Barry or Emmitt? (1 Viewer)

[JuSt CuZ]

More yards, more TDs, more heart, more rings. I like facts.

I like them too, but too bad thats an opinion.

Nope. All 4 are facts. Put up a poll and see if you get more than 20% choosing Barry having more heart than Emmitt. I think the facts stack up pretty well that that guy had no heart, the way he quit football and quit on his team. On the eve of camps starting up, no less. He gave up on football just 2 years after resigning, what, a 5-6 year deal? He refused to pay the Lions back portions of his signing bonus, which is preposterous (and lost that case, thankfully). No discussion with his teammates or coaches or players. Just a faxed statement. Too bad they didn't have Twitter back in the day. That would have been classy.

:X

Emmitt has the heart, the rings, the yards, the touchdowns. Barry quit on his team and his fans. Those are the facts of the case. You just hyperventilated and vomited smilies on the board.

Now, if you want to compare post-career achievements, Barry wins hands down. I don't know what the hell he's doing with his life--or what he's quit since football--but I am pretty sure he hasn't been the ###-clown that Emmitt has been in his post-retirement life.

See, I can be fair and balance. Enjoy your day.

Here is the poll PFT just started this morning, notice how many more votes Barry has, its not even close---> http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/14/the-emmitt-vs-barry-poll/

Looks like 10% know how to pick a winner...and the best RB of the two. Good for them.

According to PFT, its 9000 to 1000 Barry! ...and you say that, lol.Everyone knows about Emmitt's touchdowns and rushing record, but yet more then enough football fans seem to think Barry is better. Does it make him better by a fact? No it will never be a fact, it just will always be the opinion of many, that Barry is way better...and according to the percentages...undebatable!

So, what you're saying is that 11% know what they're talking about. Look at that, 1% increase in just a few hours. Excellent to see.Clearly, it is debatable. Otherwise, the OP (that would be you) wouldn't have started a poll to begin with. It's a good debate. And, I applaud how energetic you have been in defense of your position, no matter how misguided it is.

LOL, is everyone catching this guy? He's entertaining!

 

[Mello]

I like using Football Outsiders' statistics. They only go back to 1992 but the value of them is that they grade each player on a play by play basis and compare what that player did compared to the league average in that situation. Basically it accounts for the fact that 10 yards on 3rd and 15 is meaningless (and may be worse than average) whereas 3 yards on 3rd and 2 is very valuable. Also, an 80 yard TD run isn't much better than a 50 yard TD run. It doesn't separate the player from his teammates. No stat ever will in football.

DYAR (Defense-adjusted Yards Above Replacement) Ranking 1992 - 1998

1992: Smith- 1st(375) Sanders-15th (95)

1993: Smith- 2nd(342) Sanders-15th (60)

1994: Smith- 1st(370) Sanders- 2nd(266)

1995: Smith- 1st(463) Sanders- 7th(159)

1996: Smith-19th (61) Sanders- 2nd(306)

1997: Smith-18th (40) Sanders- 2nd(390)

1998: Smith- 4th(205) Sanders-29th(-17)

Cummulative:

Smith - 1856

Sanders - 1259

Emmitt was 3rd in the league in 1999 but was an average RB in his remaining years in Dallas and a poor RB in his two years in Arizona.

Admittedly, starting at 1992 isn't fair to Barry. He was outstanding his first 3 seasons where Emmitt had an average rookie season and a great second year. Even so there's no way those years would have made up the 600 DYAR difference between the two. Emmitt's carries were far more valuable to his team and he was far more consistent. Barry would have some amazing runs, but then get stuffed putting his team in bad situations. You can chalk everything up to the teams around them, but if that's the case I want to see some more Cowboys in the HoF if they were that good. The only other player that's likely to get in the hall from his teams is Larry Allen who was a rookie in 1994. Not Moose, Stepnoski, Erik Williams, Newton, Tuinei, or Novacek.

 

[mcd]

I like using Football Outsiders' statistics. They only go back to 1992 but the value of them is that they grade each player on a play by play basis and compare what that player did compared to the league average in that situation. Basically it accounts for the fact that 10 yards on 3rd and 15 is meaningless (and may be worse than average) whereas 3 yards on 3rd and 2 is very valuable. Also, an 80 yard TD run isn't much better than a 50 yard TD run. It doesn't separate the player from his teammates. No stat ever will in football.DYAR (Defense-adjusted Yards Above Replacement) Ranking 1992 - 19981992: Smith- 1st(375) Sanders-15th (95)1993: Smith- 2nd(342) Sanders-15th (60)1994: Smith- 1st(370) Sanders- 2nd(266)1995: Smith- 1st(463) Sanders- 7th(159)1996: Smith-19th (61) Sanders- 2nd(306)1997: Smith-18th (40) Sanders- 2nd(390)1998: Smith- 4th(205) Sanders-29th(-17)Cummulative: Smith - 1856 Sanders - 1259Emmitt was 3rd in the league in 1999 but was an average RB in his remaining years in Dallas and a poor RB in his two years in Arizona.Admittedly, starting at 1992 isn't fair to Barry. He was outstanding his first 3 seasons where Emmitt had an average rookie season and a great second year. Even so there's no way those years would have made up the 600 DYAR difference between the two. Emmitt's carries were far more valuable to his team and he was far more consistent. Barry would have some amazing runs, but then get stuffed putting his team in bad situations. You can chalk everything up to the teams around them, but if that's the case I want to see some more Cowboys in the HoF if they were that good. The only other player that's likely to get in the hall from his teams is Larry Allen who was a rookie in 1994. Not Moose, Stepnoski, Erik Williams, Newton, Tuinei, or Novacek.

Very interesting stats, I actually went to the site to check out how it was applied. I quit looking after seeing Green Ellis had a DYAR ranking of 354 points last year (3rd place), compared to Chris Johnson & his DYAR points of 18 (31st place). Frank Gore had a negative 2 ranking.

 

[adrenaline]

I like using Football Outsiders' statistics. They only go back to 1992 but the value of them is that they grade each player on a play by play basis and compare what that player did compared to the league average in that situation. Basically it accounts for the fact that 10 yards on 3rd and 15 is meaningless (and may be worse than average) whereas 3 yards on 3rd and 2 is very valuable. Also, an 80 yard TD run isn't much better than a 50 yard TD run. It doesn't separate the player from his teammates. No stat ever will in football.DYAR (Defense-adjusted Yards Above Replacement) Ranking 1992 - 19981992: Smith- 1st(375) Sanders-15th (95)1993: Smith- 2nd(342) Sanders-15th (60)1994: Smith- 1st(370) Sanders- 2nd(266)1995: Smith- 1st(463) Sanders- 7th(159)1996: Smith-19th (61) Sanders- 2nd(306)1997: Smith-18th (40) Sanders- 2nd(390)1998: Smith- 4th(205) Sanders-29th(-17)Cummulative: Smith - 1856 Sanders - 1259Emmitt was 3rd in the league in 1999 but was an average RB in his remaining years in Dallas and a poor RB in his two years in Arizona.Admittedly, starting at 1992 isn't fair to Barry. He was outstanding his first 3 seasons where Emmitt had an average rookie season and a great second year. Even so there's no way those years would have made up the 600 DYAR difference between the two. Emmitt's carries were far more valuable to his team and he was far more consistent. Barry would have some amazing runs, but then get stuffed putting his team in bad situations. You can chalk everything up to the teams around them, but if that's the case I want to see some more Cowboys in the HoF if they were that good. The only other player that's likely to get in the hall from his teams is Larry Allen who was a rookie in 1994. Not Moose, Stepnoski, Erik Williams, Newton, Tuinei, or Novacek.

All of this means very little. I'm sure Detroit was in many more 3rd & 15 situations, I'm sure Dallas was in many more 3rd & 2 situations.

 

[death of the cool]

I really feel this topic keeps coming up for 2 reasons:

1. To try to diminish what Emmitt and the Cowboys accomplished.

2. Try to build up Sanders higher than other similar RB's because of his early retirement.

The Cowboys won 3 superbowls and Emmitt won multiple rewards that cannot be taken away from him. Sure his rushing title may eventually fall, but not to Sanders. Blast your opinions about greatest this or greatest that, but the only thing hanging from the roof in Detriot is suicidal Lions fans.

 

[JuSt CuZ]

I really feel this topic keeps coming up for 2 reasons:1. To try to diminish what Emmitt and the Cowboys accomplished.2. Try to build up Sanders higher than other similar RB's because of his early retirement.The Cowboys won 3 superbowls and Emmitt won multiple rewards that cannot be taken away from him. Sure his rushing title may eventually fall, but not to Sanders. Blast your opinions about greatest this or greatest that, but the only thing hanging from the roof in Detriot is suicidal Lions fans.

No positive remark for Barry = Cowboys Fan

 

[adrenaline]

It would be more interesting comparing Emmitt Smith, LaDainian Tomlinson & Franco Harris, they all have similar ypc & were on some good teams. Of course Tomlinson blows Emmitt away In the TD category & Harris has more rings so I guess they were both better than Emmitt. Ok, Harris was just to prove a point, some strong arguements could be made for Tomlinson over Emmittt though. These guys were all good, Barry was special.

 

[PatsFanCT]

More yards, more TDs, more heart, more rings. I like facts.

I like them too, but too bad thats an opinion.

Nope. All 4 are facts. Put up a poll and see if you get more than 20% choosing Barry having more heart than Emmitt. I think the facts stack up pretty well that that guy had no heart, the way he quit football and quit on his team. On the eve of camps starting up, no less. He gave up on football just 2 years after resigning, what, a 5-6 year deal? He refused to pay the Lions back portions of his signing bonus, which is preposterous (and lost that case, thankfully). No discussion with his teammates or coaches or players. Just a faxed statement. Too bad they didn't have Twitter back in the day. That would have been classy.

:X

Emmitt has the heart, the rings, the yards, the touchdowns. Barry quit on his team and his fans. Those are the facts of the case. You just hyperventilated and vomited smilies on the board.

Now, if you want to compare post-career achievements, Barry wins hands down. I don't know what the hell he's doing with his life--or what he's quit since football--but I am pretty sure he hasn't been the ###-clown that Emmitt has been in his post-retirement life.

See, I can be fair and balance. Enjoy your day.

Here is the poll PFT just started this morning, notice how many more votes Barry has, its not even close---> http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/14/the-emmitt-vs-barry-poll/

Looks like 10% know how to pick a winner...and the best RB of the two. Good for them.

According to PFT, its 9000 to 1000 Barry! ...and you say that, lol.Everyone knows about Emmitt's touchdowns and rushing record, but yet more then enough football fans seem to think Barry is better. Does it make him better by a fact? No it will never be a fact, it just will always be the opinion of many, that Barry is way better...and according to the percentages...undebatable!

So, what you're saying is that 11% know what they're talking about. Look at that, 1% increase in just a few hours. Excellent to see.Clearly, it is debatable. Otherwise, the OP (that would be you) wouldn't have started a poll to begin with. It's a good debate. And, I applaud how energetic you have been in defense of your position, no matter how misguided it is.

No, it's not debatable, as the poll clearly shows.

 

[cobalt_27]

More yards, more TDs, more heart, more rings. I like facts.

I like them too, but too bad thats an opinion.

Nope. All 4 are facts. Put up a poll and see if you get more than 20% choosing Barry having more heart than Emmitt. I think the facts stack up pretty well that that guy had no heart, the way he quit football and quit on his team. On the eve of camps starting up, no less. He gave up on football just 2 years after resigning, what, a 5-6 year deal? He refused to pay the Lions back portions of his signing bonus, which is preposterous (and lost that case, thankfully). No discussion with his teammates or coaches or players. Just a faxed statement. Too bad they didn't have Twitter back in the day. That would have been classy.

:X

Emmitt has the heart, the rings, the yards, the touchdowns. Barry quit on his team and his fans. Those are the facts of the case. You just hyperventilated and vomited smilies on the board.

Now, if you want to compare post-career achievements, Barry wins hands down. I don't know what the hell he's doing with his life--or what he's quit since football--but I am pretty sure he hasn't been the ###-clown that Emmitt has been in his post-retirement life.

See, I can be fair and balance. Enjoy your day.

Here is the poll PFT just started this morning, notice how many more votes Barry has, its not even close---> http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/14/the-emmitt-vs-barry-poll/

Looks like 10% know how to pick a winner...and the best RB of the two. Good for them.

According to PFT, its 9000 to 1000 Barry! ...and you say that, lol.Everyone knows about Emmitt's touchdowns and rushing record, but yet more then enough football fans seem to think Barry is better. Does it make him better by a fact? No it will never be a fact, it just will always be the opinion of many, that Barry is way better...and according to the percentages...undebatable!

So, what you're saying is that 11% know what they're talking about. Look at that, 1% increase in just a few hours. Excellent to see.Clearly, it is debatable. Otherwise, the OP (that would be you) wouldn't have started a poll to begin with. It's a good debate. And, I applaud how energetic you have been in defense of your position, no matter how misguided it is.

No, it's not debatable, as the poll clearly shows.

More yards, more Tds, more heart, more SB rings. You're probably right, it's not really debatable.

 

[PatsFanCT]

I like them too, but too bad thats an opinion.

Nope. All 4 are facts. Put up a poll and see if you get more than 20% choosing Barry having more heart than Emmitt. I think the facts stack up pretty well that that guy had no heart, the way he quit football and quit on his team. On the eve of camps starting up, no less. He gave up on football just 2 years after resigning, what, a 5-6 year deal? He refused to pay the Lions back portions of his signing bonus, which is preposterous (and lost that case, thankfully). No discussion with his teammates or coaches or players. Just a faxed statement. Too bad they didn't have Twitter back in the day. That would have been classy.

:X

Emmitt has the heart, the rings, the yards, the touchdowns. Barry quit on his team and his fans. Those are the facts of the case. You just hyperventilated and vomited smilies on the board.

Now, if you want to compare post-career achievements, Barry wins hands down. I don't know what the hell he's doing with his life--or what he's quit since football--but I am pretty sure he hasn't been the ###-clown that Emmitt has been in his post-retirement life.

See, I can be fair and balance. Enjoy your day.

Here is the poll PFT just started this morning, notice how many more votes Barry has, its not even close---> http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/14/the-emmitt-vs-barry-poll/

Looks like 10% know how to pick a winner...and the best RB of the two. Good for them.

According to PFT, its 9000 to 1000 Barry! ...and you say that, lol.Everyone knows about Emmitt's touchdowns and rushing record, but yet more then enough football fans seem to think Barry is better. Does it make him better by a fact? No it will never be a fact, it just will always be the opinion of many, that Barry is way better...and according to the percentages...undebatable!

So, what you're saying is that 11% know what they're talking about. Look at that, 1% increase in just a few hours. Excellent to see.Clearly, it is debatable. Otherwise, the OP (that would be you) wouldn't have started a poll to begin with. It's a good debate. And, I applaud how energetic you have been in defense of your position, no matter how misguided it is.

No, it's not debatable, as the poll clearly shows.

More yards, more Tds, more heart, more SB rings. You're probably right, it's not really debatable.

Thanks for finally agreeing. Now maybe you should hunt down a "Does 2 + 2 = 4" thread to disagree with. Or a "Dilfer is better than Marino and Kelly because he has more rings" to agree with.

 

[BSanders2009]

Clearly, it is debatable. Otherwise, the OP (that would be you) wouldn't have started a poll to begin with. It's a good debate. And, I applaud how energetic you have been in defense of your position, no matter how misguided it is.

Do you have anything to support your stance here? You just keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again. No proof, no analysis, no nothing. Just the same old "more yards, more TDs, more heart". If it's debatable, then start debating!

 

[cobalt_27]

Clearly, it is debatable. Otherwise, the OP (that would be you) wouldn't have started a poll to begin with. It's a good debate. And, I applaud how energetic you have been in defense of your position, no matter how misguided it is.

Do you have anything to support your stance here? You just keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again. No proof, no analysis, no nothing. Just the same old "more yards, more TDs, more heart". If it's debatable, then start debating!

The truth is self-evident. The debate begins and ends with the facts: Emmitt has more yards, more tds, more rings, more heart. I can't help you much more if you choose to focus on the highlight reels over what matters most.

 

[Tau837]

Clearly, it is debatable. Otherwise, the OP (that would be you) wouldn't have started a poll to begin with. It's a good debate. And, I applaud how energetic you have been in defense of your position, no matter how misguided it is.

Do you have anything to support your stance here? You just keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again. No proof, no analysis, no nothing. Just the same old "more yards, more TDs, more heart". If it's debatable, then start debating!

The truth is self-evident. The debate begins and ends with the facts: Emmitt has more yards, more tds, more rings, more heart. I can't help you much more if you choose to focus on the highlight reels over what matters most.

 

[adrenaline]

Clearly, it is debatable. Otherwise, the OP (that would be you) wouldn't have started a poll to begin with. It's a good debate. And, I applaud how energetic you have been in defense of your position, no matter how misguided it is.

Do you have anything to support your stance here? You just keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again. No proof, no analysis, no nothing. Just the same old "more yards, more TDs, more heart". If it's debatable, then start debating!

The truth is self-evident. The debate begins and ends with the facts: Emmitt has more yards, more tds, more rings, more heart. I can't help you much more if you choose to focus on the highlight reels over what matters most.

This hasn't been pointed out before, oh wait a min... The only fact here is Emmitt played longer & on a better team. No evidence of actual skill, I realize you Emmittt supporters have to keep pointing this out over & over because it's all you have.

 

[cobalt_27]

Clearly, it is debatable. Otherwise, the OP (that would be you) wouldn't have started a poll to begin with. It's a good debate. And, I applaud how energetic you have been in defense of your position, no matter how misguided it is.

Do you have anything to support your stance here? You just keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again. No proof, no analysis, no nothing. Just the same old "more yards, more TDs, more heart". If it's debatable, then start debating!

The truth is self-evident. The debate begins and ends with the facts: Emmitt has more yards, more tds, more rings, more heart. I can't help you much more if you choose to focus on the highlight reels over what matters most.

This hasn't been pointed out before, oh wait a min... The only fact here is Emmitt played longer & on a better team. No evidence of actual skill, I realize you Emmittt supporters have to keep pointing this out over & over because it's all you have.

