Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Best RB Ever (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter JJ Evans
- Start date
Both are "talented?" You're talking about taking a potential Hall of Famer over a man who revolutionized a position. Defense wins championships, baby. I'll gladly give you Tomlinson for Taylor.
Tau837
Footballguy
Payton is a nobrainer IMO.
He WAS the offense
QBs he played with: Bob Avellini, Bobby Douglass, Gary Huff, Virgil Carter, Vince Evans, Mike Phipps, Jim McMahon, Steve Fuller, Greg Landry, Rusty Lisch, Mike Tomczak, Doug Flutie, Jim Harbaugh. Heck, Payton himself lined up at QB a few times. Basically, Jim McMahon was the best he played with. That's not saying much.
Payton played with 1 Pro Bowl QB in 13 seasons: McMahon in 1985. (And why exactly did McMahon make the Pro Bowl? The Bears passing offense was 22nd in yards and 23rd in TDs... McMahon threw for 2392 yards and 15 TDs.
)
Not only did he never play with a 1000 yard receiver, he never even played with a 900 yard receiver. In fact, only 3 times in his 13 year career did any Bears receiver top 800 yards, and only 3 other times did any Bears receiver top 700 yards. And there were no good receiving TEs, either. It should come as no surprise that no Bears WR (or TE) made the Pro Bowl during Payton's career.
To reinforce this, consider Chicago's pass yardage ranks during Payton's career: 23 (of 26), 28 (of 28), 21, 26, 26, 28, 28, 22, 17, 26, 22, 24, 14. They finished in the bottom quarter of the league 10 times in Payton's career.
Payton himself led the Bears in receptions 6 times, and had the second highest total 5 other times.
In his last few years, his offensive lines were pretty good, but for most of his career it wasn't. Two of Payton's linemen made the Pro Bowl a total of 5 times in his 13 seasons, all in his final 3 seasons: Jim Covert (1985, 1986), and Jay Hilgenberg (1985, 1986, 1987).
Compared to Jim Brown
Brown is the only back I would consider comparing to Payton, and I admit I didn't see him play, so that may bias my opinion. That said, consider that Brown joined a dynasty.
1950-56 (pre-Brown): 63-20-1 (.759), 6 postseason appearances in 7 years, 6 championship games, 3 championships
1957-1965 (with Brown): 79-34-5 (.699), 5 postseason appearances in 9 years, 3 championship games, 1 championship
Now compare that to Payton and the Bears:
1968-1974 (pre-Payton): 31-66-1 (.320), no postseason appearances
1975-1987 (with Payton): 111-83 (.572), 6 postseason appearances, 1 championship
How about a supporting cast comparison? Payton's is addressed above. It seems very hard to support the notion that the Browns were not already a very, very good team when Brown joined them, which naturally implies that he was surrounded by a talented group of teammates. Remember, there was no free agency (or draft?) at that time, so it would be very hard for me to see how the talent level of a team that appeared in 6 championship games in the 7 years prior to Brown's rookie season had suddenly dropped to average or worse. This is supported by the number of Pro Bowlers Brown played with:
- Browns QBs made the Pro Bowl 4 times in Brown's 9 seasons: Milt Plum (1960, 1961), Frank Ryan (1964, 1965).
- Browns WRs made the Pro Bowl 5 times in Brown's 9 seasons: Ray Renfro (1957, 1960), Bobby Mitchell (1960), Paul Warfield (1964), and Gary Collins (1965).
- Brown played with the following Pro Bowl offensive linemen: Art Hunter (1959), Mike McCormack (1957, 1960, 1961, 1962), Jim Smith (1958, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962), John Morrow (1961, 1963), **** Schafrath (1963), Gene Hickerson (1965), John Wooten (1965). That's 7 different linemen for a total of 15 times in 9 seasons, and only one season without a Pro Bowler--1964. In 6 of his seasons, Brown had 2 or more Pro Bowlers on the line.
To be fair, there were fewer teams when Brown played, so it stands to reason he would have played with more Pro Bowlers. Still, the difference is too big to be accounted for simply by that IMO.
I just don't see evidence that Brown was better. Again, I admit that could be because I never saw him play with my own eyes, while I did see Payton play often.
Conclusion
Payton's accomplishments are more impressive than Jim Brown's (or any other RB's), IMO.
By the way, he still leads all RBs in yards from scrimmage (trailing only Jerry Rice and still ahead of Emmitt by 700+ yards). Frankly, I don't completely understand why rushing yards are hyped so much yet total yards are virtually ignored (not by us in fantasy football, but by the mass media).
