Anyone but skin homers really think

[burmafrd]

You prove that Moss is considered Owens equal. Can't can you?

 

[Hostile]

Thats just crazy talk. The Commanders have the best OL in the division. Having the QB that needs the most time in the division (Bledsoe) means that the best OL should go hand in hand.

I agree with that, but I'm not ready to render my OL as useless as a gelding on a stud farm. Meanwhile I like my receiving weapons. I also am not above simply getting a more mobile QB at some point.

 

[SultanOfSix]

He used career stats. He didn't actually state them but it was definitely what he was talking about.

Really? All I saw was a general reference to T.O. having multiple better years than Moss, from which he concluded that T.O. is most likely the better receiver.

I don't even see career or stats mentioned anywhere.

 

[Vintage]

Only skins homers would have Moss close to Owens. No one esle around does. Glenn has had a better career then Lloyd- so unless you can show that Glenn will fade this year and Lloyd will be better....
Witten is of course better then Cooley.
BUT lets make this a little more clear.
Owens is a 1
Moss is a 2
Glenn is a 1
Llloyd is a 2
Witten is a 1
Cooley is a 2
Is that clear enough?
OR give them a numeric ranking with 10 being all world and 1 stinking up the place
Owens is a 9
Moss is a 8
Glenn is a 6
Lloyd is a 5
Witten is a 8
Cooley is a 7 (being generous)
Totals: Boys 23
Skins 20
Now could that be any more clear?

So....Glenn and Owens are 1's...

And Moss is a 2?

Yet Moss is rated higher than Glenn?

Abitrary numbers prove nothing.

 

[burmafrd]

Owens is better then Moss. Career stats. Best seasons. Who is feared more- OWENS OR MOSS? Just so many ways.

 

[kartr]

.
Salsbury had us at 6, then Golic said he doesnt know why werent even higher, so they switched us

Golic is a meathead. You can count on one hand the number of times he's been right about anything. He and Sclereth(sp) go at it all the time.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I used a bad example. My bad. Seems no one here wants to talk about my actual point but harp on the bad example.

No, your point is vague, unclear, and misguided. Everybody knows that past, historical stats don't necessarily equate to producing more in the future. But what is your point? Are you saying Owens is past his prime? Otherwise you're making a moot point.

Let it be known I never said Moss was better than Owens, just the difference between the two in terms of overall quality isn't as big some here would like to suggest.

There's been plenty of receivers that have had one or two great years and have done nothing afterwards. The NFL has been filled with the David Boston's and Michael Westbrook's of the world. On the other hand, if a receiver has produced at a rate similarly to what Owens has done on a year-to-year basis, he's much more likely to continue to do so if he's still in his prime.

Maybe if you guys spent less time insulting the Skins fan and more time actually reading what he wrote this wouldn't be so difficult to understand.

We read what written and it was a nonsensical example and conclusion. Perhaps Moss turns out to become Steve Smith or perhaps he turns out to be Michael Westbrook. That's an uncertain.

But Owens has consistently proved himself to be a great receiver, and barring injury or some other disaster, he's much more likely to have a great year next season than Moss at this point in time.


Rich.........

 

[burmafrd]

I keep hearing from skins fans that Moss is as good or just a tiny step under Owens. I say prove it. SHOW EVIDENCE. THAT ON A YEAR TO YEAR BASIS THAT MOSS IS AS GOOD AS OWENS, or just slightly less. CAN'T do it, can you. JUST by the on field stats, Owens is better. Better overall, more feared, higher ranked.

 

[SultanOfSix]

I think Yakuza summed it up pretty damn good.

 

[kartr]

Owens is a complete reciever. Moss is an all or nothing kind of reciever, hes not going over the middle to pick up tough 1st downs.

Glenn is at this point still better than Lloyd/Randle el

Crayton is improving but not as good as Randle El imo, but I would take him over Lloyd

I hope no one even tries to debate Witten/Cooley


and how did Salsbury have the Giants over Dallas

Owens > Buress
Glenn > Toomer
Crayton > Sinorice Moss
Witten > Shockey

Even more importantly, Brunell > Bledsoe and Reskins qbs > Dallas qbs. I believe that Dallas team qb ranking is like 24th in the NFL.

 

[burmafrd]

As usual Kartr you miss the point. The comparison is ONLY WR/TE. No QB, RB, O LINE as part of the consideration.

 

[Doomsday101]

Owens is better then Moss. Career stats. Best seasons. Who is feared more- OWENS OR MOSS? Just so many ways.

Both are very good and Moss numbers last year were pretty close to the best season TO ever had. After all Moss did have 85 catches for 1,483 yards 17.3 per catch average. I do think TO is better but both guys strike fear with their abilities

 

[burmafrd]

Point is who is better. Owens.

 

[SkinsandTerps]

Steve Smith has really only had 2 good seasons.

 

[Doomsday101]

Point is who is better. Owens.

At this stage maybe so, but Moss is just getting into the prime of his career.

 

[Gamebreaker]

No, your point is vague, unclear, and misguided. Everybody knows that past, historical stats don't necessarily equate to producing more in the future. But what is your point? Are you saying Owens is past his prime? Otherwise you're making a moot point.

I'm not going over this again. I've stated and re-stated the same point over and over again. Go back and re-read it if you want.

We read what written and it was a nonsensical example and conclusion. Perhaps Moss turns out to become Steve Smith or perhaps he turns out to be Michael Westbrook. That's an uncertain.

You see, this type of bias is likely the reason this is even being contested. Steve Smith has proven no more than Moss has one a season-to-season basis. To say if Moss turns out to be Smith, when Smith's career is eerily similar in that he had a very good season in 2003, injury-riddled one in 2004, and then a monster year in 2005. By your very logic, how is Smith any more proven than Moss?

But Owens has consistently proved himself to be a great receiver, and barring injury or some other disaster, he's much more likely to have a great year next season than Moss at this point in time.

I agree. This doesn't mean Owens is a much better reciever than Moss is, which is what I was in discussion about anyway.

 

[Doomsday101]

Steve Smith has really only had 2 good seasons.

True but just as the case with Moss both are hitting their prime. Both will be entering their 6th season. And just like Moss, Smith has put up 2 1,000 yard season. Frankly they compare pretty good with each other.

 

[burmafrd]

If Owens is 95 on a 100 scale what is Moss? Lets see what the skins homers have to say.

 

[Gamebreaker]

I keep hearing from skins fans that Moss is as good or just a tiny step under Owens. I say prove it. SHOW EVIDENCE. THAT ON A YEAR TO YEAR BASIS THAT MOSS IS AS GOOD AS OWENS, or just slightly less. CAN'T do it, can you. JUST by the on field stats, Owens is better. Better overall, more feared, higher ranked.

I've BEEN asking you to do that for how many pages now? Now you want me to prove you wrong on a argument you can't even defend yourself.

How about this? Actually come up with an analysis why Owens is "much better" than Moss and I'll counter it.

 

[Doomsday101]

If Owens is 95 on a 100 scale what is Moss? Lets see what the skins homers have to say.

Going by that scale I would say Moss is a 90 and moving up