Moss claims to be better than Rice

[Satchboogie3]

Im sorry but anyone would say Jerry Rice is better than Randy Moss. It is common sense....Moss barely beat Rice's record and Rice did it in 12 games. Plus, the Patriots were trying o hard to break all those those records on there last game, they threw to Moss all day when they should have been resting there players.

Moss is the closest to Rice, so why shouldn't he be in the conversation? And by the way, Moss had 20 seasons in which he could have scored 20+ TD, but he didn't did he. The Most he had prior to that was 17. How about this, seasons with 17+ TDs: Rice - 2 (20 seasons) Moss - 3 (10 seasons)

 

[Patsrock]

Im sorry but anyone would say Jerry Rice is better than Randy Moss. It is common sense....Moss barely beat Rice's record and Rice did it in 12 games. Plus, the Patriots were trying o hard to break all those those records on there last game, they threw to Moss all day when they should have been resting there players.

Rest players?? How did that work out for the teams that did?? Oh yeah it didn't the two teams that played the game out the right way are in the Super Bowl!

Oh yeah Moss is not better than Rice at this moment, talk to me when Moss retires.

 

[Gold Miner 49]

Well, this is for sure, no one EVER again will score 22 Touch Downs in just 12 games. NO ONE.

 

[MossFan4Life]

Well, this is for sure, no one EVER again will score 22 Touch Downs in just 12 games. NO ONE.

This is also for sure, Rice will never score more than 23 tds in a season, even though he played the full 16 games 17 different times! :singing:

 

[Gold Miner 49]

This is also for sure, Rice will never score more than 23 tds in a season, even though he played the full 16 games 17 different times! :singing:

Well all im sayinf is that you dont know football if you think the Randy Moss is the greatest of all time, look what he did in Oakland? Nothing, he didnt even try, what a ****ty attitude.

 

[Patsrock]

Well all im sayinf is that you dont know football if you think the Randy Moss is the greatest of all time, look what he did in Oakland? Nothing, he didnt even try, what a ****ty attitude.

I can say the same thing to you then. You said the Pats should have been resting the guys in the final game, but once again how did resting the players work for Indy and TB. Indy in 2005??

 

[Satchboogie3]

WTF was he supposed to do? He didn't want to get traded. He ended up on a ****ty ****ty ****ty team. So he shut it down for 1 season and tried to get in a better situation. Worked, didn't it.

Rice was never in that situation. NEVER.

Randy Moss saw more double, triple, and quadruple coverage than any other WR in the history of the NFL and he STILL was amazing. What do you think that says about how good he was.

 

[363839]

Moss is the best receiver ever. If he had played with Brady the last 7 years nobody would even debate it. If he signs a contract with the Pats and plays until he's 36 (6 more years), he'll break Rice's TD record and probably win another title or 4. Game over.

There, I fixed it for you.

You're welcome.

 

[bradmahn]

Well, this is for sure, no one EVER again will score 22 Touch Downs in just 12 games. NO ONE.

Give Randy Moss a chance to play against us (as in scabs and message board posters) and I bet he'd catch 30.

 

[MossFan4Life]

Give Randy Moss a chance to play against us (as in scabs and message board posters) and I bet he'd catch 30.

If he had played with Montana and Young that many years, he may have already had 30.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

He's judging Moss on what he did in Oakland, and NOT judging Rice on what HE did in Oakland.

Man, what is it about Oakland anyway?

PFnV

 

[Satchboogie3]

Give Randy Moss a chance to play against us (as in scabs and message board posters) and I bet he'd catch 30.

I don't think that is true. The starters played through the first 12 games, as did Rice. It was only for the final 3 games where backups, etc played. So Rice played against starters through those 12 games.

 

[Patsrock]

I don't think that is true. The starters played through the first 12 games, as did Rice. It was only for the final 3 games where backups, etc played. So Rice played against starters through those 12 games.

No the strike was weeks 3 thru 6 with scabs in weeks 4,5,6 no games week 3.

