manbeast Posted March 3, 2010 Author Share Posted March 3, 2010 Manbeast, your argument is absurd. You have to judge players by their results, not by what "they could have done". So, you give Jim Kelly, James Lofton, Thurman Thomas and Don Beebe (that is hilarious!) all the credit for Andre Reeds career success. But, conversely, Reed gets no credit for Kelly, Lofton, Thomas of Beebe's (did I mention Beebe is hilarious?) success? Think about it, Jame Lofton was considered washed up by most, when he came to Buffalo. Don't you think the revival of his career had anything to do with playing opposite of Reed? Since your argument is based purely on speculation and not on fact, I will throw this out there. I like Moulds, a lot...but if there is a legit criticism to his game, and something that Andre Reed had him dwarfed with by miles, is desire. For all his size, and physical stature, I thought there were many times over Moulds tenure, that he didn't play as hard as he could have. I could never make that argument against Andre Reed. Reed may have lost his head a time or two, and may not have been the first to realize that he had lost a step or two in his last season or tow, but the guy played hard, and above his perceived abilities, for years. If I believed what you said up top then why would I call him a great reciever those names had nothing to do with the OP that was an off topic discussion. Not with the original post. They actually had to do with The greatest reciever ever to play the game. although they are relavent to the discussion. Like I said nobody can truely prove or disprove it what I want people to see is that we need to at least try to back up our opinions and be open minded I already changed my mind about who had the better cast around them because someone used factual infomation and didn't try to back up an opinion with another opinion. I watched Moulds play and Reed and Evans so my opinion out weighs yours unless you back it up. I do believe he belongs in the HOF but if it is so overwhelming why isn't he there. how is it that Evans gets all the blame. He's not a #1 BS. He's a #1. On a team with a bad line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manbeast Posted March 3, 2010 Author Share Posted March 3, 2010 Both Craig and Watters were the equal of Thomas when it came to receiving. In fact, Craig (566 catches) caught almost 100 more balls than Thomas (472) and Watters caught essentially the same amount (467). They were all great at it. Also, if you think Lofton was as good as Taylor by the time he got to the Bills, you're wrong. Actual Lofton's production was roughly half of Taylors 9 year career in four years with the bills and he didn't start a single game the first 2 seasons. roughly 2700 yrds and 21 TDs and a much more impressive ypc average. craig was a better recieving threat arguably but not the as scary running TT had 8 cosecutive 1000 rushing yard seasons would have been more if he didn't have to share. Watters put up 6 in a row but not with SF he only had 1 in four yrs with them. Craig put up 2 in a row 3 in his whole career. Although 1000yrds rec and 1000 yrds rushing in a single season is very impressive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 If I believed what you said up top then why would I call him a great reciever those names had nothing to do with the OP that was an off topic discussion. Not with the original post. They actually had to do with The greatest reciever ever to play the game. although they are relavent to the discussion.Like I said nobody can truely prove or disprove it what I want people to see is that we need to at least try to back up our opinions and be open minded I already changed my mind about who had the better cast around them because someone used factual infomation and didn't try to back up an opinion with another opinion. I watched Moulds play and Reed and Evans so my opinion out weighs yours unless you back it up. I do believe he belongs in the HOF but if it is so overwhelming why isn't he there. how is it that Evans gets all the blame. He's not a #1 BS. He's a #1. On a team with a bad line. Sorry, you lost me... I am not really referring to Evans at all...his career is in its' prime, and he is a completely different kind of receiver than either Moulds or Andre were. If you are saying that Reed belongs in the HOF (I think that is what you are saying) but are questioning why he isn't there already, than you are starting a whole new argument. Andre has been a "semi-finalist" for the HOF, for a few years now, at a position that it is difficult to get in at, right now. But at least his name comes up. Do you think when Moulds is eligible in about 2 years, he would get any consideration at all? I don't. Do you think he would be deserving of any? I don't. Don't get me wrong, I like Moulds. I have been watching the Bills since 1972, when I was 7. So, like you, I have seen Evans, Moulds and Reed. I saw Jerry Butler, Frank Lewis, Bob Chandler, Ahmad Rashad and Marlin Briscoe play...so my opinion out weighs yours! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manbeast Posted March 3, 2010 Author Share Posted March 3, 2010 Its been a good discussion some of you guys did a good job of research and actually convinced me of some things and others called names and tried to back up opinions with more opinions. To the ones that backed it up I respect you even if I didn't agree. Andre Reed was the only one who really had a chance to prove he was elite and he did. Eric Moulds I feel did better given the circumstances. Lee Evans hopefuly for our sanity will have that chance after all before TE got his first concussion Evans had the highest aypc in the history of the NFL through four games. I believe we have the off the turf pieces now if we can get the players. To the rest of you I am not going to say what I want to. You have a great night. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manbeast Posted March 3, 2010 Author Share Posted March 3, 2010 Sorry, you lost me... I am not really referring to Evans at all...his career is in its' prime, and he is a completely different kind of receiver than either Moulds or Andre were. If you are saying that Reed belongs in the HOF (I think that is what you are saying) but are questioning why he isn't there already, than you are starting a whole new argument. Andre has been a "semi-finalist" for the HOF, for a few years now, at a position that it is difficult to get in at, right now. But at least his name comes up. Do you think when Moulds is eligible in about 2 years, he would get any consideration at all? No but thats not his fault, Terrell Davis won't get in either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 No but thats not his fault, Terrell Davis won't get in either. Dude, I love you cuz your a Bills fan and all, but you keep changing the argument... Terell Davis won't get into the HOF, most likely, simply because his career wasn't long enough. IIRC, he was a leauge, or at least conference, MVP. I suppose you will say that is only because he played with guys like Elway and Sharpe. Yet, people argue that the only reason that Elway ever won a ring, was because of Terrell Davis. Eric Moulds had a long career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts