PDA

View Full Version : What team had the best aerial options since the merger?


Ness
05-26-2012, 09:32 PM
My top vote goes to the Rams circa 1999-2001. At least from what I saw personally. Bruce, Holt, Hakim, Proehl, and Faulk out of the backfield for a solid three years was pretty deadly.

The Vikings of the late 90's with Reed, Moss, Carter, and Smith were nice as well. I'd give to the edge to the Rams though in that period.

The 49ers had a nice group in the late eighties with Rice, Taylor, Jones, and Craig, and I like that they didn't play in a dome...but unfortunately I was too young to watch that with immense detail on a weekly basis.

phlysac
05-26-2012, 09:59 PM
One of my favorite groups...

Buffalo Bills

Andre Reed
James Lofton
Don Beebe
Thurman Thomas
Kenneth Davis
Keith McKeller
Pete Metzelaars

WCH
05-26-2012, 10:26 PM
One of my favorite groups...

Buffalo Bills

Andre Reed
James Lofton
Don Beebe
Thurman Thomas
Kenneth Davis
Keith McKeller
Pete Metzelaars

Kelly/Lofton/Reed/Beebe/Thomas is a "holy ****" squad. I think that if they played under todays rules, they'd probably be the dynasty to end all dynasties.

TheFinisher
05-26-2012, 11:05 PM
Arizona with Fitzgerald, Boldin and Breaston.

San Diego with Winslow Sr., Charlie Joiner and John Jefferson.

Miami with Super Duper and Mark Clayton.


And when you consider the QBs of those teams you understand why they were some of the greatest offenses of all time.

Ness
05-27-2012, 12:21 AM
I also liked the Houston Oilers line up of the late eighties, early 90's.

Haywood Jeffires
Ernest Givens
Drew Hill
Curtis Duncan
Lorenzo White

RaiderNation
05-27-2012, 12:26 AM
Jerry Rice, Tim Brown and Jerry Porter in 2002 were awesome with Gannon at QB. I doubt there's ever been a combo with as many catches as Rice and Brown had in their careers that played together.

Bulldogs
05-27-2012, 12:44 AM
Some options that haven't been mentioned yet:

Mid 2000 Colts:

Peyton Manning
Reggie Wayne
Marvin Harrison
Brandon Stokley
Marcus Pollard
Edgerrin James

Late 2000 Patriots:

Tom Brady
Randy Moss
Wes Welker
Donte Stallworth
Ben Watson

The top three aren't as strong for the Pats here, but a top 5 QB all time throwing to a top 5 receiver all time is pretty awesome.

bam bam
05-27-2012, 01:15 AM
Kyle Boller
Travis Taylor
Clarence Moore
Randy Hymes

Brent
05-27-2012, 07:46 AM
Tim Rattay/Alex Smith
Arnaz Battle
Brandon Lloyd
Rasheed Marshall
Marcus Maxwell
Kevan Barlow/Frank Gore

I forgot how bad '05 was.

descendency
05-27-2012, 08:01 AM
Brady to Moss and Welker may be the best QB to WR combo ever.

Matthew Jones
05-27-2012, 10:33 AM
Aaron Rodgers to Greg Jennings, Jordy Nelson, and Jermichael Finley is one of the best in recent memory.

Gay Ork Wang
05-27-2012, 11:05 AM
Chicago Bears!

stlouisfan37
05-27-2012, 11:50 AM
As much as I hate to admit it, it's hard to argue against the 49er teams with Montana/Rice/Taylor/Jones/Craig/Rathman. The Greatest Show teams were awfully good as well, but they never had the TE that I always thought would have made them unstoppable had they worked it into the gameplan.

But I actually think that maybe the most well-balanced passing attack could be the current New Orleans team. They had 6 guys with over 500 yards receiving last year, and Pierre Thomas added 425.

Sloopy
05-27-2012, 02:41 PM
I think you have to include the current Saints lineup in this.

Obviously, it is statistically the greatest passing attack of all time in terms of yards this season and the only one of the teams listed with two 5,000+ yard season (2011, 2008)

7 players with over 400 yards with 6 of whom had over 500 and two with over 1,000 yards.

Also, a RB who broke records for most yards in a season (receiving, rushing, and returning)

The Pats 2007 team could also be considered the greatest passing attack of all time if you look at it in terms of TDs. Including a receiver who broke Jerry Rice's record for TDs in a season.

The Colts would likely place third behind them.

If I had to order it, I'd go:

1. Saints
2. Pats
3a. Colts
3b. Rams

Without a doubt though, it has to be the Saints if one looks at it objectively.

They may not have a Rice or Moss etc. but they have a larger group of dependable WRs.

descendency
05-27-2012, 03:56 PM
Without a doubt though, it has to be the Saints if one looks at it objectively.

I'm not going to try to pretend I am objective, but I do think there will be some merit to me questioning the "without a doubt" part. The Patriots beat the doors off just about everyone before they hit their late season skid. They destroyed teams like they were playing in a dome. The 08 Patriots put up 42 before half - in a blizzard. I'd love to see Brees in Foxborough in a blizzard.

The Saints struggle outside of the dome. The 49er playoff game was very close, but that could have been a blowout in the dome. Brees just never looks comfortable outdoors.

I think it's fair to say that the Saints, in their dome, are the best offense ever. Outside, I do think it's fair to question that.

OSUGiants17
05-27-2012, 04:23 PM
Eli Manning to Nicks/Cruz/Manningham

If we had a better TE or Gilbride threw the ball more this group could have broken records. Still had a great season even without those 2 IFs.

Sportsfan486
05-27-2012, 04:42 PM
I think you have to include the current Saints lineup in this.

Without a doubt though, it has to be the Saints if one looks at it objectively.

They may not have a Rice or Moss etc. but they have a larger group of dependable WRs.

Uh. Just no. The Saints have a fantastic and versatile offensive scheme with an amazing QB. They also have probably the best RB in terms of the passing game and the second best TE.

They also have a relatively weak WR corp. Marques Colston would be Green Bay's #3 WR/#4 target. None of their other WRs would make Green Bay's top 5 targeted options in the passing game.

The Saints passing game would rank as the #3 best in the NFL currently, let alone since the merger. The Packers and Patriots are simply and currently superior right now and I don't think there's a single objective coach/GM that would take the Saints passing options (or QB, for that matter) above those of either of those two teams.

Would I rank the Saints passing offense of last year in the top 10 since the merger? Yes. But not top 5.

Saints-Tigers
05-27-2012, 05:03 PM
Our weapons aren't the best. Drew just is :D

phlysac
05-27-2012, 05:05 PM
Tim Rattay/Alex Smith
Arnaz Battle
Brandon Lloyd
Rasheed Marshall
Marcus Maxwell
Kevan Barlow/Frank Gore

I forgot how bad '05 was.

Don't forget Johnnie Morton, Jason McAddley, and Billy Bajema.

Ness
05-27-2012, 05:34 PM
Don't forget Johnnie Morton, Jason McAddley, and Billy Bajema.

And Curtis Conway.

Sloopy
05-28-2012, 02:11 PM
I'm not going to try to pretend I am objective, but I do think there will be some merit to me questioning the "without a doubt" part. The Patriots beat the doors off just about everyone before they hit their late season skid. They destroyed teams like they were playing in a dome. The 08 Patriots put up 42 before half - in a blizzard. I'd love to see Brees in Foxborough in a blizzard.

The Saints struggle outside of the dome. The 49er playoff game was very close, but that could have been a blowout in the dome. Brees just never looks comfortable outdoors.

I think it's fair to say that the Saints, in their dome, are the best offense ever. Outside, I do think it's fair to question that.

Maybe the without a doubt tag is a bit much. As I also said in the post, the Patriots have an argument and I think that one could say that scoring more points is more valuable to a team than having more yards.

I don't really want to get into the dome argument because it would exclude a few of the teams we are talking about here. In the end, we can't say how any of these teams would fair if they didn't play in a dome any more than we can say how the Pats would have done if they had a dome.

Yes the Saints struggle outdoors, but you could also make the argument that they would be more ready for weather if they didn't play in a dome for half of their games.

The Saints have a fantastic and versatile offensive scheme with an amazing QB. They also have probably the best RB in terms of the passing game and the second best TE.

They also have a relatively weak WR corp. Marques Colston would be Green Bay's #3 WR/#4 target. None of their other WRs would make Green Bay's top 5 targeted options in the passing game.

Please tell me you are joking right now. Marques Colston would easily be the #3 WR on that team if not the #2. TBH there is a possibility that he would beat out Jennings. End of the day, Rodgers makes those WRs.

The Saints passing game would rank as the #3 best in the NFL currently, let alone since the merger.

Please... tell me more about how the record breaking #1 ranked passing team in the league last year is the 3rd best passing team :waiting:

The Packers and Patriots are simply and currently superior right now and I don't think there's a single objective coach/GM that would take the Saints passing options (or QB, for that matter) above those of either of those two teams.

Good. I love the factual direction that this argument is going in :njx:

[/quote]Would I rank the Saints passing offense of last year in the top 10 since the merger? Yes. But not top 5.[/QUOTE]

How are they top 10 since the merger but not top 3 this past year? I don't have a top 10 list in mind, but I imagine it would be hard to be in the top 10 if your not in the top 3 even of a specific year.

so no facts needed, no logical process, no objective view... just Pats and Packers are better this year and statistically the best passing attack ever isn't even in the conversation... got it.

I get that stats aren't everything; but when talking about prolific passing attacks, one might wan't to at least consider production as a key aspect of determining who is the best.

bigbluedefense
05-28-2012, 02:22 PM
I gotta go with either the Greatest Show on Turf or the 2007 Pats. It's a tough one btw those 2. The Rams had more firepower, but Moss and Welker with K. Faulk in the backfield was deadly too.

The 89 49ers were sick too.

Monomach
05-28-2012, 02:39 PM
I have to go with the Vikings when the 1990s were becoming the 2000s.

Chris Carter and Randy Moss at wideout. Collections of running backs who were above average pass-catchers. Averagish TEs. ...and they weren't a product of their QB.

Sportsfan486
05-28-2012, 08:15 PM
Please tell me you are joking right now. Marques Colston would easily be the #3 WR on that team if not the #2. TBH there is a possibility that he would beat out Jennings. End of the day, Rodgers makes those WRs.

Please... tell me more about how the record breaking #1 ranked passing team in the league last year is the 3rd best passing team :waiting:

so no facts needed, no logical process, no objective view... just Pats and Packers are better this year and statistically the best passing attack ever isn't even in the conversation... got it.

I get that stats aren't everything; but when talking about prolific passing attacks, one might wan't to at least consider production as a key aspect of determining who is the best.

I'm pretty sure I said Colston would be GB's #3. And yes, Finley would still be ahead of him for targets. And the fact that you even mentioned Colston and Jennings in the same sentence is, to be brutally honest, ignorant. Also, how does Rodgers make his receivers good yet Brees doesn't do the same? Way to fail at making a point.

The Pats and Packers have the better QBs. Like I said. I suppose you could argue Brees is better than Brady but there isn't a coach or GM that would take Brees over Rodgers right now. Are you really going to argue that?

Yards. What do yards get you, exactly? They broke YARDAGE records. I'm sorry but who cares? They didn't break scoring records and, frankly, their passing attack is based extensively on what are effectively long handoffs. And they had a whooping 400 more passing yards than the Packers, even with the Packers letting off the gas consistently in games they were blowing out on route to 15-1.

Stats aren't everything. The Packers are clearly the superior passing team (do I have to explain that one? They have the best QB and the best overall passing weapons and they scored more PPG with much less of a running game.) The Patriots and Saints are close, more 2a and 2b, but Gronkowski is obviously better than Graham (as excellent as Graham is,) and the receiving core is better.

And for your stats.. go rewatch Packers games towards the middle of the 3rd quarter and Saints games at the end of the 4th. Notably blowouts. The difference? Packers pulled Rodgers early in every blowout while the Saints kept Brees in. Yet still scored more points.