 

[wpdougie2180]

Why does everyone continue to use Montana & Young as an excuse? Did Rice not break records in college without Montana & Young, did he not break records with QBs such as Grbac, Garcia, & Gannon, did he not lead the Raiders to the Super Bowl(the same Raiders team Moss played for). Everyone tries to diminish what Rice did but you can't because he did it and Moss didn't regardless of how you want to look at it. Others say Moss is better because teams have doubla and triple teamed him so does that mean Bullet Bob Hayes is the best because he changed the game forcing teams to start using zone coverages and double and triple covering him? People use hypotheticals about what ifs but whos to say if these hypotheticals would turn out like everyone thinks they would.

Also this is why Rice will be considered better Moss:
Randy Moss 2001-82 1233 15.0 10
__________2002-106 1347 12.7 7
Age 24-25

Jerry Rice 2001-83 1139 13.7 9
_________2002-92 1211 13.2 7
Age 39-40

 

[mgm79]

Can anyone find this quote anymore? I don't see it on the blog.

 

[bradmahn]

Why does everyone continue to use Montana & Young as an excuse? Did Rice not break records in college without Montana & Young, did he not break records with QBs such as Grbac, Garcia, & Gannon, did he not lead the Raiders to the Super Bowl(the same Raiders team Moss played for). Everyone tries to diminish what Rice did but you can't because he did it and Moss didn't regardless of how you want to look at it. Others say Moss is better because teams have doubla and triple teamed him so does that mean Bullet Bob Hayes is the best because he changed the game forcing teams to start using zone coverages and double and triple covering him? People use hypotheticals about what ifs but whos to say if these hypotheticals would turn out like everyone thinks they would.

You wanna talk about Rice breaking D-II records? What?

Grbac had a string of good games when playing in the San Fran offense and Rice's production was a mixed bag, but when he played with Garcia he had 800 yards twice, then went to the Raiders who flung the ball around with Gannon. Rice was nothing more than a good receiver at that point in his career, and went to a team with a good passing offense. He didn't produce top ten receiver seasons and he wasn't "breaking records." Might I add that Gannon was a Pro Bowler the two years prior to Rice's arrival.

For fifteen of his twenty-one seasons, Rice had a Hall of Fame quarterback. Without Montana or Young, Rice had the worst stretch of seasons in his career. How can one trivialize the value of a quarterback when evaluating the play of a wide receiver? This makes no sense to me.

And before anyone flames that last comment, think about how for four seasons we all declared "imagine what Brady could do with weapons like Manning." Same boat, different sailor.

I hate the arguments of "best ever" and "greatest ever," but the stance of so many posters here that it is stupid to consider Randy as even comparable to Rice is laughably ridiculous.

Why do many people consider Barry Sanders the best running back ever despite the fact that other players played longer and accrued more raw statistics, or "had more heart" (after all, Barry left the game at his peak and actually quit on his team), or etc., etc., etc. Why doesn't anyone claim that idea is stupid?

 

[wpdougie2180]

You wanna talk about Rice breaking D-II records? What?

Grbac had a string of good games when playing in the San Fran offense and Rice's production was a mixed bag, but when he played with Garcia he had 800 yards twice, then went to the Raiders who flung the ball around with Gannon. Rice was nothing more than a good receiver at that point in his career, and went to a team with a good passing offense. He didn't produce top ten receiver seasons and he wasn't "breaking records." Might I add that Gannon was a Pro Bowler the two years prior to Rice's arrival.

For fifteen of his twenty-one seasons, Rice had a Hall of Fame quarterback. Without Montana or Young, Rice had the worst stretch of seasons in his career. How can one trivialize the value of a quarterback when evaluating the play of a wide receiver? This makes no sense to me.

And before anyone flames that last comment, think about how for four seasons we all declared "imagine what Brady could do with weapons like Manning." Same boat, different sailor.

I hate the arguments of "best ever" and "greatest ever," but the stance of so many posters here that it is stupid to consider Randy as even comparable to Rice is laughably ridiculous.

Why do many people consider Barry Sanders the best running back ever despite the fact that other players played longer and accrued more raw statistics, or "had more heart" (after all, Barry left the game at his peak and actually quit on his team), or etc., etc., etc. Why doesn't anyone claim that idea is stupid?

