Better pure runner> Emmitt Smith vs Fred Taylor (4 Viewers)

[Bodysnatcher]

You guys act like the only thing about running is what "looks like" natural talent.

Michael Irvin said something a long time ago that made great sense, he said "I am very close friends with Barry Sanders, and I will have to say that Emmitt Smith is the best running back that I have ever seen play. I remember when we drafted him, I was watching his tapes from Florida thinking 'why did we pick up this guy, he hardly looks like he is running'. That was until I was able to see him for himself. Emmitt is so great, he makes it look easy. He doesn't get as much credit, because you have other running backs like Barry doing things that look impossible, all of those cuts, and turns in every run, trying to make people miss. That is the difference, Emmitt was so great, that he made making people miss look easy. He would dip his shoulder at a cetain angle, and the defenders would just glide right off of him. He didn't need to make his moves look spectacular, because he was great enough to make it look easy."

Add that to the fact that Emmitt Smith may be the best HB blocker to ever play the game, and was a great receiver out of the backfield. More durable than any back in history, and mentally, and physically tougher than the other backs in question. He would play games with a seperated shoulder, fractured ankle... the man was a beast.

If I am in control of a fantasy team, I choose Emmitt over any running back in history.

It's this type of homerism and hyperbole that makes me ignore the rest of what you've written.Emmitt's highest YPC were 5.3, 4.7, 4.6 - in none of his other 11 years did he break 4.3. He was a product of great blocking, and a great offensive system, and as was seen in a previous post, he wasn't clearly that much better than his counterparts in that offense.

On the other hand, only twice has Taylor ever had less than 4.6 YPC for a season. And he's never been in a powerhouse offense like Dallas.

Sanders' career LOW YPC was 4.3, which he did twice, 4.5 once, 4.6 once, 4.8 once, and the rest were over 5 YPC, one year over 6 YPC. And that was on a horrible offense and terrible run blocking.

So when it comes to simple running the ball - Smith IMO is not even part of the conversation of best ever.

If you want to talk about all around RB, then we'll talk - and even then there have been better ones.

He put up AVERAGE numbers for a LONG time. That says he was one of the most durable backs ever, that's it.

That doesn't even matter. Emmitt's yards per carry were effected by the fact that not only did he have a TON of short goaline carries, but he was also the workhorse of the team. He wasn't an injury prone back, who was used in the manner than Taylor is, and has been. The defense and everyone in the world knew that Emmitt was getting the ball, and they just pounded and pounded away with him. That will bring your yards per carry down. They would pound Emmitt whether the running game was working or not, he always found a way to control the game. There were countless times when they were running with Emmitt, just running out the clock with their big leads, and the entire defense knew there wasn't going to be a pass. Also... that just proves that Emmitt DID NOT HAVE A BETTER LINE! If Emmitt's offensive line was so much greater than anyone else's why weren't his yards per carry higher? You shot down your own argument, with your own stats.

 

[831hoops]

You guys act like the only thing about running is what "looks like" natural talent.

Michael Irvin said something a long time ago that made great sense, he said "I am very close friends with Barry Sanders, and I will have to say that Emmitt Smith is the best running back that I have ever seen play. I remember when we drafted him, I was watching his tapes from Florida thinking 'why did we pick up this guy, he hardly looks like he is running'. That was until I was able to see him for himself. Emmitt is so great, he makes it look easy. He doesn't get as much credit, because you have other running backs like Barry doing things that look impossible, all of those cuts, and turns in every run, trying to make people miss. That is the difference, Emmitt was so great, that he made making people miss look easy. He would dip his shoulder at a cetain angle, and the defenders would just glide right off of him. He didn't need to make his moves look spectacular, because he was great enough to make it look easy."

Add that to the fact that Emmitt Smith may be the best HB blocker to ever play the game, and was a great receiver out of the backfield. More durable than any back in history, and mentally, and physically tougher than the other backs in question. He would play games with a seperated shoulder, fractured ankle... the man was a beast.

If I am in control of a fantasy team, I choose Emmitt over any running back in history.

It's this type of homerism and hyperbole that makes me ignore the rest of what you've written.Emmitt's highest YPC were 5.3, 4.7, 4.6 - in none of his other 11 years did he break 4.3. He was a product of great blocking, and a great offensive system, and as was seen in a previous post, he wasn't clearly that much better than his counterparts in that offense.

On the other hand, only twice has Taylor ever had less than 4.6 YPC for a season. And he's never been in a powerhouse offense like Dallas.

Sanders' career LOW YPC was 4.3, which he did twice, 4.5 once, 4.6 once, 4.8 once, and the rest were over 5 YPC, one year over 6 YPC. And that was on a horrible offense and terrible run blocking.

So when it comes to simple running the ball - Smith IMO is not even part of the conversation of best ever.

If you want to talk about all around RB, then we'll talk - and even then there have been better ones.

He put up AVERAGE numbers for a LONG time. That says he was one of the most durable backs ever, that's it.

That doesn't even matter. Emmitt's yards per carry were effected by the fact that not only did he have a TON of short goaline carries, but he was also the workhorse of the team. He wasn't an injury prone back, who was used in the manner than Taylor is, and has been. The defense and everyone in the world knew that Emmitt was getting the ball, and they just pounded and pounded away with him. That will bring your yards per carry down. They would pound Emmitt whether the running game was working or not, he always found a way to control the game. There were countless times when they were running with Emmitt, just running out the clock with their big leads, and the entire defense knew there wasn't going to be a pass. Also... that just proves that Emmitt DID NOT HAVE A BETTER LINE! If Emmitt's offensive line was so much greater than anyone else's why weren't his yards per carry higher? You shot down your own argument, with your own stats.

Emmitt

He had a low YPC in spite of his O-Line. Not a whole lot of skill needed on runs like these.

 

[switz]

You guys act like the only thing about running is what "looks like" natural talent.

Michael Irvin said something a long time ago that made great sense, he said "I am very close friends with Barry Sanders, and I will have to say that Emmitt Smith is the best running back that I have ever seen play. I remember when we drafted him, I was watching his tapes from Florida thinking 'why did we pick up this guy, he hardly looks like he is running'. That was until I was able to see him for himself. Emmitt is so great, he makes it look easy. He doesn't get as much credit, because you have other running backs like Barry doing things that look impossible, all of those cuts, and turns in every run, trying to make people miss. That is the difference, Emmitt was so great, that he made making people miss look easy. He would dip his shoulder at a cetain angle, and the defenders would just glide right off of him. He didn't need to make his moves look spectacular, because he was great enough to make it look easy."

Add that to the fact that Emmitt Smith may be the best HB blocker to ever play the game, and was a great receiver out of the backfield. More durable than any back in history, and mentally, and physically tougher than the other backs in question. He would play games with a seperated shoulder, fractured ankle... the man was a beast.

If I am in control of a fantasy team, I choose Emmitt over any running back in history.

It's this type of homerism and hyperbole that makes me ignore the rest of what you've written.Emmitt's highest YPC were 5.3, 4.7, 4.6 - in none of his other 11 years did he break 4.3. He was a product of great blocking, and a great offensive system, and as was seen in a previous post, he wasn't clearly that much better than his counterparts in that offense.

On the other hand, only twice has Taylor ever had less than 4.6 YPC for a season. And he's never been in a powerhouse offense like Dallas.

Sanders' career LOW YPC was 4.3, which he did twice, 4.5 once, 4.6 once, 4.8 once, and the rest were over 5 YPC, one year over 6 YPC. And that was on a horrible offense and terrible run blocking.

So when it comes to simple running the ball - Smith IMO is not even part of the conversation of best ever.

If you want to talk about all around RB, then we'll talk - and even then there have been better ones.

He put up AVERAGE numbers for a LONG time. That says he was one of the most durable backs ever, that's it.

That doesn't even matter. Emmitt's yards per carry were effected by the fact that not only did he have a TON of short goaline carries, but he was also the workhorse of the team. He wasn't an injury prone back, who was used in the manner than Taylor is, and has been. The defense and everyone in the world knew that Emmitt was getting the ball, and they just pounded and pounded away with him. That will bring your yards per carry down. They would pound Emmitt whether the running game was working or not, he always found a way to control the game. There were countless times when they were running with Emmitt, just running out the clock with their big leads, and the entire defense knew there wasn't going to be a pass. Also... that just proves that Emmitt DID NOT HAVE A BETTER LINE! If Emmitt's offensive line was so much greater than anyone else's why weren't his yards per carry higher? You shot down your own argument, with your own stats.

Right, because everyone was so scared of Jax passing O that Taylor didn't face any 8-men fronts And Irvin, Harper, Novacek, etc. all did so well only because the Ds didn't commit anything to defending the pass, they had 8 men defending Emmitt, and 3 defending Irvin, Harper, and Novacek Do you know how ridiculous that sounds? Especially to those of us who watched the Cowboys during their heyday, and know that Emmitt didn't face 8 man fronts regularly.

Actually, what I proved is that Emmitt wasn't that great of a "runner", because he couldn't average a very high YPC even though his OL was dominant.

 

[switz]

Emmitt Smith, the greatest back to ever live. You don't have to believe me... believe the record books.

Not to Hijack but to say the above is like saying Karl Malone was better than Jordan because Malone is the all time scoring leader in the NBA. It is like saying because Bill Russell has more titles he was better than Jordan.I am sure if you said Jordan was the GOAT in B Ball you will not get much flak as you are getting when you say Emmitt is the GOAT RB.

BTW, I'll take Barry

BTW.... it was about Taylor vs Emmitt, not Barry vs Emmitt.Also, you are acting like these guys weren't coming along in the same era. Also, Detroit ALWAYS had a good offense when Barry played. They had great receivers, and always had good QB's as well. It was the defense that always kept them out of being as good as they could be... well that and that fact that San Fran, and Dallas were too well rounded for any of the other teams.

Barry Sanders was a great back, but Emmitt was better, in my opinion. Emmitt has more rushing yards, more rushing touchdowns, just as many rushing titles (head to head against Barry), more receiving yards, more receiving touchdowns, ect... He was more durable, he had a better nose for the endzone, he was a better blocker, I have said enough. Emmitt was the man during their time, and it doesn't change just because he played longer than he needed to.

Let's see - Andre Ware?

Oh they did have Bret Perriman (who?) and Herman Moore (pretty good)

I can't even recall who the other skill players were really.... Ware was a bust, Moore was one of the first of the "big" WRs...

Even going back to Taylor verse Emmitt - Taylor was better.

 

[Sleeper 43]

Emmitt just retired too late. For some reason we like our stud backs to retire in their prime. It makes them immortal.

Your right. He should have retired alot sooner rather than pad his stats for a couple years to break the rushing record.He knew when the Cowboys let him go it was time to hang it up but he wanted the record. Coming from a person who knows Walter Payton didnt out-live his welcome in the NFL to pad stats, it bothers me.I cant wait til Tomlinson rectifies the situation. About Fred Taylor... If Jim Brown endorses him as the best in today's game, he must have skills, he just never put it all together.P.S an SUV could have fit in some of those wholes Emmit ran through, it was ridiculous.

 

[pollardsvision]

this is a pretty impossible question to answer, but then again, so are most of the things we ponder when it comes to football.

it appears that emmitt and freddy were pretty comparable when they were actually on the field and the big difference, from a career #s perspective is simply the amount of carries.

the big difference was emmitt's ability to stay on the field.

we talk about skills such as vision, agility, burst, etc., but isn't the ability to take the ball 20-30 every single week, take a pounding, suit up and do it again the next week, every single week, every year a pretty major "skill" for a RB.

is the ability to stay healthy a "skill" for a RB?

i imagine many would call it a skill and many would call it some form of luck.

either way, emmitt was great at it.

 

[pollardsvision]

but no matter how you slice it, fred taylor's 4.6 career YPC is pretty bad-###.

 

[TwinTurbo]

I would take Fred Taylor in his prime. The guy was a homerun threat on every play. I really wish Fred Taylor would have been drafted by a bigger market team than the Jags. The guy would have received a lot more attention from the media and fans and more people would have been able to appreciate the skills he brought to the game. We all know about him in the fantasy football community, but honestly how many of his games did you actually get to see? Taylor is one player I wish I could have watched more during his prime.

 

[Bodysnatcher]

Emmitt just retired too late. For some reason we like our stud backs to retire in their prime. It makes them immortal.

Your right. He should have retired alot sooner rather than pad his stats for a couple years to break the rushing record.He knew when the Cowboys let him go it was time to hang it up but he wanted the record. Coming from a person who knows Walter Payton didnt out-live his welcome in the NFL to pad stats, it bothers me.I cant wait til Tomlinson rectifies the situation. About Fred Taylor... If Jim Brown endorses him as the best in today's game, he must have skills, he just never put it all together.

Emmitt Smith had broken Walter Payton's record BEFORE HE LEFT DALLAS! Obviously, you have followed his career very closely.

 

[Capella]

Seriously?

In terms of RUNNING the ball? It is not only a legit question, but the "correct" answer is actually Taylor.

wtf are you talking about?

 

[CalBear]

Emmitt Smith, the greatest back to ever live. You don't have to believe me... believe the record books.

Records are the result of playing at a high level PLUS longevity. It doesn't mean he was the greatest ever, it just means he was good, and played LONGER than the guys who were better than him (a la Barry Sanders)

Smith led the league in rushing four times and was top-5 seven times. He broke the record for single-season TDs. Taylor never finished in the top 5 in rushing yardage and scored 10 TDs only twice in his career. Taylor never even made the Pro Bowl. It's not a question of longevity vs. short-term production. It's a question of top-level production by a back who wasn't physically imposing vs. two good but not great seasons by a back with great measurables.The question is about as silly as "who is the better pure receiver, Marvin Harrison or Plaxico Burress"?

 

[RenegadeGM]

It seems to me it has got to the point where it's almost trendy to knock Emmitt as not being very good throughout his career and to list all the backs that were better "pure runners" than he was, all while pointing out what an amazing OL he ran behind.

I think part of this is the fact that he was so durable, in the end it seems to be held against him. Because he was so good for so long, and held on maybe a season or two too long, people forget just how good he was during his prime, running roughshod over opponents in the playoffs despite separating his shoulder.

No, I'm not a Dallas fan or a big Emmitt backer, but with each passing year his stock seems to fall even more.

Bottom line: Emmitt is the league's all-time leading rusher and he has the body of work to back any challenge up. Throw all the what-ifs you want out there, but the guy was productive, period.

 

[AussieOyOyOy]

Emmitt Smith, the greatest back to ever live. You don't have to believe me... believe the record books.

Records are the result of playing at a high level PLUS longevity. It doesn't mean he was the greatest ever, it just means he was good, and played LONGER than the guys who were better than him (a la Barry Sanders)

Smith led the league in rushing four times and was top-5 seven times. He broke the record for single-season TDs. Taylor never finished in the top 5 in rushing yardage and scored 10 TDs only twice in his career. Taylor never even made the Pro Bowl. It's not a question of longevity vs. short-term production. It's a question of top-level production by a back who wasn't physically imposing vs. two good but not great seasons by a back with great measurables.The question is about as silly as "who is the better pure receiver, Marvin Harrison or Plaxico Burress"?

People judge RBs on pretty running, which is not necessarily the same thing as great running. Emmitt Smith was an out-of-this-world RB. No highlights will jump out at you, but play-after-play-after-play, this guy was just about as good as it gets. I lived in Oklahoma throughout Emmitt's NFL career, and saw (was subjected to seeing?) Dallas every single week of every single year. Smith's vision and feel are in a class of their own.I think I look at RBs differently than most do. Most will say that Barry Sanders or Fred Taylor is the epitome of a "natural" runner. I think Emmitt Smith and Terrell Davis are the true "natural" runners. There are no style points in football. It doesn't matter how stupid one makes a would-be tackler look. It's about how efficiently one makes a would-be tackler miss.

 

[Gerg73]

Fred Taylor Highlights from his Rookie Year (In White Uni's)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGjAqy-Pjt0

Pretty sick.

 

[phthalatemagic]

Pure runner?

Fred Taylor. He could run any distance faster than Smith. Maybe someone else have a different definition of "pure runner"

 

[Sleeper 43]

Emmitt just retired too late. For some reason we like our stud backs to retire in their prime. It makes them immortal.

Your right. He should have retired alot sooner rather than pad his stats for a couple years to break the rushing record.He knew when the Cowboys let him go it was time to hang it up but he wanted the record. Coming from a person who knows Walter Payton didnt out-live his welcome in the NFL to pad stats, it bothers me.I cant wait til Tomlinson rectifies the situation. About Fred Taylor... If Jim Brown endorses him as the best in today's game, he must have skills, he just never put it all together.

Emmitt Smith had broken Walter Payton's record BEFORE HE LEFT DALLAS! Obviously, you have followed his career very closely.

Sorry , your right. I'm not claiming to be a follower of the Cowboys, however I witnessed how things went down just like everyone else.Bottom line is Emmit wore out his welcome with the Cowboys which is saying ALOT. They would have loved him to retire as a Cowboy but he was finished and wasn't willing to retire to the point it was hurting the Cowboys. I wonder how hard that was on Jerry Jones? His time in Arz was nothing more than stat padding on a one of very few teams who were willing to give him the rock still. Yeah he broke 1k yards there but it was trash time and the team sucked. It just angers me that people praise Emmit so much when his career was basically paved with perennial pro-bowl line-man and TEs, a hall of fame QB and FB, holes anyone could have exploited, bascially the moon sun and stars aligned for a career.My eyes didn't deceive me.

 

[CalBear]

Bottom line is Emmit wore out his welcome with the Cowboys which is saying ALOT. They would have loved him to retire as a Cowboy but he was finished and wasn't willing to retire to the point it was hurting the Cowboys. I wonder how hard that was on Jerry Jones? His time in Arz was nothing more than stat padding on a one of very few teams who were willing to give him the rock still. Yeah he broke 1k yards there but it was trash time and the team sucked. It just angers me that people praise Emmit so much when his career was basically paved with perennial pro-bowl line-man and TEs, a hall of fame QB and FB, holes anyone could have exploited, bascially the moon sun and stars aligned for a career.My eyes didn't deceive me.

Emmitt rushed for 9 TDs for Arizona at age 35, which is among the best performances ever for a RB at that age, and on a bad team. Edge only managed 6 TDs in his first season with Arizona.

 

[kilrb]

Hard to believe this is even being debated. Taylor isn't even the best back on his own team much less should he even be mentioned in the same sentence as the Smith. Case Closed.

 

[clinton_c]

Why do people constantly try to tear down dallas cowboy football players?

Emmitt was only good because of his line.

Aikman was only good because of Irvin and Emmitt.

Irvin was only good because of Emmitt and Aikman.

Why do we never see the "Young wasn't that great without Rice" threads.

Or the "Matt Jones is a better pure WR than Rice"

Its basically just Cowboy bashing. You can tear the players down if you want...they are still in the HOF. They still have their rings.

 

[The Moz]

Dallas during the hey day had greatest O line in history ! Emmitt would run 20 yards before being touched alot of plays . That said Emmitt was still a damn good back.

Put Taylor on dallas during those years and if he could stay healthy would of had several 2000 yard seasons.

Put Barry behind that line -- maybe 3000

 

[SSOG]

Showdown of the only 2 good RBs to come out of Florida the last 20 years or so?

Ernest Graham and Deshaun Wynn have been looking pretty good so far, no?Anyway, between the 20s, I'd take Taylor, but in the red zone, I'd take Smith. Pretty simple question.

 

[Jason Wood]

Seriously?

In terms of RUNNING the ball? It is not only a legit question, but the "correct" answer is actually Taylor.

This is seriously one of the most ridiculous threads we've had in the Shark Pool in a long time. It's bad enough when people play the "imagine if Barry Sanders and Emmitt Smith switched teams" game, but FRED TAYLOR!?!? Baffled. Someone mentioned TDs as being about "opportunity." Fair enough but last time I checked Fred Taylor is one of the worst short yardage backs of his era. When given the opportunity he's been a) horrible and b) worse than his backups. Taylor has also been pulled from games by not one, but two coaches for a lack of ability as a receiver. And when someone mentions "running" ability, it's as though things like balance, leg drive, acceleration, ability to get yards after initial contact, vision, patience don't matter? You can argue until you're blue in the face that Emmitt Smith wouldn't be the all-time record holder if he had less advantageous supporting teammates, but to suggest he's not one of the best of all time, AND not superior to Fred Taylor in nearly every respect is, to my mind, ridiculous. And this is from a guy that LOATHED Smith as a player b/c he was a Cowboy.

 

[Mr. Mojo]

Emmitt by a mile. He had the acceleration, cutting ability and toughness to make the most out of any run. Near the goal line, he was unstoppable. Yes, Dallas had a great OL in their prime, but Emmitt performed well even later when they didn't and even at Arizona at the end of his career.

Fred Taylor also had the benefit of a great OL for a number of years (have we forgotten Boselli already?). I like his top end speed better than Emmitt's but that's about it.

Taylor was quicker in and out of his cuts, was faster, he had more wiggle.I'm not sure in any area outside of toughness that Emmitt had an edge over Taylor.

When did Emmitt perform well in AZ??????

His last season, when he rushed/recieved for over 1,000 yards and 9 TDs on a 6-10 crap team.Checks the stats.

 

[gman8343]

Better pure runner I guess I'd side with Taylor, but the better runningback was Emmitt by a country mile.

 

[Enforcer]

Showdown of the only 2 good RBs to come out of Florida the last 20 years or so?

John L Williams (SEA) was one of a kind. I read something on Drinen's blog that blew me away. He was a top ten fantasy RB as a full time fullback. I can't think of anyone else since that even comes close.

 

[Bodysnatcher]

What is hilarious to me, is that the same people saying that Emmitt was only good because of his amazing offensive line, are the same people slagging on Emmitt for his yards per carry. Which doesn't even make sense. Then, they say... look, Emmitt didn't even get touched when he ran the ball... yet again they talk about his Yards per carry... once again, not making sense. Then, they say... look at Emmitt's yards per carry, they were average, even though he had that great line!... WTF? Then what the hell is great about the line? If the line made Emmitt great... then why did he have to fight so hard for yards? If he has such a low yards per carry... why is his line considered to be so great? Why was it such a hot topic in Emmitt's day that it was his average to be tackled by the 4th man who touched him during a run. Meaning, he broke away from 3 defenders on average. Hell, if you watch his highlights, you can see him being tagged at the line of scrimmage or shortly there-after on several occasions, only to make them miss and go further. Also, it was Emmitt's VISION that made him great. He wouldn't just follow a certain hole, and it be there every time. He had the patients to see what developed in front of him, and pick the right running lane, cut back, blast through, follow, ect... and he hit the openings with a burst matching that of anyone ever. His burst through the hole was amazing.

Stop with the damn double standards. Emmitt Smith was great, and Fred Taylor isn't in his league.

 

[JTM]

Fred Taylor and it's not even close.

Please explain why it is not close™.

Taylor = Speed.

General Malaise = Hater

 

[JTM]

Seriously?

In terms of RUNNING the ball? It is not only a legit question, but the "correct" answer is actually Taylor.

This is seriously one of the most ridiculous threads we've had in the Shark Pool in a long time. It's bad enough when people play the "imagine if Barry Sanders and Emmitt Smith switched teams" game, but FRED TAYLOR!?!? Baffled. Someone mentioned TDs as being about "opportunity." Fair enough but last time I checked Fred Taylor is one of the worst short yardage backs of his era. When given the opportunity he's been a) horrible and b) worse than his backups. Taylor has also been pulled from games by not one, but two coaches for a lack of ability as a receiver. And when someone mentions "running" ability, it's as though things like balance, leg drive, acceleration, ability to get yards after initial contact, vision, patience don't matter? You can argue until you're blue in the face that Emmitt Smith wouldn't be the all-time record holder if he had less advantageous supporting teammates, but to suggest he's not one of the best of all time, AND not superior to Fred Taylor in nearly every respect is, to my mind, ridiculous. And this is from a guy that LOATHED Smith as a player b/c he was a Cowboy.

A-MEN...bunch of haters...the 'pure runner' comparison is hilarious...I'm going to post a Carl Lewis vs Emmit Smith thread...

 

[Ranethe]

Emmitt Smith, the greatest back to ever live. You don't have to believe me... believe the record books.

Records are the result of playing at a high level PLUS longevity. It doesn't mean he was the greatest ever, it just means he was good, and played LONGER than the guys who were better than him (a la Barry Sanders)

Smith led the league in rushing four times and was top-5 seven times. He broke the record for single-season TDs. Taylor never finished in the top 5 in rushing yardage and scored 10 TDs only twice in his career. Taylor never even made the Pro Bowl. It's not a question of longevity vs. short-term production. It's a question of top-level production by a back who wasn't physically imposing vs. two good but not great seasons by a back with great measurables.The question is about as silly as "who is the better pure receiver, Marvin Harrison or Plaxico Burress"?

People judge RBs on pretty running, which is not necessarily the same thing as great running. Emmitt Smith was an out-of-this-world RB. No highlights will jump out at you, but play-after-play-after-play, this guy was just about as good as it gets. I lived in Oklahoma throughout Emmitt's NFL career, and saw (was subjected to seeing?) Dallas every single week of every single year. Smith's vision and feel are in a class of their own.I think I look at RBs differently than most do. Most will say that Barry Sanders or Fred Taylor is the epitome of a "natural" runner. I think Emmitt Smith and Terrell Davis are the true "natural" runners. There are no style points in football. It doesn't matter how stupid one makes a would-be tackler look. It's about how efficiently one makes a would-be tackler miss.

Exactly. This isn't a beauty contest. Emmitt's style wasn't as glamorous as others mentioned and there is no doubt he didn't have the breakway ability of many others, but I saw some very spectacular 5 yard runs, some at the goalline, that left me with my jaw open wondering how he scored. It's a pretty silly question really. First you have to qualify the question as "pure runner", (whatever that means),then you have to subtract points because of the O-Line he played on, then you have to..........ad nauseum. And Fred Taylor of all RB's to make the comparison with. Make it with Barry, make it with any number of others, but to make it with a guy who had a few good seasons forces you to talk about what if........As an aside, for all of you throwing some of the ypc numbers around, I would be curious to know how many carries for no gain or a loss Taylor had. No idea so not saying this would support Emmitt, just curious.

 

[Ranethe]

Seriously?

In terms of RUNNING the ball? It is not only a legit question, but the "correct" answer is actually Taylor.

This is seriously one of the most ridiculous threads we've had in the Shark Pool in a long time. It's bad enough when people play the "imagine if Barry Sanders and Emmitt Smith switched teams" game, but FRED TAYLOR!?!? Baffled. Someone mentioned TDs as being about "opportunity." Fair enough but last time I checked Fred Taylor is one of the worst short yardage backs of his era. When given the opportunity he's been a) horrible and b) worse than his backups. Taylor has also been pulled from games by not one, but two coaches for a lack of ability as a receiver. And when someone mentions "running" ability, it's as though things like balance, leg drive, acceleration, ability to get yards after initial contact, vision, patience don't matter? You can argue until you're blue in the face that Emmitt Smith wouldn't be the all-time record holder if he had less advantageous supporting teammates, but to suggest he's not one of the best of all time, AND not superior to Fred Taylor in nearly every respect is, to my mind, ridiculous. And this is from a guy that LOATHED Smith as a player b/c he was a Cowboy.

 

[Tremendous Upside]

Case closed

 

[JTM]

Dallas during the hey day had greatest O line in history ! Emmitt would run 20 yards before being touched alot of plays . That said Emmitt was still a damn good back.Put Taylor on dallas during those years and if he could stay healthy would of had several 2000 yard seasons. Put Barry behind that line -- maybe 3000

...watch less highlight reels and more football games before making those statements--you don't know what you're talking about. Sanders ran best under chaos--never hit the hole straight-on so what does the line matter, they just got in his way half the time. Taylor couldn't hold Emmit's jock. Proof: 20 years from now people outside of Jacksonville will not even remember Fred Taylor much less be talking about him being such a great runner...

 

[switz]

What is hilarious to me, is that the same people saying that Emmitt was only good because of his amazing offensive line, are the same people slagging on Emmitt for his yards per carry. Which doesn't even make sense. Then, they say... look, Emmitt didn't even get touched when he ran the ball... yet again they talk about his Yards per carry... once again, not making sense. Then, they say... look at Emmitt's yards per carry, they were average, even though he had that great line!... WTF? Then what the hell is great about the line? If the line made Emmitt great... then why did he have to fight so hard for yards? If he has such a low yards per carry... why is his line considered to be so great? Why was it such a hot topic in Emmitt's day that it was his average to be tackled by the 4th man who touched him during a run. Meaning, he broke away from 3 defenders on average. Hell, if you watch his highlights, you can see him being tagged at the line of scrimmage or shortly there-after on several occasions, only to make them miss and go further. Also, it was Emmitt's VISION that made him great. He wouldn't just follow a certain hole, and it be there every time. He had the patients to see what developed in front of him, and pick the right running lane, cut back, blast through, follow, ect... and he hit the openings with a burst matching that of anyone ever. His burst through the hole was amazing. Stop with the damn double standards. Emmitt Smith was great, and Fred Taylor isn't in his league.

I don't think you really have good comprehension. YPC doesn't measure how hard you fight for yards, it's how many yards you get per carry. And you know what, it's measured not from when you break the first tackle, but from the line of scrimmage. So, say you get a great big OL that opens huge holes so that you are untouched for 3-4 yards. That 3-4 yards FREE. Then you only make 1.5 yards on your own. That's not the definition of a good runner at all. But that was Emmitt.BTW, since it's apparent you've only watched highlights - they are highlights, not the norm, they are exceptional plays. So if Emmitt breaking a tackle in the backfield and getting 3 yards is exceptional....

 

[Texican]

Okay next question.....

Which one is the better speaker?

 

[switz]

Emmitt = decent back+good OL+longevity.

Emmiit != great runner, best of all time

 

[Ranethe]

Emmitt = decent back+good OL+longevity.Emmiit != great runner, best of all time

I thought the question was Emmitt vs. Fred Taylor?Totally ridiculous to call him a "decent" back...totally ridiculous.I lurk here all the time, always liked your posts, but you lost me here. Minimizing his skill to the point of absurdity.

 

[switz]

Emmitt = decent back+good OL+longevity.Emmiit != great runner, best of all time

I thought the question was Emmitt vs. Fred Taylor?Totally ridiculous to call him a "decent" back...totally ridiculous.I lurk here all the time, always liked your posts, but you lost me here. Minimizing his skill to the point of absurdity.

I guess it depends on your definition of decent. It's not an insult in my mind. However, it does differentiate between Emmit and backs I considered great.

 

[CravenM]

Without a good working definition of "pure runner", I'll throw my Gator opinion in the mix:

Emmitt was a dominant RB every single year he played at any level from his first year at high school, 3 years at Florida and all of his years at Dallas (obviously not so much in his waning years at Zona).

Taylor was excellent his senior year in HS, senior year at Florida and several years at Jax.

If the definition of pure runner was "who's the fastest", it's Taylor running a 4.3 forty. If the definition is "who would you rather have on your team in any situation?", it's Emmitt.

P.S.: Other notable Gator RBs include Neil Anderson, John L Williams, Errict Rhett, Earnest Graham and Deshawn Wynn. Not murderer's row but nothing to sneeze at

 

[switz]

Without a good working definition of "pure runner", I'll throw my Gator opinion in the mix:

Emmitt was a dominant RB every single year he played at any level from his first year at high school, 3 years at Florida and all of his years at Dallas (obviously not so much in his waning years at Zona).

Taylor was excellent his senior year in HS, senior year at Florida and several years at Jax.

If the definition of pure runner was "who's the fastest", it's Taylor running a 4.3 forty. If the definition is "who would you rather have on your team in any situation?", it's Emmitt.

P.S.: Other notable Gator RBs include Neil Anderson, John L Williams, Errict Rhett, Earnest Graham and Deshawn Wynn. Not murderer's row but nothing to sneeze at

Who broke all of Emmitt's college records, correct?

 

[bentley]

You guys act like the only thing about running is what "looks like" natural talent.

Michael Irvin said something a long time ago that made great sense, he said "I am very close friends with Barry Sanders, and I will have to say that Emmitt Smith is the best running back that I have ever seen play. I remember when we drafted him, I was watching his tapes from Florida thinking 'why did we pick up this guy, he hardly looks like he is running'. That was until I was able to see him for himself. Emmitt is so great, he makes it look easy. He doesn't get as much credit, because you have other running backs like Barry doing things that look impossible, all of those cuts, and turns in every run, trying to make people miss. That is the difference, Emmitt was so great, that he made making people miss look easy. He would dip his shoulder at a cetain angle, and the defenders would just glide right off of him. He didn't need to make his moves look spectacular, because he was great enough to make it look easy."

Add that to the fact that Emmitt Smith may be the best HB blocker to ever play the game, and was a great receiver out of the backfield. More durable than any back in history, and mentally, and physically tougher than the other backs in question. He would play games with a seperated shoulder, fractured ankle... the man was a beast.

If I am in control of a fantasy team, I choose Emmitt over any running back in history.

It's this type of homerism and hyperbole that makes me ignore the rest of what you've written.Emmitt's highest YPC were 5.3, 4.7, 4.6 - in none of his other 11 years did he break 4.3. He was a product of great blocking, and a great offensive system, and as was seen in a previous post, he wasn't clearly that much better than his counterparts in that offense.

On the other hand, only twice has Taylor ever had less than 4.6 YPC for a season. And he's never been in a powerhouse offense like Dallas.

Sanders' career LOW YPC was 4.3, which he did twice, 4.5 once, 4.6 once, 4.8 once, and the rest were over 5 YPC, one year over 6 YPC. And that was on a horrible offense and terrible run blocking.

So when it comes to simple running the ball - Smith IMO is not even part of the conversation of best ever.

If you want to talk about all around RB, then we'll talk - and even then there have been better ones.

He put up AVERAGE numbers for a LONG time. That says he was one of the most durable backs ever, that's it.

That doesn't even matter. Emmitt's yards per carry were effected by the fact that not only did he have a TON of short goaline carries, but he was also the workhorse of the team. He wasn't an injury prone back, who was used in the manner than Taylor is, and has been. The defense and everyone in the world knew that Emmitt was getting the ball, and they just pounded and pounded away with him. That will bring your yards per carry down. They would pound Emmitt whether the running game was working or not, he always found a way to control the game. There were countless times when they were running with Emmitt, just running out the clock with their big leads, and the entire defense knew there wasn't going to be a pass. Also... that just proves that Emmitt DID NOT HAVE A BETTER LINE! If Emmitt's offensive line was so much greater than anyone else's why weren't his yards per carry higher? You shot down your own argument, with your own stats.

Right, because everyone was so scared of Jax passing O that Taylor didn't face any 8-men fronts And Irvin, Harper, Novacek, etc. all did so well only because the Ds didn't commit anything to defending the pass, they had 8 men defending Emmitt, and 3 defending Irvin, Harper, and Novacek Do you know how ridiculous that sounds? Especially to those of us who watched the Cowboys during their heyday, and know that Emmitt didn't face 8 man fronts regularly.

Actually, what I proved is that Emmitt wasn't that great of a "runner", because he couldn't average a very high YPC even though his OL was dominant.

What?1993 New York Daily News Cowboys-Jets preview:

"Most people try to use an eight-man front to try to slow Emmitt down," Aikman said. "Normally, when teams come up with eight-man fronts you'd think you won't have success running. But Emmitt has great ability to make people miss. Rarely does the first guy bring him down. He bounces off people."

1992 Cowboys-Giants postgame:

"I'm seeing eight-man fronts, nine-man fronts" Smith said earlier in the week.

Milwaukee Journal Constitution 1993 Cowboys-Packers review:

October 1993: Defensive coordinator Ray Rhodes built his entire game plan around stopping Smith, committing eight men to the task.

Washington Post 1995 Cowboys-Redskins review:

With frequent eight-man fronts, Washington's defense held Dallas's all-pro running back Emmitt Smith to 95 yards on 22 carries.

1999 Cowboys-Dolphins preview:

RB Emmitt Smith, playing with a fractured hand, will face eight-man fronts from the outstanding Dolphins defense.

 

[SayWhat?]

Dumbest

Thread

Ever

 

[switz]

You guys act like the only thing about running is what "looks like" natural talent.

Michael Irvin said something a long time ago that made great sense, he said "I am very close friends with Barry Sanders, and I will have to say that Emmitt Smith is the best running back that I have ever seen play. I remember when we drafted him, I was watching his tapes from Florida thinking 'why did we pick up this guy, he hardly looks like he is running'. That was until I was able to see him for himself. Emmitt is so great, he makes it look easy. He doesn't get as much credit, because you have other running backs like Barry doing things that look impossible, all of those cuts, and turns in every run, trying to make people miss. That is the difference, Emmitt was so great, that he made making people miss look easy. He would dip his shoulder at a cetain angle, and the defenders would just glide right off of him. He didn't need to make his moves look spectacular, because he was great enough to make it look easy."

Add that to the fact that Emmitt Smith may be the best HB blocker to ever play the game, and was a great receiver out of the backfield. More durable than any back in history, and mentally, and physically tougher than the other backs in question. He would play games with a seperated shoulder, fractured ankle... the man was a beast.

If I am in control of a fantasy team, I choose Emmitt over any running back in history.

It's this type of homerism and hyperbole that makes me ignore the rest of what you've written.Emmitt's highest YPC were 5.3, 4.7, 4.6 - in none of his other 11 years did he break 4.3. He was a product of great blocking, and a great offensive system, and as was seen in a previous post, he wasn't clearly that much better than his counterparts in that offense.

On the other hand, only twice has Taylor ever had less than 4.6 YPC for a season. And he's never been in a powerhouse offense like Dallas.

Sanders' career LOW YPC was 4.3, which he did twice, 4.5 once, 4.6 once, 4.8 once, and the rest were over 5 YPC, one year over 6 YPC. And that was on a horrible offense and terrible run blocking.

So when it comes to simple running the ball - Smith IMO is not even part of the conversation of best ever.

If you want to talk about all around RB, then we'll talk - and even then there have been better ones.

He put up AVERAGE numbers for a LONG time. That says he was one of the most durable backs ever, that's it.

That doesn't even matter. Emmitt's yards per carry were effected by the fact that not only did he have a TON of short goaline carries, but he was also the workhorse of the team. He wasn't an injury prone back, who was used in the manner than Taylor is, and has been. The defense and everyone in the world knew that Emmitt was getting the ball, and they just pounded and pounded away with him. That will bring your yards per carry down. They would pound Emmitt whether the running game was working or not, he always found a way to control the game. There were countless times when they were running with Emmitt, just running out the clock with their big leads, and the entire defense knew there wasn't going to be a pass. Also... that just proves that Emmitt DID NOT HAVE A BETTER LINE! If Emmitt's offensive line was so much greater than anyone else's why weren't his yards per carry higher? You shot down your own argument, with your own stats.

Right, because everyone was so scared of Jax passing O that Taylor didn't face any 8-men fronts And Irvin, Harper, Novacek, etc. all did so well only because the Ds didn't commit anything to defending the pass, they had 8 men defending Emmitt, and 3 defending Irvin, Harper, and Novacek Do you know how ridiculous that sounds? Especially to those of us who watched the Cowboys during their heyday, and know that Emmitt didn't face 8 man fronts regularly.

Actually, what I proved is that Emmitt wasn't that great of a "runner", because he couldn't average a very high YPC even though his OL was dominant.

What?1993 New York Daily News Cowboys-Jets preview:

"Most people try to use an eight-man front to try to slow Emmitt down," Aikman said. "Normally, when teams come up with eight-man fronts you'd think you won't have success running. But Emmitt has great ability to make people miss. Rarely does the first guy bring him down. He bounces off people."

1992 Cowboys-Giants postgame:

"I'm seeing eight-man fronts, nine-man fronts" Smith said earlier in the week.

Milwaukee Journal Constitution 1993 Cowboys-Packers review:

October 1993: Defensive coordinator Ray Rhodes built his entire game plan around stopping Smith, committing eight men to the task.

Washington Post 1995 Cowboys-Redskins review:

With frequent eight-man fronts, Washington's defense held Dallas's all-pro running back Emmitt Smith to 95 yards on 22 carries.

1999 Cowboys-Dolphins preview:

RB Emmitt Smith, playing with a fractured hand, will face eight-man fronts from the outstanding Dolphins defense.

5 quotes in what 14 years?

 

[bentley]

5 quotes from the first page of a Google search mostly concentrated around his prime from a period when few newspapers were online so the records are scarce. I know you're fishing or an idiot (or both), so I'm done discussing.

 

[CravenM]

Without a good working definition of "pure runner", I'll throw my Gator opinion in the mix:

Emmitt was a dominant RB every single year he played at any level from his first year at high school, 3 years at Florida and all of his years at Dallas (obviously not so much in his waning years at Zona).

Taylor was excellent his senior year in HS, senior year at Florida and several years at Jax.

If the definition of pure runner was "who's the fastest", it's Taylor running a 4.3 forty. If the definition is "who would you rather have on your team in any situation?", it's Emmitt.

P.S.: Other notable Gator RBs include Neil Anderson, John L Williams, Errict Rhett, Earnest Graham and Deshawn Wynn. Not murderer's row but nothing to sneeze at

Who broke all of Emmitt's college records, correct?

I'm pretty sure Rhett played for 4 seasons in the Spurrier offense and Emmitt played 3 years under the probation-laden teams.But your point is quite valid. I thought Rhett was a perfect fit for the Spurrier offense. The dude could take on any LB and put him on his butt and no other RB in the 90's could do it. Rhett was definitely one of my favorite players.

 

[SayWhat?]

5 quotes in what 14 years?

Yes, I'm quite sure that those 5 quotes referenced the only times 8 man fronts were used against Emmitt and the Cowboys. Fred Taylor better than Emmitt Smith? Stop the madness.

 

[JTM]

What is hilarious to me, is that the same people saying that Emmitt was only good because of his amazing offensive line, are the same people slagging on Emmitt for his yards per carry. Which doesn't even make sense. Then, they say... look, Emmitt didn't even get touched when he ran the ball... yet again they talk about his Yards per carry... once again, not making sense. Then, they say... look at Emmitt's yards per carry, they were average, even though he had that great line!... WTF? Then what the hell is great about the line? If the line made Emmitt great... then why did he have to fight so hard for yards? If he has such a low yards per carry... why is his line considered to be so great? Why was it such a hot topic in Emmitt's day that it was his average to be tackled by the 4th man who touched him during a run. Meaning, he broke away from 3 defenders on average. Hell, if you watch his highlights, you can see him being tagged at the line of scrimmage or shortly there-after on several occasions, only to make them miss and go further. Also, it was Emmitt's VISION that made him great. He wouldn't just follow a certain hole, and it be there every time. He had the patients to see what developed in front of him, and pick the right running lane, cut back, blast through, follow, ect... and he hit the openings with a burst matching that of anyone ever. His burst through the hole was amazing. Stop with the damn double standards. Emmitt Smith was great, and Fred Taylor isn't in his league.

I don't think you really have good comprehension. YPC doesn't measure how hard you fight for yards, it's how many yards you get per carry. And you know what, it's measured not from when you break the first tackle, but from the line of scrimmage. So, say you get a great big OL that opens huge holes so that you are untouched for 3-4 yards. That 3-4 yards FREE. Then you only make 1.5 yards on your own. That's not the definition of a good runner at all. But that was Emmitt.BTW, since it's apparent you've only watched highlights - they are highlights, not the norm, they are exceptional plays. So if Emmitt breaking a tackle in the backfield and getting 3 yards is exceptional....

Is this football or track?!? I never once saw Emmit pull a hammy and drop the ball. Taylor has perennial fumbilitis. Emmit rushed for 4 yards almost every play; Taylor gets stuffed constantly before finally breaking one. Emmit was the feature back, the 3rd down back, and the short-yardage back; Taylor's not even the best back on his team. Emmit led Dallas to three (3) Championships; Taylor leads his team in games missed. Smith was the first player ever to rush for 1,400 yards five (5) straight seasons. Smith is the only man to win the Super Bowl, be Super Bowl MVP, League MVP, and win the rushing crown in the same season. Smith and Jim Brown are the only players to start their careers with 7-straight seasons with 10+ TD's. Smith has 175 TD's--only 2nd to Rice at 207. Since we're playing football I'll take the football player all day long. It's not even close. You're just a hater...WHO NEEDS TO WATCH THE GAMES???...when Dallas needed it most, Emmit showed up and delivered. When JAX needs it most they call Greg Jones or Jones-Drew...ridiculous.

 

[Spartans Rule]

5 quotes in what 14 years?

I was surprised by this. Who would've thought that Bentley, who obviously has access to every newspaper that ever mentioned the Cowboys, sorted neatly into categories, could only find five articles about Emmitt Smith facing eight-man fronts? Clearly then these were the only five times it ever happened.

 

[Spartans Rule]

As usual, a nice fishing effort by Joe T.

 

[Ranethe]

Fred Taylor and it's not even close.

Please explain why it is not close™.

Taylor = Speed.

And Agility.And burst, thrust and acceleration that Emmitt did not have.Oh, and power with speed.Jukes and moves.Cutting at full speed.(and then the injury)

Also, much more heart.

Rereading this thread just makes me Seriously, you guys are just making stuff up. GM, you just gotta be stirring the pot, you dog you.

 

[Bodysnatcher]

What is hilarious to me, is that the same people saying that Emmitt was only good because of his amazing offensive line, are the same people slagging on Emmitt for his yards per carry. Which doesn't even make sense. Then, they say... look, Emmitt didn't even get touched when he ran the ball... yet again they talk about his Yards per carry... once again, not making sense. Then, they say... look at Emmitt's yards per carry, they were average, even though he had that great line!... WTF? Then what the hell is great about the line? If the line made Emmitt great... then why did he have to fight so hard for yards? If he has such a low yards per carry... why is his line considered to be so great? Why was it such a hot topic in Emmitt's day that it was his average to be tackled by the 4th man who touched him during a run. Meaning, he broke away from 3 defenders on average. Hell, if you watch his highlights, you can see him being tagged at the line of scrimmage or shortly there-after on several occasions, only to make them miss and go further. Also, it was Emmitt's VISION that made him great. He wouldn't just follow a certain hole, and it be there every time. He had the patients to see what developed in front of him, and pick the right running lane, cut back, blast through, follow, ect... and he hit the openings with a burst matching that of anyone ever. His burst through the hole was amazing. Stop with the damn double standards. Emmitt Smith was great, and Fred Taylor isn't in his league.

I don't think you really have good comprehension. YPC doesn't measure how hard you fight for yards, it's how many yards you get per carry. And you know what, it's measured not from when you break the first tackle, but from the line of scrimmage. So, say you get a great big OL that opens huge holes so that you are untouched for 3-4 yards. That 3-4 yards FREE. Then you only make 1.5 yards on your own. That's not the definition of a good runner at all. But that was Emmitt.BTW, since it's apparent you've only watched highlights - they are highlights, not the norm, they are exceptional plays. So if Emmitt breaking a tackle in the backfield and getting 3 yards is exceptional....

Are you touched in the head? First of all, I have been following the Cowboys, and the NFL in general since Tony Dorsett was playing for the Cowboys, let alone Emmitt Smith. So , you can stop being childish with all of the "highlights" nonsense. Now, onto reality.... your logic is probably the most ######ed, and self served pile of manure that I have ever seen trying to be passed off as sense, and knowledge. Even on these message boards where waterheads like you dwell all day long.You are just talking complete nosense, and trying to pass it off as fact. All the while, anyone with a brain here is laughing their asses off at you, because your posts are pathetic. I am done with you now. Keep on living in that fantasy world, obviously Emmitt Smith must have slept with your girl or something.