NFLN Top 100 players :10 to 1

[SVN]

jim brown #2 so rice is 1

 

[PatriotsInGA]

I love how the moment Dallas Clark is out for the season, everybody in the media starts gushing about how he is so great for winning games with nooooooo offensive talent, but wait he still has Reggie Wayne and Pierre G. Who the hell played with Brady up until 07, NO ONE! I could careless about the ranking, just the superbowls

Well according to Fitzy is was: Jabar Gaffney, Reche Caldwell, and your mom as the Pats WRs

 

[SHOWTIME15]

not sure its about that , marino and manning couldnt repeat too. Its about MVPS ...

it's just the bias against brady for having only one "manning like" season where he puts up great numbers. that's what the perception is. and people remember brady's latest playoff performance - that is still fresh in people's minds. i am sure that this list was compiled over the summer way before our 6-1 start.

anyone else notice that manning's receivers 7 times out of 10 are WIDE open? then everyone praises him for his ability to throw.

 

[SVN]

gruden's metaphors so cheesy and over the top.

 

[SVN]

it's just the bias against brady for having only one "manning like" season where he puts up great numbers. that's what the perception is. and people remember brady's latest playoff performance - that is still fresh in people's minds. i am sure that this list was compiled over the summer way before our 6-1 start.

anyone else notice that manning's receivers 7 times out of 10 are WIDE open? then everyone praises him for his ability to throw.

for me its because of BB presence and cassel winning 11 games where people forgot that they had the easiest schedules that yr

 

[jbb9s]

Yeah well, when Brady gets his 4th then 4/5 is better than 4/4.

Jeez - this stuff really bugs me. Brady to Moss with a few minutes left. What else could he do? Go over to Peas and say "hey idiot - Ellis can't possibly cover a dude 8" taller than him at the goaline!"

Conversely, I didn't see Brady on the field for Vrabel's Blitz and Law's Pick 6......

I think you go by Rating, TD/Int %, etc. Let Belichick be judged on W/L. Maybe 4th quarter rating would be good too or playoff rankings obviously. And I know Brady is better than Peyton in all those categories.

The SB count works for Brady V Mannings/Favre/Marino but fails him against Bradshaw/Montana......

 

[AQPE]

Very disappointing rankings overall in my opinion. Ranking Manning and Favre over Brady is an absolute joke. I have no issue with Montana, Unitas, Sammy Baugh, or Otto Graham over Brady, as I think it is legitimate to argue that each of them were more dominant in their times than Brady is in his. Are championships the only factor, not in my opinion, but I think it is by far the most important factor. It is what they are playing for, after all. Enough so that I'd rank Bradshaw over Manning or Favre? I'd have to say yes, though I'd certainly understand why most would disagree. I remember those Steelers teams well, and other than Staubach I really don't think there were more than a couple of other quarterbacks in that time who I think would have won 4 with the Steelers.

I have a bigger issue with Jerry Rice at #1 than I do with the Brady/Manning/Favre rankings. I appreciated Rice as much as anyone but it is inexplicable to me that they could rank anyone above Jim Brown, especially a wide receiver. Ranking Rice higher than Brown is ludicrous, I think. Even today, when the rules/officiating has made the passing game so much more important than it was even 15 years ago in the NFL, would you take the current best WR (Andre Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald, for example) over the current best RB (say Adrian Peterson or Chris Johnson). I sure wouldn't. I've never seen a wide receiver take over a game in the last 5 minutes to preserve a win. I've seen plenty of running backs, quarterbacks, defensive linemen, and linebackers do that.

Noone will ever convince me that Rice dominated his era more than Jim Brown, or Joe Montana, LT, Walter Payton, or Joe Greene. I didn't see Sammy Baugh or Otto Graham but I'd be willing to bet they'd be on that list too. I'd rank any of them over Rice without any qualms. I'd rather have Deacon Jones, Butkus, Ronnie Lott, Anthony Munoz, maybe even Deion Sanders and Barry Sanders on my team than Jerry Rice.

To me Rice wasn't even either the best player or the most important player on his team, and for a good percentage he wasn't even the second-best or second-most important player. If Steve Young wasn't such an excellent quarterback, I wonder if Rice would be considered a top 25 player, much less #1.

 

[Modest]

This list was such horse****. Payton Manning should have been 1-11. If Payton Mannings could block for Payton Manning in an offensive line, and hand off to Payton Mannings running the ball and have the option to throw the ball to Payton Manning WRs and TEs, with 11 Payton Mannings on defense to try and cover any of the opponents futile attempts to score, then obviously the score of every football game they played would be Payton- 91. People not Payton- 0.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

All you need to know about this list is they have a wide receiver listed as the greatest player of all time.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Ranking Favre above anyone makes me question the sanity of this list. Since when is a three-year stretch of dominance (and still with plenty of bad mistakes) enough to outrank a career of glory, excellence and consistency? Terrible. If this is the criteria, I nominate Terrell Davis, Daunte Culpepper, and Andre Rison as top-15 players of all-time. And shut up about Favre's streak. It has brought him much more humiliation than glory.

Not sure why everyone is bent out of shape about Brady being lower than Manning. Brady is a CNN Sportsman of the Year, AP Male Athlete of the Year, ESPN Player of the Decade, all awards that Manning never won. It should be obvious by the constantly changing MVP criteria that NFL greats have a hard-on for Manning. In 2003, it wasn't about stats. In 2004, it was all about stats. In 2008, it was about leadership. In 2009, it was about being Manning rather than Brees or Rivers, two more deserving candidates. In years where Manning struggles, it goes to a running back.

Anyway, I'm actually glad that Brady is ranked 21st. He still has a lot of years with yet another chip on his shoulder. In case you guys haven't noticed, being the front runner isn't a good thing. Brady could have cemented his place at the GOAT in 2007, but he lost the SB due to factors outside of his control. Manning could have cemented his place as the GOAT in 2009, but he lost the SB due to a rookie-like interception. I say GOAT, but really the debate will go on forever. Brady could win seven SBs and Colts fans would still argue for Manning, who could win five and Pats fans would still prefer Brady. Regardless, Brady is a guy who thrives on being doubted and slighted. I expect that, when his career is over, these lists will rank him higher than 21st.

One last thing: a quarterback should be number 1. Most important position on the field. Give me all the greatest players and ask me who I take to start a team, and it's going to be a QB. No disrespect to the greatness of Jerry Rice or Jim Brown, but a QB is like a queen on a chessboard, while other positions can only be rooks.

 

[Brettlax3434]

Brady is the GOAT. Winning another superbowl will prove that, and he will. People always find somthing wrong with what Brady does. His defense is to good, he has Randy Moss. Blahh Blahh Blahh. Isnt the real truth about Brady that he wins with teams that "arent that good". Which of course is a joke because they are that good. Brady is a big part of that. He knows how to win and manages games until the game is on the line, then he dominates. Brady is the greatest of all time.

 

[jmt57]

Very disappointing rankings overall in my opinion. Ranking Manning and Favre over Brady is an absolute joke. I have no issue with Montana, Unitas, Sammy Baugh, or Otto Graham over Brady, as I think it is legitimate to argue that each of them were more dominant in their times than Brady is in his. Are championships the only factor, not in my opinion, but I think it is by far the most important factor. It is what they are playing for, after all. Enough so that I'd rank Bradshaw over Manning or Favre? I'd have to say yes, though I'd certainly understand why most would disagree. I remember those Steelers teams well, and other than Staubach I really don't think there were more than a couple of other quarterbacks in that time who I think would have won 4 with the Steelers.

I have a bigger issue with Jerry Rice at #1 than I do with the Brady/Manning/Favre rankings. I appreciated Rice as much as anyone but it is inexplicable to me that they could rank anyone above Jim Brown, especially a wide receiver. Ranking Rice higher than Brown is ludicrous, I think. Even today, when the rules/officiating has made the passing game so much more important than it was even 15 years ago in the NFL, would you take the current best WR (Andre Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald, for example) over the current best RB (say Adrian Peterson or Chris Johnson). I sure wouldn't. I've never seen a wide receiver take over a game in the last 5 minutes to preserve a win. I've seen plenty of running backs, quarterbacks, defensive linemen, and linebackers do that.

Noone will ever convince me that Rice dominated his era more than Jim Brown, or Joe Montana, LT, Walter Payton, or Joe Greene. I didn't see Sammy Baugh or Otto Graham but I'd be willing to bet they'd be on that list too. I'd rank any of them over Rice without any qualms. I'd rather have Deacon Jones, Butkus, Ronnie Lott, Anthony Munoz, maybe even Deion Sanders and Barry Sanders on my team than Jerry Rice.

To me Rice wasn't even either the best player or the most important player on his team, and for a good percentage he wasn't even the second-best or second-most important player. If Steve Young wasn't such an excellent quarterback, I wonder if Rice would be considered a top 25 player, much less #1.

