The most overrated player in NFL history

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:

Stats stats stats, nothing whatsoever about actual on field performance. No attempt whatsoever to apply context to those stats, such as the fact that his career ended early with a neck injury, and that the Cowboys pounded Emmitt Smith in the red zone, greatly reducing his red zone touchdown opportunities, which would have made him a touchdown machine as he was a monster on the jump ball, or the fact that the Cowboys were a run first offense, making Irvin's huge receiving seasons from 91-96 even more incredible.

But back to the "all I look at is stats" phenomenon in this thread. Do you do the same thing with college players? Is that how you evaluate who is good? Is that how you scout? Why bother watching guys when you can just look at stats and honors?

Kliff Kingsbury for #1 overall pick! Peyton Manning had nowhere near the passing yards!

"What ifs" are fun. If they didn't have Emmitt, the team is one dimensional and they dont win those SB's, which would've left Irvin on a far less memorable team.

Go look at the stats and tell me where they don't correlate with other players' on field performance. Stats represent facts. The eye test will only get you so far, because its prone to situational bias and emotions.

I never said Irvin sucked, I said he was overrated. He gets remembered like a top 10 all time WR, and hes not.

I also previously brought up Namath and Bradshaw. I wasn't singling out Irvin as THE most overrated ever. I just brought him into the conversation.

Originally posted by longterm9erfan:

Originally posted by SoCold:
Aikman 12 seasons
comp % 61.5 - yards 32,942 - ypp 7.0 - td 165 - int 141

Alex Smith 12 seasons
comp % 62.4 - yards 31,888 - ypp 6.9 - td 183 - int 96

lol

Wow.....very good research. This is eye opening, particularly the TD, INT numbers. We should also take into account the talent that Aikman had around him compared to the talent around Smith (at least for much of his career).

you can compare Alex vs 99% of QBs from the 80s and 90s and he has better stats. it's a night and day difference how the game was played in the 80s/90s compared to the last 10 years.

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:
Stats stats stats, nothing whatsoever about actual on field performance. No attempt whatsoever to apply context to those stats, such as the fact that his career ended early with a neck injury, and that the Cowboys pounded Emmitt Smith in the red zone, greatly reducing his red zone touchdown opportunities, which would have made him a touchdown machine as he was a monster on the jump ball, or the fact that the Cowboys were a run first offense, making Irvin's huge receiving seasons from 91-96 even more incredible.

But back to the "all I look at is stats" phenomenon in this thread. Do you do the same thing with college players? Is that how you evaluate who is good? Is that how you scout? Why bother watching guys when you can just look at stats and honors?

Kliff Kingsbury for #1 overall pick! Peyton Manning had nowhere near the passing yards!

"What ifs" are fun. If they didn't have Emmitt, the team is one dimensional and they dont win those SB's, which would've left Irvin on a far less memorable team.

Go look at the stats and tell me where they don't correlate with other players' on field performance. Stats represent facts. The eye test will only get you so far, because its prone to situational bias and emotions.

I never said Irvin sucked, I said he was overrated. He gets remembered like a top 10 all time WR, and hes not.

I also previously brought up Namath and Bradshaw. I wasn't singling out Irvin as THE most overrated ever. I just brought him into the conversation.

You want stats?

From 1991-1995, Michael Irvin averaged 1418.6 yards per season, which was second only to some guy named, "Jerry." And during this stretch, this was where the Cowboys ranked in number of pass attempts each season:

1991: 14th
1992: 12th
1993: 24th
1994: 26th
1995: 28th

In my opinion, he WAS a top 10 all-time receiver. Actually watching games, you get to see him make Darrell Green his b***h to an extent no other receiver could.
Personally, I prefer my receivers to be more explosive, but he was a one-on-one physical matchup nightmare to where I can't ignore it. He was a better version of Larry Fitzgerald (without being nearly as annoying as dreadlocks media faux-"class" darling). He could actually run patterns rather than always making catches with corners draped all over him. Shawnte Spencer would never have been able to shut him down.

I also don't know why you are so intent on looking at career numbers. Career numbers are extremely prone to "stat compilers"…guys who were merely OK to good, but did that for a long time. Drew Bledsoe and Vinny Testaverde have more career passing yards than Joe Montana, for example. Kerry Collins too.

Do you honestly think Derrick Mason was a better receiver than Michael Irvin? Hines "I just caught my 4th 7-yard pass and got up smiling like a psychopath" Ward?

As an aside, for those talking about Alex Smith's numbers and QB numbers in general, comparing guys from previous eras to modern guys….Kirk Cousins has had 3 4,000+ yard seasons so far, including a 4900+ yard season, and he has only played 6 years. Joe Montana never had any. Also, Ryan Tannehill has a better career passer rating than Dan Marino and Brett Favre.

Originally posted by OwensSmokedHall06:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:
Stats stats stats, nothing whatsoever about actual on field performance. No attempt whatsoever to apply context to those stats, such as the fact that his career ended early with a neck injury, and that the Cowboys pounded Emmitt Smith in the red zone, greatly reducing his red zone touchdown opportunities, which would have made him a touchdown machine as he was a monster on the jump ball, or the fact that the Cowboys were a run first offense, making Irvin's huge receiving seasons from 91-96 even more incredible.

But back to the "all I look at is stats" phenomenon in this thread. Do you do the same thing with college players? Is that how you evaluate who is good? Is that how you scout? Why bother watching guys when you can just look at stats and honors?

Kliff Kingsbury for #1 overall pick! Peyton Manning had nowhere near the passing yards!

"What ifs" are fun. If they didn't have Emmitt, the team is one dimensional and they dont win those SB's, which would've left Irvin on a far less memorable team.

Go look at the stats and tell me where they don't correlate with other players' on field performance. Stats represent facts. The eye test will only get you so far, because its prone to situational bias and emotions.

I never said Irvin sucked, I said he was overrated. He gets remembered like a top 10 all time WR, and hes not.

I also previously brought up Namath and Bradshaw. I wasn't singling out Irvin as THE most overrated ever. I just brought him into the conversation.

You want stats?

From 1991-1995, Michael Irvin averaged 1418.6 yards per season, which was second only to some guy named, "Jerry." And during this stretch, this was where the Cowboys ranked in number of pass attempts each season:

1991: 14th
1992: 12th
1993: 24th
1994: 26th
1995: 28th

In my opinion, he WAS a top 10 all-time receiver. Actually watching games, you get to see him make Darrell Green his b***h to an extent no other receiver could.
Personally, I prefer my receivers to be more explosive, but he was a one-on-one physical matchup nightmare to where I can't ignore it. He was a better version of Larry Fitzgerald (without being nearly as annoying as dreadlocks media faux-"class" darling). He could actually run patterns rather than always making catches with corners draped all over him. Shawnte Spencer would never have been able to shut him down.

I also don't know why you are so intent on looking at career numbers. Career numbers are extremely prone to "stat compilers"…guys who were merely OK to good, but did that for a long time. Drew Bledsoe and Vinny Testaverde have more career passing yards than Joe Montana, for example. Kerry Collins too.

Do you honestly think Derrick Mason was a better receiver than Michael Irvin? Hines "I just caught my 4th 7-yard pass and got up smiling like a psychopath" Ward?

As an aside, for those talking about Alex Smith's numbers and QB numbers in general, comparing guys from previous eras to modern guys….Kirk Cousins has had 3 4,000+ yard seasons so far, including a 4900+ yard season, and he has only played 6 years. Joe Montana never had any. Also, Ryan Tannehill has a better career passer rating than Dan Marino and Brett Favre.

correct. like i said, some people fail to see the difference between today's football game and that of a different era. it's a night and day difference.

Originally posted by LVJay:

Elvis Grbac

I know, I'm so sick of hearing about this guy I mean he only won one super bowl

Originally posted by Young2Rice:

Originally posted by cciowa:
i could say john elway is in the top ten. what did he do aside from getting kicked by the niners till they got him davis? marino is another one. and entire vikings teams from the 70s,

Those guys were pretty good. Their respective teams couldn't put a team together that could beat the super teams of that era.

Marino was especially spectacular.

I am just an a*****e

Originally posted by LVJay:

Originally posted by VaBeachNiner:

Definitely this!

Originally posted by Andra:

Originally posted by LVJay:
Elvis Grbac

I know, I'm so sick of hearing about this guy I mean he only won one super bowl

Bosworth. good one.

Originally posted by TheGore49er:

Originally posted by longterm9erfan:

Originally posted by SoCold:
Aikman 12 seasons
comp % 61.5 - yards 32,942 - ypp 7.0 - td 165 - int 141

Alex Smith 12 seasons
comp % 62.4 - yards 31,888 - ypp 6.9 - td 183 - int 96

lol

Wow.....very good research. This is eye opening, particularly the TD, INT numbers. We should also take into account the talent that Aikman had around him compared to the talent around Smith (at least for much of his career).

you can compare Alex vs 99% of QBs from the 80s and 90s and he has better stats. it's a night and day difference how the game was played in the 80s/90s compared to the last 10 years.

It still proves Aikman was pretty avg for his time. Vs the rest of the QBs of his time he only led the league 1 time. He led the league in Comp % 69.1 in 1993. That's it.

Steve Young led the league in Comp % 5 times, TDs 4 times, ypp 5 times and Passer Rating 6 times.

Originally posted by OwensSmokedHall06:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:
Stats stats stats, nothing whatsoever about actual on field performance. No attempt whatsoever to apply context to those stats, such as the fact that his career ended early with a neck injury, and that the Cowboys pounded Emmitt Smith in the red zone, greatly reducing his red zone touchdown opportunities, which would have made him a touchdown machine as he was a monster on the jump ball, or the fact that the Cowboys were a run first offense, making Irvin's huge receiving seasons from 91-96 even more incredible.

But back to the "all I look at is stats" phenomenon in this thread. Do you do the same thing with college players? Is that how you evaluate who is good? Is that how you scout? Why bother watching guys when you can just look at stats and honors?

Kliff Kingsbury for #1 overall pick! Peyton Manning had nowhere near the passing yards!

"What ifs" are fun. If they didn't have Emmitt, the team is one dimensional and they dont win those SB's, which would've left Irvin on a far less memorable team.

Go look at the stats and tell me where they don't correlate with other players' on field performance. Stats represent facts. The eye test will only get you so far, because its prone to situational bias and emotions.

I never said Irvin sucked, I said he was overrated. He gets remembered like a top 10 all time WR, and hes not.

I also previously brought up Namath and Bradshaw. I wasn't singling out Irvin as THE most overrated ever. I just brought him into the conversation.

You want stats?

From 1991-1995, Michael Irvin averaged 1418.6 yards per season, which was second only to some guy named, "Jerry." And during this stretch, this was where the Cowboys ranked in number of pass attempts each season:

1991: 14th
1992: 12th
1993: 24th
1994: 26th
1995: 28th

In my opinion, he WAS a top 10 all-time receiver. Actually watching games, you get to see him make Darrell Green his b***h to an extent no other receiver could.
Personally, I prefer my receivers to be more explosive, but he was a one-on-one physical matchup nightmare to where I can't ignore it. He was a better version of Larry Fitzgerald (without being nearly as annoying as dreadlocks media faux-"class" darling). He could actually run patterns rather than always making catches with corners draped all over him. Shawnte Spencer would never have been able to shut him down.

I also don't know why you are so intent on looking at career numbers. Career numbers are extremely prone to "stat compilers"…guys who were merely OK to good, but did that for a long time. Drew Bledsoe and Vinny Testaverde have more career passing yards than Joe Montana, for example. Kerry Collins too.