Coulda, woulda, shoulda. Maybe if Barry had some heart, he would have played longer. Maybe if he didn't get dropped for a loss on short yardage situations (to the extent that they finally yanked him in those situations), his teams might have performed better and advanced farther. It's not as though Barry was a part of, otherwise, unproductive offenses. Herman Moore, for example, was first team all-pro 3 times (Irvin, for example, just once). The Lions will end up with as many offensive linemen from the 90s inducted into Canton as the Cowboys will have (1 apiece).Clearly, I would stipulate that the Cowboys were better than the Lions, as a team. But, a huge piece of why they were better was Emmitt. The offense could rely on him to be...well...reliable. Whereas you never knew what you'd get with Barry. A 40 yard run here and an 80 yard run there are great and really help boost that YPC statistic. And, he sure looked pretty on the replays. Damn, that guy could move. But, he couldn't grind a team down--or at least he never did. If you can get past the glitter and sparkles of Barry, what really stands out for the Cowboys and made them successful was the fact that they could rely on Emmitt to punch the other team in the mouth over and over again. Aikman, Irvin, Novacek, and Moose were all essential, and the line was great even if there was only one standout in that group. But, ask anyone who was the most essential, core piece of that dynasty, and they'll tell you Emmitt was the reason.Barry, again...he was a spectacle. Fun to watch. That counts for a lot as a fan.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

1. Barry Sanders (177 votes [82.33%]) Percentage of vote: 82.33% 2. Emmitt Smith (38 votes [17.67%]) Percentage of vote: 17.67%

Hard to believe it's this close.

 

[FUBAR]

Clearly, it is debatable. Otherwise, the OP (that would be you) wouldn't have started a poll to begin with. It's a good debate. And, I applaud how energetic you have been in defense of your position, no matter how misguided it is.

Do you have anything to support your stance here? You just keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again. No proof, no analysis, no nothing. Just the same old "more yards, more TDs, more heart". If it's debatable, then start debating!

The truth is self-evident. The debate begins and ends with the facts: Emmitt has more yards, more tds, more rings, more heart. I can't help you much more if you choose to focus on the highlight reels over what matters most.

to the player and team, wins should matter. But to fans, we watch because it's entertaining. We're usually more entertained when our team wins but in the end, for fans, it's all about entertainment.

 

[Tau837]

1. Barry Sanders (177 votes [82.33%]) Percentage of vote: 82.33% 2. Emmitt Smith (38 votes [17.67%]) Percentage of vote: 17.67%

Hard to believe it's this close.

 

[mcd]

Clearly, it is debatable. Otherwise, the OP (that would be you) wouldn't have started a poll to begin with. It's a good debate. And, I applaud how energetic you have been in defense of your position, no matter how misguided it is.

Do you have anything to support your stance here? You just keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again. No proof, no analysis, no nothing. Just the same old "more yards, more TDs, more heart". If it's debatable, then start debating!

The truth is self-evident. The debate begins and ends with the facts: Emmitt has more yards, more tds, more rings, more heart. I can't help you much more if you choose to focus on the highlight reels over what matters most.

This hasn't been pointed out before, oh wait a min... The only fact here is Emmitt played longer & on a better team. No evidence of actual skill, I realize you Emmittt supporters have to keep pointing this out over & over because it's all you have.

Herman Moore, for example, was first team all-pro 3 times (Irvin, for example, just once). The Lions will end up with as many offensive linemen from the 90s inducted into Canton as the Cowboys will have (1 apiece).

Thank you for this golden nugget , it will be invaluable when I start the "Who was better: Herman Moore or M. Irvin" thread. With this info & the fact that Moore had more heart than Irvin did...

 

[Truman]

I like using Football Outsiders' statistics. They only go back to 1992 but the value of them is that they grade each player on a play by play basis and compare what that player did compared to the league average in that situation. Basically it accounts for the fact that 10 yards on 3rd and 15 is meaningless (and may be worse than average) whereas 3 yards on 3rd and 2 is very valuable. Also, an 80 yard TD run isn't much better than a 50 yard TD run. It doesn't separate the player from his teammates. No stat ever will in football.DYAR (Defense-adjusted Yards Above Replacement) Ranking 1992 - 19981992: Smith- 1st(375) Sanders-15th (95)1993: Smith- 2nd(342) Sanders-15th (60)1994: Smith- 1st(370) Sanders- 2nd(266)1995: Smith- 1st(463) Sanders- 7th(159)1996: Smith-19th (61) Sanders- 2nd(306)1997: Smith-18th (40) Sanders- 2nd(390)1998: Smith- 4th(205) Sanders-29th(-17)Cummulative: Smith - 1856 Sanders - 1259Emmitt was 3rd in the league in 1999 but was an average RB in his remaining years in Dallas and a poor RB in his two years in Arizona.Admittedly, starting at 1992 isn't fair to Barry. He was outstanding his first 3 seasons where Emmitt had an average rookie season and a great second year. Even so there's no way those years would have made up the 600 DYAR difference between the two. Emmitt's carries were far more valuable to his team and he was far more consistent. Barry would have some amazing runs, but then get stuffed putting his team in bad situations. You can chalk everything up to the teams around them, but if that's the case I want to see some more Cowboys in the HoF if they were that good. The only other player that's likely to get in the hall from his teams is Larry Allen who was a rookie in 1994. Not Moose, Stepnoski, Erik Williams, Newton, Tuinei, or Novacek.

Do you have a success rate for these guys? Won't let me look at anything but the last 3 years because I don't ave premium. I guarantee Smith will show to be a more consistent runner using that metric.

 

[cobalt_27]

Clearly, it is debatable. Otherwise, the OP (that would be you) wouldn't have started a poll to begin with. It's a good debate. And, I applaud how energetic you have been in defense of your position, no matter how misguided it is.

Do you have anything to support your stance here? You just keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again. No proof, no analysis, no nothing. Just the same old "more yards, more TDs, more heart". If it's debatable, then start debating!

The truth is self-evident. The debate begins and ends with the facts: Emmitt has more yards, more tds, more rings, more heart. I can't help you much more if you choose to focus on the highlight reels over what matters most.

to the player and team, wins should matter. But to fans, we watch because it's entertaining. We're usually more entertained when our team wins but in the end, for fans, it's all about entertainment.

This is a solid point and I think what drives the poll numbers (incidentally across any spectrum, whether it be in sports, politics, music, etc). We want to be entertained. We pick the insanely hot chick at the nightclub who is psycho-insane, but you deal with it because she authors up the most intense nights of sex you could ever imagine. This is just how we roll and why it shouldn't be any surprise that the flashy headcase is earning 90% of the vote here. We want the hot chick because she rocks our world. It's why we've fallen in love (again) with Michael Vick, who is the latest incarnation of a freak of nature dude with sick highlight reel acts. We'd want to watch him any day over, say, Drew Brees, even though Brees, while he can't possibly do all the things Vick can do, is still the better QB. Most of us place a disproportionate value on the dramatic. Barry provided all of us with insane dramatics. But, in the end, where did it get any of us? He never led his teams to anything of substance, he got yanked in critical scoring situations because he couldn't be counted on, and in the end, he abandoned his teammates, city, and fans. This parallels the LeBron James debacle or the Vick experience. These guys are crazy good at what they do, but there is a reason they aren't winners and never will be winners that has minimally to do with who surrounds them.

