Sturm: NFL 100 - At No. 29, Emmitt Smith did what he did for longer and better than anyone

[data]

That offensive line was great, but it was not at all unprecedented.

For example, Jim Brown's offensive line had (I think) 4 hall of famers. 4.

No one ever seems to being that up.

1960s Green Bay Packers has three Hall of Famers - Forrest Gregg, Jerry Kramer, Jim Ringo

 

[data]

When it comes to all-time greatest RBs, it’s asinine when OJ Simpson is lowered on their list (or even disqualified) because of the Nicole Simpson murder. Happens frequently, though.

 

[Simpleton]

A lot of great offensive lines only had 1 hall of famer.

I believe Grimm is the only hall of famer from the 80s Hogs.

I believe Webster is the only hall of famer from the 70s Steelers lines.

Just as examples.

But guys like Jon Kolb, Joe Jacoby, and Jeff Bostic, and Erick Williams, Mark Tuinei, and Mark Stepnoski were legitimately great.

They were clearly a great OL, but even a great OL isn't going to take a supposed top 10-15ish RB of all time and churn out the results Emmitt did.

Could another GOAT-tier RB like Sanders have put up better stats? Maybe.

But people discredit the unprecedented dominance of Emmitt as a function of some mythical God-level OL and it's completely preposterous.

At the end of the day he racked up accomplishments, stats and dominated en route to Super Bowls in a way no RB ever has before or since. And with a OL that was mostly made up of guys who were afterthoughts before he got there.

The fact of the matter is there are a lot of stupid people who basically gawk at physical studs at RB and awe at their size/speed/physicality, and because Emmitt isn't physically imposing and didn't have a visually appealing style he gets discredited. It's basically people who don't know football and aren't able to notice the subtle ways he dominated (vision, balance, etc.).

Like, if someone wants to argue Payton or Sanders, fine, I disagree but fine. But people who argue guys like Peterson or Earl Campbell are basically size queens salivating over big fast men because they don't understand the nuance of football enough to appreciate how special Emmitt was.

 

[Genghis Khan]

They were clearly a great OL, but even a great OL isn't going to take a supposed top 10-15ish RB of all time and churn out the results Emmitt did.

But people discredit the unprecedented dominance of Emmitt as a function of some mythical God-level OL and it's completely preposterous.

Agreed.

 

[data]

It's basically people who don't know football and aren't able to notice the subtle ways he dominated (vision, balance, etc.).

So true. Ppl disregard the vision and balance.

How does Emmitt make the OL look better? Well, look at his game film and you’ll see a significant portion of Emmitt’s runs aren’t down the designed hole.

Secondly, his balance allowed every 3 yard gain to become a 5 yard gain.

End of the game, those subtleties add up to a couple extra time-consuming first downs a game and turn 80 yard games for other RBs into 100 yard games for Emmitt.

 

[Smitty]

That offensive line was great, but it was not at all unprecedented.

For example, Jim Brown's offensive line had (I think) 4 hall of famers. 4.

No one ever seems to bring that up.

I can’t speak about what happened in like 1950.

 

[Smitty]

That Cowboys OL took on a life of it's own because Madden would talk about their ass sweat every other quarter, Allen was a GOAT level player (but not even around for the first two SB's) and haters just wanted to look for ways to minimize our stars.

At the end of the day that group never had more than 1 HOF-level OL at any given time, were they great as a group?

Sure.

But what's more likely, that 2-3 guys who were nobody's for 8 years just turned into Pro Bowlers at 31 or Emmitt, with some of the best vision of any back ever, made them look better than they were?

This isn’t an accurate description of the OL at all. You are referencing Tuinei who at a later age suddenly became a Pro Bowler. Stepnoski is on the damn all decade team. Larry Allen and Erik Williams are two of the best OL of the decade as well. Nate Newton was absolutely legit.

 

[boozeman]

That Cowboys OL took on a life of it's own because Madden would talk about their ass sweat every other quarter, Allen was a GOAT level player (but not even around for the first two SB's) and haters just wanted to look for ways to minimize our stars.

C'mon.

