Jerry Rice #1R

[Dodger]

Emmit had more to do with winning a game by himself than Jerry. Take a look a John Taylor's numbers in the same offense but he doesn't get much credit. Lawrence Taylor was a beast in changing a game, so was Derrick Thomas, Deion Sanders, Earl Campell, Jim Brown in his time along with hoards of others. Which do you pick first? Aikman, Roger, Montana, Dan Fouts, Steve Young, Marino, Elway, Manning, on and on or do you pick Jerry? I pick the first Eight in any order before Jerry and not even have to blink or pause.

Based on your criteria, I suppose you could argue that Emmitt was the better player, but not everyone looks at this list using your criteria.

Personally, I think it's difficult to pick any one person and say that person is the greatest player ever. But as I said before, I have no problem with Rice as that guy.

 

[Khartun]

Emmitt Smith holds a gazillion records as a rusher, and he was what, 28th?

Ya, I have no problem with Rice being number 1 and I think he deserves it but I had a real problem with Emmitt's placement. Gayle Sayers above Emmitt is ridiculous IMO. I think he should have been right behind Brown and Payton. Then listening to Peter King in that roundtable after the show made me want to vomit.

 

[Stautner]

I don't think anyone can really say with authority who the best football player of all time is, but Jerry's name would certainly be in the conversation.

There really is no way to even compare players in different positions because theskill sets and demands, and statistical measures and so many other things are so different from position to position? Does "the best" have to play a skill positiion where stats can be measured against others who play skill positioins, or can an OT or Center or NT be teh bestt football player?

In any case, I would have to include Jerry Rice, Jim Brown, Reggie White, Lawrence Taylor, and Dick Butkus in the conversation if i were discussing best ever, but there obviously are a number of other folks that could be brought into the discussion.

 

[TNCowboy]

Ya, I have no problem with Rice being number 1 and I think he deserves it but I had a real problem with Emmitt's placement. Gayle Sayers above Emmitt is ridiculous IMO. I think he should have been right behind Brown and Payton. Then listening to Peter King in that roundtable after the show made me want to vomit.

I can't speak to Sayers, having never seen him except on film.

A lot of people have a very high opinion of him.

Personally, he was good for what, 6 years? Emmitt's longevity is a mark in his favor, IMO, but 6 years is a long enough career to measure how good someone is.

It's one reason that I believe Michael Irvin has always been shortchanged. Michael missed out on all the junk stats that most receivers put up for those last 3 or 4 years when they're no longer an elite player. If he had, he'd have another 2,000-4,000 more yards and another 200 or so catches that would put his #s on par with anyone but Rice. IMO, Michael is the 2nd best WR I've ever seen, and during the 7 or 8 years where Michael was healthy and in his prime, he was every bit as good as Rice.

 

[mldardy]

Uh...you could probably say that about any great player who ever played the game which, to me, makes this point of contention meaningless. Did Emmitt benefit from his coaches and from other great players around him? Did Montana? Did Lawrence Taylor?

And as for who made the greater impact to help win games, again, Rice has scored more TDs than anyone. TDs help you win games.

No one is saying Emmitt didn't benefit from it but it seems to penalize Emmitt where it doesn't with Jerry. If you are going to give Jerry all this love at the WR position you **** sure better give the same amount to Emmitt because he holds all of these same records as a RB that Jerry holds as WR.

 

[Baileyneverfailey]

So longevity matters. Where would that leave Jim Brown, Earl Campbell, and Gayle Sayers. All of which played less than 10 years. Given that it's the RB position, that isn't that uncommon. How do you compare a position of high impact and short careers to a position that isn't?

Part of being the greatest player of all time in a comparison across all positions is the longevity. If those guys wanted to be the greatest player of all time, they should've played longer. Emmitt did it, and though I wouldn't put him number 1, he really should've been higher on the list than he was.

 

[jimmy40]

Emmitt did it, and though I wouldn't put him number 1, he really should've been higher on the list than he was.

Not with the way the vote was set up because he's not considered hands down the best running back ever.

 

[DWhite Fan]

How is Jerry Rice the #1 player of all time? People say, "well, look at his numbers." but they don't do that wit Emmitt do they? Emmitt is at #28 or something and he was a bigger part of the offense than Jerry was in his.

Jim Brown is the greatest player of all time without a doubt. There is no way a WR can possibly be the greatest player because he only touches the ball about 5 times a game while a RB like Emmitt or Brown touches the ball over 20 times a game.

I would put Rice at #6 behind:

1. Jim Brown - Totally dominated his era.
2. Johnny Unitas - Yep, that's right, he is The Man.
3. Joe Montana - Can't argue with success.
4. Emmitt Smith - Far more important to his team than Rice was.
5. Lawrence Taylor - Most dominant defensive player ever.

