Steely Dan Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 Might Need To Be An Insider To View - Not sure. Comment No. 32: How can Andre Reed not even be mentioned in this article? Two of the seven panelists ranked Reed among the Top 10. Warren Moon was one of them. "He made more big runs after the catch than anybody I've seen," Moon said. "He was almost like Rice in that vein as far as when he made the catch, he became a runner right away. He played in a good offense, but he was tough. He was another guy that could block, he broke tackles as a receiver and very rarely dropped a ball. I'm kind of surprised he hasn't made it to the Hall of Fame, but I think he will." Dre' is very underrated IMO. Kudos to Warren Moon!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 Might Need To Be An Insider To View - Not sure. Comment No. 32: How can Andre Reed not even be mentioned in this article? Two of the seven panelists ranked Reed among the Top 10. Warren Moon was one of them. "He made more big runs after the catch than anybody I've seen," Moon said. "He was almost like Rice in that vein as far as when he made the catch, he became a runner right away. He played in a good offense, but he was tough. He was another guy that could block, he broke tackles as a receiver and very rarely dropped a ball. I'm kind of surprised he hasn't made it to the Hall of Fame, but I think he will." Dre' is very underrated IMO. Kudos to Warren Moon!! Those lists are pretty much a joke. Regardless of the position they are covering, they have absolutely no clue. They are all skewed towards the recent players, because actually researching players who played before 1985 is too hard. You are seeing the same thing with the HOF. The older reporters are retiring and the newer guys have no clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 You are seeing the same thing with the HOF. The older reporters are retiring and the newer guys have no clue. The "hot pockets" electronic media mentality seems to grow every year, as more content shifts to the web. The lack of time (or inclination) to do research in a 'real time' disposable news cycle is diluting all forms of analysis, regardless of the topic. 'Dre may have to go in as a veteran's committee selection if he doesn't make the 'regular' cut the next few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 The "hot pockets" electronic media mentality seems to grow every year, as more content shifts to the web. The lack of time (or inclination) to do research in a 'real time' disposable news cycle is diluting all forms of analysis, regardless of the topic. 'Dre may have to go in as a veteran's committee selection if he doesn't make the 'regular' cut the next few years. What makes it even worse, is that the those same people who refuse to do their own research on the older players also disparage the people who take the time to do said research. Therefore, the older players will never get their due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 Funny too that people aren't factoring in the playoffs, when stars are made. Reed is 3rd all time in playoff receptions and 2nd in Super Bowl catches and 3rd in Super Bowl yardage. Every guy above him is in the Hall of Fame. Reed imy favorite Bill of all time, but he deserves to be in the HOF. If you put me on the committee and gave me 20 minutes, he would be in with a bullet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsWatch Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 I do not think it is that simple. There are a number of writers who vote for Hall of Fame who remember the whiney Reed who also made some negative comments about the sports writers who are voting for Hall of Fame. Writers have "Elephant-type" memory for these type of comments and no listing of facts and comparisions will change their mind. He will get in when he has "paid the penalty" for the remarks and no earlier. I did not think he deserved 1st round Hall of Fame vote and even last year he didn't but neither did any of the other WRs either. Too many other football players deserved entry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdelma Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 Because Andre was about the team and not himself like Owens and Irvin. Big mouth who get press. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huuuge Bills Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 The thing I hated about that list was that they had Irvin as the 4th best receiver of all time. Really??? And I know moss is talented, but jerry rice is the only receiver better than him? He completely quit wehen he was in Oakland, and that alone should knock him down the list. Nevermind how he disapeared in the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 I do not think it is that simple. There are a number of writers who vote for Hall of Fame who remember the whiney Reed who also made some negative comments about the sports writers who are voting for Hall of Fame. Writers have "Elephant-type" memory for these type of comments and no listing of facts and comparisions will change their mind. He will get in when he has "paid the penalty" for the remarks and no earlier. I did not think he deserved 1st round Hall of Fame vote and even last year he didn't but neither did any of the other WRs either. Too many other football players deserved entry. Agreed. I'm as grateful as any Bills fan for Reeds's great Buffalo career. But top 10? No way. I don't even go back in history before my time, to come up with better WRs. Alworth, Berry, Warfield, Maynard, Bilitnikof, Swann, Lofton, Rice, Largent, Gene Washington. Reed never sees the field if any of these guys were on his team. He's not a whole lot further behind though, and most (all?) are in the HOF, so there continues to be hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 rating a wr is tough, but it's skewed lately. the top wrs now have very big stats compared to guys of old. they are also much more impressive physical specimens. good point above about the play offs -- if we had won a single sb reed would have been in first ballot, yet he doesn't get enough credit for his playoff contribution. as sick as moss is, i'd much rather play him than TO in the playoffs, moss is like brady; perfect when on but once off he just isn't nearly the same player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WellDressed Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Stats put him in. I just wish he didn't blow up in xxvi and agaisnt miami in '99 on the goal line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewy23 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 I don't think Reed is a top 10 receiver. He just misses the cut. He had a lot of receptions (5th all time) and his postseason success is amazing. His problem is his lack of touchdowns...I was looking at the list of all time touchdown leaders and he's not even in the top 20 Link. I know the list includes running backs, but you see Moss and Owens up there and they still have a few years left in them. Reed was great and he had a ton of catches and he should be and will be in the hall of fame one day. I just don't see him being a top 10 all-time guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Agreed. I'm as grateful as any Bills fan for Reeds's great Buffalo career. But top 10? No way. I don't even go back in history before my time, to come up with better WRs. Alworth, Berry, Warfield, Maynard, Bilitnikof, Swann, Lofton, Rice, Largent, Gene Washington. Reed never sees the field if any of these guys were on his team. He's not a whole lot further behind though, and most (all?) are in the HOF, so there continues to be hope. I don't put 'Dre in the top 10 either, but I gotta disagree with those three guys being better than him. Hypotetical: Assuming Kelly didn't have a HOF running back or a HOF #2 WR (admittedly in his golden years, but still productive) to spread the ball around to, how many more balls does Reed see? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 I love how Randy Moss went from Darryl-Strawberry-level-wasted-talent a year ago to the 2d greatest WR in history now. A year ago he wouldn't have even made the list. I've always though Moss was an unbelievable talent and was pretty sure he'd be a hit in NE, but you gotta love the hot-pockets overreaction in both directions. And no, I wouldn't put Andre in the top 10 either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirPorl Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Andre Reed helped define yards after catch. He was a hard working guy who put up great numbers. I say he is right up there around the Top 10 of all time at the position. He should get into the hall of fame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts