ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    One other note - Randy's omission may have something to do with not having a superbowl ring.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    His stats should stand for themself though, listen Tory Holt was a great WR the first few years of this decade, then he was merely a good WR where as Moss and Harrison dominated for this entire decade. Moss had two 17 TD seasons and one 23 TD season. He played in two conference championships one with the Vikes and one with teh Pats which he won and one super bowl appearence in which he cought what would have been the game winning TD had we not blown it. So I would say he deserves to be on that list with Harrison rather then Holt. Yes Holt has a ring but that shouldnt be the desiding factor.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from theplaintruth. Show theplaintruth's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    This is great.  I appreciate everyone's candor.  Allow me to dispell another "Mossism".  The infamous " I play when I want to play" is the biggest LIE the media and Moss Haters have perpetuated over the years.  For the record, the "so-called" quote was part of an interview with one of the most respected sports journalists in MN history.  His name is Sid Hartman and even he came forth and said that the quote was taken out of context.  He stated that Randy never even made that specific quote.  It was more to the affect that "no other coach, player, or defensive scheme will ever dictate the way I play, I'll dictate the way they play".  If you think about, this in indeed the TRUTH.  The "takes plays off" comments came from his own coach, Denny Green, who stated " that the offensive scheme the Vikes ran dictates that Randy "take plays off" when he could to conserve energy.  They required him to be on the field for matchup purposes (that's why he would be on the field instead of sidelines).  His mere presence meant that the defense couldn't load up the box against Robert Smith and company.  Moss runs more "go routes or 9's) than anyone in NFL history this side of Bullett Bob Hayes or Cliff Branch, so rather than pull him out of the game, he was told' "take a blow" on select plays.  None of his teammates ever questioned his work ethic.  Have any of you ever seen his training regimen video?  You might want to take a look.  He learned extremely from Cris Carter.  As far as his ring, as a rookie, he came within a missed field goal of getting to the SuperBowl.  Furthermore, with a different gameplan against the Giants, the games not even close.  I don't mean to detract from any accomplishments of the players selected, I just don't see any comparison to Randy Moss, and he's consistently done it with double and triple coverage.  For more insight to this, go to NFL.com and review the video montage they've compliled of he and  Tom's record breaking season.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    Never in my life have a seen a WR do what Moss does. I mean the guy will run right past 2 or 3 defenders for a TD its just insane. He can catch a TD in triple coverage. I have never seen anyone do it the way he does it.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    This is a "rings" board.  Peyton Manning has 3 MVP's, 4 1st team all-pro selections and one Ring.  Brady has 1 MVP, 1 1st team all-pro selection, and 3 rings.  

    Brady was picked ahead of Manning.  So I think it is a rings thing with regard to Moss. 
     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from CTLadyluvsPats. Show CTLadyluvsPats's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    In Response to ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM:
    [QUOTE]All-Decade Offense QB : Tom Brady, New England RB : LaDainian Tomlinson, San Diego FB : Lorenzo Neal, Cincinnati/S.D./Balt. WR : Marvin Harrison, Indianapolis WR : Torry Holt, St. Louis TE : Tony Gonzalez, Kansas City T : Walter Jones, Seattle T : Jonathan Ogden, Baltimore G : Alan Faneca, Pittsburgh/N.Y. Jets G : Steve Hutchinson, Seattle/Minnesota C : Olin Kreutz, Chicago All-Decade Defense DE : Michael Strahan, N.Y. Giants, DT : Warren Sapp, Tampa Bay/Oakland DT : Kris Jenkins, Carolina/N.Y. Jets DE : Jason Taylor, Miami/Washington LB : Derrick Brooks, Tampa Bay LB : Ray Lewis, Baltimore LB : Brian Urlacher, Chicago CB : Champ Bailey, Washington/Denver CB : Troy Vincent: Phil./Mia./Buff./Wash. S : Ed Reed, Baltimore S : Troy Polamalu, Pittsburgh Who deserves it? Who doesn't?
    Posted by jbolted[/QUOTE]

    Since ESPN created this list, I give it no credence.
    Just my two cents.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    Well anything ESPN touches is complete and utter bull sh*t but its still fun to debate whether or not Moss deserved to be on the list. Which he did ring or no ring.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from bubthegrub2. Show bubthegrub2's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    In Response to Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM:
    [QUOTE]Well anything ESPN touches is complete and utter bull sh*t but its still fun to debate whether or not Moss deserved to be on the list. Which he did ring or no ring.
    Posted by MVPkilla[/QUOTE]

    I looked up the career stats of Harrison and Holt, and compared them to my own choices, Randy and TO. It's clear that Holt is simply not in the same league, and there are reasons I'd put Marvin behind the other two. For one thing, Harrison seemed to all but disappear in postseason play. He also had the advantage of playing with the same (HOF caliber) QB his entire career. And his specialty was catching the ball then usually getting tackled there or going out of bounds.

