In Their Prime who is better : Randy Moss vs Terrell Owens

[Jistic]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cebby

If Moss had more than 2 years of quality quarterbacks throwing to him, nobody would debate him being the best ever. The fact that he did what he did with grandpa Cunningham and gumpkin Culpepper is amazing. The only receiver even in the argument against Moss at his best is Rice.

There would be plenty of debate. Unless you're just a numbers guy. There's way more the GOAT discussion than numbers. Talent wise best ever. But so many other areas he's not at all.

I think when enough time goes by people will look back at this era and think of other receivers that were better than Moss. Fitzgerald will be one for sure.

[Cebby]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jistic

There would be plenty of debate. Unless you're just a numbers guy. There's way more the GOAT discussion than numbers. Talent wise best ever. But so many other areas he's not at all.

I'm not saying he's better than Rice, just everyone else.

The fact that he can be better statwise with 2 years of good quarterbacking is absurd. If he had Warner, Montana/Young, or Manning, there would be no debate.

If this is going to degenerate into "he doesn't block" then go ahead.

[KG]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jistic

There would be plenty of debate. Unless you're just a numbers guy. There's way more the GOAT discussion than numbers. Talent wise best ever. But so many other areas he's not at all. I think when enough time goes by people will look back at this era and think of other receivers that were better than Moss. Fitzgerald will be one for sure.

I don't know. You think about a guy like Andre Johnson. He's an absolute beast but he's never going to play on good teams like Moss, TO, and to an extent Fitz has. It has a lot do with how your remembered. Hell, it pretty much got Lynn Swann into the HOF.

[Jistic]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cebby

I'm not saying he's better than Rice, just everyone else. The fact that he can be better statwise with 2 years of good quarterbacking is absurd. If he had Warner, Montana/Young, or Manning, there would be no debate. If this is going to degenerate into "he doesn't block" then go ahead.

Or degenerate into "OMG look at those numbers". Numbers are the worst argument for any talk of best ever. This isn't baseball. Way too many factors involved.

[Jistic]

Quote: Originally Posted by kgx2thez

I don't know. You think about a guy like Andre Johnson. He's an absolute beast but he's never going to play on good teams like Moss, TO, and to an extent Fitz has. It has a lot do with how your remembered. Hell, it pretty much got Lynn Swann into the HOF.

Agreed. It's the Hall of FAME not Hall of great stats. Irvin is another one. But Swann and Irvin are also thought of as complete or all around great receivers.

[grunt]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jistic

Agreed. It's the Hall of FAME not Hall of great stats. Irvin is another one. But Swann and Irvin are also thought of as complete or all around great receivers.

Irvin was as good as Rice but Rice did it longer.

[SPTO]

Quote: Originally Posted by grunt

Irvin was as good as Rice but Rice did it longer.

Eh?

Irvin was more of a possession receiver who got a few long gains but was essentially a move the chains down the field guy. Rice was a lot more versatile and could go downfield as well as be a possession guy.

They served different functions but i'd say Rice was a tad better.

[MassNole]

Randy Moss and it isn't even close.