Greatest wide receiver duo in history?

doubledragon

Isaac Bruce claims that he and Torry Holt are the greatest wide receiver duo in NFL history, Cris Carter took offense to Isaac Bruce's claim and said that he and Randy Moss are the greatest, so who is really the greatest wide receiver duo in NFL history?

telephoto1

Taylor and Rice, or Swann and Stallworth.

doubledragon

Here is the video of Cris Carter responding to Isaac Bruce's claim.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1422543391280218120

VikingDude

Depends on how you look at it. Carter & Moss only had 4 years together but Holt & Bruce had 10. So they would naturally put up greater numbers. But if you look at averages, Moss & Carter had better averages together.

doubledragon

I must confess, I enjoy when two alpha male type players bicker about these types of things. One fires a shot and the other responds with heavy artillery.

perkdog

Edelman and Gronk 😜

LandrysFedora

Duper and Clayton were a solid combo for the Fins in the 80's

Hallco

Reggie Wayne and Marvin Harrison were great! Maybe not the all time best, but I won a couple of Fantasy leagues with them!

Tabe

I'll take Brett Perriman and Herman Moore, 1995:

Perriman: 108 catches, 1488 yds
Herman Moore: 123 catches, 1686 yards

perkdog

@Tabe said:
I'll take Brett Perriman and Herman Moore, 1995:

Perriman: 108 catches, 1488 yds
Herman Moore: 123 catches, 1686 yards

They are probably the most underrated duo in NFL history in my opinion.

perkdog

Andre Reed and James Lofton

2dueces

@perkdog said:
Andre Reed and James Lofton

Excellent choice. I think Swan and Stallworth were just incredible in my youth. Rice and Taylor in the 80’s and Reed and Lofton in the 90’s.

Such a different game but still these duos shined. The younger members can’t believe how hard it was to be a QB or receivers. Guys getting blasted over the middle and QB’s getting sandwiched and slammed. It’s amazing they lasted 5 or 6 years. Joe Montana took an awful beating for a guy 190 lbs.

keets

I loathe Pittsburgh but Swan and Stallworth were transformational, defenses had to change just for them and not too many did a good job.

AFLfan

Don Maynard and Art Powell weren't too shabby wit the early New York Titans. These were their stats in the 14-game 1962 season.

Rushing & Receiving Table

				Game	Rece	Rece	Rece	Rece	Rece	Rece	Rece
No.	Player	Age	Pos	G	Rec	Yds	Y/R	TD	Lng	R/G	Y/G	Fmb
84	Art Powell	25	LE	14	64	1130	17.7	8	80	4.6	80.7	1
13	Don Maynard	27	FL	14	56	1041	18.6	8	86	4.0	74.4	0
	Team Total	26.1		14	242	3161	13.1	20	86	17.3	225.8	39
	Opp Total			14	194	2606	13.4	28		13.9	186.1	30

Provided by Pro-Football-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 8/19/2021.

Justacommeman

Hey Todd is that the DaVinci Code or MyPillowGuy data?

m

streeter

Jerry Rice and John Taylor. No ifs ands or butts.

orioles93

Clark, Monk, and Sanders were a great trio

Tabe

@keets said:
I loathe Pittsburgh but Swan and Stallworth were transformational, defenses had to change just for them and not too many did a good job.

Swann averaged 40 catches a year. Has to be one of the most overrated receivers ever.

Justacommeman

@Tabe said:

@keets said:
I loathe Pittsburgh but Swan and Stallworth were transformational, defenses had to change just for them and not too many did a good job.

Swann averaged 40 catches a year. Has to be one of the most overrated receivers ever.

Agree. Never a big fan of Swann and you can add Franco Harris as well

m

keets

Swann averaged 40 catches a year. Has to be one of the most overrated receivers ever.

Paul Warfield averaged less than that, around 32/season, was he overrated?? it was a different game when they played. Teams were far more balanced and dedicated to the running game, they weren't throwing the ball 50 times/game. both players had a "trademark" style: Lynn Swan ran what we used to call a "button-hook" and Bradshaw put the ball close to ground where nobody else could catch it except Swan, and he always did --- Paul Warfield had a 42" vertical leap, he'd go across the middle and the QB would put the ball three feet over his head so he could go up and get it, he always did.

I watched these guys play, I still remember my Dad shaking me awake one morning to tell me the Browns had traded Warfield to Miami!!! I wish I had a dollar for every time I saw Swan make one of his catches to extend yet another Steeler's drive when I was sure they were gonna punt.

fans need to reconcile with the fact that Bill Walsh altered the dynamic in the NFL. why run the ball when a short pass accomplishes the same thing with better results?? if the "West Coast Offense" had a theme song it could be Video Killed The Radio Star because the Fullback is dead and the two-back game is on life support. if you're fast, sort of tall with good hands you're gold.

I don't disagree with Mark very often, but Warfield, Swan and Harris are each deserving of a bust in the NFLHOF. they played in a different era with a different style and much different rules. understanding that is key to recognizing their individual greatness.

JoeBanzai

@Justacommeman said:

@Tabe said:

@keets said:
I loathe Pittsburgh but Swan and Stallworth were transformational, defenses had to change just for them and not too many did a good job.

Swann averaged 40 catches a year. Has to be one of the most overrated receivers ever.

Agree. Never a big fan of Swan and you can add Franco Harris as well

m

Franco Harris "over rated"?

Wow.

Justacommeman

@JoeBanzai said:

@Justacommeman said:

@Tabe said:

@keets said:
I loathe Pittsburgh but Swan and Stallworth were transformational, defenses had to change just for them and not too many did a good job.

Swann averaged 40 catches a year. Has to be one of the most overrated receivers ever.

Agree. Never a big fan of Swan and you can add Franco Harris as well

m

Franco Harris "over rated"?

Wow.

To the point their are so many backs I like better then him but he gets the great team bump. I mean Curtis Martin off the top of my head Id much rather have. Martin rarely gets mentioned with the "great backs". Harris very good running back on a great team.

m

keets

Harris very good running back on a great team.

Harris great running back on one of the best all-time Teams.

--- hey, I hit "auto-correct" and look what happened!!

coolstanley

Swann/Stallworth

They were money in the postseason where it counts. 4 rings.

Tabe

@keets said:
Swann averaged 40 catches a year. Has to be one of the most overrated receivers ever.

Paul Warfield averaged less than that, around 32/season, was he overrated?? it was a different game when they played. Teams were far more balanced and dedicated to the running game, they weren't throwing the ball 50 times/game. both players had a "trademark" style: Lynn Swan ran what we used to call a "button-hook" and Bradshaw put the ball close to ground where nobody else could catch it except Swan, and he always did --- Paul Warfield had a 42" vertical leap, he'd go across the middle and the QB would put the ball three feet over his head so he could go up and get it, he always did.

Stallworth had multiple seasons of 70+ catches.

Button hooks are an incredibly easy route to run and throw. If that was Swann's trademark, it really doesn't say much for him.

Justacommeman

@keets said:
Swann averaged 40 catches a year. Has to be one of the most overrated receivers ever.

Paul Warfield averaged less than that, around 32/season, was he overrated?? it was a different game when they played. Teams were far more balanced and dedicated to the running game, they weren't throwing the ball 50 times/game. both players had a "trademark" style: Lynn Swan ran what we used to call a "button-hook" and Bradshaw put the ball close to ground where nobody else could catch it except Swan, and he always did --- Paul Warfield had a 42" vertical leap, he'd go across the middle and the QB would put the ball three feet over his head so he could go up and get it, he always did.

I watched these guys play, I still remember my Dad shaking me awake one morning to tell me the Browns had traded Warfield to Miami!!! I wish I had a dollar for every time I saw Swan make one of his catches to extend yet another Steeler's drive when I was sure they were gonna punt.

fans need to reconcile with the fact that Bill Walsh altered the dynamic in the NFL. why run the ball when a short pass accomplishes the same thing with better results?? if the "West Coast Offense" had a theme song it could be Video Killed The Radio Star because the Fullback is dead and the two-back game is on life support. if you're fast, sort of tall with good hands you're gold.

I don't disagree with Mark very often, but Warfield, Swan and Harris are each deserving of a bust in the NFLHOF. they played in a different era with a different style and much different rules. understanding that is key to recognizing their individual greatness.

Swann also averaged less then 50 yards per game. He caught over 50 passes in a season exactly once. I think you rust belt guys are a little bit caught up in nostalgia. There is a place for Swann, Warfield and Harris in the Hall but don't ask me to believe they were all time greats. They certainly were not.

Stallworth was better then Swann. Give me Isaac Curtis over both of them. I think he still has to buy a ticket to get in the Hall

m

Swann

m

keets

tabe, I may have oversimplified with the button-hook, but what I described was money for Pittsburgh. as for nostalgia from rust belt guys, that's sort of like the pot calling the kettle black. Mark, I seem to recall you're from Michigan, sort of IN the rust belt although you are forgiven for being a bit younger than I am. that's a sin?? what age does is provide perspective, hence, my comment about different eras, different rules and a different kind of game. we no longer have the pleasure of watching two running backs in a T-formation or I-formation, today it's all about motion, thanks to Tom Landry.

I had the pleasure of watching the NFL in the early 1960's to see it develop into what it is today, now I'm told that's just nostalgia.

Justacommeman

@keets said:
tabe, I may have oversimplified with the button-hook, but what I described was money for Pittsburgh. as for nostalgia from rust belt guys, that's sort of like the pot calling the kettle black. Mark, I seem to recall you're from Michigan, sort of IN the rust belt although you are forgiven for being a bit younger than I am. that's a sin?? what age does is provide perspective, hence, my comment about different eras, different rules and a different kind of game. we no longer have the pleasure of watching two running backs in a T-formation or I-formation, today it's all about motion, thanks to Tom Landry.

I had the pleasure of watching the NFL in the early 1960's to see it develop into what it is today, now I'm told that's just nostalgia.

I'm not indicting you for being biased. It's a natural thing. We all do it. Back in the day we saw a lot of "our teams" exclusively on TV. It was more localized. Where I grew up in was the Central division. Packers, Vikings, Lions and Bears. We got a steady diet of those games. Therefore it's natural that guys like JoeBanzai waxes poetic about his Vikings and the guys he saw a lot. The fact that you, Brick and Coolstanley do the same about the Browns, Steelers etc is expected. You saw them a lot. Just don't expect the rest of us to rally behind that bandwagon. We may see it differently.

Swann was a good receiver on a all- time great team. See!!! FYI what Warfield lacked in volume he more then made up in yards. He was great.

mark

JoeBanzai

@Justacommeman said:

@JoeBanzai said:

@Justacommeman said:

@Tabe said:

@keets said:
I loathe Pittsburgh but Swan and Stallworth were transformational, defenses had to change just for them and not too many did a good job.

Swann averaged 40 catches a year. Has to be one of the most overrated receivers ever.

Agree. Never a big fan of Swan and you can add Franco Harris as well

m

Franco Harris "over rated"?

Wow.

To the point their are so many backs I like better then him but he gets the great team bump. I mean Curtis Martin off the top of my head Id much rather have. Martin rarely gets mentioned with the "great backs". Harris very good running back on a great team.

m

Curtis Martin was a fabulous running back. Harris looks to be slightly better until you look at fumbles, Martin rarely fumbled.

Both HOFers and deservedly so.

I think Harris was unique during his time as he was one of the few big punishing runners who could break off a long run with his speed. I wouldn't put him in the GOAT discussion, but I wouldn't call him over rated either.

Tabe

@JoeBanzai said:

I think Harris was unique during his time as he was one of the few big punishing runners who could break off a long run with his speed. I wouldn't put him in the GOAT discussion, but I wouldn't call him over rated either.

Rarely did though - 8 times in his 13 year career, his longest rush was under 40 yards. For more than 2/3 of his career, he averaged under 4 yards a carry. His first 4 seasons were great - 5.6, 3.7, 4.8, 4.8. After that, he averaged 3.86, leaving him at just 4.1 for his career.

Tabe

@keets said:
tabe, I may have oversimplified with the button-hook, but what I described was money for Pittsburgh. as for nostalgia from rust belt guys, that's sort of like the pot calling the kettle black. Mark, I seem to recall you're from Michigan, sort of IN the rust belt although you are forgiven for being a bit younger than I am.

I'm from Michigan as well. Which is why I fondly remember Billy Sims but don't proclaim him an all-time great

keets

Mark, you're off the "mark" with me on this one, I'll leave it at that. have a nice day.

Justacommeman

@Tabe said:

@keets said:
tabe, I may have oversimplified with the button-hook, but what I described was money for Pittsburgh. as for nostalgia from rust belt guys, that's sort of like the pot calling the kettle black. Mark, I seem to recall you're from Michigan, sort of IN the rust belt although you are forgiven for being a bit younger than I am.

I'm from Michigan as well. Which is why I fondly remember Billy Sims but don't proclaim him an all-time great

I bet you saw more Billy then Franco. I know I did. I would take Sims over Harris 100/100 times if I was choosing between the two. My guess is you would as well. It illustrates my point. Not in a 1000 years that you could convince me that Harris was better by any measure. Stats or eye test. I must of only seen games where Harris took the ball and ran towards the sidelines to avoid tackles. He never meet a sidelines he didn't like. It worked for him abs he's smart. He lasted a long time.

