Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Here's some cool steve smith numbers to munch on while we wait for tampa bay.


PhillyB

Recommended Posts

I did some research on NFL.com and Pro-Football-Reference.com and dug up the following numbers:

Steve Smith's current career receiving yardage total is 9,944.

Fifty-six yards against the Bucs on Sunday will put him at 10,000 yards receiving in his ten-year career. This will move him to number 35 on the all-time receiving list, past Eric Moulds. Another sixty and he'll pass the legendary Shannon Sharpe. If he manages roughly a hundred yards receiving per game for the rest of the year he'll leapfrog a cluster of guys and move into 30th all time, booting former Panther - Keyshawn Johnson - out of that spot.

Steve Smith currently has beat five of his previous receiving seasons - with the yards he's accrued so far this is his fifth best season. Previous postings of 1110 (2003) 1166 (2006) 1421 (2008) and 1563 (2005) still stand in his way.

His 18.0 avg/catch stands for second best in his career. In 2008 it was 18.2, and extra 2.4 inches per catch. GOD STEVE COME ON MAN PICK IT UP

The longest TD of his career is 80 yards. He got one for 77 this year.

22 receptions for 20+ yards this year. He posted the same number in 2005. Only 2008 was better, with 23.

In receptions over 40 yards he has 4 grabs. Last year he had zero... the Jimmy Clausen era seems so long ago, returning only in the darkest depths of our nightmares.

In rushing he has 2.9 yards per game, which is probably better than Chris Johnson and ties his record set in 2008.

In 2004 Steve Smith had his only career passing yard, posting a 39.6 passer rating.

... thats all I got. Thank you sweet jesus for cam newton! I'll be counting those 56 yards one by one Sunday and probably spilling my beer when he reaches it. :cheers2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now this is actually a good thread that makes a lot of sense. But it still talks more about less meaningless accomplishments than the ones that really matter. I can do a lot a better than that.

Steve Smith is also one of the only 7-8 guys who have won a triple crown in receiving in the history of the NFL and his personal wikipedia page always comes up first in Google when you type in receiving triple crown. It's almost like if you typed in quarterback triple crown and the first result was some quarterback's personal wikipedia page or say 3 time Super Bowl champion. Except it's not. The first is a list. Second is Joe Montana.

Obviously Google thinks Smith's accomplishment is more amazing in his job than Joe Montana was for a quarterback or most of the other receivers that did it. He's so fuging bad-ass even Google agrees. And so does Bing. And they rank pages not just by popularity, unlike ESPN's rankings, but by both popularity AND authoritative meaningful accomplishments(kind of like YPP) ;) This and Steve Smith truly is a real life example of the old cliche saying "next to the definition of elite receiver in the dictionary or encyclopedia you'll find a picture of Steve Smith." This is actually that saying being true for once. And even Raging Bull can understand that. That's who is currently listed in the dictionary next to one of the most valuable stats for a receiver. If not the most valuable for a single season. I can't really think of anything more valuable than a receiver's individual value based on his own merit at his position to his team's offense. Sure there's others, but he's one of that group, by merit and currently he's the one that's done it most recently(before him being 1992).

And if that's not enough, Smith also coaches soccer, is an investor and even had an Autralian soccer player named his son after him. He's that fuging bad ass. It just doesn't get more bad ass than Steve Smith....

Yeah...I'm gushing. But unlike Cam homers this guy actually earned this type of praise. Nobody gave him millions of dollars for beating up on amateurs.

If you are a stat guy like you propose you know your explanation is total bull. Google does not rank a page based on authoritative meaningful accomplishments but relevancy to the topic, number of quality links to that page, quality of that link based on page hits,etc. But google doesn't rank pages by whether they believe the page is more meaningful to them than another based on content. They take the attitude that the more links to a page and the more hits it receives, the more relevant it is based on consumer use.

http://www.free-seo-news.com/newsletter194.htm#facts

http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=35769

Now I suspect you know that but stated things as you did desiring an argument and you can have it with whoever wants to argue on and on but it won't be me. Hard to believe that anyone would think that Google would read pages and establish relevancy based on meaningful accomplishments versus relavency based on keywords, established links, number of hits etc. After all, there are likely a million pages of new information added to the web every day. It is unrealistic to assume that any search engine would be able to keep up with everything and rank them based on anything but a very complicated statistical model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woh are the 7 or 8 that have won the receiving triple crown? IIRC, there are 3... Jerry Rice, Sterling Sharpe and Steve Smith...

The other 4 were pre-1960, pre-AFL, with the merger of the 2 leagues being in 1970. Call it what you want, there are 3 in the modern era. Not discounting what them other guys did before my time, but the game was considerably different then...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now this is actually a good thread that makes a lot of sense. But it still talks more about less meaningless accomplishments than the ones that really matter. I can do a lot a better than that.

You can certainly do better than "less meaningless". :rolleyes:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Hello, soccer fans [crickets, tumbleweed flies by]. The World Cup kicks off in less than 2 weeks and, well, 🇺🇸USA USA USA🇺🇸 and all. We beat Senegal 3-2 yesterday in a tune-up friendly at BoA, with Christian Pulisic finally entering the scoring column.  How will we do in the World Cup once our tournament kicks off on the 12th? Well, there are 48 teams (assuming Iran is there) and it feels like one of two thing happens: we get grouped for the first time since '98, or we make it to the Round of 16 for the third time in the last four World Cups. I tried out the lottery for an Atlanta game and struck out, so yesterday was as World Cup as I'll get for in-person ($285/ticket for like Norway vs $39/ticket for USMNT right beforehand was a layup).  The U.S. has a travel-heavy schedule in group play, playing in LA, Seattle and LA. Real road warrior mentality being built. Glad the east coast gets worse kickoff times for a NA World Cup than a Qatar World Cup.
    • Well, that's the thing. Drafting players only for their physical measurables as you are suggesting only really happened during 2024, and X unfortunately has become the poster child for that. To be clear, it's not necessarily about drafting RAS over skill, but RAS over NFL-readiness and/or a solid body of work. Lots of players show skill in college, but those skills don't necessarily translate to the NFL for a multitude of reasons. But, getting back to the main point, to be clear, I believe that our FO is still enamored with physical gifts (who wouldn't be?), but now they're letting Dr. Eric Eager's proprietary system--his "secret sauce" prioritize the players that the Panthers draft, and it seems like it weighs not only a solid body of work, relative to a college career of course, but consistent gradual improvement as evidenced by production pretty highly. 
    • Its a good article about how pathetically bad our past drafts ('23 and '24) have been. Building the team in '23 since we weren't ready yet and taking your qb in '24 made so much more sense in hindsight. Ladd McConkey over XL is pretty much a given but not sure it does as much to change Bryce's trajectory as the author suggests.  As bad as '23 and '24 drafts were, the '25 and '26 really give me hope.  
×
×
  • Create New...