He WAS the offense
QBs he played with: Bob Avellini, Bobby Douglass, Gary Huff, Virgil Carter, Vince Evans, Mike Phipps, Jim McMahon, Steve Fuller, Greg Landry, Rusty Lisch, Mike Tomczak, Doug Flutie, Jim Harbaugh. Heck, Payton himself lined up at QB a few times. Basically, Jim McMahon was the best he played with. That's not saying much.
Payton played with 1 Pro Bowl QB in 13 seasons: McMahon in 1985. (And why exactly did McMahon make the Pro Bowl? The Bears passing offense was 22nd in yards and 23rd in TDs... McMahon threw for 2392 yards and 15 TDs.
)Not only did he never play with a 1000 yard receiver, he never even played with a 900 yard receiver. In fact, only 3 times in his 13 year career did any Bears receiver top 800 yards, and only 3 other times did any Bears receiver top 700 yards. And there were no good receiving TEs, either. It should come as no surprise that no Bears WR (or TE) made the Pro Bowl during Payton's career.
To reinforce this, consider Chicago's pass yardage ranks during Payton's career: 23 (of 26), 28 (of 28), 21, 26, 26, 28, 28, 22, 17, 26, 22, 24, 14. They finished in the bottom quarter of the league 10 times in Payton's career.
Payton himself led the Bears in receptions 6 times, and had the second highest total 5 other times.
In his last few years, his offensive lines were pretty good, but for most of his career it wasn't. Two of Payton's linemen made the Pro Bowl a total of 5 times in his 13 seasons, all in his final 3 seasons: Jim Covert (1985, 1986), and Jay Hilgenberg (1985, 1986, 1987).
Compared to Jim Brown
Brown is the only back I would consider comparing to Payton, and I admit I didn't see him play, so that may bias my opinion. That said, consider that Brown joined a dynasty.
1950-56 (pre-Brown): 63-20-1 (.759), 6 postseason appearances in 7 years, 6 championship games, 3 championships
1957-1965 (with Brown): 79-34-5 (.699), 5 postseason appearances in 9 years, 3 championship games, 1 championship
Now compare that to Payton and the Bears:
1968-1974 (pre-Payton): 31-66-1 (.320), no postseason appearances
1975-1987 (with Payton): 111-83 (.572), 6 postseason appearances, 1 championship
How about a supporting cast comparison? Payton's is addressed above. It seems very hard to support the notion that the Browns were not already a very, very good team when Brown joined them, which naturally implies that he was surrounded by a talented group of teammates. Remember, there was no free agency (or draft?) at that time, so it would be very hard for me to see how the talent level of a team that appeared in 6 championship games in the 7 years prior to Brown's rookie season had suddenly dropped to average or worse. This is supported by the number of Pro Bowlers Brown played with:
- Browns QBs made the Pro Bowl 4 times in Brown's 9 seasons: Milt Plum (1960, 1961), Frank Ryan (1964, 1965).
- Browns WRs made the Pro Bowl 5 times in Brown's 9 seasons: Ray Renfro (1957, 1960), Bobby Mitchell (1960), Paul Warfield (1964), and Gary Collins (1965).
- Brown played with the following Pro Bowl offensive linemen: Art Hunter (1959), Mike McCormack (1957, 1960, 1961, 1962), Jim Smith (1958, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962), John Morrow (1961, 1963), **** Schafrath (1963), Gene Hickerson (1965), John Wooten (1965). That's 7 different linemen for a total of 15 times in 9 seasons, and only one season without a Pro Bowler--1964. In 6 of his seasons, Brown had 2 or more Pro Bowlers on the line.
To be fair, there were fewer teams when Brown played, so it stands to reason he would have played with more Pro Bowlers. Still, the difference is too big to be accounted for simply by that IMO.
I just don't see evidence that Brown was better. Again, I admit that could be because I never saw him play with my own eyes, while I did see Payton play often.
Conclusion
Payton's accomplishments are more impressive than Jim Brown's (or any other RB's), IMO.
By the way, he still leads all RBs in yards from scrimmage (trailing only Jerry Rice and still ahead of Emmitt by 700+ yards). Frankly, I don't completely understand why rushing yards are hyped so much yet total yards are virtually ignored (not by us in fantasy football, but by the mass media).
Last edited by a moderator:
Koya
Footballguy
amen. few players, in any sport, have changed the way the game is played more than LT. LT2 may very well be one of the greatest back ever (may). LT is the greatest LB ever and possibly the greatest defensive player ever. He changed not only defense, he changed OFFENSE (ask Joe Gibbs about that).Ok.. back to the topic. I just love my LT.
Iwannabeacowboybaby!
Footballguy
Weird, my exact top 5. Dickerson was a lot better than what people have given him credit for.If Barry would have played longer, maybe he moves up a spot.I haven't crunched numbers or thought a lot about it, but I'm wondering where Marshall Faulk sits in history.I would put Jim Brown first, based mostly on reputation since I never saw him play. I would put Emmitt 2nd, followed closely by Sweetness. Barry and Dickerson would round out my top 5.
Koya
Footballguy
As christo later noted, although Rice was dominant, LT changed the way the game was played. He was the reason Gibbs went to those 3 WR sets, why the quick QB release became a necessity. Because you are going to try a five.. or SEVEN step drop? Againt LT? Are you kidding me? Rice was not the force on offense, individually, that LT was. Rice, if paired with a poor QB, would not be able to do all he did, as great as he was. LT took a team on his back and single handedly controlled games. Controlled his team. Controlled how the other team played. Ok, no more hijack I promise.:buttons lips:
3,062 Carries. 5.0 Yards Per CarryWho else can boast 5 yards per carry over a career? Of the top 50 running backs, career yardage wise, of all time, just one. Jim Brown. I'm not arguing against Brown. All I've seen of him is highlights. But Barry had 700 more carries, and missed only six games his entire career. Durability.Matter of fact, just 10 on this list have even averaged over 4.5, and that includes active players on the cusp, like Taylor, Holmes, and Garner, who must maintain a high average the rest of their careers just to keep pace with this number. I'm sorry, but if you're third all time in rushing yardage, and second all time (among the top 50) in average, you have to at least be "Considered" the best ever.And all the carries for losses you mention... makes that 5.0 look even better, doesn't it?
UrlacherIsGod
Footballguy
And NO, Emmitt didn't make the cut because his O-line made him a better RB than he really ever was.
Here's how it goes:#1 Walter Payton#2 Jim Brown#3 Barry Sanders#4 Emmitt Smith#5 Gale Sayers#6 Eric Dickerson#7 Tony Dorsett#8 O.J. Simpson#9 Marcus Allen#10 Marshall FaulkTerrell Davis? Give me a freakin' break! If you want to play the "boo hoo he got hurt" card, then Bo Jackson deserves a slot much higher than Terrell Davis.'nuff said
jurb26
Footballguy
Who exactly says that LT is better than those guys, you? Seems to me that all of the others on the list made the Pro Bowl and LT did not. A bit strange that the "best RB ever" wasn't able to even make the Pro Bowl this year against inferior competition (as you imply it to be) don't you think? Not that I feel that is the determing factor here, but shows who the majority feels is better outside of the FF world. It could be very easily argued that some are better than him! Namely Portis, Lewis, and Holmes the guys choosen over him for the Pro Bowl. I mean something had to have been seen in these guys that was perceived as "better" than LT or they would not have been picked. None of the guys on this list have "deficiency" in their game per say. They were all top players in the NFL, some better at different aspects though. LT has been blessed with the opp to use and show all of his skills, the same can not be said for others though. Even still I don't see how finding faults in LT is even needed to support this view. I don't view is strengths as on par with some of the other guys just yet, so faults need not even be considered. Plus if this is the basis of your arguement, then Payton or Faulk would make much better choices than LT at this point of his career.It is also interesting that you should bring up the impact that LT had on the SD running game when the man I support had a much greater impact on the Det running game than did LT on SD's. SD in 2000:351 carries (28th), 1062 yds (31st), 3.03 avg (31st), and 7 tds (26th)Then after LT:435 carries (18th), 1695 yds (20th), 3.90 avg (20th), 13 tds (11th)LT himself: 1236, 3.6, 10Very nice indeed, however....Det in 1988:391 carries (26th), 1243 yds (27th), 3.18 avg (28th), 7 tds (28th)Then after Barry:421 carries (20th), 2053 yds (8th), 4.88 avg (1st), 23 tds (1st)Barry himself: 1470, 5.2, 14 Oh and by the way Barry did this in 15 games, not the 16 LT had.Seems Barry had a much greater impact on his team. Not only did he catapult Det up to 1st in 2 major catagories, but he also increased the yardage by nearly 200 yds more than what LT was able to. Neither had good Olines, so that point is a push. What is also ironic about this point is while SD as a team had increased success at running the ball, LT was actually below the teams lowly avg of 3.9 at 3.6. Barry was well ahead of his teams avg of 4.88 at 5.2. It may also be good to note that Barry was in the Pro Bowl every single season he played. LT has only been there once in 3 years. I know, I know but SD sucks so he is handy capped. Well Det didn't exactly have a playoff team every year Barry was there and there were times he was the only Pro Bowler on the team.Now I don't mean to bash LT in any way, he is a great player. He may just be one of the best if not best of all time by the time he is done. But 3 years does not make him in line with the likes of these guys I'm afraid. At least not to me. The tallent may in fact be there, but tallent along with productivity sustained over time is what makes players all time greats or the best ever. Otherwise, great tallent that comes and passes very fast such as Bo Jackson only make for good bar stories.
Last edited by a moderator:
TexasHammer
Footballguy
PLOWHORSES1. Jim Brown. If you don't know about Jim, you don't know anything.2. Walter Payton. Nobody was as good for as long.3. Marion Motley. 5.7 yards per carry average if you include his AAFC yards. Was All-Pro caliber at linebacker, too. And you didn't want him picking up your blitz--he would decleat you.4. Emmitt Smith. Don't tell me about his line, one year he sat out the first two games of the season during a contract dispute. Jerry Jones thought he could put any old back behind that line. He was wrong. So is anyone who thinks Smith was an average back benefitting from a superior line. He had superb vision, and while he never juked anyone out of their socks, he was shifty enough that no-one could get a clean lick on him, either.5. Earl Campbell. When you absolutely need that first down. One of my all-time favorite quotes: "I feel offended when any one man can tackle me".RACEHORSES6. Gale Sayers. The Kansas Comet.7. Barry Sanders. If he had had Emmitt's line, he would have hit 2000 more than once. All due love to Smith, and I believe I gave it to him, Barry was better.8. Hugh McIlhenny. McIlhenny is to Sanders what Dr. J is to Jordan.9. Lenny Moore. A touchdown machine who was a great back and a great flanker.10. Marshall Faulk. Every defensive coordinator's nightmare in his prime.
allfaulkedup
Footballguy
SweetnessRushes: 2Rushing yards: 2Rushing TDs: 3Yards from scrimmage: 2Rush/Receive TDs: 7I am not saying that Brown or Sanders playing a few more years would not have changed his position on some of those lists but if I had to take one back to win one game its Payton all the way. He was tuff as nails and did everything possible from his position. He is the mold all super backs are now facing up to Faulk, LT, McAllister, Holmes, James, etc... can you block can you catch can you avoid tackles can you run between the tackles will you put your head down and knock the snot out of someone for a first. Payton is a yes on every one of those questions and maybe most important he was a team player and a leader. Name one "off the field" problem Payton brought to his team.And oh yeh Emmit is definitely on the list.
TexasHammer
Footballguy
Definitely in a perfect world I would have Jim Brown and Walter Payton as my backs, probably with Lorenzo Neal, Sam Gash, or Daryl Johnston as my fullback.
allfaulkedup
Footballguy
I think thats the point most of us Payton backers are saying here with him you did not need the two backs shifty/sledge hammer that WAS Payton everything in one package.
You guys who use Emmitt's line as an excuse for his success crack me up. Barry Sanders did have Glover and Brown who were pro bowlers. In fact, through their first 8 years in the league, Emmitt had one more pro bowler on his line than Barry did. And then there was that huge 4 year run Barry had that included his 2,000 yard season in which he had 2 WRs on his team who each were over 1,000 yards, but yeah Barry had no help. I always hear, anyone could run behind Emmitt's line. But isn't it funny that when Emmitt didn't play, Dallas lost. 1993 really comes to mind here when Emmitt held out. Emmitt missed the first 2 games with a holdout and then missed 2 games later in the year due to injury...the dreaded Thanksgiving day game with Leon's blunder and the following game against Atlanta. Dallas lost all 4 of these games. So, that was 12-0 with Emmitt and 0-4 without Emmitt that year, but yeah sure, anyone could do what he did. How about Jim Brown...he was as big as the DTs he was facing. Best RB of his era but definitely well ahead of his time and I highly doubt he would be as successful in today's NFL with the increased size and speed of the players. Cowboy haters are funny folks. Usually incapable of being objective and giving credit where it is due. But I guess jealousy does do that to people. Barry was the best pure runner I ever saw, but as far as a complete RB, sorry, but he was not a real good receiver and was definitely not a good blocker at all. Not a guy you could turn to that could grind out a clock in the 4th quarter for you to preserve a small lead. And if it is 4th and goal at the 2 with 2 seconds left and the team is down by 4, wouldn't you give the ball to the best RB of all time? Emmitt would get the ball in that case everytime. Barry would be on the bench.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
I agree with you that he wouldn't be a "man among boys today", but he would be the best RB in the league today as he was then.I agree with you up until the last part. He was a physical freak for his time and that's what made him so dominant. Throw him in with today's RBs and he MAY still be the best, but he would not be "a man among boys." As much as I dislike the man there is no player in history that could make Ray Lewis look like a boy.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
Leroy Hoard 
Dancing Bear
Footballguy
I'm afraid that there is no contest here. IMHO Jim Brown is simply the BEST RB EVER!He never placed worse than 4th [his first year] in total yards from scrimmage and placed 1st 6 out of the 9 years he played. In the years that he was not 1st he was 100 yards or less away from the leader! When he lead he lead. In the last 3 years he played he out gained his nearest RB competitor [Clem Daniels, who?] by over 900 yards!From an endurance perspective he was the Brett Favre of RB's, he only missed 2 games out of 9 years [120 possible games]!He led the league in TD's 5 times out of 9.From a fantasy perspective he was a MAN among boys. He never placed worse than 3rd and finished 1st 5 times. No one else even comes close!
Voice Of Reason
Footballguy
You gotta have Terrell Davis on this list. He may not have had the best career in terms of longevity, but it is a best RB ever poll, and his prime was better than many player's prime on this list.
jurb26
Footballguy
I'm sorry, but I think you guys are flat wrong if you think Payton could run the ball in the same way as Barry or Earl. Yes, I'll give you that he was a more complete player. But better pure runner, don't think so. BTW, you wouldn't "need" both of those guys back there in any way. I was simply replying to IF I could have 2 in my back field which 2 I would like to pair together the most.I think thats the point most of us Payton backers are saying here with him you did not need the two backs shifty/sledge hammer that WAS Payton everything in one package.
jurb26
Footballguy
This is a debate that I have with my step-father all the time. I'm sorry, but I just dont' think that it would be that easy. Brown was absurdly tallented compared to the competition he played against back then. Heck we don't even know if he was going against the best possible competition out there to be honest. Football wasn't nearly the priority it is now opposed to back then. These guys were hardly paid and there was little incentive to be on the field. Heck even Brown himself bolted for this reason, so who is to say others did not do the same or simply never even played because other opps were far better. He was bigger than most linemen and faster than most WRs. Very impressive indeed, but this would not be the case if he played now. Not even close. Training methods of course would have helped him greatly, but IMO it is far to tough to say how well he would be in todays game seeing that the dynamics and competition level have increased so drastically since he has played. I think he would clearly still be able to be a top player, but not near the man umong boys he was back then. Because in reality when I watch the films of him run, that is exactly what it did look like. A man playing football vs high school kids. This simply would not be the case in todays game. I know from debating this with my step-father that this is a debate that I will never "win", but still think it needs to be stated that this is not as cut and dry as you make it seem.I agree with you that he wouldn't be a "man among boys today", but he would be the best RB in the league today as he was then.I agree with you up until the last part. He was a physical freak for his time and that's what made him so dominant. Throw him in with today's RBs and he MAY still be the best, but he would not be "a man among boys." As much as I dislike the man there is no player in history that could make Ray Lewis look like a boy.
Wu-banger
Footballguy
Without Emmitt Smith on the list ; this poll has no credibility and seems almost a personal slight by you towards Smith. Emmitt is a top 5 back and you ignoring his accopmlishments is showing your ignorance.Leaves thread without voting (I'll save my vote for something important like voting for Ralph Nader 
)
)
H.K.
Footballguy
Sanders had impressive ability and great stats, but that does not make him the best all-around RB ever. He may be the best in a few areas, but he is not the best ever.Averaging five yards a carry looks good on paper, but the old saying is that stats are for losers. Consider that 20 carries for 100 yards is a 5.0 average, but it doesn't necessarily help a team win. I remember watching Sanders play and they'd track his yards per carry during the games. He'd have 19 carries for 19 yards and then break a 81 yarder for a score in the third quarter when the Lions were getting beat 24-0 because all of Sanders juking and jiving led to nothing but three and outs and put his team in the hole. Obviously the defense is playing looser because they expect pass, so it would help him break one and pad his stats.But if average is such an important stat for you, then take a look at the receiving numbers:Sanders caught 352 for 2921 yards and 10 TD's, averaging 8.3 yards per catch.Payton caught 492 for 4538 yards and 15 TD's, averaging 9.2 yards per catch.Payton was a more complete back, he played longer, he had better numbers, he won a championship. Sanders may be top five, but he is not in the same category of Payton, Emmitt, Jim Brown when it comes to being considerded "best ever RB".
Last edited by a moderator:
3nOut
Footballguy
Thats the point of this poll. The question is who is the Best RB Ever, not the Purest Runner Ever. Thats why I voted for Sweetness. I was tempted to vote for Sayers as i think he was the Purest Runner. Simply amazing! If his career wasn't unfortunately cut short by injury, he may have been considered in the top spot in this discussion.
Reservoir Dog
Footballguy
I'm 30, so Jim Brown was before my time.The best I ever seen was Barry Sanders.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
jurb26
Footballguy
This comparison is very misleading. Care to tell me how many 1000 yds WRs Payton played with. Well I'll help you out, 0! How many did Barry play with, 9. These were totally different Os. Sanders was hardly ever used in the passing game in a down field passing system. The receiving stats are a poor link of how the abilities compare. Rushing is the best link as it is constant between RBs. Some RBs play in schemes that utilize them in the passing game much more so than others. Simply look at Holmes and how he was used in Balt for his one season as the main RB. Only 260 yds rec. He goes to KC under a new pass friendly system for RBs and puts up nearly 3 times that yardage every year. Did Holmes suddenly learn how to carch the football when he packed his bags, or was he just not used properly in Balt. Similarly, Faulk was never a huge threat catching the ball in his 1st 4 years with Indy. Well at least not to the magnitude that we know Faulk to be now. He had around 475 rec yds a year those 4 seasons. Mora comes in the 5th year and starts to figure out just how to use the man he gets traded to St.L the following year and well, you know how the rest turned out.
Last edited by a moderator:
Reservoir Dog
Footballguy
These arguments about the greatest players are always interesting. I'll tell you one thing though, if Sanders had played behind the Dallas O-line (with Moose at FB), this wouldn't even be up for debate.
montanagold
Footballguy
Well..... since inflated stats don't matter. Even though there is no doubt Emmitt is in the top 5.... What about someone like Bo Jackson. Ever see that guy tote the rock... man!
Jason Wood
Zoo York
I must resist, I must resist
Jason Wood
Zoo York
Just another perspective to throw into the discussion: 10 ESPN people were asked and this is their top 10:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/s/2002/1021/1448989.html
1) Jim Brown
2) Walter Payton
3) Emmitt Smith
4) Barry Sanders
5t) Eric Dickerson
5t) O.J. Simpson
7) Earl Campbell
8) Gale Sayers
9) Marshall Faulk
10) Tony Dorsett
http://espn.go.com/nfl/s/2002/1021/1448989.html
1) Jim Brown
2) Walter Payton
3) Emmitt Smith
4) Barry Sanders
5t) Eric Dickerson
5t) O.J. Simpson
7) Earl Campbell
8) Gale Sayers
9) Marshall Faulk
10) Tony Dorsett
Jason Wood
Zoo York
Dickerson was honestly a MACHINE...guy would've been the top fantasy player had people been playing fantasy at that point.After Woods ESPN post, just thought I would resurface this question. Nobdy has any thoughts on this?
Iwannabeacowboybaby!
Footballguy
OJ was a great back. No, I think we can seperate his on the field and off the field stuff.He had in my opinion the greatest season ever for a RB. He rushed for over 2000 yards in 14 games. That's all they played back then. He also played for a crummy team, which shows you how good he must have been.However, playing for a crummy team is why he isn't talked about as much when talking about the greats.
Jason Wood
Zoo York
Simpson's 2000 yard season was amazing in the context of 14 games, but it still wasn't the best season EVAH for a RB IMHO. Simpson had a paltry 70 receiving yards that year and 12 touchdowns. His season ranks 31st all time in yards from scrimmage and even if you projected it over a 16 game season, his 2,369 yards (projected) would fall short of Faulk's 1999 season and Tomlinson's 2003 season. Faulk also scored 12 touchdowns but Tomlinson had 17.Statistically, Simpson's 1985 season was more impressive than his 2,000 yard campaign. 2,243 yards from scrimmage and 23 touchdowns (including 7 receiving scores).Simpson's production is only bested by two backs: Marshall Faulk (2000) and Priest Holmes (2002). And what's interesting is that not only do Faulk and Holmes finish 1/2 (to Simpson's 3) in points per game, but they also did so in 14 games (although they eached missed 2 whereas Simpson didn't have more than 14 to play).
Tau837
Footballguy
Well, when Brown was leading the league in rushing, there were only 12-14 teams. In Payton's first season, there were 26 teams; for the rest of his career there were 28. Payton only led the league once, but he finished second 5 times. He was in the top 5 9 times and in the top 10 11 times in his 13 seasons.Payton was similarly dominant in yards from scrimmage: top 5 9 times and top 10 11 times. He led the league twice. And he still leads all NFL running backs in career yards from scrimmage (he trails only Jerry Rice, and still leads Emmitt by 727 yards).As for endurance, Payton didn't miss a game in his final 10 seasons. No edge for Brown here.
ElGatoLoco
Footballguy
I am a huge Bears fan, but I have to give a nod to Earl Campbell. Walter was great, but I've seen some amazing footage of Earl. Just think what he could have done if he stuck around. Just think of what Walter could have done with the O-line Emmitt Smith had.
H.K.
Footballguy
So it's OK to point to Sanders better yards per rush average than Payton and overlook the fact that Sanders had the luxury playing with pro bowl receivers to prevent the defense from focusing soley on him, but then you discount Payton's better yards per reception number for the same reason? Sorry, but you can't have it both ways.
i'll tell you who was the most talented tailback to ever play the game was...Bo Jackson.While he may not have been the 'greatest,' the most dominant back I ever saw, albeit for too brief a period, was Earl Campbell.
A while back a friend asked me if I were to build an NFL team and could start with one player from all the greats in my lifetime, who would that player be? After some thought, I said Earl Campbell. Ironically, that was his choice as well. What was all the more ironic was that the person who originally posed the same question to him also chose Campbell.
Probably a poor example of validation for my choice, but man I loved watching him play.
he was a shining star that burned oh so bright for such a short period of time.
another guy, like campbell, that was a physical freak and an incredible talent was oj simpson.
i guess what your definition of "great" is. if it is numbers it's one thing, if it's longevity/toughness it's another.
i base it on if i could have one guy, for one year, in his prime, this is who i want:
1. bo jackson
2. oj simpson
3. eric dickerson
4. jim brown
5. barry sanders
6. earl campbell
jurb26
Footballguy
The only Pro Bowl WR Sanders played with was Moore. The Bears and Lions simply played different styles of O at the times. It is hardly comparable. Sanders wasn't used as much in the passing game whos fault is that? Its hard to say really. But you also list Payton's career numbers vs. Sanders when in reality Payton played 3 extra years. The realative stats are
ayton: 373/3456/9.2/9Sanders: 352/2921/8.3/1037.8 rec, 349 yds, 1.15 tds per year for Payton35.2 rec, 292.1 yds, 1 td per year for BarryThe rushing numbers:295.2 carries, 1286.6 yds, 4.4 YPC, 8.5 tds per yr for Payton306.2 carries, 1526.9 yds, 5.0 YPC, 9.9 tds per yr for BarryTotals:1635.7 yds, 4.9 per touch, 9.6 tds per year for Payton1819 yds, 5.33 per touch, 10.9 tds per year for BarryWhile Payton still holds the edge in rec, it isn't nearly to the magnitude you are trying to imply and Barry actually has more TDs. Plus I think the overall number show that Paytons rec advatange isn't enough to justify all that big a mark up.Oh if you think that the "Pro Bowl" WRs of Det took the attention away from him then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. I think it was the other way around. I can remember seeing times that he would just run to the flats or take an pathetic PA fake from Mitchell and the entire D would react. Not that Payton wasn't capable of the same thing, but the point still is still there. Barry was the focus of the D every time he took the field for the Lions much like any stud RB is, not such stars as Batch, Mitchell, Krieg, Peete, and Moore.
jurb26
Footballguy
Yeah this is the reason this debate is always classic. Even though the numbers are all great to look at and use. I think this always one way or another really comes down to who you enjoyed watching the most. What your flavor of RB is if you will. That for me was Barry. Was simply the most entertianing RB I have ever seen. He could make a highlight out of a mear 1 yard gain just getting back to the LOS. I loved watching all of these guys play an in reality don't think that there is a wrong answer.
allfaulkedup
Footballguy
I challenge anyone to watch the video by NFL Films "Pure Payton" and to come away saying that Walter Payton was not the single greatest most complete RB to ever play the game.IMO a RB who can do everything you ask from him including being a team leader and a class act on the field and off thats the guy I want for my team, thats the guy I call the greatest, Sweetness.
Jason Wood
Zoo York
I swear to God if there was ever a time I wanted to blatantly abuse my mod powers and ban someone just for disagreeing with me it would be this!i'll tell you who was the most talented tailback to ever play the game was...Bo Jackson.While he may not have been the 'greatest,' the most dominant back I ever saw, albeit for too brief a period, was Earl Campbell.
A while back a friend asked me if I were to build an NFL team and could start with one player from all the greats in my lifetime, who would that player be? After some thought, I said Earl Campbell. Ironically, that was his choice as well. What was all the more ironic was that the person who originally posed the same question to him also chose Campbell.