The Steelers of that era had a good QB, a good group of receivers, a good running back, excellent O line, excellent special teams and a GREAT defense. That will win you lots of championships and it did. No weakness anywhere.

m

Justacommeman

@keets said:
Mark, you're off the "mark" with me on this one, I'll leave it at that. have a nice day.

That's fine! I feel the same about your POV.

I'll wish you a nice entire weekend ; )

m

coolstanley

@Justacommeman said:

@Tabe said:

@keets said:
tabe, I may have oversimplified with the button-hook, but what I described was money for Pittsburgh. as for nostalgia from rust belt guys, that's sort of like the pot calling the kettle black. Mark, I seem to recall you're from Michigan, sort of IN the rust belt although you are forgiven for being a bit younger than I am.

I'm from Michigan as well. Which is why I fondly remember Billy Sims but don't proclaim him an all-time great

I bet you saw more Billy then Franco. I know I did. I would take Sims over Harris 100/100 times if I was choosing between the two. My guess is you would as well. It illustrates my point. Not in a 1000 years that you could convince me that Harris was better by any measure. Stats or eye test. I must of only seen games where Harris took the ball and ran towards the sidelines to avoid tackles. He never meet a sidelines he didn't like. It worked for him abs he's smart. He lasted a long time.

The Steelers of that era had a good QB, a good group of receivers, a good running back, excellent O line, excellent special teams and a GREAT defense. That will win you lots of championships and it did. No weakness anywhere.

m

Five hof's. I would say it was a great offense.

Hydrant

Watching the game on television and being there in person (especially on the field) is two different things. It's night and day.
Stats don't mean anything........ The best receiver duo was Rice and whoever the other guy was.

Justacommeman

@Hydrant said:
Watching the game on television and being there in person (especially on the field) is two different things. It's night and day.
Stats don't mean anything........ The best receiver duo was Rice and whoever the other guy was.

I can live with Rice and Taylor as the best

m

streeter

We agree, yeah!!!

Warren Wells and Biletnikof?(sp?)

Tabe

@coolstanley said:

Five hof's. I would say it was a great offense.

Those five guys are:

Lynn Swann
John Stallworth
Mike Webster
Franco Harris
Terry Bradshaw

Does anybody really believe that Swann and his 336 catches and no 1000yd seasons are getting into the HOF on an average team? If he puts up those same numbers for the Lions?

Or Terry Bradshaw with his 1:1 TD:INT ratio? We already know the answer - Ken Anderson had better numbers, made more Pro Bowls, and isn't in the Hall.

Franco and his 12000 yards get in regardless of team.

Ditto Mike Webster and his 9 Pro Bowls.

Stallworth? He likely gets in. There aren't many guys that overlap him at all that have 8700 yards and aren't in the Hall.

So, in my eyes, that's 3 HOFers. So now the question becomes results. From 1972-78, they ranked 4th - 7th in points scored before hitting #1 in 1979. To me, that's consistently very good, it's not great. Finishing top 3 in scoring once - albeit at #1 - in an 8-year stretch is not great. It's consistently very good.

That's perhaps nitpicking.

Anyway, for me, the bottom line is I don't see Bradshaw and Swann (for sure) getting into the Hall if they played anywhere else.

craig44

the best combo i can remember seeing was Moss and Wes Welker. you had the best of both worlds. A great slot/possesion receiver and maybe the best field stretching WR the league has ever seen. they were only together for a few seasons, one of which was without brady, but together they were fantastic

keets

I talked with a friend of mine last night and mentioned this discussion. he said "Jerry Rice and whoever's on the other side."

coolstanley

@Tabe said:

@coolstanley said:

Five hof's. I would say it was a great offense.

Those five guys are:

Lynn Swann
John Stallworth
Mike Webster
Franco Harris
Terry Bradshaw

Does anybody really believe that Swann and his 336 catches and no 1000yd seasons are getting into the HOF on an average team? If he puts up those same numbers for the Lions?

Totally disagree. Bradshaw was voted a top 50 NFL player of all time by the NFL network. One of the greatest postseason QB's in history. Swann was voted 1st team Pro Football Hall of Fame All-1970's Team. So he certainly deserves to be in the HALL. For a receiver under 6 ft tall he was very athletic, and one of the main reasons why those teams won 4 super bowls.

JoeBanzai

@Tabe said:

@JoeBanzai said:

I think Harris was unique during his time as he was one of the few big punishing runners who could break off a long run with his speed. I wouldn't put him in the GOAT discussion, but I wouldn't call him over rated either.

