6 of the 10 All Time Passing leaders are active, only 3 are active hOF and one is going to be in soon so that is your top 10.
Takenton, Fouts and Montana are all in the top 20 and the best of the best that will be erased from history soon which is a shame.
Back to Largent. He had 100 TD's when he retired in 89. Since then 9 more people have either tied or have eclipsed him. Antonio Brown is the ONLY active player w any kind of shot at getting up there but that will be tough since he is sitting on 75.
Rice's record will be the other record that might never be broken. 197 TD's... He almost doubled Largent's then record, lol.
And he'll be close to 10th in a few years. These stats are meaningless in the NFL
If a QB has a decent line he can throw for 5k a year for a few years then trickle down t 4k so yes I agree.
I remember when Largent retired he had a few records and all were broken in like 2 years.
Farve had a record for what, not even a year?
The one record that will be tough to get at will be most yards by a RB. The longevity just isn't there anymore.
Too many rb's by committee anymore too.
Igot may have a point about the td record. I thought guys were closer than I thought. That top four is gonna be tough to break into but I think a lot of guys will get into Marino territory before long. Same deal with yards.
NFL all time stats are so fucking skewed though. Almost all guys in the top ten of most stats played just within the last twenty years.
Yes, with rule changes and added games, players like OJ, Ghost and Brown are all but forgotten unless there is an NFL special about them.
Hell, who remembers Largent anymore?
The only reason people remember Dick Butkus is for the name and they all forget about how bad of a dude he really was when he played.
I'll look at the leaders, I need a laugh.
Emmit, Walter, a current Bills player and Barry top 4.....
lol, when I think GREAT, Frank Gore doesn't come to mind, is that why you didn't name him?
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Back to Largent. He had 100 TD's when he retired in 89. Since then 9 more people have either tied or have eclipsed him. Antonio Brown is the ONLY active player w any kind of shot at getting up there but that will be tough since he is sitting on 75.
No, it’ll be tough for Brown to reach 100 TDs because he’s more likely to be in a mental-institution than on an NFL team at this point. Or jail.
Back to Largent. He had 100 TD's when he retired in 89. Since then 9 more people have either tied or have eclipsed him. Antonio Brown is the ONLY active player w any kind of shot at getting up there but that will be tough since he is sitting on 75.
No, it’ll be tough for Brown to reach 100 TDs because he’s more likely to be in a mental-institution than on an NFL team at this point. Or jail.
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
And he'll be close to 10th in a few years. These stats are meaningless in the NFL
If a QB has a decent line he can throw for 5k a year for a few years then trickle down t 4k so yes I agree.
I remember when Largent retired he had a few records and all were broken in like 2 years.
Farve had a record for what, not even a year?
The one record that will be tough to get at will be most yards by a RB. The longevity just isn't there anymore.
Too many rb's by committee anymore too.
Igot may have a point about the td record. I thought guys were closer than I thought. That top four is gonna be tough to break into but I think a lot of guys will get into Marino territory before long. Same deal with yards.
NFL all time stats are so fucking skewed though. Almost all guys in the top ten of most stats played just within the last twenty years.
And that's what makes what Marino did in the era he played in amazing. Imagine if he played in today's game?
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,298
And he'll be close to 10th in a few years. These stats are meaningless in the NFL
If a QB has a decent line he can throw for 5k a year for a few years then trickle down t 4k so yes I agree.
I remember when Largent retired he had a few records and all were broken in like 2 years.
Farve had a record for what, not even a year?
The one record that will be tough to get at will be most yards by a RB. The longevity just isn't there anymore.
Too many rb's by committee anymore too.
Igot may have a point about the td record. I thought guys were closer than I thought. That top four is gonna be tough to break into but I think a lot of guys will get into Marino territory before long. Same deal with yards.
NFL all time stats are so fucking skewed though. Almost all guys in the top ten of most stats played just within the last twenty years.
And that's what makes what Marino did in the era he played in amazing. Imagine if he played in today's game?
He would average over 40 td's and 5,000 yards a year.
would have been 5>2 if the saints hadn't been hosed and pats got the JV squad.
If I had known then what I know now...
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
And he'll be close to 10th in a few years. These stats are meaningless in the NFL
If a QB has a decent line he can throw for 5k a year for a few years then trickle down t 4k so yes I agree.
I remember when Largent retired he had a few records and all were broken in like 2 years.
Farve had a record for what, not even a year?
The one record that will be tough to get at will be most yards by a RB. The longevity just isn't there anymore.
Too many rb's by committee anymore too.
Igot may have a point about the td record. I thought guys were closer than I thought. That top four is gonna be tough to break into but I think a lot of guys will get into Marino territory before long. Same deal with yards.
NFL all time stats are so fucking skewed though. Almost all guys in the top ten of most stats played just within the last twenty years.
And that's what makes what Marino did in the era he played in amazing. Imagine if he played in today's game?
He would average over 40 td's and 5,000 yards a year.
Put Tarkenton in that convo, Elway, Fouts and Montana and let's see some numbers.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,298
And he'll be close to 10th in a few years. These stats are meaningless in the NFL
If a QB has a decent line he can throw for 5k a year for a few years then trickle down t 4k so yes I agree.
I remember when Largent retired he had a few records and all were broken in like 2 years.
Farve had a record for what, not even a year?
The one record that will be tough to get at will be most yards by a RB. The longevity just isn't there anymore.
Too many rb's by committee anymore too.
Igot may have a point about the td record. I thought guys were closer than I thought. That top four is gonna be tough to break into but I think a lot of guys will get into Marino territory before long. Same deal with yards.
NFL all time stats are so fucking skewed though. Almost all guys in the top ten of most stats played just within the last twenty years.
