2 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

True or false: Mcnabb was the worst pure passer that TO spent extensive time with in his career.

Without looking at stats I'd say maybe 5 and Jeff Garcia were close as far as being a pure passer.  Neither were great but good at times.

4 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

True or false: Mcnabb was the worst pure passer that TO spent extensive time with in his career.

Young, Romo, Garcia…

Probably Garcia? With and without Owens was a big difference, but was with McNabb as well.

Speaking of Boston Scott, he needs 2 TDs this year (vs the Giants) to tie Brian Westbrook for the most TDs by an Eagle all time against the Giants.  I have a feeling he gets it.

3 minutes ago, RLC said:

Possibly, but he did play with Ryan Fitzpatrick.

Well Fitzpatrick takes the cake on that one.  I was only recalling Young/Garcia/Mcnabb/Romo.

14 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

 

In general, a WR (on paper in an otherwise blind comparison) that goes for 1,600 yards and 2 TDs is probably more intriguing to me than one that goes for 750 yards and 10 TDs.  

 

 

Yeah that’s my main point. That’s essentially Julio Jones’ career vs Mike Evans’. Mike has already caught 20 more TDs than Julio and is still going, but if you had to pick which receiver helped his team score more points, it’s Julio without question.
 

Putting the team into position to score is the primary role, regardless of if the TD goes to you or not. Being a significant redzone threat is an important skill, but it’s far from the most important

4 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

The goal to get a touchdown is that of an offense as a whole. It is not reflective of the receivers’ abilities if the team successfully runs the ball in the redzone. A WR is there to assist the offense in moving the ball down the field into a scoring drive whether or not you catch the actual TD. That’s a receiver’s job.

Minnesota’s offense just swing passes to Dalvin Cook over and over again in the redzone. Justin Jefferson was not voted the 2nd player in the NFL because he has 0 career double digit TD seasons. It’s because he moved the chains better than every other WR in the nfl. 
 

I don’t agree with whatever straw man argument you’re going on about with Andre Johnson, no

 

A WR who defense cannot stop from consistently scoring touchdowns is extremely valuable.  The way you keep trying to defend your goofy ass criteria is in a way where you seem to imply that TO was only effective in the redzone and was nowhere to be seen outside of that.  Again, 3rd most reception yards of all time.  But what made TO one of the 3 best WRs ever is because he didn't just get yards.  He scored a historic amount of touchdowns as well.  That wasn't luck.  That wasn't just giving him cheap gimme touchdowns.  That was an absolute beast of a player that opposing teams could not keep out of the endzone.  

 

And it's not a straw man argument, it's taking taking the criteria you creates and showing you how flawed it is when you actually apply it to another player of the same position and era. You knocked TO because:

a) He never had 1,500 yards in a season.  Andre Johnson had 3 such seasons.

b) He never led the league in receptions.  Andre Johnson had 2 such seasons.

c) He never led the league in receiving yards.  Andre Johnson had 2 such seasons.

 

So if you value receiving yards so much and you want to disregard TO's 3rd most receiving yards of all time because he never led the league in receiving in any given season then why wouldn't you put Andre Johnson over TO?  Can you explain to me why you don't think that Andre Johnson at his best wasn't better than TO at his best? 

3 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Speaking of Boston Scott, he needs 2 TDs this year (vs the Giants) to tie Brian Westbrook for the most TDs by an Eagle all time against the Giants.  I have a feeling he gets it.

There was a play last year where Sirianni gifted Scott a TD at the goalline (game 2 of 3 I think?) So yeah Nick may make sure he gets it

1 minute ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Yeah that’s my main point. That’s essentially Julio Jones’ career vs Mike Evans’. Mike has already caught 20 more TDs than Julio and is still going, but if you had to pick which receiver helped his team score more points, it’s Julio without question.