Rarely did though - 8 times in his 13 year career, his longest rush was under 40 yards. For more than 2/3 of his career, he averaged under 4 yards a carry. His first 4 seasons were great - 5.6, 3.7, 4.8, 4.8. After that, he averaged 3.86, leaving him at just 4.1 for his career.

All true. I'll just say he was pretty fast for a 230 LB runner. He had a pretty great 1979, leading the Steelers to a #1 offensive. He also had a 71 yard run that year. He had a 4.1 YP carry average in 1981 and 4.3 YPC in the shortened 1982 season.

My recollection is influenced by his destruction of my Vikings in SB IX. Stallworth caught 3 passes and Swan none in the game. Franco and the defense won it.

Billy Sims certainly was on track to be one of the all time great runners, when his career was ended by the turf at Minnesota. To this day I can't understand why the shoot that was installed there was allowed to be played on by the NFL.

@keets said:
I talked with a friend of mine last night and mentioned this discussion. he said "Jerry Rice and whoever's on the other side."

That's funny, but even though I can't stand Randy Moss, I'll say the three years from 1998-2000 they were the best, but Rice/Taylor were close for 1989-91, Holt/Bruce were right there 2000-2002 and they played together for the longest time by far.

Short term I'll say Carter/Moss, but if you look at it for a longer period of time I don't see any duo better than Torry Holt and Issac Bruce.

_In looking at the numbers, I am baffled at why Torry Holt isn't in the HOF! _

12 consecutive seasons of at least 1188 yards is impressive. A better run than either Carter or Moss or even Bruce for that matter. Rice was the absolute best here and Taylor the worst.

keets

Tabe

@coolstanley said:

Totally disagree. Bradshaw was voted a top 50 NFL player of all time by the NFL network. One of the greatest postseason QB's in history. Swann was voted 1st team Pro Football Hall of Fame All-1970's Team. So he certainly deserves to be in the HALL. For a receiver under 6 ft tall he was very athletic, and one of the main reasons why those teams won 4 super bowls.

Swann definitely wasn't one of the main reasons why won 4 Super Bowls. The reason they won four is the defense. Period.

And I don't care about the NFL Network vote. They are blinded by the rings. That team won just as often with his backups. There's not a chance in the world he's top 100 let alone top 50.

streeter

'Rice was the absolute best here and Taylor the worst.'

Ah, come on. John Taylor was one of my favorites. I don't have stats on him but he was terrific to watch and I was at the Stick for Everyone of his games.
Not as good as Rice or Owens but real solid.

Hydrant

Whoever the best receiving duo was, a good (great?) quarterback does enter into the equation. Somebody is throwing the ball to the "duo." That might be the biggest(?) factor of all when considering this? I think so. I definitely think so........Maybe, just maybe, when quarterback x throws the ball to receiver y , y is GREAT. But.....if quarterback z throws the ball to receiver y,.......you never heard of receiver y.

Justacommeman

@streeter said:
'Rice was the absolute best here and Taylor the worst.'

Ah, come on. John Taylor was one of my favorites. I don't have stats on him but he was terrific to watch and I was at the Stick for Everyone of his games.
Not as good as Rice or Owens but real solid.

His stats are literally identical to Lynn Swann. If you love Lynn Swann you gotta love John Taylor. They are the same.

John Taylor

Lynn Swann

streeter

MJ,
That quote was from a previous poster.

Yes MJ but I look at Swann as a conceited ****k. Even worse as an AD at SC. And the only guy I have ever seen wear jeans to a PGA tour event.
Taylor my kind of people. Very humble, like you.

Justacommeman

@streeter said:
MJ,
That quote was from a previous poster.

Yes MJ but I look at Swann as a conceited ****k. Even worse as an AD at SC. And the only guy I have ever seen wear jeans to a PGA tour event.
Taylor my kind of people. Very humble, like you.

Oh I realized that. Noted one of your fav's. Swann's work on ABC as a commentator added to his "allure". Not my cup of tea either. I'll take John Taylor all day every day

m

coolstanley

@Tabe said:

@coolstanley said:

Totally disagree. Bradshaw was voted a top 50 NFL player of all time by the NFL network. One of the greatest postseason QB's in history. Swann was voted 1st team Pro Football Hall of Fame All-1970's Team. So he certainly deserves to be in the HALL. For a receiver under 6 ft tall he was very athletic, and one of the main reasons why those teams won 4 super bowls.

Swann definitely wasn't one of the main reasons why won 4 Super Bowls. T\

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHpYUS06G_I