N/S Poll. Better receiver Michael Irvin or Steve Smith? (1 Viewer)

[SigFreudianSlip]

I know. Different eras, just want to hear your takes on who you’d rather have if building a team, between Irvin and Smith.
Who is the better receiver in your opinion? Another thread has me thinking about this. I am firmly in the camp of Smith being better. And the Ring argument holds no water for me as it’s a team game. Irvin was on a Dynasty type team. Imo. Drew should have 3 or 4 rings if we could field a competent defense every year, and no one is diminishing his first ballot HOF status. So, who’s better? Smith vs. Irvin?
Stats are heavily in Smith’s favor but I do understand he played after Irvin in a different era. I get that. I’d still take him over Irvin.

 

[Bill]

I always hated that we had to go up against Steve Smith twice each year because I knew he was going to rough up our defense each time. I just wish that it could have been Drew throwing to him when he was at the top of his game.

Talent or no talent, I never cared for Irvin.

 

[Saintsfan8989]

Irvin had an all time great OL, RB, very good TE, and a HOF QB. Smith had a few decent years from Delhomme. I'd take Smith. He did more with less.

 

[SaintRob39]

Smith by a mile. Look at the team Irvin had and the team that Smith had. This shouldn't be close. Smith was the REAL Playmaker.

 

[MLU]

Smith.

Easily...

 

[Polo_Haynes2.0]

I'm 39 years old and would like to believe I seen and or witnessed the best the NFL has to offer. Whether the era is 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s...seen it all!
Hooooooowwwwweverrrr, in my opinion the best ball was played circa 80s-90s. To an earlier poster, can't remember his handle, had greats points about Irvin, BUT, I truly feel Michael Irvin shouldn't be mentioned with Jerry Rice! ONLY one person should and that's Moss. Watched too much Cowboys as a child, teenager being that Emmit Smith was my idol as fellow Rb's. Irvin was a savage and would attack the ball as a hands receiver should but he to caught way too many right between the #88. When I think of receiver, I think of hands and attacking the ball with just YOUR hands. Body catches are understandable sometime and this situation may call for it. But hands, Rice, Carter, Moss, Monk, Reed, Carmichael, end of discussion. One of the best things I remember about Steve Smith even in his earlier years, was him making it a point to attack the ball and trying to catch every pass with just his hands and fingers. That really stood out to me. Super aggressive, tough as nails, a FOOTBALL player. I'll take that, his quickness, speed, agility, overall competitive mean attitude at 5'9 any day over Irvin who I loved and appreciated. I'm not the tallest guy in the world either but I know what it's like to be Smith's size and great athlete. You just can't teach, tough or athleticism. Being a tough FOOTBALL player isn't an act by any means. That's what Steve Smith was, great receiver who happened to be one of the toughest football players ever. He's not overrated on this board. Some people just really hate him for their own personal reasons, some just really respect the sheer talent. I remember how much I "hated" Tom Brady, didn't like him at Michigan either, it took me till I was about 32 years old to finally just say how great he is. #Smithallday!

 

[BoNcHiE]

Irvin played 5 less seasons and only has 2,807 less yards. He averaged more TDs per season, more yards per catch. He had the size, speed, and was a big play maker.

Irvin is a d-bag on TV, no doubt, but he was a more special WR. He'd of put up numbers with any QB. Smith may of not had great QBs (he had good ones though most of his years), but he had QBs who would key in on him and give him a lot of balls. He wasn't being held back.

 

[texasjefe]

Jerry Rice's rival was...

(not Steve Smith).

 

[UFCSaint]

Steve Smith had way more heart, fire, and grit. Not to mention way less off-field incidents. Also...who did Smith have throwing to him throughout his career? Jimmy Clausen? Jake Delhomme? Chris Weinke? Cam Newton? Not exactly the picture of accuracy.

 

[superchuck500]

Irvin played 5 less seasons and only has 2,807 less yards. He averaged more TDs per season, more yards per catch. He had the size, speed, and was a big play maker.

Irvin is a d-bag on TV, no doubt, but he was a more special WR. He'd of put up numbers with any QB. Smith may of not had great QBs (he had good ones though most of his years), but he had QBs who would key in on him and give him a lot of balls. He wasn't being held back.

I have to agree. Irvin is the modern big receiver prototype. I don’t get the argument that he was a lesser receiver because he had a better team. If you watched him in his prime, he was an absolute mismatch and a total beast.

Smith was outstanding but all else equal I’d take Irvin every time.

 

[44slayer]

Jerry Rice's rival was...

(not Steve Smith).

Jerry Rice had no rival. Michael Irvin, regardless of the fact his career was cut short, was never Jerry Rice's rival. And thats no dig at Irvin, he was an elite WR. Rice was absolutely transcendent. He is in a handful of guys who redefined their positions in all of sports.

He still fumbled before the goal line in that game vs us back in the old NFC West days though.

Irvin and Smith, I will admit Irvin was the more polished, prototypical WR. But Im taking Smith because the guy played with more heart than just about anyone Ive ever seen. He was going to prove you wrong every time he stepped on the field. The guy had no quit in him and never backed down from anyone.

 

[hookedsaint]

Does anyone else see a little jerry rice in our own micheal Thomas?

 

[bobad]

Irvin. Big guys that can run and play that well are hard to find. I think he would go earlier than Smith in a do-over draft.

 

[SigFreudianSlip]

I have to agree. Irvin is the modern big receiver prototype. I don’t get the argument that he was a lesser receiver because he had a better team. If you watched him in his prime, he was an absolute mismatch and a total beast.

Smith was outstanding but all else equal I’d take Irvin every time.

I get that. I only dismissed the rings argument as I think that is immaterial when judging two players against each other in a team sport.
I don’t think the better team POV sways my opinion either way. They were both great but I’d take Smith all day.

 

[superchuck500]

I get that. I only dismissed the rings argument as I think that is immaterial when judging two players against each other in a team sport.
I don’t think the better team POV sways my opinion either way. They were both great but I’d take Smith all day.

I think it’s easier to throw to big targets.