(10-04-2021, 09:53 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Pro Bowls are only one measurement when looking at an entire career. Again, how did Curtis stack up against his peers? Because if Truck’s research is accurate (and I’m assuming it is) he was not even close to a guy like Chad who led the conference in receiving yards 4 consecutive years (and the entire league one of them).

Thank you.

If anyone wants to peruse, I simply went to their pages on PFR:

Curtis: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CurtIs00.htm (scroll down to, "Appearances on Leaderboards, Awards and Honours.)"
Comparison with Lofton: https://stathead.com/football/pcm_finder.cgi?player_id2=LoftJa00&player_id1=CurtIs00&sum=0&request=1
Comparison with Largent: https://stathead.com/football/pcm_finder.cgi?player_id2=LargSt00&player_id1=CurtIs00&sum=0&request=1
Career TD leaders: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/rec_td_career.htm
Career yards leaders: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/rec_yds_career.htm

Again, nobody here is saying Curtis was a scrub or a poor player, but amongst his peers, he was NOT at the top or among them, whereas Chad WAS at the top for 5+ years.

(10-04-2021, 10:06 PM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: The Ring of Honor should be populated by older Bengal players first so they can enjoy being honorees for as many years as possible. It made me sad Ken Riley could not be there. Forrest Gregg and Sam Wyche — both deserving of induction — passed away recently.

With that in mind I would recommend inducting old greats like Bob Trumpy, Isaac Curtis, James Brooks, Jim Breech, and maybe Lemar Parrish.

Trumpy, Brooks and Parrish should be in before a lot of guys. Curtis and Breech, wait a little longer.

Trumpy is the best TE in team history and did a ton for those first teams, so he definitely deserves it a ton, while Parrish was Deion before Deion (as Fred has said) and Brooks was a stalwart HB.

BTW, going back to the TE thing, just some more comparison:

Trumpy vs. McGee: https://stathead.com/football/pcm_finder.cgi?player_id2=TrumBo00&player_id1=McGeTo00&sum=0&request=1
Trumpy vs. Ross: https://stathead.com/football/pcm_finder.cgi?player_id2=TrumBo00&player_id1=RossDa00&sum=0&request=1
Trumpy vs. Holman: https://stathead.com/football/pcm_finder.cgi?player_id2=HolmRo00&player_id1=TrumBo00&sum=0&request=1
Ross vs. Holman: https://stathead.com/football/pcm_finder.cgi?player_id2=RossDa00&player_id1=HolmRo00&sum=0&request=1
McGee vs. Holman (from above): https://stathead.com/football/pcm_finder.cgi?player_id2=HolmRo00&player_id1=McGeTo00&sum=0&request=1
McGee vs. Ross: https://stathead.com/football/pcm_finder.cgi?player_id2=RossDa00&player_id1=McGeTo00&sum=0&request=1

So as we can see, going from the numbers, it is Trumpy above all and the rest are kinda lumped together, with Ross being the leader of the other 3.

Given era, team they played on and numbers (I don't know how the two older guys were at blocking), I would actually put:

Trumpy>Ross>McGee>Holman

(10-05-2021, 10:54 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: So as we can see, going from the numbers, it is Trumpy and above all and the rest are kinda lumped together, with Ross being the leader of the other 3.

Given era, team they played on and numbers (I don't know how the two older guys were at blocking), I would actually put:

Trumpy>Ross>McGee>Holman

Besides being a great tight end we cannot forget what Bob Trumpy did after his playing days were over. He hosted one of the best radio sports talk shows I’ve ever heard. Trumpy was smart and fair and today guys like Mike Florio, Stephen A. Smith, Peter King, and the rest all stand in Trumpy’s shadow.

(10-04-2021, 12:32 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: The only thing he ever led in, was Y/R in 1975.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CurtIs00.htm

He had 2 seasons in top 10 of yards, 4 in TDs and is 53rd all-time in Y/R, which was his best attribute.

Fairly pedestrian, actually (and no, I'm not trolling; that is absolutely pedestrian. Maybe ascended pedestrian).

EDIT* I mean, James Lofton played in the same era, on worse teams and he had almost double the amount of yards, in only 4 more seasons and had 6 years of 1,000 yards. Ditto for Steve Largent, though he came through a touch later and played longer as well.

Just looking at the all-time yards list, there are SO MANY guys in the same era and a decade before, who have more yards than Curtis.

And that's just yards; I haven't even looked at TDs or anything.

Issac Curtis should get in before Chad. 

Curtis played in a offense that I can compare to 
Let's say to the Browns offense under Stefanski
In that meaning 5 to 7 guys on offense could be dialed
Up to beat you.

Those offenses in Curtis tenure had a pleathora
Of weapons. Chip Meyers..Bob Trumpy..HoF Charlie
Joiner, Lenvil Elliott, Pete Johnson, Cris Collinsworth
Dan Ross, ML Harris.....

Curtis was never going to be a 1,000 WR in the
Bengals offense. The volume of targets was never
Centered on 2-targets. 
But that doesnt make him any less among
The WRs of his day...
Lynn Swann had lesser numbers than Curtis.
He is,only a HoF er cause he has rings
You didnt see WRs getting 1,000 yds on a regular
Basis until eh...lets see...the early 80s...
Morgan,Walker, Loften...but offense were opening
Up and it added 2-games in 78.

Curtis was just as talented as Chad. He played
In a era where DBs abused and mauled WRs.
And the safeties in Curtis time would decapitate you
Thom Darden, Jack Tatum, Charlie Waters, 
Donnie Shell, Dick Anderson, Gary Fencik

Nobody had.the combination of speed
And hands that Curtis had.
And Ike also played 3-years with garbage
At QB. 

(10-05-2021, 03:09 PM)impactplaya Wrote: Issac Curtis should get in before Chad. 

Curtis played in a offense that I can compare to 
Let's say to the Browns offense under Stefanski
In that meaning 5 to 7 guys on offense could be dialed
Up to beat you.

Those offenses in Curtis tenure had a pleathora
Of weapons. Chip Meyers..Bob Trumpy..HoF Charlie
Joiner, Lenvil Elliott, Pete Johnson, Cris Collinsworth
Dan Ross, ML Harris.....

Curtis was never going to be a 1,000 WR in the
Bengals offense. The volume of targets was never
Centered on 2-targets. 
But that doesnt make him any less among
The WRs of his day...
Lynn Swann had lesser numbers than Curtis.
He is,only a HoF er cause he has rings
You didnt see WRs getting 1,000 yds on a regular
Basis until eh...lets see...the early 80s...
Morgan,Walker, Loften...but offense were opening
Up and it added 2-games in 78.

Curtis was just as talented as Chad. He played
In a era where DBs abused and mauled WRs.
And the safeties in Curtis time would decapitate you
Thom Darden, Jack Tatum, Charlie Waters, 
Donnie Shell, Dick Anderson, Gary Fencik

Nobody had.the combination of speed
And hands that Curtis had.
And Ike also played 3-years with garbage
At QB. 

And Chad didn't play with:

At WR:

- Touraj
- Warrick
- Henry

At RB:

- Rudi
- Dillon
- Benson

At QB:

- Smith
- Kitna
- Mitchell
- Fitzpatrick

We'll just pretend he also didn't play with other weapons and (at times) dogshit QBs, right?

Come on; Chad wasn't protected by other players, was double teamed, had dogshit throwing to him for his first 2 years and all of 2008 and still LED THE CONFERENCE in yards.

Using the excuse that, "there were too many weapons," is complete BS (and you know it).

Quote:You didnt see WRs getting 1,000 yds on a regular
Basis until eh...lets see...the early 80s...

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/SpeeMa00.htm

2 before 1950.

1949-1954

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1949/index.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1950/index.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1951/index.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1952/index.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1953/index.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1954/index.htm

Stop with the excuses. The guy is Bengal great, but he is not at the level of AJ, Chad, Collinsworth or Pickens. The numbers prove it, the peers prove it and he's the only one to have an NFL MVP throwing it to him, outside of Collinsworth (and Pickens for 1 year with Boomer).

I have yet to see a single one of you, "Curtis 1st," people, post or provide any TANGIBLE, physical evidence or numbers, in this argument. Just excuses and, "he looked better."

Stop.

(10-05-2021, 04:00 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: And Chad didn't play with:

At WR:

- Touraj
- Warrick
- Henry

At RB:

- Rudi
- Dillon
- Benson

At QB:

- Smith
- Kitna
- Mitchell
- Fitzpatrick

We'll just pretend he also didn't play with other weapons and (at times) dogshit QBs, right?

Come on; Chad wasn't protected by other players, was double teamed, had dogshit throwing to him for his first 2 years and all of 2008 and still LED THE CONFERENCE in yards.

Using the excuse that, "there were too many weapons," is complete BS (and you know it).


https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/SpeeMa00.htm

2 before 1950.

1949-1954

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1949/index.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1950/index.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1951/index.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1952/index.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1953/index.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1954/index.htm

Stop with the excuses. The guy is Bengal great, but he is not at the level of AJ, Chad, Collinsworth or Pickens. The numbers prove it, the peers prove it and he's the only one to have an NFL MVP throwing it to him, outside of Collinsworth (and Pickens for 1 year with Boomer).

I have yet to see a single one of you, "Curtis 1st," people, post or provide any TANGIBLE, physical evidence or numbers, in this argument. Just excuses and, "he looked better."

Stop.

Scott Mitchell..Akili Smith...really....Chad wasnt even a starter his rookie year. 
Chad was a raw talent out of OSU. 
you act like Chad played multiple seasons with Mitchell and Smith.
Btw,Kitna was a.better QB than you remember. He threw for 41 TDs and 31 INTs 
2-seasons as a starter. 
Curtis could do everything Chad Johnson did on the field. 
Curtis played in a era where teams barely threw over 26 times a game. 
Chad dominated no question. 
But.you need to realize he played in a era where physicality was the norm
And Ike even had a rule made cause of him

(10-05-2021, 04:46 PM)impactplaya Wrote: Scott Mitchell..Akili Smith...really....Chad wasnt even a starter his rookie year. 
Chad was a raw talent out of OSU. 
you act like Chad played multiple seasons with Mitchell and Smith.
Btw,Kitna was a.better QB than you remember. He threw for 41 TDs and 31 INTs 
2-seasons as a starter. 
Curtis could do everything Chad Johnson did on the field. 
Curtis played in a era where teams barely threw over 26 times a game. 
Chad dominated no question. 
But.you need to realize he played in a era where physicality was the norm
And Ike even had a rule made cause of him

Kitna didn't have a good year with un until '03; Chad has 2 seasons (as I mentioned above) with dogshit and a 3rd, though he wasn't in peak form (clearly) and he was hurt for a few games.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/2001.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/2002.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/2008.htm

And people still aren't understanding that Curtis wasn't up to the level of his peers, whereas Chad was ABOVE 99% of his peers. Just acknowledge that.

And again, you have provided no stats to beef up your argument, none.

Less than 26 attempts a game?

Browns, 31.2 attempts in 1952. Their opponents? 29 attempts per game.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cle/1952.htm

Colts, 31.3 attempts in 1961.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/clt/1961.htm

Vikings, 29.8 attempts in 1966.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/min/1966.htm

Now, these are 3 teams I picked at random, who had more than 26 attempts per game, decades before Curtis was even in the league.

In Curtis' best year, 1975, the Bengals had 30.9 attempts a game.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/1975.htm

How is it that each reason that is brought up, gets blown out of the water? Or how is it, that when talking about the EXACT player, on the EXACT team he played on, your reasoning still gets debunked?

I don't know why people just can't accept that the guy was not at the level of others; there's bias from the word go, on the Curtis 1st people, but come on, you're just as bad as Fred in this case, with his manipulation and distortion of stats.

(10-05-2021, 05:03 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Kitna didn't have a good year with un until '03; Chad has 2 seasons (as I mentioned above) with dogshit and a 3rd, though he wasn't in peak form (clearly) and he was hurt for a few games.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/2001.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/2002.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/2008.htm

And people still aren't understanding that Curtis wasn't up to the level of his peers, whereas Chad was ABOVE 99% of his peers. Just acknowledge that.

And again, you have provided no stats to beef up your argument, none.

Less than 26 attempts a game?

Browns, 31.2 attempts in 1952. Their opponents? 29 attempts per game.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cle/1952.htm

Colts, 31.3 attempts in 1961.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/clt/1961.htm

Vikings, 29.8 attempts in 1966.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/min/1966.htm

Now, these are 3 teams I picked at random, who had more than 26 attempts per game, decades before Curtis was even in the league.

In Curtis' best year, 1975, the Bengals had 30.9 attempts a game.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/1975.htm

How is it that each reason that is brought up, gets blown out of the water? Or how is it, that when talking about the EXACT player, on the EXACT team he played on, your reasoning still gets debunked?

I don't know why people just can't accept that the guy was not at the level of others; there's bias from the word go, on the Curtis 1st people, but come on, you're just as bad as Fred in this case, with his manipulation and distortion of stats.

Im not going to deny Chad Johnson's dominance.
Was he the best WR in the NFL say from 2003 to 2009
Top 5 easy.
But Curtis was just as feared in his prime.
He averaged a TD every 8 catches for his career. 

They're both going up there, might as well do Curtis first so he's alive to see it. Chad's gonna be around awhile.

(10-05-2021, 05:03 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Kitna didn't have a good year with un until '03; Chad has 2 seasons (as I mentioned above) with dogshit and a 3rd, though he wasn't in peak form (clearly) and he was hurt for a few games.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/2001.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/2002.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/2008.htm

And people still aren't understanding that Curtis wasn't up to the level of his peers, whereas Chad was ABOVE 99% of his peers. Just acknowledge that.

And again, you have provided no stats to beef up your argument, none.

Less than 26 attempts a game?

Browns, 31.2 attempts in 1952. Their opponents? 29 attempts per game.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cle/1952.htm

Colts, 31.3 attempts in 1961.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/clt/1961.htm

Vikings, 29.8 attempts in 1966.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/min/1966.htm

Now, these are 3 teams I picked at random, who had more than 26 attempts per game, decades before Curtis was even in the league.

In Curtis' best year, 1975, the Bengals had 30.9 attempts a game.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/1975.htm

How is it that each reason that is brought up, gets blown out of the water? Or how is it, that when talking about the EXACT player, on the EXACT team he played on, your reasoning still gets debunked?

I don't know why people just can't accept that the guy was not at the level of others; there's bias from the word go, on the Curtis 1st people, but come on, you're just as bad as Fred in this case, with his manipulation and distortion of stats.

You're trying to compare 2 different eras of football.  One where it was legal to maul a wide receiver down the field and destroy a qb vs the era where if you touch the receiver outside of 5 yards, there's a flag.  The rules have been adjusted to the offense because touchdowns bring viewership.  There is no denying that so your stats do not tell the whole story.

I would choose Curtis over Chad everyday and not think twice about it.  Curtis was not only the better receiver but also the better Bengal.  He didn't throw temper tantrums or demand to be traded during his time unlike Chad.  I love Chad but he wouldn't have those stats in the 70's/80's either.  

I suggest you watch some games from those times so you can have a better understanding of how the game was played back then.  

(10-05-2021, 05:03 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Kitna didn't have a good year with un until '03; Chad has 2 seasons (as I mentioned above) with dogshit and a 3rd, though he wasn't in peak form (clearly) and he was hurt for a few games.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/2001.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/2002.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/2008.htm

And people still aren't understanding that Curtis wasn't up to the level of his peers, whereas Chad was ABOVE 99% of his peers. Just acknowledge that.

And again, you have provided no stats to beef up your argument, none.

Less than 26 attempts a game?

Browns, 31.2 attempts in 1952. Their opponents? 29 attempts per game.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cle/1952.htm

Colts, 31.3 attempts in 1961.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/clt/1961.htm

Vikings, 29.8 attempts in 1966.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/min/1966.htm

Now, these are 3 teams I picked at random, who had more than 26 attempts per game, decades before Curtis was even in the league.

In Curtis' best year, 1975, the Bengals had 30.9 attempts a game.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cin/1975.htm

How is it that each reason that is brought up, gets blown out of the water? Or how is it, that when talking about the EXACT player, on the EXACT team he played on, your reasoning still gets debunked?

I don't know why people just can't accept that the guy was not at the level of others; there's bias from the word go, on the Curtis 1st people, but come on, you're just as bad as Fred in this case, with his manipulation and distortion of stats.

The Bengals averaged 25 passes a game in 1973
74 76. 

(10-04-2021, 12:23 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Did Curtis ever lead the the league in any significant receiving category? Or even the conference? How did he stack up against his peers compared to Chad?

Yes he did, he was 1st in Yards Per Catch and TDS, I posted a while ago about 5 categories of Chad and Curtis and it was a mix bag.. what hurt Curtis more than anything was he had couple injuries in that key 5/6 year that slowed him down.. 

In the end Curtis, Chad and AJ will go into Ring of Honor, I would give respect to Curtis over Chad because of age , the actual change in NFL rules he caused and how he conducted himself his entire career especially as he was phased out at end of career.. 

(10-05-2021, 06:53 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Yes he did, he was 1st in Yards Per Catch and TDS, I posted a while ago about 5 categories of Chad and Curtis and it was a mix bag.. what hurt Curtis more than anything was he had couple injuries in that key 5/6 year that slowed him down.. 

In the end Curtis, Chad and AJ will go into Ring of Honor, I would give respect to Curtis over Chad because of age , the actual change in NFL rules he caused and how he conducted himself his entire career especially as he was phased out at end of career.. 

Was never 1st in TDs. Ever. I've posted more than enough links to show that.

Anyways, I've extended this debate long-enough; for the 90th (and last) time, (not directed to you, Essex) I know you can't compare the two because of era, thus the only way to compare is to compare TO THEIR ******* PEERS, FFS.

Chad led the conference in yards, 4 straight years and the league, once. Holds every team WR record and was among the top 3 WRs in the league, from 2003-2007 (5 years), whereas Curtis wasn't even top 5 for any year, save for maybe 1975.

AMONGST THEIR PEERS, CHAD WAS BETTER, FACT.

Again, not saying anything else on this.

(10-05-2021, 08:20 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Was never 1st in TDs. Ever. I've posted more than enough links to show that.

Anyways, I've extended this debate long-enough; for the 90th (and last) time, (not directed to you, Essex) I know you can't compare the two because of era, thus the only way to compare is to compare TO THEIR ******* PEERS, FFS.

Chad led the conference in yards, 4 straight years and the league, once. Holds every team WR record and was among the top 3 WRs in the league, from 2003-2007 (5 years), whereas Curtis wasn't even top 5 for any year, save for maybe 1975.

AMONGST THEIR PEERS, CHAD WAS BETTER, FACT.

Again, not saying anything else on this.

(10-05-2021, 08:20 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Was never 1st in TDs. Ever. I've posted more than enough links to show that.

Anyways, I've extended this debate long-enough; for the 90th (and last) time, (not directed to you, Essex) I know you can't compare the two because of era, thus the only way to compare is to compare TO THEIR ******* PEERS, FFS.

Chad led the conference in yards, 4 straight years and the league, once. Holds every team WR record and was among the top 3 WRs in the league, from 2003-2007 (5 years), whereas Curtis wasn't even top 5 for any year, save for maybe 1975.

AMONGST THEIR PEERS, CHAD WAS BETTER, FACT.

Again, not saying anything else on this.

He was 2nd in 74, i posted a while ago showing Curtis among his peers was better than Chad among his peers in  2 categories for sure TDs and YPC in their best 5/6 year average.  I agree two areas f where Chad excelled was in receptions/yards among his peers.  You can;t compare their numbers since different eras....but if you look at their top 5/6 years among their peers, it is much closer than you want to make it out to be .  that is a FACT....  and as I stated.. as i stated Curtis created something because of his talent that Chad did not.. the NFL put in what was termed the "Curtis Rule" because they were roll blocking him off the line.. I think that is a good indication of also of how good Curtis was as a WR, I wish injuries did not take some of his greatness away but it around 77/78 season since he was for sure on pace to challenge for a spot in HOF..

In the end we are splitting hairs between two great WRs of different eras here.. but I give the nod to Curtis to be in HOF since he played with greatest decade of the Bengals, and retired as a Bengal with as much class as you can have... 

(10-05-2021, 05:30 PM)Sled21 Wrote: They're both going up there, might as well do Curtis first so he's alive to see it. Chad's gonna be around awhile.

Hell, Ike would probably hate this post more than folks picking Chad over him. Dude just turned 70; let's not put him in the ground yet. 

(10-05-2021, 09:29 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Hell, Ike would probably hate this post more than folks picking Chad over him. Dude just turned 70; let's not put him in the ground yet. 

Amen to that. I turned 70 last January and I feel I have plenty of years left (knock on wood). 

I'll be 62 on the 30th, face it, when you hit this age sure, you should have lots of years left, but on the other hand no one is really surprised when you croak unexpectedly.

(10-05-2021, 08:20 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Was never 1st in TDs. Ever. I've posted more than enough links to show that.

Anyways, I've extended this debate long-enough; for the 90th (and last) time, (not directed to you, Essex) I know you can't compare the two because of era, thus the only way to compare is to compare TO THEIR ******* PEERS, FFS.

Chad led the conference in yards, 4 straight years and the league, once. Holds every team WR record and was among the top 3 WRs in the league, from 2003-2007 (5 years), whereas Curtis wasn't even top 5 for any year, save for maybe 1975.

AMONGST THEIR PEERS, CHAD WAS BETTER, FACT.

Again, not saying anything else on this.

Chad needs to be one of the next guys that goes in... Fact.

(10-06-2021, 09:05 AM)jason Wrote: Chad needs to be one of the next guys that goes in... Fact.

Why? He needs to go in sure, but why should he go in before some of the older deserving guys? 

(10-06-2021, 09:07 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Why? He needs to go in sure, but why should he go in before some of the older deserving guys? 

The best players go in, regardless of when they played.

That's why Willie should be the next guy in, as he is the best retired Bengal, who is not in.