dave mcbride Posted March 2, 2010 Posted March 2, 2010 I love Moulds, but Moulds didnt make Price look like a Pro Bowler, Bledsoe did. Lets be realistic about Moulds though...(not bashing him, just reviewing his legendary production) He only broke 1000 yards 4 times in his 12 year career, and one of those times was barely over 1000. He only had 80 catches or more 4 times His TD total over 12 years is just 49 (about 4 per year) He only amassed 7 or more TD's 3 times (the most in one year being 10) He never had a back to back 1000 yard season In 6 out of his 12 years he had 800 yards or less (well one was 816) In 5 of his 12 years he had 2 TD's or less His career yards per game is just 53.7 Only averaged more than 80 yards per game 3 times in 12 years These stats are not to bash Moulds, because I think he was a really good WR and always a favorite of mine. This is to show a reality check to those that put him on this pedastal like he was a perennial pro bowler, yet he was just as ineffective in games as much as Evans. Like Evans though, I think he was handicapped by terrible QB play which led to his mediocre production in most of his professional years. Evans has been a model citizen, actually has better career numbers thus far in his career than Moulds, and has played under a way worse coaching regime with WAY worse QB's yet he is bashed constantly on here. Why does Moulds get all the excuses in the books for his mediocre and poor statistical years (which were the MAJORITY of his pro years) and Evans gets bashed despite being a model citizen? And in regards to your comment about Moulds having worse QB's...Im sorry, but having Bledsoe for a short period alone skews this in Moulds favor as Bledsoe could probably come out of retirement today and still grossly outperform Trent and Fitz who have combined for some of the worst QB play I have seen in a long time. Your premise is off because Moulds didn't even play his best for Bledsoe. His best season by far (screw the stats) was 98, when he had one of the best seasons a Bills receiver ever had. He also was excellent in 1999 and 2000. I mean, he was at his absolute peak in 1998 -- an absolute beast. I definitely agree with the original poster that he was more talented than Reed. Great, great player in his prime. Andre Reed was an excellent player as well, but I always felt he was slightly overrated by Bills fans. He simply couldn't dominate like Irvin, TO, Moss, Rice, etc. Moulds had that sort of talent up until he tore his groin in early 2003. Reed was blessed with a blue chip QB and for a number of years a great RB, a great o-line, and solid TE production.
Pete Posted March 2, 2010 Posted March 2, 2010 Moulds is a very underrated WR and one of my favorites. Some of his plays on deep balls against the Dolphins were flat out amazing. Reed was one of the toughest ever going over the middle. Two different styles. I would of loved to see Moulds play in a good offense, same with Lee Evans. I am big fans of all 3
jj____ Posted March 2, 2010 Posted March 2, 2010 how the **** did lee evans have a better supporting cast than eric moulds? i love moulds and all but that statement combined with him "being better than andre reed" tops it, not by much, as the dumbest **** i've read on this board. 95% of you understand what you're talking about and the other 5% never cease to amaze me
manbeast Posted March 2, 2010 Author Posted March 2, 2010 That's for damn sure. I loved Moulds, too...but to say he's better than Andre Reed... did you EVER see Reed play?When Andre gets into the Hall of Fame and Eric Moulds doesn't get close, that should be all the proof you need. I always hear that the Bills were just so talented back then that anyone could do what he did. But the Bills were so good back then BECAUSE of the great players. The stats mean nothing in this argument. The Bills had SO MANY options back then that the ball was distributed to many different guys. Andre Reed's numbers would have been through the roof had he been the only option on the team (like someone named, maybe, Eric Moulds)gre Why I responded to this post is beyond me. I usually ignore the incredibly stupid ones. You still havn't proved me wrong. I told you I couldn't back it up with stats. So who were the other solid recievers that Moulds had on the team that actualy drew coverage. By the wat will Terrell Davis make the hall. Where was the O-line. Bledsoe had one good year in BUF. Don't forget Beebe and Lofton and TT. Moulds was always doubled or tripled in coverage. The truth is that Moulds, Reed and Evans are all excellent recievers and my true point is that you really can't keep comparing them to each other I believe Moulds was the best and it is impossible to prove me wrong as it is impossible for me to prove you wrong. The problem is that there are alot of if onlys. Reed had all the benifits that neither Evans or Moulds had. Teams had to game plan around moulds they had toe game plan against Reeds hole team. As far as being stpid I backed my opinion up i didn't just throw it out there. I could keep backing it up but I would be here all day.
jj____ Posted March 2, 2010 Posted March 2, 2010 moulds got to play with kelly, flutie, and bledsoe. arguably the best quarterbacks we've had in buffalo in the past 30 years
Lurker Posted March 2, 2010 Posted March 2, 2010 Unfortunately I can't back this up I agree with you there.
manbeast Posted March 2, 2010 Author Posted March 2, 2010 how the **** did lee evans have a better supporting cast than eric moulds? i love moulds and all but that statement combined with him "being better than andre reed" tops it, not by much, as the dumbest **** i've read on this board. 95% of you understand what you're talking about and the other 5% never cease to amaze me RB, QB minus one solid Bledsoe year. Why don't you back up what you say instead of just insulting people if you know so much. Proof of my knowledge is I can back my opinion up that is the whole point I am trying to make after the Evans post I am A huge fan of all 3 WRs. That 95% you talk about post baseless opinions with know facts and I am sick of it and if I can make one person realize that they need research before they make a post then I am successful. You my friend are the exact type that I am talking about. Some of the guys actually backed uo why they disagree and they will always have credibility with me where as you need to just watch the knowledge on the board and you may learn something. Last year was not the worst bills team I have ever seen We actually had a decent D last year but every one wants to knock the guys who back that up with facts. Its even Ok to have a baseless opinion as long as you don't call people idiots for not agreeing.
manbeast Posted March 2, 2010 Author Posted March 2, 2010 I agree with you there. Don't !@#$ with what I actually say and make it sound different.
jj____ Posted March 2, 2010 Posted March 2, 2010 RB, QB minus one solid Bledsoe year. Why don't you back up what you say instead of just insulting people if you know so much. Proof of my knowledge is I can back my opinion up that is the whole point I am trying to make after the Evans post I am A huge fan of all 3 WRs. That 95% you talk about post baseless opinions with know facts and I am sick of it and if I can make one person realize that they need research before they make a post then I am successful. You my friend are the exact type that I am talking about. Some of the guys actually backed uo why they disagree and they will always have credibility with me where as you need to just watch the knowledge on the board and you may learn something. Last year was not the worst bills team I have ever seen We actually had a decent D last year but every one wants to knock the guys who back that up with facts. Its even Ok to have a baseless opinion as long as you don't call people idiots for not agreeing. you're blowing my mind right now. you honestly can say lee evans played with better quarterbacks? you're really gonna compare jim kelly, doug flutie, and drew bledsoe to jp losman, kelly holcomb, and trent edwards? next lets get to the point about the rbs. in 98 when moulds put up a solid year with solid receiving yards and 9 td, antwain smith rushed for over 1,000 yards and 8 td. 2000 was another good year for moulds as a team the bills rushed for almost 2,000 yards that year, which was also the year we had sammy morris and sean bryson who could block pretty well if my memory serves me correctly. 2002 another solid year for moulds and travis henry rushes for over 1400 yards, in 04 its the same with mcgahee, and the same in 05. A decent d?! you kidding me? we had jairus byrd, dude, our rush defense was one of the worst in the league!! p.s. you ignoramus saying that you can back up some thing you said, and then not doing it isn't really making a point.
manbeast Posted March 2, 2010 Author Posted March 2, 2010 moulds got to play with kelly, flutie, and bledsoe. arguably the best quarterbacks we've had in buffalo in the past 30 years I got to give you that one. Except he had Kelly his rookie year and started only 5 games. He had one year with drew Bledsoe and a good line. He had 2 good years with Flutie. One year you could even say was great 20+ yards a catch. Isn't it amasing when ever the guy had a decent supporting cast he had good numbers. Thanks for helping.