Do you honestly think Derrick Mason was a better receiver than Michael Irvin? Hines "I just caught my 4th 7-yard pass and got up smiling like a psychopath" Ward?

As an aside, for those talking about Alex Smith's numbers and QB numbers in general, comparing guys from previous eras to modern guys….Kirk Cousins has had 3 4,000+ yard seasons so far, including a 4900+ yard season, and he has only played 6 years. Joe Montana never had any. Also, Ryan Tannehill has a better career passer rating than Dan Marino and Brett Favre.

Irvin was legit. There's a reason why we put Deon on Alvin Harper and bracketed Irvin. Personally, I don't think Deon would have fared well against Irvin's physicality on those drags and curls.

Albert Haynesworth

Bosworth was overrated coming out of college. Literally nobody overrates his nfl career, they all know he sucked.

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by OwensSmokedHall06:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:

Stats stats stats, nothing whatsoever about actual on field performance. No attempt whatsoever to apply context to those stats, such as the fact that his career ended early with a neck injury, and that the Cowboys pounded Emmitt Smith in the red zone, greatly reducing his red zone touchdown opportunities, which would have made him a touchdown machine as he was a monster on the jump ball, or the fact that the Cowboys were a run first offense, making Irvin's huge receiving seasons from 91-96 even more incredible.

But back to the "all I look at is stats" phenomenon in this thread. Do you do the same thing with college players? Is that how you evaluate who is good? Is that how you scout? Why bother watching guys when you can just look at stats and honors?

Kliff Kingsbury for #1 overall pick! Peyton Manning had nowhere near the passing yards!

"What ifs" are fun. If they didn't have Emmitt, the team is one dimensional and they dont win those SB's, which would've left Irvin on a far less memorable team.

Go look at the stats and tell me where they don't correlate with other players' on field performance. Stats represent facts. The eye test will only get you so far, because its prone to situational bias and emotions.

I never said Irvin sucked, I said he was overrated. He gets remembered like a top 10 all time WR, and hes not.

I also previously brought up Namath and Bradshaw. I wasn't singling out Irvin as THE most overrated ever. I just brought him into the conversation.

You want stats?

From 1991-1995, Michael Irvin averaged 1418.6 yards per season, which was second only to some guy named, "Jerry." And during this stretch, this was where the Cowboys ranked in number of pass attempts each season:

1991: 14th
1992: 12th
1993: 24th
1994: 26th
1995: 28th

In my opinion, he WAS a top 10 all-time receiver. Actually watching games, you get to see him make Darrell Green his b***h to an extent no other receiver could.
Personally, I prefer my receivers to be more explosive, but he was a one-on-one physical matchup nightmare to where I can't ignore it. He was a better version of Larry Fitzgerald (without being nearly as annoying as dreadlocks media faux-"class" darling). He could actually run patterns rather than always making catches with corners draped all over him. Shawnte Spencer would never have been able to shut him down.

I also don't know why you are so intent on looking at career numbers. Career numbers are extremely prone to "stat compilers"…guys who were merely OK to good, but did that for a long time. Drew Bledsoe and Vinny Testaverde have more career passing yards than Joe Montana, for example. Kerry Collins too.

Do you honestly think Derrick Mason was a better receiver than Michael Irvin? Hines "I just caught my 4th 7-yard pass and got up smiling like a psychopath" Ward?

As an aside, for those talking about Alex Smith's numbers and QB numbers in general, comparing guys from previous eras to modern guys….Kirk Cousins has had 3 4,000+ yard seasons so far, including a 4900+ yard season, and he has only played 6 years. Joe Montana never had any. Also, Ryan Tannehill has a better career passer rating than Dan Marino and Brett Favre.

Irvin was legit. There's a reason why we put Deon on Alvin Harper and bracketed Irvin. Personally, I don't think Deon would have fared well against Irvin's physicality on those drags and curls.

Irvin was like the Richard Sherman of Wr's, top notch push offs that never got called

Alex Smith.

dude has netted almost a quarter of a billion dollars.