I was originally going to make an official "i dont actually care about the world cup" thread, but that wouldnt end well, so I made this instead to spark some sort of debate
Anyways, yesterday I was looking at Reed's nfl profile to compare stats in another debate and I noticed that he was actually inducted this past year. I must have missed this year's induction, so I assumed Tim Brown must have gotten in too. I checked and he still hasn't gotten in. This is a decision that makes no sense to me. Granted, I am a Raiders fan 2nd (Vikings fan 1st), so I will probably have a bit of bias on this subject, but from an objective point of view, I don't think it's hard to argue in Brown's favor
For starters, neither player won a Super Bowl, so you can't use the "he was a winner" argument for Reed. But Brown's stats completely blow Reed's out of the water. Reed's prime came at a very weak era for WRs and the AFC as a whole, I'm willing to bet that the Bills wouldnt have been as good in the NFC. But he's only got 4 seasons where he reached 1000 yards. 4. That's it. And somehow, while only recording 3 seasons of 1000 yards or more during 1988-94, he actually made 7 Pro Bowls in a row. Unbelievable. I know he was 2nd in receptions in NFL history at the time of his retirement, but he just racked up stats. He was a quality starter for a while but didn't really have great longevity
Brown's prime (as a receiver at least) came during the 90s, which was a prime era for receivers. I don't think we'll ever see another season like 1995, that was the year of the receiver. And yet, Brown still managed to string together 9 straight 1000 yard seasons, all of which (outside of 1998) he recorded 1100 yards or more. And if you want to talk about longevity, Brown made a Pro Bowl in 2001 when he was 35. But I'm not going to base an argument on Pro Bowls, because we all know that it doesn't mean that much. No, Brown's main argument is that he was actually the better player who got stuck on a team that didn't start to excel until late in his career when he had Rich Gannon and Jerry Rice and Charlie Garner. He was 3rd in receptions, 2nd in receiving yards, and 3rd in touchdowns when he retired, and his career stats are easily better than Reed's
I'm interested to see what people think about this subject tbh
Anyways, yesterday I was looking at Reed's nfl profile to compare stats in another debate and I noticed that he was actually inducted this past year. I must have missed this year's induction, so I assumed Tim Brown must have gotten in too. I checked and he still hasn't gotten in. This is a decision that makes no sense to me. Granted, I am a Raiders fan 2nd (Vikings fan 1st), so I will probably have a bit of bias on this subject, but from an objective point of view, I don't think it's hard to argue in Brown's favor
For starters, neither player won a Super Bowl, so you can't use the "he was a winner" argument for Reed. But Brown's stats completely blow Reed's out of the water. Reed's prime came at a very weak era for WRs and the AFC as a whole, I'm willing to bet that the Bills wouldnt have been as good in the NFC. But he's only got 4 seasons where he reached 1000 yards. 4. That's it. And somehow, while only recording 3 seasons of 1000 yards or more during 1988-94, he actually made 7 Pro Bowls in a row. Unbelievable. I know he was 2nd in receptions in NFL history at the time of his retirement, but he just racked up stats. He was a quality starter for a while but didn't really have great longevity
Brown's prime (as a receiver at least) came during the 90s, which was a prime era for receivers. I don't think we'll ever see another season like 1995, that was the year of the receiver. And yet, Brown still managed to string together 9 straight 1000 yard seasons, all of which (outside of 1998) he recorded 1100 yards or more. And if you want to talk about longevity, Brown made a Pro Bowl in 2001 when he was 35. But I'm not going to base an argument on Pro Bowls, because we all know that it doesn't mean that much. No, Brown's main argument is that he was actually the better player who got stuck on a team that didn't start to excel until late in his career when he had Rich Gannon and Jerry Rice and Charlie Garner. He was 3rd in receptions, 2nd in receiving yards, and 3rd in touchdowns when he retired, and his career stats are easily better than Reed's
I'm interested to see what people think about this subject tbh
