Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Does Andre Reed getting into the Hall of Fame help Steve Smith's case?


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1 TN05

TN05

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • LocationConover, North Carolina

Posted 01 February 2014 - 07:35 PM

I ask this because looking at Reed's numbers, they really aren't that great. He averaged 59 catches, 825 yards and 5 touchdowns over a 16-year career on one of the best offenses in the league. To compare, Steve Smith averages 64 catches, 938 yards and 5 touchdowns over a 13-year career, despite having basically two seasons (2001, 2004) wasted and playing on a team that threw the ball less than pretty much every other team.

Even if we take out the two injury years for Smith and one injury year for Reed (1995), we get Reed at 61 catches, 859 yards and 6 touchdowns in an average seasons while Smith averages 75 catches, 1,089 yards and 6 touchdowns per season... and that still doesn't account for his two years as a returner, when he ranked among the best in the league in that group. With that included Smith has 16,607 total yards and 73 total touchdowns.



#2 Proudiddy

Proudiddy

    The Thread Killer (Since 2004)

  • Moderators
  • 14,626 posts

Posted 01 February 2014 - 07:39 PM

I certainly would think and hope so. There are a lot less deserving WRs in there than Smitty and Reed.

#3 ctrcat

ctrcat

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 913 posts

Posted 01 February 2014 - 07:41 PM

Smitty will get his ring (or two) in the next couple years and make this conversation moot.

#4 bigjohn

bigjohn

    Block and Tackle

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 681 posts

Posted 01 February 2014 - 08:05 PM

Reed played in a day when receivers weren't putting up the numbers that receivers are these days.  I am afraid that's what a lot of voters will look at.

 

I agree Smith deserves to be in the Hall--if the voters use a combination of numbers, the teams/quarterbacks he played with, and the eyeball test, he's in.



#5 TN05

TN05

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • LocationConover, North Carolina

Posted 01 February 2014 - 08:27 PM

Reed played in a day when receivers weren't putting up the numbers that receivers are these days.  I am afraid that's what a lot of voters will look at.

 

I agree Smith deserves to be in the Hall--if the voters use a combination of numbers, the teams/quarterbacks he played with, and the eyeball test, he's in.

 

True, but was he ever really the best receiver in the game? He only had 4 1,000 yard seasons over 16 years. Steve has 7 over 13 seasons (and only 11 as a starting receiver). More importantly, he had Jim Kelly throwing the ball to him during his prime. Steve Smith got Jake Delhomme.



#6 Guest_Dark Knight_*

Guest_Dark Knight_*
  • Guests

Posted 01 February 2014 - 08:52 PM

True, but was he ever really the best receiver in the game? He only had 4 1,000 yard seasons over 16 years. Steve has 7 over 13 seasons (and only 11 as a starting receiver). More importantly, he had Jim Kelly throwing the ball to him during his prime. Steve Smith got Jake Delhomme.


You must've joined the Panthers wagon in '11.

Smith was the best player in the NFL in '05.

#7 Jangler

Jangler

    Its gonna be just like they say, them voices tell me so

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 46,751 posts

Posted 01 February 2014 - 08:53 PM

reread that, he was talking about Reed.



#8 Camsfanclub

Camsfanclub

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 356 posts

Posted 01 February 2014 - 08:56 PM

You must've joined the Panthers wagon in '11.

Smith was the best player in the NFL in '05.

I think you misinterpreted what he was saying. Might want to re-read it, he was complimentary of steve.



#9 TN05

TN05

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • LocationConover, North Carolina

Posted 01 February 2014 - 08:58 PM

You must've joined the Panthers wagon in '11.

Smith was the best player in the NFL in '05.

 

That's funny. Maybe you should reread? I fugging start a topic on how Steve Smith should get in based on Andre Reed's precedent and you think I'm dissing him?

Steve Smith was far and away the best player in the game in 2005, as I implied in my post by noting Reed never was. Andre Reed was never the best in the game and never got over 1,320 yards for that matter.



#10 Rules&Regulations

Rules&Regulations

    HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,239 posts

Posted 01 February 2014 - 09:42 PM

Anything that helps clear up the WR log-jam is good.

#11 thomas96

thomas96

    HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,391 posts

Posted 01 February 2014 - 09:55 PM

I can see Smith having a huge year next year if we get another WR (or 2) to open up the field more. I'm talking like 1300 yards and 10 touchdowns. He definitely deserves HoF and a Super Bowl ring. I hope he comes back to coach after he retires too, but I could see him playing another 3-4 years. (not at an elite level of course)



#12 Panthers111

Panthers111

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 159 posts

Posted 01 February 2014 - 10:35 PM

Having Jake throw Smitty the ball was probably the best thing that could have happened to Smiths numbers. Think Manning Brady Rodgers Brees - they spread the ball around like crazy. I would compare Jake and Smith to Stafford and Megatron. Whenever Stafford is in trouble throw it up to Johnson. 



#13 Growl

Growl

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,852 posts

Posted 01 February 2014 - 10:50 PM

Yes, but more significantly is the commitment to clearing out the voting committee has taken to sort out the jam at the position the last couple years. Steve could very realistically top Reed.


Keep pounding 89 and you could vey well get what you should.


And get rid of the media as the determiners of this kind of thing, today's media isn't qualified to make these kind of decisions

#14 PiratePanther189

PiratePanther189

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,008 posts

Posted 02 February 2014 - 12:36 AM

There wasn't nearly as much of a logjam at the WR position in Andre Reed, Michael Irvin, and Jerry Rice's day in terms of who is an elite receiver and who isn't. Today's passing league has made it very hard to determine and every team wants to argue for their 2000's receiver.

 

Smitty means a lot to us as fans, but as other people have said in past threads, if Smitty was to get in to the Hall without a ring then there's a lot of other guys that would have a case just as good as his. I don't know whether the Hall wants to open up the receiver position wide enough to allow so many in. In the past, WR HOF'ers have been a pretty tough group to join. Smith needs a ring or two to solidify his argument.



#15 ajax4132

ajax4132

    HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,397 posts

Posted 02 February 2014 - 12:47 AM

I think being 5'9 helps Smitty case more than anything.

 

For him to put up the stats that he had, they way he dominated his competition in his prime

 

and as an above poster he was the best wr in the game in 05

 

all at 5'9

 

 




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.