Skip Bayless Thinks Irvin Is The GOAT Wide Reciever

[Bleu Star]

I was just tuning into ESPN First Take right now and Skip Bayless thinks Michael Irvin is the greatest wideout of alltime, better than Jerry Rice. What are your thoughts on this? Me personally I think Bayless is nuts, I love Irvin as much as the next guy but there is no way he was a better wideout than Jerry Rice IMO.

For the first time in a long time, Skip Bayless is correct.

 

[Cowboys2008]

I almost said BINGO, but Im gonna put a disclaimer. He may not be the all time goat, but his play from 91 to 95 Ive never seen a wideout that was better. Not to mention, Playmaker changed what cornerbacks looked like in the nfc east. You had to have a bobby taylor or anius williams to even have a chance to line up with michael at cb....

The tell tell sign though is...ask Prime Time who he would rather cover on an island, Irvin or Rice, and "uncle Bens" will not be the answer.

Dieon stated at the time that he was going to get better being able to practice every day against Irvin. Odd statement to make if Rice was the better WR, seeing as how he had jsut spent a couple years practicing every day against him in San Fran.

The "possible" greatest CB to ever play the game said that when coming to play with Irvin. No such comments were ever made about Rice coming from him. Hell, the '9ers went and got Sanders specifically to counter our Irvin threat. I think they even knew.

 

[speedkilz88]

I have ALWAYS thought Irvin was better then Rice, clearly classifying him as the greatest WR the game has ever known.

Unlike Rice who was the focal point of all his offenses, Irvin was secondary to the running of Emmitt. And as so, changed the position. One could only imagine what Irvin could have done in Rice's roll.

And also lets not forget how much padding of the numbers occurred for Rice by being in the west coast style offense. In fact, we see a lot of this currently in GB with their WRs, but few would consider any of them up there some of the elite in the game at the moment. Rice totally benefited from this and from being on a high profile team that was consistently winning and playing for championships.

IMHO, Michael Irvin, THE GREATEST WR to EVER play the game!

But then there are 2 other sides to consider...

a) How much of Irvin's dominance was actually from the drugs? Cocaine is quite the motivator.

or the flip side;

b) How much did Irvin possibly lose due to the drugs presence in his life? Could he have possibly even been better?

From everything I've read/heard Michael wasn't a drug addict. He was a casual user/partier and his use of drugs had more to do with the women he was involved with. He always claimed his addiction was women.

 

[ThreeSportStar80]

Michael Irvin was my favorite player so I'm a bit biased... I think had he not got hurt his stats would be even better.

 

[Shadowfax]

I was just tuning into ESPN First Take right now and Skip Bayless thinks Michael Irvin is the greatest wideout of alltime, better than Jerry Rice. What are your thoughts on this? Me personally I think Bayless is nuts, I love Irvin as much as the next guy but there is no way he was a better wideout than Jerry Rice IMO.

Pup used to shut Rice down with no help. Never saw anyone that could do that to Mike, not even Prime Time who clearly held Mike on that no call in the NFC championship game!

 

[thechosen1n2]

Pup used to shut Rice down with no help. Never saw anyone that could do that to Mike, not even Prime Time who clearly held Mike on that no call in the NFC championship game!

so clearly, that he jokes about it with mike to this day.

 

[jterrell]

Aikman was far more talented than either of them. If he had played in a pass heavy offense, he might of shattered alot of records.

Not sure how you define talent but Aikman had less overall athleticism than either guy. He was accurate but those guys both had insane pass efficiency over their careers. Aikman was a big, tough, strong-armed guy with accuracy and smarts. But he did what he did with a lot of consistency and routine. I do not rank him higher than Young, especially, in pure talent.

I'd rather have Aikman but that's because he had an advantage between the ears.

 

[jterrell]

Irvin was not over a career better than Rice but from 91-96 he was the better player. He was our emotional leader and the guy basically invented swagger.

While Norv channeled Troy out onto the field in ruthless efficiency, Jimmy channeled Irvin with alpha-male domination and superiority.

 

[Vtwin]

Not sure how you define talent but Aikman had less overall athleticism than either guy. He was accurate but those guys both had insane pass efficiency over their careers. Aikman was a big, tough, strong-armed guy with accuracy and smarts. But he did what he did with a lot of consistency and routine. I do not rank him higher than Young, especially, in pure talent.

I'd rather have Aikman but that's because he had an advantage between the ears.

Different offenses. SF's offense used a ton of short passes.

Young had mobility over Aikman but to me Aikman is a no-brainer over Young and I would take him over Montana but admit that my homer may be showing... a tiny, tiny bit.

 

[QT]

Two different types of WR. Can't really compare. Irvin did not have the speed. He used his body well. I don't know how many times Irvin got caught at the 1 or 2 and Emmitt punched it in.

That said, I'm one of Irvin's biggest fans. Followed him since the commished called him "Marshall" Irvin.

