In this thread, I tell you why Deion Sanders... (1 Viewer)

[Raider Nation]

You may (and most likely WILL) disagree with me, but I'm about to make a damn fine presentation.

On NFL Total Access the other night, Brian Baldinger was counting down his "5 best current players" in the league. Darrelle Revis was #1 on his list because he is a shutdown corner and he dominated every big time WR he faced.

So Revis is the best player in the NFL because he's a supreme shutdown corner.

I have no problem with that assessment, by the way. Now take the case of Deion Sanders. He was the best shutdown corner EVER, all while being the best and most feared return man of his time. Let that soak in for a minute.

The term "shutdown corner" is overused in the first place. There have only been a few true shutdown corners in the history of the league. Sanders tops the list. When offensive coordinators on opposing teams were game-planning against Deion, most of them realized how futile it was to even think about throwing at him. He most literally "took half the field away" from the quarterback.

In 1992, Dallas beat San Francisco in the NFC Championship game.

In 1993, Dallas beat San Francisco in the NFC Championship game.

In 1994, the Niners realized something had to change to get over the hump against the Cowboys. So they signed Deion Sanders and promptly beat Dallas in the Championship game that year, then destroyed San Diego in the Super Bowl. Now the tables had been turned, and it was up to Dallas to get the edge on San Francisco. So the Cowboys went out and signed ..... Deion Sanders.

Later that year, Dallas beat Pittsburgh in the Super Bowl and they were back on top.

Sanders had 53 career INT's (most of which came before teams smartened up and stopped throwing his way) with 10 defensive TDs. He also had over 5,700 yards and 9 TDs on punt/kick returns, and even had 3 receiving TDs and 475 yards receiving in a very part-time role as a WR in Dallas in 1996. Many NFL folks used to think he could have been a Pro Bowl wide receiver had he toiled strictly on that side of the ball.

The only knock on Prime Time - and I can't dispute it - is that he wasn't exactly what you'd call a "willing" tackler.

I can already hear the arguments I'm about to get.

"How many Super Bowls did Deion lead the Falcons to?"

"Nnamdi Asomugha is a shutdown corner, and the Raiders stink every year!"

"[insert great QB here] won a Super Bowl, and that team wouldn't have won 5 games without him!"

Before you throw this at me, please have the capability to understand that a great QB can affect his team FAR more than a great cornerback can. It's not Deion's fault he was born a cornerback. But regardless of position value and based strictly on sheer football talent, I'd take Sanders over all the rest.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Argue with me if you are so inclined.

*** No disrespect to Jim Brown, Lawrence Taylor, Jerry Rice, Reggie White, Joe Montana, etc. I just think Deion was the greatest of the greats. However, in about two or three more years I think my answer will forever change to Peyton Manning. ***

 

[baconisgood]

So Revis is the best player in the NFL because he's a supreme shutdown corner.

A. No, Revis is (one of) the best NFL players because his season last year was one of the best ever at his position. He was outstanding to an outstanding degree- not just because he was good.B. Jim Brown.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Jim Brown is the greatest football player ever, but I like your hutzpah!

Deion certainly one of the best ever, he changed the game like few players can. Peyton, he is doing things that even older generations can appreciate to the point of being amazed by just watching him do something in a game that is background noise. But Peyton will never be as good a football player than Jim Brown was. Brown was a man among boys, he is the standard and we can just hope another one of him comes along someday in our lifetimes.

 

[Montana16]

Jim Brown is the greatest football player ever, but I like your hutzpah! Deion certainly one of the best ever, he changed the game like few players can. Peyton, he is doing things that even older generations can appreciate to the point of being amazed by just watching him do something in a game that is background noise. But Peyton will never be as good a football player than Jim Brown was. Brown was a man among boys, he is the standard and we can just hope another one of him comes along someday in our lifetimes.

LOLOLOLOL at jim brown being called the best player ever when this isnt even a discussion! Its not even a debate! 2 words...JERRY RICE! Calling brown the best player is like calling wilt chamberlain the best basketball player. Different era, different game. I only see chamberlain sleepwalking his way past a bunch of goofy white guys and coal miners. I know thats not exactly the case and he had SOME competition but you get my point. Jim brown is fantastic but its debateable that hes even the best RB. Its common knowledge and widely accepted that Jerry Rice is the overall best football player ever. Untouchable stats+Big game wins in the SB era=Top of the mountain.

 

[Raider Nation]

So Revis is the best player in the NFL because he's a supreme shutdown corner.

A. No, Revis is (one of) the best NFL players because his season last year was one of the best ever at his position. He was outstanding to an outstanding degree- not just because he was good.

I'm not really sure what I said about Revis which was inaccurate.... but okay.

 

[Raider Nation]

Jim Brown is the greatest football player ever, but I like your hutzpah! Deion certainly one of the best ever, he changed the game like few players can. Peyton, he is doing things that even older generations can appreciate to the point of being amazed by just watching him do something in a game that is background noise. But Peyton will never be as good a football player than Jim Brown was. Brown was a man among boys, he is the standard and we can just hope another one of him comes along someday in our lifetimes.

LOLOLOLOL at jim brown being called the best player ever when this isnt even a discussion! Its not even a debate! 2 words...JERRY RICE! Calling brown the best player is like calling wilt chamberlain the best basketball player. Different era, different game. I only see chamberlain sleepwalking his way past a bunch of goofy white guys and coal miners. I know thats not exactly the case and he had SOME competition but you get my point. Jim brown is fantastic but its debateable that hes even the best RB. Its common knowledge and widely accepted that Jerry Rice is the overall best football player ever. Untouchable stats+Big game wins in the SB era=Top of the mountain.

So how do you feel about Jerry Rice?

 

[bostonfred]

Tom Brady

Deion Sanders

Jerry Rice

Jim Brown

Barry Sanders

 

[Raider Nation]

Tom Brady

Deion Sanders

Jerry Rice

Jim Brown

Barry Sanders

Stunned. STUNNED, I tell you! If you lived in Utah, would your list be exactly the same? Be honest.

 

[bostonfred]

Tom Brady

Deion Sanders

Jerry Rice

Jim Brown

Barry Sanders

Stunned. STUNNED, I tell you! If you lived in Utah, would your list be exactly the same? Be honest.

If I lived in Utah I'd be willing to be Brady's third wife.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

What this tells me is that Sanders was the piece of the puzzle that helped one awesome team defeat other awesome teams and be champions. In the lofty air of the NFL's elite, Sanders was the element that made one better than the others. If you put him on a great team, he'd help them become champions. That doesn't make him the best in NFL history, though.

Without Emmitt Smith, the elite Cowboys were 0-2 during his holdout, including a loss to the Bills (IIRC). When he came back, they won the Super Bowl that same year. Joe Montana, past his prime, went to Kansas City and they beat the Oilers (who were dominant at the time) and went to the conference championship game. I don't see why their contributions aren't just as valuable.

Sanders was a great player, no doubt. But he didn't play a position that allowed him to to be the best NFL player of all time. Position value does matter. Nobody would include the best kicker ever in a discussion of best NFL players ever.

If you had an elite NFL franchise and wanted to get over the hump and beat the other elite NFL franchises, Sanders was your man. If you had a mediocre or poor team, you'd be better off passing on him. His impact on the team wasn't big enough for those kinds of teams to utilize him.

 

[Raider Nation]

What this tells me is that Sanders was the piece of the puzzle that helped one awesome team defeat other awesome teams and be champions. In the lofty air of the NFL's elite, Sanders was the element that made one better than the others. If you put him on a great team, he'd help them become champions. That doesn't make him the best in NFL history, though. Without Emmitt Smith, the elite Cowboys were 0-2 during his holdout, including a loss to the Bills (IIRC). When he came back, they won the Super Bowl that same year. Joe Montana, past his prime, went to Kansas City and they beat the Oilers (who were dominant at the time) and went to the conference championship game. I don't see why their contributions aren't just as valuable.Sanders was a great player, no doubt. But he didn't play a position that allowed him to to be the best NFL player of all time. Position value does matter. Nobody would include the best kicker ever in a discussion of best NFL players ever. If you had an elite NFL franchise and wanted to get over the hump and beat the other elite NFL franchises, Sanders was your man. If you had a mediocre or poor team, you'd be better off passing on him. His impact on the team wasn't big enough for those kinds of teams to utilize him.

All of that is spot on, sir.A shutdown corner will not make a bad team good, but he can make a good team great as Deion proved.But his position not having the impact of a QB or RB should not be held against him. He is, IMO, the best "football player" ever.

 

[Barry]

I always thought Reggie White had as big an impact on games as anyone else.

 

[Raider Nation]

I always thought Reggie White had as big an impact on games as anyone else.

Max Lane agrees.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

What this tells me is that Sanders was the piece of the puzzle that helped one awesome team defeat other awesome teams and be champions. In the lofty air of the NFL's elite, Sanders was the element that made one better than the others. If you put him on a great team, he'd help them become champions. That doesn't make him the best in NFL history, though. Without Emmitt Smith, the elite Cowboys were 0-2 during his holdout, including a loss to the Bills (IIRC). When he came back, they won the Super Bowl that same year. Joe Montana, past his prime, went to Kansas City and they beat the Oilers (who were dominant at the time) and went to the conference championship game. I don't see why their contributions aren't just as valuable.Sanders was a great player, no doubt. But he didn't play a position that allowed him to to be the best NFL player of all time. Position value does matter. Nobody would include the best kicker ever in a discussion of best NFL players ever. If you had an elite NFL franchise and wanted to get over the hump and beat the other elite NFL franchises, Sanders was your man. If you had a mediocre or poor team, you'd be better off passing on him. His impact on the team wasn't big enough for those kinds of teams to utilize him.

All of that is spot on, sir.A shutdown corner will not make a bad team good, but he can make a good team great as Deion proved.But his position not having the impact of a QB or RB should not be held against him. He is, IMO, the best "football player" ever.

OK. I guess that's where we disagree. If someone is the best football player ever, they should be able to make a bad team good. If they can't, for whatever reason, they're not the best football player ever. If you have to be a QB or RB to make a bad team good, then I can hold his position against him. He wasn't good enough to be something that impacts teams in a bigger way. He was only good enough to be something that impacts a team to a lesser degree. He was great at that "something" but the best football player ever should be able to make a bad team good.

 

[FavreCo]

The problem I have with Sanders is he was a wimp at tackling. You can't call someone the best when he was lacking in part of his game.

Also when he went up against Marvin Harrison (albeit nearing the end of his career) faking a hamstring injury becasue you are torched by Harrison is lame...and he was torched bad.

 

[Mentos]

Sammy Baugh should be mentioned here. You can seriously argue that he was the greatest football player of all time.

The guy led the league in various passing statistics (att, comp, comp %, yards, TDs) over the course of his career. As a defensive back, he led the league in interceptions in 1943. He also led the league in punting average four times.

 

[Polar Dude]

I think the dilemma is determining what "greatest" means. Most athletic? Most valuable to his team? Valued contributor to the most championships? Most productive (stat-wise)? Most dominant against the competition? Most dominant at his position? Most well-rounded? Best at the most important position? Consistently productive over the longest number of seasons? Some other form of criteria?

The odd thing is, even as I was listing this criteria, I was thinking of people who would likely be near the top of these lists. Jerry Rice's name came to mind a number of times, but I doubt he would ever be my choice for the greatest player in NFL history. He'd be in the discussion, but he wouldn't be my choice.

