PDA

View Full Version : Andre Johnson highest paid receiver


Splat
08-05-2010, 12:00 PM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/08/05/texans-plan-tentative-press-conference-to-announce-andre-johnson-deal/

The Texans are close enough to a new contract (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/08/05/texans-andre-johnson-close-to-a-new-deal/) with Andre Johnson (http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&id=1575) that they are ready to go public with it.

A "tentative" press conference has been scheduled for 2:30 ET to announce the end (http://www.houstontexans.com/blog/index.asp?post_id=1292), which may make Johnson the highest paid receiver in football.

Him and Fitz are neck and neck flip a coin really, I have no problem with this.

BmoreBlackByrdz
08-05-2010, 12:02 PM
I feel like Johnson is easily the best WR in the game. Fitz is great, no question, but I'd take Johnson 10 times outta 10.

He definitely deserves to be the highest paid WR.

K Train
08-05-2010, 12:04 PM
while im surprised they were willing to renegotiate with 5 years left on the deal, in Andre's defense having his uncle represent him screwed him out of some coin. I think the texans owner did the right thing in renegotiating it, hes a top WR and never causes problems for them, hes basically the offense

Paranoidmoonduck
08-05-2010, 12:06 PM
Good for him. If anyone's earned that distinction, it's him.

killxswitch
08-05-2010, 12:21 PM
Good, hopefully he can ease off some and enjoy his paycheck.

Brent
08-05-2010, 02:10 PM
http://resources.toolwi.com/resource/preview:2/e5fabaa93e2b62c2b02a8bb706b00bca.gif

well, that's cool

vidae
08-05-2010, 02:18 PM
I feel like Johnson is easily the best WR in the game. Fitz is great, no question, but I'd take Johnson 10 times outta 10.

He definitely deserves to be the highest paid WR.

10 times out of 10? I don't see how he's that much better than Fitz. They're both amazing. I'd put them at 1a and 1b.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 02:27 PM
I like how someone that has never logged 10 TDs in a season in despite playing 7 years and having the ball force fed to them as much as anyone, can be "easily the best receiver in the league."

locseti
08-05-2010, 02:27 PM
He da best.

Brent
08-05-2010, 02:29 PM
I like how someone that has never logged 10 TDs in a season in despite playing 7 years and having the ball force fed to them as much as anyone, can be "easily the best receiver in the league."
David Carr, Tony Banks, Dave Ragone and Sage Rosenfels, come to mind.

PoopSandwich
08-05-2010, 02:30 PM
I like how someone that has never logged 10 TDs in a season in despite playing 7 years and having the ball force fed to them as much as anyone, can be "easily the best receiver in the league."

Are you just somehow forgetting to factor in the receivers around him and the QB's he has had to play with as well as a couple injuries or do you just look at one stat and decide if a player is worth it or not worth it.

If you put Andre Johnson in place of Randy Moss in 2007 it would be Andre Johnson with receiving records for a single season, same thing with Fitz.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 02:32 PM
David Carr, Tony Banks, Dave Ragone and Sage Rosenfels, come to mind.


Yea, that was a good excuse for a while, except the last two years with obscene catch totals, and a QB that is actually pretty good(as far as pumping stats out anyway).

Calvin Johnson cranked out 12 on a way lower catch total with Dan Orsafety as his QB, the excuses work in the beginning of your career, but Johnson is 29 years old and just has never been elite at getting in the endzone, even with quality QB play.

PoopSandwich
08-05-2010, 02:35 PM
Yea, that was a good excuse for a while, except the last two years with obscene catch totals, and a QB that is actually pretty good(as far as pumping stats out anyway).

Calvin Johnson cranked out 12 on a way lower catch total with Dan Orsafety as his QB, the excuses work in the beginning of your career, but Johnson is 29 years old and just has never been elite at getting in the endzone, even with quality QB play.

Touchdowns mean absolutely nothing. Jamal Lewis scored 3 or 4 touchdowns in one game with a 2.0 yard average and like 30 yards rushing.

Jerome Bettis got like 3 tds on 3 yards.

TD's are one of the dumbest ******* stats in the game, I can get my team the most amount of yards and someone else gets the throw when my 2 feet are in the end zone, big deal.

locseti
08-05-2010, 02:38 PM
Get real, yards>TD's,

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 02:38 PM
What was the excuse this year when his team was first in passing yards and 5th in touchdowns? Hell even Kevin Walter managed 8 TDs on 60 catches last year

Excuse me while I don't feel sorry for him, players have gotten up over 12-15 touchdowns in worse situations.

Td record my ass.

Brent
08-05-2010, 02:38 PM
Jerome Bettis got like 3 tds on 3 yards
Ah, yes, the Shaun Alexander tactic of collecting stats. "Let my back up get all the carries on this drive, unless we're inside the 5."

Bob Sanders Dreadlock
08-05-2010, 02:39 PM
Get real, yards>TD's,

Which one wins games?

PoopSandwich
08-05-2010, 02:40 PM
Which one wins games?

Its a stupid measurement of a single person's achievement if you're just looking at their touchdowns.

Visanthe Shiancoe got 11 tds last year therefore he's better than Andre Johnson.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 02:40 PM
Yards don't mean squat if you can't finish drives off. It's not a be all and end all number, like saying "oh he had 1 more TD, therefore, he is better" but this dude lags behind big time in comparison to like every good receiver in recent history.

Which really good receiver has never cracked 10 ONCE. You'd think he'd fluke into 10 TDs at least once.

PoopSandwich
08-05-2010, 02:43 PM
Yards don't mean squat if you can't finish drives off. It's not a be all and end all number, like saying "oh he had 1 more TD, therefore, he is better" but this dude lags behind big time in comparison to like every good receiver in recent history.

Which really good receiver has never cracked 10 ONCE. You'd think he'd fluke into 10 TDs at least once.

So the difference between him getting 9 touchdowns and 10 touchdowns is so astronomical that you're gonna completely forget that he beat every single receiver in the league by over 220 yards last year while averaging 15.5 yards per catch?

Cool.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 02:48 PM
So the difference between him getting 9 touchdowns and 10 touchdowns is so astronomical that you're gonna completely forget that he beat every single receiver in the league by over 220 yards last year while averaging 15.5 yards per catch?

Cool.


No, it's the fact that it's not a high number or unachievable goal over a long career where you are force fed teh ball and are "by far the best receiver".

10 shouldn't be the number, if someone is by far the best receiver, it should be way over that, the fact that it's single digits is just what makes it laughable, when people like Vernon Davis can snag 13 as a TE with a way worse QB.


He's "by far" the best receiver, but he's not in shouting distance of these guys in career highs scoring the ball.

Dude is a beast of a specimen with stupid good hands and power, he's just not a super elite end zone threat, and it shows.

Ness
08-05-2010, 02:50 PM
Yea, that was a good excuse for a while, except the last two years with obscene catch totals, and a QB that is actually pretty good(as far as pumping stats out anyway).

Calvin Johnson cranked out 12 on a way lower catch total with Dan Orsafety as his QB, the excuses work in the beginning of your career, but Johnson is 29 years old and just has never been elite at getting in the endzone, even with quality QB play.

He can still have the crown of "best wide receiver" in the NFL. He's never had double digit touchdowns sure, but he's had at least 8 the last three seasons, while leading the NFL in receiving yardage the last two seasons...a feat matched by only Jerry Rice I believe. He'll probably have more than 10 touchdowns at some point in his career. Just hasn't happen for him yet. Not a big deal though.

