Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A serious Moss vs Rice debate

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

  • A serious Moss vs Rice debate

    Seeing that Randy Moss is about to be placed at #65 for all time players, and being able to guess that Rice will easily be top 15 or so (deservedly), I got to wondering about how big the gap between them actually is.

    Now, football historians always go Rice (or any historical players), while younger guys will lean towards what they can see.

    Now, I doubt Moss will last another 9 years or so to match Rice's career, but still, I figured I would compare them using first 12 seasons, because that's about when Rice started to decline anyways.

    Randy Moss is averaging 1205.4 yards per year with 12.3 TD's, 77 catches per at a 15.8 ypc avg. In that time, Rice was averaging 1364 with 12.8 TD's, 87 receptions at 15.6 ypc. In that span of time, Moss missed about two more games, so injuries were negligible.

    Seeing as bother have played in great offenses, and received a large amount of help, The only real factor that can be considered that affected the stats, was Moss' time in Oakland. You can't let it alter too much, because he still played poorly, but, honestly, his two years there were about equivalent to one regular year. Without them, he would be averaging 1290 and 13.7 with 82 receptions.

    Between them they possess the two best individual seasons by a WR ever, with Moss having a 1500 23 year, and rice having a 1100 22 year, in only 12 games.

    I do believe at this point Rice is better, but if Randy picks it up this year and manages another 1200 and 15? In Moss' 13th year, he has already done what Rice did in his, so this is a good shot for him to gain some statistical mileage on Rice. The gap isn't as far as people want to believe. In terms of sheer dominance, I wouldn't be able to take one over the other, it is simply Rice's longevity that gives him the nod for now.

    Regardless, I just want to see if people think the gap is truly as large as NFL network says, or if it may actually be a little closer.

  • #2
    When you list all the players it probably is.

    If you list WR only, both have to be top 3. There is no denying Moss did play on a crappy Raider team, but it still remains that he barely tried and almost quit. Rice started to play on ****** teams, but he didn't quit he continued to play, until they pulled him out and messed up his streak of consecutive receptions in a game...or was it consecutive TD? But from there it went downhill.

    Comment


    • #3
      If Rice is anywhere near 15 it's a travesty, he should be top 5 at least. What more do you want out of a career, literally the only conceivable knock on Rice is that he is not a quarterback.

      Comment


      • #4
        I really can't look past Moss' years in Oakland. You have guys like Steve Smith who have played their entire career with bad quarterbacks while Moss completely shuts it down unless he's playing with a guy who's top 10. Look at what happened to Andre Johnson's stats once the Texans finally ditched David Carr and got Schaub

        With that said, when Moss is happy he elevates the level of the offense he plays in so high that I think his position is fair. Any higher, especially a level equivalent to Rice...no

        Comment


        • #5
          It seriously is not a debate.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Shiver View Post
            It seriously is not a debate.
            Thanks for that. Even though, you know, I said Rice is better, and in my post I was mostly asking about the gap between them.

            But thanks. Good help.

            Comment


            • #7
              If you want to say you'd rather have Moss, you can. But if the argument is for greatest, then its definitely Rice. And He is a top 5 lock, I think he should be a top 3 lock.

              Too many variables for me, Rice had the better QBs and teams overall but Moss has played in the more wide open era. Moss does more to stretch defenses and open up your entire offense, but he is almost one dimensional.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by SchizophrenicBatman View Post
                I really can't look past Moss' years in Oakland. You have guys like Steve Smith who have played their entire career with bad quarterbacks while Moss completely shuts it down unless he's playing with a guy who's top 10. Look at what happened to Andre Johnson's stats once the Texans finally ditched David Carr and got Schaub

                With that said, when Moss is happy he elevates the level of the offense he plays in so high that I think his position is fair. Any higher, especially a level equivalent to Rice...no
                Moss' first year in Oakland wasn't bad by other WR's standards. 1000 and 8. They were just bad for Moss' standards. He definitely tanked it in the second year, though.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by CC.SD View Post
                  If Rice is anywhere near 15 it's a travesty, he should be top 5 at least. What more do you want out of a career, literally the only conceivable knock on Rice is that he is not a quarterback.
                  He should be, I'm just always conservative on my estimates of how other people may or may not rank anyone. My guess would be top 5, but I can't guarantee he will be there. I CAN guarantee he won't be lower than 15.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Rice has 4 rings and a Super Bowl MVP. Moss has a history of not playing great in big games.

                    ex. of Moss in big games:

                    "But he finished with just six catches for 75 yards -- just one catch for 4 yards in the second half and overtime."

                    1998 NFCCG: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/foo...falcons_first/

                    "It's going to be hard for us to win a Super Bowl in Minnesota," said Moss, who managed only two receptions for 18 yards. "I don't want to say Minnesota will never win a Super Bowl, but it is going to be hard."

                    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/foo...ngs_giants_ap/


                    5 receptions for 62 yards and 1 TD in Patriots-Giants Super Bowl

                    http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=280203017



                    It really isn't a debate.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      that's my point though

                      Moss' years with Oakland turdsandwich:
                      60 1,005 8
                      42 553 3

                      Year with Matt Cassell in New England:
                      69 1,008 11

                      The two years he tried most of the time weren't bad by any means, but they really don't separate him from other guys of his era. Rice didn't have to deal with anything like that in his prime but plenty of other guys have, and did you check out with he with a late 30s Rich Gannon when he was 39 and 40?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Moss is probably the most dominating receiver of all time, but Rice is the most reliable and consistently amazing. Just look at it that way.


                        RIP TheManInBlack

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by SchizophrenicBatman View Post
                          that's my point though

                          Moss' years with Oakland turdsandwich:
                          60 1,005 8
                          42 553 3

                          Year with Matt Cassell in New England:
                          69 1,008 11

                          The two years he tried most of the time weren't bad by any means, but they really don't separate him from other guys of his era. Rice didn't have to deal with anything like that in his prime but plenty of other guys have, and did you check out with he with a late 30s Rich Gannon when he was 39 and 40?

                          Raiders and Rice
                          01-02 83 1139 9
                          02-03 92 1211 7
                          03-04 63 869 2
                          04-05 5 67
                          Seattle
                          04-05 25 362 3

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by SchizophrenicBatman View Post
                            that's my point though

                            Moss' years with Oakland turdsandwich:
                            60 1,005 8
                            42 553 3

                            Year with Matt Cassell in New England:
                            69 1,008 11

                            The two years he tried most of the time weren't bad by any means, but they really don't separate him from other guys of his era. Rice didn't have to deal with anything like that in his prime but plenty of other guys have, and did you check out with he with a late 30s Rich Gannon when he was 39 and 40?
                            With Cassell he definitely tried. Cassell's deep ball is horrendous. He would throw them like 5 yards out of bounds. I won't defend his Oakland numbers, but with Cassell he still gave an effort most of the time.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              There's a debate between Moss and Rice? Since when?

                              Thanks to The Dynasty for the sig

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              Debug Information