Stampede Blue: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:





A quick way to piss BBS off: Rank Randy Moss ahead of Marvin Harrison

This, my friends, is the greatest WR in football not named Jerry Rice.
Listen, I understand there are some stooooooopid people out there. Take this person; I mean, that is one dumb lady. But almost equally as dumb is the recent article by ESPN writer Mike Sando. This is the same Mike Sando who, months ago, said the 2007 Colts were one of the best teams... ever! Sando used statistics to make that bold (and idiotic) claim. I mean, I live the Colts and I often make some silly homer comments about them, but "best ever?" Apparently, months later, Sando still likes over-valuing stats. Recently, after Sando canvassed such intellectual stall worths as Keyshawn Johnson, he came to the amazing conclusion that Jerry Rice is the best WR ever, and right behind him is... Randy Moss?

In fact, of the top 10 WRs of all time, Colts receiver Marvin Harrison is ranked 10th, behind Cris Carter (8), Terrel Owens (9), and Michael "Where's the f&*king COCAINE!" Irvin (4).

Now, if there is a fast track way to piss me off, it's dumbass articles like this. First of all, of the panelists evaluating the greatest receivers of all time, not one of them is a cornerback. Warren Moon (QB), Raymond Berry (WR), Mike Holgreme (Fat coach), Ted Thompson, (General Manager), Boyd Dowler (WR), and Keyshawn Johnson (over-rated WR and braindead TV commentator) were never corners. The lone former-defensive back on the panel, Ken Houston, played safety. As many know, cornerbacks are usually the first line of defense against a WR, and if anyone knows if a WR is good or not, it's a CB. Safeties are in the know to, obviously. but having only one on the panel makes the entire panel laughable and the article a worthless piece of crap.

I understand that articles like this are especially created so hotheads like me can go "WTF!" and post links to it on my blog so it can spike ESPN's ugly, video-laced website. Knowing that, I won't waste time picking through the obvious stupidity of having idiots like Keyshawn Johnson decide who the best WR of all time is. What I will say is that whenever CBs, or defensive backs in general, and modern-day WRs are asked who the consensus best WR in football is, they always say Marvin Harrison.

Indeed, an article as recently as two days ago spotlighted Niners CB Nate Clements. Clements was asked who the best WRs are right now. His response was this:

1. Marvin Harrison, Indianapolis Colts

Clements: "I think the way he runs routes separates him, and he has excellent hands. He is a sure-handed catcher. He has the speed. The numbers don't lie."

2. Randy Moss, New England Patriots

Clements: "He's been real consistent throughout his career."

3. Chad Johnson, Cincinnati Bengals

Clements: "Chad is very quick. He can catch the ball. He has good size. He runs good routes and he can go up and go get the ball."

Now, I love Marvin Harrison, but his injury has many lingering questions. So, currently, I would not rank him ahead of Randy Moss. Comparing careers, is Marvin better? Absolutely, and anyone who disagrees is an idiot who should be immediately dismissed. I could pull out all kinds of numbers, games won, and show off that shiny ring Marvin has. I could also point out Marvin has never punched his head coach or tried to run over a cop with his car. It's amazing how, when evaluating a player's entire career, incidents like these are never brought into the evaluation process even though they have a direct correlation to a team winning or losing football games. Creating an unnecessary distraction for your team (especially distractions like those) is the same as dropping a key pass during a key situation.

Regardless, what truly speaks volumes is high level NFL DBs still consider Marvin the best WR of the modern era. While media idiots like ESPN trumpet Owens or Moss, the people who actually play the friggin' game always say Harrison, Harrison, HARRISON! Yet, one sees very little recognition for Marvin on this.

It's just another example of why sports media is in the toilet bowl, and why blogs (like this one) are so important to keeping things real. Now, please excuse me as I step off my high horse, look for my chainsaw, and track down Mike Sando so I can persuade him never to write dumb articles like this again.

0 recs | Comment 40 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

I actually think the list is quite accurate
although I think Irvin should be ranked #3 ahead of Hudson.

by Terry on Mar 27, 2008 2:55 PM EDT   0 recs

You want to know what I think?
I think that the lions and the cowdungs are the only teams not to win a play-off game in somethin like, over ten years.

Yeah, chew on that one. Your dungs are being compared to the Detroit Lions!

"GO HORSE!"

by beester on Mar 27, 2008 11:46 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Marvin Harrison
is far superior to Irvin

by metalmilitia on Mar 27, 2008 4:02 PM EDT   0 recs

Marvin/Irvin
Harrison has caught 292 more passes than Irvin retired with

Harrison has 2,040 more receiving yards

Harrison has caught 58 more touchdowns

There's more to evaluating playrs than pure stats but the stats have to be in the same ballpark before you take anything else into account.

my blog <http://shakennbaken.blogspot.com>

by shake n bake on Mar 27, 2008 4:39 PM EDT   0 recs

no they don't
not when one of the players career ended prematurely due to injury as Irvin's did.

Harrison had a fine career but my man Playmaker was pure money clutch with 3 rings to prove it.

I'd take Irvin over Harrison any day and twice on Sundays.

by Terry on Mar 27, 2008 4:55 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Harrison has only played one more season
You can take away Marvin's best season and he'll still have better numbers now in the same number of years as Irvin.
my blog <http://shakennbaken.blogspot.com>

by shake n bake on Mar 27, 2008 5:11 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

This argument is silly
Harrison is better than Irvin, and its obvious. The only people who will advocate for Irvin are Cowboys fans. Irvin's rings also don't give him a notch over Harrison. If rings are the equalizer, than that must mean Lynn Swann is better than BOTH Marvin and Irvin.

The point of the article is people who actually still play say Harrison is the not not named Jerry Rice.

Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.

by BigBlueShoe on Mar 27, 2008 5:11 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

One more thing
It took Irvin a few times to get into the HoF basically because he is a complete idiot. With Harrison, when he retires he will be a first ballot HoFer, and it might be unanimous.
Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.

by BigBlueShoe on Mar 27, 2008 5:15 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

judging by the rankings, its not obvious
I can make the same argument BBS and say that only Colts fans think Harrison is better than Irvin and the ESPN rankings prove it.

I'm pretty sure that QBs and WRs can judge WRs just as well as CBs, that argument you make is very weak.

by Terry on Mar 27, 2008 5:48 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

No you cant
because if you talk to fans from other teams and look at rankings from other sights (which are not biased) they will all state Harrison is better

by metalmilitia on Mar 27, 2008 8:00 PM EDT   0 recs

58...
58 more touchdowns is almost impossible to argue with. Harrison is clearly better.

by MasterRWayne on Mar 27, 2008 8:04 PM EDT   0 recs

catching more TDs down't mean
Harrison is better. The Cowboys dynasty was extremely well balanced while the Colts under Manning were always a passing team. The stats are skewed as no way Harrison catches as many passes as a Cowboy with that team.

Irvin clearly had more money, clutch catches than Harrison during his career and thats what makes him better IMO.

by Terry on Mar 27, 2008 11:29 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Clutch
The guy with much better stats isn't as better because the other guy is clutch. Where have I heard that before?

Oh Yeah, every single time someone refuses to accept that the player they like better isn't the best by the numbers. They have to turn to something that isn't quantifiable and exists in their own mind, where of course their favorite player is the best.

my blog <http://shakennbaken.blogspot.com>

by shake n bake on Mar 28, 2008 12:03 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

oh and
what exactly is more clutch than catching a pass that puts 6 points on the board. Did Irvin make any 10 point catches I never heard about.
my blog <http://shakennbaken.blogspot.com>

by shake n bake on Mar 28, 2008 8:15 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Terry
This may be your dumbest argument yet. Dude, at least check easily-available statistics before you spout your nonsense. "The Colts under Manning were always a passing team." Oh really? Actually the balance of the Colts attack has always been one of their strengths. I'll give you some stats. I've gone back 10 years to ensure a good sample size. In platoon cases (whether due to injury or team decision), I've combined stats:

'98 -- Faulk  1319 yds
'99 -- James  1553 yds (led league)
'00 -- James  1709 yds (led league)
'01 -- James/ 1766 yds
       Rhodes
'02 -- James/ 1325 yds
       Mungro
'03 -- James/ 1416 yds
       Rhodes
'04 -- James  1548 yds
'05 -- James  1506 yds
'06 -- Addai/ 1722 yds
       Rhodes
'07 -- Addai/ 1605 yds
       Keith

Yeah, I see your point. Too bad the Colts never had a running game and had to artificially inflate Marvin's stats....

by ctnyc on Mar 28, 2008 11:17 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I never said the Colts didn't have a running game
I said they were a passing team, meaning they throw a lot which is proven by Manning's numbers. I noticed you didn't post all of those Back's TD totals, I wonder why? Because you would be proving me right. Nice try though.

Also, your better stats argument is a baseball argument, doesn't quite work they way in football. There are more intangibles to look at, like being the heart and soul of the greatest dynasty of all time.

by Terry on Mar 28, 2008 11:58 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

More lies
To the uninitiated, this is a favorite rhetorical trick of Terry's: strongly imply something, then when it's proven completely false, holler "I never said that!" Terry's right in only the most technical way. He never said the actual words "the Colts didn't have a running game." What he said was "The Cowboys dynasty was extremely well balanced while the Colts under Manning were always a passing team. The stats are skewed as no way Harrison catches as many passes as a Cowboy with that team."

You see? He makes the argument that if the Colts weren't such a passing team Marvin never would have had his statistical success. Then when I point out that the Colts have actually been one of the league's better running teams over the last decade, he claims he never made such an argument. Nice try, but again, the fact that his past comments are right here on the intertubes for everyone to refer to belies his lame excuses.

As for the greatest dynasty argument, I had no idea that Michael Irvin played for the 49ers.

by ctnyc on Mar 28, 2008 1:41 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Oh and by the way
I thought TDs didn't matter. Wasn't it you who said "catching more TDs down't mean
Harrison is better"? But now if I don't include TD totals for RBs it proves your point. So I guess TDs don't matter when they don't support your point, but they do matter when they do support your point. I see.

Nice try though.

by ctnyc on Mar 28, 2008 1:54 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

your argument makes no sense
First of all, I wasn't implying that the Colts weren't balanced and the Cowboys were, I was stating that when the Colts want to get in the endzone they pass. Irvin played on a team that had the greatest RB of all time so him catching TD passes wasn't necessary like it was for Harrison. If Harrison played with the best back who ever lived, then he wouldn't have caught so many TDs, its really that simple.

by Terry on Mar 28, 2008 2:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Berry Sanders played for the Lyons, moron!
But you are right about one thing, he is the greatest RB of all time.
"GO HORSE!"

by beester on Mar 28, 2008 2:52 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Your Emmitt
Couldn't hold Berry's jock strap, on the football field.
"GO HORSE!"

by beester on Mar 28, 2008 2:53 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Two points
Harrison is light years better than Michael Irvin. Pretty much everyone not a Cowboys fan believes that, and there are a gaggle of stats and wins to prove it. Simply stating "The Cowboys had a running offense while the Colts throw all the time" is the same tired, moronic line that Jimmy Johnson has said for years. The Colts run the football as much as anyone, yet Harrison still catches lots of passes and scores lots of TDs because he is great.

Second, I think Emmit smith is a great player, but he can't hold Barry Sanders' jock. Smith took football more seriously and loved the game more, but Sanders was simply a freak. For ten years, he terrorized teams.Emmit Smith was lucky enough to land on a team like Dallas with loads of talent. Barry Sanders played for the Lions, one of the most inept franchises in sports history.

But in terms of running the football, Sanders is leaps and bounds better than Smith... and probably everyone else.  

Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.

by BigBlueShoe on Mar 28, 2008 3:17 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

if that was true BBS
I guess ESPN's panel wouldn't have Irvin 6 places ahead of Harrison and I doubt anyone on that panel is a Cowboys fan..matter of fact I know they're not.
Therefore, your first statement is complete BS as this post proves there are many non Cowboys fans who think Irvin is light years better than Harrison.

Second, Emmitt is clearly the greatest RUNNING BACK to ever play.

Barry Sanders was the greatest RUNNER to ever play.

Big difference. A running back actually blocks and catches passes in addition to actually running the ball. Sanders couldn't hold Emmitt's jock strap in those areas which are obviously just as important.

by Terry on Mar 28, 2008 4:07 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

goajgioajsg
Can you please ban Terry already? :/

by KingRichard on Mar 29, 2008 12:36 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Again
with the lying. Here's what you said Terry: "The Cowboys dynasty was extremely well balanced while the Colts under Manning were always a passing team. The stats are skewed as no way Harrison catches as many passes as a Cowboy with that team." And yet now you claim "I wasn't implying that the Colts weren't balanced." What exactly do you think "the Colts under Manning were always a passing team" means? C'mon, you can't possibly be that stupid.

And you said "no way Harrison catches as many passes as a Cowboy with that team." You said absolutely zilch about TDs, you said Marvin wouldn't catch as many passes, period. This is not my argument Terry, these are your words. Now you are changing your argument because you have been proven wrong. May I once again remind you how these internets work: we can all go back and re-read what you've written. So changing your story midstream only makes you look more and more ridiculous.

Again, nice try though.

by ctnyc on Mar 29, 2008 12:38 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

58 TDs is
Almost the whole gap between Jerry Rice and 2nd place (Cris Carter).

The exact difference between Tim Brown and Eddie Kenison

bigger than the gap between Peerless Price and Issac Bruce

Bigger than the gap from Plaxico Burress, Muhsin Muhammad or Chad Johnson to Myself

my blog <http://shakennbaken.blogspot.com>

by shake n bake on Mar 28, 2008 8:14 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

only in regular season
like I said, when the games really counted, Irvin was more clutch than Harrison. Yes, I'm talking post season play.

        rec     yds     TDs
Irvin   87      1,314    8

Harrison  63     927     4
 

by Terry on Mar 28, 2008 5:39 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Right on time
to the small sample size.

It makes sooo much more sense to evaluate a player by 15-16 games than by 150+

So 4 TDs in the playoffs is worth 58 regular season TDs is that the exchange rate?

my blog <http://shakennbaken.blogspot.com>

by shake n bake on Mar 28, 2008 6:47 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Awesome!
Shake that was totally OWNERSHIP!

by MasterRWayne on Mar 28, 2008 11:01 AM EDT   0 recs

marvin harrison isn't better than randy moss
I haven't seen Marvin pull up Randy Moss numbers. Who owns the most touch down cataches in a season. Moss does and behind him is Jerry Rice. Is Marvin up in that catagory, No he is not. Moss is going to have bigger numbers since he's catching touch downs from the best QB of this era. Three more years of it and he'll be even more on top. I didn't see Peyton Manning throwing 23 or 22 or even 21. Yeah he had 49 touch downs in a single season, but it was broken by Tom Brady.

by tommybrady on Mar 28, 2008 4:23 PM EDT   0 recs

18-1
What a choke!

by coltsfanawalt on Mar 29, 2008 9:16 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Actually...
I would make the argument that Terrel Owens is a better receiver than Irvin.

by MasterRWayne on Mar 29, 2008 10:34 AM EDT   0 recs

depends on how much you penalize
him for his drops and being a locker room cancer. Definitely an argument.
my blog <http://shakennbaken.blogspot.com>

by shake n bake on Mar 29, 2008 10:40 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

but brady
and your pats ran up the score.

ill provide a couple of links where the manning could have easily placed a hell of a lot more TD's if he wasnt benched tommybrady

by metalmilitia on Mar 29, 2008 4:26 PM EDT   0 recs

Terry
Fans that are not cowboy fans seem to disagree with you as well.

http://forums.helmet2helmet.net/index.php?showtopic=33693&st=0&#entry3129409

See it is only cowboy fans who agree with you

by metalmilitia on Mar 29, 2008 10:36 PM EDT   0 recs

18 to 88 on Harrison-Irvin
http://18to88.com/Articles/88top10.html

scroll past Harrison vs Cris Carter

my blog <http://shakennbaken.blogspot.com>

by shake n bake on Mar 30, 2008 12:46 AM EDT   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the Indianapolis Colts, 2006 NFL Champions!
Ad-medium-smq

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Peyton4prez_small
Hall of Fame
Small
LATEST ON MARVIN
Alt_small
Gridiron News
Ookla_small
Spector
Brady_sack_small
John Clayton mentions Harrison
Bob-sanders-081107_small
The 200 best players of the modern NFL
Small
E-MAIL ANSWER
Small
any updates on marvin situation?
Alt_small
Sorgi, Betts, or Tafralis?
Bob-sanders-081107_small
How long before the rookies help the Pats?

Post New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Ad-banner-faketeams
Site Meter