K Train
08-05-2010, 02:52 PM
If you put Andre Johnson in place of Randy Moss in 2007 it would be Andre Johnson with receiving records for a single season, same thing with Fitz.
i believe he would have shattered the record on that team, not just broke it


i think andre is the best WR, and in 2 years i think calvin will be the best. but its not by a wide margin at all, fitz certainly makes a case for being the best right now.

its funny though with all the diva WRs that ***** about everything... andre, fitz, and calvin (imo the top 3) are just the nicest guys lol

LonghornsLegend
08-05-2010, 02:54 PM
I think the TD argument is legit, and the QB argument really isn't because I can think of quite a bit of WR's who have notched over 10 TD's with terrible QB's as well.


He gets a ton of targets, he's got incredible size, and he has a very good QB, he really should have gotten at least 10 TD's by now especially with the amount of targets and catches he gets.


Maybe 2007 he was gonna do it before he got hurt I'm not sure, but I'd still take Fitz over him, he's a dominant and very good WR but there are no excuses for him to not have 10 TD's in a season before.

Babylon
08-05-2010, 02:55 PM
Whether he's the highest paid or not really doesnt guarantee he's the best in the league but i'd have him in the top 3-5.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 02:57 PM
I'd say it's a big deal, I can't think of anyone but Art Monk that is considered an elite guy and couldn't ever get over 9.

Really, Andre must have the biggest stat padding teammates ever.

Anyway Ness, to me, you aren't the best receiver in the league over someone like Fitzgerald or Randy Moss, who is going to score down there if the ball comes their way, or is going to break that deep one and take it all the way in.

Think about it that way, Randy Moss has played with some good QBs, but he also played on the worst offensive display of all time, with Aaron Brooks throwing behind the worst protection I've ever seen. He still managed 8 scores on only 60 grabs.

Some guys are just score way more than others, and it's an apparent trend now, not just a 1 or 2 year anomaly.

SMH at shattering hte touchdown record. Thank you LonghornsLegend, at least I know I'm not crazy.

Edit: Totally called you Metsox... :S

Complex
08-05-2010, 03:12 PM
i believe he would have shattered the record on that team, not just broke it


i think andre is the best WR, and in 2 years i think calvin will be the best. but its not by a wide margin at all, fitz certainly makes a case for being the best right now.

its funny though with all the diva WRs that ***** about everything... andre, fitz, and calvin (imo the top 3) are just the nicest guys lol

Calvin Johnson a top 3 WR right now? lol

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 03:17 PM
Jimmy Smith is the best receiver I could think of that never cracked 10.

Jimmy was really good, had some seasons like Andre with the high catch and yards totals.

Anyone here think Jimmy Smith at his peak would be easily the best receiver in the league right now?

Ness
08-05-2010, 03:19 PM
I'd say it's a big deal, I can't think of anyone but Art Monk that is considered an elite guy and couldn't ever get over 9.

Really, Andre must have the biggest stat padding teammates ever.

Anyway Ness, to me, you aren't the best receiver in the league over someone like Fitzgerald or Randy Moss, who is going to score down there if the ball comes their way, or is going to break that deep one and take it all the way in.

Think about it that way, Randy Moss has played with some good QBs, but he also played on the worst offensive display of all time, with Aaron Brooks throwing behind the worst protection I've ever seen. He still managed 8 scores on only 60 grabs.

Some guys are just score way more than others, and it's an apparent trend now, not just a 1 or 2 year anomaly.

His career isn't over yet though. Michael Irvin didn't get 10 (his only double digit touchdown season) until he was 29. Same with Tim Brown not reaching that mark until he was 29. Jimmy Smith never got there along with Amani Toomer. All those guys had some pretty good careers. Andre Johnson may not be the best in the NFL hands down, but he's one of the best. And that is all that really matters I suppose. But for me, if someone believes that he's the best in the NFL I don't really think it's that unusual to have that opinion.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 03:21 PM
Do you think Michael Irvin, Tim Brown, Jimmy Smith, or Amani toomer would be in contention for best receiver in the league right now?

Ness
08-05-2010, 03:21 PM
Jimmy Smith is the best receiver I could think of that never cracked 10.

Jimmy was really good, had some seasons like Andre with the high catch and yards totals.

Anyone here think Jimmy Smith at his peak would be easily the best receiver in the league right now?

There are a lot of guys like Irvin and Reed who only had one season where they had at least ten touchdowns. Now do you think their legacies would be any different if they didn't have double digit touchdowns in that one season?

And you're forgetting James Lofton. He never cracked ten touchdowns.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 03:23 PM
Big difference from saying he's like Andre Reed, to saying he's by far the best receiver in the league.

Ness
08-05-2010, 03:23 PM
Do you think Michael Irvin, Tim Brown, Jimmy Smith, or Amani toomer would be in contention for best receiver in the league right now?

If they were in Andre Johnson's position? Yes. Irvin and Brown at least.

Ness
08-05-2010, 03:24 PM
Big difference from saying he's like Andre Reed, to saying he's by far the best receiver in the league.

Where did I say Andre Johnson is like Andre Reed?

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 03:27 PM
You're saying other great players like Reed and Irvin didn't get 10 TDs at that age, and I'm saying, those guys wouldn't be considered the best receiver in the league by far(or at all, for that matter), so my point is made.

Johnson compares more favorably to great receivers like that then he does to unquestionable best in the league status.

PoopSandwich
08-05-2010, 03:33 PM
When you use the argument that someone has had alot of touchdowns easily with worse qb's it just hurts your argument proving that its more of a fluke stat than anything.

Andre Johnson gets them in place to score touchdowns, he may not be the one who gets the catch all the time and I guarantee alot of it comes from double teams in the red zone allowing worse players to get the stats, which is why its a stupid stat.

If you can't use your eyes and are just going to look at one stat then it proves how narrow-minded you are.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/rec_yds_single_season.htm

Two of his seasons in yards receiving rank in the top 20 of all time.

jayceheathman
08-05-2010, 03:38 PM
I'd say it's a big deal, I can't think of anyone but Art Monk that is considered an elite guy and couldn't ever get over 9.

Really, Andre must have the biggest stat padding teammates ever.

Anyway Ness, to me, you aren't the best receiver in the league over someone like Fitzgerald or Randy Moss, who is going to score down there if the ball comes their way, or is going to break that deep one and take it all the way in.

Think about it that way, Randy Moss has played with some good QBs, but he also played on the worst offensive display of all time, with Aaron Brooks throwing behind the worst protection I've ever seen. He still managed 8 scores on only 60 grabs.

Some guys are just score way more than others, and it's an apparent trend now, not just a 1 or 2 year anomaly.

SMH at shattering hte touchdown record. Thank you LonghornsLegend, at least I know I'm not crazy.

Edit: Totally called you Metsox... :S

Darrele Revis didnt lead the league INT's yet I am sure you probably think he is the best corner in the game.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 03:38 PM
Well, David Boston had 1598, and Rob Moore had 1584.

Easily the best two receivers of their time.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 03:40 PM
Darrele Revis didnt lead the league INT's yet I am sure you probably think he is the best corner in the game.

1) I don't think Revis is the best CB in the game.

2) INT's is the exact opposite of this argument, so you fail HORRIBLY. Teams force the ball away from Revis. Houston forces the ball TOO Johnson. Revis gets less chances to get his hands on the ball than most CBs. Johnson gets as many chances with the ball as anyone, he was thrown at like 170+ times in the last two years.

Shahin
08-05-2010, 03:42 PM
Calvin Johnson a top 3 WR right now? lol

Sounds about right. Definitely top 5.

jayceheathman
08-05-2010, 03:44 PM
1) I don't think Revis is the best CB in the game.

2) INT's is the exact opposite of this argument, so you fail HORRIBLY. Teams force the ball away from Revis. Houston forces the ball TOO Johnson. Revis gets less chances to get his hands on the ball than most CBs. Johnson gets as many chances with the ball as anyone, he was thrown at like 170+ times in the last two years.

They wouldnt throw as much to Jarrius Bird yet he still got more INT's.

Andre Johnson doesnt have one down the whole game where he isnt double teamed and he still gets that many receptions.

Chris Johnson also ran for 800 more yards than AP yet he was behind by a whole 4TD's.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 03:46 PM
Yet, Andre Johnson doesnt have one down the whole game where he isnt double teamed and he still gets that many receptions.


Yea, so does every other elite receiver, and they still score a lot more than Johnson, some of them on almost half the catches.

PoopSandwich
08-05-2010, 03:47 PM
Well, David Boston had 1598, and Rob Moore had 1584.

Easily the best two receivers of their time.

Yeah because Andre Johnson definitely looks like he's going down the path of David Boston...

jayceheathman
08-05-2010, 03:54 PM
Yea, so does every other elite receiver, and they still score a lot more than Johnson, some of them on almost half the catches.

No, they dont. Fitz had Bolden as well as a decent running game to take pressure off of him. The Texans had zero running game what so ever, an injured Owen Daniels, not very strong OLine, and even then he put up great numbers. With the Texans you know one thing and thats that the ball is going to Andre Johnson and even then they couldnt stop it. When it goes to the red zone, Kubiak completely went away from AJ. He would run, run, and run some more with Chris Brown and then attempt a field goal.

Vernon Davis didnt even have to deal with corners trying to cover him and wasnt double teamed.

The other one that consistently saw double teams was Roddy White.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 03:57 PM
No, they dont. Fitz had Bolden as well as a decent running game to take pressure off of him.

Miles Austin had single coverage for awhile until teams caught on.

Vernon Davis didnt even have to deal with corners trying to cover him and wasnt double teamed.

The only one that consistently saw double teams was Roddy White.


How about Calvin Johnson on the 0-16 Lions with Dan Orlovsky, Jon Kitna, and the corpse of Daunte Culpepper?

He managed 12 on only 78 catches while seeing 100% of the defensive attention.

K Train
08-05-2010, 03:58 PM
well thats just cause calvin is filthy

jayceheathman
08-05-2010, 03:59 PM
How about Calvin Johnson on the 0-16 Lions with Dan Orlovsky, Jon Kitna, and the corpse of Daunte Culpepper?

He managed 12 on only 78 catches while seeing 100% of the defensive attention.

With the Texans you know one thing and thats that the ball is going to Andre Johnson and even then they couldnt stop it. When it goes to the red zone, Kubiak completely went away from AJ. He would run, run, and run some more with Chris Brown and then attempt a field goal. Before that, he would give the ball to Slaton and he would fumble.

Everyone knew they were going to beat the Lions anyway so they didnt bother playing since they didnt want anyone getting injured.

Ness
08-05-2010, 04:02 PM
You're saying other great players like Reed and Irvin didn't get 10 TDs at that age, and I'm saying, those guys wouldn't be considered the best receiver in the league by far(or at all, for that matter), so my point is made.

Johnson compares more favorably to great receivers like that then he does to unquestionable best in the league status.

Michael Irvin during some years were considered by few to be the best receiver in the NFL. Only Jerry Rice really stood in his way. But I already said it doesn't matter. He's one of the best in the NFL and that is what is important. James Lofton at a point in time was considered the best in the NFL by a lot of people and he never had double digit touchdowns once.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 04:08 PM
With the Texans you know one thing and thats that the ball is going to Andre Johnson and even then they couldnt stop it. When it goes to the red zone, Kubiak completely went away from AJ. He would run, run, and run some more with Chris Brown and then attempt a field goal. Before that, he would give the ball to Slaton and he would fumble.

Everyone knew they were going to beat the Lions anyway so they didnt bother playing since they didnt want anyone getting injured.


Everyone knew they would beat the Texans back in the day too, Andre still couldn't get 12.

Keep the excuses coming.

PoopSandwich
08-05-2010, 04:20 PM
Everyone knew they would beat the Texans back in the day too, Andre still couldn't get 12.

Keep the excuses coming.

Your argument is so flawed and stupid it's unbelievable it's clearly impossible to reason with you.

Edit : Do you understand that 9 touchdowns was also tied for 10th in the league or are you going to ignore that...

3 Tight ends and 6 pro-bowlers are the ones who were ahead of him last year in touchdowns.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 04:26 PM
10th in the league is nice dude. It's just not "omfg, he's the best in the league by far and no one should question it" good.

And the stupid assertions like "he would smash the TD record" are more flawed than anything.

Like was shown, guys have done more scoring in worse situations than Andre, and you guys can't punch holes in that and you're all getting mad, haha.

Ness
08-05-2010, 04:32 PM
10th in the league is nice dude. It's just not "omfg, he's the best in the league by far and no one should question it" good.

And the stupid assertions like "he would smash the TD record" are more flawed than anything.

Like was shown, guys have done more scoring in worse situations than Andre, and you guys can't punch holes in that and you're all getting mad, haha.

People might just be getting frustrated with your ignorance. I mean using the double digit touchdown thing as Andre Johnson's handicap for him not being considered the best in the NFL is pretty ridiculous if you think about it. That would be like saying Larry Fitzgerald is in no way shape or form the best in the NFL at receiver because he's never lead the league in receiving yardage, or never had over 1500 yards in a season at this point in his career.

PoopSandwich
08-05-2010, 04:33 PM
10th in the league is nice dude. It's just not "omfg, he's the best in the league by far and no one should question it" good.

And the stupid assertions like "he would smash the TD record" are more flawed than anything.

Like was shown, guys have done more scoring in worse situations than Andre, and you guys can't punch holes in that and you're all getting mad, haha.

No were saying how stupid of an argument it is and providing actual evidence to why its a stupid argument and all you do is keep bringing it up like its the end all receiver stat.

I never even once said he was the best in the league by far and that no one should question it, I think him and Fitz are the best in the league but it's not like others aren't good.

You have your head so far up your own ass that you can't take time to read and understand what people are saying you just spew out the same bull **** over and over again "OMG HE HASNT CRACKED 10 TOUCHDOWNS IN A SEASON! 10 OR MORE OF HIS RECEPTIONS WERENT IN THE END ZONE IT MEANS HES NOT GOOD ENOUGH! NAME ME ONE GUY WHOS AWESOME THAT HASNT CRACKED 10 TOUCHDOWNS BY HIS AGE HE MUST SUCK IF HE HASNT! ITS OBVIOUS THAT THERE ARENT OTHER FACTORS LIKE DOUBLE TEAMING OR OTHER PEOPLE WHO GET OPEN ON A PLAY THAT THE QUARTERBACK THROWS TO THERES NO WAY THAT IS IT!!!!"

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 04:38 PM
People might just be getting frustrated with your ignorance. I mean using the double digit touchdown thing as Andre Johnson's handicap for him not being considered the best in the NFL is pretty ridiculous if you think about it. That would be like saying Larry Fitzgerald is in no way shape or form the best in the NFL at receiver because he's never lead the league in receiving yardage.

Valid criticism, if someone said he were a lock and it was unquestionably the best.

Then again, he's been 2nd, and 4th twice, and he's been tied for first in TDs twice to go along with those yards, and has a top 5 and top 10 finish as well.

I'm not asking for 15+ touchdowns a year, but I want to see a guy prove that he's a dominant threat to score all the time, and Andre hasn't shown it to the level of some guys.

Haha, yea Winslow, I said he isn't good at all, that's what I said. Might wanna go take a breather dude, you mad.

PoopSandwich
08-05-2010, 04:46 PM
=
Haha, yea Winslow, I said he isn't good at all, that's what I said. Might wanna go take a breather dude, you mad.

Sarcasm flies right over your head.

jayceheathman
08-05-2010, 04:54 PM
Everyone knew they would beat the Texans back in the day too, Andre still couldn't get 12.

Keep the excuses coming.

Your argument is like saying that Peyton Manning is one of the worst QB's because he was almost in the top 5 in INT's last year.

Ness
08-05-2010, 05:06 PM
Valid criticism, if someone said he were a lock and it was unquestionably the best.

Then again, he's been 2nd, and 4th twice, and he's been tied for first in TDs twice to go along with those yards, and has a top 5 and top 10 finish as well.

I'm not asking for 15+ touchdowns a year, but I want to see a guy prove that he's a dominant threat to score all the time, and Andre hasn't shown it to the level of some guys.

Haha, yea Winslow, I said he isn't good at all, that's what I said. Might wanna go take a breather dude, you mad.

But yeah, if you're going to take that angle and nit-pick, then you could take practically any player that is considered "the best" at their position by a consensus of people, take what little negative points they may have, pile them up and make a strawman case...regardless of how many positives are on the other side of the coin.

It would be like me saying Peyton Manning is no way the best quarterback in the league because of his average record in the playoffs.

Bob Sanders Dreadlock
08-05-2010, 05:42 PM
But yeah, if you're going to take that angle and nit-pick, then you could take practically any player that is considered "the best" at their position by a consensus of people, take what little negative points they may have, pile them up and make a strawman case...regardless of how many positives are on the other side of the coin.

It would be like me saying Peyton Manning is no way the best quarterback in the league because of his average record in the playoffs.

How do you evaluate a player? Sit around and look at all the positives while ignoring the negatives? Sounds like Jon Gruden to me. Brett should feel good about people not remembering his 317 interceptions with his ample amount of positive records.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 05:45 PM
Apparently if you don't think someone is by far and unquestionably the best player at his position because he's lacking in a certain area, you think he sucks.

NFLDC counterarguments ftw.

I get it now though, Andre Johnson just gets more attention than anyone ever has in the redzone to where he can't pile up catches and TDs, but for the rest of the game, he does just fine.

Oh by the way, Andre is closer to Brandon Marshall than he is to being some uber untouchable receiver. Brandon also is a great possession guy you can force the ball too that isn't a dominant touchdown threat, but he's also happened to crack 10, with even less catches ;)

So yea, they just put 8 guys on Andre Johnson, and their QB can't find a receiver with 8 guys covering one receiver, I'm glad NJX came in with his "I will take down your argument without ever making an argument of my own" shtick to put me in my place.

I dunno why it's so hard to believe that every big receiver isn't equal at getting touchdowns. And it's not all redzone, someone like Johnson might pile up more 40 yard gains powering through guys and then getting tackled, and the other guy might get less 40 yarders total, but almost always finish it by getting it in the endzone.

Some guys just get in more, and it's not all circumstance, because like I keep showing, but people keep wanting to ignore, you can notch mid teens in TDs without having Peyton Manning as a QB and you can get up to 12 and up with guys like Dan Orlovksy.

Brent
08-05-2010, 05:52 PM
tl;dr - using td receptions alone to suggest a wr sucks is asinine at best.
I dont think any one is going to counter you.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 05:52 PM
I dont think any one is going to counter you.


As usual, he'll argue against someone by putting words in their mouth and beating that point.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 06:26 PM
Your argument is like saying that Peyton Manning is one of the worst QB's because he was almost in the top 5 in INT's last year.


No, it's nothing like that, how is "almost being top 5" even part of this? Even still, I'm not basing it off of one year or one fluke season where he had pedestrian touchdown numbers, it's 7 years worth of data.

Your analogies are like, not good.

And NJX, since you found that Moss and Johnson have the same amount of redzone touchdowns, surely you can show me who was thrown to more, right?

PoopSandwich
08-05-2010, 06:56 PM
NFLDC counterarguments ftw.



You're the one trying to argue how good someone is based on how many times they get a ball thrown to them in the end zone even though they have two top 20 receiving yard seasons with garbage QB play most of his career.

descendency
08-05-2010, 06:59 PM
Andre is by far the best WR in the game. Big, Physical, Fast, Strong.

I heard the Texans have two plays: Andre left and Andre right.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 07:01 PM
Andre is by far the best WR in the game. Big, Physical, Fast, Strong.

I heard the Texans have two plays: Andre left and Andre right.


They should try "Andre Endzone"

A Perfect Score
08-05-2010, 07:30 PM
Lance Moore had 10 TDs in a season. Better then Andre Johnson? I think so.

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 08:00 PM
Lance Moore is proof that you don't have to be all that good to fluke your way into 10 td's.

You all can stick to the raw 10 number and make yourselves feel like you are winning the argument, but the fact is, there is a difference in dynamics in receivers that are capable of 12-15 touchdowns and guys in the 7-8-9 range.

Splat
08-05-2010, 08:11 PM
I don't think Revis is the best CB in the game.

Then who is?

Saints-Tigers
08-05-2010, 08:18 PM
Then who is?

Namandy awesomer

FUNBUNCHER
08-05-2010, 09:51 PM
Saints-Tiger is speaking TRUTH.

IF you're gonna put a WR out there as the best or top 2-3 in the league, with the amount of balls that AJ catches, and he's NEVER cracked 10 TDs once, well it's......odd.

It's the reason that although when Rice and Monk were contemporaries and were putting up similar stats from a catches and yardage standpoint, there was never any debate about who was better; Rice was simply a scoring machine.

Possession WRs are nice, invaluable in fact, but guys who score the football are in their own category.

Marvin Harrison and T.O. are different animals compared to a guy like Andre Johnson, and I don't believe they received any less attention from D-coordinators than AJ.

Like Brandon Marshall, Andre Johnson is a 'great WR', but also like Marshall, they're both more possession type guys than T.O. or Randy Moss.

In the modern NFL, it's hard for me to call a guy the best in the game, yet after 7 years his high total in a season is 9 TDs.

For my money, Larry Fitzgerald is the best in the game, because he puts points on the scoreboard with greater regularity.

Special offensive skill players score TDs, there's no way to disregard this fact or to minimize its significance.

At some point in the future, never scoring 10+ TDs in a year may be a minor knock against Andre Johnson; Chris Carter had 5 double digit TD seasons after the age of 29.

Toan
08-05-2010, 09:58 PM
Namandy awesomer

oh my gawd. he's gone full ******.

RufusMcDaniel
08-05-2010, 10:16 PM
IYF8G4xd2UA

9fS_Gxgz6EQ

Well when he gets TDs he makes them count. Oh and I hope he retires soon as well.

Best Receiver in the game IMO.

Vox Populi
08-05-2010, 10:16 PM
Demarcus Ware isn't a top pass rusher because he doesn't force enough fumbles and turnovers.

Malaka
08-05-2010, 10:27 PM
Eh I think Fitz and AJ are 1a and 1b. I think you guys are overanalyzing things. Honestly just depends on what you like. AJ will put up more yards and Fitz will get you more TDs. I like the point that was made about AJ being the top priority in endzone, that's very true which could explain his TDs not being double digits. Since Fitzy had Boldin, Breaston, and Doucet, although he might have been the top priority there too defenses couldn't focus everything on him since there were some pretty decent other options. Meanwhile AJ had pretty much just Owen Daniels who is an excellent albeit oft injured option.

Looking back two seasons, statwise, we can see a very simple way to put it. As I said before, Andre Johnson will get you more yards, and Larry Fitzgerald will get you more TDs.

Fitzgerald: 09 1,092 Yards 11.3 Avg 13 TD
08 1,431 Yards 14.9 Avg 12 TD

Total: 2,523 Yards 13.1 Avg 25 TDs

Johnson: 09 1,569 Yards 15.5 Avg 9 TD
08 1,575 Yards 13.7 Avg 8 TD

Total: 3,144 14.6 Avg 17 TDs.

Johnson put up way more yards, Fitz had a lot more TDs. You can say TDs > Yards, and so be it you like Fitz, but you can't say the yards don't translate to point for the team in general. Judging by the YPC, Johnson has more big plays, which would mean Fitzgerald's TDs are more in the redzone. The Cardinals have been a better team than the Texans, so I am going to go out on a limb and say that the offense in general was better with Kurt at the helm over Schaub, and the trio of Fitzgerald, Boldin, and Breaston over the trio of Johnson, Walter, and Daniels.

Orange juice and apple juice, two very different juices. Thankfully I am able to like them both equally.

Breaker
08-05-2010, 10:28 PM
Adrian Peterson isn't a top 5 RB because 13 of his 20 career fumbles had been recovered by the opposing defense.

Toan
08-05-2010, 10:31 PM
Drew Brees isn't a HOF QB because he threw more interception than TDs in his third season in the NFL.

FUNBUNCHER
08-05-2010, 10:36 PM
Adrian Peterson isn't a top 5 RB because 13 of his 20 career fumbles had been recovered by the opposing defense.


Just silly.

You type up an OBSCURE statistical data crunch, as if that equates to an argument about why an 'elite' WR has yet to score double digit TDs in a season after seven years in the NFL.

If AD had never scored double digit TDs EVER, would the entire world be on his jock as the 'next coming' in the NFL??

Shiver
08-05-2010, 10:37 PM
Getting over the touchdowns argument, I would prefer Andre Johnson because his game is more multifaceted. He threatens defenses on all levels. Fitzgerald isn't really a deep threat.

FUNBUNCHER
08-05-2010, 10:46 PM
Getting over the touchdowns argument, I would prefer Andre Johnson because his game is more multifaceted. He threatens defenses on all levels. Fitzgerald isn't really a deep threat.

Teams sure do play him like he's a deep threat. He ALWAYS gets extra safety help on longer routes.

Andre Johnson may have better timed speed, but I don't see much difference in their acceleration/speed on game day.

One thing about AJ, he's come close to averaging 100yards/game receiving the last 3 years, which is freakish.

Really I think it's a matter of time before the TDs start coming in bunches for him.

XxXdragonXxX
08-05-2010, 10:51 PM
Top 10 RB's of all time

1. Emmitt Smith
2. Ladanian Tomlinson
3. Marcus Allen
4. Walter Payton
5. Jim Brown
6. John Riggins
7. Shaun Alexander
8. Marshall Faulk
9. Barry Sanders
10. Jerome Bettis

FUNBUNCHER
08-05-2010, 10:54 PM
Top 10 RB's of all time

1. Emmitt Smith
2. Ladanian Tomlinson
3. Marcus Allen
4. Walter Payton
5. Jim Brown
6. John Riggins
7. Shaun Alexander
8. Marshall Faulk
9. Barry Sanders
10. Jerome Bettis

Non sequitur much??lol

XxXdragonXxX
08-05-2010, 11:00 PM
Non sequitur much??lol


Yes, this whole argument is.

FUNBUNCHER
08-05-2010, 11:09 PM
Yeah, but not really.
TDs and WRs kinda go together like PB and jelly.

Andre's got the jelly, but he needs that buttah babee!!!

XxXdragonXxX
08-05-2010, 11:21 PM
Using a single statistic to say someone isn't the best is logically flawed.


I mean, are you trying to say Andre just suddenly becomes an average WR when the Texans get near the endzone? Or is it more likely that the Texans simply give the ball to someone else while the defense is focused on Andre?

Ness
08-06-2010, 12:48 AM
How do you evaluate a player? Sit around and look at all the positives while ignoring the negatives? Sounds like Jon Gruden to me. Brett should feel good about people not remembering his 317 interceptions with his ample amount of positive records.

Where did I say I did that? And if you got that out of my response then you don't understand that I'm saying.

The key is to look at both sides of the coin. In this case it has to do with Andre Johnson. His only glaring negative that has been talked about thus far among a consensus is his lack of touchdowns. Now I could use that little bit of information, blow it out of context while ignoring the positives, and make a case that Andre can't possibly be the best receiver in the NFL, but I would just look like a fool in the process.

This argument is like saying Joe Montana was never the best at his position at any given time because he never threw for 4000 yards in a season. See I'm taking one negative and using it to outweigh everything else to make my case.


For my money, Larry Fitzgerald is the best in the game, because he puts points on the scoreboard with greater regularity.

That's absurd. Larry Fitzgerald has never had over 1500 receiving yards or led the league in receiving yardage. o.O

jsagan77
08-06-2010, 04:14 AM
Randy Moss is still the best WR in the NFL...

Andre is 1b

Fitz is 1c

/thread

Saints-Tigers
08-06-2010, 09:55 AM
yes, anyone ever. oh wait, you mean you DO understand hyperbole?
I'd rather not talk in hyperbole, and drag this way off topic so you can argue some point that no one is trying to make, as per usual.


i'm sure you'll let me know why you think marshall wasn't a dominant touchdown threat. because i'm sure you've seen more than 3 total minutes of broncos football in the last three years. oh wait, you're making up arguments about something you know nothing about? awesome.

Oh, the you haven't watched him argument, the last resort for when you can't make your own argument as to why he is a dominant touchdown threat.

Hah, even if the only thing I ever watched my own team, he destroyed my team just a season ago, which is besides the point anyway, speaking to just about anyone on a football website like this, you know they have seen plenty of games from plenty of teams. We all know about Brandon Marshall.


exactly 8 guys. and what argument should i be making? my entire argument is that you using touchdowns as some kind of valid metric is idiotic at best, and demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of football at worst. i'm pretty sure i clearly outlined that argument, i'm shocked you couldn't find it. i mean, all it would've taken was reading.

No, you all are pretending I'm saying touchdowns are the only thing in this equation for best receiver to make your point, where I haven't said it once.

I don't see how you can totally disregard the amount of touchdowns though, if it doesn't matter that you have high TDs like other elite receivers, should they matter at all? What if he had 0 touchdowns per season ? It still wouldn't matter?


so who's better? the dude cherry picking a touchdown, or the dude who gets you into position to actually score points? you've argued, thus far, that the apparent only thing that matters is who scores. i mean, it's a totally valid way to compare jerome bettis and duce staley in 2004, right? bettis scored all the goalline touchdowns, so he was clearly better. gametape doesn't matter. other carry stats don't matter. he got in the end zone more, so he's better.

How about the dude that does both? BElieve it or not, there are dudes that pile up a ton of yards and finish off with the TD.

yippee? and trent dilfer can win super bowls. i'm happy we've moved past completely irrelevant information, now.

Relevant


i used the words YOU put in your own mouth. it's too bad they don't sound very good.


No you didn't, I haven't said one time that touchdowns are the only measure for great receivers, but like anything else, it has to be taken in when you start talking about it.

why would a imply b? one is extremely easy to figure out (they're called 'box scores'). but please, feel free to google up your own research.

No, I don't see in the box scores on any sites that I visit that show the times they scored in the redzone/goal line, and from the redzone stats I found, it was TDs, not the full picture(times targeted, ETC).

So if you want to present some facts as part of your argument, don't just present half the story. It would be nice to see the whole argument though, I'd like to see what it shows, but I would bet that his touchdown/thrown to ratio is a lot lower than guys like Fitzgerald.


That's absurd. Larry Fitzgerald has never had over 1500 receiving yards or led the league in receiving yardage. o.O

That would be a better argument if his highest yards in a season finish was 10th(like Andre's touchdown total.) He's been 2nd twice and 4th on his big seasons, while being top 5 for scoring too.