Jones vs. Evans probably exhibit A for yards over TDs, but it's an extreme.  Evans spent most of his career in an offense that was designed to throw him jump balls in the end zone.  He's a damn good WR, but he was never really a take over the game matchup nightmare drag the team down the field kind of weapon.  Julio Jones was.  And he played on an offense with a steady qb, but very little other help.  

3 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

A WR who defense cannot stop from consistently scoring touchdowns is extremely valuable.  The way you keep trying to defend your goofy ass criteria is in a way where you seem to imply that TO was only effective in the redzone and was nowhere to be seen outside of that.  Again, 3rd most reception yards of all time.  But what made TO one of the 3 best WRs ever is because he didn't just get yards.  He scored a historic amount of touchdowns as well.  That wasn't luck.  That wasn't just giving him cheap gimme touchdowns.  That was an absolute beast of a player that opposing teams could not keep out of the endzone.  

 

And it's not a straw man argument, it's taking taking the criteria you creates and showing you how flawed it is when you actually apply it to another player of the same position and era. You knocked TO because:

a) He never had 1,500 yards in a season.  Andre Johnson had 3 such seasons.

b) He never led the league in receptions.  Andre Johnson had 2 such seasons.

c) He never led the league in receiving yards.  Andre Johnson had 2 such seasons.

 

So if you value receiving yards so much and you want to disregard TO's 3rd most receiving yards of all time because he never led the league in receiving in any given season then why wouldn't you put Andre Johnson over TO?  Can you explain to me why you don't think that Andre Johnson at his best wasn't better than TO at his best? 

But it is a straw man if you take those criteria and ignore everything else I said. My argument is based on relativity. Your Straw man is based entirely on absolutism. Andre Johnson is not making the WR Mt rushmore on "2 such seasons”. TO had a top 10 WR career, these are the finer points in separating top 10 WRs from one another. Andre Johnson is missing a lot of stuff to be in this discussion.

2 hours ago, Cliftoma said:

https://dailysnark.com/2023/08/16/multiple-fights-break-out-at-cowboys-training-camp-after-micah-parsons-punches-teammate/?fbclid=IwAR1K8-dv742p3b-sEAcE2xAGhYpuF3nPlhbZnHtP29f2h1s4hLAvNKntvs0

Things are going well at Cowboy 🤡 camp 🤣

He really is an Eagles player already!

Longevity vs. peak performance is a debate that will rage forever across all sports.

Just now, Aerolithe_Lion said:

But it is a straw man if you take those criteria and ignore everything else I said. My argument is based on relativity. Your Straw man is based entirely on absolutism. Andre Johnson is not making the WR my rushmore on "2 such seasons”. TO had a top 10 WR career, these are the finer points in separating top 10 WRs from one another. Andre Johnson is missing a lot of stuff to be in this discussion.

 

It's because your criteria holds no water.  It's empty and hollow.  Your argument is trash especially when these receiving yards you want to act like are more valuable than yards is also an aspect of Owens game where he was one of the best.  3rd most receiving yards in the history of the game.  But you want to disregard that simply because he never led the league in those categories for a single season despite doing so over the course of his career.  So when you then try to disregard these supposed high value points when pointing out how would put Andre Johnson above TO by your thinking it turns everything you stand on here into a joke.  

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

Longevity vs. peak performance is a debate that will rage forever across all sports.

For QBs it’s Steve Young vs Brett Favre. IMO any top 10 list that doesn’t have Steve Young is nuts. His prime was worlds better than Favre. But because he was a late bloomer and Favre refused to retire, you often see Favre higher on most lists.

1 minute ago, RLC said:

Possibly, but he did play with Ryan Fitzpatrick.

I'm tough on McNabb but he's clearly HoVG even if he's just a bit short of HoF. Garcia is far short of that and Romo's best statistics were with Dez instead of TO.

Romo has HoF stats (at least old school stats) but he lost too many of those bad playoffs or game 16 playoff scenarios to be as good as McNabb was.

Its not fair to compare 28 year old Romo to last ditch 33 year old McNabb even if that was an ugly couple of weeks.

Garcia was 33-34 with SF and TO. Nice stats at times but he does not belong in the conversation with Romo, McNabb, and Young IMO. 

I think we remember Garcia as better because of that 5-1 season saving run through the NFC East in 2006.

Just now, RememberTheKoy said:

 

It's because your criteria holds no water.  It's empty and hollow.  Your argument is trash especially when these receiving yards you want to act like are more valuable than yards is also an aspect of Owens game where he was one of the best.  3rd most receiving yards in the history of the game.  But you want to disregard that simply because he never led the league in those categories for a single season despite doing so over the course of his career.  So when you then try to disregard these supposed high value points when pointing out how would put Andre Johnson above TO by your thinking it turns everything you stand on here into a joke.  

But since no one is saying Andre is above TO, that makes this retort you made moot right?

2 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Longevity vs. peak performance is a debate that will rage forever across all sports.

 

Talking TO was Frank Gore or something.  He had over a decade of nothing but peak performance.  

5 hours ago, RunItBAck said:

Dangerous offenses under Smith, Garcia ? Mcnaab is even questionable compared to Vick/Mahomes 🤣

The 2006 Eagles were 5-1 with Garcia, 6th in scoring and 1st in the entire NFL in yards per play.

you have no idea what you’re talking about.

2 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

Talking TO was Frank Gore or something.  He had over a decade of nothing but peak performance.  

No one is saying that, you’re just wildly making stuff up now. You haven’t made a post yet that isn’t riddled with straw man’s or insults

Just now, Aerolithe_Lion said:

But since no one is saying Andre is above TO, that makes this retort you made moot right?

 

No, it makes your criteria moot.  Because if it is only applicable for you to try to discredit TO, despite having 3rd most receiving yards of all time in addition to 3rd most TDs of all time, but it can't used to compare him to a contemporary where this criteria would clearly point to Andre Johnson as being the better WR then it's a completely farcical point.  

Just now, RememberTheKoy said:

 

No, it makes your criteria moot.  Because if it is only applicable for you to try to discredit TO, despite having 3rd most receiving yards of all time in addition to 3rd most TDs of all time, but it can't used to compare him to a contemporary where this criteria would clearly point to Andre Johnson as being the better WR then it's a completely farcical point.  

Well that’s not my criteria. The fact you think it is means you are missing the conversation entirely

Now do his next 2 games where Westbrook carried him and he was about a 52% playoff completions passer.

There is no McNabb was not good enough in the playoffs argument that does not include Garcia was also not good enough.

Just now, Aerolithe_Lion said:

No one is saying that, you’re wildly making stuff up now

 

How is TO not Frank Gore in your eyes?  Frank Gore is a guy who was never the best RB and just got all his yards over a long career.  The way you have talked about TO in this thread and try to lessen his 3rd most all time TDs and 3rd most all time receiving yards can be looked at no other way than treating him like he's Frank Gore. 

2 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

How is TO not Frank Gore in your eyes?  Frank Gore is a guy who was never the best RB and just got all his yards over a long career.  The way you have talked about TO in this thread and try to lessen his 3rd most all time TDs and 3rd most all time receiving yards can be looked at no other way than treating him like he's Frank Gore. 

Because TO is a top 10 WR who ever lived? You’re the only one making blanket assessments of player careers. My original post was comparing the specific details of receivers who have already done enough to establish themselves amongst the top tiers who ever lived

2 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Well that’s not my criteria. The fact you think it is means you are missing the conversation entirely

 

No it is.  It's exactly your criteria that you laid out in your original post.  

 

2 hours ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Terrell Owens never led the league in receiving. Not once. Terrell Owens never led the league in catches. Once thing that really separates the greatest WRs are the 1500 yard seasons. Those are special.

 

1 minute ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Because TO is a top 10 WR who ever lived? You’re the only one making blanket assessments of player careers. My original post was comparing the specific details of receivers who have already done enough to establish themselves amongst the top tiers who ever lived

 

He's a top 3 WR at worst.