Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;809067]Who did Monk have for QB's and who did Rice have? Monk's #'s with 1 good QB and 2 average QB are impressive, what would he have done with back to back HOF QB's. Don't under estimate Monk.[/quote]

Not underestimating him at all. I just don't put Monk in the class of Rice. I wouldn't put anyone in his class.

Monk was very good, Rice was great. Some even argue the single best football player to have played the game. Never heard anyone make that argument for Monk.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;809057]You would take Art Monk over Jerry Rice any day?

Should you ever apply for a job as a scout or in a personnel department for any NFL team, be sure to erase completely and permanently that comment from the Internet. That sentence alone will prevent you from getting that job.[/quote]

Maybe he could intern at the school of Vinny?

;)

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

The fact is, the Hall of Fame...it's a weird place. The voting is weird. Nothing about the Hall of Fame makes sense. There seems to be a lot of pettiness amongst the members of the media who vote. One guy on NFL Network's Top 10 Players Who Should be in the Hall of Fame, one guy straight up said that Kenny Stabler will NEVER get his vote to be in the Hall of Fame based solely on character.

It's very nitpicky and full of grudges and personal vendettas.

Shoud T.O be a first ballot Hall of Famer? Sure, if you look at the numbers, which is what's really supposed to matter. He's one of the best wide receivers ever from that standpoint. Character crap aside, T.O always shows up ready to play, and he always seems to make the quarterbacks who throw to him better.

Will he be? Depends on whether the press either loves his antics because they gave them material or hates him.

There's so many wide receivers that should be in the Hall though, he might not make it in just because of the log jam at the position.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;809034]I second that and for that matter, I would take Monk over Rice any day.[/quote]

SFREDSKIN your homerism is hilarious. As much as we all love Art Monk, he was simply not the wr Jerry Rice was. Rice was a game breaker who could take a 5 yard slant all the way. Monk simply didn't have those kind of skills and very few did. Yeah having great QB's helped, but even if you put Monk in the old 49ers offense w/ Montana and Young, he's still not the TD producer that Rice was.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=NLC1054;809087]The fact is, the Hall of Fame...it's a weird place. The voting is weird. Nothing about the Hall of Fame makes sense. There seems to be a lot of pettiness amongst the members of the media who vote. One guy on NFL Network's Top 10 Players Who Should be in the Hall of Fame, one guy straight up said that Kenny Stabler will NEVER get his vote to be in the Hall of Fame based solely on character.

It's very nitpicky and full of grudges and personal vendettas.

Shoud T.O be a first ballot Hall of Famer? Sure, if you look at the numbers, which is what's really supposed to matter. He's one of the best wide receivers ever from that standpoint. Character crap aside, T.O always shows up ready to play, and he always seems to make the quarterbacks who throw to him better.

Will he be? Depends on whether the press either loves his antics because they gave them material or hates him.

[B]There's so many wide receivers that should be in the Hall though, he might not make it in just because of the log jam at the position[/B].[/quote]

That will probably be the explanation too.

I think Cris Carter has gotten robbed, and of course we know that Monk did too. So I won't be shocked if T.O. gets the snub for a year or two.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Mattyk;809091]That will probably be the explanation too.

I think Cris Carter has gotten robbed, and of course we know that Monk did too. So I won't be shocked if T.O. gets the snub for a year or two.[/quote]

They also look a lot at post season production. What has TO done there? I don't feel like digging, but he only had success early with the 49ers and then the Eagles. I remember he played injured in the Super Bowl loss. Did he get injured in the playoffs or the regular season that year?

Overall, I don't think he has a lot to stand on for the post season (again, an impression without looking it up).

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

Love Monk. But there were years you could have legitimately made the argument-with guys like Charlie Brown and Gary Clark-that Monk wasn't even the best WR on his team. In his prime, you never doubted that with Jerry Rice.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Mattyk;809083]Maybe he could intern at the school of Vinny?