People forget that Johnny Unitas wasn't just a QB but he called the plays and was a great OC. It was his play-calling as much as his throwing ability that made him great. He was the standard that every other QB was measured by for most of the last 40 years.

I agree with you that Unitas doesn't get the credit he is really due.
Seeing where Taylor is listed just reminds me of what Thomas Henderson could have and should have accomplished. I believe Henderson had that same talent and just wasted it...

 

[Stautner]

Emmit had more to do with winning a game by himself than Jerry. Take a look a John Taylor's numbers in the same offense but he doesn't get much credit. Lawrence Taylor was a beast in changing a game, so was Derrick Thomas, Deion Sanders, Earl Campell, Jim Brown in his time along with hoards of others. Which do you pick first? Aikman, Roger, Montana, Dan Fouts, Steve Young, Marino, Elway, Manning, on and on or do you pick Jerry? I pick the first Eight in any order before Jerry and not even have to blink or pause.

John Taylor's numbers are good for a certain time, but they aren't remotely in the same ballpark as Jerry Rice's in that same offense. And Rice put up decent numbers even after he left SF - wasn't he about 40 years old when he became a 1,000 yard receiver with the Raiders - AND taking second chair behind Tim Brown?

Did it ever occur to you that it was Jerry Rice that helped Montana and Young, or can it only be the other way around?

I certainly understand if you wouldn't put Rice No. 1, but how in the world can you not admit that he is a legitimate consideration for it.

 

[Stautner]

I agree with you that Unitas doesn't get the credit he is really due.
Seeing where Taylor is listed just reminds me of what Thomas Henderson could have and should have accomplished. I believe Henderson had that same talent and just wasted it...

Even if (Big IF) Henderson had the same kind of Talent, it wouldn't have been used in Landry's 4-3 the way Taylor was used with the Giants.

 

[crazytown41]

Rice had 2 of the greatest QB's throw to him.

#1 should've been Taylor, Payton or Brown

 

[Stautner]

Rice had 2 of the greatest QB's throw to him.

#1 should've been Taylor, Payton or Brown

Are you sure they weren't 2 of the greatest QB's becasue they were throwing to Rice?

 

[crazytown41]

Are you sure they weren't 2 of the greatest QB's becasue they were throwing to Rice?

You do realize Montana won 2 SB's without Rice, right??

 

[Baileyneverfailey]

Okay guys, obviously Barry Sanders is the greatest player of all time, because he's the only one where you can't blame how good he was on the supporting cast.

 

[Stautner]

You do realize Montana won 2 SB's without Rice, right??

And Jerry won one without Montana.

Anyway, I wasn't really trying to say Montana wasn't great with Jerry, but neither was Jerry dependent on Montana to be great. He averaged 1175 yards an 8 TD's a year at age 39 and age 40 playing for Oakland. How man other WR's do you know that were even playing at that age, much less putting up those kinds of numbers?

Bottom line is that BOTH were great players, and neither was dependent on the other to be a great player.

Look at this realistically. Jerry not only broke all the receiving records, he shattered them. He wasn't holding on late in his career to break records, he had them at a fairly young age and playing at a high level into his 40's only extended them.

In career yardage he is 7,315 yards ahead of the next closest guy - which is a very solid career for most WR's - and in TD's he is 44 ahead of the next closest guy.

Look at it as a Cowboy fan. This is 10,991 yards and 132 TD's ahead of Michael Irvin, who most considered to be the best WR in Cowboys history.


Again, I don't blame anyone for picking someone other than Rice as their No. 1 choice, but given how he completely blew away every other WR I don't know how anyone could say he wasn't a worthy consideration for the title.

 

[Stautner]

Okay guys, obviously Barry Sanders is the greatest player of all time, because he's the only one where you can't blame how good he was on the supporting cast.

Good post. I'm sure that has some folks backing up, although i don't expect thm to admit it.

 

[CarlAllDay]

In my book, yes.

I've said for years now that I think he's not only the best WR to ever play but the best football player to ever play.

I completely agree with him at #1.

me too, and emmitt definately top 10

 

[Dodger]

No one is saying Emmitt didn't benefit from it but it seems to penalize Emmitt where it doesn't with Jerry. If you are going to give Jerry all this love at the WR position you **** sure better give the same amount to Emmitt because he holds all of these same records as a RB that Jerry holds as WR.

Well, yeah, sometimes that appears to be the case, although I've never penalized Emmitt for it. Personally, I think he should have been ranked much higher than he was.

 

[SkinsandTerps]

The thing with Rice is that as somone else said...'it is hard to debate him being the best ever at his position'. Other players at other positions...it can be easily debatable.

 

[Dodger]

The thing with Rice is that as somone else said...'it is hard to debate him being the best ever at his position'. Other players at other positions...it can be easily debatable.

Which is why I have no problem with his ranking on the top 100.