Jerry Rice - the best player in NFL history?

[Bmore]

fixed.

greatest wr? yes. he played on the team that invented the west coast offense and flourished in it. not only because that offens is meant to make recievers look good, but becasue his work ethic was 2nd to none. the greatest player ever honor cannot go to a wr simply becasue he has to depend on someone to get him the ball. i say jim brown is, but i think at the end of teh day you might be able to make a case for peyton manning. the top five would include brown, sanders (barry of course, not that clown dieon), payton, p. manning, and joe montana. i havent included defenders at this point and a case can be made for a few of them as well (deacon jones anyone? they made rules to stop him).

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.

 

[steeljake]

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.

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.

 

[packersfan4eva]

I gotta go with Barry Sanders. He is the 2nd All-time leading rusher while playing for the Detroit Lions, who almost never won. If he had played for...say.....the 49ers, he'd easily have the greatest stats for a running back in NFL history.

 

[adembroski]

I can understand those who say he's one of the greatest players of all time. What I don't get is anyone who says he's one of the greatest receivers of all time.

How is he not, by any measurable standard, the single greatest WR who ever played the game? He is, with a bullet. It's not even close. You can talk about eras, but his numbers were awe inspiring in any era. Even Larry Fitzgerald would have to play at his current level another eleven years to pass Rice in receptions, another thirteen to pass him in yardage. That's not accounting for slow down, that's repeating what he's averaged over the first 6 years of his career (and he had a headstart, almost double what Rice produced in his rookie year).

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

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 post is "shite".

Unitas went seven consecutive years without missing a start. He was a washed up old man by the time the SB era came around. Aside from that, not sure how you can make such a reckless and stupid statement when he played in (and won) multiple championship games.

And his passer rating is very good for his era. He was putting up 90+ ratings in the 50's when other guys struggled to top 60. He led the league multiple times, and had plenty of statistical seasons that would hold up against guys today, and he did it 50 years ago.

Just an awful, awful post.

 

[NAHSTE]

Best WR of all-time no doubt. But the best footballer of all time would be really hard to peg. Gonna go with Jim Brown based on dominance. He could play in any era and be great.

Jerry is easily the best WR of all-time and it's not even close, I just don't know how you can justify listing a peripheral player as the GOAT.

 

[FirstTimer]

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.

Fucking awful post.

This post is "shite".

Unitas went seven consecutive years without missing a start. He was a washed up old man by the time the SB era came around. Aside from that, not sure how you can make such a reckless and stupid statement when he played in (and won) multiple championship games.

And his passer rating is very good for his era. He was putting up 90+ ratings in the 50's when other guys struggled to top 60. He led the league multiple times, and had plenty of statistical seasons that would hold up against guys today, and he did it 50 years ago.

Just an awful, awful post.

Thank you for saving me the time of having to respond to that garbage.

Unitas is arguably the greatest QB to ever play the game.

 

[elbingz]

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.

Back then everyone was also on Joe Namath's nuts and he sucked. All he did was win a Superbowl. Back then all you had to do was win a championship and the writers would be on your nuts. It's the same today, but not nearly as ignorant as back then.

 

[j.hen]

TONY G!!!!!!!!!

 

[FirstTimer]

Back then everyone was also on Joe Namath's nuts and he sucked. All he did was win a Superbowl. Back then all you had to do was win a championship and the writers would be on your nuts. It's the same today, but not nearly as ignorant as back then.

Namath being overrated as fuck doesn't take away Unitas' accomplishments. Namath is one of the most overrated QB's of all time in every way imaginable. Unitas, for my money, is the greatest QB of all time.

 

[elbingz]

Namath being overrated as fuck doesn't take away Unitas' accomplishments. Namath is one of the most overrated QB's of all time in every way imaginable. Unitas, for my money, is the greatest QB of all time.

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.

 

[FirstTimer]

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.

Unitas, in years where he started 10 or more games(13) of them only had 4 seasons where he threw more INT's than TD's and two of those seasons were when he was 36 and 37 years old and WELL past his prime in Baltimore.

After 1967 Unitas was never the same player and age and injuries caught up to him very quickly. He tore muscles in his arm before the start of the '68 season and while he battled through some marginal seasons for a few more years and had a decent game or two along the way his arm, and his career were never the same for the next 5 years. He started on 14 games in his last 3 seasons in the NFL.