;)[/quote]

To bring this full circle; TO was drafted by Vinny!

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Mattyk;809078]Not underestimating him at all. I just don't put Monk in the class of Rice. I wouldn't put anyone in his class.

Monk was very good, Rice was great. Some even argue the single best football player to have played the game. Never heard anyone make that argument for Monk.[/quote]

You don't consider Art Monk a[COLOR="Red"] great[/COLOR] wide receiver?
:doh:

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=dmek25;809063][B]his issue with the eagles was money[/B]. could have easily been handled by the eagle front office. but they chose to play hard ball. so i guess my answer to your question is yes. the redskins have NEVER had a receiver the caliber of Owens in his prime. closest thing was Taylor[/quote]

That was part of it, but that's no excuse for throwing your qb under the bus. McNabb didn't sign his checks. Seems like you're finding excuses for his behavior.

My answer would be no, TO would bring short term success & long-term stress.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;809097]Love Monk. But there were years you could have legitimately made the argument-with guys like Charlie Brown and Gary Clark-that Monk wasn't even the best WR on his team. In his prime, you never doubted that with Jerry Rice.[/quote]

One of my friends who played with the skins in that era always has said that Downtown Charlie Brown had the talent, ability & drive to have the career Monk had. He says it had a lot to do with the politics of teams. The qualifier of this is the guy also LOVES Monk and was in no way disrespecting him.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=freddyg12;809100]That was part of it, but that's no excuse for throwing your qb under the bus. McNabb didn't sign his checks. Seems like you're finding excuses for his behavior.

My answer would be no, TO would bring short term success & long-term stress.[/quote]

But McNabb also made it a point to say that they didn't need TO. Now, I don't think a QB should say "we're screwed" or something along those lines. But TO was the reason they were so dominant that year, and they shouldn't have been so dismissive about him being hurt.

Also, had the Eagles paid TO what he wanted, they could have easily made another trip to the SB the next season (and prob win the whole thing).

As SS said:

[quote=SmootSmack;809003]T.O. probably spoke the truth more often than not. Unfortunately, speaking the truth does not often make a good teammate[/quote]

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;809099]You don't consider Art Monk a[COLOR=red] great[/COLOR] wide receiver?
:doh:[/quote]

Great as in the same class as Rice? No.

What's wrong with saying he was very good?

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Leader In Sports;809094]They also look a lot at post season production. [B]What has TO done there[/B]? I don't feel like digging, but he only had success early with the 49ers and then the Eagles. I remember he played injured in the Super Bowl loss. Did he get injured in the playoffs or the regular season that year?

Overall, I don't think he has a lot to stand on for the post season (again, an impression without looking it up).[/quote]

Well, for starters he had "the catch" - 49ers vs. the Pack in '98.

And in the Super Bowl against the Patriots he had 9-122 on an ankle he broke about a month before.

He had some big playoff moments.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;809097]Love Monk. But there were years you could have legitimately made the argument-with guys like Charlie Brown and Gary Clark-that Monk wasn't even the best WR on his team. In his prime, you never doubted that with Jerry Rice.[/quote]

Smootsmack channeling Peter King! King said that when he covered those great 80s giants teams, the players said they weren't afraid of Monk, but they were of Clark cause he made big plays.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Mattyk;809105]Well, for starters he had "the catch" - 49ers vs. the Pack in '98.

And in the Super Bowl against the Patriots he had 9-122 on an ankle he broke about a month before.

He had some big playoff moments.[/quote]
I don't think those 2 will get him in the HOF. I am willing to put money he won't be first ballot and am not 100% about him getting in.

Do you see Steve McNair in the HOF? He was a co-MVP one year. I would put McNair over T.O. any day.

What about Roman Gabriel? He was the NFL MVP and Comeback Player of the Year. We could go on - Randall Cunningham, Terrell Davis, Roger Craig, Phil Simms, etc, etc.

There are lots of guys that are very good. T.O. was/is a great individual player, but I don't see him contributing to a team. After all, football is a team sport.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=freddyg12;809100]That was part of it, but that's no excuse for throwing your qb under the bus. McNabb didn't sign his checks[B].seems like you're finding excuses for his behavior[/B].

My answer would be no, TO would bring short term success & long-term stress.[/quote]
i have always believed that Owens is a first class ass. all im saying is that if the eagles front office would have handled him a little different, Owens and Mcnabb would have been a force to be dealt with for many seasons. he has been blessed with superior talent, and can out work almost anyone on the practice field. is he a cancer? most of the time. but remember this, players win games

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Leader In Sports;809107]I don't think those 2 will get him in the HOF. I am willing to put money he won't be first ballot and am not 100% about him getting in.

Do you see Steve McNair in the HOF? He was a co-MVP one year. [B]I would put McNair over T.O. any day.[/B]

What about [B]Roman Gabriel[/B]? He was the NFL MVP and Comeback Player of the Year. We could go on -[B] Randall Cunningham, Terrell Davis, Roger Craig, Phil Simms, etc, etc.[/B]

There are lots of guys that are very good. T.O. was/is a great individual player, but I don't see him contributing to a team. After all, football is a team sport.[/quote]
there goes any of your cred. you would honestly put Mcnair in and not Owens?

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

i cant believe the most posts i have had in over 2 years, and its defending TO

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Ruhskins;809102]But McNabb also made it a point to say that they didn't need TO. Now, I don't think a QB should say "we're screwed" or something along those lines. But TO was the reason they were so dominant that year, and they shouldn't have been so dismissive about him being hurt.

Also, [B]had the Eagles paid TO what he wanted[/B], they could have easily made another trip to the SB the next season (and prob win the whole thing).

As SS said:[/quote]

He was signed to a 7-year deal & only played 1 year before complaining & asking for a new deal. When he didn't get what he wanted, he began the childish antics, working out in his driveway, dissing McNabb & others, etc. Sure the Eagles got him for less than he could've gotten elsewhere, but remember that he & Drew R. orchestrated the trade after he was initially sent to Baltimore.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;809099]You don't consider Art Monk a[COLOR=Red] great[/COLOR] wide receiver?
:doh:[/quote]

He WAS great. However, Rice was the GOAT. You just can't compare ANYONE with Rice. This can be said without denigrating or disrespecting Monk or anyone else you're talking about.

It's like talking about Michael Jordan in basketball. Yes, there WERE other great players, but they're not Mike.

Rice vs. Monk is about equivalent to talking about Jordan vs. Dr. J.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=hooskins;809027]first doesnt read well. he said almost. and if you are implying winning a superbowl is a criteria for the HOF, then they really made a big mistake enrolling marino.[/quote]

No I read just fine. If you read this a knew TO never won a SB then you knew what he was saying if you did not know you could take that either way.

"few receivers I can think of that almost single handily (or as close to single handily one can be in football) won his team a Super Bowl"

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=dmek25;809109]there goes any of your cred. you would honestly put Mcnair in and not Owens?[/quote]

Look what McNair contributed to the TEAM. Rice was a team player, Owens plays for himself. I don't think Owens made the TEAM better - just look at Dallas with and without him.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=freddyg12;809111]He was signed to a 7-year deal & only played 1 year before complaining & asking for a new deal. When he didn't get what he wanted, he began the childish antics, working out in his driveway, dissing McNabb & others, etc.[B] Sure the Eagles got him for less than he could've gotten elsewhere[/B], but remember that he & Drew R. orchestrated the trade after he was initially sent to Baltimore.[/quote]

I don't see what's wrong about getting a raise. How he went about it was terrible, but the 2004 Eagles were dominant with McNabb and TO.

I think TO was probably worst with the Cowboys, but they were also pretty dysfunctional.