metzelaars_lives Posted March 2, 2010 Posted March 2, 2010 Careful buddy, cause this is a touchy subject. With respect to stats, you have to go relative to era. If you put Jeff Bagwell's stats in the 1910's, he would've been one of the greatest hitters ever. I realize it's not that drastic of a difference, but nonetheless... Let me put an end to this: 1. Go to youtube 2. Search something to the effect of "Bills Oilers comeback" 3. Watch Andre Reed catch 3 sick TD's all in the second half 4. Watch Andre Reed do the two-handed reverse spike after the third one to take the lead and feel the tingles go throughout your body 5. Come back on TBD and tell me Eric Moulds was a greater all-time WR than Andre Reed Peace.
jj____ Posted March 2, 2010 Posted March 2, 2010 I got to give you that one. Except he had Kelly his rookie year and started only 5 games. He had one year with drew Bledsoe and a good line. He had 2 good years with Flutie. One year you could even say was great 20+ yards a catch.Isn't it amasing when ever the guy had a decent supporting cast he had good numbers. Thanks for helping. so what is your point!? you originally said that lee evans had a better supporting cast than eric moulds, but moulds obviously put up better numbers, so by your logic moulds had to have had a better supporting cast.
manbeast Posted March 2, 2010 Author Posted March 2, 2010 you're blowing my mind right now. you honestly can say lee evans played with better quarterbacks? you're really gonna compare jim kelly, doug flutie, and drew bledsoe to jp losman, kelly holcomb, and trent edwards? next lets get to the point about the rbs. in 98 when moulds put up a solid year with solid receiving yards and 9 td, antwain smith rushed for over 1,000 yards and 8 td. 2000 was another good year for moulds as a team the bills rushed for almost 2,000 yards that year, which was also the year we had sammy morris and sean bryson who could block pretty well if my memory serves me correctly. 2002 another solid year for moulds and travis henry rushes for over 1400 yards, in 04 its the same with mcgahee, and the same in 05. A decent d?! you kidding me? we had jairus byrd, dude, our rush defense was one of the worst in the league!! p.s. you ignoramus saying that you can back up some thing you said, and then not doing it isn't really making a point. Very good you did some research but Kelly was his rookie year where he and he only started 5 games and genious Evans played in 2004 and 05. 2004 was his rookie year. I said decent not good a bad D doesn't finish second in passing D and don't even try to say its because teams ran it they were fortunate they were able to run because the could not pass it. I am done listening to the personal attacks. I am mainly trying to make a point. Maybe your right about Evans he and his supporting cast have had some of the worst coaching regimes I have ever experienced. But these coaches ruined two QBs. I will definetly put Losman and TE ahead of Collins, Holcomb, and Tolbert or what ever his name was and AVP. The only one who had anything good that was consistant was Reed but it was a different Era and it is easy to argue for Reed to be the best. The other 2 put up good numbers on less than stellar Os other than one year for each that they had a good O.
billsfreak Posted March 2, 2010 Posted March 2, 2010 moulds got to play with kelly, flutie, and bledsoe. arguably the best quarterbacks we've had in buffalo in the past 30 years Not sure there is even any argument there? Who else would there be since 1980? Mathison, Collins, Hobert, Holcomb, Losman, Van Pelt? The only QBs that have been in Buffalo in the last 30 years that even come close were all on the visiting teams.
