Throwdowns > Completed

Views
8
Comments
63
  • January 13, 2008 03:28 PM ET

Jerry Rice is NOT the greatest WR in NFL history.

Lifer: Metallica Sucks! (348-131-26) vs J (Browns 19-0) Carbathlee (51-5-2)
15
Votes
31
Votes
15
Votes
31
Votes


No, friends, set your preconceived notions about Rice being the best of all time aside. The real answer to this is Don Hutson.

Hutson, who played for 11 season on the Packers from 1935-1945, revolutionized the WR position (and the QB position). He was the reason that passing became such a large part of football. Before him, there was barely any passing in football (name for me one great QB in the NFL before 1935 or '36...you can't).

Now, follow me here: Hutson played 11 seasons, Rice played 20 seasons. Yet, Don Hutson has more seasons as the league leader in: Receiving Yards, receiving TDs, Receptions, scoring, Yds/Game, Yds/Reception. And this is with Hutson playing 9 fewer seasons!

And you can't give me the Rings argument either. Jerry Rice won 3 Super Bowl championships in 20 years; Don Hutson won 3 NFL Championships in 11 seasons.

So, to conclude, Hutson left a larger legacy (and helped popularize the passing game), as many Championships and was better in his era than Rice was in his.


I will take this through 3 different arguments

1. The ERA they played in- Believe it or not, this was a huge advantage for why Huston was so good. Huston played in the ERA where you could make more money working in the mill than playing football and if you were offered to play in the NFL most people would decline. It was not nearly as big as it is now. Most of the time, the most talented players would pass on the NFL because they knew they could get more money elsewhere so Huston really had terrible competition to go against. In Rice's era, if you asked someone to play in the NFL they would in a heartbeat. You wouldn't even have to pay them, they might pay you. The level of competition was much higher with Rice. Huston played guys who wouldn't make it in the WAC.

#2- Durability- HOW can you fault Rice for playing 20 years? The fact that he was able to sustain such excellence for so long just adds to his greatness. He is one of the only WRs that can play for 20 years and be as good his last year as he was his first. The guy never lost it. Why do you think Huston retired? 11 years too much for him? That doesn't sound like a quality of the best WR ever to me.

3rd argument nex


I'll address your arguments.

1. Your first argument works both ways. Hutson may not have been playing against great players, but that mean his team was severely talentless too. Not to mention the fact that, in the old days, the most talented players played on both Offense and Defense and ST (Hutson was an accomplished DB and K). You can talk about how there was less talent, but there were also fewer teams, which meant that there was less watering down of playing levels than in today's NFL.

2. I'll say it again: Hutson was a great WR, and a very good DB and Kicker. Most Wide Receivers back in those days didn't last nearly as long as he did. Some of them (Gaynell Tinsley, Bill Smith, Ernie Caddell, Bill Karr) didn't even play more than 6 seasons! And this was in an era when pads and protection were either low quality or not there (helmets were leather, and not even required until the 1940s). I don't know how you can talk about eras in the last argument and blatantly ignore this. Stick Jerry Rice at 3 major positions and without protective gear and see how long he lasts.


1. He was a man among boys. It didn't matter if his team sucked, he was great and he was playing against people who weren't.

2. IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT HE PLAYED DB AND K! You said best WR. NO WHERE did you mention DB or K so lets kill that off right now. This is just straight up WR.

3. Rice has 1,549 receptions for 22,895 receiving yards and 197 touchdowns. Hutson has 488 receptions for 7,991 yards and 99 touchdowns.

1,549 to 488 receptions in favore of rice

22,895 to 7,991 receiving yards in favor of Rice

197 touchdowns to 99 touchdowns in favor of Rice

You can sit here and make excuses for why Rice was better all day, but at some point you have to say thats enough. Rice completely owns Hutson in every catagorie. Hutson had 1 season with over 1,00 receiving yards. 3 seasons with over 10 touchdowns and a season high of 74 receptions and only 3 times over 50 catches. Compare that to Rice who had over 1,000 yards 14 times. Over 10 touchdowns 9 times and over 50 catches every year but his rookie year, last year, and the year where he was injured the whole season.


1. You ignored what I said. Fewer teams + fewer talented players = more teams + more talented players. Simple as that.

2. You COMPLETELY ignored what I said! When I was talking about how Hutson played DB and K, I was talking about how much more wear and tear that would put on him! Read through my argument, don't just scan it.

3. You're comparing stats between Hutson (run-dominated era, 116 games) and Rice (equal at best, 303 games). Nevertheless, Hutson had a better Yds/Rec, and more TD/Game than Rice, which is impressive...considering the eras.

Comparing players of completely different eras based on stats alone is ludicrous. Otto Graham, one of the greatest QBs of all time, has a career 78.2 QB rating. Brian Griese, one of the career backups in our generation, has a career 83.6 QB rating.

More interesting facts: Rice had 27 career fumbles, Hutson had only 1. Rice had one career MVP award, Hutson had 2. Hutson held 18 records at the time of his retirement, as well.


First before I go over your argument let me just say this, did you ever hear the expression the great ones don't need excuses? I don't see how Hutson can be the best if you make up 20 excuses for him. Your arguments consist of reasons why he doesn't have the best stats and why he WOULD have been the best WR with different surroundings while my arguments consists of what HAD happened and the cold hard facts. Hutson COULD have been better than Rice if they played in the same era, but touch luck. They didn't and I have no idea how someone can fault Jerry Rice for that.

Now, the MVP stat to me is irrelevant because when Hutson was doing it, no one else was. Jerry like I said had much more competition. Plus, since the superbowl, Jerry Rice is the ONLY WR to win the MVP. It is MUCH harder to win MVP at WR than any other position now and the fact that Rice did is a HUGE accomplishment. Neither Randy Moss nor Marvin Harrison have EVER won an MVP so what does that tell you?

Hutson COULD have had better stats if he would've played longer.
if he had a better QB
if he was in the same era
if, if, if, if
Rice DID it. Not COULD have

Comments (63) Add A Comment

Comment has been removed
January 13, 2008  03:33 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Uhh...you're choice.

January 13, 2008  03:54 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

This TD is epic......

January 13, 2008  04:05 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

hutson comes no where close......

January 13, 2008  04:25 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

I love for Rice on this site is amazing.

Give the man his due, yes, but he's not the greatest WR of all time. He was just a great WR that ended up playing with 2 HoF QBs.

January 13, 2008  04:27 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

That's another point, Bio. Hutson had 5 different QBs throwing to him, none of whom were all that great, unlike Rice's HOF QBs (Montana and Young).

January 13, 2008  04:35 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

it's hard to compare wr or any other positions that played at different eras, but what hutson has done puts my vote to lifer for now...i'll check back when its over to see how it turned out...good td though

January 13, 2008  04:42 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

lifer...someone threw the balls for him to make the catches...weather it was a great HOF or a joe schmoe qb...the passes were there for him to catch....

January 13, 2008  04:43 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Its all on how you look at it. Yes Hudson was much better than anyone else from his era than Rice was compared to his. In fact that is not even close. If that is how you look at it than you have to say Hutson was the best WR. Now the competition was a lot thinner in those days and I am not even sure if anyone other Caucasians were allowed play.

January 13, 2008  04:44 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Steveo, are you actually saying that having a HOF quarterback is no better than having an average quarterback? That is the most ridiculous thing I've heard all day.

January 13, 2008  04:55 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Well how I look at this is Hutson revolutionized the game but at the same time the level of compititon was not as high as it was in Rice's day. So vote to Jenkster

January 13, 2008  04:56 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

not even, players are always getting more talented and more athletic so to say that anyone in the 30's and 40's is the best is bogous

January 13, 2008  04:58 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Joe Montana was already a great QB before Rice arrived.

1324/2077 (63.8%), 15609 Yards, 106 TDs, 54 INTs

January 13, 2008  05:00 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Ok, basically, I think everyone's making the same point: Hutson was easily the best of his era, he was multi-talented (which, I have to say, I actually think is pointless in this TD since only the WR position is in contention), and did not play with notable QB's. But IMO, I think that Rice is probably the best all time, all things considered. He dominates nearly every major offensive statistic for the position, and what's more he is far ahead of the guy in 2nd (examples: 1549 career rec for Rice, 1101 for Cris Carter (2nd all time); 208 career TD's, 175 for Emmitt Smith). The career length argument may be somewhat valid, but number of rings shouldn't be a factor (Marino is one of the best QB's all time, but where's his ring?). Rice played for 20 seasons, and was productive for all of them (though, admittingly, ad different levels). And let's not forget intangibles like blocking and such, which Rice was very good at (I'm not sure how good Hutson was)

When all is said and done, I think Hutson defined the WR position, but Rice took it to a completely new level.

January 13, 2008  05:03 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Not not as much as you think...bears made it to the super bowl without a hof qb last year...buffalo bills lost all their super bowls with a HOF qb...farve is a HOF qb who has had a rough past 5 years with donald driver....larry fitzgerrald and chad johnson have no hof qb throwing to them and they are top wide receivers this season...Just because you don't have a HOF qb doesnt mean your tema will be bad...or that you cant be a good wide receiver...

January 13, 2008  05:07 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Favre had a rough two years. Love how people forget. They won the division the year before their 4-12 season.

January 13, 2008  05:07 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

wzy, reread my argument, I never used Hutson's playing of other positions to solidify that part of my argument, I used to show why Hutson retired earlier than Rice.

January 13, 2008  05:09 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

You can be a good WR without a HOF QB (see Carter and Tim Brown) but it sure helps. You think Harrison would have the same numbers without Manning throwing him the ball. The offense you play in is also a big part of it.

January 13, 2008  05:11 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

cant beat Jenkster he too good

 
January 13, 2008  05:13 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

If you keep players in their ERA and just judge them there, which is probably more fair, than you have to give it to Hudson and that way the Sammy Baugh fans can see he is one the greatest too. If you go by pure talent than you might have to go with Moss. His stats so far are slightly better and I think he is more of threat than Rice. Rice was great at the short slants of the west coast offense where Moss could stretch the field and was more of threat to take it to the house on any play than Rice.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Leaderboard

  Fan W L T Win %
1 DetroitFan* BS: Start Stanton! 132 9 7 91.6%
2 Porkins: Catches bullets 138 13 1 91.1%
3 Baun-ded=PUCKHEAD 52 5 1 90.5%
4 The Ram 138 17 4 88.1%
5 Foosball 68 9 2 87.3%
6 Philly-- www.sportsnoise.com 74 11 4 85.4%
7 Hyped78 112 19 5 84.2%
8 Dookie: Here We Go Steelers 117 19 8 84.0%
9 [The] Coach 97 18 5 82.9%
10 BSchwartz07 129 27 6 81.5%

Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Jerry tries to pep up sulking T.O.
    Views
    6875
    Comments
    1115
  2. 2
    Brewers considering run at Sabathia
    Views
    3039
    Comments
    495
  3. 3
    Lions will listen to offers for Williams
    Views
    19595
    Comments
    77
  4. 4
    Media angers Cowboys coach
    Views
    9794
    Comments
    66
  5. 5
    Kobe causes logjam at small forward
    Views
    8322
    Comments
    55

Weekly Most Active Users

Comments + Blog Posts + Throwdowns

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5

Message Boards

  1. Fantasy > Football

    Get Maroney, give Edge...Do I…
    Views
    25
    Replies
    1

Blogs

SI.com

Swimsuit

Bar RefaeliBar Refaeli
Oluchi OnweagbaOluchi Onweagba

SI Photos

Cheerleader of the WeekCheerleader of the Week
Best NFL shots from Week 5Best NFL shots from Week 5

SI Vault