 

[dmac37]

Clearly, it is debatable. Otherwise, the OP (that would be you) wouldn't have started a poll to begin with. It's a good debate. And, I applaud how energetic you have been in defense of your position, no matter how misguided it is.

Do you have anything to support your stance here? You just keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again. No proof, no analysis, no nothing. Just the same old "more yards, more TDs, more heart". If it's debatable, then start debating!

The truth is self-evident. The debate begins and ends with the facts: Emmitt has more yards, more tds, more rings, more heart. I can't help you much more if you choose to focus on the highlight reels over what matters most.

to the player and team, wins should matter. But to fans, we watch because it's entertaining. We're usually more entertained when our team wins but in the end, for fans, it's all about entertainment.

This is a solid point and I think what drives the poll numbers (incidentally across any spectrum, whether it be in sports, politics, music, etc). We want to be entertained. We pick the insanely hot chick at the nightclub who is psycho-insane, but you deal with it because she authors up the most intense nights of sex you could ever imagine. This is just how we roll and why it shouldn't be any surprise that the flashy headcase is earning 90% of the vote here. We want the hot chick because she rocks our world. It's why we've fallen in love (again) with Michael Vick, who is the latest incarnation of a freak of nature dude with sick highlight reel acts. We'd want to watch him any day over, say, Drew Brees, even though Brees, while he can't possibly do all the things Vick can do, is still the better QB. Most of us place a disproportionate value on the dramatic. Barry provided all of us with insane dramatics. But, in the end, where did it get any of us? He never led his teams to anything of substance, he got yanked in critical scoring situations because he couldn't be counted on, and in the end, he abandoned his teammates, city, and fans. This parallels the LeBron James debacle or the Vick experience. These guys are crazy good at what they do, but there is a reason they aren't winners and never will be winners that has minimally to do with who surrounds them.

I'm a huge Lion fan from Detroit and loved watching Barry with his "phone booth quicks" and a constant threat to take it to the house. I'm not saying Barry is not a winner but for all the talent he had he did not have that intangable to make everyone around him better and get it done when it matters.

IMO the best way to judge who is better, with one game on the line which RB would you choose to go to war with in order to win the game?

My answer is Emmitt

 

[N Zone]

Barry Sanders scored less touchdowns, had more plays with lost yardage, less 1st downs and didn't close out games in the 4th quarter. Emmitt did everything and is and always will be the greatest football player ever!

 

[Stitch]

Even Emmitt Smith said that Barry was a better RB. This really isn't even debatable. It's Barry. By FAR!!

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

How can it be Barry's fault the Lions didn't win? Everyone knows that QBs are 100% responsible for wins and losses. /snark

This thread is a great example of how a vocal minority can make it seem like there are two equal arguments when in fact there are not.

 

[JuSt CuZ]

Barry Sanders scored less touchdowns, had more plays with lost yardage, less 1st downs and didn't close out games in the 4th quarter. Emmitt did everything and is and always will be the greatest football player ever!

Yet still ran for more yards on less carries during the 10 years he played.You guys are arguing against over 90% of the football world who believe its not even close, yet you guys go out and just continuing making the same point. We know all this yet 90 out of every 100 people say "We dont care", Barry is better.

you guys are talking about people not watching football...Well maybe you guys should of watched football, then just reading a record book.... cuz if you watched it...you would see that Barry was the better runner.

Yet another great video of a Barry run --->

 

[cobalt_27]

Barry Sanders scored less touchdowns, had more plays with lost yardage, less 1st downs and didn't close out games in the 4th quarter. Emmitt did everything and is and always will be the greatest football player ever!

Yet still ran for more yards on less carries during the 10 years he played.You guys are arguing against over 90% of the football world who believe its not even close, yet you guys go out and just continuing making the same point. We know all this yet 90 out of every 100 people say "We dont care", Barry is better.

you guys are talking about people not watching football...Well maybe you guys should of watched football, then just reading a record book.... cuz if you watched it...you would see that Barry was the better runner.

Yet another great video of a Barry run --->

I think it's been conceded 1000x already that Barry was a fancier runner than anybody on the planet. An important part of playing the position? Absolutely. But, speed and escapability don't subsume all that goes into a RB skill set, and there are reasons Barry never won anything, quit on his team, got pulled in critical situations, etc. Taken together, you can have all your fancy pants scampering all you want...and the smart guy will always take the tough, gutty, reliable, ultra-talented, winner. Remember, Emmitt will be regarded as the all-time leader in yardage and TDs (until someone new comes along and breaks his records), in addition to his 3x SB championships and SB MVP. This is in contrast to Barry, who will only be remembered as the guy who danced around real pretty on the turf and quit on his team. You can have your 80% vote for the prom queen, and I'll take the winner/champ/record-holder. Thanks.

 

[JuSt CuZ]

Barry Sanders scored less touchdowns, had more plays with lost yardage, less 1st downs and didn't close out games in the 4th quarter. Emmitt did everything and is and always will be the greatest football player ever!

Yet still ran for more yards on less carries during the 10 years he played.You guys are arguing against over 90% of the football world who believe its not even close, yet you guys go out and just continuing making the same point. We know all this yet 90 out of every 100 people say "We dont care", Barry is better.

you guys are talking about people not watching football...Well maybe you guys should of watched football, then just reading a record book.... cuz if you watched it...you would see that Barry was the better runner.

Yet another great video of a Barry run --->

You call it quitting, I call it retiring. You are bias, and I think its plain to see, so your opinion to others can carry as much weight as they see fit.Did Emmitt ever do this? ---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXQmKo2Ijp8

 

[Go Blue]

Barry Sanders scored less touchdowns, had more plays with lost yardage, less 1st downs and didn't close out games in the 4th quarter. Emmitt did everything and is and always will be the greatest football player ever!

Yet still ran for more yards on less carries during the 10 years he played.You guys are arguing against over 90% of the football world who believe its not even close, yet you guys go out and just continuing making the same point. We know all this yet 90 out of every 100 people say "We dont care", Barry is better.

you guys are talking about people not watching football...Well maybe you guys should of watched football, then just reading a record book.... cuz if you watched it...you would see that Barry was the better runner.

Yet another great video of a Barry run --->

I'm not sure why you seem to have a personal vendentta against Barry, but man it runs deep. I watched him play for 10 years and never saw him quit on even a single play. Not one. Granted, he walked away from the game and I was extremely upset at that time. Losing takes it's toll on a person. Looking back, I can honestly say, I can see why someone would want to walk away from the losing mentality. As a football fan, how he left the game shouldn't have a bearing on his football skills though.

When I started watching football, Dallas (America's team) was my favorite team. I'm from Michigan, so the Lions were my 2nd favorite. I doubt I watched every Dallas and Detroit game that Barry and Emmitt played in, but I sure tried. Barry danced becuase he had to. Plain and simple. When your facing 11 guys, that know your getting the ball, what he acomplished was amazing. Emmitt absolutely was tough, gutty, and reliable as you put it. I rarely saw the ultra talented guy your speaking of. Was Emmitt a very good RB. Absolutely, no doubt in my mind. I can count on both hands, how many times I saw Emmitt stoned in the backfield though. I don't think anyone would ever say that Detroit had a better O-line than Dallas. My opinion of why Emmitt always had more space than Barry was because of the other threats on offensive. The defense had to account for Hall of Famers Aikman and Irvin amoung others. The bottom line is that an ultra talented RB would have done more with all the space Emmitt was given. In my mind, a guy like Eddie George or Thomas Jones would have been very successful running in Dallas. I can't think of a single RB that would have been successful running in Barry's shoes.

Barry acomplished the most while given the least amount of help of any RB I've ever seen. That is an opinion of a football fan, not a Barry supporter.

 

[cobalt_27]

Barry Sanders scored less touchdowns, had more plays with lost yardage, less 1st downs and didn't close out games in the 4th quarter. Emmitt did everything and is and always will be the greatest football player ever!

Yet still ran for more yards on less carries during the 10 years he played.You guys are arguing against over 90% of the football world who believe its not even close, yet you guys go out and just continuing making the same point. We know all this yet 90 out of every 100 people say "We dont care", Barry is better.

you guys are talking about people not watching football...Well maybe you guys should of watched football, then just reading a record book.... cuz if you watched it...you would see that Barry was the better runner.

Yet another great video of a Barry run --->

Did Barry ever do this? ---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8bxK5Iybt4

 

[Ilov80s]

Why is it people say Barry quit? The guy retired. I wish I could have the success and fortune to retire at the age Barry did. He walked away from a brutal game with fortune, a timeless legacy, and his health.

 

[cobalt_27]

Barry Sanders scored less touchdowns, had more plays with lost yardage, less 1st downs and didn't close out games in the 4th quarter. Emmitt did everything and is and always will be the greatest football player ever!

Yet still ran for more yards on less carries during the 10 years he played.You guys are arguing against over 90% of the football world who believe its not even close, yet you guys go out and just continuing making the same point. We know all this yet 90 out of every 100 people say "We dont care", Barry is better.

you guys are talking about people not watching football...Well maybe you guys should of watched football, then just reading a record book.... cuz if you watched it...you would see that Barry was the better runner.

Yet another great video of a Barry run --->

I keep hearing all this about losing taking it's toll. First of all, Barry played in as many winning seasons (5) as he did losing seasons (5). Walter Payton endured a worse record in his first 10 years with the Bears than Barry did in his 10-year career with the Lions. So, according to some of you, Walter Payton should have quit as well.All this sympathy for Barry playing for losing teams? Seriously, get over it. There are HOF players who dealt with far worse. If he truly walked away because he was sick of losing, then that's a loser's mentality.

 

[Ilov80s]

Barry Sanders scored less touchdowns, had more plays with lost yardage, less 1st downs and didn't close out games in the 4th quarter. Emmitt did everything and is and always will be the greatest football player ever!

Yet still ran for more yards on less carries during the 10 years he played.You guys are arguing against over 90% of the football world who believe its not even close, yet you guys go out and just continuing making the same point. We know all this yet 90 out of every 100 people say "We dont care", Barry is better.

you guys are talking about people not watching football...Well maybe you guys should of watched football, then just reading a record book.... cuz if you watched it...you would see that Barry was the better runner.

Yet another great video of a Barry run --->

He retired for the same reasons anyway one else retires. He saved up enough money, was losing his interest in his job, and wanted to spend his time with his family/traveling/whatever retired people do. That's the American dream.

 

[Moniker]

Did Emmitt ever do this? ---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXQmKo2Ijp8

I think people are confusing running ability and the running back position. In and of itself, 2000 yards doesn't make a better running back.

 

[JuSt CuZ]

Barry Sanders scored less touchdowns, had more plays with lost yardage, less 1st downs and didn't close out games in the 4th quarter. Emmitt did everything and is and always will be the greatest football player ever!

Yet still ran for more yards on less carries during the 10 years he played.You guys are arguing against over 90% of the football world who believe its not even close, yet you guys go out and just continuing making the same point. We know all this yet 90 out of every 100 people say "We dont care", Barry is better.

you guys are talking about people not watching football...Well maybe you guys should of watched football, then just reading a record book.... cuz if you watched it...you would see that Barry was the better runner.

Yet another great video of a Barry run --->

Nah, but he didnt play 15 years, he only played 10 and finished 3000 yards behind him. But stick to a record book, we will stick to watching the Games.

 

[JuSt CuZ]

Did Emmitt ever do this? ---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXQmKo2Ijp8

I think people are confusing running ability and the running back position. In and of itself, 2000 yards doesn't make a better running back.

But the rushing record playing 5 more years with a worse ypc avg is? lol

 

[JuSt CuZ]

UPDATE on PFT Votes:

Barry - 17,000

Emmitt - 2,400

Wow, we are all just off base I guess.

 

[cobalt_27]

Did Emmitt ever do this? ---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXQmKo2Ijp8

I think people are confusing running ability and the running back position. In and of itself, 2000 yards doesn't make a better running back.

But the rushing record playing 5 more years with a worse ypc avg is? lol

Yup, when you have elite top-end speed like Barry, you're going to break off long runs and pad the YPC stat. DeAngelo Williams has a better YPC than Walter Payton and Emmitt Smith, not to mention his contemporary, Adrian Peterson. Does this mean he's the better RB?

 

[cobalt_27]

Did Emmitt ever do this? ---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXQmKo2Ijp8

I think people are confusing running ability and the running back position. In and of itself, 2000 yards doesn't make a better running back.

