Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Don Hutson or Jerry Rice: Who is the Greatest WR?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    i remember not to long ago getting into a disagreement over Moss vs Rice, so i'm just going to stay out of this one


    Courtesy of Fenikz - Much Appreciated

    Originally posted by dRaFtDoRk
    You can't be a good corner if no one throws your way. Thats my way of seeing it.

    Comment


    • #17
      I don't pretend to have been watching Hutson play but:

      Hutson was coo, but if you want to say he's better than Jerry Rice, then I want to say you're a moron.

      RIP ST

      Comment


      • #18
        Hutson was great, best of his era. But I look at Randy Moss now, who when teams take him away, he is gone. Rice still would get 7 catches a game. Rice is the best hands down.


        Follow Me on Twitter!
        https://twitter.com/ShanePHallam

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Shahin View Post
          I don't pretend to have been watching Hutson play but:
          Hutson was coo, but if you want to say he's better than Jerry Rice, then I want to say you're a moron.
          Ya, i never saw him either, so i can't make a real arguement other than statistics, and hearsay


          Courtesy of Fenikz - Much Appreciated

          Originally posted by dRaFtDoRk
          You can't be a good corner if no one throws your way. Thats my way of seeing it.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by DragonFireKai View Post
            Among Rice's contemporaries are players like Cris Carter, Randy Moss, and Marvin Harrison.

            Among Hutson's contemporaries are players like Dante Lavelli, Pete Pihos, and Elroy Hirsch.

            Of those players in Rice's era, Cris Carter had the most TDs, at 130, or 65% of Rice's 197. Tim Brown had the most yards, 14,934, or 65% of Rice's 22,895.

            Of the players in Hutson's era, Dante Lavelli had the most TDs, at 62, or 63% of Hutson's 99. Elroy Hirsch had the most yards, 7,029, or 88% of Hutson's 7,991.

            In terms of yardage, Rice had nearly as many yards more than his nearest competitor, 7,961, than Hutson had period. And Rice did it in multiple schemes, with multiple QBs, and many different coaches.
            Rice played a ton of seasons, and Hutson played 11 years and only 10-11 game seasons, most of them 10 games. Also, Hirsch did not even start playing until the year after Hutson retired. The same can be said of Lavelli. Plus they played in longer seasons and were part of the first passing age. So it is really unfair to compare their numbers, and they still are not as good as Hutson's even with your formula above.

            Also, Don Hutson caught a touchdown every 4.9 passes caught, Jerry Rice, one every 7.9 passes caught. I am not taking anything away from Rice, because we was such a great player for such a long time. He will be remembered by most as the greatest receiver of all-time, but I think Hutson is on par with him.

            I think it is important not to forget the players that laid the way (making almost nothing) for the players that play the game today.

            Comment


            • #21
              Hutson and Rice are Equals

              Originally posted by Dam8610 View Post
              Are you by any chance a Packers fan? Jerry Rice was EXTREMELY dominant over his era. IMO Rice is the only player who is the undisputed GOAT of his position. Most of his records nearly double the next closest competitior. There's no one at any other position that can claim anything of that nature, even on the day they retired.
              No. I am not a Packers fan. I am a fan of football and it's history. In fact, I happen to love Jerry Rice as a player. He is one of my favorite players of all-time. He was great at taking a short slant route and turning it into a long touchdown and was a quarterbacks dream.

              I just don't think it is as clear cut as some believe. Jerry Rice was able to play the game at a high level for a very long time. In Hutson's day, players made no money, didn't receive very good medical treatment, and as a result did not play as long.

              Brett Favre has all of the passing records, but I don't think he is the greatest quarterback of all-time. I don't even have him in my top 5 all-time. So you can't just go off of stats alone.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by DragonFireKai View Post
                The difference is that with Montana, you can create a well rounded argument for several players for them being better than Montana. You can't do that with Rice, the only argument anyone can come up with is that Hutson did really well for playing that long ago. However, when you look at the fact that he only played for one team, and after he left, players like Nolan Luhn had 7 TD seasons in his stead in the same system, it points to a schematic advantage. The packers in that era passed the ball 250-350 times a season, that's a 1970s offense, not 1940s.

                Hutson was great, but Rice was great on a level playing field.
                In the 1940's and 1950's the Cleveland Browns also had a schematic advantage under Paul Brown.

                In the 1980's and 1990's the 49ers had a schematic advantage under Bill Walsh, a Paul Brown disciple. Nobody could duplicate the 49ers scheme for years, and not very successfully until the mid 1990's.

                Again, I am not taking anything away from Rice, I loved the guy. In my opinion, Hutson was on par with him. He could go deep for touchdowns, and could take crossing routes or slants for touchdowns, much like Rice. He averaged 1 touchdown every 4.9 catches to Rice's 1 touchdown every 7.9 catches. I just believe it is not as clear cut as you make it sound. They are 1a and 1b as the greatest receivers of all-time.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by 20yardline View Post
                  I just don't think it is as clear cut as some believe. Jerry Rice was able to play the game at a high level for a very long time. In Hutson's day, players made no money, didn't receive very good medical treatment, and as a result did not play as long.

                  That doesn't help your argument much, it just furthers the argument against it.

                  The schemes weren't as evolved, and the players weren't as good. There are always players ahead of their time when a sport takes off.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by ShutDwn View Post
                    That doesn't help your argument much, it just furthers the argument against it.