Well said.

I know many are going to focus on the order of the quarterbacks, but Rice over Brown is a much bigger mistake in my opinion. Nothing against Rice, one of the greatest players ever, but if people watched games rather than relying almost exclusively on stats there would be no debate; Jim Brown would be number one.

Obviously many voters are swayed by the stats, but there are several flaws in doing that. For starters when Brown played the season was only 12 games long, and the playoffs were one game; when Rice played they were 16 games long and the playoffs were three games. In addition Rice 16 years while Brown played nine. Why should Brown be penalized for playing one-third as many games?

The biggest difference though is the changes in the way the game is played, brought on largely by the changes in how the game is officiated. Look at the all-time leaders in most offensive categories, especially passing and receiving. They're dominated by active players; it's rare to find an al-time leading receiver or passer who did not play in the 90's or later. This results in too many people thinking current players are the 'greatest ever' and ignoring players from previous eras.

To put it in perspective consider this: Thomas Jones, Warrick Dunn and 21 other players have run the ball more often than Jim Brown did. Want another stat? Jim Brown averaged over 23 more yards per game in his career than the NFL's so-called all-time leading rusher, Emmitt Smith did in his career.

Debate quarterbacks all you want, Jim Brown is the greatest NFL player ever.

 

[wpdougie2180]

Well said.

I know many are going to focus on the order of the quarterbacks, but Rice over Brown is a much bigger mistake in my opinion. Nothing against Rice, one of the greatest players ever, but if people watched games rather than relying almost exclusively on stats there would be no debate; Jim Brown would be number one.

Obviously many voters are swayed by the stats, but there are several flaws in doing that. For starters when Brown played the season was only 12 games long, and the playoffs were one game; when Rice played they were 16 games long and the playoffs were three games. In addition Rice 16 years while Brown played nine. Why should Brown be penalized for playing one-third as many games?

The biggest difference though is the changes in the way the game is played, brought on largely by the changes in how the game is officiated. Look at the all-time leaders in most offensive categories, especially passing and receiving. They're dominated by active players; it's rare to find an al-time leading receiver or passer who did not play in the 90's or later. This results in too many people thinking current players are the 'greatest ever' and ignoring players from previous eras.

To put it in perspective consider this: Thomas Jones, Warrick Dunn and 21 other players have run the ball more often than Jim Brown did. Want another stat? Jim Brown averaged over 23 more yards per game in his career than the NFL's so-called all-time leading rusher, Emmitt Smith did in his career.

Debate quarterbacks all you want, Jim Brown is the greatest NFL player ever.

Very disappointing rankings overall in my opinion. Ranking Manning and Favre over Brady is an absolute joke. I have no issue with Montana, Unitas, Sammy Baugh, or Otto Graham over Brady, as I think it is legitimate to argue that each of them were more dominant in their times than Brady is in his. Are championships the only factor, not in my opinion, but I think it is by far the most important factor. It is what they are playing for, after all. Enough so that I'd rank Bradshaw over Manning or Favre? I'd have to say yes, though I'd certainly understand why most would disagree. I remember those Steelers teams well, and other than Staubach I really don't think there were more than a couple of other quarterbacks in that time who I think would have won 4 with the Steelers.

I have a bigger issue with Jerry Rice at #1 than I do with the Brady/Manning/Favre rankings. I appreciated Rice as much as anyone but it is inexplicable to me that they could rank anyone above Jim Brown, especially a wide receiver. Ranking Rice higher than Brown is ludicrous, I think. Even today, when the rules/officiating has made the passing game so much more important than it was even 15 years ago in the NFL, would you take the current best WR (Andre Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald, for example) over the current best RB (say Adrian Peterson or Chris Johnson). I sure wouldn't. I've never seen a wide receiver take over a game in the last 5 minutes to preserve a win. I've seen plenty of running backs, quarterbacks, defensive linemen, and linebackers do that.

Noone will ever convince me that Rice dominated his era more than Jim Brown, or Joe Montana, LT, Walter Payton, or Joe Greene. I didn't see Sammy Baugh or Otto Graham but I'd be willing to bet they'd be on that list too. I'd rank any of them over Rice without any qualms. I'd rather have Deacon Jones, Butkus, Ronnie Lott, Anthony Munoz, maybe even Deion Sanders and Barry Sanders on my team than Jerry Rice.

