Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Most dominant receiver ever?


piratesownninjas
 Share

Recommended Posts

Jerry Rice is the Hank Aaron to Don Hutson's Babe Ruth.

 

 

Jerry Rice: dominant, but not the most dominant

Rice, for his part, was the most awe-inspiring receiver most of us have ever seen: a true football phenom who put up gaudy numbers over a lengthy career and seemed to reserve his greatest efforts for the biggest games -- as evidenced by his incredible list of postseason records, too.

 

He was a dominant player, as the Cold, Hard Football Facts prove. But he was hardly the most dominant receiver ever. Not even close.

 

That honor goes to Green Bay Hall of Fame receiver Hutson, who plied his trade for the Packers from 1935 to 1945.

 

Cold, Hard Football Facts contributor and the BBC's NFL broadcaster, Mike Carlson, conducted a lengthy study comparing Rice to Hutson several years ago. The numbers changed our view of football history and clearly place Hutson well above Rice as the most dominant receiver the game has ever seen.

 

Here's how they stack up, relative to their times, in every major receiving category.

 

Receptions: Rice caught more passes than any other player in history (1,549), easily blowing away Hutson's career total (488). But Rice played in a pass-happy era when 100 catches in a year were common. And he led the league in receptions just twice (1990 and 1996). Hutson led the NFL in receptions an unbelievable eight times in 11 seasons.

 

When Hutson joined the NFL, the single-season record was 22 catches. He set a new record with an incredible 74 receptions in 1942. And while the former Alabama star's 488 career receptions seem humble by our stands, it more than doubled the previous record of 190 and reinvented our concept of the receiver as a weapon in pro football.

 

Yards: Rice, with his record 22,895 career receiving yards, clearly blows away Hutson (7,991) in this category, too.

 

But in the context of their time, it's quite a different story. Rice led the league in receiving yards six times in 20 seasons. Hutson led the league seven times in his 11 seasons, including a record four years in a row (1941-44).

 

And consider this: When Huston joined the NFL, no player had produced more than 350 receiving yards in a season. He topped that mark in all 11 seasons of his career -- like we said, he was Ruthian in his production relative to the standards of the era.

 

Huston's 1,211 yards of 1942 was the first 1,000-yard receiving season and stands as the most by any player in the first 31 years of NFL history. Meanwhile, Hutson's ability to produce big games stands unchallenged, even today.

 

Rice, for example, topped 200 yards four times in his 303-game career. Hutson? He topped 200 yards four in just 116 games. Given 303 games, Huston might have produced an incredible 10 200-yard days. Only the AFL's Lance Alworth produced more 200-yard games (five) in his career than Rice and Hutson.

 

Touchdowns: Once again, Rice's career numbers dwarf Hutson's. The 2010 Hall of Famer boasts a record 197 touchdown catches. The 1963 Hall of Famer hauled in 99 touchdown passes. But Hutson's record stood for nearly half a century, before finally broken by Steve Largent (100 career TDs) in 1989.

 

Hutson scored a record 17 touchdowns in 1942. Very good, even by today's standards. But far more impressive when you consider that the Packers played just 11 games that year and that Hutson hauled in more touchdowns than eight entire clubs in the 10-team NFL.

 

His mark of 17 TD receptions in a season stood for 42 years, until Mark Duper grabbed 18 TD passes from Dan Marino in 1984.

 

Again, truly Ruthian numbers.

 

The knock on Hutson, much like it is on Sammy Baugh and Sid Luckman, is that he dominated the talent-starved war seasons of 1942-44 (players began returning by the 1945 season). But keep in mind that Huston dominated the pre-war seasons of 1935 to 1941, too, leading the league in TD catches in five of those six years.

 

Also keep in mind that, 65 years after he retired, Hutson remains No. 8 on the all-time TD reception list (99). Six of the seven players ahead of him on the all-time TD receptions list played here in the pass-happy 21st century.

 

We can only imagine what kind of dizzying numbers Hutson might have produced in the 21st-century, when teams pass the ball more than 500 times a year over the course of a 16-game season.

 

Championships: Finally, both players enjoyed incredible team success. Rice won three titles in four opportunities during his 20-year career. He played on three championship teams with San Francisco before ending up on the losing end of Super Bowl XXXVII, when he was with Oakland.

 

Hutson also went 3-1 in NFL title games, winning championships for TitleTown in 1936, 1939 and 1944. The Packers lost to the Giants in the 1938 championship game.

 

Rice was the most productive receiver in history and the most dominant receiver of our time. But certainly not the most dominant receiver of all time. That title seems like it will always belong to Don Hutson.

 

 

 

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writ...p#ixzz0vtd36woN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much like Babe Ruth is right. Before Ruth 12 home runs was a lot but Ruth hit over 50 in 1920.

 

 

He also played defense and kicked.

 

Like everyone in the days before free substitution, Hutson was a 60-minute player who spent most of his career as a very fine safety on defense. In his final six seasons, he swiped 30 opposing quarterbacks’ passes. Often after scoring a touchdown, he would kick the extra point. In one quarter of a 1945 game, he caught four touchdown passes and kicked five PATs for an amazing 29 points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was not near the number of talented athletes on the field to compete with Hutson. Much easier for him to stand out. Sure he was the best of his time, but no way can anyone accurately estimate how he'd do in modern day football when there are far more athletes on the field. Yes, I realize players were "tougher back then" with their knocked out teeth and 60 minute play and holding down a full time day job. But that's more to the point. Less true athletes, less refined skill. Less competition. I'm quite surprised this is even a discussion. Was there a Deion Sanders or Darryl Green back in Hutson's day?

Edited by Jedi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jerry Rice is the Hank Aaron to Don Hutson's Babe Ruth.

 

 

Jerry Rice: dominant, but not the most dominant

Rice, for his part, was the most awe-inspiring receiver most of us have ever seen: a true football phenom who put up gaudy numbers over a lengthy career and seemed to reserve his greatest efforts for the biggest games -- as evidenced by his incredible list of postseason records, too.

 

He was a dominant player, as the Cold, Hard Football Facts prove. But he was hardly the most dominant receiver ever. Not even close.

 

That honor goes to Green Bay Hall of Fame receiver Hutson, who plied his trade for the Packers from 1935 to 1945.

 

Cold, Hard Football Facts contributor and the BBC's NFL broadcaster, Mike Carlson, conducted a lengthy study comparing Rice to Hutson several years ago. The numbers changed our view of football history and clearly place Hutson well above Rice as the most dominant receiver the game has ever seen.

 

Here's how they stack up, relative to their times, in every major receiving category.

 

Receptions: Rice caught more passes than any other player in history (1,549), easily blowing away Hutson's career total (488). But Rice played in a pass-happy era when 100 catches in a year were common. And he led the league in receptions just twice (1990 and 1996). Hutson led the NFL in receptions an unbelievable eight times in 11 seasons.

 

When Hutson joined the NFL, the single-season record was 22 catches. He set a new record with an incredible 74 receptions in 1942. And while the former Alabama star's 488 career receptions seem humble by our stands, it more than doubled the previous record of 190 and reinvented our concept of the receiver as a weapon in pro football.

 

Yards: Rice, with his record 22,895 career receiving yards, clearly blows away Hutson (7,991) in this category, too.

 

But in the context of their time, it's quite a different story. Rice led the league in receiving yards six times in 20 seasons. Hutson led the league seven times in his 11 seasons, including a record four years in a row (1941-44).

 

And consider this: When Huston joined the NFL, no player had produced more than 350 receiving yards in a season. He topped that mark in all 11 seasons of his career -- like we said, he was Ruthian in his production relative to the standards of the era.

 

Huston's 1,211 yards of 1942 was the first 1,000-yard receiving season and stands as the most by any player in the first 31 years of NFL history. Meanwhile, Hutson's ability to produce big games stands unchallenged, even today.

 

Rice, for example, topped 200 yards four times in his 303-game career. Hutson? He topped 200 yards four in just 116 games. Given 303 games, Huston might have produced an incredible 10 200-yard days. Only the AFL's Lance Alworth produced more 200-yard games (five) in his career than Rice and Hutson.

 

Touchdowns: Once again, Rice's career numbers dwarf Hutson's. The 2010 Hall of Famer boasts a record 197 touchdown catches. The 1963 Hall of Famer hauled in 99 touchdown passes. But Hutson's record stood for nearly half a century, before finally broken by Steve Largent (100 career TDs) in 1989.

 

Hutson scored a record 17 touchdowns in 1942. Very good, even by today's standards. But far more impressive when you consider that the Packers played just 11 games that year and that Hutson hauled in more touchdowns than eight entire clubs in the 10-team NFL.

 

His mark of 17 TD receptions in a season stood for 42 years, until Mark Duper grabbed 18 TD passes from Dan Marino in 1984.

 

Again, truly Ruthian numbers.

 

The knock on Hutson, much like it is on Sammy Baugh and Sid Luckman, is that he dominated the talent-starved war seasons of 1942-44 (players began returning by the 1945 season). But keep in mind that Huston dominated the pre-war seasons of 1935 to 1941, too, leading the league in TD catches in five of those six years.

 

Also keep in mind that, 65 years after he retired, Hutson remains No. 8 on the all-time TD reception list (99). Six of the seven players ahead of him on the all-time TD receptions list played here in the pass-happy 21st century.

 

We can only imagine what kind of dizzying numbers Hutson might have produced in the 21st-century, when teams pass the ball more than 500 times a year over the course of a 16-game season.

 

Championships: Finally, both players enjoyed incredible team success. Rice won three titles in four opportunities during his 20-year career. He played on three championship teams with San Francisco before ending up on the losing end of Super Bowl XXXVII, when he was with Oakland.

 

Hutson also went 3-1 in NFL title games, winning championships for TitleTown in 1936, 1939 and 1944. The Packers lost to the Giants in the 1938 championship game.

 

Rice was the most productive receiver in history and the most dominant receiver of our time. But certainly not the most dominant receiver of all time. That title seems like it will always belong to Don Hutson.

 

 

 

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writ...p#ixzz0vtd36woN

 

Hey somebody else gets it. Most don't in this stats-are-everything sports world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was not near the number of talented athletes on the field to compete with Hutson. Much easier for him to stand out. Sure he was the best of his time, but no way can anyone accurately estimate how he'd do in modern day football when there are far more athletes on the field. Yes, I realize players were "tougher back then" with their knocked out teeth and 60 minute play and holding down a full time day job. But that's more to the point. Less true athletes, less refined skill. Less competition. I'm quite surprised this is even a discussion. Was there a Deion Sanders or Darryl Green back in Hutson's day?

It's not about who the greatest ever, but most dominant. The numbers don't lie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hutson was awesome

 

I've seen this discussion many times on another board. When comparing his accomplishments to those of a player like Jerry Rice I think it's useful to point out that Hutson played in a 10 team league... whereas Rice played in a 28+ team league in his era... particularly when talking about leading the league in whatever category...

Edited by byron2112
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was not near the number of talented athletes on the field to compete with Hutson. Much easier for him to stand out. Sure he was the best of his time, but no way can anyone accurately estimate how he'd do in modern day football when there are far more athletes on the field. Yes, I realize players were "tougher back then" with their knocked out teeth and 60 minute play and holding down a full time day job. But that's more to the point. Less true athletes, less refined skill. Less competition. I'm quite surprised this is even a discussion. Was there a Deion Sanders or Darryl Green back in Hutson's day?

 

 

 

 

Players like Hutson were trendsetters and changed how future generations played football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hutson was awesome

 

I've seen this discussion many times on another board. When comparing his accomplishments to those of a player like Jerry Rice I think it's useful to point out that Hutson played in a 10 team league... whereas Rice played in a 28+ team league in his era... particularly when talking about leading the league in whatever category...

If Hutson would not have done what he did, Jerry Rice may not have been able to accomplish what he did. Hutson can't help how many teams played in his league. He dominated everything that was put in front of him. By saying that Hutson's numbers don't count because he played in a 10 team league, you're opening yourself up to an argument against Rice... Only Rice's numbers after the Jags and Texans were added to the league should count...

Rice was by far more productive numbers wise, but he didn't dominate the league the way Hutson did. Regardless of league size, no one can touch Hutson.

 

If I was to talk most dominant WR's ever I would put

1. Hutson

2a. Rice

2b. Moss

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How long did the "Emmitt Smith isn't the greatest ruunning back of all time" thread last, I wonder?

longer than this one will be

 

Was there a Deion Sanders or Darryl Green back in Hutson's day?

 

not playing in the NFL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You cannot compare players from different eras. The game today is a completely different game than the one Hutson played in. Case in point, Hutson was mentioned on one of NFL networks Top 10 lists. Back when he played they lined up man to man straight up on every play. There was no game planning going on to stop Hutson. He saw single coverage essentially his entire career. I agree that Hutson was one of the first players that turned the league into what it is today, but to compare him to Rice, and say one was better than the other is just futile. Paul "Bear" Bryant, who coached Hutson at Alabama, saiid that Ozzie Newsome was the best receiver he ever coached, Hutson included. Is Ozzie Newsome better than Jerry Rice?

Edited by Capt. Stanky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey somebody else gets it. Most don't in this stats-are-everything sports world.

 

The thing is aren't we really focusing on stats when comparing Rice and Hutson? We may not be comparing career stats, but we're comparing their stats compared to their peers. The question is how would they both do if they were thrust into each others Eras? I think Rice could beat single coverage at the rate that Hutson did. I don't know if I can say the same about Hutson, but that's probably more because I wasn't around when he played. Once again, you can't compare, even if you are trying to make the arguement about the most dominent. It's all relative to the era that they played in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WELL. I go with Raymond Berry as good (maybe not as dominant) as Hutson and Rice. He had more moves and ran his patterns within inches of perfection everytime. He fumbled only once in 13 year season. Johnny Unitas' go to guy and always open, especially on those famous Unitas led last minute drives. Raymond did have one leg shorter than the other, he was a 20th round pick back then and a long shot to make the Colts.

Edited by Scooby's Hubby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information