Exactly. Different question and equation. If you need to hit a home run on 3rd and 13, the man to take is Barry. If you want to build a consistent gameplan around a consistent RB who did everything, you'd choose Emmitt.

 

[JuSt CuZ]

Did Emmitt ever do this? ---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXQmKo2Ijp8

I think people are confusing running ability and the running back position. In and of itself, 2000 yards doesn't make a better running back.

But the rushing record playing 5 more years with a worse ypc avg is? lol

Yup, when you have elite top-end speed like Barry, you're going to break off long runs and pad the YPC stat. DeAngelo Williams has a better YPC than Walter Payton and Emmitt Smith, not to mention his contemporary, Adrian Peterson. Does this mean he's the better RB?

Many RBs are better then Emmitt, many! This is a debate of a certain era between Barry and Emmitt, which you lost.I would rank a good bit ahead of Emmitt and I'm sure many others would as Well.

Payton 4.4

Brown 5.2

LT 4.3

Barry 5.0

Dickerson 4.4

Simpson 4.7

Faulk 4.3

...and you know what, its odd, all of them have a better average then Emmitt did. I put a lot of weight in how your average ypc is. In time ADP in my opinion could be better then Emmitt, but only time will tell, as he still is playing. You dont think he will break the record if he plays 15 years? or any of they other guys above if they played 15 years?

 

[JuSt CuZ]

Did Emmitt ever do this? ---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXQmKo2Ijp8

I think people are confusing running ability and the running back position. In and of itself, 2000 yards doesn't make a better running back.

Exactly. Different question and equation. If you need to hit a home run on 3rd and 13, the man to take is Barry. If you want to build a consistent gameplan around a consistent RB who did everything, you'd choose Emmitt.

Have you not noticed your arguments are not effecting peoples opinion? Hmmm, maybe thats because they are not effective. You have not pointed out anything people did not already know before this debate. So by all accounts you FAILED at this debate.

This just in: 90% of people are wrong!

ETA: Actual tweet from PFT...

ProFootballTalk

PFT Planet picks Barry over Emmitt, in a landslide http://t.co/Uyjzlro

3 minutes ago FavoriteRetweetReply

Here is what the story says....

PFT Planet picks Barry over Emmitt, in a landslide

Posted by Mike Florio on July 15, 2011, 11:52 AM EDT

We put it out to a vote, and the outcome makes Reagan-Mondale look like a photo finish. Nearly 85 percent of you have picked Barry Sanders over Emmitt Smith in a poll of PFT Planet. Only 12 percent picked Smith, and three percent called it a tie.

Frankly, we’re surprised it was that close. Though Emmitt is a Hall of Famer, a three-time Super Bowl champion, and the all-time rushing leader, Barry Sanders was and is one of a kind, and in our book Sanders is in the mix with Jim Brown and Walter Payton as the best ever, with Emmitt at the top of the second cut.

 

[cobalt_27]

Did Emmitt ever do this? ---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXQmKo2Ijp8

I think people are confusing running ability and the running back position. In and of itself, 2000 yards doesn't make a better running back.

But the rushing record playing 5 more years with a worse ypc avg is? lol

Yup, when you have elite top-end speed like Barry, you're going to break off long runs and pad the YPC stat. DeAngelo Williams has a better YPC than Walter Payton and Emmitt Smith, not to mention his contemporary, Adrian Peterson. Does this mean he's the better RB?

Many RBs are better then Emmitt, many! This is a debate of a certain era between Barry and Emmitt, which you lost.I would rank a good bit ahead of Emmitt and I'm sure many others would as Well.

Payton 4.4

Brown 5.2

LT 4.3

Barry 5.0

Dickerson 4.4

Simpson 4.7

Faulk 4.3

...and you know what, its odd, all of them have a better average then Emmitt did. I put a lot of weight in how your average ypc is. In time ADP in my opinion could be better then Emmitt, but only time will tell, as he still is playing. You dont think he will break the record if he plays 15 years? or any of they other guys above if they played 15 years?

I didn't lose squadoosh. The fact that I am not affecting anyone's opinion is irrelevant. I can't help it if the majority of people choose to value highlight reel flash (and over-reliance on YPC data) over substance. Walter Payton, for example, is one of the greatest players (let alone RBs) to ever put on a uniform, and his YPC was a padestrian 4.4. Eric Dickerson, Tomlinson, Faulk...these are all guys who were far better than the likes of Tiki Barber or James Brooks or Wendell Tyler or Napolean Kaufman, even though they averaged less than these guys on a YPC basis. The whole basis of evaluating a RB based on his YPC is pretty stupid, to be perfectly blunt about it. And, polling fans is a nice way to capture the temperature of the room and gauge relative popularity of players, but it's a terrible way to evaluate who was the best...at anything.

 

[PatsFanCT]

Did Emmitt ever do this? ---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXQmKo2Ijp8

I think people are confusing running ability and the running back position. In and of itself, 2000 yards doesn't make a better running back.

But the rushing record playing 5 more years with a worse ypc avg is? lol

Yup, when you have elite top-end speed like Barry, you're going to break off long runs and pad the YPC stat. DeAngelo Williams has a better YPC than Walter Payton and Emmitt Smith, not to mention his contemporary, Adrian Peterson. Does this mean he's the better RB?

LOL, Barry was never the fastest guy on the field. He probably wasn't even as fast as Emmitt. He was small and very quick, but was never, ever considered to have had elite top-end speed.Barry had just as much heart as Emmitt or anyone else getting payed to play the game they loved, and never quit on his team.

Barry retired because the Detroit brass refused to give him any line help year after year. He asked, and practically begged them, but they would never give him any help. He finally got tired of having to face eight and nine in the box on every down, which Emmitt never had to do.

Barry Sanders was the only running back who ever played the game that could accomplish what he did in Detroit with what he had. Jim Brown couldn't, Sweetness couldn't, and no way in hell would Emmitt be able to do it.

As far as the yards and TD's go, Emmitt had a longer career playing behind a better team and a better line, so those stats are irrelevant.

And the rings? We've established ad nauseam, the validity of that, when Dilfer has a ring and Marino and Kelly don't.

 

[Moniker]

UPDATE on PFT Votes:Barry - 17,000Emmitt - 2,400Wow, we are all just off base I guess.

Nah, that just shows that 17,000 general fans voted compared to 2,400 people who really understand the game of football.

 

[PatsFanCT]

Did Emmitt ever do this? ---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXQmKo2Ijp8

I think people are confusing running ability and the running back position. In and of itself, 2000 yards doesn't make a better running back.