To me Rice wasn't even either the best player or the most important player on his team, and for a good percentage he wasn't even the second-best or second-most important player. If Steve Young wasn't such an excellent quarterback, I wonder if Rice would be considered a top 25 player, much less #1.

If you haven't seen Rice take over a game do yourself a favor and watch the Super Bowl against the Bengals. Rice is the only player that played good in that game and while Montana gets all the pub for the game winning drive it was Rice who caught 5 catches on the drive and caused the double team that got Taylor open and he won MVP of that game. And the thing against Brown is he was ordinary against good competition and pedestrian in the 3 NFL championships (which would be the equivalent to the Super Bowl) while Rice always played big in his 4 Super Bowls. If you ignore Brown's playing a very weak division 11 games out of the 12 a year and Jim Taylor putting better numbers against the much much tougher Western division and then laying a goose egg in the big games (other than a 75-yard run when his team was already up 23-0 in the 4th). Let me ask you fellow Patriot fans would you take Manning over Brady simply based on regular season play and ignore his postseason play or Super Bowl play?

p.s edit: Rice played 20 years and doubled every thing that Brown did and no I don't give him credit for what he could have done since he didn't actually do it he retired to make ****ty movies.

 

[Calciumee]

For me, I couldn't care where Brady places! 1 or 100, he is still one of the best players ever to me, and since him we have 3 superbowls, more than Colts fans can say about Manning

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I didn't see Baugh but I saw the rest of them play football.
Selecting Rice first, dominant as he was as a wideout, doesn't make sense. The contention that a QB has to be #1 does make sense with one glaring exception...
One player and one player alone dominated most every game like a man among boys and that was Jim Brown, GOAT.

 

[dhamz]

Rice is arguably the best of all time, he is easily a top 10 all time player.

The reason he is #1 on this list is the way they did the voting. The panel got a list of 300 players and was to rate each on a scale of 1 to 10. Some voters only gave 10s to the guy they think is the best ever at that position as it is the only way to get some seperation - so on some ballots the only QB at 10 is Montana, some it is Elway, some Manning etc. At RB you've got Brown, Payton, some Sanders, etc. At WR the guy getting the 10 on all of the ballots like that is always going to be Rice.

 

[Uncle Rico]

Brady is the GOAT. Winning another superbowl will prove that, and he will. People always find somthing wrong with what Brady does. His defense is to good, he has Randy Moss. Blahh Blahh Blahh. Isnt the real truth about Brady that he wins with teams that "arent that good". Which of course is a joke because they are that good. Brady is a big part of that. He knows how to win and manages games until the game is on the line, then he dominates. Brady is the greatest of all time.

Yeah, funny ... playing so long with The Greatest Player of All Time didn't seem to count against Montana at all. Oh well, good discussion. I enjoyed the roundtable at he end, all those great player highlights.

 

[patsfan13]

didn't see Graham, Hutson and some others play. I saw J Brown and J Rice play their careers both are great and the best at their position.

Jim Brown is the greatest player, fast, physical, smart the entire d plan for the other team was to stop him, they never succeeded. Watching J Brown play was like watch a College All American playing in a HS football game, he was a man among boys.

Clearly the people who voted never saw him play.


As to Brady he will appear and win another few SB's with the rebuilt PAtriot team he will clearly be the best QB of the SB era when his career ends.

 

[captain stone]

If the Pats had not succumbed to illness, purposely artificial heat & noise, and corrupt, incompetent officiating, PayaTon Manning would have zero championships. Zero. Zip. Nada.
Brady would've had his 4th that year vs Wrecks GrossMan & da Bears, and should've had his 5th the following year were it not for his coaches, OL & Pierre Woods.

5 Championships to None...easily within his reach, and not having the other 2 mostly out of his control. PayaTon ahead of Brady is enough of a joke now; imagine if the above scenario had actually happened.

Besides, ranking NFL players in just one group, regardless of position, is really stupid anyway.
How can a CB or Safety be compared to an OLman, or a DLman to a WR?
What the NFLN should've done instead is create a series based on the best players all-time at every position group, then perhaps at the end announce an all-time team based on those voted the best at each of those positions.

 

[SVN]

I didn't see Baugh but I saw the rest of them play football.
Selecting Rice first, dominant as he was as a wideout, doesn't make sense. The contention that a QB has to be #1 does make sense with one glaring exception...
One player and one player alone dominated most every game like a man among boys and that was Jim Brown, GOAT.

incidently baugh was presented on NFLN by BB and he said somehting like -he was brady, brian moorman,ed reed all rolled into one .