    Here are the stats for each (taken from NFL.com). In order they are:
    Games played...receptions...yards...TDs...rec/game...TD/rec ratio (how many catches per TD):

    Marvin Harrison: 190; 1102; 14,590; 128; 5.8; 8.6
    Torry Holt: 158; 869; 12,660; 74; 5.5; 11.7

    My choices:

    Randy Moss: 170; 843; 13,201; 135; 5.0; 6.2
    Terrell Owens: 189; 951; 14,122; 139; 5.0; 6.8

    As you can see, Harrison has averaged almost a reception more per game, and has played in the most games out of the four. Yet he takes almost two more receptions to find the end zone. Holt has been a lot less productive in scoring, and is far behind the other three in overall production. The other two things which I figured in was Randy's ability to catch those passes no other WR would even dream of, and TO's ability to catch the ball in traffic, out-physical the DB, and make YAC. This makes those two more valuable, IMO.

    I also think it's wrong to limit this list to only two WRs. What team only lines up two on any given play? Maybe they could make a "sub-category" for slot WRs.

    Another issue is Rodney Harrison not being in the mix. The guy has the most sacks/INTs combo, and has excelled in the postseason. The same with Willie Mac. Though some may claim that SB rings do not matter, isn't that the reason all 32 teams line up each September (with the possible exception of the Lions)? Clutch play in January should be a distinction, IMO. But as far as Randy not making the cut, I agree it's due to image problems, much like I assume it is with TO. Yet these two are clearly better than the two chosen by ESPN. Of course, we all know how full of s h i t those guys are!!!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    In Response to Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM:
    [QUOTE]Consider the source. Anyone who would use a handle like "Ron Borges" on a Patriots message board is either a troll or a complete moron!!!
    Posted by bubthegrub2[/QUOTE]

    Or, he may in fact be Ron Borges. 

    This does not preclude either of your first two possibilities in any manner. It actually leads me to think that both would then be highly likely.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    I never would have said Randy and TO but Bub proves his point.  If you wanted any two wide receivers from this decade on the field for any play, you would want Randy and TO over everyone else.  They both have had off the field issues (exaggerated by the media), but this type of contest should honor the best football players, not the best citizens.  If money weren't an issue and you could pay them enough to keep their mouths shut, every coach in the league would want them on the field for every play.

    And underdog you are full of it.  This contest isn't about who won the most popularity contests it's about who was the best player at his position.  So Manning dominated a lot of bad teams and put up huge numbers on them.  He flat out sucked against playoff teams.  Even in his super bowl run he threw what, 7 interceptions in 4 games and would have lost in the first round if his defense hadn't bailed him out and Kansas City hadn't been so inept -they missed a field goal from what, the 7 yard line?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    here's the problem with Bub's assessment re: the receiver position. 

    1.  He is partially making size a criteria.  Its not.  Simply because Holt and Harrison aren't 6'3"+, 215#+ and can't reach as high or commit offensive pass interference with their size by pushing a defender out of the way to get to balls, should not preclude them from the list.  Skill aside, they have special size that allows them to do things others can't.  Yet Harrison at 4-6" shorter and 50# lighter (don't believe the ht wt listing - if he's 175 soaking wet then I'm Bill Belichick), has managed more receptions, nearly as many TD's, more yards, more first downs, just as many spectacular catches.  Truth be told, what Harrison has accomplished without the size is truly amazing and puts him well ahead of any of these guys based on the only things that matter, skill and production. 

    By the way, as mentioned above, you left an equally as important stat - First Downs.  Every catch is not a touchdown, so moving the chains is easily as important.  Harrison has 758.  Moss has 600.  Owens has 660

    If you want to make a case for Moss in front of Holt, fine.  But there is no way either go in front of Harrison.  As for TO, he's been in the league as long as Harrison.  Has 150 less catches and 100 fewer first downs.  TO's numbers could be better if he did not have so many drops. 

    But I will also stick to my original opinion that these guy's as malcontents (owens and moss) significantly detracted from what reporters think of them on a larger scale.  Neither Harrison nor Holt created team drama. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    Mighty - I would disagree with the All Pro popularity contest thing.  Pro Bowl - somewhat. 

    What I don't understand is when I have the stats to prove something you say its not about stats.  For example - Harrison and Holt have SB's.  Owens and Moss don't.  When I provide intangibles, you bring up stats. For example, its not Manning's honors, its Brady's superbowls or how Manning played in the playoffs.  

    Find a theory and stick to it.   

    By the way - as for Manning's playoff play, if he is so god awful, then why is he only 4 points below Brady on passer rating, and yet Brady has such a significantly better record?  I know - Defense.  Brady has had the luxury of it.  Manning has not. 