The Packers had 5 more passing touchdowns than the Saints and 6 less INTs. Despite above factual. They scored more POINTS PER GAME than the Saints despite a clearly inferior rushing game (again, anyone going to argue that?) Yes. They're a better aerial attack.

I'll agree that the Saints and Pats are 2a and 2b. The Packers are clearly superior.

As for the Saints last year not being top 5... again, you're stuck on stats. Rule changes have catered to offensive number explosion, most notably in the passing game. You can't compare stats from now and 10 years ago; apples and oranges. You have to compare within the framework of the other offenses of the time.

Some of those Niners and Rams teams, the Pats in 2007. You have to have them top 5. Ditto for the Packers last year.

Brent
05-29-2012, 07:23 AM
Don't forget Johnnie Morton, Jason McAddley, and Billy Bajema.
And Curtis Conway.
Just... wow... so many memories that were blocked out are coming back.

Sloopy
05-29-2012, 04:26 PM
I'm pretty sure I said Colston would be GB's #3. And yes, Finley would still be ahead of him for targets. And the fact that you even mentioned Colston and Jennings in the same sentence is, to be brutally honest, ignorant. Also, how does Rodgers make his receivers good yet Brees doesn't do the same? Way to fail at making a point.

I never said Brees didn't make Colston, the point is that neither are on a Megatron, Fitz, Dre etc. level. I'd put them in both in that 2nd tier of WRs, still viable #1 options but not elite.

So yea, they kind of are in the same breath.

I don't know that Finely would be ahead of Colston in terms of targets. Finley was targeted 92 times this year while Colston was targeted 107 times, fairly even.

However, even if Colston was #2 to Jennings, Nelson even edged Finley in targets this year. I would argue that Colston would get more targets as the #2 WR than Nelson and Colston undoubtedly has more reliable hands than Finley.

Still, now we are just arguing hypotheticals which can never be proven right or wrong

The Pats and Packers have the better QBs. Like I said. I suppose you could argue Brees is better than Brady but there isn't a coach or GM that would take Brees over Rodgers right now. Are you really going to argue that?

I love the, "GMs would do (insert statement here) so I am clearly right" argument.

You have NO idea what GMs would do, nor do I, so this is a pointless argument.

Yards. What do yards get you, exactly? They broke YARDAGE records. I'm sorry but who cares? They didn't break scoring records and, frankly, their passing attack is based extensively on what are effectively long handoffs.

Yardage gets you closer to the goal line to score.

I did point out earlier that an argument could be made for the Pats the year they broke the passing record. Still, a record is a record.

And they had a whooping 400 more passing yards than the Packers, even with the Packers letting off the gas consistently in games they were blowing out on route to 15-1.


They also had one more passing TD than the Pack, either way you look at it, they were better than the pack this year.


Stats aren't everything.

I believe I stated the same thing earlier, but you can't ignore a record breaking season by saying stats don't matter.

The Packers are clearly the superior passing team (do I have to explain that one?

Yes...

Please tell me under what logic that the pack had a better passing attack.

Brees had a better completion percentage and yards per game average.

They were very close this year, but the fact is that this particular year, the Saints passing attack was better.

They have the best QB and the best overall passing weapons and they scored more PPG with much less of a running game.

The passing attack of NO scored more ppg than the packs passing attack... so yea.

I won't even dignify your best QB comment with a response. RODGERZZZZZ is very good, he may be the best in the league... last year, Brees was better, just the way that it is.

Don't really get how the receiving corps is better for the pack, specifically this year. Nelson was the only receiver to break 1,000 yards, after that they only had 4 other guys break 400 yards.

The Saints had TWO players break 1,000 yards with 5 more breaking 400 yards.

Again, stats aren't everything but the saints have a large number of 2nd and 3rd tier WRs they can go to, GB has one 2nd tier guy and a few 3rd tier guys.

The Patriots and Saints are close, more 2a and 2b, but Gronkowski is obviously better than Graham (as excellent as Graham is,) and the receiving core is better.

How do you figure this one? Yea, Gronk trumps Graham. After that I would probably have to go with the Saints WRs if you were to make lists in descending order.

And for your stats.. go rewatch Packers games towards the middle of the 3rd quarter and Saints games at the end of the 4th. Notably blowouts. The difference? Packers pulled Rodgers early in every blowout while the Saints kept Brees in. Yet still scored more points.

A. Brees had more passing TDs than Rodgers, so I really don't get why it matters that the pack scored more points overall since we are talking about passing attacks here.

B. Thats fine and well, we could postulate that Rodgers would have had a better season if he had stayed in, but he didn't and all we can make judgments on are known quantities, i.e. Brees having a better season than Rodgers.

The Packers had 5 more passing touchdowns than the Saints and 6 less INTs. Despite above factual. They scored more POINTS PER GAME than the Saints despite a clearly inferior rushing game (again, anyone going to argue that?) Yes. They're a better aerial attack.

Still, Rodgers had less passing TDs than Brees, I don't care what your backup QB can do for you.

I'll agree that the Saints and Pats are 2a and 2b. The Packers are clearly superior.

Clearly, despite mounting evidence to the contrary.

As for the Saints last year not being top 5... again, you're stuck on stats. Rule changes have catered to offensive number explosion, most notably in the passing game. You can't compare stats from now and 10 years ago; apples and oranges. You have to compare within the framework of the other offenses of the time.

The Pats and Colts being some of the main opponents to the Saints teams, also had the same benefits. Furthermore, the Rams, 49ers, and Vikings teams being mentioned also benefited from the 5 yard rules etc. that were already being imposed around or before their time.

Some of those Niners and Rams teams, the Pats in 2007. You have to have them top 5. Ditto for the Packers last year.

LOL, you must be some kind of homer if your putting a passing attack that wasn't even the best passing attack this year in the same conversation as the 07 Pats, niners and Rams.

At least there is an argument for the Saints.

gpngc
05-29-2012, 07:02 PM
This is the group that changed the game:

Kurt Warner
Issac Bruce
Torry Holt
Az Hakim
Ricky Proehl
Marshall Faulk

Sportsfan486
05-29-2012, 11:50 PM
They also had one more passing TD than the Pack, either way you look at it, they were better than the pack this year.
The passing attack of NO scored more ppg than the packs passing attack... so yea..

Actually, um, no.

That's simply and factually incorrect. The Packers scored 5 more passing touchdowns than the Saints. That is a fact that you can check in any one of hundreds of public domains of information.

I want to say more but my mother always said..

BloodBrother
05-30-2012, 12:48 AM
Packers had 51 passing TD's last season, which I think tied the 04 Colts for most passing TD's in a season

Ness
05-30-2012, 04:57 AM
This is the group that changed the game:

Kurt Warner
Issac Bruce
Torry Holt
Az Hakim
Ricky Proehl
Marshall Faulk
Three years in a row #1 in points scored. That's ridiculous.

Sloopy
05-30-2012, 07:22 AM
Actually, um, no.

That's simply and factually incorrect. The Packers scored 5 more passing touchdowns than the Saints. That is a fact that you can check in any one of hundreds of public domains of information.

I want to say more but my mother always said..

Your absolutely right. Your back up QB scored a few extra TDs.

However, Brees still scored more TDs than Rodgers and as I said, I don't care what your back up QB can do for you.

You simply have 0 facts which back up your argument that the passing attack of GB this year was better than that of the Saints, hence your "dumb ass" comment in your neg rep post. I generally find that personal attacks come when their is lack of other subtense to an argument, this holds true in your case.

It's fine if you have a hard on for Rodgers or if your a GB fan, but maybe you should take your own advice and get in touch with reality.

This years GB team simply has no argument for being the best passing attack this year, much less one of the greatest aerial attacks since the merger.

I can understand supporting and believing in your team but your just taking it to far and not looking at this objectively.

Gay Ork Wang
05-30-2012, 08:22 AM
Is sloppy a Saints fan?

WCH
05-30-2012, 08:23 AM
This years GB team simply has no argument for being the best passing attack this year, much less one of the greatest aerial attacks since the merger.

I can understand supporting and believing in your team but your just taking it to far and not looking at this objectively.

