nfff....nfff....nfff....nfff....nfff...

8/2/2008 11:31:58 AM

Quote :

"yeah Smith is horrible, I'm surprised he got 1,000 receiving yards last year"

Outside of the fact that there were lots of 900+ yard receivers last year. He managed to drop a lot of important balls. I know they don't keep a tally of when balls are dropped (3rd downs for instance), but anyone who watched the games knows what I am talking about.

I'm not saying the guy isn't good. I'm just saying the hype the guy gets is unwarranted. I mean for gods sake he punches people in practice ROUTINELY. You cant suspend him either, because he is (which makes this the most depressing) the best player youve got at any position.

8/2/2008 11:37:19 AM

Name 4 wide receivers who have been better than him over the past, say, 4 seasons. Hell, name 2. I'll bet you can't. Statistics would be nice. When you're the best at what you do, you deserve the hype. Unlike Favre who hasn't been even a top 10 quarterback since 2000.

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 11:50 AM. Reason : :]

8/2/2008 11:49:01 AM

Shrike apparently missed the 2007 season (and pretty much every thing since 2000). Maybe you can find it on DVD or something and catch up.

Smith was 15th in receptions, 20th in TDs, and 23rd in yards (among 23 players with 1000+ receiving yards).

He was 15th, 10th, and 10th in 2006.

He's a solid receiver, but to say he's in the top two in the NFL is about the dumbest thing anyone could say about football; he's not even in the top ten.

--

aha, you changed your post from the past two seasons to the past four. I guess you wanted to include his monster '05, not sure why'd you include '04 since he since missed the entire season.

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 12:06 PM. Reason : ]

8/2/2008 12:00:59 PM

Actually I edited my post to throw in the pot shot at Favre. 4 seasons was there from the beginning.

Outside of Marvin Harrison (who has Peyton Manning throwing to him), there hasn't been another receiver who's been as productive as Smith since he moved from special teams to WR.

He was also a monster in all his playoff appearances, another place where Favre tends to shit the bed.

8/2/2008 12:13:45 PM

Smith had one awesome season, 2005. Before or since, he hasn't been in the top 10 in a single category. He hasn't been monster in all of his playoff appearances, either; he's either awesome or absent. He had like 300+ yards in the first two games in 2005 and disappeared for the NFC Championship and the Super Bowl. Same in 2006, 200+ yards versus the Bears and 20 or so against the Seahawks.

Favre doesn't tend to shit the bed, either. He's been solid, not great, in his 20+ appearances. He also had serviceable performances in the Super Bowl, unlike Smith.

Quote :

"Outside of Marvin Harrison (who has Peyton Manning throwing to him), there hasn't been another receiver who's been as productive as Smith since he moved from special teams to WR. "

Yes, there are, there are several. They keep stats for these things, you know?

--

Smith apparently was 10th in 2006 in TD and yards, but still.

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 12:24 PM. Reason : ]

8/2/2008 12:21:30 PM

Quote :

"Favre doesn't tend to shit the bed, either. He's been solid, not great, in his 20+ appearances. He also had serviceable performances in the Super Bowl, unlike Smith."

Uh, since the last time Favre went to the Super Bowl, he's only won 3 playoff games and he's thrown more interceptions than touchdowns (not to mention the only QB in NFL history to throw 2 OT interceptions). How exactly is that solid?

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 12:27 PM. Reason : :]

8/2/2008 12:25:49 PM

Oh, so we're just picking and choosing which parts of the career we're going to compare? That's only a third of his playoff appearances. I could take Smith's last 2 games and he'd have the awesome game against the Bears and the nap against the Seahawks. How is that solid?

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 12:32 PM. Reason : ]

8/2/2008 12:28:15 PM

All I'm comparing is recent history, I never claimed anything else. All I asked was show me how Steve Smith could be considered overhyped when his numbers since he's been a WR compare favorably to almost any WR in the league. Especially when Favre gets showered in praise even though he's been a trainwreck for the better part of this decade.

8/2/2008 12:33:55 PM

Favre had two really bad seasons (2005 and 2006). He had passer ratings over 90 in 2001, 2003, and 2004. He also led the league in TD in 2003. He was as good from 2001-2003 as he was during any point in his career. And considering what he had to work with, last year may have been his best ever.

Yes, he sucked a huge fat dick in 05 and 06. Those were only two out of eight seasons, though, and he was nowhere near being a 'trainwreck' outside of those two years.

Quote :

"his numbers since he's been a WR compare favorably to almost any WR in the league"

Quote :

"Smith was 15th in receptions, 20th in TDs, and 23rd in yards (among 23 players with 1000+ receiving yards). He was 15th, 10th, and 10th in 2006."

Favorably? I guess. Top two/four/ten? Not outside of 2005.

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 12:42 PM. Reason : ]

8/2/2008 12:39:10 PM

Quote :

"Favorably? I guess. Top two/four/ten? Not outside of 2005."

Right, so he had one of the best WR years ever in 2005, two monster playoff performances, and he's been good every year except where he broke his leg in the first game.

Again, name 2/4/10 receivers who can claim that in the same time span.

..

Quote :

"He had like 300+ yards in the first two games in 2005 and disappeared for the NFC Championship and the Super Bowl."

I missed this earlier. Yeah, the Seahawks shut him down by triple teaming him. But he had a fine superbowl performance, look it up. What's Favre's excuse for personally blowing two playoff games in overtime?

Quote :

"Favre had two really bad seasons (2005 and 2006). He had passer ratings over 90 in 2001, 2003, and 2004. He also led the league in TD in 2003. He was as good from 2001-2003 as he was during any point in his career. And considering what he had to work with, last year may have been his best ever."

He also broke the interception record in that timespan, including throwing 16 of them in the playoffs.

8/2/2008 12:52:36 PM

He also broke every other record in that timespan, look it up.

This is a dumb argument. Steve Smith is not one of the top receivers in the league. He was in 2005 and he's been good ever since, but good isn't great. I'm not hating on the guy, he's a good receiver and I'd be happy to have him on my team. He isn't the world-beater that Panthers fans make him out to be, but I can understand how that happens when you have no other offensive weapons.

--

An incomplete list of receivers I would choose over Steve Smith, based on performance in the past four years:

Owens, Holt, Harrison, Moss, Ward, Johnson, Burress, Wayne

That's without looking at stats. I'm sure I can get two or three more if I put some time into it.

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 1:03 PM. Reason : ]

8/2/2008 12:59:35 PM

Well I'd say its a good thing you're not a GM. Owens and maybe Johnson are the only 2 I would consider before Smith. The rest are too old or have been too inconsistent. I realize Moss was incredible last season (before the playoffs started anyway), but he also pitiful for the 3 seasons before that.

Another way to look at it, he's been the #1 or #2 WR taken in damn near every FF mock draft since 2004.

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 1:25 PM. Reason : :]

8/2/2008 1:16:58 PM

These are the four-year averages for the receivers I listed:

		Rec		Yds		TD
S. Smith	70		948		7
T. Owens	72		1124		12
R. Moss		62		954		12
T. Holt		96		1270		9
M. Harrison	71		968		10
H. Ward		74		922		7
C. Johnson	93		1379		8
P. Burress	61		981		8
R. Wayne	88		1271		9

8/2/2008 1:36:54 PM

I gotta go w/ Ernie on this , you are out of your fucking mind. Which FF are you in? I was in 3 last year and he wasn't taken until the 4th or 5th WR in each, if not later.


It's cool to be a homer, but you gotta be realistic at times. He is a top 10 WR in the league, and has good years left, but he isn't in my top 5, nor most experts.

8/2/2008 1:40:37 PM

^^Uh, he had 0s for all those in 2004. If you did this fairly (plugged in his 03 stats for 04) it would look like -

Rec Yds TD
S. Smith 90 1259 9
T. Owens 72 1124 12
R. Moss 62 954 12
T. Holt 96 1270 9
M. Harrison 71 968 10
H. Ward 74 922 7
C. Johnson 93 1379 8
P. Burress 61 981 8
R. Wayne 88 1271 9

Which would put him at #3 in yard, #3 receptions, and a 3 way tie for third most touchdowns.

And what experts do you speak of? Most experts acknowledge Smith as one of the top receivers in the league. Show me one that doesn't.

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 1:53 PM. Reason : :]

8/2/2008 1:53:01 PM

Quote :

"Uh, he had 0s for all those in 2004."

He actually played in one game, and he isn't the only receiver from my list to have missed a significant amount of time.

Quote :

"If you did this fairly (plugged in his 03 stats for 04)"

So we're going back five seasons now?

Either way, your math is way off. If you include Smith's '03 season, his average receptions rise to 73.4 (not 90), yards to 980.2 (not 1259), and TD to 6.8 (not 9).

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 2:00 PM. Reason : ]

8/2/2008 1:56:36 PM

Well you could do it either way, sub in 03 or just remove 04 completely. And there is no way it would be in the 70s, he caught over 80 passes each of those seasons.

Quote :

"Either way, your math is way off. If you include Smith's '03 season, his average receptions rise to 73.4 (not 90), yards to 980.2 (not 1259), and TD to 6.8 (not 9)."

His 03 stats were 88 receptions, 1110 yards, and 7 touchdowns.....

Quote :

" He actually played in one game, and he isn't the only receiver from my list to have missed a significant amount of time."

He missed time those other seasons as well, but I don't recall another WR on that list missing an entire season.

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 2:03 PM. Reason : :]

8/2/2008 1:58:23 PM

Oh, so you substituted his '03 for his '04 and used everyone else's '04?

That's fucking retarded. Stick to your argument.

Quote :

"Name 4 wide receivers who have been better than him over the past, say, 4 seasons. Hell, name 2. I'll bet you can't. Statistics would be nice. When you're the best at what you do, you deserve the hype."

Quote :

"Outside of Marvin Harrison (who has Peyton Manning throwing to him), there hasn't been another receiver who's been as productive as Smith since he moved from special teams to WR."

Quote :

"All I'm comparing is recent history, I never claimed anything else."

You've been pretty much wrong about every point you've made.

Quote :

"Right, so he had one of the best WR years ever in 2005"

32nd most receptions for a season, 17th most yards, 77th most TD. Call up Canton, here comes Steve Smith!

Quote :

"He missed time those other seasons as well, but I don't recall another WR on that list missing an entire season."

He's missed three games since '05. Still though, your argument is that he's been one of the top two receivers since '04. If he can't stay healthy, he's not one of the best receivers. You can't be a part-time top receiver.

Off the top of my head, Owens missed most of '05 and Harrison missed most of last year. I'm sure they've all missed a game or two here and there.

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 2:07 PM. Reason : ]

8/2/2008 2:03:33 PM

Quote :

"Oh, so you substituted his '03 for his '04 and used everyone else's '04? That's fucking retarded. Stick to your argument. "

You want to count a season where he had 0s across the board? Accurate sure, but doesn't exactly make for a fair comparison.

Quote :

"32nd most receptions for a season, 17th most yards, 77th most TD. Call up Canton, here comes Steve Smith!"

Yeah, one guy leading the league in every significant WR stat for the season isn't impressive at all. Someone does that every season........

Quote :

"You've been pretty much wrong about every point you've made."

Honestly, you said he's not even top 10 which is way more ludicrous than anything I said (by your own, biased stats)

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 2:10 PM. Reason : :]

8/2/2008 2:07:14 PM

Quote :

"You want to count a season where he had 0s across the board? Accurate sure, but doesn't exactly make for a fair comparison."

You were the guy who said four seasons, not me.

Quote :

"Yeah, one guy leading the league in every significant WR stat for the season isn't impressive at all. Someone does that every season........"

You said it was one of the all-time best seasons. Yes, he was the best receiver in the league in '05. Compare his number to every season ever, though, and he doesn't really stand out that much.

Quote :

"by your own, biased stats"

Biased stats? What?

You said the past four years. I gave the stats for the past four years.

I'll concede that Smith has in fact been a top ten receiver over the past four seasons. I was wrong, I hadn't looked at the numbers, I was just going by instinct. But he's been at best the #10 receiver. You said he was #1 or #2, behind only Harrison. C'mon, guy.


[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 2:12 PM. Reason : ]

8/2/2008 2:09:00 PM

Ernie is just being a dumbass as usual.

He's averaging in seasons where Smitty was injured for the year, and he's comparing him to primary receivers in high-powered offenses. Every one of those guys listed plays in a much better passing attack than the Panthers. And yet despite consistent double-teams and fewer opportunities, Smitty has averaged 1200+ yards and 9+ TD's in his last 4 full seasons.

Put him in an offense like Cincinnati's and he would explode.

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 2:15 PM. Reason : 2]

8/2/2008 2:14:47 PM

Quote :

"He's averaging in seasons where Smitty was injured for the year, and he's comparing him to primary receivers in high-powered offenses."

Goddammit, read the fucking thread before you try to jump on one post out of context, Prawn Star.

Shrike said Steve Smith has been the #1 or #2 receiver for the past four seasons. That's 2007, 2006, 2005, and 2004. Yes, Smith missed all but one game of 2004, but I didn't make that my argument, Shrike did. Yes he plays in shitty offense, too. But he's the ONLY weapon they have. His stats should be slightly inflated because of that. Moss was in even shittier offenses for three of those seasons. The Giants and Steelers aren't exactly pass-happy either.

It's impossible to compare receivers in a vacuum. Going on what we have, though, there's no way you can make the argument that Steve Smith has been one of the top 2 or top 4 receivers over the past four seasons. Again, I concede that he's been a top 10, but just barely.

Quote :

"Put him in an offense like Cincinnati's and he would explode."

No, he'd be T.J. Houshmandzadeh, another guy who's been slightly better than Smith since '04.

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 2:28 PM. Reason : ]

8/2/2008 2:20:12 PM

Quote :

"No, he'd be T.J. Houshmandzadeh, another guy who's been slightly better than Smith since '04."

Ahahaha, just the fact that Houshmandzadeh has similar stats shows that the stats don't tell the whole story. Smith would absolutely blow up in a pass-first offense with a strong-armed QB.

Quote :

"Moss was in even shittier offenses for three of those seasons. The Giants and Steelers aren't exactly pass-happy either."

Good point. It's widely acknowledged that Moss is the best receiver in the NFL, and he didn't do shit in Oakland. Hines is considered a top-10 WR despite unspectacular stats, and Plaxico played better than any other WR down the stretch in the end of the season even though his stats have never been spectacular.

Likewise, Smitty has been nothing short of amazing these past 5 years, even though he plays in an offense thats run-first. I think its safe to say that Smith is a top 10 WR, maybe top 5 if he has a resurgent year being paired with Muhammad and Delhomme again. Just looking at the stats doesn't tell the whole story.

8/2/2008 2:48:34 PM

Quote :

"And what experts do you speak of? Most experts acknowledge Smith as one of the top receivers in the league. Show me one that doesn't."

Ok, this article doesn't have him in the top 5, and he is their last listed honorable mention(10th)

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/893855/
top_five_projected_nfl_wide_receivers.html?page=2&cat=14

Sporting news.com has him ranked 10th

NFL Choice. com doesn't have him ranked in their top 10

Mocking the draft.com has him 7th

cbssportsline has him 7th

I can keep going. Nobody has him in their top 5, which is what I said.

Which brings me to my original statement: "He is a top 10 WR in the league, and has good years left, but he isn't in my top 5, nor most experts."


[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 2:54 PM. Reason : damn homers.]

8/2/2008 2:52:56 PM

seriously


he's played multiple seasons on one leg (hamstring), played 13 games last year with the amazing combination of david carr, vinny testeverde, and matt moore

ask any of the "experts" on espn,fox,nbc, or cbs, and they'll tell you he's at the very least top 5, if not top 3

8/2/2008 3:03:24 PM

except that they don't. maybe he has the potential to be a top 3 WR, but if he is always hurt that takes away, and you do have to consider who is passing to someone when ranking them. Sucks that they don't have a better qb, sucks that he got hurt, such is life.

What I will say is people are not talking about him right now as a top 5 wr, you are forgetting names like fitgerald and edwards, guys who people are putting ahead of him at this point.

8/2/2008 3:08:26 PM

^Exactly

Over the past four years, his stats make him the tenth best receiver in the league. Who cares if he could have or should have been better; he wasn't. You'll never hear me saying "Favre would have won that second Super Bowl had John Elway not played out of his mind." You have to go by what he's done, and he hasn't done well enough to be a top five receiver.

If we're moving the discussion to top ten receivers in 2008 (whether for just this season or moving forward), then there's no way I'd put Smith on the list. There are way too many good young guys.

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 3:13 PM. Reason : ]

8/2/2008 3:11:59 PM

Quote :

"he's not even in the top ten."

Smith isn't a top 10 receiver huh....holy shit yall Packers fans are jealous

Quote :

"Owens, Holt, Harrison, Moss, Ward, Johnson, Burress, Wayne"

I know this motherfucker didn't put Plexiglass on this list

8/2/2008 3:30:17 PM

Jealous of 7-9 record, a 27th ranked offense and a middle of the road, aging defense? Not so much.

Read the thread, read the numbers

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 3:34 PM. Reason : ]

8/2/2008 3:33:56 PM

jealous of how good Steve Smith is

claiming he is not a top 10 receiver in the NFL is seriously destroying any credibility you have

you put waaaay to much stock in numbers as usual...try watching the guy play week in and and week out

8/2/2008 3:34:40 PM

i never thought he was that great either honestly...idk if hes in top 10 its like 10 on the dot

8/2/2008 3:35:26 PM

Quote :

"jealous of how good Steve Smith is"

I'll take Driver and Jennings over Smith and the ghost of Muhsin Muhammed.

Like I said, read the thread. I conceded that he was maybe the tenth best receiver over the past four years. Are their any non-homers that are arguing otherwise?

Quote :

"try watching the guy play week in and and week out"

I've probably seen 75% of Smith's games over the past four years. Maybe you should try watching other receivers play week in and week out.

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 3:39 PM. Reason : ]

8/2/2008 3:36:06 PM

name 9 that were better

you can hate on the guy all you want about having a temper and hitting his teammate...thats expected...but when you start saying he's not that good a receiver, you look like a complete and total idiot

^i do...now name 9 that are better

MAN BRETT FAVRE SUCKS, I'M NOT HATING, TRY WATCHING OTHER QB DURS TROLL TROLLS

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 3:38 PM. Reason : .]

8/2/2008 3:37:29 PM

Quote :

"i do...now name 9 that are better"

I did

Quote :

"you can hate on the guy all you want about having a temper and hitting his teammate...thats expected...but when you start saying he's not that good a receiver, you look like a complete and total idiot MAN BRETT FAVRE SUCKS, I'M NOT HATING, TRY WATCHING OTHER QB DURS TROLL TROLLS"

For the love of god, read the fucking thread

I'm not trolling, I gave Smith his due and I made a damn good argument why I think he's been no better than the tenth best receiver over the past four years. I'm not hating on the guy at all, I never said STEVE SMITH SUCKS. I've said several times that he's a good receiver. Shrike said he was one of the top two in the league and I was simply destroying that proposition.

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 3:42 PM. Reason : ]

8/2/2008 3:39:40 PM

Quote :

"An incomplete list of receivers I would choose over Steve Smith, based on performance in the past four years: Owens, Holt, Harrison, Moss, Ward, Johnson, Burress, Wayne"

you mean right here when you listed 8, including Plax who tries every other play?

i've been reading through the thread and i see the typical Steve Smith hate by the Panthers haters

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 3:42 PM. Reason : .]