    Did you think the colts d was going to step up in the playoff the year of their sb run?  If you did you were the only one.  The colts d ranked 23 in points and 21 in yards that year.  Not exactly super bowl material. 

    Manning has always had to try to win games in spite of his defense where Brady had the luxury of playing conservatively.  I can't take Brady's name off this list (he's great), but he's benefitted from a significantly better team as a whole than Manning.  
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from jbolted. Show jbolted's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    In Response to Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM:
    [QUOTE]This is great.  I appreciate everyone's candor.  Allow me to dispell another "Mossism".  The infamous " I play when I want to play" is the biggest LIE the media and Moss Haters have perpetuated over the years.  For the record, the "so-called" quote was part of an interview with one of the most respected sports journalists in MN history.  His name is Sid Hartman and even he came forth and said that the quote was taken out of context.  He stated that Randy never even made that specific quote.  It was more to the affect that "no other coach, player, or defensive scheme will ever dictate the way I play, I'll dictate the way they play".  If you think about, this in indeed the TRUTH.  The "takes plays off" comments came from his own coach, Denny Green, who stated " that the offensive scheme the Vikes ran dictates that Randy "take plays off" when he could to conserve energy.  They required him to be on the field for matchup purposes (that's why he would be on the field instead of sidelines).  His mere presence meant that the defense couldn't load up the box against Robert Smith and company.  Moss runs more "go routes or 9's) than anyone in NFL history this side of Bullett Bob Hayes or Cliff Branch, so rather than pull him out of the game, he was told' "take a blow" on select plays.  None of his teammates ever questioned his work ethic.  Have any of you ever seen his training regimen video?  You might want to take a look.  He learned extremely from Cris Carter.  As far as his ring, as a rookie, he came within a missed field goal of getting to the SuperBowl.  Furthermore, with a different gameplan against the Giants, the games not even close.  I don't mean to detract from any accomplishments of the players selected, I just don't see any comparison to Randy Moss, and he's consistently done it with double and triple coverage.  For more insight to this, go to NFL.com and review the video montage they've compliled of he and  Tom's record breaking season.
    Posted by theplaintruth[/QUOTE]
    Watching Moss play in Oakland was nothin' special to say the least. I watched in person his 4 games with the Raiders against SD. The vantage point of being at the game allows you to isolate on certain players if inclined. What I saw was by far less than stellar play. There is no way he was in the top 2 during the period from 2004-2006. Therefore,this alone excludes from all decade teams if you ask me, although just barely. His is very good though. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    I never said it's about stats.  The only thing it's about is who is the better player.  I acknowledge that Marvin Harrison has probably accomplished more this decade, but everyone knows the two best wide receivers this decade were TO and Randy Moss.  If you didn't have to worry about off the field nonsense, these are the guys you would want on the field for every offensive snap. Harrison might be better pound for pound, but size does matter in the NFL. 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    Mighty - Everyone knows? Really?  Everyone knows is - your words - a popularity contest. 

    What everyone knows is that throughout much of their career, Randy Moss and Terrell Owens received just as much noteriety for their team last behavior (and in Randy's case - some off field issues, as well) as they did for their in game quality.  Harrison and Holt, on the other hand, quietly built their resume while also making their teams better.   

    I simply don't remember every team beating down the doors for Terrell Owens when he was available after San Fran/Baltimore or Philly or Dallas.  If he was the best, why not go get him.   

    The same goes for Randy Moss (but to a lesser degree). 

    If Tom Brady is the QB of the decade because he accomplished more (he has more sb rings and more playoff wins, otherwise it generally ends there), then why doesn't that same logic apply to Marvin Harrison vs. Randy Moss.  You said he accomplished more, but you are claiming Moss is the better player.  I don't get that. 

    Size does makes a difference in the NFL, but as you said, Harrison accomplished more in spite of his size.  That makes Harrison better without question.  
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from bubthegrub2. Show bubthegrub2's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    here's the problem with Bub's assessment re: the receiver position. 

    1.  He is partially making size a criteria.  Its not.  Simply because Holt and Harrison aren't 6'3"+, 215#+ and can't reach as high or commit offensive pass interference with their size by pushing a defender out of the way to get to balls, should not preclude them from the list.

    This is a crock of s h i t! Size aside, what really matters is results. Wes Welker is 5'9" and has led the league in receptions the last two seasons. And that's including the guys well over 6 feet! You are reading your own analogy into my post, please don't tell me (or others) what it is I am using as criterea!

