John Stallorth/Lynn Swann VS Jerry Rice/John Taylor

[7DnBrnc53]

You don’t have to be a 49ers fan, and believe me I’m not, to see that Jerry Rice is clearly the greatest receiver, and maybe the greatest player, of all time.

Disputing that is as misguided as not admitting that Tom Brady is one of the top half dozen QBs in history.

Those sound like opinions from the NFL Network or Skip Bayless, not opinions from solid football analysis.

[Bryan]

Thanks! Yeah, that certainly makes more sense.

Makes more sense than what, exactly? Your initial snark fail about Taylor making the Pro Bowl as a returner? If anyone cares at this point, Taylor was selected to the Pro Bowl as a WR, pulled out with 'injury', and was replaced by Mark Carrier.

[TanksAndSpartans]

here is a list of why Rice isn't the best WR ever (from a 49er watchdog site):

https://web.archive.org/web/19980422063 ... html#jerry

This reminded of me of one that I read that said Jim Brown is overrated:

https://thepeoplesnews.wordpress.com/20 ... overrated/ but if you look closely at the top, it indicates "Satire".

I found it interesting when they said there was no best ever - the idea that Rice, Lavie Dilweg, and Don Hutson aren't really comparable, I would agree is a defensible position, but wouldn't it be rather boring if we all just agreed there's no way to come up with lists of the best players? With what the Rams did in '51, that seems like a candidate starting point for lists of modern receivers - I would agree lists with 2-way ends and modern receivers are kind of silly, but I wouldn't come to the conclusion you can't have any lists. I think the site's position actually would have been stronger if they had picked a player. I remember I read someone saying something to the effect that Sammy Baugh's success was despite being hammered on play after play without the benefit of protection the modern rules provide to the QB - the site was saying something similar about Rice, it just didn't offer up any other names. Maybe because they are determined to not only make the point Rice isn't the best ever, but also that he isn't necessarily a better receiver than say Al Toon either. If Rice is overrated, I think a lot more people have it wrong than '49 fans and media. I can't recall many lists he doesn't make. He wasn't chosen until the 2nd round of the MMQB draft for a recent example though. But, the first WRs off the board were Hutson, Rice, Warfield, C. Johnson, R. Berry, and Alworth.

[rhickok1109]

At least one highly respected scout and talent evaluator thought that Sterling Sharpe was better than Rice.

I was at the 1992 Packer-Bear game at Lambeau, seated in the press box next to Paul Wiggin, who was then an advance scout for the Vikings. Wiggin was scouting the Bears because they were going to play the Vikes on MNF the following week. I knew Wiggin a little bit from 30 years before, when I was covering the Browns and he was their LDE and defensive captain. He made a lot of interesting comments in the course of the game.

At one point, Favre threw a short sideline pass to Sharpe on third and long. Sharpe caught the ball a good 6 or 7 yards short of the first down, and a cornerback and safety man were right there, but Sharpe muscled his way to the marker and then several yards beyond it.

"That's why Sharpe is better than Rice," Wiggin remarkeded. "He can do everything Rice can, but Rice never would've picked up that first down."

[JohnH19]

I stated on this forum several years ago that Sterling Sharpe should receive strong HOF consideration but the early end to his career eliminates him from "best ever" talk. Rice's total body of work is what makes him the best.

[JohnH19]

You don’t have to be a 49ers fan, and believe me I’m not, to see that Jerry Rice is clearly the greatest receiver, and maybe the greatest player, of all time.

Disputing that is as misguided as not admitting that Tom Brady is one of the top half dozen QBs in history.

Those sound like opinions from the NFL Network or Skip Bayless, not opinions from solid football analysis.

I've never felt so insulted.
I actually can't stand watching the NFL N's talking heads and I have never watched any program that Bayless has been on.

Any solid football analysis that does not acknowledge obvious greatness isn't all that solid. It only shows extreme bias.
So you keep hating on the old 49ers and the Patriots dynasty and they'll try to keep track of where all their rings are stashed.

[Reaser]

At least one highly respected scout and talent evaluator thought that Sterling Sharpe was better than Rice.

I was at the 1992 Packer-Bear game at Lambeau, seated in the press box next to Paul Wiggin, who was then an advance scout for the Vikings. Wiggin was scouting the Bears because they were going to play the Vikes on MNF the following week. I knew Wiggin a little bit from 30 years before, when I was covering the Browns and he was their LDE and defensive captain. He made a lot of interesting comments in the course of the game.

At one point, Favre threw a short sideline pass to Sharpe on third and long. Sharpe caught the ball a good 6 or 7 yards short of the first down, and a cornerback and safety man were right there, but Sharpe muscled his way to the marker and then several yards beyond it.

"That's why Sharpe is better than Rice," Wiggin remarkeded. "He can do everything Rice can, but Rice never would've picked up that first down."

Great anecdote, Ralph.

Every time Sharpe comes up in a thread about PFHOF discussion I always say that you can argue -and I have- that he was better than Rice for a period. So the basic case is that for a period when he played he was arguably better than Rice and/or at worst second-best to the WR many consider the best to ever do it.

[Bryan]

Every time Sharpe comes up in a thread about PFHOF discussion I always say that you can argue -and I have- that he was better than Rice for a period. So the basic case is that for a period when he played he was arguably better than Rice and/or at worst second-best to the WR many consider the best to ever do it.

To me, Sharpe was the only WR who was comparable to Rice in Rice's prime. Sharpe didn't have the elite hands that Rice had (IMO), but Sharpe could catch the ball in traffic and he could turn a 7-yard hitch into a 12-yard first down by simply carrying guys on his back. I watched the Packers on a (somewhat) weekly basis starting in the late-70's, and James Lofton was a great WR and a great weapon for some pretty bad Packer offenses...I was happy when Lofton made the HOF, but I thought Sharpe was better than Lofton. I also think Sharpe was superior to his HOF peer group of Tim Brown, Andre Reed, Cris Carter & Michael Irvin. If there could be a WR equivalent to Jim Taylor, I think Sterling Sharpe would be it.

[7DnBrnc53]

You don’t have to be a 49ers fan, and believe me I’m not, to see that Jerry Rice is clearly the greatest receiver, and maybe the greatest player, of all time.

Disputing that is as misguided as not admitting that Tom Brady is one of the top half dozen QBs in history.

Those sound like opinions from the NFL Network or Skip Bayless, not opinions from solid football analysis.

I've never felt so insulted.
I actually can't stand watching the NFL N's talking heads and I have never watched any program that Bayless has been on.

Any solid football analysis that does not acknowledge obvious greatness isn't all that solid. It only shows extreme bias.
So you keep hating on the old 49ers and the Patriots dynasty and they'll try to keep track of where all their rings are stashed.

That's good. Nobody should watch that crap.

And, I don't see myself as being biased against the 49ers and Pats. I am just trying to keep things within reason. People have been praising Rice and Brady to the hilt for years, and I just see it as being way over the top.

[Rupert Patrick]

Every time Sharpe comes up in a thread about PFHOF discussion I always say that you can argue -and I have- that he was better than Rice for a period. So the basic case is that for a period when he played he was arguably better than Rice and/or at worst second-best to the WR many consider the best to ever do it.

To me, Sharpe was the only WR who was comparable to Rice in Rice's prime. Sharpe didn't have the elite hands that Rice had (IMO), but Sharpe could catch the ball in traffic and he could turn a 7-yard hitch into a 12-yard first down by simply carrying guys on his back. I watched the Packers on a (somewhat) weekly basis starting in the late-70's, and James Lofton was a great WR and a great weapon for some pretty bad Packer offenses...I was happy when Lofton made the HOF, but I thought Sharpe was better than Lofton. I also think Sharpe was superior to his HOF peer group of Tim Brown, Andre Reed, Cris Carter & Michael Irvin. If there could be a WR equivalent to Jim Taylor, I think Sterling Sharpe would be it.

I too think Sharpe and Rice were clearly the two top receivers during Sharpe's career. i did a little research about the so-called receiving Triple Crown, which is leading (or tying for the league lead) in Receptions, Receiving Yards and Receiving TD's in the same season. It used to be pretty easy to accomplish this in a small league, as Ray Flaharty did it in 1932 and Hutson did it in 1936 and 1941 thru 44. Elroy Hirsch accomplished it in 1951, along with Pete Pihos in 1953 and Raymond Berry in 1959. Dave Parks in 1965 and Alworth in 1966 also accomplished the feat. Since the merger, it has happened only three times, by Rice in 1990, Sterling Sharpe in 1992, and Steve Smith in 2005. Not Randy Moss or TO or Antonio Brown or Irvin or Carter or anybody else. That's how good Sharpe was, and he had to beat out Rice to lead in all three of those. I wish Sterling Sharpe would have emerged as a stronger HOF candidate with his brother being inducted. I think a strong case could be made for Sterling as a short career guy whose career was short due to injury.