What he did from 1957-1967 in that era is BEYOND incredible and the fact that he is still in the Top 10-20 in so many passing stats(Completions, Attempts, Yards, TD's, YPA) this long after he played and looking at the change in eras speaks volumes to the type of QB he was.

 

[FirstTimer]

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.

Continuing on with this. Namath shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath as Unitas. In 13 season Namath only had two seasons where he threw more TD's than INT's. Had a losing record for his career and his career stats and accomplishments pale in comparison to Unitas.

 

[Fox1994]

I gotta go with Barry Sanders. He is the 2nd All-time leading rusher while playing for the Detroit Lions, who almost never won. If he had played for...say.....the 49ers, he'd easily have the greatest stats for a running back in NFL history.

Were he on the Cowboys, we'd be walking around like "Emmit who?" 2053 yards for the Lions... The backbone of his team every year. Ya, he was something... But then there's Payton and Peyton and John U and JB... It's easier to do it by position, and even that's difficult.

Continuing on with this. Namath shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath as Unitas. In 13 season Namath only had two seasons where he threw more TD's than INT's. Had a losing record for his career and his career stats and accomplishments pale in comparison to Unitas.

QFT

 

[FirstTimer]

I gotta go with Barry Sanders. He is the 2nd All-time leading rusher while playing for the Detroit Lions, who almost never won. If he had played for...say.....the 49ers, he'd easily have the greatest stats for a running back in NFL history.

Yeah and had Payton played for the 49ers teams of the 1980's, or had ANY talent around him prior to 1984 Barry wouldn't even have been in the equation...and around we go.

I hate these: "If this guy had played for this team" stuff because it completely ignores the fact that any All time great running back would greatly benefit from being surrounded by better players. Sanders backers always want to point out how bad the Lions were in the 1990's while ignoring that Payton played for some of the most appallingly bad offenses in the NFL during 85% of his career. Sanders had it bad but I would have loved to see what Walter could have done surrounded by even marginal talent for most of his career. Scott Mitchell, Herman Moore, and Brett Perriman look like HOF'ers compared to what the Bears had on offense in the mid 70's to early 80's.



Payton was a better all around player than Sanders anyways so I don't see how anyone could say Barry was the GOAT when other guys were as good if not better runners and better all around players.

 

[FirstTimer]

Here's some fun stats: Walter Payton did not run behind a Pro Bowl or All Pro Offensive lineman until 1985(Hilgenberg/Covert). Payton retired after the 1987 season.

Payton did not play with another skill position player on offense who went to the Pro Bowl as a Bear until the 1985 season as well(McMahon). That was the only time in his career he had another Pro Bowl skill position player with him. Even that season McMahon made it based solely on the fact he was the QB of the Bears and they were 15-1. He was 20th in yards in the NFL and 19th in TD's.


Sanders guys can complain about the lack of talent Barry had on offense but from 1990-1997 Sanders always had at least one Pro Bowl and/or All Pro player with him on offense(Normally Lomas Brown and Herman Moore). Don't make me start listing Chicago Bears QB's and WR's from the mid 70's to early 1980's.

As far as supporting casts go it is: Emmitt>>>>>>Barry>>>>Payton and it's really not even close.

 

[Rayman]

Gotta love the Emmitt haters pointing to the supporting cast conveniently forgetting the amount of Pro Bowlers Barry Sanders played with.

Give me Walter Payton and Jim Brown, and I'll say yes, they were better. I won't say that about a back who came out of the game when his team got down inside the 20.

And for the record, that "great" offensive line consisted of (going left to right) a converted DT, an undrafted overreater, an "undersized" center, and two 3rd round picks.

They didn't make him great. He made them above average.

 

[jaxjaggywires]

Sanders retired when he was 30. Taking Emmitt's stats from 31-35 (when he retired), and just adding those declining numbers to Sanders' total, Smith never would have taken the #1 spot. He'd still be about 1500 yards short.

Just saying...the only negative against Sanders is the fact that he said 'f this shit' and quit so early.

 

[Bmore]

Fucking awful post.


Thank you for saving me the time of having to respond to that garbage.

Unitas is arguably the greatest QB to ever play the game.

... wtf?

I said that and you groaned me lol :facepalm:

 

[FirstTimer]

... wtf?

I said that and you groaned me lol :facepalm:

Because you said there were no stats........