    By the way, as mentioned above, you left an equally as important stat - First Downs.  Every catch is not a touchdown, so moving the chains is easily as important.  Harrison has 758.  Moss has 600.  Owens has 660

    I will give you this point, I did not include first downs in my reasons. But while making first downs is indeed a crucial part of the game, scoring points is more important, IMO. Any given team can acheive double the first downs as it's opposition, but if they only lead to FGs or no points, it is a useless stat. The goal of the game is to win, and I'd rather have more TDs than first downs!

    If you want to make a case for Moss in front of Holt, fine.  But there is no way either go in front of Harrison.  As for TO, he's been in the league as long as Harrison.  Has 150 less catches and 100 fewer first downs.  TO's numbers could be better if he did not have so many drops. 

    150 less catches @ .8 less per game. While I agree his drops have hurt him, the fact is Manning goes to Harrison much more than his QBs have gone to TO. You also have (once again) neglected to address all my points. While TO has played well in the postseason, Marvin has all but disappeared. This suggests that either Harrison cannot handle the pressure of the big games as well, or is not as good against better competition. That has to figure into this discussion. The point of the game is to win championships. This is not an indictment of Marvin, just that I feel both Moss and TO are better at the position as a whole.

    But I will also stick to my original opinion that these guy's as malcontents (owens and moss) significantly detracted from what reporters think of them on a larger scale.  Neither Harrison nor Holt created team drama. 

    I think we're all pretty much in agreement over this. Which is why we are expressing out own opinions, and mine is given without any such predjudice. As a matter of fact, I cannot stand Owens. Were they to poll us on if we would want him on our respective teams, my answer would be a resounding "NO"! I wouldn't want this guy anywhere near the Patriots locker room. But that doesn't mean he shouldn't be amongst the candidates for this. Just as I despise Peyton Manning, I couldn't argue that anyone else would come close to being second behind Brady. And as far as the off-field issues, the public perception is media driven. They choose whom to vilify and who to defend. As far as I know, neither Moss or Owens has ever been caught with a firearm linked to a shooting. Yet because the media chooses to downplay this story, they are "morally substandard" to a guy like Marvin? Still, all the off-field fodder aside, I'll stick to my picks. After all, it's only my opinion. We will have to "agree to disagree" on this once again!

    What I don't understand is when I have the stats to prove something you say its not about stats.  For example - Harrison and Holt have SB's.  Owens and Moss don't.  When I provide intangibles, you bring up stats. For example, its not Manning's honors, its Brady's superbowls or how Manning played in the playoffs. 

    The difference is the nature of the subject. In this case, it's an "all-decade team", which seems to indicate production. Therefore you need to use the stats. As for bringing SBs into it, Harrison, Moss, and Owens have all been to one this decade. Holt has been to two, yet even you agree his stats do not compare. To use SBs for this discussion, we'd have to nix all of these guys and name Deion Branch, Hines Ward, and Santonio Holmes as our guys. All three have won SB MVP as a WR (and honorable mention to TO in a great game albeit a loss). For the Manning vs. Brady thing, it was who did one want on their team (or to build a team around). There you must consider intangibles, and thus we did.

    By the way - as for Manning's playoff play, if he is so god awful, then why is he only 4 points below Brady on passer rating, and yet Brady has such a significantly better record?  I know - Defense.  Brady has had the luxury of it.  Manning has not. 

    I see we're back to the same old excuse! Passer rating is such an inexact science it's ridiculous to use as basis for anything. But the simple reason the discrepancy is so little is that Manning either has well over 100 or well below 70! Using an average is not a good tool for judgement. And as far as a lack of defense goes, that is a cop out. It was not the Indy defense which threw 4 INTs in the 03 AFCCG. Nor was it the defense which scored only 3 points the next postseason. While they may not have been as good as the Patriots on that side of the ball, they cannot be blamed for Manning's poor performance. With all those "bad" defenses the Colts have still managed to win an average of 12 games a season. Except when it gets to the postseason, where they are a .500 team. I never noticed the defense playing that much worse than they did in the regular season. But this has been a reoccurring thing for Peyton!
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ShiningWizard. Show ShiningWizard's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    I especially like the part about Tom Brady being selected the QB of the decade over Peyton Manning.  Anybody else notice that? 
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    Dogg we're talking past each other so let's just agree on this:

    Most accomplished receiver this decade:  Marvin Harrison
    Best receiver pound for pound:  Marvin Harrison
    Most talented receiver(s):  (1) Randy Moss, (2) TO, (3) Marvin Harrison
    Most Dangerous Recievers on any given play:  (1) Randy, (2) TO
    Worst Citizens:  (1) TO, (2) Randy Moss, (3) Chad Johnson
    Best QB:  Brady  :)
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    In Response to Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM:
    [QUOTE]Dogg we're talking past each other so let's just agree on this: Most accomplished receiver this decade:  Marvin Harrison Best receiver pound for pound:  Marvin Harrison Most talented receiver(s):  (1) Randy Moss, (2) TO, (3) Marvin Harrison Most Dangerous Recievers on any given play:  (1) Randy, (2) TO Worst Citizens:  (1) TO, (2) Randy Moss, (3) Chad Johnson Best QB:  Brady  :)
    Posted by themightypatriots[/QUOTE]

    I wouldn't give a citizenship award to any player who shoots at someone, hides the gun, and lies to the police.

