Logical Reasoning Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 Without looking at stats or excel spreadsheets that would show who was better mathematically, Reed was the better receiver. His catches over the middle, his ability to get open, and his run after the catch were up with (but not better than) Rice. Neither Kelly nor Thomas would have had the careers they did without Reed. Who can forget in the Cleveland playoff game, when he took a simple hook, made someone miss, and ran seventy plus yards for a touchdown. This is not to say that Carter should not be in but Reed should have been in before him. I can see where the voters would not have wanted to put three Bills in last year, but it should have had no impact on this year for Andre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hossage Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 I will not entertain that thought for a second. I am certain that Carter was an incredibly rare talent, whereas Reed was merely very good. I think you have gotten used to the home cooking. I honestly think that is just crazy talk. Chris Carter was that good. He had the best hands that I have ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logical Reasoning Posted August 6, 2010 Author Share Posted August 6, 2010 I will not entertain that thought for a second. I am certain that Carter was an incredibly rare talent, whereas Reed was merely very good. I think you have gotten used to the home cooking. I honestly think that is just crazy talk. Chris Carter was that good. Carter was great and deserves to be there but Reed was better and it is not the home cookin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geno Smith's Arm Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 You know I looked up the stats, and Carters are a little bit more impressive, but I don't remember him impressing me near as much as Reed. He had great hands, and I was thinking maybe he was more of an intermediate receiver, but he has lots of long balls too. All I can say is that when I watch the Andre Reed touchdown compilations on Youtube he sure looks like a HOFer (ONLY TD's, there were some many great catches that he was just short of the endzone, and so many great catches over the middle that aren't on those reels!). I would like to see something like that made up of Carter's TD's, but no one has posted one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLZFAN4LIFE Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 Reed can thank Norwood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharper802 Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 Carter is almost in the league of Jerry Rice. Reed is barely better than Art Monk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 Carter is and was a chump. Nice stats , but hardly an impact player like Andre was. He's similar but not quite at the level of an Art Monk, and I don't think Monk was HOF-worthy either. He definitely should have to wait longer than Monk did before he gets in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 Without looking at stats or excel spreadsheets that would show who was better mathematically, Reed was the better receiver. His catches over the middle, his ability to get open, and his run after the catch were up with (but not better than) Rice. Neither Kelly nor Thomas would have had the careers they did without Reed. Who can forget in the Cleveland playoff game, when he took a simple hook, made someone miss, and ran seventy plus yards for a touchdown. This is not to say that Carter should not be in but Reed should have been in before him. I can see where the voters would not have wanted to put three Bills in last year, but it should have had no impact on this year for Andre. The difference is that Carter has been on the Radio and Television broadcast in the last five years, which can pretty much influence the voters whereas Reed never did anything similar after he retired from the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 Andre was the better WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geno Smith's Arm Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 The difference is that Carter has been on the Radio and Television broadcast in the last five years, which can pretty much influence the voters whereas Reed never did anything similar after he retired from the NFL. EXACTLY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 Reed's playoff performances were far more feast than famine, and his playoff production and significance dwarfed that of CC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderweb Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 Andre was the better WR. Here, here! Very few receivers ever came close to Andre's ability to run after the catch. 951 catches as well. Carter had 1101 catches so clearly he was no slouch, but Buffalo was never as pass happy as Minny was was back in the day and Andre and Kelly had their spats and for whatever reason, Kelly ignored him at times. I'll never forget Carter's last year when he signed after the season started to play for Miami. He looked axtremely old, slow, and I do recall "Mr. Hands" dropping a few balls as well. I actually enjoyed his failure with Miami as he's an egotistical athlete short on intelligence. Carter was great, but so was Andre. Trouble with Andre is that he made it look so easy, those that followed the Bills back then often took Andre for granted. After recently watching some highlight videos of him, I came away in awe of what he could do. Andre deserves HOF every bit as much, if not more so than Carter. Hossage clearly missed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 All Cris Carter did was catch touchdown passes. Seriously though Carter didn't always have the best QB's in Minny and when he did get even above average QB's he just lit it up (Cunningham and Culpepper). Carter is one of the best ever and is better then Reed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Barker Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 No one that is not a huge Bills fan would ever try to argue that Reed > Carter. Andre was amazing and it's not like it's a blowout, but the edge goes to Carter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreakPop Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 I don't know, I didn't get to see a lot of Carter. What I did see of him though didn't make me say WOW he is just sooo much better than Reed. I think most of the good receivers around their time were basically all equal in talent except Rice. To say so and so is better than this guy or that is really splitting hairs I think. FWIW Carter had 150 more catches than Reed about 700 more yards and 43 more TDs but he also played 33 more games than Andre, and that is almost 2 full seasons worth of games. Give Andre 33 more games or Carter 33 less games and who might have the better #'s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talley56 Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 A friend of mine (a Bears fan) told me that the fact that Kelly is in the HOF is a travesty since he benefited from the no-huddle offense. Unfortunately, a lot of people see it the same way and make the same argument against Reed getting in. While I think that is the dumbest reason to keep someone out (especially to say it's a "travesty") in the grand scheme of things both Monk and Carter were probably better. However, I don't think it would be ridiculous if Reed got in over Carter though both should get in at some point in spite of the offenses they were in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 Rice was terrible. Reed is the greatest receiver in the history of the world. We would have never won those four superbowls without him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 No one that is not a huge Bills fan would ever try to argue that Reed > Carter. Andre was amazing and it's not like it's a blowout, but the edge goes to Carter. Do yourself a favor and speak only for yourself. Rice was terrible. Reed is the greatest receiver in the history of the world. We would have never won those four superbowls without him. This is supposed to be funny? Because it's not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wing Man Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 Both Reed and Carter are great WRs, but Carter got better press and exposure during and after his career, hence, he's going in first. Rice was one of the top football players at any position in the history of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metzelaars_lives Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 Carter is almost in the league of Jerry Rice. Reed is barely better than Art Monk. Agreed, but be careful- no one sniffs Jerry Rice. Andre Reed is a top 15 all-time receiver, Cris carter is a top 5. My all-time top 5: 1. Rice 2. Largent 3. Carter 4. Harrison 5. Moss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts