Packers not in Canton

[Future]

peak value? Wow.

Walker had 1 great season, 1 good season, 1 promising season, and nothing else. 1 season with double digit TDs, and 2 seasons with 1000 yards. 1 season with 80+ catches, 2 with 50+ catches. And has never been the #1 season on a team.

So, that peak value never materialized if not for 1 season.

Javon Walker NFL & AFL Football Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com

The other posted 6 consecutive 1000 yard seasons, in a (so far) 12 year career where for the most of the time he was the team's #1 receiver. 4 seasons with 80+ catches, 9 seasons with 50+ catches.

Donald Driver NFL & AFL Football Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com

And not only production, Walker was a louzy route runner with average hands, injury prone and a diva.

Walker had more athletic skills than Driver, no doubt, and had one season where he was better than Driver.

But one season does not a career make. Javon Walker never came close to the kind of wide receiver and football player Donald Driver is.

And the short term theory is so, so wrong. The Packers are built for the future. So are the Steelers.

Teams that tried to win now? 2010 Jets, 2009 Vikings, 2007 Patriots, and every year the Redskins show that this kind of formula is flawed. Heck, just take a look at the so-called "free agency winners" every year, and none of them ends up winning the championship.

You'd have to go back to the 1996 Packers to really find a team that spent big in FA with veterans in the same year they won a championship.

The thing with football is, it's not fantasy. It's not "who can play the brightest at a moment".

Football is a game of endurance. If you can't be consistant, you don't play in this league.

Ryan Leaf and Jeff George had more "talent" than Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Joe Montana...

Agree with all of what you said except for the part where you used three teams that came within heartbeats of winning or going to the Super Bowl as examples of why "buying a team" doesn't work. I'd say it worked for all three of those teams. What they did in the offseason prior to their big run gave them a great shot at a championship.

 

[Jasonfan]

peak value? Wow.

And the short term theory is so, so wrong. The Packers are built for the future. So are the Steelers.

Teams that tried to win now? 2010 Jets, 2009 Vikings, 2007 Patriots, and every year the Redskins show that this kind of formula is flawed. Heck, just take a look at the so-called "free agency winners" every year, and none of them ends up winning the championship.

You'd have to go back to the 1996 Packers to really find a team that spent big in FA with veterans in the same year they won a championship.

Ryan Leaf and Jeff George had more "talent" than Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Joe Montana...

You seem to be misunderstanding my point. The 2010 Jets, 2009 Vikings, and 2007 Patriots have nothing to do with the discussion. My argument has absolutely nothing to do with Free Agency vs Drafting.

I also am not talking about "talent" either so I am not sure why you mention Ryan Leaf and Jeff George.


****My argument IS that players should be valued based upon how they PERFORMED at their peak. Here is a question for you:

Do you consider Edgar Bennett to be a Better Running Back than Bo Jackson and Terrell Davis?

Do you consider Mike Alstott a be a Better Running Back than Gale Sayers?

If your answer is Yes then Philosophically we disagree. I propose that Bo Jackson and Gale Sayers are far superior Running Backs seven though their Yards, TDs, and Seasons Played are less

 

[ivo610]

You seem to be misunderstanding my point. The 2010 Jets, 2009 Vikings, and 2007 Patriots have nothing to do with the discussion. My argument has absolutely nothing to do with Free Agency vs Drafting.

I also am not talking about "talent" either so I am not sure why you mention Ryan Leaf and Jeff George.


****My argument IS that players should be valued based upon how they PERFORMED at their peak. Here is a question for you:

Do you consider Edgar Bennett to be a Better Running Back than Bo Jackson and Terrell Davis?

Do you consider Mike Alstott a be a Better Running Back than Gale Sayers?

If your answer is Yes then Philosophically we disagree. I propose that Bo Jackson and Gale Sayers are far superior Running Backs seven though their Yards, TDs, and Seasons Played are less

Mike Alstott was a FB. Sayers went in bc of several things, not just as a RB. Your twisting the argument, Sayers wasnt a flash in the pan, one year and done, he was what some considered the best player they had ever seen.

I consider Terrell Davis a better running back. And I like that comparison much better as they both played the same amount of years in the NFL. Davis being a 3x all pro. (RS knows how much I love that)

Bo Jacksons football career is beyond overrated. Great sports career, but his nfl career was a couple highlights but otherwise forgettable.

 

[ivo610]

If we are arguing about how players performed at their peak, does that make Timmy Smith the greatest RB in your opinion?

 

[Jasonfan]

Mike Alstott was a FB. Sayers went in bc of several things, not just as a RB. Your twisting the argument, Sayers wasnt a flash in the pan, one year and done, he was what some considered the best player they had ever seen.

I m just talking about their rushing skills, not how well they punt/throw/return kicks,etd. Alstott played "FB" technicalaly but TB used him often more as a tailback than as the FB position we consider today. The fact remains for this discussion that he has more yards and tds rushing than Gale Sayers.

If you want a non FB, Warrick Dunn has more than 2x more yards rushing than Gale Sayers. Despite this I would still say that Sayers is better.

**If someone is using the argument that Chris Carter, Curtis Martin, and Jerome Bettis (long careers, far superior accumulated stats) deserve to make the Hall of Fame over Sterling Sharpe, Terrell Davis, and Priest Holmes then it is not logically consistent for them to say that Gale Sayers was a better RB than Warrick Dunn.

 

[Jasonfan]

If we are arguing about how players performed at their peak, does that make Timmy Smith the greatest RB in your opinion?

1-Peak performance almost universally refers to someone's performance over 1 year. For example you might hear "Brett Favre Peaked in 1996" but would NEVER hear "Brett Favre peaked in Game 75 of his career" or "Favre peaked during pass 3,103 of his career"

2-Timmy Smith does not even hold the single game rushing record in the NFL (a performance in the playoffs does not automatically place above a performance in the regular season)

3-When assessing individual performance you have to factor in: Number of Attempts, Quality of Opposing Defense, Quality of Offensive Line, etc. Your propsed greatest performance does not address any of these variables