WRs better known for being with their 2nd or 3rd teams
Re: WRs better known for being with their 2nd or 3rd teams
Elroy Hirsch started with the Chicago Rockets of the AAFC, through the Rams and the NFL on his way to the HoF.
-
- Posts: 2318
- Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:30 pm
Re: WRs better known for being with their 2nd or 3rd teams
Maybe Mitchell, but Warfield was already an established star and the reason why it took the fourth pick in the draft for the Dolphins to get him.JuggernautJ wrote:Bobby Mitchell and Paul Warfield, both ex-Browns, come to mind.
-
- Posts: 1382
- Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 7:14 pm
- Location: NinerLand, Ca.
Re: WRs better known for being with their 2nd or 3rd teams
Perhaps it's my personal prejudices (I barely recall seeing Warfield play as a Brown, I would've been 10 when he left) but I do recall (vividly) the early '70's Dolphins. Maybe that's why I think of Warfield as being "better known" in Miami.BD Sullivan wrote:Maybe Mitchell, but Warfield was already an established star and the reason why it took the fourth pick in the draft for the Dolphins to get him.JuggernautJ wrote:Bobby Mitchell and Paul Warfield, both ex-Browns, come to mind.
-
- Posts: 189
- Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 10:00 pm
Re: WRs better known for being with their 2nd or 3rd teams
Ed McCaffrey started slowly with the Giants, then met greater success with the 49ers and Broncos.
Re: WRs better known for being with their 2nd or 3rd teams
I think Warfield is a guy where there can be a legitimate difference of opinion as to which team he's more associated with. I think Miami myself, but I could listen to arguments for Cleveland.JuggernautJ wrote:Perhaps it's my personal prejudices (I barely recall seeing Warfield play as a Brown, I would've been 10 when he left) but I do recall (vividly) the early '70's Dolphins. Maybe that's why I think of Warfield as being "better known" in Miami.BD Sullivan wrote:Maybe Mitchell, but Warfield was already an established star and the reason why it took the fourth pick in the draft for the Dolphins to get him.JuggernautJ wrote:Bobby Mitchell and Paul Warfield, both ex-Browns, come to mind.
-
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 1:24 pm
- Location: Mexico City, Mexico
Re: WRs better known for being with their 2nd or 3rd teams
Andre Rison
Wes Chandler
Freddie Scott
Freddie Solomon
Wallace Francis
Wes Chandler
Freddie Scott
Freddie Solomon
Wallace Francis
-
- Posts: 1733
- Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 3:36 pm
- Location: Tonawanda, NY
Re: WRs better known for being with their 2nd or 3rd teams
Was Rison ever known for being on any one particular team? I think IIRC he holds the records for most different teams to score a touchdown for. (7 I think)Teo wrote:Andre Rison
Wes Chandler
Freddie Scott
Freddie Solomon
Wallace Francis
Re: WRs better known for being with their 2nd or 3rd teams
Warfield was an all-pro with both Cleveland and Miami so I don't think he qualifies for this list. I call it a draw.conace21 wrote: I think Warfield is a guy where there can be a legitimate difference of opinion as to which team he's more associated with. I think Miami myself, but I could listen to arguments for Cleveland.
-
- Posts: 2318
- Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:30 pm
Re: WRs better known for being with their 2nd or 3rd teams
The reason why Miami Warfield gets more visibility than the (original) Cleveland version is obviously the fact that the Dolphins were a mini-dynasty where highlights are constantly being shown, whereas the Browns were "only" "a consistently solid team that won their last title in ancient times (aka pre-Super Bowl)JohnH19 wrote:Warfield was an all-pro with both Cleveland and Miami so I don't think he qualifies for this list. I call it a draw.conace21 wrote: I think Warfield is a guy where there can be a legitimate difference of opinion as to which team he's more associated with. I think Miami myself, but I could listen to arguments for Cleveland.
Re: WRs better known for being with their 2nd or 3rd teams
BD Sullivan wrote:The reason why Miami Warfield gets more visibility than the (original) Cleveland version is obviously the fact that the Dolphins were a mini-dynasty where highlights are constantly being shown, whereas the Browns were "only" "a consistently solid team that won their last title in ancient times (aka pre-Super Bowl)JohnH19 wrote:Couldn't agree more, Warfield was just as good a Brown but the Browns didn't reach the levels of the Find. Even though the Browns were very good.conace21 wrote: I think Warfield is a guy where there can be a legitimate difference of opinion as to which team he's more associated with. I think Miami myself, but I could listen to arguments for Cleveland.
Warfield was an all-pro with both Cleveland and Miami so I don't think he qualifies for this list. I call it a draw.