BLOODY-DISGUSTING - View Single Post - The NFL Prediction Thread
View Single Post
Old 02-08-2013, 05:53 AM   #337
DudeClassicMan
Fresh Kill
 
DudeClassicMan's Avatar
DudeClassicMan has no status.
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 838
Default

Your opinions are too uninformed and unflinching in their stupidity, ignorance and banality to deserve respect. The fact that the one thing you’re sticking to being Pro Bowls (something more given than earned like 1,000 yard seasons) shows how little your opinion is worth. The only thing Reed has is he was pretty good for a lot longer than Irvin. That’s it.

Anything like a sustained five-year period of dominant play as a top three receiver in the league? Not even fucking close and you can cling to your worthless Pro Bowl crap like a baby if you want to. Never mind how fucking laughable it is that you give less weight to three Super Bowl titles which are won and which Irvin was arguably the 2nd most important member of each of those teams than Pro Bowl nominations which are arbitrarily given. By the way, how many coaches get fired every offseason? There’s your fucking esteemed Pro Bowl voters, jackass.

Getting back to my point about importance to the dynasty though; let’s be honest here, Aikman was the starting quarterback when the team started 0-2 missing Emmitt during his contract holdout in ’93 and when they started 2-3 in ’96 because of Irvin’s suspension. The fact that you can just shrug off Irvin being the 2nd or 3rd most important player (and really the triplets were all equally important) on a three-time Super Bowl Champion shows what a fucking joke your opinion is.

Of course, the Hall obviously doesn’t give a shit or penalize Irvin for getting off to a slow start in his first three seasons (the real reason Reed and all these others have a slight longevity edge numbers-wise) due to a mix of injuries and being on a bad-to-average team whether random dweebs on the interwebs do or not. And that’s the way it should be; as long as a guy’s career wasn’t cut severely short like Sterling Sharpe or Terrell Davis, if their very best was Hall Of Fame worthy, that’s what truly matters and that’s what they’re getting voted in on; not padding their stats by sticking around to the age of 37 to 38 with average seasons. Nearly 12,000 yards on 750 receptions are significant milestones; especially for a guy whose career got cut short at 33. The Hall Of Fame would suck dick if all it did was reward above average to pretty good longevity which is what your career was if you only had four 1,000 yard seasons in a 16-year career.

Looking at each of Reed’s individual seasons, none of them were really great and he certainly never had the sustained greatness Irvin had for half a decade from ’91-’95 or a season comparable to Irvin’s best two seasons. This is indisputable and you’re a disingenuous punk or a moron if you’re ignoring plain as day numbers with your bullshit more Pro Bowls excuse; which aren’t even statistics. And yes, your Pro Bowl horseshit is stupid; Irvin’s ’96-’98 seasons were all better or comparable statistically with Reed’s four non-1,000 yard Pro Bowl seasons. Irvin: two 1,000 yard seasons where he didn’t get insipid little Pro Bowl nominations whereas Reed because it is a popularity contest made the Pro Bowl four times without even having 1,000 yards AND over other AFC guys that had more yardage than him.

Conveniently ignoring that Reed was never consistently great like Irvin just because of arbitrary crap like Pro Bowls is an opinion you’re allowed to have like you’re allowed to believe the moon is made out of cheese.

As for all these great seasons you’re buttering Reed’s grits for in the name of longevity after he turned 33; well, he actually put up: 880, 795, 536 and 103 yards. Wow, that is so fucking excellent there’s no way if Irvin hadn’t gotten prematurely retired (to the point of risking paralysis had he returned) he never would’ve been able to match that. NOT.

As for your receptions vs. yardage inanity and you somehow not getting that 1,000 yards has been a benchmark milestone much longer and more tangible than bogus Pro Bowls; I guess you’d rather have more receptions for less yardage than less receptions for more yardage.

I see somebody brought up Carter, who even though he was a TD machine, he caught a lot of worthless short pass dogshit; the type of stuff the Cowboys simply didn’t have to forcefeed to Irvin.

On the subject of junk yardage and chunk yardage (plays of 20-plus yards and 40-plus yards) the numbers clearly show Carter caught a lot more junk than Irvin and despite catching 30 more balls in his best seasons than Irvin, Irvin actually had more big chunk plays on 30 fewer receptions a season.

For example:

Carter’s back-to-back 122 reception seasons in ’94 and ’95.

http://www.nfl.com/player/criscarter...11/careerstats

244 RECEPTIONS, 2,627 YARDS, 10.7 YPC, 24 TD
20-plus yard plays: 32
40-plus yard plays: 4
1st downs: 143

Irvin’s best two seasons; ’91 and ’95.

http://www.nfl.com/player/michaelirv...02/careerstats

204 RECEPTIONS, 3,126 YARDS, 15.3 YPC, 18 TD
20-plus yard plays: 48
40-plus yard plays: 9
1st downs: 167

To me, that’s more than enough compelling evidence to prove how many more significant passes Irvin caught and how much rinky dink chump change Carter caught. And although Irvin was on the much more talented overall offense, long before Carter had Moss, Jake Reed http://www.nfl.com/player/jakereed/2502609/careerstats was the receiver lined up across from Carter and he too was much better than any receiver that ever played opposite Irvin.

Furthermore, Jake Reed’s chunk plays often outnumbered Carter’s and in ’96 and ’97 his yardage totals were better than Carter’s outright. So let’s not pretend Carter had no help at all BEFORE Randy Moss. Jake Reed had something Andre Reed never even had; four consecutive 1,000 yard seasons.

Now personally I feel Carter should’ve gotten in a lot sooner than he did on the basis of being an all-time great TD machine alone. Although the Hall’s rationale for keeping him out must have been they felt he benefitted from being force fed a lot of chump change receptions as I just pointed out.
One more thing about all Carter’s TD’s. As Nancy, Dr. Z and I have all pointed out once the ball got in the red zone Irvin’s TD chances significantly went down because that was the Emmitt zone. Which is why it should be pointed out 55 or nearly half of Carter’s TD’s came from less than ten yards.

For their careers, if you consider Irvin catching 350 less passes than Carter in 75 less games, his chunk plays (31-24 edge in 40-plus yard receptions) and 1st downs measure up well. 2 out of every 3 of Irvin’s receptions went for 1st downs; Carter closer to 1 out of every 2.

It's not the Hall Of Lame Longevity. It's the Hall Of Fame. There's absolutely nothing wrong about one of three of the equally most valuable players on a three-time Super Bowl Champion getting in before a bunch of other guys of lesser or similar quality careers. If Super Bowls meant that little, then the Hall of Fame truly would be a fucking joke. Just like you're a fucking joke for comparing Irvin to David Patten and Deion Branch.

Last edited by DudeClassicMan; 02-08-2013 at 05:59 AM.
DudeClassicMan is offline   Reply With Quote