But the rushing record playing 5 more years with a worse ypc avg is? lol

Yup, when you have elite top-end speed like Barry, you're going to break off long runs and pad the YPC stat. DeAngelo Williams has a better YPC than Walter Payton and Emmitt Smith, not to mention his contemporary, Adrian Peterson. Does this mean he's the better RB?

Many RBs are better then Emmitt, many! This is a debate of a certain era between Barry and Emmitt, which you lost.I would rank a good bit ahead of Emmitt and I'm sure many others would as Well.

Payton 4.4

Brown 5.2

LT 4.3

Barry 5.0

Dickerson 4.4

Simpson 4.7

Faulk 4.3

...and you know what, its odd, all of them have a better average then Emmitt did. I put a lot of weight in how your average ypc is. In time ADP in my opinion could be better then Emmitt, but only time will tell, as he still is playing. You dont think he will break the record if he plays 15 years? or any of they other guys above if they played 15 years?

I didn't lose squadoosh. The fact that I am not affecting anyone's opinion is irrelevant. I can't help it if the majority of people choose to value highlight reel flash (and over-reliance on YPC data) over substance. Walter Payton, for example, is one of the greatest players (let alone RBs) to ever put on a uniform, and his YPC was a padestrian 4.4. Eric Dickerson, Tomlinson, Faulk...these are all guys who were far better than the likes of Tiki Barber or James Brooks or Wendell Tyler or Napolean Kaufman, even though they averaged less than these guys on a YPC basis. The whole basis of evaluating a RB based on his YPC is pretty stupid, to be perfectly blunt about it. And, polling fans is a nice way to capture the temperature of the room and gauge relative popularity of players, but it's a terrible way to evaluate who was the best...at anything.

IF YPC are so irrelevant, then why do you keep bringing up Barry getting talked for a loss?I don't think YPC tells the whole story either, but what does tell the whole story is by simply watching them both. And Barry wins that in a landslide, as the poll suggests.

I don't know what you think you can debate that gives Emmitt any kind of edge in the "who was better" category, and truly don't think you even believe it yourself. I think you're simply playing out your hand hoping to get people to fold, but when you turn over your cards, your pair of two's ain't going to beat the royal straight flush.

 

[BSanders2009]

Barry Sanders scored less touchdowns, had more plays with lost yardage, less 1st downs and didn't close out games in the 4th quarter. Emmitt did everything and is and always will be the greatest football player ever!

Yet still ran for more yards on less carries during the 10 years he played.You guys are arguing against over 90% of the football world who believe its not even close, yet you guys go out and just continuing making the same point. We know all this yet 90 out of every 100 people say "We dont care", Barry is better.

you guys are talking about people not watching football...Well maybe you guys should of watched football, then just reading a record book.... cuz if you watched it...you would see that Barry was the better runner.

Yet another great video of a Barry run --->

Excellent posting!!

 

[cmv5]

Did Emmitt ever do this? ---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXQmKo2Ijp8

I think people are confusing running ability and the running back position. In and of itself, 2000 yards doesn't make a better running back.

But the rushing record playing 5 more years with a worse ypc avg is? lol

Yup, when you have elite top-end speed like Barry, you're going to break off long runs and pad the YPC stat. DeAngelo Williams has a better YPC than Walter Payton and Emmitt Smith, not to mention his contemporary, Adrian Peterson. Does this mean he's the better RB?

Many RBs are better then Emmitt, many! This is a debate of a certain era between Barry and Emmitt, which you lost.I would rank a good bit ahead of Emmitt and I'm sure many others would as Well.

Payton 4.4

Brown 5.2

LT 4.3

Barry 5.0

Dickerson 4.4

Simpson 4.7

Faulk 4.3

...and you know what, its odd, all of them have a better average then Emmitt did. I put a lot of weight in how your average ypc is. In time ADP in my opinion could be better then Emmitt, but only time will tell, as he still is playing. You dont think he will break the record if he plays 15 years? or any of they other guys above if they played 15 years?

I didn't lose squadoosh. The fact that I am not affecting anyone's opinion is irrelevant. I can't help it if the majority of people choose to value highlight reel flash (and over-reliance on YPC data) over substance. Walter Payton, for example, is one of the greatest players (let alone RBs) to ever put on a uniform, and his YPC was a padestrian 4.4. Eric Dickerson, Tomlinson, Faulk...these are all guys who were far better than the likes of Tiki Barber or James Brooks or Wendell Tyler or Napolean Kaufman, even though they averaged less than these guys on a YPC basis. The whole basis of evaluating a RB based on his YPC is pretty stupid, to be perfectly blunt about it. And, polling fans is a nice way to capture the temperature of the room and gauge relative popularity of players, but it's a terrible way to evaluate who was the best...at anything.

Just take a minute and look at your post. You are using grammatical errors and insulting people as a way to try to make your point. That is all people need to take into account regarding your opinion.

 

[JuSt CuZ]

UPDATE on PFT Votes:Barry - 17,000Emmitt - 2,400Wow, we are all just off base I guess.

Nah, that just shows that 17,000 general fans voted compared to 2,400 people who really understand the game of football.

Hows that argument working out for you guys? lol

 

[Moniker]

UPDATE on PFT Votes:Barry - 17,000Emmitt - 2,400Wow, we are all just off base I guess.

Nah, that just shows that 17,000 general fans voted compared to 2,400 people who really understand the game of football.

Hows that argument working out for you guys? lol

Good arguments only work when the receiving end of the argument actually pay attention to what is being argued about...Numerous times in this thread those arguing that Barry was a better running back have posted his rushing stats. While important, rushing in and of itself does not make a running back. On the other side, I can't remember once that an Emmitt supporter has said that Emmitt was a better runner, but that he was a better running back.

 

[cobalt_27]

UPDATE on PFT Votes:

Barry - 17,000

Emmitt - 2,400

Wow, we are all just off base I guess.

Nah, that just shows that 17,000 general fans voted compared to 2,400 people who really understand the game of football.

Hows that argument working out for you guys? lol

Good arguments only work when the receiving end of the argument actually pay attention to what is being argued about...Numerous times in this thread those arguing that Barry was a better running back have posted his rushing stats. While important, rushing in and of itself does not make a running back. On the other side, I can't remember once that an Emmitt supporter has said that Emmitt was a better runner, but that he was a better running back.

Exactly. Well stated.