 

[data]

This isn’t an accurate description of the OL at all. You are referencing Tuinei who at a later age suddenly became a Pro Bowler. Stepnoski is on the damn all decade team. Larry Allen and Erik Williams are two of the best OL of the decade as well. Nate Newton was absolutely legit.

Our offensive line was awesome 1992 - 1995 and Emmitt made the OL look even better.

That’s why we almost won four Super Bowls

 

[bbgun]

I recorded this back in the day.

 

[Genghis Khan]

This isn’t an accurate description of the OL at all. You are referencing Tuinei who at a later age suddenly became a Pro Bowler. Stepnoski is on the damn all decade team. Larry Allen and Erik Williams are two of the best OL of the decade as well. Nate Newton was absolutely legit.

Agreed.

For his part Tuinei came into the league as a DL and converted to OL so it took a few years to get to his apex. When he figured it out he was great.

 

[data]

Nate Newton was absolutely legit.

I was disappointed he didn’t make the All Decade Team, but he wasn’t gonna best Randall McDaniel, Larry Allen, Bruce Matthews. Steve Wisniewski got the last spot

 

[data]

Wait...so Michael Irvin won’t be on this fucking list?

 

[Cotton]

Wait...so Michael Irvin won’t be on this fucking list?

Looks like he will be in the top 27 at least. If he doesn't make the list at all, may as well flush the whole thing.

 

[data]

Looks like he will be in the top 27 at least. If he doesn't make the list at all, may as well flush the whole thing.

He ain’t gonna be on it. Not above Emmitt, Larry Allen, Staubach and Bob Lilly

Which is crazy because Irvin may have been the most valuable Triplet (hardest to replace) but probably gets the least mention of the three.

 

[ZeroClub]

Like, if someone wants to argue Payton or Sanders, fine, I disagree but fine. But people who argue guys like Peterson or Earl Campbell are basically size queens salivating over big fast men because they don't understand the nuance of football enough to appreciate how special Emmitt was.

Jim Brown was bigger than Campbell. Are you saying that anyone who argues in favor of Jim Brown is a size queen who doesn't understand the nuance of football?

 

[Simpleton]

This isn’t an accurate description of the OL at all. You are referencing Tuinei who at a later age suddenly became a Pro Bowler. Stepnoski is on the damn all decade team. Larry Allen and Erik Williams are two of the best OL of the decade as well. Nate Newton was absolutely legit.

Tuinei, Newton and Stepnoski were all obviously very good during that run, and the line itself kind of had a "whole that's greater than the parts" vibe, but my point is that people talk about Emmitt like he isn't even a top 5-10 RB of all time even though his accomplishments and stats on the biggest stage are literally unprecedented.

It would be like saying Brady isn't the GOAT QB because of Belichick or their defenses (which I know some people argue idiotically) when his accomplishments just blow every other QB out of the water.

It's because that OL and their greatness is exaggerated to ridiculous proportions. It's not that they weren't great, it's that their dominance is completely overblown to minimize what Emmitt did.

Guys like Tuinei and Newton were literally starting games in Dallas for about 5 years before Emmitt showed up, if these guys were such irresistible studs that any RB could dominate behind why were we a middling team with a talent like Walker running behind them (and putting up ok but not great stats)?

Why is it that only once between 1992-1997 did a non-Emmitt RB average even 4 YPC despite various guys getting around 50 or so carries each year?

Why is it that Derrick Lassic put up 127 yards on 35 carries (3.6 YPC) with our entire OL in place in 93 when Emmitt held out while we went 0-2? Only to have Emmitt come back and pop off for his highest YPC of his career (5.3)?

I'm not saying the OL as it existed at that point in time wasn't great or even in consideration for one of the best ever, it's that the perception of them as this inevitable force of nature that carried Emmitt for 10 years is preposterous, especially when they weren't necessarily all together during their peak for that long.

Allen didn't even come around until 1994, Williams was in the car accident that same year and was never the same, Stepnoski was gone in 1995, at which point Tuinei and Newton were 34 and 35 years old. Allen's dominance didn't even line up with when those other guys were at their peak, and once he got to his peak he was playing with like a rookie Flozell Adams and a 40 year old Nate Newton while Emmitt was still churning out 1300-1400 yard seasons at nearly the age of 30.

 

[ravidubey]

Tuinei and Newton were terrible, just flat out bad in the late 80's. Dallas had become utterly unable to draft, trade, or develop real talent anymore up front.

So they went for size. In the 80's, 300+ lb. offensive lineman was a developing trend and not the norm it is today, and Washington was the prototype everyone was chasing.

But Newton, Gogan, Schultz, and Tuinei while each over 300lbs, were at the very bottom of the NFL OL talent pool.

John Gesek came in and helped them work better as a team, but it was Emmitt that really gave that group a common goal. Unlike Herschel Walker who hit holes at world class speed, Emmitt took time to set up defenders and make them miss. Walker would break insane runs at times, but had no wiggle.

I believe they felt they were more of a team working with Emmitt and together had the best chance to move the sticks on any given play, and again, IMO, I think Emmitt played a big part in making that OL better.

 

[data]

Fuck it. Since I’m betting Irvin doesn’t get his due from The Athletic, I’ll state the case for Michael Irvin. We all know his intangibles, so not going to get into it.

However, Irvin gets knocked down on the all-time GOAT WRs because of his injuries and how they prevented Irvin from piling on past-his-prime yards. Furthermore, in addition to his career-ender at Veterans Stadium, he lost 16 games in his first three years (1988-1990). For perspective, not even including his early year injuries, but had he played three more seasons past his prime and added 2,500 garbage yards, Irvin would jump up from his current #28 to about #9. How much more inclusion would Irvin get at #9? A whole helluva lot. As evidence, Larry Fitzgerald often gets included in the goat conversation despite his stat compiler-ish career. Anyway, Irvin’s last two seasons he averaged 1,100 yards so I don't think 2,500 in three seasons is a stretch at all.

But I've never been a real fan of total career yardage stats...even if Irvin played longer, it wouldn’t have enhanced his stats for his prime (my most important criterion for greatness). So, away with the hypotheticals and let’s analyze reality. Here's my take on the greatness of Michael Irvin.

-------

TLDR. If you exclude TDs, Michael Irvin is one of the top 2 greatest WRs in efficiency from 1985 - 2010. Efficiency meaning production per Target (again, excluding TDs).

-------
I totaled the seven (7) best seasons for 16 WRs (during 1985 - 2010, 2010+ excluded cuz got passing insane, so no Megatron, Antonio Brown or Julio Jones).

Miscellaneous Non-Michael Irvin Observations:
1. Catch % (@Genghis Khan @Cowboysrock55 @Iamtdg ) doesn't vary much between the Top 15 WRs, only an 8% variance (between highest 66% - 61%, with lowest #16 Ochocinco being #57%).

2. 1st Down % has higher 21% variance (between highest 76% Ochocinco - 63% Hines Ward)

3. YPC also has a higher 20% variance between Top 14 WRs (then really dropping off at #15 Hines Ward and lowest #16 Cris Carter are a yard lower than #14 Fitzgerald).

4. YPT (Target) has the largest variance. Outliers are Jerry Rice #1 in his own tier (good) at 7% higher than #2 Moss. Also in his own tier (bad), the lowest #16 is Cris Carter with 9% lower than #15 Hines Ward. The middle 14 WRs have a 17% variance.

5. Terrell Owens, Randy Moss and Jerry Rice averaged almost a TD-per-game in their Top 7 seasons. Amazing.

6. Torry Holt averaged the most receiving yards. Surprisingly, Jimmy Smith and Steve Smith ranked #6 and #7.

7. Berman/Tom Jackson nailed Cris Carter as he truly 'all he does is catch Touchdowns'. His only positive Rate Statistic was TDs and was below average in all other categories.

8. Why is Andre Reed in the Hall of Fame?

9a. Just comparing the below stats, there's there little separating Torry Holt, Reggie Wayne, Steve Smith and Ochocinco. Compared to actual HOF consideration, OchoCinco deserves more consideration while Hines Ward should be crossed off. However, if I had to vote for one (statistically), Torry Holt gets it.

9b. Statistically, Hines Ward is like Cris Carter without the TDs, but Super Bowl MVP.

10. I deleted Tim Brown and Andre Johnson as they just lowered the averages.

------------------

How does Michael Irvin stack up?

SECTION 1A (RATE STATISTICS, WITHOUT TDs)

Now, we know Irvin suffers in comparison to the elite with TDs, so this section excludes TDs. How does Irvin compare when it comes to efficiency with the other Big Four Rate Stats -- Catch %, First Down %, Yards per Catch and Yards per Target? Long story short, Michael Irvin ranks #1. Honest to God, other than eliminating TDs (which is very significant and I account for later), I didn't doctor or stack the deck in favor for Irvin.

Michael Irvin, 24 points
Rice, 22
Moss, 17
Isaac Bruce, 14
T.O., 12
Torry Holt, 11
OchoCinco, 5
Reggie Wayne, 2
Marvin Harrison, 0
Steve Smith, -2
Jimmy Smith, -6
Andre Reed, -7
Rod Smith, -10
Larry Fitzgerald, -19
Hines Ward -24
Cris Carter -39

-YPC. @Cowboysrock55 loves YPC, right? Well if you thought Randy Moss was the king of YPC with all those sky-high bombs, you're correct with his 15.9 YPC. But Michael Irvin is #2 at 15.6 YPC, although the difference is somewhat negligible down to #8 Steve Smith at 14.9 YPC.
Moss, 15.9
Irvin, 15.6
Rice, 15.5
I. Bruce, 15.4
OchoCinco, 15.1
Holt, T.O., 15.0
Steve Smith, 14.9
Jimmy Smith, 14.4
Andre Reed, 14.3
Rod Smith, 13.9
Reg Wayne, Harrison, 13.7
Fitzgerald, 13.3
Hines Ward, 12.3
C Carter, 12.1

- YPT (Target). Michael Irvin is #T2 and the dropoff is at #7.
Rice, 10.2
Moss, Irvin, 9.5
I. Bruce, 9.4
T. Holt, 9.3
T.O., 9.2
Steve Smith, 9.1
Marvin Harrison, Jimmy Smith, 8.8
Reg Wayne, OchoCinco, 8.6
Rod Smith, 8.4
Fitzgerald, 8.2
Hines Ward, 8.1
C Carter, 7.4
* Andre Reed, not enough data

- 1st Down %. Irvin is #T1 and almost in his own Tier 1 with OchoCinco. Irvin may not have been prolific in the end zone, but this is why haters are sick of Irvin’s swordsman first down showboating move. He’s the highest rated first-down WR. Better than Sex Panther, 76% of the time, every time.
OchoCinco, Irvin, 76%
Reggie Wayne, 73%
T.O., 72%
Moss, I. Bruce, 71%
Holt, Harrison, 69%
Rod Smith, 68%
Jimmy Smith, Fitzgerald, 66%
C Carter, 65%
Steve Smith, 64%
Hines Ward, 63%
*Rice and Andre Reed, not enough data

- Catch %. Irvin is one of 9 receivers #T6 with 61%.
Hines Ward, Rice, 66%
Harrison, 65%
Reggie Wayne, 63%
T. Holt, 62%
A. Reed, Fitzgerald, C Carter, T.O., Jimmy Smith, Bruce, Rod Smith, Steve Smith, Irvin 61%
Moss, 60%
OchoCinco, 57%

Method...By totaling the Rate Statistics, per statistic, I subtracted the player's actual metric from the average of all 16 WRs, then added them together. For example, Rice's 15.5 YPC is 8% higher than the average 14.4, so he got +8 points. Ochocinco's Catch % is 8% lower than the average, so he got -8 points. Did this for all four Rate Stats and totaled them.
---------------

SECTION 1B (RATE STATISTICS, WITH TDs)

Now being completely fair and adding in TDs-per-Reception, Irvin drops significantly, but he's still #6. When T.O., Moss and Rice screw the bell-curve by averaging ~1TD-per-game, making eleven (11) other WRs lose points. Overall rankings by Total Points with TDs:
Moss, 76
T.O., 69
Rice, 60
M. Harrison, 11
I. Bruce, 10
Irvin, 1
OchoCinco, -4
T. Holt, -9
Reg Wayne, -15
Andre Reed, -17
Steve Smith, -19
Rod Smith, -25
Cris Carter, -27
Fitzgerald, -34
Jimmy Smith, -35
Hines Ward, -41

----------------

SECTION 2 (BOX SCORE STATS)

No more rate statistics, just totals of their box score stats. The average 16-game season statline for our Top 16 WRs is 95 catches, 1360 yards, 10 TDs. NOTE: Some stats are inflated because I extrapolated stats over 16 full games (ie TO rarely played a full 16).

