No, inserting "eventually" and "slightly more" was acknowledging the fact their totals would be more. But career totals is NOT what I meant by "better" in the post you responded to. I was speaking on Andre's league-leading dominance over Fitz and Wayne in those categories. You know, the part you deleted. FACTS Now you wanna talk trash about how I ignored your post and haven't said anything factual, while YOU delete/ignore FACTS. Get off that weak sauce
His best years, 2008-10, he actually had a healthy Schaub, a good supporting cast and was the best WR in the league. Makes you wonder the numbers he'd put up with a good QB and supporting cast for a longer stretch. Even with pick 6 Schaub and Case Keenum in 2013 he put up 1,400 yards receiving. And enough with the force-fed argument. Look at what is happening with Hopkins this year. And Fitzgerald from 2012-2014 didn't even top 1,000 yards or 12 yards per catch
First Team All-Pro Selections Andre Johnson - 2x Tim Brown - none Isaac Bruce - none After Owens, Megatron, and Moss are inducted, Andre will have the best case of any non-member.
Andre is like the family member you want to stay mad at but cant. Everybody hated the fact that he went to divisional teams but when he comes back and officially retires a Texan, there wont be a single dry cheek by any Houston football fans.
Spot on post @donkeypunch. He did so much for this franchise; it's a damn shame we weren't able to get him the success he deserved. Our first truly great player. Is Foster going to retire a Texan too? Those two will be apart of Texans history forever.
Not "would be more" - "are more," as in right now... their numbers are better. Numbers are not up for debate; this isn't an opinion. Reggie Wayne has more receptions, more yards, more touchdowns. Larry Fitzgerald has more receptions and more touchdowns; in a matter of weeks, he'll have more yards. You said Wayne did not have better numbers; you said Fitzgerald did not have better numbers "at all" - those are both egregiously wrong. Not "slightly" or "eventually;" there's no "would" - they're wrong. This'll go a lot smoother from here if you'll just admit that and move on. Here's a link to your post; I'll quote it in full: What you meant is pretty clear: Wayne and Fitzgerald did not have better numbers; "at all" in the case of Fitzgerald. And nowhere in the post do you mention "league-leading dominance." If you want to have a discussion about league-leading dominance, OK - as I've mentioned, Reggie Wayne played opposite a Hall of Fame wide receiver for 8 years; Larry Fitzgerald joined a team with Anquan Boldin and shared targets with him for six years. During Harrison's tenure, Wayne averaged 7.1 targets/game. During Boldin's tenure, Fitzgerald averaged 9.4 targets/game During Andre Johnson's prime/peak ('06-'13); he averaged 10.3 targets/game. His "dominance" was a component of opportunity. Give Wayne and Fitzgerald 10.3 targets a game, and their average 16-game stats would look like this: Fitzgerald: 97/1,309/11 Wayne: 107/1,507/10 Johnson: 104/1,446/7 Weak sauce? What are you, 83? You accused me of refusing to answer a yes/no question when I had indeed answered a yes/no question. Correcting you - regardless of how foolish it made you look - is not trash talking; it's setting the record straight, especially since you have demonstrated a very casual relationship with facts throughout this discussion. If you're going to make an accusation, you had better make sure it's an accurate one. The forum now alerts you whenever someone responds to one of your posts; there's really no excuse for having missed it.
And what would Reggie Wayne's numbers have been if he hadn't played 8 years opposite a Hall of Fame wide receiver? And what would Calvin Johnson's numbers have been if he had a QB as good as Matt Schaub over a seven-year stretch?... You can play this game with *every* player; you thinking it's unique to Andre is the problem. Sure, let's look... Hopkins is averaging 9.5 targets a game this year; during the period you referenced for Fitz, he averaged 8.7. In his Matt Schaub heyday ('07-'13), Johnson averaged 10.3. In the stretch you mentioned above ('08-'10), he averaged 10.7. But it's not just quantity; it's quality, too - who do you think Hopkins would rather play with: '08-'10 Schaub or '16 Osweiler? Now with Fitz, it should first be noted that he's 29, 30 and 31 during the years you referenced; not exactly his prime. And in 2012, his QBs were Kolb, Skelton and Lindley - but, sure - let's pretend Andre Johnson is the ONLY WR in history to be stuck with a bad QB... If you have to bend over backwards "yeah but"ing a guy into the HoF... does he really belong in the Hall of Fame?
If you get into a HOF discussion with a baseball fan, you better pack a lunch no matter what sports HOF you are talking about.
Seems to me like you're bending over backwards to argue why he isn't hall of fame material. You've even argued that bad QBs HELPED him. Now you're arguing that good teammates would HURT him. How can those both be true? Andre put up the stats with either bad or good QBs. It didn't matter. From 2008-10 he was clearly the best WR, and there were other years where he put up great stats, even with a broken Schaub and Keenum he managed 1,400+ yards. He put up his best years with a Kubiak offense that spread the ball around, so when they finally got weapons around him he produced even more. I don't know what your point of the Hopkins targets is. Obviously his stats suck this year because he has very little help, no matter how much they try to "force feed" him. That makes Andre more impressive, you could actually force feed him with little effect on his efficiency (catch rate, yards per catch, yards per game, etc)
So what's the excuse for Larry Fitzgerald from 2012-14 not reaching 1,000 yards and averaging less than 12.5 yards per catch? These were his age 29, 30, and 31 years. Seems to me that Andre was just a physical specimen who was harder to shut down no matter what you threw at him. As far as Wes Welker, he only 11 yards per catch and only 1 season above 1,400 yards. He only averaged over 12 yards per catch one season while Andre averaged 13.4 for his career. This is playing with Tom Brady. Welker was really more a slot receiver.