I wouldn't say that there's no argument for GB. FootballOutsiders has them ranked ahead of the Saints by quite a wide margin, and it's hard to get much more "objective" than using mathematical models of efficiency based on 19 years of play-by-play data.

In terms of having the best passing options ever, I don't think either team is even in the discussion at this point in time. They simply aren't at the same talent levels as the Bills and Rams teams that were previously mentioned.

Sloopy
05-30-2012, 08:34 AM
Is sloppy a Saints fan?

Check out the sig :)

Ravens baby :P


I wouldn't say that there's no argument for GB. FootballOutsiders has them ranked ahead of the Saints by quite a wide margin, and it's hard to get much more "objective" than using mathematical models of efficiency based on 19 years of play-by-play data.

It certainly is one way to look at it.

Again, I'm not saying that the Packers weren't a good (very good) passing team this year, that would be ignorant.

And I guess saying that there is no argument is harsh. However, in the case of sportsfan, his only arguments appear to be that the pack had 51 total passing touchdowns and everything else is just opinionated crap to be frank. Arguments such as: If Colston was on the Packers, he wouldn't beat out Finley for targets.

In terms of having the best passing options ever, I don't think either team is even in the discussion at this point in time. They simply aren't at the same talent levels as the Bills and Rams teams that were previously mentioned.

I agree that these teams had bigger names, but I still think one has to look at production as a key factor here. Hence why I have the Pats and Saints as my top two with me slightly favoring the Saints although I understand the Pats argument and certainly don't reject it's validity.

The fact is the Saints put together quite a season with some impressive #s from there receiving corps, better #s than teams with bigger names.

Certainly Moss, Rice, etc. are better receivers than Colston and if you were drafting in some sort of fantasy draft you would take them over Colston, but as a unit, this team has a very potent passing attack, more potent than the Rams or Bills had despite bigger names.

BandwagonPunditry
05-30-2012, 09:03 PM
Surprised the 1980s Chargers haven't got a mention yet: (edit: they have been, my bad)

Dan Fouts
Charlie Joiner
John Jefferson/Wes Chandler
Kellen Winslow

Three hall of famers in that list and Don Coryell calling the shots. It was a game changing aerial offense.

J52
06-03-2012, 03:31 PM
Duper/Clayton/Marino or greatest show on turf. Those two regimes changed the world. Marino and crew took the previous records in passing and shattered all of them with Duper and Clayton.

Warner and crew took the game from what it used to be to the ridiculous pass only game that football has became recently.

badgerbacker
06-08-2012, 02:39 PM
Your absolutely right. Your back up QB scored a few extra TDs.

However, Brees still scored more TDs than Rodgers and as I said, I don't care what your back up QB can do for you.

Sloopy, the thread is "What team had the best aerial options since the merger" not "what quarterback had the best statistical season"

The fact that the Packers back up QB was putting up huge numbers should be used as further evidence as to how dominant the overall attack was. You can't throw out a back-up's stats when talking about team performance.

To say that there is no argument against the Saints is a little short-sighted. Basically the only argument the Saints have over the Packers is total yardage. The Packers had a better yards/attempt, passer rating, more passing TDs, fewer INTs, and a better overall record.

Sloopy
06-10-2012, 12:04 PM
Sloopy, the thread is "What team had the best aerial options since the merger" not "what quarterback had the best statistical season"

The fact that the Packers back up QB was putting up huge numbers should be used as further evidence as to how dominant the overall attack was. You can't throw out a back-up's stats when talking about team performance.

That's fair. Still IIRC it was by one TD, meanwhile the Saints still put up a record breaking season for yards.

To say that there is no argument against the Saints is a little short-sighted. Basically the only argument the Saints have over the Packers is total yardage. The Packers had a better yards/attempt, passer rating, more passing TDs, fewer INTs, and a better overall record.

I don't think I said that there is no argument against the saints. In fact I believe that I said there is similarly a good argument for the Pats.

What I did say is that there isn't a real argument for the Pack as the best passing attack this year.

I'm not sure what overall record has to do with the passing attack, yes you can argue that the offense carried the team, but W/L is a team stat.

Packers had better yards per attempt and passer rating etc. but the Saints still outproduced them.

I understand that yards aren't everything, but I have to laugh at the idea that a record breaking season would be trumped by the third best passing attack in the league last year.

Either way, this isn't an thread about the best passing attack last year. it IS about who has had the best aerial options since the merger.

For that discussion, the 2011 Packers really don't have an argument. The Saints do, as they are statistically the 1b (1a as the Pats, no particular order) one of the best passing attacks EVER.

Others in the argument include the Rams, 49'ers and some others which have been named.

WCH
06-10-2012, 12:45 PM
I agree that these teams had bigger names, but I still think one has to look at production as a key factor here. Hence why I have the Pats and Saints as my top two with me slightly favoring the Saints although I understand the Pats argument and certainly don't reject it's validity.


I agree that production is a key factor, and the Saints certainly produced. For my money, though, I'm still going with the Reed/Lofton/etc lineup. James Lofton's best days were behind him by the time he played for the Bills, but he was still a great player for them. I think that a lot of people forget how insanely good he was.

This current Pats squad is interesting because their most dangerous weapons are the two TEs and a slot receiver. If you had told me a few years ago that an offense like that would have one of the top passing attacks in the NFL, I'd have thought that you were batshit insane.

Sloopy
06-10-2012, 12:47 PM
True, but when they broke records they had Moss so it's not only the TE's.

Can't Imagine what that team would be like if Moss were still around with Gronk and Hernandez!!!

badgerbacker
06-10-2012, 05:29 PM
I understand that yards aren't everything, but I have to laugh at the idea that a record breaking season would be trumped by the third best passing attack in the league last year.

Rodgers also had a record breaking season in terms of passer rating, so the Saints weren't the only ones breaking passing records... Everyone is entitled to their own opinion about what is most impressive though *shrugs*

Not trying to be a Packer homer and I don't think they were necessarily the best passing attack last year, but I think they should at least be in the conversation considering how ridiculously efficient they were (and still put up monster totals as well).

Either way, my money goes towards the 2007 Patriots in this thread.

By the way, is the "since the merger" really necessary? Was there some dominant passing attack early in the 20th century that I'm not aware of?

7DnBrnc53
06-10-2012, 09:09 PM
As much as I hate to admit it, it's hard to argue against the 49er teams with Montana/Rice/Taylor/Jones/Craig/Rathman. The Greatest Show teams were awfully good as well, but they never had the TE that I always thought would have made them unstoppable had they worked it into the gameplan.

But I actually think that maybe the most well-balanced passing attack could be the current New Orleans team. They had 6 guys with over 500 yards receiving last year, and Pierre Thomas added 425.

I know that the Rams of that period didn't have a great TE, but I don't think that Brent Jones was a great TE, either. He was a slow player that fit a WCO system.

And, while they had a good attack, I don't think that the Niner offenses of the 80's and 90's were as explosive as the Air Coryell Chargers, Greatest Show Rams, late-90's Vikes, or the Pats and Colts of recent years.

BigBanger
06-11-2012, 03:06 PM
The 1994 49ers were probably my favorite offensive team I have ever watched.

I think Steve Young is one of the absolute greatest QBs ever. And how he orchestrated that offense... it was masterful. And I think ahead of his time. He was as efficient as QBs are in today's NFL.

Brent Jones was one of the best TEs in the game at the time.

Ricky Watters (over 700 yards receiving in 94) and William Floyd out of the backfield was a great combination. Floyd is also one of my favorite FBs to ever play the game.

And.. Jerry Rice, who was the wide receiving corps.

VikesWookie
06-20-2012, 01:24 AM
i liked the oilers wr core w/ moon at the helm as well as the redskins core with rypien slingin the pig. monk, gary clark, ricky sanders with a young brian mitchell.

denver had an extremely efficient wr core in those back to back superbowl years. prolly not the best, but fit perfectly with their scheme (smith,mccaffrey,sharpe)

Brent
06-20-2012, 08:08 AM
1998 Minnesota Vikings.