    When I re-read that, I realize I could be talking about Harrison or Burress. 

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from mic01w. Show mic01w's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    The Pats are super bowl bound.  I love the Pats!
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from 19andNo. Show 19andNo's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    In Response to Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM:
    [QUOTE]ED REED = Overrated I would take Rodney Harrison any day.
    Posted by RonBorges[/QUOTE]

    Do you take his cheap shots and use of steriods too. 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    I take cheap shots at your mother all the time, like sometimes I spit on her back so she thinks im done and then when she turns around i hit her with the money shot on her stupid face....does that count?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    here's the problem with Bub's assessment re: the receiver position. 

    1.  He is partially making size a criteria.  Its not.  Simply because Holt and Harrison aren't 6'3"+, 215#+ and can't reach as high or commit offensive pass interference with their size by pushing a defender out of the way to get to balls, should not preclude them from the list.

    This is a crock of s h i t! Size aside, what really matters is results. Wes Welker is 5'9" and has led the league in receptions the last two seasons. And that's including the guys well over 6 feet! You are reading your own analogy into my post, please don't tell me (or others) what it is I am using as criterea!

    I THINK WES WELKER IS FANTASTIC, AS I DO MOSS, BUT HERE IS THE COMMENT YOU MADE:  "The other two things which I figured in was Randy's ability to catch those passes no other WR would even dream of, and TO's ability to catch the ball in traffic, out-physical the DB, and make YAC. This makes those two more valuable, IMO."  HARRISON HAS MADE EVERY SPECTACULAR CATCH POSSIBLE UNLESS THEY REQUIRED HIM TO BE 6'4" WITH LONG ARMS.  YOUR T.O. COMMENT IS ABOUT SIZE, TOO.  SO, HOW DID I READ INTO THIS ANALOGY?  THESE ARE YOUR WORDS.   


    By the way, as mentioned above, you left an equally as important stat - First Downs.  Every catch is not a touchdown, so moving the chains is easily as important.  Harrison has 758.  Moss has 600.  Owens has 660

    I will give you this point, I did not include first downs in my reasons. But while making first downs is indeed a crucial part of the game, scoring points is more important, IMO. Any given team can acheive double the first downs as it's opposition, but if they only lead to FGs or no points, it is a useless stat. The goal of the game is to win, and I'd rather have more TDs than first downs!

    SINCE 1999 THE COLTS O HAS BEEN OUT OF THE TOP 5 IN SCORING JUST TWICE.  BUT YOU ARE PRAISING SCORING IN THE ABSENCE OF OTHER PRODUCTION.  HARRISON HAS IT ALL.  AS FOR WINS, I THINK ONE OF THE THREADS HERE SHOWED THAT THE COLTS HAD MORE WINS THAN ALL BUT THE PATS (A DIFFERENCE OF ONE GAME) IN THE LAST DECADE.  I THINK HARRISON'S PRODUCTION HAS PRODUCED NOTHING IF NOT WINS. 


    If you want to make a case for Moss in front of Holt, fine.  But there is no way either go in front of Harrison.  As for TO, he's been in the league as long as Harrison.  Has 150 less catches and 100 fewer first downs.  TO's numbers could be better if he did not have so many drops. 

    150 less catches @ .8 less per game. While I agree his drops have hurt him, the fact is Manning goes to Harrison much more than his QBs have gone to TO. You also have (once again) neglected to address all my points. While TO has played well in the postseason, Marvin has all but disappeared. This suggests that either Harrison cannot handle the pressure of the big games as well, or is not as good against better competition. That has to figure into this discussion. The point of the game is to win championships. This is not an indictment of Marvin, just that I feel both Moss and TO are better at the position as a whole.

    WHY IS THE PER GAME STAT MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE OVERALL STAT?  .8 CATCHES PER GAME PRODUCED A 150 CATCH DIFFERENTIAL.  OVER TIME ITS SIGNIFICANT.  YOU ARE MINIMALIZING IT TO MAKE THE DIFFERENCE SEEM SMALLER.  AND DO YOU HAVE A STAT THAT SHOWS HOW MANY TIMES OWENS HAS BEEN THROWN TO VS. HARRISON OR IS THIS JUST YOUR PERCEPTION?  REGARDLESS, THE RECEIVER HAS TO MAKE THE CATCH.  AS FOR THE PLAYOFFS, NONE OF THESE GUYS HAS SET THE WORLD ON FIRE, BUT OWENS DID HAVE 2 VERY GOOD ONES RECENTLY.  I THINK THE FACT THAT ONE OF THEM WAS AGAINST THE PATS IS WHY HE STICKS IN YOUR MIND.   


    But I will also stick to my original opinion that these guy's as malcontents (owens and moss) significantly detracted from what reporters think of them on a larger scale.  Neither Harrison nor Holt created team drama. 

    I think we're all pretty much in agreement over this. Which is why we are expressing out own opinions, and mine is given without any such predjudice. As a matter of fact, I cannot stand Owens. Were they to poll us on if we would want him on our respective teams, my answer would be a resounding "NO"! I wouldn't want this guy anywhere near the Patriots locker room. But that doesn't mean he shouldn't be amongst the candidates for this. Just as I despise Peyton Manning, I couldn't argue that anyone else would come close to being second behind Brady. And as far as the off-field issues, the public perception is media driven. They choose whom to vilify and who to defend. As far as I know, neither Moss or Owens has ever been caught with a firearm linked to a shooting. Yet because the media chooses to downplay this story, they are "morally substandard" to a guy like Marvin? Still, all the off-field fodder aside, I'll stick to my picks. After all, it's only my opinion. We will have to "agree to disagree" on this once again!

    I DO THINK MOSS HAD AN ISSUE OF BUMPING AN OFFICER WITH HIS CAR.  NOT SURE WHERE THAT COMPARES TO FIREARMS, BUT ASSAULTING A POLICE OFFICER WITH A CAR IS AN ISSUE. 

    What I don't understand is when I have the stats to prove something you say its not about stats.  For example - Harrison and Holt have SB's.  Owens and Moss don't.  When I provide intangibles, you bring up stats. For example, its not Manning's honors, its Brady's superbowls or how Manning played in the playoffs. 

    The difference is the nature of the subject. In this case, it's an "all-decade team", which seems to indicate production. Therefore you need to use the stats. As for bringing SBs into it, Harrison, Moss, and Owens have all been to one this decade. Holt has been to two, yet even you agree his stats do not compare. To use SBs for this discussion, we'd have to nix all of these guys and name Deion Branch, Hines Ward, and Santonio Holmes as our guys. All three have won SB MVP as a WR (and honorable mention to TO in a great game albeit a loss). For the Manning vs. Brady thing, it was who did one want on their team (or to build a team around). There you must consider intangibles, and thus we did.

    I NEVER SAID THAT HOLT'S STATS DO NOT COMPARE, PLEASE DON'T PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH.  AS FOR THE SUPERBOWLS, I SAID RINGS.  LOOK, MANNING'S REGULAR SEASON STATS - WHICH GETS THE TEAM TO THE PLAYOFFS, RUNS CIRCLES AROUND BRADY.  ONLY BRADY'S WINS IN THE POSTSEASON, WHICH ARE NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF PERFORMANCE BUT ARE MUCH MORE RELIANT ON THE PLAY OF TEAMMATES, ARE WHERE BRADY IS BETTER.  THUS, IN THIS CASE, BY USING THE NEW ENGLAND CRITERIA, BOTH HARRISON AND HOLT HAVE THE MOST IMPORTANT VICTORIES WHERE MOSS AND OWENS DO NOT.   

    By the way - as for Manning's playoff play, if he is so god awful, then why is he only 4 points below Brady on passer rating, and yet Brady has such a significantly better record?  I know - Defense.  Brady has had the luxury of it.  Manning has not. 

    I see we're back to the same old excuse! Passer rating is such an inexact science it's ridiculous to use as basis for anything. But the simple reason the discrepancy is so little is that Manning either has well over 100 or well below 70! Using an average is not a good tool for judgement. And as far as a lack of defense goes, that is a cop out. It was not the Indy defense which threw 4 INTs in the 03 AFCCG. Nor was it the defense which scored only 3 points the next postseason. While they may not have been as good as the Patriots on that side of the ball, they cannot be blamed for Manning's poor performance. With all those "bad" defenses the Colts have still managed to win an average of 12 games a season. Except when it gets to the postseason, where they are a .500 team. I never noticed the defense playing that much worse than they did in the regular season. But this has been a reoccurring thing for Peyton!

    BUT IT IS AN EFFORT AT DETERMINING A QB'S EFFECTIVENESS.  IF IT WERE USELESS, WELL THEN, IT WOULD NOT BE USED.  LACK OF DEFENSE IS NO COP OUT AT ALL.  WINS AND LOSSES, PARTICULARLY IN THE POSTSEASON ARE ALMOST ALWAYS TEAM ORIENTED.  RARELY DOES ONE SINGLE PERSON DOMINATE A GAME.  AS FOR THE AFCCG WAS THAT THE TY LAW HUMPING MARVIN HARRISON AT THE LINE OF SCRIMMAGE GAME.  WAS THAT THE GAME?  THAT WAS ALSO THE COLTS D THAT RANKED 20 IN SCORING IN THE LEAGUE. 

    AT ANY RATE, IT SEEMS THAT YOU RECALL ALL OF MANNING'S BAD GAMES BUT FORGET HIS GOOD ONES (OR AT LEAST DOWNPLAY THEM).  I WOULD EXPECT NOTHING LESS. 
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from theplaintruth. Show theplaintruth's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    Chew on this for a  moment.  When you talk about Great Players in skill positons, MANY factor in the "system" they operate in.  They say certain college QB's (who've produced outstanding numbers etc...) will never make it in the NFL.  Some aren't even granted the opportunity.  Now bring this concept into this conversation.  Harrison, Holt, and T.O. played in such systems.  Harrison enjoyed playing in the Colts "helter skelter" chain moving system and maestro Peyton Manning, Holt enjoyed playing with the "greatest show on turf" led by Kurt Warner and Marshall Falk.  T.O. benefited from the West Coast Offense with players like Rice and Young etc...  Randy Moss had no such system to thrive in.  In MN, he played with QB's like, Brad Johnson, Randal Cunningham (who was operating his marble business in Las Vegas prior to being signed by MN), Jeff George, (rookie) Daunte Culpepper and a cast of others who don't come to mind at this time but all pretty non-descript.  They used running back by committee, even when they had Robert Smith.  This means they never saw "8 in the box", just nickle and dime packages.  Schemes were designed to stop Randy Moss period.  The "Tampa Two" was a scheme was developed in part due to impact of Moss around the league.  MN and Oak never had to move Moss around to get him  open, he simply lined up wide left or right and beat the coverage (meaning 2 to 3 grown men drawing a paycheck  to stop him).  I'm NOT discounting his 2 years in Oakland (it was painful to watch), but I point to it as good production in the worst of circumstances.  Everyone knows that the Raiders won't flourish until  Al Davis is gone.  Remember HOF RB Marcus Allen sat for 2 seasons because he disagreed with what Davis was doing to the team.  Jerry Porter sat  1 & 1/2 seasons under the same circumstances.  Moss amassed nearly 1600 yards ,11TD's, 110 receptions, with a 15.0 yds per catch average in 2 seasons in Oakland while playing with injuries that normally severely hamper WR's.  Finally, the media only portrays parts of individuals that fit the image they want to portray.  The like to demonize the "Million Dollar Babies" for getting paid an enormous sum to play a game.  However, even though it's their job to report the "whole story" as a journalist, they don't as it defeats their purpose.  They know that YOU (fans) have issues with not being CHOSEN to be the ONE in that position of being  a  star so they feed you what you want to stoke that anger.  Example, Joe Buck and his unbelievable rant on Moss doing the "bump" with the goal post in  Green Bay.  He lost his mind over a player "paying tribute" to a former teammate / friend
    who was seated in  the end zone (it was a team celebration from college), and the "faux mooning" was in response to GB fans who line up and "drop trou" to the visiting teams as their busses roll out of GB. That's just one example.  For every incident reported about Randy, I can name one they failed to report that impacted far more individuals...  Final stat check.  Moss has 4 less TD's than Owens.  Owens has played for 2 more seasons (scoring 12 TD's). This puts T.O. @ 125 since 1998 and Moss @ 135 since 1998.  Throughout that time period T.O.'s quarterbacks were Steve Young, Jeff Garcia, Donovan McNabb, and Tony Romo.  Enough said... 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from bubthegrub2. Show bubthegrub2's posts

    Re: ESPN ALL DECADE TEAM

    Worst Citizens:  (1) TO, (2) Randy Moss, (3) Chad Johnson

    Sure, those three have had their issues. But I still don't recall any of them under suspicion in a shooting or being in possession of a handgun used in a crime.

    Do you take his cheap shots and use of steriods too. 

    "Cheap shots" is a matter of opinion. And Rodney was caught using HGH in the offseason, NOT steroids. If you want to be a hater, please, get your facts straight!

    I take cheap shots at your mother all the time, like sometimes I spit on her back so she thinks im done and then when she turns around i hit her with the money shot on her stupid face....does that count?

    Taz, I don't know if I'd be admitting it if I had truly done that s l u t!!! And you may want to go to the free clinic for some antibiotics!!!

    HARRISON HAS MADE EVERY SPECTACULAR CATCH POSSIBLE UNLESS THEY REQUIRED HIM TO BE 6'4" WITH LONG ARMS.  YOUR T.O. COMMENT IS ABOUT SIZE, TOO.  SO, HOW DID I READ INTO THIS ANALOGY?  THESE ARE YOUR WORDS.   