Getting over the touchdowns argument, I would prefer Andre Johnson because his game is more multifaceted. He threatens defenses on all levels. Fitzgerald isn't really a deep threat.

I dunno about that, Andre has more 40 yard + catches in his career, but a ton come from YAC and because he's better at shedding tackles than Fitzy.

I think if I'm drawing up a deep play, I'd rather throw it to Larry, I don't have stats to back that up, but I think he's more likely to come down with the ball down field, but a lot less likely to catch one underneath and turn it into a Brandon Marshall/Andre Johnson tackle breaking fiesta.

Anyway, the whole thing to me comes down to having the total package. Some don't think Fitzgerald is a deep threat, and Andre is, and if you feel that way, this SHOULD be Johnson easy, I just think it's Johnson that is probably the lesser in the vertical downfield passing game, and that a lot of his big yards and high YPC averages come more from his ability to gain YAC.

Now is that a product of play calling, that he just doesn't get the opportunities others get? Like I said, we've seen a ton of other guys in ****** situations, or on teams that make them get double and triple coverage constantly, and have terrible QBs chucking them the ball.

The QB argument cuts both ways too though, because before he had a more than decent QB, Andre had a career high of 1147 yards and 8 touchdowns in a 5 year career(his injury season where he played 9 games looked like it would eclipse that, but who knows).

We've seen guys (Calvin Johnson) play in situations like the early Texans, and they've eclipsed Andre Johnson level numbers with ease.

Thing is, I don't think it's all redzone scoring numbers, I just think that Johnson/Marshall aren't as consistent as jump ball threats deep down the field as Fitzgerald, Prime Moss, etc, despite them having amazing highlights going up and yanking the ball from guys and getting yards after the catch.

Redzone was probably a bad marker, what I really mean is goal line scoring.

He's just more of a "catch the ball and get it into the endzone" kinda guy as opposed to a "catch the ball in the endzone" guy.

I'd love to see how many of his TDs the last two years were caught IN the endzone, and how many came on the goal line. Without any numbers in my face, I bet his total is lower in comparison to someone like Fitzgerald, who can break some plays and get you TDs with YAc, but is unstoppable down on the goal line, no matter how many guys you put around him.

Guys we can have some discussion here, or we can pretend that I'm saying touchdowns are the only measure, and I can pretend that you guys are saying that only yards and catches matter(WES WELKER FTW!!) and let this turn into a flame war, or we can discuss how much each matters.

Welker is actually a good measure, where do you guys rank him? He doesn't have touchdowns, but leading in catches and being 2nd in yards(in 14 games) would make him 2nd to Johnson? Or does scoring the ball actually matter in this situation? OR does he get it all because of Moss? He's done it well without Brady.

Smooth Criminal
08-06-2010, 10:15 AM
Good for him. He's the best receiver in the game and he does it without all the garbage that usually comes from receivers.

stephenson86
08-06-2010, 10:30 AM
Him and Larry are both the best I personally can't split them. So what if he isn't getting TD's in the double digits helping other players on your team by drawing coverage opening up the defense for scores is just as important as scoring it yourself. Team game at the end of the day.
Fitz has never seen as much attention because he always had 2 other receivers on the field that needed defensive attention. When it gets down to the RZ he sees more single coverage. If Fitz and AJ swapped I would put money on their TD totals flip flopping as well, with Fitz getting less and AJ getting more.

Saints-Tigers
08-06-2010, 10:35 AM
Him and Larry are both the best I personally can't split them. So what if he isn't getting TD's in the double digits helping other players on your team by drawing coverage opening up the defense for scores is just as important as scoring it yourself. Team game at the end of the day.
Fitz has never seen as much attention because he always had 2 other receivers on the field that needed defensive attention. When it gets down to the RZ he sees more single coverage. If Fitz and AJ swapped I would put money on their TD totals flip flopping as well, with Fitz getting less and AJ getting more.


Guess we'll see what happens this year then. No Boldin, no Kurt Warner, etc.

AntoinCD
08-06-2010, 10:55 AM
1) I don't think Revis is the best CB in the game.

2) INT's is the exact opposite of this argument, so you fail HORRIBLY. Teams force the ball away from Revis. Houston forces the ball TOO Johnson. Revis gets less chances to get his hands on the ball than most CBs. Johnson gets as many chances with the ball as anyone, he was thrown at like 170+ times in the last two years.

I hate that arguement. Revis gets thrown at more than most. The Jets defensive gameplan funnels everything to Revis because he can hold down on side. Revis gets more chances than a lot of CBs however because of his style of play and his ability to be so good in man coverage he has less chances to make a play on the ball. Seldom does Revis get an easy INT. Most of them are ridiculously good plays on the ball

Saints-Tigers
08-06-2010, 11:14 AM
Like I said, even if I only watched my own teams games, I'd have seen more than 3 minutes of Brandon Marshall, just by seeing the one game where he played us. You can try to pretend I don't watch football though, if that makes you feel better.

I never even said once in this topic that he's not the best receiver, or didn't have the best year, I said it's stupid to think he's by far the best receiver, 10/10 times and some upper echelon above everyone else when he can't even outproduce other guys in all facets of the game, but you seem to be too up your own ass with trying to prove that I said "he's not the best because touchdowns are all that matter"

I've watched plenty enough games to say that he and Marshall aren't as good at finishing with TDs as Fitzgerald and Moss are, stats just happen to back up my sentiments, and not yours, that's why you are so angry that stats are being presented.

Maybe, just maybe throwing it to a single covered Texans player is more effective than going to a double covered Johnson, where as going to a double covered Moss is better than going to a single covered other guy(welker for instance). Some guys are just better than other guys at some things.

Your box scores still don't tell me what I want to know really, I can find out who had more TDs, but it really doesn't show me how they got them. Moss going up over 2 guys for a 5 yard catch in the back of the endzone isn't the same as Johnson catching a 3 yard pass and driving it into the endzone. Both will log as a 5 yard TD.

Reggie Bush is a good example of how you can use stats and if you look at his stats from last season, you can easily see what type of player he is, especially given his injury history. He was awesome on his touches, but hasn't proven he can get a ton of touches and stay healthy.

Anyway, I just think Johnson is like a speedier version of Marshall, able to get over the top a bit more, but he's most effective when the field is spread so you can get it to him and let him do damage after the catch, but that style of play is a lot less effective on the goal line when things are so jammed up, and guys that are superior at going up and getting the ball over the top of guys consistently(Moss, Fitz?) are more effective down there, and that's a big part of why Moss gets his TDs, no matter how much you shut down the rest of his game, and it's not just a matter of guys forcing him the ball too much, or Johnson not getting it enough.

That's not to say Johnson and Marshall aren't great in that regard, they just aren't all time great.

Anyway, my problem was never with people choosing Johnson, but more pretending that it is some undisputable choice, and that he's so far ahead of everyone else that it's dumb to discuss, because I think when you factor all things in, he hasn't proved he's on some other level.

I see what has you all pissy is that someone would have the gall to use stats to back up an argument, so I hope this makes you feel better.

LonghornsLegend
08-06-2010, 11:47 AM
Getting over the touchdowns argument, I would prefer Andre Johnson because his game is more multifaceted. He threatens defenses on all levels. Fitzgerald isn't really a deep threat.


Huh? I don't understand this. Fitz has been an elite deep threat ever since his Pitt days. In that playoffs where the Cards made the SB all he did was run deep routes and go up and grab the ball over the defender at it's highest point.


Also while Andre has gotten over 1500 yards twice, Fitz has topped 1400 yards 3 times. Andre does have three seasons over 100 receptions, but Fitz is only a few catches away from having 4.


