NFL!

[gmgreggor]

Sept 20, 2012 19:55:33 GMT -5 Broph said:

Sept 20, 2012 19:31:13 GMT -5 gmgreggor said:

Really you can throw out a lot of those stats.

The lg hasn't really been a passing lg until the last 25 yrs or so at best and that's being generous. It's relative.

ol awful, so what if the league wasn't a passing league, how does that make it less of a case. It was more difficult to pass back then with the rules the way they were on PI and contact by DB's....but, since teams didnt pass as much that is less impressive./ In reality that makes those numbers more impressive, not less so, and the numbers nowadays less impressive.


As for the Best Player at your position, thats idiotic. Rice was something special, that doesn't take away the fact that Carter was too, just means Rice was that much better than everybody else.

No, it doesn't. It makes numbers inflated so you can't compare 40,50 yrs ago since the rules are differnt. I understand Rice was special, but there's other WR's I would take over Carter. His yards per catch were very ordinary.

[Broph]

Sept 20, 2012 21:26:29 GMT -5 gmgreggor said:

Sept 20, 2012 19:55:33 GMT -5 Broph said:

ol awful, so what if the league wasn't a passing league, how does that make it less of a case. It was more difficult to pass back then with the rules the way they were on PI and contact by DB's....but, since teams didnt pass as much that is less impressive./ In reality that makes those numbers more impressive, not less so, and the numbers nowadays less impressive.


As for the Best Player at your position, thats idiotic. Rice was something special, that doesn't take away the fact that Carter was too, just means Rice was that much better than everybody else.

No, it doesn't. It makes numbers inflated so you can't compare 40,50 yrs ago since the rules are differnt. I understand Rice was special, but there's other WR's I would take over Carter. His yards per catch were very ordinary.

what?!? the lack of the NFL being a passing league makes his numbers inflated? are you fucking insane?

[gmgreggor]

Sept 20, 2012 21:28:40 GMT -5 Broph said:

Sept 20, 2012 21:26:29 GMT -5 gmgreggor said:

No, it doesn't. It makes numbers inflated so you can't compare 40,50 yrs ago since the rules are differnt. I understand Rice was special, but there's other WR's I would take over Carter. His yards per catch were very ordinary.

what?!? the lack of the NFL being a passing league makes his numbers inflated? are you fucking insane?

Can you read?

The lg being a passing league since late 80's to 90's or so negates the older stats. It was a running league. You used to not be able to win without a good running game. The going back 40 to 50 yrs like Marty said isn't comparable.

[gmgreggor]

Meh, I just know what my eyes saw.

I remember a guy that ran short slants and 8 yard outs pretty much.

Nothing spectacular.

[Broph]

except Carters stats hold up to now, I mean, you wanna talk about passing, the PI rules and contact rules are so stringent now it way inflates passing yards, Carter did numbers up their with the best in an era where that wasnt exactly easy, he was 8th, of ALL Receivers ever, even over the last 25 years, and even through the current period, where it is easier than ever to get huge numbers

[Broph]

and the yards per catch thing is kinda stupid, he got open, and made first downs, sure, he didnt explode as often as some guys, but the guy got 12+yards per catch, and with 10 yards being the general first down distance, thats obviously a big deal.

[Broph]

getting open is a big deal, catching the ball is a big deal, contact was FAR more lenient, you could grab hold etc far more than you can now, there was no 5 yards then no contact during his time, thats what makes his ability to get open and make those catches such a big deal. Now you can air it out and the slightest bit of contact draws a PI, making it easier to go deep, and easier to connect on those underneath routes.

[gmgreggor]

Sept 20, 2012 21:47:22 GMT -5 Broph said:

getting open is a big deal, catching the ball is a big deal, contact was FAR more lenient, you could grab hold etc far more than you can now, there was no 5 yards then no contact during his time, thats what makes his ability to get open and make those catches such a big deal. Now you can air it out and the slightest bit of contact draws a PI, making it easier to go deep, and easier to connect on those underneath routes.

You sure about the 5 yard rule? I think that was instituted in late 70's.

[gmgreggor]

I'm not saying he wasn't a good WR. Looking closer at his stats he was better than I remembered stat wise.

But there were quite a few other WR's I'd take over him during his time even excluding Rice.

[gmgreggor]

I remember him as a possesion guy.

A good one but that's what he was.

[Broph]

Sept 20, 2012 21:52:49 GMT -5 gmgreggor said:

I remember him as a possesion guy.

A good one but that's what he was.

wtf is so wrong with being a possession guy, he did it as well as anybody in league history, outside Jerry Rice who just did everything

[gmgreggor]

Sept 20, 2012 21:53:42 GMT -5 Broph said:

Sept 20, 2012 21:52:49 GMT -5 gmgreggor said:

I remember him as a possesion guy.

A good one but that's what he was.

wtf is so wrong with being a possession guy, he did it as well as anybody in league history, outside Jerry Rice who just did everything

I just think there was better all around WR's in his era.

Which goes back to my initial point that you should at least be in the converstaion about being the best at your position at some point.

I'm not sure he ever really was.

[Broph]

it was put in in 1977, but the ability to make contact with receivers was a bit less stressed, in 1994 the NFL instituted the Chuck rule, but it contradicted itself and as such didnt give as much leeway as it was supposed too, basically it gave defenders the ability to impede the receivers to defend themselves...despite the fact that the rule was to not impede the receiver

in 2004 the NFL chose to focus on the unimpeded progress of the receiver, really opening up the passing game

[gmgreggor]

Yea, it's ridiculous now.

But the passing rules were not like they were in the early days when Carter played though either.

[gmgreggor]

I guess my view can be summed up like this.

I'd rather a comet like Gale Sayers who was great for a few yrs get in the Hall than someone who was just pretty good and steady for many.

[greeme]

Sept 20, 2012 22:09:13 GMT -5 gmgreggor said:

I guess my view can be summed up like this.

I'd rather a comet like Gale Sayers who was great for a few yrs get in the Hall than someone who was just pretty good and steady for many.

sayers>>>>>>>>

[SPENCER]

Carter was pretty good.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using proboards

[gmgreggor]

Sept 22, 2012 9:24:56 GMT -5 SPENCER said:

Carter was pretty good.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using proboards

Is pretty good HOF though?

[gmgreggor]

To me no.

[Nanzanator]

when youre that high all time in catches yards and tds you have to get in