I can tell you two other players that have done worst (similar) things than TO:
- Haynesworth's saga with the Redskins
- R. Moss giving up at the end of his time in Minny and the whole time he was with the Raiders

I don't think anyone will defend what TO did, but I just don't think those actions are terrible enough to keep him out of the HOF.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Leader In Sports;809120]Look what McNair contributed to the TEAM. [B]Rice was a team player[/B], Owens plays for himself. I don't think Owens made the TEAM better - just look at Dallas with and without him.[/quote]
au contraire, mon fraire. i seem to remember on more then one occasion Rice bitching and moaning about not getting the ball enough. or the niners not running enough plays for him. the same thing people are chastising Owens for

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

However, there has been one unhappy side effect: Rice has felt threatened by the presence of Owens and Stokes. Though he's tied for the lead in the NFC with 69 receptions, Rice has twice complained about not getting enough balls thrown his way. Most recently, after San Francisco's 31-20 victory over the New Orleans Saints on Nov. 22 (the 49ers were sparked by a pair of Owens touchdown catches), Rice suggested he might retire because of his frustration with his role.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=dmek25;809127]au contraire, mon fraire. i seem to remember on more then one occasion Rice bitching and moaning about not getting the ball enough. or the niners not running enough plays for him. the same thing people are chastising Owens for[/quote]

All receivers want the ball. When Rice joined a team, they were better. When he left, they felt the loss (except the Seahawks). When TO joined a team, there was not much effect. You can claim the Eagles, but they went to how many NFC Championship games without TO? They were bound to finally get over the hump, just like Bill Cowher with the Steelers. The Eagles were solid contenders before TO.

How much better did the cowboys do when they signed him?

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

Dude, McNabb had his best season EVER with T.O. It's not even close.

3,875 yards is the second most for McNabb. 64% completion percentage is a career high. 31 touchdowns, eight interceptions and his highest ever quarterback rating period. Yeah, they went to a bunch of NFC Championship games without T.O, but T.O helped them get over the hump without a doubt.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=NLC1054;809132]Dude, McNabb had his best season EVER with T.O. It's not even close.

3,875 yards is the second most for McNabb. 64% completion percentage is a career high. 31 touchdowns, eight interceptions and his highest ever quarterback rating period. Yeah, they went to a bunch of NFC Championship games without T.O, but T.O helped them get over the hump without a doubt.[/quote]

OK, you are talking numbers - I am talking success. They went to how many NFC Championship games before T.O. got there? Terrell did not make his teams significantly better. Look at the Eagles before he got there, and while he was there. Look at the Cowboys before he got there, and after he was there. Should we even mention Buffalo? If he was THAT good, teams would do what they had to to keep him. Dude is a cancer.

Oh yea, he did not help them "get over the hump". The hump results in a Lombardi trophy, which the Eagles still don't have.

T.O. is clearly not a first ballot HOFer. He had the talent, but not the mentality.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

I think there are four hall of fame receivers from the current era: Terrell Owens, Marvin Harrison, Randy Moss, and Derrick Mason.

Carter, and hopefully Tim Brown, need to go into Canton in the next two years before Harrison is eligible and then Owens and Moss shortly thereafter.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=NLC1054;809132]Dude, McNabb had his best season EVER with T.O. It's not even close.

3,875 yards is the second most for McNabb. 64% completion percentage is a career high. 31 touchdowns, eight interceptions and his highest ever quarterback rating period. Yeah, they went to a bunch of NFC Championship games without T.O, but T.O helped them get over the hump without a doubt.[/quote]

Numbers may be overrated by McNabb was accurate with T.O. That should say something :D

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

All that matters in the Hall of Fame is numbers. How many winning season did O.J Simpson have with Buffalo while he was there? Not a whole lot. There's a lot of guys who never made it to a Super Bowl, hell, guys who never made it to a NFL/AFL/NFC/AFC Championship game.

