Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Was Stephen Baker a beast?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Was Stephen Baker a beast?

    I was in kindergarten during the 90's Super Bowl run, but the dude looked sick in the clips from America's Game. I don't remember ever hearing about him before however.

  • #2
    Re: Was Stephen Baker a beast?

    compared to the other giants WRs at the time and before him, yes.

    Compared to a guy like Nicks or Cruz, or even Manningham, no.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Was Stephen Baker a beast?

      His nickname was "the touchdown maker".

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Was Stephen Baker a beast?

        He was in Tecmo Super Bowl! That game was my addiction growing up.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Was Stephen Baker a beast?

          [quote user="NYGRealityCheck"]His nickname was "the touchdown maker".[/quote]

          That was his college nickname...but with the Giants, he only averaged around 3TDs per season...

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Was Stephen Baker a beast?

            [quote user="BrandonJacobs"]I was in kindergarten during the 90's Super Bowl run, but the dude looked sick in the clips from America's Game. I don't remember ever hearing about him before however.[/quote]

            All of the Giants receiver sucked until Toomer. Bavaro was great... but If Nicks and Cruz had been on those teams they would have gone undefeated.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Was Stephen Baker a beast?

              [quote user="slipknottin"]compared to the other giants WRs at the time and before him, yes.

              Compared to a guy like Nicks or Cruz, or even Manningham, no.[/quote]Agreed
              Football has been very, very good to us.
              After losing seasons 2013-15, the giants put up 11 wins in 16.. they are on way Back
              But for now we can console ourselves with this fact-

              # of Super Bowl victories since 1985:

              1-Chicago, St. Louis, Tampa Bay, Indianapolis, New Orleans, Seattle
              2-Washington, Green Bay, Pittsburgh, Baltimore
              3-San Francisco, Dallas, Denver
              4-New York Giants!!!
              5-NE
              Let's make it 5 in 2016 so we can be on a LINE NE again!!!

              ***Stat provided by "Schloss22"***

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Was Stephen Baker a beast?

                He definitely was the best that we had for a long time, but that is not saying much, because the receivers were mediocre at best. They were mostly possession type receivers, and along with Bavaro and Cross, they whole was much more than the sum of its parts.

                Baker was a very reliable receiver, but by no means a 'beast'. Toomer changed the way that Giants fans look at the position.

                Chris Calloway was not too bad either. He also had a couple of years where he proved to be an excellent threat, but far from being considered a 'beast'.

                The Baker-Ingram combo was very efficient, but they were always there to move the chains, instead of being counted on as game changing threats.

                Good topic, as it makes me look back at what was the late 80s and early 90s. I have to say that if you want to look at a combo of receivers that were true beasts, you have to look at the 49ers and Rams. Ellard and Anderson, and the Rice-Taylor combos were nightmares to face against. Plus we can't forget the Reed-Lofton combo of the Bills. And of course, the best of that time period has to be the Irvin-Harper combo... they really changed the game, up until Minnesota had its Carter-Moss combo later that decade.

                For the most part, the typical receiver type from that period were rather small and quick. Miami had its great combo with Duper and Clayton for example.

                The 80s were rather weird when you think of how teams scouted receivers. There were always exceptions, like the Swann-Stallworth combo, but for the most part, receivers were not much bigger than 5'10".

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Was Stephen Baker a beast?

                  The Giants in this time frame pretty much relied on receivers as possession type receivers. As said previously they were there to supplement the ground game. The ground game came first and then receiving usually came down to tight-end then receiver.

                  With a stingy defense it was an effective way of doing it.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Was Stephen Baker a beast?

                    [quote user="THE_New_York_Giants"][quote user="BrandonJacobs"]I was in kindergarten during the 90's Super Bowl run, but the dude looked sick in the clips from America's Game. I don't remember ever hearing about him before however.[/quote]

                    All of the Giants receiver sucked until Toomer.* Bavaro was great... but If Nicks and Cruz had been on those teams they would have gone undefeated.*
                    [/quote]Maybe maybe not CB's were allowed to grab WR's then . Safeties were allowed to hit.I think Nicks would translate well not sure about Cruz

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Was Stephen Baker a beast?

                      [quote user="miked1958"][quote user="slipknottin"]compared to the other giants WRs at the time and before him, yes.

                      Compared to a guy like Nicks or Cruz, or even Manningham, no.[/quote]Agreed[/quote]

                      Disagree.

                      Lionel Manuel and Earnest Gray were better. And Joe Morrison, Del Shofner and Homer Jones were far superior to Stephen Baker.

                      Baker did make an important catch in Supe 25. But, as a point of fact, he averaged under 30 yards receiving per game. Not exactly beastly for a wideout.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Was Stephen Baker a beast?

                        [quote user="BrandonJacobs"]I was in kindergarten during the 90's Super Bowl run, but the dude looked sick in the clips from America's Game. I don't remember ever hearing about him before however.[/quote]

                        he was a touchdown maker
                        https://www.facebook.com/groups/TheeBloodSport/

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Was Stephen Baker a beast?



                          ha, yeah not a beast ... but when you catch a TD in the Super Bowl ... you are immortalized in Giants lore and rightly so




                          '88 was his best year ... 40 catches for 656 and 7 TDs ... which could project to a 1K season in this new NFL

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Was Stephen Baker a beast?



                            He was a good receiver, not close to being a beast. He remains a good guy. I've chatted with him a few times in the parking lot before games.




                            My reference point for beast is Bavaro. That is a high bar to hit.

                            No one remembers who came in second.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Was Stephen Baker a beast?

                              [quote user="jomo"]


                              He was a good receiver, not close to being a beast. He remains a good guy. I've chatted with him a few times in the parking lot before games.




                              My reference point for beast is Bavaro. That is a high bar to hit.




                              [/quote]




                              +1




                              He was one of the best of a group of mediocre receivers.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X