                    The schemes weren't as evolved, and the players weren't as good. There are always players ahead of their time when a sport takes off.
                    I added some additional information to my original post that you might find interesting. Also, you may not have seen one of my other replies about Hutson had a TD every 4.9 catches to Rice's TD every 7.9 catches.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by 20yardline View Post
                      I added some additional information to my original post that you might find interesting. Also, you may not have seen one of my other replies about Hutson had a TD every 4.9 catches to Rice's TD every 7.9 catches.
                      You tend to have more TDs per catch when your best skill is running by the opposing CB.


                      The problem arises when people use statistics like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support instead of illumination.

                      If luck is where preparation meets opportunity, then clutch is where failure meets luck.

                      <Add1ct> setting myself on fire can't be that hard
                      <Add1ct> but tackling a mosquito might prove a challenge

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by 20yardline View Post
                        Don Hutson 4.2 Catches a game 68.9 yards per game and .85 touchdowns per game
                        Crazy Legs Hirsch 3.0 catches for 55.7 yards per game and 0.47 touchdowns per game
                        Lavelli 3.1 catches for 52.7 yards per game and 0.58 touchdowns per game

                        Here is Rice vs. other receivers of his era and shortly after.

                        Jerry Rice 5.1 catches a game for 75.6 yards per game and 0.65 touchdowns/game
                        Randy Moss 5.0 catches a game for 79.1 yards per game and 0.81 touchdowns/game
                        Sterling Sharpe 5.3 catches a game for 72.6 yards per game and 0.58 touchdowns/game
                        Wow, these are sketchy comparisons. Comparing Rice to Moss is akin to comparing Hutson to Lance Alworth. As for Sterling Sharpe, he retired in the prime of his career, after what could be considered his best professional season, and after what undoubtedly were the best 3 years of his career. Rice played for a good 5 years past his prime, bringing his averages down a great deal in the process.


                        The problem arises when people use statistics like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support instead of illumination.

                        If luck is where preparation meets opportunity, then clutch is where failure meets luck.

                        <Add1ct> setting myself on fire can't be that hard
                        <Add1ct> but tackling a mosquito might prove a challenge

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I'll never understand how anyone can talk about a player that played in an era before they were born (let alone in 1930) with any credible knowledge other than what they've read.

                          But I guess there's no harm in people daydreaming about how great Don Hutson was even though probably never saw more than a minute of compiled footage of him.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by 20yardline View Post
                            In the 1940's and 1950's the Cleveland Browns also had a schematic advantage under Paul Brown.

                            In the 1980's and 1990's the 49ers had a schematic advantage under Bill Walsh, a Paul Brown disciple. Nobody could duplicate the 49ers scheme for years, and not very successfully until the mid 1990's.
                            The numbers produced by Walsh's West coast offense and produced by say, the Air Croyell, The Raiders' Vertical Passing, or Shula's High Octane, are quite comparable. The difference between what Lambeau and Brown, and their nearest competitor was much greater.

                            In 1942, when the Packers offense was at its peak, Irv Comp passed for over 2000 yards and 24 TDs, the next closest competitors passed for 1500 yards and 16 TDs, that's a third again as much as the number two guy, Sammy Baugh, a hall of fame QB. In 1995, when Rice was at his peak, the number two passer had 4,338 yards and 33 TDs. To replicate the schematic advantage that the packers enjoyed, we'd be talking about passing for 5,784 yards and 44 TDs. The 49ers QBs didn't come anywhere near that level of production, in fact, Steve Young failed to crack the top ten in either catagory in 1995. Walsh's teams never came anywhere near the disparity of ability that Lambeau enjoyed.

                            Again, I am not taking anything away from Rice, I loved the guy. In my opinion, Hutson was on par with him. He could go deep for touchdowns, and could take crossing routes or slants for touchdowns, much like Rice. He averaged 1 touchdown every 4.9 catches to Rice's 1 touchdown every 7.9 catches. I just believe it is not as clear cut as you make it sound. They are 1a and 1b as the greatest receivers of all-time.
                            You're pulling out isolated statistics here and there to support your argument, however, the overwhelming amount of evidence supports Rice. He's had more yards, more TDs, more Catches, more championships, more pro bowls, more all pro nominations, proved himself against more advanced defenses, against better athletes, and in varied schemes.

                            Brett Favre has all of the passing records, but I don't think he is the greatest quarterback of all-time. I don't even have him in my top 5 all-time. So you can't just go off of stats alone.
                            Why not? He has all the records, he has a championship, he has more MVP awards than any player in history. I think your top five is very skewed if you do not include Favre.

                            Rice played a ton of seasons, and Hutson played 11 years and only 10-11 game seasons, most of them 10 games. Also, Hirsch did not even start playing until the year after Hutson retired. The same can be said of Lavelli. Plus they played in longer seasons and were part of the first passing age. So it is really unfair to compare their numbers, and they still are not as good as Hutson's even with your formula above.
                            Hirsch started playing 12 years after Hutson. Randy Moss started playing 13 years after Rice.

                            I think it is important not to forget the players that laid the way (making almost nothing) for the players that play the game today.
                            Just because you were the first to do something doesn't mean you were the best. Bill George is not the greatest Middle Linebacker ever, he's not even in the conversation for best mike in Bears history.

                            Stand Tall and Shake the Heavens!
                            The Destroyer Is Manifest!
                            I reserve the rights to retract any posts made betwen midnight and 5 AM PST due to being really, really drunk

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              you cant compare them you really cant, different eras, different games reallly

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by stephenson86 View Post
                                you cant compare them you really cant, different eras, different games reallly
                                Simply Right!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X

                                Debug Information