The numbers come first, always. You get into the HOF based off numbers first and foremost.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Chico23231;809040]Can be easily argued TO is the 2nd greatest WR after Rice ever. Me, I prefer to give that title to Randy Moss, NO ONE was as dominating at WR in their prime IMO. Moss is the greatest deep ball reciever ever by an enormous margin. [/quote]

So you would say the NFL's 2nd greatest WR is a one trick pony that gave up on plays and had a horrible attitude.

Without a doubt, Moss could have been the NFL's best ever to play the WR position based on talent alone. The problem is, Moss has never (or ever will be) a complete WR. He was a one trick pony. If it wasn't the deep ball, then chances are Randy isn't trying to catch it. I've seen Jerry Rice take 5 yard slants to the house on numerous occasions. Catch balls over the middle, one handed catches on the sideline. There wasn't a route he couldn't run with perfection. I look for a WR to be complete in all aspects and Moss isn't even remotely in that category.

In fact, he's not even on Steve Largent's class in terms of what a WR should be. You shouldn't get into the Hall of Fame merely because you were more athletic and could jump over people to obtain a bunch of numbers. It should be based on how hard you worked and the effort you put for to get there and the dedication to your position you exhibited. Many guys in there didn't have 1/3 the athletic talent that Randy has and still got the job done through practice, hard work, and respect for the game. He has none of that. One thing you could never fault Owens for was his dedication to his craft. He worked hard, he ran his routes precisely, and he executed more times than not. It's just unfortunate that he chose to open his mouth one too many times.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

As bad as T.O is...I love the guy. I know the character stuff, I know he's locker room poison...but I can't hate the guy. Him and Ochocinco.

They make the game fun to watch, if they don't always make it fun to play for the guys on the field. And as NC said, T.O is dedicated to his craft. He's always in shape, he runs the entire route tree (or most of it), he makes the quarterback he's playing with better, usually.

Should T.O get in on the first ballot? In terms of numbers, work ethic and overall impact on the game, yeah. If you want to dock him on character, there's a lot of prick's in the Hall of Fame. A ton of them. And there's plenty of guys with excellent character out of it. But I don't think he'll get in as a first ballot Hall of Famer anyway, because the press will try to humble him, or some bullshit.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=NC_Skins;809138]So you would say the NFL's 2nd greatest WR is a one trick pony that gave up on plays and had a horrible attitude.

Without a doubt, Moss could have been the NFL's best ever to play the WR position based on talent alone. The problem is, Moss has never (or ever will be) a complete WR. He was a one trick pony. If it wasn't the deep ball, then chances are Randy isn't trying to catch it. I've seen Jerry Rice take 5 yard slants to the house on numerous occasions. Catch balls over the middle, one handed catches on the sideline. There wasn't a route he couldn't run with perfection. I look for a WR to be complete in all aspects and Moss isn't even remotely in that category.

In fact, he's not even on Steve Largent's class in terms of what a WR should be. You shouldn't get into the Hall of Fame merely because you were more athletic and could jump over people to obtain a bunch of numbers. It should be based on how hard you worked and the effort you put for to get there and the dedication to your position you exhibited. Many guys in there didn't have 1/3 the athletic talent that Randy has and still got the job done through practice, hard work, and respect for the game. He has none of that. One thing you could never fault Owens for was his dedication to his craft. He worked hard, he ran his routes precisely, and he executed more times than not. It's just unfortunate that he chose to open his mouth one too many times.[/quote]To be fair to Moss, he didn't have a whole lot to prove re: the hall of fame after his seven years with the Vikings, when he was the most dominant receiver of the pre-shogun spread era.

Any questions on Moss as a hall of fame player after that point were answered when he was put in one of the great passing offenses of all time and was its centerpiece for three seasons.