 

[dbair1967]

Not sure how you define talent but Aikman had less overall athleticism than either guy. He was accurate but those guys both had insane pass efficiency over their careers. Aikman was a big, tough, strong-armed guy with accuracy and smarts. But he did what he did with a lot of consistency and routine. I do not rank him higher than Young, especially, in pure talent.

.

Aikman was a tremendous athlete when he came out. He was quite nimble afoot and had alot of big scrambles early in his career before the knee and back things took their tole. IIRC he ran 4.6 in the combine and was an excellent baseball player.

The idea that he was some immobile big lug comes from people who only saw him play the last few years of his career.

And from a pure passing standpoint, SF never had someone with his size, arm strength or accuracy.

 

[jterrell]

Different offenses. SF's offense used a ton of short passes.

Young had mobility over Aikman but to me Aikman is a no-brainer over Young and I would take him over Montana but admit that my homer may be showing... a tiny, tiny bit.

I'd argue Young was at athletic as Vick and more accurate. But Young might be my least favorite QB from a brains and personality standpoint. Montana was a lot like Brady in that he was agile and mobile without much overall speed or size and he was accurate but not possessing of a cannon.

Can't argue against taking nay guys that won multiple Super bowls but I like ours just fine and would certainly rather have a beer with him.

 

[Ashwynn]

I'd take Irvin over Rice if they were both rookies and destined to have the same career. Then I would trade back up for Rice.

I agree with Skip, its close, but I would give the edge to Irvin. Call me a homer, I dont care. I'll admit it, I am.

 

[CATCH17]

Based on everything we know Rice is better than Irvin...


But as a Biased fan I choose Irvin over Rice all day.

 

[realtick]

This debate is not even close, I don't care how you want to try to parse it, rationalize, hypothesize, or dream it up: It's Jerry Rice > Michael Irvin

Michael Irvin himself has called Jerry Rice the GOAT.

Does anyone realize that Jerry Rice has more than doubled Irvin's career numbers?

Irvin: 11,904 yards, 750 receptions, 65 TDs

Rice: 22,895 yards, 1,549 receptions, 197 TDs (not to mention another 10 TDs rushing!)

We aren't talking about a few hundred yards here or there, a few more receptions and a handful more of touchdowns.

There could have been two Michael Irvins and they still wouldn't have put up the numbers Jerry Rice did.

 

[Ashwynn]

This debate is not even close, I don't care how you want to try to parse it, rationalize, hypothesize, or dream it up: It's Jerry Rice > Michael Irvin

Michael Irvin himself has called Jerry Rice the GOAT.

Does anyone realize that Jerry Rice has more than doubled Irvin's career numbers?

Irvin: 11,904 yards, 750 receptions, 65 TDs

Rice: 22,895 yards, 1,549 receptions, 197 TDs (not to mention another 10 TDs rushing!)

We aren't talking about a few hundred yards here or there, a few more receptions and a handful more of touchdowns.

There could have been two Michael Irvins and they still wouldn't have put up the numbers Jerry Rice did.

How much longer did Rice play then Irvin...I dont know, thats why I'm asking. Larger amount of time will make an accumulation of stats skewed, the larger the time difference, the larger the stat discrepancy.

 

[perrykemp]

Somebody needs to mention Don Hutson

This. Looks at Hutson's numbers -- they blew away everybody else playing at the time... no WR has been more dominant vs other WRs of an era than Hutson.

 

[Tabascocat]

Irvin was a great wide out and leader but when the league outlawed the receiver induced contact they took away his game. In his last year or two it seemed he was targeted for offensive pass interference or illegal contact quite often. I have often wondered how he would fared if the rule was enforced in the beginning of his career as at the end. Weird how Cowboy's success led to three rules (Irvin - contact, Williams - hands to the face, smith - helmet)

And dont forget R. Williams horse collar rule. BTW, not my first post, just a different ID

 

[Ashwynn]

And dont forget R. Williams horse collar rule. BTW, not my first post, just a different ID

The Barbarian stiff arm rule. The Jason Witten no running without your helmet rule. Was thinking there was an Emmitt Smith rule, but dont recall specifics now.

 

[realtick]

How much longer did Rice play then Irvin...I dont know, thats why I'm asking. Larger amount of time will make an accumulation of stats skewed, the larger the time difference, the larger the stat discrepancy.

Rice played eight more seasons that Irvin (20 seasons to 12), but I'm not going to take away from Rice for doing that. The same way I wouldn't penalize Emmitt Smith for being so relatively durable throughout his career.

That's just a testament to his durability and what a rare athlete Jerry Rice was. We're talking about a guy that put up 1,100+ yard seasons in his 16th and 17th season in Oakland.

If you want to look at his numbers a different way, we can look at each players' first 11 seasons (I won't count Irvin's 12th because he only played in four games after the spine injury)

Rice: 15,123 yards, 942 receptions, 146 TDs

Irvin: 11,737 yards, 740 receptions, 62 TDs