So on this argument that better teammates would hurt Andre Johnson. Foster became the full-time starter in 2010 and Hopkins was drafted in 2013. Andre's stats: 2010: 1216 yards, 8 TDs, 14.1 y/c in 13 games 2011: 492 yards, 2 TDs, 14.9 y/c in 7 games 2012: 1598 yards, 4 TDs, 14.3 y/c 2013- 1407 yards, 5 TDs, 12.9 y/c So maybe it lowered his TDs, which makes sense given Kubiak's emphasis on the run and how good Arian was at rushing TDs. But he was still unstoppable in getting big chunks of yards
Another example of TD's being somewhat flukish (at least for WRs vs RBs) Julio Jones last 2 years averaged 1,732 yards but only 7 TDs.
League-leading is what I was speaking on. Should've been clear by my following post where you deleted 90% of the info. In Fitzgerald's 7 seasons WITHOUT Boldin, he's led the league in NOTHING. Harrison sucked his final 2 seasons, since then Wayne led the once .. and he had Peyton "Stat Beast" Manning majority of his career. I would've assumed the poster didn't see the post. Your response was trash talking and a load of bullcrap anyways. You delete facts, then claim nothing factual was said. Weak sauce
Is the argument for real? No consideration for QB accuracy or about the *quality* of targets. Lol at extrapolating extra targets: maybe he didn't get more because he wasn't open. No consideration for the Foster affect. Reggie Wayne? Roddy White??? What are you smoking, bro? Reggie Wayne nor Roddy White were *ever* considered to be the best WR in the league. Period. Some people made an argument for a bit after Larry's run in their super bowl loss, but then AJ put up another league-leading year, squashing that argument. Wayne and/or Roddy were gonna move to the side for 1st team all-pro of Andre didn't miss a couple games for his ankle too. Everybody knew it (LOOK AT THE NUMBERS!!! THE NUMBERS!!! MOAR NUMBERS!!!). Lol. Isaac Bruce, still never the best WR in the league at any point in his tenure. Same with Brown. Who else? Andre had a firm 3-5 year run as top in the league: no debate on that. This revisionist history is crazy. He's getting in. Obviously, he's gonna wait, but he's getting in.
No, I actually haven't argued that at all. What I *have* argued is that I don't buy the idea that a great QB would have inflated what were already league-leading statistics. I think it ultimately would have been a net-zero: more quality at the sacrifice of less quantity. He was targeted 183 times in 2013, a career high - which I'm sure was completely unrelated to the poor play at QB... 2013 was nothing more than a deluge of opportunities. Note, in the six previous seasons, he averaged 14.4 yards/reception and 9.4 yards/target; in '13, those numbers fell to 12.9 and 7.7. He was actually doing less with more; but the more was significant enough that he was able to run up larger quantities. It's the equivalent of a back who averages 3.2 YPC - give him enough carries, and he'll hit 1,000. Let's reset... Let's also drop "force feed" from the conversation; I don't believe I ever used that term - if I did, it's taken on a meaning I didn't intend... 1) *every* WR could cobble together a litany of excuses for why they didn't do more; that is not exclusive to Andre Johnson and therefore, it's not going to elevate him nor should it negate some of his shortcomings (like TDs - which is going to be an issue among the voters); 2) specifically, if you want to argue his numbers would have been better if only he had a better QB... a) bullshit; he had a *very good* QB for the duration of his prime ('07-'12); b) a truly great QB would have almost certainly led to fewer opportunities, balancing out any "advantage" a better QB would have provided. A great QB is great because... well, he's great. He wouldn't need to lean on Johnson. Look, this isn't a referendum on Andre Johnson; he was clearly a great WR and, for a stretch, one of the best WRs in football. But is he a Hall of Fame wide receiver? My primary contention is that he's going to struggle to garner support among the voters. My opinion - which, frankly, isn't really relevant - is that he wasn't transcendent and not Hall worthy. He reminds me of Warren Moon, frankly... he rolled up a lot of big numbers that, frankly, feel kind of empty. And i know Moon is in the Hall of Fame - he shouldn't be (IMO).
In only 3 more games (over 7 seasons), Stafford passed for ~3000 MORE yards than Schaub did as a Texan (7 seasons) and Stafford threw 39 MORE TDs. Do yourself a favor and stop overrating Schaub.
Ah, gotcha - silly me; I should have waited for your follow-up post to explain what you *really* meant... Kurt Warner also left with Boldin; Fitzgerald's QBs for his age 27-29 seasons (ie his prime) were Derek Anderson, John Sketon, Max Hall and Kevin Kolb - that might've had some impact, don't you think? Man, if only Larry Fitzgerald had spent his prime with a better QB! Oh, but wait - that's been trademarked by Andre Johnson, hasn't it? He's the only WR to EVER play with inferior QBs........ Reggie Wayne was 31 years old the season after Harrison retired. He played his entire prime as a WR2. But his rate stats were still on par with Johnson's. Again... we're talking about counting statistics - and those tend to be tied to opportunities. And nobody had more opportunities during his prime than Andre Johnson. Look, I don't want to trash talk Andre Johnson: he was a great WR. I just don't think he was HoF great... *especially* if we have to contort ourselves into all kinds of odd shapes to make the case.
