I am making the case.
Santana Moss is a better wide receiver than Terrell Owens.
Let it soak for a moment.
My complaint is that Wide Receiver rankings largely assume that Dallas has the better crew. There is no doubt in my mind that Dallas has an incredible receiving core, particularly their brand new 1-2 punch of Owens and Terry Glenn. But there is an operating assumption that Owens instantly makes this unit better than the Redskins (as an example, Football Outsiders ranks Dallas the number 1 receiving unit in the nation and I have to assume that ranking is largely due to the addition of T.O.). So I pose the question, who really is the better #1 receiver? Santana Moss or Terrell Owens?
Let's establish our metric: 1. I am not saying that Santana Moss is, historically, the better receiver. Terrell Owens has had a much more successful career in the NFL given that he's played for 5 more years than Moss and has consistently been one of the best receivers in the league. 2. I am not saying that Santana Moss is better than Terrell Owens in every aspect of the game. Owens is a large, physical guy and Moss is a smaller, more elusive receiver. In capacities and strengths and weaknesses the two represent different kinds of receivers. 3. Acknowleding that Owens is the better historical receiver, much like Jerry Rice is a better historical receiver than T.O., if you owned a football franchise, who would you choose between Moss and Owens?
If this were a long term acquisition, I think the question is answered. Santana Moss is 27 years old and Owens is 32. But I'm not out to argue that Moss is the better longterm acquisition, I mean to argue that he is the better acquisition for next year. I want to argue that Moss is the better receiver for the owner who wants to win in the 2006-2007 season.
Here's why:
Terrell Owens will turn 33 this season. It's perfectly conceivable that his best years are behind him and that this year his production will drop. Moss, on the other hand, is entering his 6th year in the league and likely has his best seasons in front of him. Remember that Owens' best year was arguably his 6th, when he had 1412 yards and 16 touchdowns.
Santana Moss is, per catch, a more productive wide receiver. Throughout his career Moss has outpreformed T.O. on a catch by catch basis. His 17.7 ypc last year eclipsed anything Owens has produced in his 10 NFL seasons. Moss' career 16.6 ypc is higher than T.O.'s single season best -- 16.4 in 1998.
The largest advantage that T.O. has over Moss is that he has an incredible knack for finding the endzone. Since games are won by points and not yards, this is certainly an issue worth exploring. Terrell Owens obviously has more career touchdowns than Moss because he's been in the league twice as long. To the untrained eye he is clearly better at finding the endzone... or is he? Moss has 45 starts and 28 touchdowns. By comparison, T.O. had 30 touchdowns after his first 45 starts in the league. I do not think that comparing touchdown production between the two players is a fair measure of their respective worths in 2006 because a) Moss has comparable numbers in the same amount of starts and b) T.O. has had a much longer career under circumstances favorable for touchdown receptions.
Since T.O. didn't play all last year, we don't have an accurate, recent measure by which to predict his production in the coming year; in other words, we don't know what Terrell Owens could have accomplished in the 2005-2006 NFL season. In 7 starts last year T.O. had 763 yards for 109 YPG. That's an amazing figure. Also impressive were the 6 touchdowns he accumulated in that same time span.
But that's just a hypothetical. There's no way to know how many yards T.O. could've accumulated because he had to have a characteristic meltdown that ultimately led to his early retirement from last season. We have no way to calculate Owens most-recent-season-production vs. that of Moss. Prorating those numbers makes little sense given we have no way of knowing if Owens could maintain those figures throughout the year.
But we can compare those first 7 games.
Moss had 777 yards after 7 games and 5 touchdowns. He had more yards than T.O. and 1 fewer touchdown, and he did it with fewer receptions.
So rather than speculate about what T.O. might have done last year, we know that what he did do was at best comparable to Santana Moss.
What we also know is that T.O. is unlikely to benefit from the same volume of redzone looks he enjoyed in Philly. Andy Reid passed early, he passed often; he passed every chance he got. Dallas is a run first offense with multiple endzone receiving options in Witten, Glenn and even Patrick Crayton. Like Washington, Dallas will also be punching most of their short yard touchdowns on the ground.
And we also know that T.O. is already suffering early hamstring injuries and taking his sweet time recovering (although he did make practice today).
To sum up: Owens will not get 90-100 receptions next year and certainly won't enjoy the exclusive redzone looks he had in Philly. Even assuming that Owens can shut up long enough not to pick a fight with Parcells (which we won't), you have to love Moss' productivity per catch. Furthermore, Owens is getting long in the tooth and could have an injury riddled year (or is at least more likely to do so, at this point, than S. Moss).
And if none of that compels you, just remember that Terrell Owens caught a miserable 51% of the passes thrown his way vs. Santana Moss who had a respectable 63% catch percentage.
Disagree? Strongly? I'd love to hear why in the comments section.
0 recs |
9 comments
Comments
I was all prepared
"Red, I do belive you talking out of you a**!"
Then you got all technical and covered your backside with the rules and then I just decided who care, I could use either of them.
by WCG on Aug 17, 2006 3:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
That initial
Thanks for cruising by. You're welcome anytime.
by Skin Patrol on Aug 17, 2006 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even though I hate T.O.
by Terry on Aug 17, 2006 4:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Don't know about the comparison
Santana Moss did not have a "good" season last year; he had a great one. He had a season that was, by many measures, at least as great as any season Terrell Owens has ever had.
There are a number of factors working against T.O., least of which his age, his health, and the off-field issues he is experiencing even now in Dallas. But even ignoring all those things, I still think a strong case can be made that I'd rather have Santana Moss merely based off what he does on the field.
I think the comparison you've made is similar to the one I tried to avoid. Is Moss an "elite" player? Not yet; that has a lot to do with longevity and career numbers. Is T.O. comparable to Jerry Rice? No. But I would've taken Terrell over Jerry in 2000.
by Skin Patrol on Aug 17, 2006 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm a chemistry guy...
It's a team effort and his antics take away from team chemistry, just ask Philly.
Solid points all around.
by Paragon SC on Aug 17, 2006 10:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I tried
There is no way to take the Terrell Owens we respect on the field without taking the self absorbed, persecution complex basket case T.O.
It makes it difficult to evaluate him merely as a player. I tried.
by Skin Patrol on Aug 17, 2006 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not about stats or one receiver
That leaves additions in 2006. Owens vs Lloyd who is a nice player and hard to catagorize until a year in the division (last year 48 catches 15.3 yards per catch, 5 TD's). His best day was against the Cowboys so that gets the adrenalin pumping. And add for Washington Randel El who is a different type of player than a traditional receiver with 35 catches averaging 15.9 with 1 TD. I am sure Coach Sanders will find inventive ways to use his skills. Add also for Dallas 2nd round pick Anthony Fasano. He looks to make the Cowboys more balanced at the two TE formation and showed in college he can catch and block.
To sum I think both clubs have strong receivers. The real issue in the passing game is the protection and breakdown of the quarterbacks. This will decide who has the better receivers.
by lee3022 on Aug 18, 2006 3:07 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Granted
Still, if I convincingly argue that Moss is better than Owens I think the nod goes to the Redskins. Terry Glenn is the better #2, but ARE is better than Crayton by a good measure and we are very deep on WRs. David Patten is an ok #3 receiver, but an excellent #4 option. James Thrash or Mike Espy will pickup the 5th spot.
And I think the Cooley/Witten comparison comes up neutral, if not in Cooley's favor.
But my main focus isn't on the Dallas receiving unit overall (even if that's how I segued into the rant). I think there is a tendency, especially among Fantasy Football players, to deify certain players' abilities on the field if they've been doing it a while. At some point talent drops off, and T.O. is approaching that age. Rather than looking at his career holistically -- and he's had a great career -- I wanted to at least question what he's going to do in the future. The Owens we knew may not be the one that is playing in Dallas this year (if at all).
by Skin Patrol on Aug 18, 2006 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Vindication
"No, Parcells will have to live with the considerable downside of coaching Owens, the most talented receiver in the league and a star who could give the Dallas Cowboys a shot at returning to the big game."
The MOST talented receiver in the league?
by Skin Patrol on Aug 21, 2006 12:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 
















