Alshon Jeffery top 100 omission?

[Mitchapalooza]

Someone really brought up Jon Kitna? lmaooooooo

 

[iueyedoc]

How many yrs at this level does he have to play in your opinion to get seriously in the discussion.

Hell, I have Jim Brown as my #1 all time best and he played what, 9 seasons in total.

I wouldn't put him up there, yet, but if he keeps producing for 2 more yrs like he has, he is definitely seriously in contention.

Yeah but in 9 years Brown led the league in rushing 8 years and set a career all time yardage mark that would last for 20 years. If Rodger's arm was ripped off in a wood chipper tomorrow, his case would be much like Gale Sayers. Sayers basically played 5 NFL seasons, 4 Pro Bowls, 5 All Pro elections. In all likelihood, he would have become the greatest running back in NFL history. No one thinks he is a top 10 all time player, though he was on that path. Many things can happen that alter what looks to be an inevitability.

 

[theOHIOSTATE!]

Yeah but in 9 years Brown led the league in rushing 8 years and set a career all time yardage mark that would last for 20 years. If Rodger's arm was ripped off in a wood chipper tomorrow, his case would be much like Gale Sayers. Sayers basically played 5 NFL seasons, 4 Pro Bowls, 5 All Pro elections. In all likelihood, he would have become the greatest running back in NFL history. No one thinks he is a top 10 all time player, though he was on that path. Many things can happen that alter what looks to be an inevitability.

Right, I agree, so how many more yrs?

Also, I think ARod has 6 yrs, not to nitpick, but.....ya.

 

[iueyedoc]

Right, I agree, so how many more yrs?

Also, I think ARod has 6 yrs, not to nitpick, but.....ya.

Who knows, a lot has to do with what he does beyond #'s. If he leads the Pack to back to back SB wins that probably is enough. If he puts up big #'s for 7-9 teams or playoff losers, he will be still be amongst a shitload of 1 SB winning QB's with the only separator being stats, so however long it would take to stand out amongst that set.

 

[Ari Bear]

Superbowl wins are the gauge of QBs, are they?

Bradshaw > Marino
Eli > Peyton

When your comparing all-time greatest, yeah they measure SB wins, yeah it matters. Terry and Eli have never been mention as the greatest ever, so because of that nobody looks at their SB wins.

 

[iueyedoc]

When your comparing all-time greatest, yeah they measure SB wins, yeah it matters. Terry and Eli have never been mention as the greatest ever, so because of that nobody looks at their SB wins.

Yeah, Bradshaw is 137th, one hundred and freaking 37th all time in passer rating and 53rd in passing yardage, how in the hell could such a pedestrian QB be in the HOF, oh that's right:

 

[Ari Bear]

Yeah, Bradshaw is 137th, one hundred and freaking 37th all time in passer rating and 53rd in passing yardage, how in the hell could such a pedestrian QB be in the HOF, oh that's right:

lol, Yeah! And if I'm not mistaken I think he threw more ints than tds. Even Cutty beats that. That's sad.

 

[L GUAPO]

You're a complete idiot.

Hahahahahaha! Beat me to it. I guess Brees sucks since he gets a lot of TDs playing from behind..as does Rodgers getting prevent TDs while playing catch up vs the Jets lol and getting blasted by the Aints.

He has taken over as the most embarrassing poster and running wild.....but then again what do we expect from a Detroit homer....what a joke

 

[L GUAPO]

Like the touchdown against Green Bay on 9/28 in which we got our asses kicked 17 to 38?
or was it the one against New England another sound thumping 23-51?
or was it the two garbage time against Detroit, another 17-34 debacle
and the one against Dallas another loss, 28 - 41
and don't forget New Orleans 15-31

So obviously, no, scoring touchdowns in garbage time doesn't matter. Look, I get it, at 6'3", Jeffrey is and always will be more of a red zone target than Tate at 5'10". Making plays that sustain drives that ultimately lead to points is equally important as putting the points on the board yourself. Doing so in games that matter, is more important. There is a reason Tate in on that list and Jeffery is not. There is a reason Tate made the pro bowl roster and Jeffery did not.

This was your statement

"Jackson Smith Tate and Edleman should not have made the list. Pretty sure Alshon had more TDs than them and is a better big play WR"

It's blatantly wrong.

You are such a moron it is almost unreal. Didn't Jeffrey score in the first quarter when we were up on them? Garbage time you say? Not only are you making shit up but you are a complete idiot! 100% wrong and false.

I guess we can take Tate's garbage TD away when they were getting trounced by the Aints so that brings his grand total to 3 and another vs the Bills D since they were injured vs all of Alshon's TDs. Nobody agrees with you here especially with your lack of logic. But hey....Tate got Seattle to the SB hahaha

Try thinking before you post. Nobody takes you seriously and you really are embarassing yourself as usual.

 

[Mitchapalooza]

I just think L Guapo can't give the Packers credit no matter what. Just like BearsBud. It's obvious Rodgers is the best QB in the NFL right now. I have no problem saying that. The guy is good as fuck. I still hate em but you gotta respect him.

 

[L GUAPO]

I just think L Guapo can't give the Packers credit no matter what. Just like BearsBud. It's obvious Rodgers is the best QB in the NFL right now. I have no problem saying that. The guy is good as fuck. I still hate em but you gotta respect him.

Did you really deduce that from my previous post pointing out great qbs like Brees and Rodgers scoring in garbage time to show how stupid nc0 and his awful attempt at an argument was?...If so, you really need to stay on topic and stop trying to start the whole Rodgers debate. Pretty lame really. Alshon and his 10 TDs totally outproduce Tate and his whopping 4....Alshon is way better...period. And that douche nc0 obviously doesn't watch football because Alshon scored early when we were up on Detroit and he said garbage time?! Laughable.

 

[L GUAPO]

Like the touchdown against Green Bay on 9/28 in which we got our asses kicked 17 to 38?
or was it the one against New England another sound thumping 23-51?
or was it the two garbage time against Detroit, another 17-34 debacle
and the one against Dallas another loss, 28 - 41
and don't forget New Orleans 15-31

So obviously, no, scoring touchdowns in garbage time doesn't matter. Look, I get it, at 6'3", Jeffrey is and always will be more of a red zone target than Tate at 5'10". Making plays that sustain drives that ultimately lead to points is equally important as putting the points on the board yourself. Doing so in games that matter, is more important. There is a reason Tate in on that list and Jeffery is not. There is a reason Tate made the pro bowl roster and Jeffery did not.

This was your statement

"Jackson Smith Tate and Edleman should not have made the list. Pretty sure Alshon had more TDs than them and is a better big play WR"

It's blatantly wrong.

Just to further your embarrassment, I looked up Alshon's TDs vs Detroit and he scored his 2nd TD with 3:35 left in the 1st quarter.......let me repeat in the FIRST QUARTER to make the score 14 to 3 Bears winning.

Damn brah.....garbage time TDs eh? Talking out your ass or being 100% wrong is a bit off. I would just say that you are just the biggest moron on here. Do you even watch the games...seriously?

 

[Packer Fan]

That you think Rodgers is in discussion as a top ten all time NFL player based on what he has accomplished to this point in his career say all that needs to be said.

It's not just what he has accomplished, which is impressive thus far, but also watching him play.

It did not take me long to determine that Steve Young was better than Joe Montana. I understand that's not the popular opinion. But it was quite clear to me that taking over that same 49er offense that Young was everything Montana was but more accurate and more mobile.

Montana has more titles. Young has a better rating, better completion percentage and more than double the rushing yards.

Rodgers has no where near the numbers of future hall of famer Brett Favre but that's not going to stop me from saying he's the better quarterback of the two, which I said years ago.

 

[theOHIOSTATE!]

I think the arguments come back to a very fundamental break in the way people perceive who the "best" athlete is.

Is the best X at a sport/position the person who achieves the most stats/rings, the person who racks up the best aggregate stats or is it the person who was the most effective over a period of time that all can agree is meaningful.

I think it is probably some combination of the 3, and to ignore the other factors is just silly. Of course rings matter, TO SOME EXTENT. Of course longevity matters, TO SOME EXTENT. IMHO the most important of the 3 is the last factor; how good were you for a meaningful amount of time. You can be damn good on a team that loses games. You can be mediocre and win a ring at the QB position and I don't need to rehash the usual suspect/s on that one since one is on ESPN every damn week squawk his head off.

Guys, there is a difference between who played best and who achieved the most in his career....that's just the nature of team sports, luck and playing in different eras, with different rules, and against different competition.

 

[nc0gnet0]

You are such a moron it is almost unreal. Didn't Jeffrey score in the first quarter when we were up on them? Garbage time you say? Not only are you making shit up but you are a complete idiot! 100% wrong and false.

jeffreys touchdowns a quick hitter thrown behind the line of scrimmage and another red zone target. Yeah, Tate doesn't get red zone targets, I wonder why? Maybe because CJ plays for the Lions and is 5-6" taller? Where in the F was Jeffery in the 4th quarter when the bears needed him most? Nowhere to be found. The stat line for the two recievers:

Tate 8 receptions on 10 targets for 89 yds an average of 11.1 yds per reception
Jeffery 9 receptions on 14 targets for a 7.9 yd average

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap3000000435074/Week-13-Bears-vs-Lions-highlights

I guess we can take Tate's garbage TD away when they were getting trounced by the Aints so that brings his grand total to 3 and another vs the Bills D since they were injured vs all of Alshon's TDs. Nobody agrees with you here especially with your lack of logic. But hey....Tate got Seattle to the SB hahaha

You might want to get your facts straight dumbass, the lions won that game, in part because of Tate's performance. Tate steps up when the game is on the line, Jeffery disappears.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/20141...ameinfo|contentId:0ap3000000413562&tab=videos

Try thinking before you post. Nobody takes you seriously and you really are embarassing yourself as usual.

Glass houses........the only one people claiming Jeffery had a better year than Tate are bears fans, no one else.

 

[Poppasmurf]

jeffreys touchdowns a quick hitter thrown behind the line of scrimmage and another red zone target. Yeah, Tate doesn't get red zone targets, I wonder why? Maybe because CJ plays for the Lions and is 5-6" taller? Where in the F was Jeffery in the 4th quarter when the bears needed him most? Nowhere to be found. The stat line for the two recievers:

Tate 8 receptions on 10 targets for 89 yds an average of 11.1 yds per reception
Jeffery 9 receptions on 14 targets for a 7.9 yd average

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap3000000435074/Week-13-Bears-vs-Lions-highlights



You might want to get your facts straight dumbass, the lions won that game, in part because of Tate's performance. Tate steps up when the game is on the line, Jeffery disappears.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/20141...gameinfo|contentId:0ap3000000413518&tab=recap



Glass houses........the only one people claiming Jeffery had a better year than Tate are bears fans, no one else.

Wait wait wait...So you're saying that Alshon gets all his points in garbage time (then you say he doesn't step up in the 4th quarter. THEN you say that him being a redzone target is some kind of indictment on him? Newsflash, Tate doesn't get redzone targets because he's not a good enough player to warrant getting those targets. By virtue of Jeffery being a redzone target, that makes him a better player, its another weapon in his arsenal.


Alshon's 4th quarter "garbage numbers" are no differn't than tate's. Alshon http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/J/JeffAl00/splits/2014/ doesn't have more yardage or touchdowns in the 4th compared to the other 3 quarters.

If you asked a GM what reciever he would take, he would LAUGH and and pick Jeffery. Tate had 1 good year. Jeffery is on pace for his 3rd standout year.

 

[Packer Fan]

I think the arguments come back to a very fundamental break in the way people perceive who the "best" athlete is.

Is the best X at a sport/position the person who achieves the most stats/rings, the person who racks up the best aggregate stats or is it the person who was the most effective over a period of time that all can agree is meaningful.

I think it is probably some combination of the 3, and to ignore the other factors is just silly. Of course rings matter, TO SOME EXTENT. Of course longevity matters, TO SOME EXTENT. IMHO the most important of the 3 is the last factor; how good were you for a meaningful amount of time. You can be damn good on a team that loses games. You can be mediocre and win a ring at the QB position and I don't need to rehash the usual suspect/s on that one since one is on ESPN every damn week squawk his head off.

Guys, there is a difference between who played best and who achieved the most in his career....that's just the nature of team sports, luck and playing in different eras, with different rules, and against different competition.

I agree to an extent but sometimes the better player is easily seen without having to compile a decade or two of accolades.

Rodgers has been consistently awesome for a fairly long time now. Compare him to the sporadic mess that was First ballot Hall of famer Brett Favre. Factor in that Rodgers has nearly the same rushing yards in his career (in less than half the time) as Favre. I don't need two decades of stats to decide who is the better quarterback. I know, as a Packer fan, who I trust more. And it's not the gunslinger.

 

[nc0gnet0]

Alshon's 4th quarter "garbage numbers" are no differn't than tate's. Alshon http://www.pro-football-reference.co...0/splits/2014/ doesn't have more yardage or touchdowns in the 4th compared to the other 3 quarters.

Lol, Seeing how the bears were out of a good portion of their games midway through the third quarter last year, you have just confirmed that a good portion of Jeffery's stats from 2014 were against a soft zone. The same cannot be said about the Lions, with the exception of the patriots, all the lions games were reasonably close. Thanks for confirming my argument.

If you asked a GM what reciever he would take, he would LAUGH and and pick Jeffery. Tate had 1 good year. Jeffery is on pace for his 3rd standout year.

I have always said in terms of value the two are about equal. When asking who had the better year last year, the answer is blatantly obvious, Tate did. As to who GM's would pick over the other, my guess it would be a pretty close split, dependent primarily on need. Alshon is a good number 2, he will be at best a serviceable number 1.

 

[nc0gnet0]

I agree to an extent but sometimes the better player is easily seen without having to compile a decade or two of accolades.

Rodgers has been consistently awesome for a fairly long time now. Compare him to the sporadic mess that was First ballot Hall of famer Brett Favre. Factor in that Rodgers has nearly the same rushing yards in his career (in less than half the time) as Favre. I don't need two decades of stats to decide who is the better quarterback. I know, as a Packer fan, who I trust more. And it's not the gunslinger.

I don't even know why this argument is in this thread. But that being that as it is, your graph is utterly useless. For a graph like this to have any value what so ever, you first need to compare how much player "x" was above the league average for that era. Then and only then can you begin to make an argument for or against. Rules changes have rendered any other form of comparison laughable.

 

[Poppasmurf]

Lol, Seeing how the bears were out of a good portion of their games midway through the third quarter last year, you have just confirmed that a good portion of Jeffery's stats from 2014 were against a soft zone. The same cannot be said about the Lions, with the exception of the patriots, all the lions games were reasonably close. Thanks for confirming my argument.



I have always said in terms of value the two are about equal. When asking who had the better year last year, the answer is blatantly obvious, Tate did. As to who GM's would pick over the other, my guess it would be a pretty close split, dependent primarily on need. Alshon is a good number 2, he will be at best a serviceable number 1.

Your argument is not confirmed. Simply saying Jeffery got his TD's in garbage time, does not make it true. Me and another poster have already illustrated that the numbers do not come in garbage time, but you have offered nothing to disprove that.

Even if you were to go on your own lions message board, I guarantee it would be about 75/25 in favor of taking Alshon over Tate.

How can you justify having less than half the touchdowns of Jefferey and 200 more yards as an OBVIOUS better season for Tate. You saying that Tate doesn't get Redzone targets, and therefore doesn't get touchdowns is true. It also means that he cannot help his team in that scenerio, and did not score touchdowns last season. Td's win games, not yardage.