So even in receptions and yardage through their careers Fitz has been more impressive, and his TD totals are almost always in the double figures. I just think Fitz is more complete, it's not like he can't rack up 100 catches, or 1400+ yards, but he can also grab tons of TD catches and those totals have been climbing the last 3 seasons.


I just really disagree with Fitz not being a deep threat, he's probably more that then anything.

CC.SD
08-06-2010, 12:35 PM
http://www.posters.ws/images/968370/charles_rogers.jpg


Oooooops

Rosebud
08-06-2010, 01:05 PM
I love the TD's argument. I mean sure you'd like to see an elite WR also be a dominant redzone threat, but AJ doesn't need to be, he does a great job of getting his team into the redzone and once there it's not his fault the team tries to run the ball in or use him as a decoy.

Even if we assumed he's not a good redzone WR, which I don't believe, but for the sake of argument let's say it's true. Even then it's quite possible for him to be one of the two best WRs in the game with his ability to score long TDs and get his team down into the redzone. And it doesn't hurt a team because he's still drawing coverages towards him letting you get someone like, oh let's say Walter and Daniels finish the drives. Redzone scoring is so over-rated for individual players. It's important and a reason why many teams have specialists for those situations, but a lot of players who aren't elite can get the job done down there.

Now in truth I don't think AJ is a bad redzone receiver, it's just Kubiak get's too cute in the redzone almost as though he's trying to prove that the offense isn't just "throw it to AJ"

PoopSandwich
08-06-2010, 01:28 PM
I never even said once in this topic that he's not the best receiver, or didn't have the best year, I said it's stupid to think he's by far the best receiver,


You do realize that every single person you're arguing with didn't say that, it was the Baltimore fan, we just think its ridiculous to keep bringing up TD's to argue about Andre Johnson, because he is the one constantly getting the Texans into scoring position, just not the one they get the ball to in the red zone.

Saints-Tigers
08-06-2010, 01:32 PM
You do realize that every single person you're arguing with didn't say that, it was the Baltimore fan, we just think its ridiculous to keep bringing up TD's to argue about Andre Johnson, because he is the one constantly getting the Texans into scoring position, just not the one they get the ball to in the red zone.

That's well and good, but doesn't someone like Fitzgerald do that too??

If Andre were getting 1800 yards, and the "Td guys" that I bring up were getting 1000-1200, then I'd see the point, but when we are talking about 100 or so yards on their high years but 3-4 touchdowns, I think it means SOMETHING, even if it's minimal.

PoopSandwich
08-06-2010, 01:50 PM
That's well and good, but doesn't someone like Fitzgerald do that too??

If Andre were getting 1800 yards, and the "Td guys" that I bring up were getting 1000-1200, then I'd see the point, but when we are talking about 100 or so yards on their high years but 3-4 touchdowns, I think it means SOMETHING, even if it's minimal.

Andre Johnson isn't just 100 yards better last year he was over 200 and has like i've said two of the best seasons for a receiver in the entirety of the league. To me 3 or 4 touchdowns doesn't mean squat because he's the one getting them into position to score every time he's just not the one getting the ball thrown to him when they get there which doesnt matter to me.

It would be like saying a running back shouldn't be considered the best because he only has like 12 touchdowns even though he had 2,000 yards rushing on like a 5.0 yards per carry and his back up with 500 yards rushing has 10 touchdowns because he gets the ball at the goal line all the time. Running back A gets them into position to score allllllllll the time he just doesn't get the ball in the red zone because that's not how their offense works or because they key up on him.

EDIT : I also believe I said Andre/Fitz are 1a and 1b so like I already said you're arguing the wrong thing with the wrong person.

I never even once said he was the best in the league by far and that no one should question it, I think him and Fitz are the best in the league but it's not like others aren't good.

We are basically all telling you that complaining about touchdown receptions is absurd.

Saints-Tigers
08-06-2010, 01:55 PM
And I'm saying touchdowns do mean something, and they aren't nearly as easy to punch in as people are assuming, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Ness
08-06-2010, 02:47 PM
That would be a better argument if his highest yards in a season finish was 10th(like Andre's touchdown total.) He's been 2nd twice and 4th on his big seasons, while being top 5 for scoring too.

Doesn't matter. Fitzgerald didn't achieve the mark. So he can't be considered the best. That is the angle you are making about Andre Johnson in regards to touchdowns.

Saints-Tigers
08-06-2010, 02:50 PM
Elway is overrated, but I digress :P

Moss Vs. Johnson, I think Johnson is better at the moment, but I still think Moss(and some others) are still better in those situations I mentioned, which was my point, I think Johnson is lacking(in regards to other guys) in that area, and I think that area is more important than some are giving credence to. Finishing off drives is HARD, your Broncos, as you mentioned, were a testament to that.

I am with you on the Broncos and the redzone fiasco they called an offense. I remember the Ed Hoculi ****** up call pretty clearly, and if I remember correctly it was already 4th down because of some WTF play calls by shanahan.

I still think Marshall(and this is why I keep mentioning him) and to a much lesser degree Johnson pile up a ton of yards that other guys don't because they are targeted so much, and I think there are other guys that you could get the ball to like that if you really needed too, but it doesn't translate to scoring always in that context.

Saints-Tigers
08-06-2010, 02:51 PM
Doesn't matter. Fitzgerald didn't achieve the mark. So he can't be considered the best. That is the angle you are making about Andre Johnson in regards to touchdowns.

IT means Fitzgerald can't be considered some untouchable number 1 without any sort of argument against him, like Johnson. Comprehension.

Ness
08-06-2010, 02:53 PM
IT means Fitzgerald can't be considered some untouchable number 1 without any sort of argument against him, like Johnson. Comprehension.

Okay you can use that argument for any player in the history of the NFL then at practically any position. Especially yearly. It's like saying Jerry Rice was the best receiver for-sure only in 1995 because he had over 1800 yards receiving.

Saints-Tigers
08-06-2010, 03:02 PM
Okay you can use that argument for any player in the history of the NFL then at practically any position. Especially yearly. It's like saying Jerry Rice was the best receiver for-sure only in 1995 because he had over 1800 yards receiving.


Umm, he was top 3 in yards and TDs for 10 straight years(top 5 in one outlier year, lol) and was 1st 6 times. Not to mention setting the touchdown record in 12 games(not that TDs matter, right).

He also never had the sheer volume of balls thrown his way that Johnson gets.

Dunno how this is similar.

Ness
08-06-2010, 03:04 PM
Umm, he was top 3 in yards and TDs for 10 straight years(top 5 in one outlier year, lol) and was 1st 6 times. Not to mention setting the touchdown record in 12 games(not that TDs matter, right).

He also never had the sheer volume of balls thrown his way that Johnson gets.

Dunno how this is similar.

Doesn't matter he only had 1800 yards once. o.O

By the way Johnson is the only guy to lead the league in receiving yards in back to back seasons other than Rice.

Paranoidmoonduck
08-06-2010, 03:06 PM
He also never had the sheer volume of balls thrown his way that Johnson gets.

Ehhhhh...

2009
Andre Johnson (152 targets, 101 catches)
Brandon Marshall (149 targets, 101 catches)
Larry Fitzgerald (147 targets, 97 catches)

I'm not seeing the disparity in volume of chances that you're leaning on as support.

Saints-Tigers
08-06-2010, 03:15 PM
That was more towards the Rice argument.

That, and his 2008 season with 1500 yards, where I feel like most of these top tier guys would have a ton of yards too if they were thrown at 171 times.

No doubt he had a phenomenal year last year.

Edit: I don't want to look like that stat ***** guy either, but the naked eye can be pretty biased, and it's nice to see some numbers too.

If I had come in here and said the opinion argument and actual game breakdown, I'd have got more posts that amount to just "nuh uh" than someone trying to refute it, and it's hard to refute opinions, raw numbers are nice.

