Randy Moss...

[nfg22]

This might not have needed its own thread but I just realized Moss has been the leading reciever on the two highest scoring offenses of all time. On different teams none the less. What perplexes me about this is that some people, at least at midseason, were saying he still needs another season or two to be listed among the all time greats.

[st.cronin]

This might not have needed its own thread but I just realized Moss has been the leading reciever on the two highest scoring offenses of all time. On different teams none the less. What perplexes me about this is that some people, at least at midseason, were saying he still needs another season or two to be listed among the all time greats.

Its widely believed that, despite his production, he was overall a detriment to his teams prior to this season.

[IMetTrentGreen]

Widely believed by morons. I chuckled when Vikings fans thought they'd replace him with Troy Williamson, or whatever his name was.

[flere-imsaho]

This goes back to the argument about what the Hall of Fame is about. Is it about guys who became famous through their exploits in the NFL (even if very brief), or guys who had a consistent level of excellence?

[nfg22]

Its widely believed that, despite his production, he was overall a detriment to his teams prior to this season.

That is complete BS to anyone that read beyond the media frenzy. The media always wants to make someone look as if they ruin a team because of attitude. Moss has always has the support of teamates. Also look at Culpepper and his career with Moss and without. It wasnt Moss' fault that Denny Green couldnt coach defense and that Mike Tice couldnt coach period.

In fact in Social Science Research Methods class I did a study on the NBA and crime. I found that teams with one or two players convicted of crime actually had better records. Anyways, I think Moss is the touchdown reciever that has ever played.

[nfg22]

This goes back to the argument about what the Hall of Fame is about. Is it about guys who became famous through their exploits in the NFL (even if very brief), or guys who had a consistent level of excellence?

Which is why I didnt say HOF but great players....but I understand what you are saying. I just think he should be judged on all out talent and production. Look at his stats through out his career. They werent short bursts...17 tds or more in 3 seasons...

[st.cronin]

Well, there's no denying that he quit on the Raiders. Maybe the team wasn't going anywhere even with him giving his best all, but that's a pretty serious black mark.

[nfg22]

Well, there's no denying that he quit on the Raiders. Maybe the team wasn't going anywhere even with him giving his best all, but that's a pretty serious black mark.

That might be true. I was more talking of the things in Minnesota but you got me there.

[mckerney]

This goes back to the argument about what the Hall of Fame is about. Is it about guys who became famous through their exploits in the NFL (even if very brief), or guys who had a consistent level of excellence?

When John Stallworth, Lynn Swan, and Art Monk are in the hall of fame, what Randy Moss did in just his first 6 years makes him HOF material.

[Eaglesfan27]

Well, there's no denying that he quit on the Raiders. Maybe the team wasn't going anywhere even with him giving his best all, but that's a pretty serious black mark.

Absolutely. That is why I'd want to see at least a few more years of high level production before I'd vote him into the HOF if I was a voter.

[Warhammer]

When John Stallworth, Lynn Swan, and Art Monk are in the hall of fame, what Randy Moss did in just his first 6 years makes him HOF material.

They also played in a radically different era. John Stallworth was the Steelers career leader in most receiving categories when he retired. Granted, Lynn Swan maybe the one player in the HoF that did the least to get in there. How long did he play, 7, 8, seasons?

[M GO BLUE!!!]

They also played in a radically different era. John Stallworth was the Steelers career leader in most receiving categories when he retired. Granted, Lynn Swan maybe the one player in the HoF that did the least to get in there. How long did he play, 7, 8, seasons?

You could hit receivers back then you know...

[QuikSand]

Absolutely. That is why I'd want to see at least a few more years of high level production before I'd vote him into the HOF if I was a voter.

Hmm. I just don't buy this argument. I guess if you want to say that a player who didn't *always* dedicate himself to the betterment of his team to your satisfaction shouldn't get voted in, I could respect that opinion (though I'd still disagree).

But what are you saying here, with the demand for a "few more years?" That you're not yet convinced that Randy Moss, when he applies himself, is a great wide receiver? Jury's still out on that? Come on.