    I didn't mention size at all. Sure, size helps, but we are not "prorating" production here. Otherwise a guy like Welker should get eight points for a TD instead of six! For whatever reason, Moss and TO seem to catch a lot of balls other receivers can't. This is a simple fact, your argument is foolish.

    SINCE 1999 THE COLTS O HAS BEEN OUT OF THE TOP 5 IN SCORING JUST TWICE.  BUT YOU ARE PRAISING SCORING IN THE ABSENCE OF OTHER PRODUCTION.

    The debate here is not the Colts offense against any other offense. It is one player against another. And the fact remains, both Moss and TO have had more TDs in less games played. Again, you are trying to twist the facts to favor your opinion.

    WHY IS THE PER GAME STAT MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE OVERALL STAT?  .8 CATCHES PER GAME PRODUCED A 150 CATCH DIFFERENTIAL.  OVER TIME ITS SIGNIFICANT.

    This is merely a reference point. Since Marvin has .8 more catches a game, it suggests that Peyton throws to him a greater percentage of the time (a stat it would be next to impossible to verify). Yet with less catches per game they have put up comparable numbers, and more TDs. The rec/TD ratio tells more, IMO.

    AS FOR THE PLAYOFFS, NONE OF THESE GUYS HAS SET THE WORLD ON FIRE

    Moss has had one of the most productive postseason careers at WR. TO would have won the MVP in SB 39 had the Eagles won (10 rec/120+ yds), playing on a broken ankle. Harrison has been average at best in the postseason (and that's being kind to him). This would suggest that both Moss and Owens are able to perform better against the best defenses in the league.

    I DO THINK MOSS HAD AN ISSUE OF BUMPING AN OFFICER WITH HIS CAR.  NOT SURE WHERE THAT COMPARES TO FIREARMS, BUT ASSAULTING A POLICE OFFICER WITH A CAR IS AN ISSUE.

    Randy bumped a meter maid out of the way without causing any injury. Marvin was caught with a handgun that was used in a shooting. You figure it out. Unless maybe you think jaywalkers should be doing hard time in prison along with rapists and murderers, the answer should be obvious...even to a stubborn Colts fan!!!

    I NEVER SAID THAT HOLT'S STATS DO NOT COMPARE, PLEASE DON'T PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH. 

    OK, those were my own words. You did claim you had no problem with leaving Holt out of the conversation, but not Harrison. That's what I was referring to.

    WINS AND LOSSES, PARTICULARLY IN THE POSTSEASON ARE ALMOST ALWAYS TEAM ORIENTED.  RARELY DOES ONE SINGLE PERSON DOMINATE A GAME.

    Again, we are not debating wins and losses here, but player to player. I'm looking at the individual performances. And IMO both Moss and Owens are head and shoulders above Harrison in postseason play.

    AS FOR THE AFCCG WAS THAT THE TY LAW HUMPING MARVIN HARRISON AT THE LINE OF SCRIMMAGE GAME.  WAS THAT THE GAME?  THAT WAS ALSO THE COLTS D THAT RANKED 20 IN SCORING IN THE LEAGUE. 

    Again with the excuses! Yet you scoff at us here when we point out that three years later half the Patriots starting defense was sick and unable to stay on the field when the Colts made their comeback in the second half! The WRs should have seen how the refs were calling the game and adjusted to it. That is what championship caliber teams do. Those who can't cut it simply whine to the competition committee! And again, please tell me how the Colts defense caused Manning to throw four INTs! Were they on the sidelines distracting the WRs when the ball was about to reach them? I'm still not getting your point on this. And after that season Polian had the "point of emphasis" brought up. Yet the following year (when the Colts offense was #1, Manning threw for 49 TDs, and they hung almost 50 on the Broncos the previous week) Manning failed to get the ball in the end zone in a 20-3 loss in Foxboro. And with a good defensive showing for the Colts, at halftime the Patriots had only managed two FGs. Who gets thrown under the bus for that one? I know, Clark dropped a couple passes!

    AT ANY RATE, IT SEEMS THAT YOU RECALL ALL OF MANNING'S BAD GAMES BUT FORGET HIS GOOD ONES (OR AT LEAST DOWNPLAY THEM).  I WOULD EXPECT NOTHING LESS. 

    I'm not downplaying or forgetting anything. The simple fact is that if you look at Brady's body of work you will see he has been consistent in postseason play. When you look at Manning's you will see he has had some of his worst performances in January. Sure, he had some very good ones against the Broncos and the Chiefs (the first time around). But in two of his sixteen playoff games he had a passer rating in the 30s. It seems that the general public agrees with me on this debate, as it was Brady, not Manning, who got the nod for QB of the decade.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share