Darth Tater Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 IMO:QB: Baugh, Steve Young, Marino HB: Barry Sanders, Jim Brown TE: Ditka, Mackey, Sharpe (I think Gates will be considered among the tops when he retires) WR: Rice DL: White, Green, Deacon Jones LBer: L. Taylor, Butkus, R. Lewis CB: Night Train, D. Green S: R. Lott I'm obviously leaving some out, but these guys are all top 5 minimum at their position, if not top 3, IMO Jim Brown was a FB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Wait a sec...didn't you say this earlier?That was after VT said: So, when someone else says it, they're wrong. But when you, almighty BS say it, you're right. And we're supposed to take you seriously? Top 5 WRs Jerry Rice Fred Biletnikoff Randy Moss Art Monk Cris Carter Irvin doesn't even come close. I said "pretty much". Wasn't sure at first if I would include Irvin or not, then after doing a little research, I figured he could possibly be top 5. You're reaching, bro. And if you don't think Irvin is worth of consideration then you haven't been paying attention. Then again, you aren't really old enough to have followed his whole career. ---------- Post added June-18th-2011 at 06:22 PM ---------- Hines Ward > Michael Irvin? LMAO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doncherry Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 [quote=Bubble Screen;8348382 [/color]Hines Ward > Michael Irvin? LMAO my thoughts exactly. In terms of DBs, Michael Haynes and Lester Hayes both deserve some love.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 I said "pretty much". Wasn't sure at first if I would include Irvin or not, then after doing a little research, I figured he could possibly be top 5. You're reaching, bro.And if you don't think Irvin is worth of consideration then you haven't been paying attention. Then again, you aren't really old enough to have followed his whole career. I'm also not really old enough to have followed Rice, Biletnikoff, Monk, or Carter their whole careers. But I know that they're closer to being in the GOAT argument than Irvin is. Please, enlighten me as to how you give Irvin the nod over Monk. Or are you just being anti-Redskin so you can call everyone who picks someone from the Skins a "homer" and act like you're better than them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 I'm also not really old enough to have followed Rice, Biletnikoff, Monk, or Carter their whole careers. But I know that they're closer to being in the GOAT argument than Irvin is.Please, enlighten me as to how you give Irvin the nod over Monk. Or are you just being anti-Redskin so you can call everyone who picks someone from the Skins a "homer" and act like you're better than them? Irvin and Monk would fall in about the same category. Wouldn't say someone was crazy for picking Monk in their top 5 over Irvin, but he wouldn't crack my top 5. And honestly, I'm not sure if Irvin would either. But Irvin and Moss are definitely in the 6-10 range, without a doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wwSEANd Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Irvin and Monk would fall in about the same category. Wouldn't say someone was crazy for picking Monk in their top 5 over Irvin, but he wouldn't crack my top 5. And honestly, I'm not sure if Irvin would either. But Irvin and Moss are definitely in the 6-10 range, without a doubt. Moss in the 6-10 range? i didn't think that anyone could justify him being anywhere other than #2. aside from Rice, who is ahead of Moss? (edit: i think you may have meant Monk when you wrote Moss. you were, after all, talking about Irvin-v-Monk for the rest of the post.) side note: i gave up long ago trying to argue for Randy Moss being better than Jerry Rice. i never saw Rice play, so i am biased against him. he had a versatility that Moss can't match, and a longevity that Moss seems unlikely to match. all that said, though, i have a question for people who have seen a lot of film on both players: could you say with confidence that Moss (at his absolute best) wasn't more of an impact player than Rice (at his absolute best)? i feel like a peak-condition and motivated Randy Moss was the most unstoppable wide receiver of all time. and yes, i realize that the fact that i have to preface that with "peak-condition and motivated" is exactly why he's not #1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 side note: i gave up long ago trying to argue for Randy Moss being better than Jerry Rice. i never saw Rice play, so i am biased against him. he had a versatility that Moss can't match, and a longevity that Moss seems unlikely to match. all that said, though, i have a question for people who have seen a lot of film on both players: could you say with confidence that Moss (at his absolute best) wasn't more of an impact player than Rice (at his absolute best)? i feel like a peak-condition and motivated Randy Moss was the most unstoppable wide receiver of all time. and yes, i realize that the fact that i have to preface that with "peak-condition and motivated" is exactly why he's not #1. Like you said, Rice brought it every play of every game, and deservedly is the GOAT receiver. Moss, at his best, was as much of a threat as Rice is, but even when he was in peak condition and motivated, still took plays off. However, if we're just going by ability, I would rank Moss as 1-B behind Rice's 1-A. Moss was an athletic freak, the first true "big" receiver. He can jump out of the building and has stickum for hands. He was unstoppable for his first few years in Minny because no one had ever had to defend someone of his measurables before; all quarterbacks had to do to was throw it in his area code and he would grab it. After about three or four years though, defensive backs got bigger and more athletic, and were able to defend him, which started him on the taking plays off. It became a known fact that if you harassed him enough at the beginning of the game, he essentially became a non-factor. As a specific example, Sean Taylor routinely defended Moss, and defended him well. I can only remember one time where Moss beat Sean. Every other time, Sean won the battle. Moss really wasn't the same "undefendable" player that he came into the league as until he came to the Patriots then - and even then he had to have Welker as Robin to his Batman to allow him to catch the record setting touchdowns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Irvin made his career by pushing off, played in a more pass-oriented offense than Monk, and didn't have to share the ball like Monk did. I mean, did Irvin play for a team with 3 1,000 yd receivers in the same season? And let's not act like attitude and professionalism shouldn't play a role. Randy Moss gets knocked, rightfully, for lack of versatility, motivation, didn't block, took plays off. Monk didn't do that, was Mr. Reliable on 3rd downs, didn't have altercations with teammates and try to stab them in the neck with scissors. If some of you cowboy fans want to trivialize Monk, we can do the same with Irvin, who made his career by pushing off, feuded with teammates, was injury-prone, and had many off field fiascoes. If you want to knock Monk for longevity, couldn't the same be done to Emmitt? Or how about the trolls look at it honestly, that all 3 of those players were great in their day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinthePRF Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Like you said, Rice brought it every play of every game, and deservedly is the GOAT receiver.Moss, at his best, was as much of a threat as Rice is, but even when he was in peak condition and motivated, still took plays off. However, if we're just going by ability, I would rank Moss as 1-B behind Rice's 1-A. Moss was an athletic freak, the first true "big" receiver. He can jump out of the building and has stickum for hands. He was unstoppable for his first few years in Minny because no one had ever had to defend someone of his measurables before; all quarterbacks had to do to was throw it in his area code and he would grab it. After about three or four years though, defensive backs got bigger and more athletic, and were able to defend him, which started him on the taking plays off. It became a known fact that if you harassed him enough at the beginning of the game, he essentially became a non-factor. As a specific example, Sean Taylor routinely defended Moss, and defended him well. I can only remember one time where Moss beat Sean. Every other time, Sean won the battle. Moss really wasn't the same "undefendable" player that he came into the league as until he came to the Patriots then - and even then he had to have Welker as Robin to his Batman to allow him to catch the record setting touchdowns. If you're going to give Welker credit for Moss' success at NE, you have to give Cris Carter some credit at the beginning of his career. The Vikes had a well rounded offense when Moss came into the league already, it wasn't Moss talent alone that helped him amass those early numbers. Ranking players on pure athletic ability is a slippery slope, want me to argue that Lawrence Phillips is a top 10 back? Lavar Arrington a top 10 LB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 If you're going to give Welker credit for Moss' success at NE, you have to give Cris Carter some credit at the beginning of his career. The Vikes had a well rounded offense when Moss came into the league already, it wasn't Moss talent alone that helped him amass those early numbers. Ranking players on pure athletic ability is a slippery slope, want me to argue that Lawrence Phillips is a top 10 back? Lavar Arrington a top 10 LB? I didn't mention it because yes, while having Carter helped Moss, it didn't help nearly as much as Welker did. The only reason I brought that up was because the question was asked that if Moss had Rice's work ethic, would he have surpassed him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Moss in the 6-10 range? i didn't think that anyone could justify him being anywhere other than #2. aside from Rice, who is ahead of Moss?(edit: i think you may have meant Monk when you wrote Moss. you were, after all, talking about Irvin-v-Monk for the rest of the post.) side note: i gave up long ago trying to argue for Randy Moss being better than Jerry Rice. i never saw Rice play, so i am biased against him. he had a versatility that Moss can't match, and a longevity that Moss seems unlikely to match. all that said, though, i have a question for people who have seen a lot of film on both players: could you say with confidence that Moss (at his absolute best) wasn't more of an impact player than Rice (at his absolute best)? i feel like a peak-condition and motivated Randy Moss was the most unstoppable wide receiver of all time. and yes, i realize that the fact that i have to preface that with "peak-condition and motivated" is exactly why he's not #1. Dude obviously I meant "Monk". Stop being silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skin'Em84 Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Dude obviously I meant "Monk". Stop being silly. Randy Monk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wwSEANd Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 Dude obviously I meant "Monk". Stop being silly. i did correct myself in the edit. everything after the edit has nothing to do with you. stop being presumptuous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.