Either you hold his lack of work ethic against him completely, or you look past it. I really don't see how any more seasons of brilliance have anything to do with it. Randy Moss is a Hall of Fame talent, and has demonstrated Hall of Fame production, and there's no arguing the other side of that assertion, I don't believe. If you want to argue against him in total, I think you are relegated to the nuances of character or effort or whatnot... not that "we're just not sure yet if this guy was really any good."

[EagleFan]

Hmm. I just don't buy this argument. I guess if you want to say that a player who didn't *always* dedicate himself to the betterment of his team to your satisfaction shouldn't get voted in, I could respect that opinion (though I'd still disagree).

But what are you saying here, with the demand for a "few more years?" That you're not yet convinced that Randy Moss, when he applies himself, is a great wide receiver? Jury's still out on that? Come on.

Either you hold his lack of work ethic against him completely, or you look past it. I really don't see how any more seasons of brilliance have anything to do with it. Randy Moss is a Hall of Fame talent, and has demonstrated Hall of Fame production, and there's no arguing the other side of that assertion, I don't believe. If you want to argue against him in total, I think you are relegated to the nuances of character or effort or whatnot... not that "we're just not sure yet if this guy was really any good."

I thought what 27 was getting at is that he would like to see Moss perform at a level like this without quitting on his team.

He is one of those players that will always have the "what could have been" tag over his head even with some of the monster numbers he puts up. He seemed to take way too many plays off, especially plays in which he was not the primary target and many more times even more obviously on running plays.

This season he seems to have done much better where that is concerned.

[Swaggs]

When John Stallworth, Lynn Swan, and Art Monk are in the hall of fame, what Randy Moss did in just his first 6 years makes him HOF material.

I agree that Moss easily belongs in the Hall of Fame, but would just point out that those three guys have a combined 12 Super Bowl appearances with 11 Super Bowl rings.

[Eaglesfan27]

Hmm. I just don't buy this argument. I guess if you want to say that a player who didn't *always* dedicate himself to the betterment of his team to your satisfaction shouldn't get voted in, I could respect that opinion (though I'd still disagree).

But what are you saying here, with the demand for a "few more years?" That you're not yet convinced that Randy Moss, when he applies himself, is a great wide receiver? Jury's still out on that? Come on.

Either you hold his lack of work ethic against him completely, or you look past it. I really don't see how any more seasons of brilliance have anything to do with it. Randy Moss is a Hall of Fame talent, and has demonstrated Hall of Fame production, and there's no arguing the other side of that assertion, I don't believe. If you want to argue against him in total, I think you are relegated to the nuances of character or effort or whatnot... not that "we're just not sure yet if this guy was really any good."

It's my belief that HOF voters should consider character as part of the equation when considering a guy for the HOF. Randy quit his last year in Minnesota and quit in Oakland and was unproductive the year before that. I'd agree with St. Cronin that is a big black mark on his career. I think he needs to make his numbers so overwhelming that these issues will be overlooked. I think he'll probably do so, as I imagine Tom Brady will make sure that NE signs him for a few more years.

[nfg22]

I think it shows that his lack of effort was always due to losing and not laziness when he took a 60 percent pay cut to win. Seriously, all athletes say it isnt about the money but how many have taken that big of a pay cut? 7 mil or more down to 3 or less..

[Glengoyne]

I know that when he was with the Vikings, and many considered him the greatest receiver in the league, I held out that he wasn't even the best receiver in the conference. I gave that designation to TO.

This season has had me rethink that some. I don't think there is any doubt this year. He was the best receiver playing the game this year.

[QuikSand]

It's my belief that HOF voters should consider character as part of the equation when considering a guy for the HOF. Randy quit his last year in Minnesota and quit in Oakland and was unproductive the year before that. I'd agree with St. Cronin that is a big black mark on his career. I think he needs to make his numbers so overwhelming that these issues will be overlooked. I think he'll probably do so, as I imagine Tom Brady will make sure that NE signs him for a few more years.

While I disagree, I concede that this is a reasonable argument. Thanks for clarifying.

[Noop]

Moss is a first ballot Hall Of Famer in my opinion, despite his "character" or how much people dislike him. Who is a better reciever talent wise? stats? That pretty much does it for me but hey what do I know?