While I prefer the above section for Rates, cumulative stats is also important to see the whole picture, especially for this upper tier group where the Catch % variance is quite consistent. These stats reveal how a WR was used, indicated by the difference in opportunities (ie Targets).

Overall, Irvin still finishes with #7, being penalized for his high YPC (thus less receptions) and, of course, TDs. This is where TD-machines shine (TO, Moss, Rice)...look at the dropoff after Rice here.
T.O., 75
Moss, 73
Rice, 65
Harrison, 26
I Bruce, 1
Holt, -1
Irvin, -5
OchoCinco, -9
Reggie Wayne, -14
Steve Smith, -21
C Carter, -22
Rod Smith, -29
Fitzgerald, -30
Jimmy Smith, -31
Andre Reed, -33
Hines Ward, -45

- TDs. We knew it would be bad, but not as bad as I thought. Irvin is deadlast, #T14 with 7 TDs per season, but he’s only a TD or 2 from being middle of the pack. Later, I might run a hypothetical to see Irvin’s rank after bumping up his TDs by one.
TO, 16
Moss, 15
Rice, 14
Harrison, 13
C Carter, 12
Fitzgerald, Holt, Bruce, OchoCinco, 9
Reg Wayne, Rod Smith, Steve Smith, Hines Ward 8
Jimmy Smith, Andre Reed, Irvin, 7

- Receptions. Irvin rank #14 with 88 receptions (ironically). Although low, this is why YPC and Catch % matter. Makes sense as Cowboys never ran WR screens.
Harrison, 108
Holt, 105
Fitzgerald, 100
Jimmy Smith, 100
C Carter, T.O., Rice, 99
Reg Wayne, 96
Randy Moss, Steve Smith, 93
Hines Ward, 91
Rod Smith, OchoCinco, 90
Irvin, 88
I. Bruce, 86
Andre Reed, 77

- Yards. Irvin is middle of pack at #8, which speaks to his higher YPC since he was #14 in Receptions. This six-spot jump is the highest from Receptions-to-Yards. Conversely, look how far down Cris Carter and Fitzgerald drop.
Holt, 1566
Rice, 1529
T.O., 1484
Moss, 1480
Harrison, 1470
Jimmy Smith, 1434
Steve Smith, 1385
Irvin, 1370
OchoCinco, 1358
Fitzgerald, 1334
Reg Wayne, 1319
I Bruce, 1318
Rod Smith, 1254
Cris Carter, 1198
Hines Ward, 1118
Andre Reed, 1104

 

[Genghis Khan]

Fuck it. Since I’m betting Irvin doesn’t get his due from The Athletic, I’ll state the case for Michael Irvin. We all know his intangibles, so not going to get into it.

However, Irvin gets knocked down on the all-time GOAT WRs because of his injuries and how they prevented Irvin from piling on past-his-prime yards. Furthermore, in addition to his career-ender on Veterans Stadium, he lost 16 games in his first three years (1988-1990). For perspective, not even including his early year injuries, but had he played three more seasons past his prime and added 2,500 garbage yards, Irvin would jump up from his current #28 to about #9. His last two seasons he averaged 1,100 yards so I don't think 2,500 in three seasons is a stretch at all.

But I've never been a real fan of total career yardage stats...so, here's my take on the greatness of Michael Irvin.

-------

TLDR. If you exclude TDs, Michael Irvin is one of the top 2 greatest WRs in efficiency from 1985 - 2010. Efficiency meaning production per Target (again, excluding TDs).

-------
I totaled the seven (7) best seasons for 16 WRs (during 1985 - 2010, 2010+ excluded cuz got passing insane, so no Megatron, Andre Johnson, Antonio Brown or Julio Jones).

Miscellaneous Non-Michael Irvin Observations:
1. Catch % (@Genghis Khan @Cowboysrock55 @Iamtdg ) doesn't vary much between the Top 15 WRs, only an 8% variance (between highest 66% - 61%, with lowest #16 Ochocinco being #57%).

2. 1st Down % has higher 21% variance (between highest 76% Ochocinco - 63% Hines Ward)

3. YPC also has a higher 20% variance between Top 14 WRs (#15 Hines Ward and lowest #16 Cris Carter are a yard lower than #14 Fitzgerald).

4. YPT (Target) has the largest variance. Outliers are Jerry Rice #1 is 7% higher than #2 Moss. Then lowest #16 is Cris Carter with 9% lower than #15 Hines Ward. The middle 14 WRs have a 17% variance.

5. Terrell Owens, Randy Moss and Jerry Rice averaged almost a TD-per-game in their Top 7 seasons. Amazing.

6. Torry Holt averaged the most receiving yards. Surprisingly, Jimmy Smith and Steve Smith ranked #6 and #7.

7. Berman/Tom Jackson nailed Cris Carter as he truly 'all he does is catch Touchdowns'. His only positive Rate Statistic was TDs and was below average in all other categories.

8. Why is Andre Reed in the Hall of Fame?

9a. Looking at these pure stats, there's there little separating Torry Holt, Reggie Wayne, Steve Smith and Ochocinco. Compared to actual HOF consideration, OchoCinco deserves more consideration while Hines Ward should be crossed off. However, if I had to vote for one (statistically), Torry Holt gets it.

9b. Statistically, Hines Ward is like Cris Carter without the TDs, but Super Bowl MVP.

10. I deleted Tim Brown and Andre Johnson as they just lowered the averages.

------------------

How does Michael Irvin stack up?

SECTION 1A (RATE STATISTICS, WITHOUT TDs)

Now, we know Irvin suffers in comparison to the elite with TDs. How does Irvin compare when it comes to the other Big Four Rate Stats -- Catch %, getting First Down %, Yards per Catch and Yards per Target? Long story short, Michael Irvin ranks #1. Honest to God, other than eliminating TDs (which is very significant, I didn't doctor or preload anything).

Michael Irvin, 24 points
Rice, 22
Moss, 17
Isaac Bruce, 14
T.O., 12
Torry Holt, 11
OchoCinco, 5
Reggie Wayne, 2
Marvin Harrison, 0
Steve Smith, -2
Jimmy Smith, -6
Andre Reed, -7
Rod Smith, -10
Larry Fitzgerald, -19
Hines Ward -24
Cris Carter -39

-YPC. @Cowboysrock55 loves YPC, right? Well if you though Randy Moss was the king of YPC with all those sky-high bombs, you're correct with his 15.9 YPC. Our man Michael Irvin is #2 at 15.6 YPC, although the difference is negligible down to #8 Steve Smith at 14.9 YPC.
Moss, 15.9
Irvin, 15.6
Rice, 15.5
I. Bruce, 15.4
OchoCinco, 15.1
T.O., 15.0
T. Holt, 15.0
Steve Smith, 14.9
Jimmy Smith, 14.4
Andre Reed, 14.3
Rod Smith, 13.9
Reg Wayne, Harrison, 13.7
Fitzgerald, 13.3
Hines Ward, 12.3
C Carter, 12.1

- YPT (Target). Michael Irvin is #T2 and the dropoff is at #7.
Rice, 10.2
Moss, 9.5
Irvin, 9.5
I. Bruce, 9.4
T. Holt, 9.3
T.O., 9.2
Steve Smith, 9.1
Marvin Harrison, Andre Reed, Jimmy Smith, 8.8
Reg Wayne, OchoCinco, 8.6
Rod Smith, 8.4
Fitzgerald, 8.2
Hines Ward, 8.1
C Carter, 7.4

- 1st Down %. Irvin is #T1 and it's a smaller Tier 1.
OchoCinco, Irvin, 76%
Reggie Wayne, 73%
T.O., 72%
Moss, I. Bruce, 71%
Holt, Harrison, 69%
Rod Smith, 68%
Jimmy Smith, Fitzgerald, 66%
Andre Reed, C Carter, 65%
Steve Smith, 64%
Rice, Hines Ward, 63%

- Catch %. Irvin is one of 9 receivers #T6 with 61%.
Hines Ward, Rice, 66%
Harrison, 65%
Reggie Wayne, 63%
T. Holt, 62%
A. Reed, Fitzgerald, C Carter, T.O., Jimmy Smith, Bruce, Rod Smith, Steve Smith, Irvin 61%
Moss, 60%
OchoCinco, 57%

Method...By totaling the Rate Statistics, per statistic, I subtracted the player's actual metric from the average of all 16 WRs, then added them together. For example, Rice's 15.5 YPC is 8% higher than the average 14.4, so he got +8 points. Ochocinco's Catch % is 8% lower than the average, so he got -8 points. Did this for all four Rate Stats and totaled them.
---------------

SECTION 1B (RATE STATISTICS, WITH TDs)

Now being completely fair and adding in TDs-per-Reception, Irvin drops significantly, but he's still #6. When T.O., Moss and Rice screw the bell-curve by averaging ~1TD-per-game, making eleven (11) other WRs lose points. Overall rankings by Total Points with TDs:
Moss, 76
T.O., 69
Rice, 60
M. Harrison, 11
I. Bruce, 10
Irvin, 1
OchoCinco, -4
T. Holt, -9
Reg Wayne, -15
Andre Reed, -17
Steve Smith, -19
Rod Smith, -25
Cris Carter, -27
Fitzgerald, -34
Jimmy Smith, -35
Hines Ward, -41

----------------

SECTION 2 (BOX SCORE STATS)

No more rate statistics, just totals of their box score stats. Over 16 games, the average 16-game season statline for our Top 16 WRs is 95 catches, 1360 yards, 10 TDs. NOTE: Some stats are inflated because I extrapolated stats over 16 full games (ie TO rarely played 16).

Overall, Irvin still finishes with #7, being penalized for his high YPC (thus less receptions) and, of course, TDs. This is where TD-machines shine (TO, Moss, Rice)...look at the dropoff after Rice here.
T.O., 75
Moss, 73
Rice, 65
Harrison, 26
I Bruce, 1
Holt, -1
Irvin, -5
OchoCinco, -9
Reggie Wayne, -14
Steve Smith, -21
C Carter, -22
Rod Smith, -29
Fitzgerald, -30
Jimmy Smith, -31
Andre Reed, -33
Hines Ward, -45

- TDs. We knew it would be bad. Irvin is deadlast, #T14 with 7 TDs per season.
TO, 16
Moss, 15
Rice, 14
Harrison, 13
C Carter, 12
Fitzgerald, Holt, Bruce, OchoCinco, 9
Reg Wayne, Rod Smith, Steve Smith, Hines Ward 8
Jimmy Smith, Andre Reed, Irvin, 7

- Receptions. Irvin rank #14 with 88 receptions (ironically). Although low, this is why YPC and Catch % matter.
Harrison, 108
Holt, 105
Fitzgerald, 100
Jimmy Smith, 100
C Carter, T.O., Rice, 99
Reg Wayne, 96
Randy Moss, Steve Smith, 93
Hines Ward, 91
Rod Smith, OchoCinco, 90
Irvin, 88
I. Bruce, 86
Andre Reed, 77

- Yards. Irvin is middle of pack at #8, which speaks to his higher YPC since he was #14 in Receptions.
Holt, 1566
Rice, 1529
T.O., 1484
Moss, 1480
Harrison, 1470
Jimmy Smith, 1434
Steve Smith, 1385
Irvin, 1370
OchoCinco, 1358
Fitzgerald, 1334
Reg Wayne, 1319
I Bruce, 1318
Rod Smith, 1254
Cris Carter, 1198
Hines Ward, 1118
Andre Reed, 1104

Wow, this is awesome Phil. Major props.

Irvin has long been vastly underrated.

I'll give people Rice and Moss.

After that though? Irvin was as good as anyone.