Who is better, Covert or Jefferson?
Justin Jefferson leads with a GOAT score of 80.4 against 79.7 for Jim Covert — a gap of 0.7 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Justin Jefferson above Jim Covert: 80.4 vs 79.7. Justin Jefferson leads on Statistics, Dominance. Jim Covert leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Jefferson wins: Dominance, Statistics
Covert wins: Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/jim-covert-vs-justin-jefferson
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Jefferson leads in 4 of 5 weighted categories.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Covert | 0 | 0 | 2 | 6 | 20 | 26 |
| 🇺🇸 Jefferson | 0 | 0 | 1,400 | 3,016 | 5,899 | 8,832 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | CovertRetired | JeffersonActive · Minnesota Vikings |
|---|---|---|
| Super Bowl titles | 1 | — |
| Pro Bowls | 2 | — |
| First-team All-Pro selections | 2 | — |
| Games played | 111 | — |
| All-Decade team selections | 1 | — |
| Offensive Player of the Year awards | — | 1 |
| Pro Bowl selections | — | 4 |
| All-Pro first teams | — | 3 |
| Receiving yards peak | — | 1,809 |
| Career receiving yards | — | 7,000 |
| Dominance w25% | 80 | 84 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 64 | 58 |
| Honours w20% | 78 | 78 |
| Statistics w15% | 86 | 92 |
Justin Jefferson leads with a GOAT score of 80.4 against 79.7 for Jim Covert — a gap of 0.7 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Covert scores higher on longevity. Jefferson leads on dominance, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Covert: 79.7, Jefferson: 80.4.
Make your case for Covert vs Jefferson. The scoring is published in full — if you can point at the pillar or the weight you disagree with, we read it. Read the methodology paper.