8/2/2008 3:42:05 PM

Like I said, if you'd have read the thread you'd have seen that I added Houshmandzadeh to the list

You need to learn the difference between "hating" and "forming an argument based on facts"

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 3:44 PM. Reason : ]

8/2/2008 3:43:03 PM

if you could count, thats not 10

8/2/2008 3:44:02 PM

Quote :

"now name 9 that are better"

You can't even remember your own argument

[Edited on August 2, 2008 at 3:46 PM. Reason : ]

8/2/2008 3:44:37 PM

so i just read that smith like punched another player lol

8/2/2008 3:45:13 PM

^^well your original argument was that he wasnt even a top 10 receiver...looks like you cant remember your original argument either

Quote :

"I think its safe to say that Smith is a top 10 WR, maybe top 5 if he has a resurgent year being paired with Muhammad and Delhomme again. Just looking at the stats doesn't tell the whole story."

8/2/2008 3:48:55 PM

Quote :

"I'll concede that Smith has in fact been a top ten receiver over the past four seasons. I was wrong, I hadn't looked at the numbers, I was just going by instinct. But he's been at best the #10 receiver. You said he was #1 or #2, behind only Harrison. C'mon, guy."

8/2/2008 3:50:21 PM

i can think of at least 5 receivers i'd rather have than smith

8/2/2008 3:54:50 PM

Quote :

"ask any of the "experts" on espn,fox,nbc, or cbs, and they'll tell you he's at the very least top 5, if not top 3"

Quote :

"except that they don't."

titans78: yes they do

for example http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2887078

hey look these so called experts (Merril Hoge? whos that? does he follow football?) all say either Steve Smith or Marvin Harrison are the best receiver in the league...but what do they know...they probably don't even watch other players play week in and week out

8/2/2008 3:56:21 PM

You can't look at just the stats. Steve Smith is way better than his stats show. Have you thought about the kind of offensive threats the panthers have had besides Steve. Last year for one thing, he really didnt have a qb to throw him the ball, and most of the time there either hasnt been a significant running threat or a significant second wideout to take any pressure off of Steve. He has been double and triple covered a lot of the past four years, where a lot of the other receivers have significant threats across field that take a lot of coverage away from them.

8/2/2008 3:56:52 PM

It's dumb to base your argument on the opinions of others, there are just as many people on either side of the fence. You found some guys who think Smith's the best (even though that article is from before last season), titans78 found some guys who thinks he isn't even top 5. I'm going by the stats and what I've seen, and that adds up to what I've said here. Smith is a good receiver, apparently the tenth best over the past four years, but not top ten in 2008.

8/2/2008 4:07:05 PM

Ernie's opinion of ranking WRs is much more relevant than Meril Hoge's opinion

sorry if i paraphrased, i couldnt remember your exact wording when you pulled the "but i guess you know more than these experts" line and used it on me in another thread

do you ever look at anything other than stats when looking at athletes? effort? toughness? well you clearly didnt look at those 2 if you put Plax on your list.

you'd argue Moss wasn't a top 50 receiver in the worse of his two years in Oakland when he hardly played...stats don't lie!

8/2/2008 4:35:19 PM

I would take the following receivers over Steve Smith, no questions asked:

Reggie Wayne
Randy Moss
Chad Johnson
Terrell Owens
Torry Holt
TJ Houshmandzadeh
Donald Driver
Marvin Harrison
Greg Jennings
Plaxico Burress

Also, I don't understand how you can run around talking shit about Randy Moss and Plaxico taking plays off, while ignoring the fact that Smith punched and injured the team's starting cornerback.

8/2/2008 4:38:46 PM

i'm sure you would take Greg Jennings since you're a Packers fan

I'll take a guy like Steve Smith who gives it 110% ON THE FIELD every single down, to somebody like Plax who simply doesn't try half the time...its laughable to put Plax on that list...or it just shows how shortsighted people are...he won the Super Bowl last year? i guess i'll forget all the times he doesn't even try

8/2/2008 4:41:59 PM

Good thing he puts 110% behind his punches as well.

8/2/2008 4:45:18 PM