And why do u think Grbac had those string of good games(including against the eventual SB champs Dallas where Rice had 150+ on Deion) also Rice played with 2 potential HOF players and out played both including a prime TO & Tim Brown. Also you mention Gannon making pro bowl, didn't Cunningham win a MVP award before Moss. And as seen in my other post he posted similar numbers to Moss at 39 & 40 when Moss was 23 & 24 respectively while Moss was out played by Nate Burleson in his QBs biggest statistical year. Now this is not diminish Moss but come on.

 

[bradmahn]

And why do u think Grbac had those string of good games(including against the eventual SB champs Dallas where Rice had 150+ on Deion) also Rice played with 2 potential HOF players and out played both including a prime TO & Tim Brown. Also you mention Gannon making pro bowl, didn't Cunningham win a MVP award before Moss. And as seen in my other post he posted similar numbers to Moss at 39 & 40 when Moss was 23 & 24 respectively while Moss was out played by Nate Burleson in his QBs biggest statistical year. Now this is not diminish Moss but come on.

I was prepared to post this long argument, but it's not worth it. Jerry Rice's best years came with quarterbacks that are in the Hall of Fame. For 3/4 of his career he played with Hall of Fame quarterbacks (not to mention the superior coaching his 49ers had). Joe Montana > Culpepper, Steve Young > Randall Cunningham of the '90s. Elvis Grbac is better than Andrew Walter or Kerry Collins.

The guy who gets the football to the receiver is very important in this game and there is no point in attempting to argue with someone who attempts to trivialize the importance of that position.

 

[wpdougie2180]

I was prepared to post this long argument, but it's not worth it. Jerry Rice's best years came with quarterbacks that are in the Hall of Fame. For 3/4 of his career he played with Hall of Fame quarterbacks (not to mention the superior coaching his 49ers had). Joe Montana > Culpepper, Steve Young > Randall Cunningham of the '90s. Elvis Grbac is better than Andrew Walter or Kerry Collins.

The guy who gets the football to the receiver is very important in this game and there is no point in attempting to argue with someone who attempts to trivialize the importance of that position.

I agree with what your saying but if you look at the facts did Culpepper not have a better season than Montana ever had in 2004 and to try and trivialize that is just revisionist history, same with Cunningham and Collins. Cunningham took his team to a 15-1 record something Young never did and Collins led his team to a NFC Championship game in his second year and to a Super Bowl over Moss's Vikings something Grbac never did. Your using the same argument that people use against Rice saying it's just longevity. Your using there careers to take away from what they did in one particular season.
Let me put in another way no one would say Kurt Warner was better than Young & Montana but for a couple of years he put up numbers that they never did. But at that particular moment he was better then them but not for a career.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I agree with what your saying but if you look at the facts did Culpepper not have a better season than Montana ever had in 2004 and to try and trivialize that is just revisionist history, same with Cunningham and Collins. Cunningham took his team to a 15-1 record something Young never did and Collins led his team to a NFC Championship game in his second year and to a Super Bowl over Moss's Vikings something Grbac never did. Your using the same argument that people use against Rice saying it's just longevity. Your using there careers to take away from what they did in one particular season.
Let me put in another way no one would say Kurt Warner was better than Young & Montana but for a couple of years he put up numbers that they never did. But at that particular moment he was better then them but not for a career.

That's kinda the point. Look at the 1998 Vikings. Set the alltime points record, went 15-1. Randall Cunningham was the quarterback. A 21-year-old Randy Moss catches 17 TD passes to be the dominant weapon in that offense. You're arguing that the fact that Cunningham and Culpepper suddenly became all-world talents when throwing to Moss is a point against him? No; Moss has made a career out of making mediocre-to-bad QBs have Culpepper-in-2004 type years. Hell, he even made Jeff George and Todd Bouman look pretty damn good. Suddenly give him a HOF-caliber QB, though (what Rice had for almost his entire career), and he breaks Rice's record in the first year.