Jerry Rice - the best player in NFL history?

[Warner2BruceTD]

Jerry Rice may not have been the most talented player to play at his position, nevermind the NFL...but there was no one, and I mean not one that could surpass Rice in work rate. You couldn't beat Rice because he would simply outwork you in ever facet of the game. While he wasn't a speed demon or a player with elite physical attributes as an athlete, he would beast those better athletes on opposing defenses with insane film study, the most precise route running you'll ever see, great vision, and a mind for the game that will simply outsmart you.

It is very difficult to even rank players by position in the NFL over the course of time, considering how ever evolving the NFL is...heck, there are some that would say Jerry is only the best Modern Era WR of all time, while giving major props to Don Hutson as the GOAT at the position. I'm not one of them, but there is a group out there that believe so.

BOLD: Um, Ric Flair? Bryan Danielson? Shawn Michaels? Pfffffft.

As for Hutson, he was more dominant as compared to his peers than probably any player in NFL history. The argument you would make against him, is that he couldnt play in Rice's era (similar to the pre shot clock/pre Russell/Wilt NBA players who were athletically inferior and took two handed set shots).

[FirstTimer]

Here is a question...why is Namath "overrated"?

He's in the HOF isn't he? ;)

I have never once seen Namath listed in any kind of "greatest" QB list

You need to VSN more ha

...Joe Namath, ability as a player aside, is a paramount character in the NFL's story.

Namath is a supporting actor in the story of the NFL. Lots of guys have had one great game or set a season record and don't go into the HOF. Namath made a career off of one game/one season. Him being in the HOF alone makes him overrated IMO.

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

He's in the HOF isn't he? ;)



You need to VSN more ha



Namath is a supporting actor in the story of the NFL. Lots of guys have had one great game or set a season record and don't go into the HOF. Namath made a career off of one game/one season. Him being in the HOF alone makes him overrated IMO.

I disagree that he is a player that has made a career on one game...Joe Namath was one of the most popular players (if not THE most popular) player in the entire sport...considering he was in the AFL, is huge. One of the key players of an entire generation of football...he was popular and he was a significant figure in what would eventually be an AFL/NFL merger.

[FirstTimer]

I disagree that he is a player that has made a career on one game...Joe Namath was one of the most popular players (if not THE most popular) player in the entire sport...considering he was in the AFL, is huge. One of the key players of an entire generation of football...he was popular and he was a significant figure in what would eventually be an AFL/NFL merger.

Meh, I wasn't alive then so I won't attest to how popular he was but whenever I consider his "legacy" to the NFL and football I'm come away very unimpressed. 4,000 yard season. SB III. Meh. Sure he was a good player. But I don't think he belongs in the HOF....or mentioned anywhere near Unitas' name.

[Warner2BruceTD]

Twice at MM when it came up, I made a really long post that convinced alot of people that Namath did indeed belong in the HOF.

I'd do it again, but im too fucking tired. He was no Unitas, but Namath was an elite QB in his day and one of the most important figures in NFL history.

[Warner2BruceTD]

That got blown out in the first round perennially. They only won once in the playoffs..............in 50 years. Pro bowlers are bullshit anyway. Lomas Brown was a gigantic piece of shit.

OK, but the Lions still had a stretch of 5 playoff seasons in 7 years during the Sanders era, and went to an NFC Title game during that stretch.

Aside from the brief Bobby Layne glory days, the Sanders era was the most successful time in team history. He didnt play for shitty teams.

[Warner2BruceTD]

Let me sort of agree with what you are saying, but sort of not. Regardless if Barry had the Lions "Pro Bowl" line or the Cowboys Pro Bowl everything, it wouldn't matter. He didn't run in the same style as Emmitt or anyone. If you asked him to follow the play the way it was drawn up, you were asking the wrong guy. Let me put it this way. Are Scott Mitchell, Herman Moore, and Lomas Brown Hall of Fame players? How many HOFers were on the Cowboys during their dominance? And if you can name anyone not named Chris Spielman or Jerry Ball on that Lions defense in the 90's(without using google), I'll be surprised.

You are having an argument with yourself, here. I'm on team Barry in the Barry/Emmitt debate.

I was just pointing out that for whatever reason, people tend to lump the Barry era together with the current era, and forget that those teams were pretty good.

[dell71]

You could probably add Johnny U to that list. They didn't take stats back then, but some say he was the best passer ever.

lol @ "They didn't take stats back then."

http://www.nfl.com/players/johnnyunitas/profile?id=UNI415291

career stats: att/cmp: 2,830/5,186 % comp: 54.6 yards: 40,239 avg: 7.8 td/int: 290/253 sack: 230 qb rating: 78.2 rushing att/yards: 450/1,777 avg: 3.9 rush td: 13

johnny U was great, but he was always hurt when it counted and his passer rating was shite.

This has already been addressed but I'd add to what FT was getting at. During Unitas' career he finished in the top 5 in passer rating 11 times, 7 of those times were top 3 and he led the league 3 times. He also led the league in pass yds 4 times, pass td 4 times. Peyton Manning led the league in rating 3 times, pass td 3 times and pass yds twice and has 8 top 3 finishes in rating. This isn't to say one is definitely better than the other but you can see their accomplishments are comparable.

I dont know....It's just too hard for me to throw a qb in that argument when they repeatedly have more ints than tds in seasons. I know it was a different era and all, but thats just how I think. I guess it's just a bias of mine. IMO, alot of QB's were glorified by the media back then.

As far as Johnny U's TD/Int ratio, you should understand this: during his entire career there were only 3 seasons in which the league as a whole threw more touchdown passes than interceptions. Throwing more picks than tds was the norm. D-backs were allowed to manhandle receivers, clotheslines were legal. League-wide comp % was usually around 51% for most of his career. Some years, the league threw around 100 more ints than tds. Still, he managed to usually be on the other side of the ledger while throwing more than anyone else. How good would he be in a league where corners are essentially playing with one hand tied behind their backs?

Why do people always say Sanders played on bad teams? The Fontes/Sanders Lions were a perennial playoff team.

During his 10 year career, they made the playoffs 5 times (4 times under Fontes) - not quite perennial. Though I will concede, they did make it 4 times in a 5 year stretch but they didn't win any of those games (his only playoff win came in his very first try).

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

http://www.nfl.com/players/johnnyunitas/profile?id=UNI415291

career stats: att/cmp: 2,830/5,186 % comp: 54.6 yards: 40,239 avg: 7.8 td/int: 290/253 sack: 230 qb rating: 78.2 rushing att/yards: 450/1,777 avg: 3.9 rush td: 13

johnny U was great, but he was always hurt when it counted and his passer rating was shite.

Take the short bus back to your group home...the grown ups are talking.