above are locks for the HOF.

Even that Marino got in without winning the Super Bowl. I guess they let anybody in now.

Yes, this was a silly statement, my guess is you wanted someone to lookup these things for you.

Sorry I can't help there.

don't worry, I got you started. (yes, I'm kind of a with this stuff)

Nope - I assumed noone would be able to do it. Trust me, if I wanted an answer, I know how to go about doing the research.That FUBAR found 9 that possibly fit the statistics has me

 

[softball]

This , but is it serious?

Randy Moss isn't as good as Terrell Owens. Periood. Owens blocks, goes over the middle, plays hurt and comes up big in big games.

And for the stat needy, this is Moss' first season of 1200+ yards since 2003!

Career:

Moss: 12,193 yards 124 Tds 79 yards per game

Owens 13,070 yrads 129 Tds 75 yards per game

Funny that someone would start this thread AFTER Moss has a great season.

I would take Owens over any WR in history BUT Rice. And I'm no fan of his personality.

 

[Maroney=Speed]

- Won a Super Bowl

- Was Super Bowl MVP

- Made All Pro 3 times

- Made 3 Pro Bowls

- Led the league in TD passes once and finished in the top 4 two other times

- Finished in the top 8 in passing yards 4 times

these stats you mention describe a lot of decent to good QBs

Really? Name 10 with all these stats. "a lot of decent to good" QBs? You should have no problem finding a bunch with ALL these stats, right?

The first limiting factor has to be SB MVP.

I can't seem to format this properly, so a link

There's only 16, how many of these had the other stats?

All-Pro 3x:

Montana, Starr, Namath, Bradshaw, Staubach, Dawson, Elway, Young, and Peyton. That's 9.

Warner was only all-pro 2x, Rypien, Brady and Simms 1x, Williams and Plunkett never.

Seems most of those 9 led the league in TD passes at least once, I am guessing (too lazy to look) the top 4 and top 8 stats are also there.

Sorry, can't do 10. Only 9 with Desi over Favre in XXXI, we'll have to wait until Brady plays a few more years.

He did say "a lot of decent to good" QBs, these 10 are among the best to ever play the position. Aside from Marino's absence of a SB win, Brady's lack of all-pro appearances so far, and Favre, these are probably 10 of the best 13 QBs ever.

MontanaElway

Staubach

Peyton

Bradshaw

Young

Namath

Starr

Dawson

Is how I would rank them. If Brady makes list slide him alittle over Montana looking up to just one person.

 

[Maroney=Speed]

- Won a Super Bowl- Was Super Bowl MVP- Made All Pro 3 times- Made 3 Pro Bowls- Led the league in TD passes once and finished in the top 4 two other times- Finished in the top 8 in passing yards 4 times

these stats you mention describe a lot of decent to good QBs

Really? Name 10 with all these stats. "a lot of decent to good" QBs? You should have no problem finding a bunch with ALL these stats, right?

Dan Marino, Never won a Super Bowl.P.Manning.B.Favrejercules I think thats it. Jercules there may be more, but all of the above are locks for the HOF.Even that Marino got in without winning the Super Bowl. I guess they let anybody in now. Yes, this was a silly statement, my guess is you wanted someone to lookup these things for you.Sorry I can't help there.

Add Tom Brady, right?

Yep, DONE.