Vox Populi
08-06-2010, 04:14 PM
So, I'm just going to throw this out there. You say Nnamdi Asomugha is the best corner in the league. You say Andre Johnson is not the best receiver in the league (no one has even said that he is unquestionably the best, only people that want to ignore everything else in the world might...) because he has never had more than 10 touchdowns in a single season.

Well, Nnamdi Asomugha has only ever had ONE season where he has had more than ONE interception and has been in the league for as many seasons as Johnson. Now, you asked what great receivers that were considered the best or among the best at their position, never had a season in their career where they got 10 touchdowns. Well, what great cornerbacks that were considered the best at their position never had more than one season with more than one interception seven years into their career?

See how I can easily dismiss any other aspects of Asomugha's game, pick one relevant statistic and ignore every other good quality about his game and say that he shouldn't even be considered the top corner in the league? Yeah, lets just ignore that he locks down half the field like you can ignore that every other thing that Andre Johnson does other than catch the football with two feet in the endzone.

I can stick my fingers in my ears and just ramble on about one statistic for pages as well if I wanted to. Heres another one just to be a douche about it. Nnamdi has only ever had 1 touchdown in his career. No hall of fame DB, safeties included had that many or less. Nnamdi has also never played in a meaningful game in his entire career or even on a good team that has been within a few games of .500. I can just blindly ignore the fact that Andre Johnson hasn't played a playoff game in his career too if I felt like it.

Its all kind of ironic...

Saints-Tigers
08-06-2010, 04:19 PM
You can try that if you like, but there is a big difference between one guy getting force the ball(Johnson) and not reaching a number, and one guy who has the ball thrown away from him .

And if you think Asomugha doesn't pick off enough balls that DO get thrown his way, that's fine, that's basically the reason everyone is taking Revis over him at the moment. He did more with his chances last year.

Thanks for helping.

Ness
08-06-2010, 04:30 PM
You can try that if you like, but there is a big difference between one guy getting force the ball(Johnson) and not reaching a number, and one guy who has the ball thrown away from him.

But there have been corners in this league where the ball hasn't been thrown towards their way due to their "reputation", and they've still come up with more than one interception yearly.

Saints-Tigers
08-06-2010, 04:34 PM
That's a valid argument, I'm ok with you feeling that way.

Most of forum likes Revis more than Aso because he capitalizes on his opportunities more last season, but I'm being come at from all angles for feeling that way about a wide receiver.

Texas Homer
08-10-2010, 04:09 AM
AJ got paid.nice for him! Keep balling dude!!

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb313/ptrain33/Texansgif-1.gif

datchapin
08-10-2010, 12:57 PM
Saints-Tiger, why are you so down on AJ. You look at one stat w/out looking at the situation. I know you haven't looked at the situation because you don't seem to mention anything about how AJ is used or when he is used. Little factoid, until the middle of this last season AJ was not included in goal line packages. While they were running the ball from the one or doing some crazyass half-back pass you know where AJ was? On the sideline.

How is he supposed to rack up TD's in those situations? I don't know what Kubiak is thinking. I do know that AJ is a beast put him on a team with a good OC or HC and AJ's TD numbers would most likely be in double digits every yr. I mean how many other receivers can you think of that would do what AJ did in the AZ game for a TD?

CC.SD
08-11-2010, 04:07 PM
AJ got paid.nice for him! Keep balling dude!!

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb313/ptrain33/Texansgif-1.gif

omgggggggggg

Saints-Tigers
08-11-2010, 06:14 PM
Saints-Tiger, why are you so down on AJ. You look at one stat w/out looking at the situation. I know you haven't looked at the situation because you don't seem to mention anything about how AJ is used or when he is used. Little factoid, until the middle of this last season AJ was not included in goal line packages. While they were running the ball from the one or doing some crazyass half-back pass you know where AJ was? On the sideline.

How is he supposed to rack up TD's in those situations? I don't know what Kubiak is thinking. I do know that AJ is a beast put him on a team with a good OC or HC and AJ's TD numbers would most likely be in double digits every yr. I mean how many other receivers can you think of that would do what AJ did in the AZ game for a TD?

So how does KEvin Walter get about as many TDs on WAY less catches? Is he pulled from the goal line too?

If a guy isn't getting a ton of balls thrown his way on the goal line like he's an elite goal line threat, maybe the coach knows he's not an elite goal line threat >_>

Splat
08-11-2010, 06:43 PM
Or maybe AJ is the whole dam team and by the time he gets done carry the O on his back down the field he needs a breather.

FuzzyGopher
08-11-2010, 06:47 PM
AJ got paid.nice for him! Keep balling dude!!

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb313/ptrain33/Texansgif-1.gif

That's a cool gif and AJ is a beast, but I have seen better tackling in a pee wee game.

Nalej
08-11-2010, 07:43 PM
That's a linebacker that bounces off. Shame on him.

PoopSandwich
08-11-2010, 08:46 PM
That's a linebacker that bounces off. Shame on him.

I like how he lowers his shoulder instead of rapping AJ up and just gets demolished.

Splat
08-11-2010, 08:52 PM
And that's why the G-Men gave Rolle the big money...

FUNBUNCHER
08-11-2010, 10:59 PM
Saints-Tiger, why are you so down on AJ. You look at one stat w/out looking at the situation. I know you haven't looked at the situation because you don't seem to mention anything about how AJ is used or when he is used. Little factoid, until the middle of this last season AJ was not included in goal line packages. While they were running the ball from the one or doing some crazyass half-back pass you know where AJ was? On the sideline.

How is he supposed to rack up TD's in those situations? I don't know what Kubiak is thinking. I do know that AJ is a beast put him on a team with a good OC or HC and AJ's TD numbers would most likely be in double digits every yr. I mean how many other receivers can you think of that would do what AJ did in the AZ game for a TD?

Great point. Stats again at best are an incomplete picture. I hope Kubiak isn't that much of an idiot that he takes his best player off the field in redzone/goal line situations.

Saints-Tigers
08-11-2010, 11:59 PM
Or maybe AJ is the whole dam team and by the time he gets done carry the O on his back down the field he needs a breather.

Lol, yea, and I'm the crazy one here.

katnip
08-13-2010, 12:15 AM
Well deserved to me. But to me one bad injury to Schaub and his catches go down. Not worth it.

Do I make sense?

Toan
08-13-2010, 08:31 AM
Lol, yea, and I'm the crazy one here.

Well, I wouldn't say crazy. Maybe, functionally-******** is a better choice of describers?

Rosebud
08-13-2010, 11:55 AM
And that's why the G-Men gave Rolle the big money...

Like I know Rolle was the best safety on the market this summer and thus got overpaid, but wtf is this? Rolle clearly didn't get paid the big bucks for his tackling. **** if tackling was all we cared about we could've kept CC Brown, dude can't cover wet bag, but tackling's the one thing he's not terrible at. Got the big bucks because of his range, ball skills and how well he should fit the FS role that Byrd beasted in last year.

datchapin
08-13-2010, 05:36 PM
So how does KEvin Walter get about as many TDs on WAY less catches? Is he pulled from the goal line too?

If a guy isn't getting a ton of balls thrown his way on the goal line like he's an elite goal line threat, maybe the coach knows he's not an elite goal line threat >_>

Don't get me started on Kubiak. KW is included on the goal line packages. I'm preping myself to sit through another Kubiak season. Please do not make me loose it before the season even starts by making me re-hash how much of a moron I think he is. AJ is a beast and deserves that money.

yourfavestoner
08-13-2010, 06:18 PM
Well deserved to me. But to me one bad injury to Schaub and his catches go down. Not worth it.

Do I make sense?

Pretty sure his numbers were almost dead even w/Rosencopter as they were with Schaub.