In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1359
Online now 1608 Record: 10351 (3/11/2012)
The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web
The place to ask questions to SpartanTailgate's recruiting experts
"The Duff" is dedicated to Michigan State football recruiting discussion
"The Bres" is dedicated to Michigan State basketball recruiting discussion
This is your pulpit to preach to the masses about everything from politics to religion
The place to buy, trade or sell Michigan State tickets
For fantasy football and other fantasy sports discussion
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
I think he was more talking about the Duper and Bilitnikof selections. That's like saying Cy Young is a better pitcher than any other modern day great (Ryan, Verlander, Clemons, etc.). That's like saying you think Bill Russel is better than Shaq.
Don't forget to mention that Joe Montana and Steve Young were throwing to Rice while Moss had George, Culpepper, Collins, Walter??? and then finally Brady for a few years.
To be a little more accurate, Rice played 20 years, not 21. 16 for SF, 3 1/2 for Oak, and 1/2 for Seattle. Plus he had one season where he only played 1 game(tore is ACL), so basically 19 seasons to Moss' 14. Moss has never played less than 13 games a season during his career.
At the age of 36(a year after he tore his ACL/MCL) Rice had 82 catches, 1,157 yards and 9 TDs.
At the age of 39 Rice had 83 catches, 1,139 yards and 9 TDs.
At the age of 40 Rice had 92 catches, 1,211 yards and 7 TDs.
Moss at the age of 35 this year had 28 catches, 434 yards and 3 TDs.
That is pure greatness and no one has ever been able to put up numbers like Jerry Rice.
Dude, Largent was good but Randy Moss was better. Largent reminds me of Monk. Consistency, longevity and loyalty were a big part of their greatness. Both were phenomenal players but were not as good as Moss. Was Ripken the best SS? I would argue that a player with 5 or 6 amazing years is a better player than a 15 year player with good numbers.
I agree with a previous posters comment though...it is almost impossible to compare WR's from the past. The game has progressed towards a pass heavy offense.
If you take personality out of it he should be in the top 5.
The fact that he pissed off Joe Buck by ass rubbing a goal post makes him one of my favorites.
I'd argue MAYBE TO or Largent are above Moss (I do think Moss 2nd best all time) but the other players he listed are just ridiculous maybe he's just a hater and can't look at it logically.
In another 10 years, the top WR of all time will look like this
Rogue Leader= Obese coward who didn't attend MSU and has no college degree
When has logic ever been a factor on this board? There is no way Moss is not at least in the top 5, let alone top 10.
Location: Mumbai, India
If you take their best 5 year span here are their numbers:
Rice (from '91-95, age 29-34): 496 receptions, 7257 yards, 65 TD's
Moss (from '99-03, age 22-26): 456 receptions, 7062 yards, 60 TD's (this does not include his 23 TD year with NE as he had some bad years with Oak prior to that year)
Also note that with Rice, you could have pretty much used any of his 5 year span from 1986-1995 and his numbers wouldn't have been that different.
Moss started out in his career to be on pace to shatter all of Rice's records. Due to Randy being Randy, he never was able to reach any record. And I will admit I was a big Randy Moss fan in his prime.
Fair enough. Duper is a bit of a stretch, but throw in Art Monk instead. And if the only arguement is stats, then Moss is up there. I honestly don't think you can tell me that he's better than these other guys, though. And his attitude is reason number 1. I don't think Moss is even close to being tough enough to do what any of the guys I mentioned did.
He was (is?) fast and could get open downfield, but no fugging way he's going across the middle to make a tough play. To me, that's a pretty big part of being a great receiver and why all those other guys are better than Moss.
Maybe Randy Moss after that.
This post was edited by One Eyed Jack 15 months ago
If you can do a half-assed job of anything, you're a one-eyed man in a kingdom of the blind.
- Kurt Vonnegut
I'll give you Rice, Huston (based soley on history) and maybe Harrison.
Isaac Bruce? Reggie Wayne? C'mon Man!!! Those two guys are a poor-man's Moss at best.
Have you looked at his stats from the 1998 playoffs & the Super Bowl? Not on him for his teams crapping the bed. And if Eli and Tyree don't pull that pass out of their ass, Moss is a champion.
But I agree Ravens by 3.
Remind yourself. Nobody built like you, you design yourself.
Solid point. And that's where the debate of what "greatest" means.
Rice was the greatest to ever play wr in the game, even in his 40's he'd still have amazing games on the field.
This post was edited by steveschneider 15 months ago
Rings, baby. Rings. Brice and Wayne have bling on their fingers. The only jewelry Moss ever had was in his mouth/teeth.
Numbers aren't the only thing I took into consideration. Numbers, the game at the time, winning, actual hands, and if they changed the game at the time. With the exception of Owens (Owens didn't always have the best hands), all of the guys listed are prime examples of the criteria listed.
Moss could have been the greatest. IMO he certainly had the perfect set of skills for an ideal WR: good hands, great speed, terrific height and amazing athleticism. However, he didn't have Rice's professionalism and work ethic. If Moss clearly played hard every game there's no doubt he very well could have been the greatest WR ever, but he isn't in my book and his decline has been much more rapid than Rice who while not great at the end of his career still put up reasonably solid numbers. Nobody seems to notice Moss anymore.
Comes down to this...
Moss = coulda shoulda woulda
Rice = GWROAT
Two down votes. Wow.
I mean it's a pretty shitty list
I actually upvoted you so you have at least three downvotes from the pinheads.
He was the most physically talented receiver until CJ came along.
This thread is a good barometer on who is a blind hater, and who can recognize greatness. Anyone trying to put "really nice" players ahead of moss is clearly a hater. Monk, Largent, etc, etc were teally nice players, that played and stayed healthy for a long time. If you watched Moss in his prime it did not take very long to realize he could do things that those other guys were flat out incapable of doing.
CJ is the closest thing since Moss. That said Moss was much faster, with better hands, and was better at adjusting to the ball on deep throws and catching it at its highest point. Cj is more of a hybrid between moss and TO, which isnt a bad thing. He is built stronger which should make him more durable over the long haul.
Some whippersnapper downvoted you. I got your back.
I must be crazy to be in a loony bin like this.
Longevity is a big part of success in sports.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports