Best RB Ever (1 Viewer)

[jurb26]

JWB, why "scale up"? Why not just take the per game avgs as they are? Probably becuase you will find they favor Barry:22.3 touches, 118.9 yds, .71 tds per game Barry22.8 touches, 111.9 yds, .66 tds per game PaytonYou site that Payton's last season is unfair to include, but in reality Barry's last season as well was by far his worst season of all! Excluding the 11 game one of course, so I don't see the point in bringing that up. Even still after taking away his final season his per game numbers are still behind Barry's:23.3, 115.3, .67You can site that Payton was in a RBBC his first year, but Barry was not simply handed the starting role his rookie year, he had to earn it. Hence the 15 game season his rookie year. So let me get this right though. Yo would like to credit Payton for 2 more years of success when he played 3 seasons longer. Yet on the same note think it only fair to not include the 3rd of those 3 seasons because it places Payton at a disadvantage? Sounds like a bit of a double standard to me. Yes I may have only factored yearly numbers at first, but even still the per game ones have Barry on top. The supporting casts are hard to rank as both were very poor most times. I'll give Payton the edge though for having it a bit worse. These are the 1 and 2 RB on my list so I could really don't care too much. As HK says we are not going to sway each others opinion with this. I say cheers to both but still favor Barry.

 

[jurb26]

1) You dismiss the additional three years that Payton played because Sanders walked away from the game like a spoiled brat.

No I took the numbers directly from pro football ref. Simply didn't break them down in any way to factor out or in other data. Which you and JWB seem to feel is needed.

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.

Umm no again, I claim that Barry just like every other stud RB was the main focus of Ds on a weekly basis. "Every other stud RB" would include Payton as well. So both were the primary goal the D had in mind. I feel this to be a push.

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.

If you can't see that these 2 Os were vastly different in scheme, then I don't even know were to begin.

 

[ShadowMaster]

What! No Franco Harris?Your probably right, he only has 4 superbowl rings........flawed

 

[Tau837]

JWB, why "scale up"? Why not just take the per game avgs as they are? Probably becuase you will find they favor Barry:22.3 touches, 118.9 yds, .71 tds per game Barry22.8 touches, 111.9 yds, .66 tds per game Payton.

How can multiplying both of their per game averages by 16 change the result? If per game favors Barry, so would per 16 games. I scaled up to put it in season based terms, since that is what your original post was based on. It's the same either way.

You site that Payton's last season is unfair to include, but in reality Barry's last season as well was by far his worst season of all! Excluding the 11 game one of course, so I don't see the point in bringing that up. Even still after taking away his final season his per game numbers are still behind Barry's:23.3, 115.3, .67

Not sure what's up with your numbers, but they are off. Payton's per game averages, excluding his final season:117.9 total yards per game, 0.69 total TDs per gameSo he got exactly 1 yard and 0.02 TDs less than Barry per game. Like I said, it's a wash.

You can site that Payton was in a RBBC his first year, but Barry was not simply handed the starting role his rookie year, he had to earn it.

So what? I counted the first year for each of them. It would have made the comparison more of an appples to apples comparison to exclude Payton's first season, but I didn't.I included it for the same reason you mention... he could have done more to claim a larger share of the touches in that first year.

So let me get this right though. Yo would like to credit Payton for 2 more years of success when he played 3 seasons longer. Yet on the same note think it only fair to not include the 3rd of those 3 seasons because it places Payton at a disadvantage? Sounds like a bit of a double standard to me.

Yes, credit for 2 out of his extra 3 seasons, the 2 he remained the feature back. Yes, do not include the 3rd because it is the one in which he shared the ball with Neal Anderson. You correctly summarized my position, yet I am failing to see a double standard. A double standard would be not counting something for Payton to help my point of view but counting it for Sanders, again to help my point of view. I'm not doing that.The rookie seasons should remain because both had a chance to earn their touches. Sanders didn't stay long enough to have a comparable final season, however, so it is reasonable to exclude that one from the discussion. Keeping it in would essentially give Sanders an advantage for quitting sooner; that is not performance-based and thus does not help us in our comparison to determine which was a better RB.If our goal here is to determine who is the best RB, we should do whatever we can to compare apples to apples.All that said, we can agree to disagree. I know for certain that no one will ever convince me that Sanders was a better RB than Payton, and presumably you feel the same about your stance. I do agree with the earlier poster who suggested that others watch Pure Payton to remember exactly how awesome he was.

 

[IanTucker]

Jim Brown.  This shouldn't even be up for debate.   He only played 9 yrs and he left on top of his game.   He was a man among boys then and he would be now also.

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.

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.

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.

But your forgetting Jim Brown today would have the benefit of better blocking. I saw all these players' entire careers.Jim Brown was the greatest.

 

[H.K.]

As HK says we are not going to sway each others opinion with this. I say cheers to both but still favor Barry.

Not gonna even respond to your other post, because we'd go on forever. So for now I'll end it with:

 

[smasher10]

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!

Bo EFFING Jackson...

The power of Nike marketing

easy there little lady. it's got nothing to do with nike ads. bo was a machine out of the dickersen/campbell mold. he had good size and could run with power, not to mention his blazing speed.

i was a Bo fan long before he went to the raiders, i grew up in family divided over the Auburn/Tennessee line (with a mutual hatred for Alabama ). i was well aware of his capabilities back then.

he didn't even get to run out of the I-form till he was a senior, they ran out of the wishbone his other years. if Bo had been given the chance to run out of the I-form his whole career, he would be considered the best college back ever.

if he had played 7-8 years in the nfl, he would be mentioned more with the all-time greats.

what is this petty hatred for Bo anyways? did he get your sister preagnant or something?

 

[jurb26]

JWB, I got my numbers from hereayton career numbers:3838 carries, 16726 yds, 110 tds, 492 rec, 4538 yds, 15 tdsin 190 career gamesMinus the 1987 season:146, 533, 4 rushing, 33, 217, 1 rec12 games this seasonto get:178 games, 4151 touches, 20514 yds, 120This would turn out to be:23.3 touchs, 115.2 yds, .67 tds per game What is confusing about this? I don't think I misread any of the stats. Oh the double standard I was refering to was that because Payton's final year was significantly worse you want to throw it out. Barry's however was his worst season as well, but you choose to include it. I understand that the RBBC may sway this a bit and am willing to give Payton the benifit of the doubt here. Still though it seems a bit strange, maybe not double standard though. As Barry was still the feature player..... you get my point.

 

[jurb26]

As HK says we are not going to sway each others opinion with this. I say cheers to both but still favor Barry.

Not gonna even respond to your other post, because we'd go on forever. So for now I'll end it with:

Agreed...

 

[OddibeMcD]

I can understand leaving LT off for now, but on a pure talent level he's the best I've ever seen.

LT played defense. However, he was the best linebacker I've ever seen too.And there is only 1 LT. IF you ever saw him play, you'd know why I say that.Look at Ray Lewis and multiply him by 1.5 and that equals Lawrence Taylor. Nobody on offense or defense could dominate a game like him.Not Joe Montanta, Barry Sanders, Jerry Rice, or Ray Lewis.

That is your opinion, so don't preach like it's gospel. While I will 100% agree that LT is the best linebacker I've ever seen play, others will argue that point with you. Saying LT was more dominant than Jerry Rice is just plain crap. Rice was the best football player ever at any position. :gang:

I will tell you what, LT in his prime was way better than anti-lock brakes.

 

[Christo]

But your forgetting Jim Brown today would have the benefit of better blocking. I saw all these players' entire careers.Jim Brown was the greatest.

Geez, you're old I don't think we're forgetting it at all. I for one am certainly not saying that the case can't be made that he is still the greatest.But what you're forgetting is that once that blocking dries up and Big Jim Brown is in the open field, there's a whole different animal waiting for him today as opposed to the late 50's and early 60's. I don't think he saw the likes of Ray Lewis scraping down the line or Roy Williams hurtling out of the secondary once he got past the line of scrimmage.Here's some others who ended up in the Hall of Fame with Brown:Ernie Stautner, DT, '50-'63, 6'1", #230Joe Schmidt, MLB, '53-'65, 6'0", #220Dick "Night Train" Lane, S, '52-'65, 6'1", #194At the same time Brown, who played from '57-'65, was 6'2" and #232. The guy was a FREAK for his day.

 

[Lord Zor]

I see this debate all the time. And it is always the same arguements from every side. It just gets silly when people start breaking down all these stats to fit their arguement.The fact is, they are all the best RBs of all time. You can't say one is clearly the best of all time. If you do, I say PROVE IT. You cannot do so, not with any facts. The best player at any position is really just your opinion. Afterall, what determines the best back? Total yards? Average? TDs? Rings? Flash? What? After you tell me, please then provide your source. Is there a book called "How to determine the best RB of all time" out there somewhere?Kind of like arguing religions when you think about it. Did this debate change anyone's mind about their original pick? I mean if you picked Barry or Walter or Earl or Emmitt or Jim, did this debate cause you to change that to someone else?NO!

 

[tommyGunZ]

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! Bo EFFING Jackson...The power of Nike marketing

skool me. Anyone who watched Bo knows he was perhaps the best power/speed back in NFL history. Jamal Lewis with Fred Taylor speed. Was extremely athletic, but didn't have that Sanders, LT2 wiggle, although his cuts were so sudden that he often left defenders grasping. Rushing | Receiving |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 1987 rai | 7 | 81 554 6.8 4 | 16 136 8.5 2 || 1988 rai | 10 | 136 580 4.3 3 | 9 79 8.8 0 || 1989 rai | 11 | 173 950 5.5 4 | 9 69 7.7 0 || 1990 rai | 10 | 125 698 5.6 5 | 6 68 11.3 0 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| TOTAL | 38 | 515 2782 5.4 16 | 40 352 8.8 2Pretty impressive #'s, considering he didn't play football at all in 1986, never went through a training camp (joining the Raiders on the fly during week 3-4), and shared the backfield with another HOF RB.That 5.4 APC is HOF material alone had Bo gotten more carries. Even more impressive considering the circumstances in which he achieved his numbers.Again, please tell me why the legend of Bo is a product of "Nike" marketing.

 

[Tau837]

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! Bo EFFING Jackson...The power of Nike marketing

skool me. Anyone who watched Bo knows he was perhaps the best power/speed back in NFL history. Jamal Lewis with Fred Taylor speed. Was extremely athletic, but didn't have that Sanders, LT2 wiggle, although his cuts were so sudden that he often left defenders grasping. Rushing | Receiving |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 1987 rai | 7 | 81 554 6.8 4 | 16 136 8.5 2 || 1988 rai | 10 | 136 580 4.3 3 | 9 79 8.8 0 || 1989 rai | 11 | 173 950 5.5 4 | 9 69 7.7 0 || 1990 rai | 10 | 125 698 5.6 5 | 6 68 11.3 0 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| TOTAL | 38 | 515 2782 5.4 16 | 40 352 8.8 2Pretty impressive #'s, considering he didn't play football at all in 1986, never went through a training camp (joining the Raiders on the fly during week 3-4), and shared the backfield with another HOF RB.That 5.4 APC is HOF material alone had Bo gotten more carries. Even more impressive considering the circumstances in which he achieved his numbers.Again, please tell me why the legend of Bo is a product of "Nike" marketing.

This thread was about the best RB ever. To me that means a complete back, one who excels at all phases. Bo didn't catch passes, and I doubt he was much of a blocker, though I don't know that for sure.Bo had 515 carries. That isn't even two seasons' worth. No way does he belong in this discussion.If someone starts a thread about what RB had the most impressive physical ability or something like that, then he might belong in the discussion.

 

[Tau837]

JWB, I got my numbers from hereayton career numbers:3838 carries, 16726 yds, 110 tds, 492 rec, 4538 yds, 15 tdsin 190 career gamesMinus the 1987 season:146, 533, 4 rushing, 33, 217, 1 rec12 games this seasonto get:178 games, 4151 touches, 20514 yds, 120This would turn out to be:23.3 touchs, 115.2 yds, .67 tds per game What is confusing about this? I don't think I misread any of the stats. Oh the double standard I was refering to was that because Payton's final year was significantly worse you want to throw it out. Barry's however was his worst season as well, but you choose to include it. I understand that the RBBC may sway this a bit and am willing to give Payton the benifit of the doubt here. Still though it seems a bit strange, maybe not double standard though. As Barry was still the feature player..... you get my point.

You're right... I deducted 16 games instead of 12 for 1987. I still think Walter is the man. But I see your arguments. Agree to disagree.

 

[Ypsitucky]

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.

I couldn't agree with you more, Mr. Pink.

 

[Tau837]

I see this debate all the time. And it is always the same arguements from every side. It just gets silly when people start breaking down all these stats to fit their arguement.The fact is, they are all the best RBs of all time. You can't say one is clearly the best of all time. If you do, I say PROVE IT. You cannot do so, not with any facts. The best player at any position is really just your opinion. Afterall, what determines the best back? Total yards? Average? TDs? Rings? Flash? What? After you tell me, please then provide your source. Is there a book called "How to determine the best RB of all time" out there somewhere?Kind of like arguing religions when you think about it. Did this debate change anyone's mind about their original pick? I mean if you picked Barry or Walter or Earl or Emmitt or Jim, did this debate cause you to change that to someone else?NO!

I assume there are people on this board who don't know or don't remember how great Payton was. When they see these posts, they may indeed change their opinion. Even if they don't, I enjoy the debate.I am open minded enough to change my opinion if someone posts a strong enough argument. It hasn't happened in this case, but I have changed my opinion on other things based on this type of debate.

 

[Ypsitucky]

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. 

i'll tell you who was the most talented tailback to ever play the game was...Bo Jackson.

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

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! Bo EFFING Jackson...

The power of Nike marketing

..and if you're talking about the greatest ever for 1 year in their prime, then Gale Sayers absolutely has to be in the top 3 or top 5.Earl

Gale

Barry

Walter

OJ

ED

and maybe even Billy Sims.

And I'm sure I left a few out.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

I've seen enough film of Brown to say that he is the greatest. Both my father and grandfather agree, FWIW. 1) Brown2) Payton3) Sayers4) Sanders5) Simpson6) Smith7) Dickerson8) Campbell9) Faulk10) MotleyAlso, FWIW, The Sporting News did a top 50 RB magazine when Smith broke the record. Here are their top 15:1) Brown2) Payton3) Sanders4) Sayers5) Campbell6) Simpson7) Motley8) Smith9) Dickerson10) Nagurski11) Faulk12) Allen13) Dorsett14) Moore15) HarrisLook at those last two and tell me that Penn State RBs bust in the NFL.

 

[tommyGunZ]

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!  Bo EFFING Jackson...The power of Nike marketing

skool me. Anyone who watched Bo knows he was perhaps the best power/speed back in NFL history. Jamal Lewis with Fred Taylor speed. Was extremely athletic, but didn't have that Sanders, LT2 wiggle, although his cuts were so sudden that he often left defenders grasping. Rushing | Receiving |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 1987 rai | 7 | 81 554 6.8 4 | 16 136 8.5 2 || 1988 rai | 10 | 136 580 4.3 3 | 9 79 8.8 0 || 1989 rai | 11 | 173 950 5.5 4 | 9 69 7.7 0 || 1990 rai | 10 | 125 698 5.6 5 | 6 68 11.3 0 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| TOTAL | 38 | 515 2782 5.4 16 | 40 352 8.8 2Pretty impressive #'s, considering he didn't play football at all in 1986, never went through a training camp (joining the Raiders on the fly during week 3-4), and shared the backfield with another HOF RB.That 5.4 APC is HOF material alone had Bo gotten more carries. Even more impressive considering the circumstances in which he achieved his numbers.Again, please tell me why the legend of Bo is a product of "Nike" marketing.

This thread was about the best RB ever. To me that means a complete back, one who excels at all phases. Bo didn't catch passes, and I doubt he was much of a blocker, though I don't know that for sure.Bo had 515 carries. That isn't even two seasons' worth. No way does he belong in this discussion.If someone starts a thread about what RB had the most impressive physical ability or something like that, then he might belong in the discussion.

And I think that Bo Jackson belongs in any discussion when talking best RB ever. If we're talking about best RB's career, no way does he deserve to be there. Neither does Gale Sayers.

 

[Horses Mouth]

<seriously>LaDainian Tomlinson belongs somewhere on that list.</seriously>

haha. Clayton's drunk. i LOVE LT2, but seriously, top 10 RB of all time in the NFL as of now?

 

[Jason Wood]

And I think that Bo Jackson belongs in any discussion when talking best RB ever. If we're talking about best RB's career, no way does he deserve to be there. Neither does Gale Sayers.

tommy,Honestly, how can you say Bo Jackson deserves to be in the conversation and not attribute it to the legend that was born out of a) his injury, b) his being a 2 sport star and c) the massively successful Nike marketing campaign?

I mean, you put those stats out there like they are a badge of honor? We're talking about the BEST EVER. BEST EVER has to mean career. And, even if you weren't talking about career and were to say, if there was one RB I would want to build a team around for one year, how could Bo even rate? Based on what? PEOPLE'S IMAGINATION OF WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN.

Honestly, they guy was non existent as a receiver --- But he's the best ever RB? So receiving prowess has no place in evaluating the position?

He was a disinterested blocker --- But again, I guess keeping your QB healthy with a blitz pickup isn't important.

Oh, but he must have been a prolific scorer? Nope...his best season ever (6 touchdowns as a rookie) wouldn't even rate among the best all time in TDs per touch, let alone TDs in totality.

But he was FAST...oh, and he played BASEBALL! Boy, those are criterion 1 and 1a for discussing the best running back ever.

And the only tangible point you mention, his YPC of 5.4...hmm, did you ever think for a second that he wouldn't have maintained that YPC had he gotten a full workload? Honestly, care to take a gander of some other RBs that have averaged better than 5 yards a carry in a season with at least 100 rushes?

Ickey Woods

Don Woods
George Wonsley
Sammy Winder
Delvin Williams
Brian Westbrook
Joe Washington
Steve VanBuren
Wendell Tyler (3 times)
Duane Thomas
Blair Thomas
Mosi Tatupu
J.D. Smith
Tony Reed
Greg Pruitt
Dickie Post
Nick Pietrosante
Tony Nathan
Chuck Muncie
Stump Mitchell
Freeman McNeil
Ted McKnight
Lawrence McCutcheon
Ollie Matson
Paul Lowe
Leroy Kelly
John Henry Johnson
Essex Johnson
Marv Hubbard
Brad Hubbert
Paul Hofer
Bob Hoernschmeyer
Abner Haynes
Troy Hambrick
Robert Green
Hoyle Granger
Cookie Gilchrist
Mike Garrett
Carl Garrett
Charlie Garner
Hokie Gajan
John Fuqua
Gerry Ellis
Warrick Dunn
Clarence Davis
Clem Daniels
John David Crow
Rick Casares
Tony Canadeo
Don Calhoun
Gary Brown
James Brooks
John Brockington
Sid Banks
Tim Biakabatuka
Michael Bennett
**** Bass
Tiki Barber
Otis Armstrong
Mike AndersonWHEW...That is ELITE and EXCLUSIVE company right there.

Bo Jackson was a fantastic athlete, one of the best of his generation. He was also a great college running back needless to say. PERHAPS had he a) stayed healthy and b) concentrated on football he would've had a career that warranted consideration among the best...BUT HE DIDN'T. He didn't come close. He never had a single season worthy of admiration. He had a few highlight plays that made people say "WHAT IF" every single season, to include him among the others in this thread is an outright affront for what those others accomplished.

 

[Phlash]

Jim Brown. This shouldn't even be up for debate. He only played 9 yrs and he left on top of his game. He was a man among boys then and he would be now also.

Heh 6'3" would still be huge today for a Running Back. He would put up similiar numbers (if not better) if he played now. He's a RB that could play at any point in the league.

 

[Phlash]

Jim Brown = best of all time. (Controlled violence on the football field).P.S. I also agree with the contingent that feels Emmitt should be in the top 10.

He also used his head. When he got tackled, he got up slowly EVERY time, because he noticed that other RBs would get up quickly early in the game, but later on would get worn down and get up slowly and the defense would know this, so by doing this the defense had a huge question mark on its head every down, and come on, if you think that a 6'3" beast is ready to come pound your face in, he probably IS ready to do it.

 

[Tau837]

BlueOnion posted this in an older thread:

I actually like Jim Brown quite a bit, probably more so now as a person. But Jim Brown had it easy.Not that I am saying he is not the best running back of all-time, but if I was to make an argument he was not, here is what I would start with.1) He played in an era where all the great 'athletes' played on offense. The football players that were not athletic enough to make the offensive team but still showed a lot of heart or toughness were put on the defensive side of the ball. The thought that a defensive line could potentially have better athletes than the offensive line (in any given game) would be very, very unlikely.2) Pursuit angles. Back in Jim Brown's era, coaches did not understand the importance of pursuit angles or containment and did not teach it to the same magnitude of today's game. Defenses were basically, "just go get the ball carrier".

I certainly can't verify whether these are valid points, but I found them interesting.

 

[jurb26]

BlueOnion posted this in an older thread:

I actually like Jim Brown quite a bit, probably more so now as a person. But Jim Brown had it easy.Not that I am saying he is not the best running back of all-time, but if I was to make an argument he was not, here is what I would start with.1) He played in an era where all the great 'athletes' played on offense. The football players that were not athletic enough to make the offensive team but still showed a lot of heart or toughness were put on the defensive side of the ball. The thought that a defensive line could potentially have better athletes than the offensive line (in any given game) would be very, very unlikely.2) Pursuit angles. Back in Jim Brown's era, coaches did not understand the importance of pursuit angles or containment and did not teach it to the same magnitude of today's game. Defenses were basically, "just go get the ball carrier".

I certainly can't verify whether these are valid points, but I found them interesting.

Watch the game film of Brown run and you will see they are very valid points. Not to mention tackling tech was atrocious. Arm tackles and head down on nearly every play. You still can't discount Brown too much for this however, as he still was head and shoulders above the other RBs at the time and it was just as bad for all of them.

 

[Clayton Gray]

<seriously>LaDainian Tomlinson belongs somewhere on that list.</seriously>

haha. Clayton's drunk. i LOVE LT2, but seriously, top 10 RB of all time in the NFL as of now?

It's called vision.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

<seriously>LaDainian Tomlinson belongs somewhere on that list.</seriously>

haha. Clayton's drunk. i LOVE LT2, but seriously, top 10 RB of all time in the NFL as of now?

It's called vision.

I en-vision Alexander being on that list as well.

 

[gigantor]

Barry, and I'm a Bears fan

LT will be top 3 when it's all said and done

 

[rockbottom895]

I hate to say it, but Tomlinson has really got me thinking. I truly believe, by the end of his career, LaDanian Tomlinson will be considered the best RB of all time.

 

[norton17]

anyone who doesn't think LT2 isn't a top 10 rb of all time hasn't seen him play.

his OL is always awful and he's still top notch

 

[Sleeper 43]

Here is my top 101. Barry Sanders2. Jim Brown3. Walter Payton4. Gale Sayers5. Eric Dickerson6. Earl Campbell7. OJ Simpson8. Tony Dorsett9. Marcus Allen10. Terrell DavisAnd NO, Emmitt didn't make the cut because his O-line made him a better RB than he really ever was.

As an Eagles fan I don't particularly like Emmitt Smith, but to not have him in your top ten is a joke, honestly. And I'm so sick and tired of people using the "his o-line was too good" nonsense. Honestly, do you think some of the other backs on your list didn't have the best lines of their generation? Comparing Emmitt to his contemporaries in terms of O-line holds water, but if you're going to give him that much of a haircut you have to discount half your list too.FLAVVED

All though the O-line was arguably one of the best units in NFL history, I have another reason for not considering Emmitt as a top 10. Emmitt blatently continued to play football for 1- 4 years after his skills diminished greatly in the name of breaking the record at the expense of going out on top like so many of the truley classy Hall of Famers do ( i.e why Tiki is retiring after this season better yet Barry Sanders) I bet it would be funny to look up Emmits ypc towards the end in Arz. The Cowboys gave him every opportunity to retire as a Cowboy without telling him straight-up "your done bro"As a Walter Payton fan I watch Walter work so hard over the years in the name of love for the game, not the record. I find what Emmitt did is cheap and it takes away from the few nice runs he did have throughout his career.

 

[dickey moe]

Why in the HELL isn't Emmitt Smith on this list?

 

[maddawg2020]

Huh? How do you justify putting a guy on that list who only played 3 seasons thus far?

Well, I happen to think that he might be one of the best RBs ever.

Tomlinson is in his 6th season, not 3rd. That's the same amount as Terrell Davis and 2/3 of what jim Brown and barry sanders played. LT is a top-5 RB ever! he has played most of his career behind a mediocre O-Line.

 

[Super King]

Huh? How do you justify putting a guy on that list who only played 3 seasons thus far?

Well, I happen to think that he might be one of the best RBs ever.

Tomlinson is in his 6th season, not 3rd. That's the same amount as Terrell Davis and 2/3 of what jim Brown and barry sanders played. LT is a top-5 RB ever! he has played most of his career behind a mediocre O-Line.

that was posted in 2004, many moons ago.

 

[jerseydevil20]

Here is my top 101. Barry Sanders2. Jim Brown3. Walter Payton4. Gale Sayers5. Eric Dickerson6. Earl Campbell7. OJ Simpson8. Tony Dorsett9. Marcus Allen10. Terrell DavisAnd NO, Emmitt didn't make the cut because his O-line made him a better RB than he really ever was.

As an Eagles fan I don't particularly like Emmitt Smith, but to not have him in your top ten is a joke, honestly. And I'm so sick and tired of people using the "his o-line was too good" nonsense. Honestly, do you think some of the other backs on your list didn't have the best lines of their generation? Comparing Emmitt to his contemporaries in terms of O-line holds water, but if you're going to give him that much of a haircut you have to discount half your list too.FLAVVED

All though the O-line was arguably one of the best units in NFL history, I have another reason for not considering Emmitt as a top 10. Emmitt blatently continued to play football for 1- 4 years after his skills diminished greatly in the name of breaking the record at the expense of going out on top like so many of the truley classy Hall of Famers do ( i.e why Tiki is retiring after this season better yet Barry Sanders) I bet it would be funny to look up Emmits ypc towards the end in Arz. The Cowboys gave him every opportunity to retire as a Cowboy without telling him straight-up "your done bro"As a Walter Payton fan I watch Walter work so hard over the years in the name of love for the game, not the record. I find what Emmitt did is cheap and it takes away from the few nice runs he did have throughout his career.

Whatever. That Cal Ripken was a real jerk too, huh? So you don't have to wonder (I'd hate to cloud your brilliant deductions with facts): 2004 Emmitt Smith 267 937 9 td 3.5 ypc (Edge is at 2.9 this year) What's so funny about that? As far as Emmitt having no class, you're just a moron. He belongs on any top 10 RB list. Without question.

 

[Reservoir Dog]

Barry Sanders!