jj____ Posted March 2, 2010 Posted March 2, 2010 Not sure there is even any argument there? Who else would there be since 1980? Mathison, Collins, Hobert, Holcomb, Losman, Van Pelt? The only QBs that have been in Buffalo in the last 30 years that even come close were all on the visiting teams. i dunno i know some people were high on losman on this board for whatever reason and you might argue against bledsoe for being jaw droppingly inconsistent
manbeast Posted March 2, 2010 Author Posted March 2, 2010 so what is your point!? you originally said that lee evans had a better supporting cast than eric moulds, but moulds obviously put up better numbers, so by your logic moulds had to have had a better supporting cast. This all had to do with the Evans bashing. I got sick of hearing it Moulds is my favorite reciever. I guss I have to agree with supporting cast overall for a career but if you read some of my post you will see some QBs you have surely tried to forget. I kinda baited everybody but I doubt it will work on these boards. The same people who have defende Evans on this board saying that he had a terrible cast will be the same ones that say he is not a true number one. The truth is all three were or one is great recievers. We are all so frustrated that we forget all the talent we had in the glory days and attack our good players that we have now. The truth is it is an impossible arguement because we really don't know how good the people we have are because we have so many weaknesses. One player can make a team great one year to the next not because they are superman but because they are the last piece of the puzzle the other players needed. Just 1 example what happens if we draft Mckinnie as the fourth overall pick instead of Williams. We blame the players far too often. If a reciever drops a ball thets his fault. If the rest of the team sucks and can't get him the ball thats not his fault.
jj____ Posted March 2, 2010 Posted March 2, 2010 This all had to do with the Evans bashing. I got sick of hearing it Moulds is my favorite reciever. I guss I have to agree with supporting cast overall for a career but if you read some of my post you will see some QBs you have surely tried to forget. I kinda baited everybody but I doubt it will work on these boards. The same people who have defende Evans on this board saying that he had a terrible cast will be the same ones that say he is not a true number one. The truth is all three were or one is great recievers. We are all so frustrated that we forget all the talent we had in the glory days and attack our good players that we have now. The truth is it is an impossible arguement because we really don't know how good the people we have are because we have so many weaknesses. One player can make a team great one year to the next not because they are superman but because they are the last piece of the puzzle the other players needed. i definitely think lee has the talent to be a top tier wide out in the nfl. he can catch, run the deep route, and has the athleticism to catch in small spaces i.e. the corner of the endzone. i dunno what group is better--holcomb, collins, alex van pelt; or capt. check down, gay-p, ryan fitzpatrick. who ever wins that must feel like the worlds tallest midget
34-78-83 Posted March 2, 2010 Posted March 2, 2010 Careful buddy, cause this is a touchy subject. With respect to stats, you have to go relative to era. If you put Jeff Bagwell's stats in the 1910's, he would've been one of the greatest hitters ever. I realize it's not that drastic of a difference, but nonetheless... Let me put an end to this: 1. Go to youtube 2. Search something to the effect of "Bills Oilers comeback" 3. Watch Andre Reed catch 3 sick TD's all in the second half 4. Watch Andre Reed do the two-handed reverse spike after the third one to take the lead and feel the tingles go throughout your body 5. Come back on TBD and tell me Eric Moulds was a greater all-time WR than Andre Reed Peace. xactly...
manbeast Posted March 2, 2010 Author Posted March 2, 2010 For one, I don't know you so I never said you are stupid...I just thought the post was stupid. Secondly, I lived in Naples,FL and went to the 1999 WC game @Miami when Moulds had a playoff record 240 yards recieving...I know that guy was a freak. (although he did fumble after his first huge catch of that game..) But back in the day I just saw Andre make clutch play after play (aside from the Super Bowls) and was so tough after the catch. By clutch plays I mean constantly on 3rd and long plays he would catch a 5-10 yard slant and turn it into 20 yards and a fresh set of downs. I do agree that the other great players around him gave him more room to operate and less double teams. But Jerry Rice had EVEN BETTER talent around him and he never gets criticized for that. Michael Irvin had EVEN MORE talent around him and he doesn't get downgraded. It's all opinion and I guess no one is right or wrong... but a (future) Hall of Famer vs a very solid WR...in my mind there's just no comparison. I never down graded Reed I have repeatedly said all three are great WRs in my mind. You are all missing the point.
Recommended Posts