And that's what makes what Marino did in the era he played in amazing. Imagine if he played in today's game?
He would average over 40 td's and 5,000 yards a year.
Put Tarkenton in that convo, Elway, Fouts and Montana and let's see some numbers.
YOU put Tarkenton in that convo, Elway, Fouts and Montana and let's see some numbers.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,298
would have been 5>2 if the saints hadn't been hosed and pats got the JV squad.
A play here or a play there and the Patriots could be anywhere from 8-1 to 1-8 in their nine (Brady/Belichick-led) Super Bowls. Their only Super Bowl where one team was in control the entire time was SB39 against the Eagles. Every other game could have gone either way.
would have been 5>2 if the saints hadn't been hosed and pats got the JV squad.
A play here or a play there and the Patriots could be anywhere from 8-1 to 1-8 in their nine (Brady/Belichick-led) Super Bowls. Their only Super Bowl where one team was in control the entire time was SB39 against the Eagles. Every other game could have gone either way.
It was? Dude, the Eagles covered. That game easily could've gone the other way had the Eagles made better adjustments and not turned the ball over a few times:
would have been 5>2 if the saints hadn't been hosed and pats got the JV squad.
A play here or a play there and the Patriots could be anywhere from 8-1 to 1-8 in their nine (Brady/Belichick-led) Super Bowls. Their only Super Bowl where one team was in control the entire time was SB39 against the Eagles. Every other game could have gone either way.
It was? Dude, the Eagles covered. That game easily could've gone the other way had the Eagles made better adjustments and not turned the ball over a few times:
1
2
3
4
Total
NE
0
7
7
10
24
PHI
0
7
7
7
21
Oh I know all about them covering with that garbage TD with under two minutes to go that blew my bet. Yeah saying the Pats were in control the whole time might not be accurate. It just wasn't as close as the final score indicates. It also was the only Brady Super Bowl to not play out like a sports movie game besides last year's game. Played out like any old regular season game.
would have been 5>2 if the saints hadn't been hosed and pats got the JV squad.
A play here or a play there and the Patriots could be anywhere from 8-1 to 1-8 in their nine (Brady/Belichick-led) Super Bowls. Their only Super Bowl where one team was in control the entire time was SB39 against the Eagles. Every other game could have gone either way.
It was? Dude, the Eagles covered. That game easily could've gone the other way had the Eagles made better adjustments and not turned the ball over a few times:
1
2
3
4
Total
NE
0
7
7
10
24
PHI
0
7
7
7
21
Oh I know all about them covering with that garbage TD with under two minutes to go that blew my bet. Yeah saying the Pats were in control the whole time might not be accurate. It just wasn't as close as the final score indicates. It also was the only Brady Super Bowl to not play out like a sports movie game besides last year's game. Played out like any old regular season game.
Yeah it was. Just not quite the nail biter as others with a last second field goal but the score was pretty indicative of how close the game was. I mean...tied at halftime and tied going into the fourth. That's a pretty tight game.
It was pretty damn nerve-racking for this guy, I'll tell you that much!
I would put him in over Marvin Harrison as well. He benefitted greatly from Peyton Manning. I think the best QB Owens got to play with was Steve Young who was at the end of his career.
I wish I was a sacrifice, but somehow still lived on.
It’s not that foolish. If you adjust the stats for era, Owens isn’t that much better. Then throw in that Owens had better QBs, Largent never wore gloves, and Owens left teams worse off than when he arrived (only 1.5 years on the Eagles and 3 years on the Cowboys when he could have been great for many years with either team), and it’s not that crazy to put Largent on over him.
That said, I do think Owens should have been on it. I just wouldn't remove Largent for him.
F Me In The Brain
this knows everybody from other commets Posts: 30,629
Being old enough to have watched Largent (guessing you are as well) it is more laughable to me Largent was good, TO was a freak. Straight unstoppable at times.
I also don't think the eras were all that different but I can just use my eyes having watched them both. If Seattle had TO they would have thrown more. Zorn's stats sure would have been better.
And ...yes, TO was better than Marvin as well, imo.
Also a nutter, but the fact that he has issues has nothing to do with how great a player he was.
Yeah I don't disagree with any of that. If the aliens come and challenge us to round up our best 53 guys for an intergalactic football game for supreme control of the universe, I'm taking Owens over Largent at WR. He's more likely to stiff-arm some alien scum to the ground and pick up the first down for sure.
Some of the activities planned include throwing snowballs at Santa, running into stationary objects and chugging Campbell’s Chunky Soup straight from the can.
Comments
Takenton, Fouts and Montana are all in the top 20 and the best of the best that will be erased from history soon which is a shame.
Back to Largent. He had 100 TD's when he retired in 89. Since then 9 more people have either tied or have eclipsed him. Antonio Brown is the ONLY active player w any kind of shot at getting up there but that will be tough since he is sitting on 75.
Rice's record will be the other record that might never be broken. 197 TD's... He almost doubled Largent's then record, lol.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Another reason why Sanders was the best, well besides Jim Brown...
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
would have been 5>2 if the saints hadn't been hosed and pats got the JV squad.
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
It was pretty damn nerve-racking for this guy, I'll tell you that much!
Would be 6>0 without Bountygate
Anyone that puts Steve Largent over TO is a fool
This article shares that view.
That said, I do think Owens should have been on it. I just wouldn't remove Largent for him.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Largent was good, TO was a freak.
Straight unstoppable at times.
I also don't think the eras were all that different but I can just use my eyes having watched them both. If Seattle had TO they would have thrown more. Zorn's stats sure would have been better.
And ...yes, TO was better than Marvin as well, imo.
Also a nutter, but the fact that he has issues has nothing to do with how great a player he was.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
https://apple.news/AJ2CxKl0dQWe36B11_uYEhg
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©