ESPN ALL Century Offense

[ErikWilliamsHeadSlap]

Love Fitz but can't see him getting any of these guys off the field.

What??? Sorry JJ doesn't have Larry's body of work yet, as great as he is. Fitz more than earned a place. Priest Holmes same thing. As good as Priest was for a short time, La Danian and Petersen played at the same or higher level and for longer.

 

[DeaconMoss]

Where is Steve Smith or Chris Carter? Justin Jefferson? lol
Tyron Smith is missing.
Holmes over AD is crazy.

 

[OGSixshooter]

He's probably 3rd on most lists behind Thomas and Trent. No shame in that.

Agreed. But for my money against JPP and other menaces of our time...gimme Tyron.

 

[Ranching]

Martin was good, but Dallas has had far better o'lineman in the past. Just my opinion.

I am also questioning how far back this list goes. Are we only talking about the past 25 years? If so then Priest Holmes doesn't belong since his career started in 1997 and Randy Moss started in 1998. Emmitt was still playing up to 2004, how does the all-time leading rusher not make this list?

I would imagine, they are only looking at their production over the last 25 years. If not, Emmitt and Barry should be there.

 

[Ranching]

Why call the list 'all century' if it only covers the past 25 years?

Says quarter century on the top. Got me, too

 

[ShortRound]

Why call the list 'all century' if it only covers the past 25 years?

OP and the poster on Twitter both mis-posted.
The ESPN graphic says Quarter Century.
(which is an odd thing to call it, most people say "of the last 25 years")

 

[McKDaddy]

What??? Sorry JJ doesn't have Larry's body of work yet, as great as he is. Fitz more than earned a place. Priest Holmes same thing. As good as Priest was for a short time, La Danian and Petersen played at the same or higher level and for longer.

I was responding to comment that Fitz should replace Julio.

I agree that Justin Jefferson doesn't have the "career" yet but he's off to a historic start. His physical abilities are better than Fitz but I don't have a problem with either argument.

I only pointed out that some people seem not to even consider Priest as a player that at least deserves any respect or consideration. I have zero problem with LT & AP as the choices.

 

[plasticman]

Very confusing. It is titled "Quarter Century" yet includes players further back.

 

[gtb1943]

to call this clickbait is insufficiently insulting

 

[maryquality]

LOL@espn

 

[Ironicalicon]

I'm not saying who should or shouldn't be there but people seem to have forgotten how good Priest was.

I'm not saying he wasn't great, he was, but better than those two? I don't see it.

 

[acr731]

Says quarter century on the top. Got me, too

OP and the poster on Twitter both mis-posted.
The ESPN graphic says Quarter Century.
(which is an odd thing to call it, most people say "of the last 25 years")

I went by the thread title....

 

[DallasEast]

My assumptions are based on personnel production from 2000 to present (a la 25 years or a quarter century per the ESPN justification):

Running Backs ????

I did not have a problem with ESPN's rationale (link), especially concerning their inclusion of Priest Holmes.

Martin was good, but Dallas has had far better o'lineman in the past. Just my opinion.

I am also questioning how far back this list goes. Are we only talking about the past 25 years? If so then Priest Holmes doesn't belong since his career started in 1997 and Randy Moss started in 1998. Emmitt was still playing up to 2004, how does the all-time leading rusher not make this list?

Bold> Yes.

See above for my thoughts concerning ESPN's listing of Holmes. This link is their assessment of Randy Moss. I agreed with it also.

In my opinion, Emmitt Smith is one of the top 25 (if not top 20) Pro Football Hall of Famers of all-time. That said, he did not perform as well from 2000 forward. Best season was over 1,200 yards rushing. 2-of-5 season rushing totals over a thousand yards. Two sub-1,000 rushing yard seasons. One sub-300 rushing yards season. He averaged less than six rushing touchdowns per season during that stretch.

I have no problem with ESPN excluding Smith from this particular list for the reasons stated above.

Love Fitz but can't see him getting any of these guys off the field.

No problem. Me? I disagree. Here is ESPN's criteria for Julio Jones (link), which I will summarize -

• 13,703 receiving yards
• 66 receiving TDs
• five-time All-Pro*

My counterpoints to ESPN for excluding Fitzgerald using their criteria -

• 17492 receiving yards
• 121 receiving TDs
• three-time All-Pro*

* Note: ESPN uses all sources for all-pro designation in addition to the league's official AP votes.

ESPN makes the argument for Jones, saying:

If we look at every player's three best seasons by receiving yards this quarter century, no wideout's top three years matched Jones' total of 5,141 -- four yards ahead of Johnson. If we do the same exercise for each player's five best seasons, Jones again sits at the top. Best seven? Still Jones.​

​

​

My head-to-head comparisons between Jones (link) and Fitzgerald (link), with the addition of completions per season -

Best 3 seasons

• Jones 5,141 receiving yards (353 receptions)
• Fitzgerald 4,251 receiving yards (279 receptions)

Best 5 seasons

• Jones 7,994 receiving yards (524 receptions)
• Fitzgerald 6,875 receiving yards (488 receptions)

Best 7 seasons

• Jones 10,586 receiving yards (702 receptions)
• Fitzgerald 9,186 receiving yards (687 receptions)

Personally, I think both players compare favorably. I would side with Fitzgerald. Just my opinion.

 

[CyberB0b]

Odd how they chose multiple players for a position. Why 3 RB, 1 Center, and 6 WR?

 

[McKDaddy]

I'm not saying he wasn't great, he was, but better than those two? I don't see it.

I wasn't saying that he was just that he seems to be overlooked when people talk about really good players.

 

[DallasEast]

lol. I never thought I would have something in common with ESPN. Their tweet stating 'ESPN has released its all-century team offense' and the embedded graphic saying 'ESPN All Quarter Century Team' read perfectly to me.

It's 2025. This is the 21st century. 'Quarter' equals 25. 2025 minus 25 equals 2000. Ergo, 2000 through 2025.

Not everyone understood how I worded my recent poll title and question. Some did. Heck. Some still did not understand it after I re-worded it. It happens, I guess.

Even so, I will not be the one offering to edit the thread title. It matches what the tweet states.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Adrian Peterson and LaDainian Tomlinson > Priest Homes and Christian McCaffrey

Only one Center? Why not add T-Freddy then?

Yeah I don’t know how then determine what position to have one or 3….AP for sure belongs on that list.

 

[MarcusRock]

It’s all Quarter century

Only took 16 posts for someone to actually read. Still faster than I figured, lol.

 

[DallasEast]

Only took 16 posts for someone to actually read. Still faster than I figured, lol.

Don't be so cruel.

 

[MarcusRock]

lol. I never thought I would have something in common with ESPN. Their tweet stating 'ESPN has released its all-century team offense' and the embedded graphic saying 'ESPN All Quarter Century Team' read perfectly to me.

It's 2025. This is the 21st century. 'Quarter' equals 25. 2025 minus 25 equals 2000. Ergo, 2000 through 2025.

Not everyone understood how I worded my recent poll title and question. Some did. Heck. Some still did not understand it after I re-worded it. It happens, I guess.

Even so, I will not be the one offering to edit the thread title. It matches what the tweet states.

It wasn't ESPN's Tweet but Dov Kleiman's Tweet of ESPN's graphic. But leave it so we can see who whines without reading.