Randy Moss has had a couple of really waste-of-a-year dreadful seasons (2006 and 2010), but this is a guy who is just a half year older than Plaxico Burress is, and I guess what I'm saying is that if there's anyone out there who would take Burress over Moss in free agency, let the record show that they're passing on a hall of famer for a guy who hasn't played football in two seasons.

The eyeball test says Moss is done as an elite receiver, but the guy is so undeniably talented that who knows. He could be the best free agent signing of the year. Or, I suppose, that he could really be done.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=NLC1054;809137]All that matters in the Hall of Fame is numbers. How many winning season did O.J Simpson have with Buffalo while he was there? Not a whole lot. There's a lot of guys who never made it to a Super Bowl, hell, guys who never made it to a NFL/AFL/NFC/AFC Championship game.

The numbers come first, always. You get into the HOF based off numbers first and foremost.[/quote]

True on OJ, but OJ also changed his team. They were a much better team when he was there and you can talk to some of the guys who played with him - they just love(d) the guy. Again, none of T.O.s teams actually got better by him being on them.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

Should he go in at some point, yes. However, not first ballot.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=NLC1054;809140]As bad as T.O is...I love the guy. I know the character stuff, I know he's locker room poison...but I can't hate the guy. Him and Ochocinco.

They make the game fun to watch, if they don't always make it fun to play for the guys on the field. And as NC said, T.O is dedicated to his craft. He's always in shape, he runs the entire route tree (or most of it), he makes the quarterback he's playing with better, usually.

Should T.O get in on the first ballot? In terms of numbers, work ethic and overall impact on the game, yeah. [B]If you want to dock him on character, there's a lot of prick's in the Hall of Fame[/B]. A ton of them. And there's plenty of guys with excellent character out of it. But I don't think he'll get in as a first ballot Hall of Famer anyway, because the press will try to humble him, or some bullshit.[/quote]

That's certainly not my point, or at least I would state it differently. Not saying don't let him in the hall cause he's a prick. I would "dock him" on job performance. His job performance, which for ally players includes interviews, teammate relationships & sideline conduct, was harmful to his teams.

Rather than debate "character" just look at what the guy did for his teams. He made plays but he also tore a couple teams apart.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Dirtbag59;809136]Numbers may be overrated by McNabb was accurate with T.O. That should say something :D[/quote]

Considering Owens routinely led the league in DROPS, this does speak well of McNabb and is famous "inaccuracy".

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=NC_Skins;809138]So you would say the NFL's 2nd greatest WR is a one trick pony that gave up on plays and had a horrible attitude.

Without a doubt, Moss could have been the NFL's best ever to play the WR position based on talent alone. The problem is, Moss has never (or ever will be) a complete WR. He was a one trick pony. If it wasn't the deep ball, then chances are Randy isn't trying to catch it. I've seen Jerry Rice take 5 yard slants to the house on numerous occasions. Catch balls over the middle, one handed catches on the sideline. There wasn't a route he couldn't run with perfection. I look for a WR to be complete in all aspects and Moss isn't even remotely in that category.

In fact, he's not even on Steve Largent's class in terms of what a WR should be. You shouldn't get into the Hall of Fame merely because you were more athletic and could jump over people to obtain a bunch of numbers. It should be based on how hard you worked and the effort you put for to get there and the dedication to your position you exhibited. Many guys in there didn't have 1/3 the athletic talent that Randy has and still got the job done through practice, hard work, and respect for the game. He has none of that. One thing you could never fault Owens for was his dedication to his craft. He worked hard, he ran his routes precisely, and he executed more times than not. It's just unfortunate that he chose to open his mouth one too many times.[/quote]

I think the year Moss set the record for 23 TD catches in a season, the same year TO lead the league in drops. Maybe im a year off. Dominance does not equal one trick pony. Moss is a huge prick, but imo TO was/is a locker room cancer which is way worse. Like I said, you can easily argue TO 2nd greatest all time, Id prefer Moss all day long. And yeah, Id probably take Moss over Steve Largent.