Harrison or Rice?

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
I love Marvin and hate Rice, but Rice was a far superior receiver.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like both, and I can tell you neither is "far superior". Marvin is ahead of Rice at this point in his career, and by the end (assuming a healthy career) it should be as pointless as another Manniing/Brady debate (and prob will because people will argue that Rice's rings are the mark of greatness [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]).

Cody

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
League leaders, Receiving TD's
Rice (all in his first 11 yrs):
#1: 6 times
#2: 1 time
#3: 2 times
Harrison:
#1: 1
#2: 4
#3: 1
League leaders, Rush+Receiving TD's, so going against RB's too:
Rice :
#1 2 time
#2 3 times
#3 1 time
#4 2 times
Harrison:
#4 two times

1987 Rice:
65 receptions 1078 yds 16.6 ypr 22 TDs + 1 TD running
In only 12 games (strike season). LT2 has 26 TD's through 12 games this year as a comparison.

[/ QUOTE ]

Was Harrison's lack of TDs the result of his drops, or did her have a QB that threw record number of TDs to an unprecedented number of targets (hint: it was the latter).
Stats can be shaped to prove whatever we want (if someone wants to prove that Harrison is better, they'll point out he's the fastest to 1000 catches) but it's play that matters, and both are/were pretty far and away the best Wide Outs of their time (Although Rice was more dominant because Harrison came out of that 1996 all WR draft class).

Cody

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just because Harrison is ahead of Rice or even if he ends up owning all of his records doesn't mean he is the better receiver. Are you forgetting the fact that the NFL has changed rules that increase the passing game?

[/ QUOTE ]

Irrelevent, Harrison plays under the rules that govern him at the time. Simply because the rules have made contact more of a penelty, doesn't mean Harrison is any more/less of a receiver.

Cody

[/ QUOTE ]

It is very relevant when looking at stats, though. Which is what this seems to be based on.

b

[Thremp]

Adjust Harrison for time and Rice looks much much better.


BTW #2 all time in completion % is Chad Pennington. Should we adjust or is he that good?

[Assani Fisher]

Harrison, Rice, and Moss were/are all awesome WRs. However theres little doubt that Rice was the best. Since Rice and Harrison played a similar style, I think the most interesting question would be this:

Rice thrived in a WCO. He was great at route running and had great hands. Moss was just an athletic freak. He excelled at running straight downfield and catching deep passes. He wasn't that tough over the middle. Clearly Rice would be the better WR to have in a WCO, and clearly Rice would be the better WR to have if you were starting a team. But if your team already had an underneath WR(Cris Carter), and your QB(Jeff George)'s main strength was just throwing it up deep and letting your WR make a play, who is the better WR for that system?

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
Harrison, Rice, and Moss were/are all awesome WRs. However theres little doubt that Rice was the best. Since Rice and Harrison played a similar style, I think the most interesting question would be this:

Rice thrived in a WCO. He was great at route running and had great hands. Moss was just an athletic freak. He excelled at running straight downfield and catching deep passes. He wasn't that tough over the middle. Clearly Rice would be the better WR to have in a WCO, and clearly Rice would be the better WR to have if you were starting a team. But if your team already had an underneath WR(Cris Carter), and your QB(Jeff George)'s main strength was just throwing it up deep and letting your WR make a play, who is the better WR for that system?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wouldn't Rice still be more versatile, therefore, making him more dangerous as a reciever?

I think the gap between them as far as running down the field and catching a deep pass is closer than the gap of route running and going over the middle.

b

[Jeff W]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
League leaders, Receiving TD's
Rice (all in his first 11 yrs):
#1: 6 times
#2: 1 time
#3: 2 times
Harrison:
#1: 1
#2: 4
#3: 1
League leaders, Rush+Receiving TD's, so going against RB's too:
Rice :
#1 2 time
#2 3 times
#3 1 time
#4 2 times
Harrison:
#4 two times

1987 Rice:
65 receptions 1078 yds 16.6 ypr 22 TDs + 1 TD running
In only 12 games (strike season). LT2 has 26 TD's through 12 games this year as a comparison.

[/ QUOTE ]

Was Harrison's lack of TDs the result of his drops, or did her have a QB that threw record number of TDs to an unprecedented number of targets (hint: it was the latter).

[/ QUOTE ]

Harrison's "lack" of TDs(.7 TDs/game can hardly be called a weakness) are probably because his smallish stature limits his red zone productivity(Jerry Rice had about 2 inches and 15 pounds on Harrison). Before Wayne's emergence, Harrison received the most targets on the Colts by a huge margin--often outgaining the next best receiver on the team 2:1(yardage) or more.

Just looking at TDs is a pretty silly way to evaluate receivers, of course. A combination of total targets, catches/target, yards/target and ideally success rate statistics that give credit to making plays that score or advance drives would be the best way to compare the two receivers.

Rice also gets credit for being a pivotal player on 4 championship teams.

[capone0]

He won in 1988, 1989, and 1994. He was not part of the 1981 and 1982 teams.

The amazing thing about Rice is the disparity in his stats in comparisonto others on his team. In his 22 TD season, 2 others had 5 TDs as the next highest. In his 17 TD season, John Taylor had 10, so it changed a little. He was the main catching weapon by far on the team.

In 2001, Marvin had 15 tds, next highest is 2 receiving TDs on his team. Likewise, in 1999, he had 12 TDs and the next closest was 4.

During the Wayne, era, even though Peyton has been very effective his TD and receptions numbers have dropped.

[Jeff W]

[ QUOTE ]
He won in 1988, 1989, and 1994. He was not part of the 1981 and 1982 teams.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oops, I thought he was on the 84 team, but he came into the league in 1985(they didn't make the playoffs in '82).

[capone0]

Whoops 1984 teams.