Probably a poor example of validation for my choice, but man I loved watching him play.
he was a shining star that burned oh so bright for such a short period of time.
another guy, like campbell, that was a physical freak and an incredible talent was oj simpson.
i guess what your definition of "great" is. if it is numbers it's one thing, if it's longevity/toughness it's another.
i base it on if i could have one guy, for one year, in his prime, this is who i want:
1. bo jackson
2. oj simpson
3. eric dickerson
4. jim brown
5. barry sanders
6. earl campbell
Bo EFFING Jackson...The power of Nike marketing
allfaulkedup
Footballguy
Definitely no wrong answer.Editted to add "Well other than Bo Jackson apparently 
"From the first time I saw him play gm ra yds avg td rec yds avg td 1977 chi | 14 | 339 1852 5.5 14 | 27 269 10.0 2 |And seeing Walter carry the Bears on his back for 8 years wtih nothing but class and finally get his superbowl ring in 85 and even then having to endure a late game TD plunge by William Perry even though he himself had not scored I was hooked. Whew, man can you imagine what some of these other modern day backs would have said/done??Mucho respect for the guy for the way he ran and for the way he lived his life.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tau837
Footballguy
I'm confused as to where you drew your statistics from.First off, Payton played in two strike years, so you can't take season averages (if that is indeed what you did). I think what would be appropriate is to look at per game averages. We can then scale those up to "per 16 game" averages to compare "average seasons." Here is the data if you do thatThe only Pro Bowl WR Sanders played with was Moore. The Bears and Lions simply played different styles of O at the times. It is hardly comparable. Sanders wasn't used as much in the passing game whos fault is that? Its hard to say really. But you also list Payton's career numbers vs. Sanders when in reality Payton played 3 extra years. The realative stats are
ayton: 323.2/1408.5/9.3 rushing, 41.4/382.1/1.3 receiving, 1790.7/10.5 totalSanders: 320.2/1596.8/10.4 rushing, 36.8/305.5/1.0 receiving, 1902.2/11.4 totalFurthermore, IMO this comparison is unfair to Payton since it includes the winding down of his career, whereas Sanders' numbers end in his prime. IMO we should not include Payton's final season, when he split time with Neal Anderson. This would boost his totals to the following:339.5/1489.0/9.7 rushing, 42.2/397.3/1.3 receiving, 1886.3/11.0 totalThis does not adjust for the fact that Payton was in RBBC as a rookie. Sanders got a leg up on him here due to his college pedigree; Payton had more to prove before he earned the feature role.Statistically, this is very close. I'd call 16 total yards and 0.4 total TDs difference over 16 games a wash. If I had to give an edge to one of them it would be Payton for two reasons:1. He achieved essentially the same production with a poorer supporting cast (see below and previous posts).2. His elite production lasted for two years longer (not including his RBBC final season).From a fantasy perspective, Payton was a top 5 RB 9 times in 13 seasons; Sanders was top 5 7 times in 10 seasons. Slight fantasy edge to Payton.---I agree Sanders played with poor support, but probably not as poor as some believe, and certainly not as poor as Payton's support. Lomas Brown made the Pro Bowl 6 times and Kevin Glover 3 times from Sanders' offensive lines. Herman Moore made the Pro Bowl 4 times.In addition to Moore, Brett Perriman and Johnnie Morton weren't bad at WR, and Richard Johnson had a 1000 yard season during Sanders' rookie season. The Detroit passing game fluctuated... here are their season pass yardage ranks during Sanders' career: 22 (of 28), 14, 27, 18, 24, 25, 3 (of 30), 17, 11, 20. In general, that is certainly poor, though there were a couple of bright spots.For comparison purposes, here are Chicago's pass yardage ranks during Payton's career: 23 (of 26), 28 (of 28), 21, 26, 26, 28, 28, 22, 17, 26, 22, 24, 14. As bad as Detroit's ranks above look, these are worse. The Bears finished in the bottom quarter of the league 10 times in Payton's career, compared to 4 times for Detroit during Sanders' career.
H.K.
Footballguy
The fact that you are making numbers up to suit your argument only helps solidify my position. 1) You dismiss the additional three years that Payton played because Sanders walked away from the game like a spoiled brat. 2) You claim that the Lions offense had nothing but Barry, but the reality was, he had more around him in his prime than Walter did. 3) You say the style of offense wasn't comparable when certain aspects helped and hurt both backs. However, you only reference where Sanders was disadvantaged.I know I'll never change your mind on who you think is better, which is fine by me because I respect your opinion and this has been a fun debate. However Payton will win the vote on this poll because he should, and rightly so.The only Pro Bowl WR Sanders played with was Moore. The Bears and Lions simply played different styles of O at the times. It is hardly comparable. Sanders wasn't used as much in the passing game whos fault is that? Its hard to say really. But you also list Payton's career numbers vs. Sanders when in reality Payton played 3 extra years. The realative stats are