 

[FUBAR]

What this tells me is that Sanders was the piece of the puzzle that helped one awesome team defeat other awesome teams and be champions. In the lofty air of the NFL's elite, Sanders was the element that made one better than the others. If you put him on a great team, he'd help them become champions. That doesn't make him the best in NFL history, though. Without Emmitt Smith, the elite Cowboys were 0-2 during his holdout, including a loss to the Bills (IIRC). When he came back, they won the Super Bowl that same year. Joe Montana, past his prime, went to Kansas City and they beat the Oilers (who were dominant at the time) and went to the conference championship game. I don't see why their contributions aren't just as valuable.Sanders was a great player, no doubt. But he didn't play a position that allowed him to to be the best NFL player of all time. Position value does matter. Nobody would include the best kicker ever in a discussion of best NFL players ever. If you had an elite NFL franchise and wanted to get over the hump and beat the other elite NFL franchises, Sanders was your man. If you had a mediocre or poor team, you'd be better off passing on him. His impact on the team wasn't big enough for those kinds of teams to utilize him.

All of that is spot on, sir.A shutdown corner will not make a bad team good, but he can make a good team great as Deion proved.But his position not having the impact of a QB or RB should not be held against him. He is, IMO, the best "football player" ever.

OK. I guess that's where we disagree. If someone is the best football player ever, they should be able to make a bad team good. If they can't, for whatever reason, they're not the best football player ever. If you have to be a QB or RB to make a bad team good, then I can hold his position against him. He wasn't good enough to be something that impacts teams in a bigger way. He was only good enough to be something that impacts a team to a lesser degree. He was great at that "something" but the best football player ever should be able to make a bad team good.

You make a strong point, but I'll still take the guy who was by far the best ever at his position, regardless of the position unless it's punter or kicker. Therefore the conversation IMO is between Brown, Rice and Deion, I honestly can't say for certain which I'd take, but Rice was among the best longer so he gets my tentative nod. I mean really, anyone who has a meaningful all time record by 40% more than the next guy, has got to be the best ever - Rice is up by 40%, 50%, and for now, 30% for receptions, yardage and touchdowns. Brown is #5 in TDs, barely top 10 in yardage. Different era of course but best ever should have some records still. The reasoning doesn't hold up very well with corners as they can be avoided better, but Deion is #23 in INTs. It is very impressive that 1/6 of his INTs went for touchdowns. Still, what stats do we have that prove Deion was the best ever? Stats don't tell the whole story of course, but our eyes can be deceived and eyewitness testimony is the worst kind, so where's the proof here? I did list DS as one of my three so I still believe he is one of the best, but it's not an easy position to argue for.

 

[konastitch]

Deion is not even in the top 10 as far as all-time "football players" is concerned. Heck, I don't know that he'd be in the top 20 as far as I'm concerned.

Someone who is downright afraid of contact can't even be mentioned in the same breath as some of the TRUE all-time greats.

There were times that I would watch Deion and actually be embarrassed FOR HIM b/c he was such a princess out there.

His speed was elite. His understanding of positioning and coverage was elite. His "ball skills" and ability to bait QBs were elite. And his ability to change a game with one play was elite. I won't question ANY of that.

BUT, (and it's a BIG but) he was FAR from a complete football player. He gambled a bit too much and for every highlight reel play he made, he also got burned by gambling, showing off, holding the ball like a loaf of bread, dancing, missing tackles, etc. I think a lot of folks get caught up in this Sportscentre/Youtube hero love-fest in the last 10 years that feature only the spectacular plays - of which Deion had many. But they forget, all too soon, about the MULTIPLE short-comings this guy had that hurt his team(s).

So to ask the question: "Was Deion one of the great football players in the history of the game?" You have to answer "Yes."

But to suggest that there has never been a better player, OVERALL, in the entire history of the game is laughable and almost to the point of insulting to TRUE greats who may not have danced their way into the hearts of fans, but certainly played a lot tougher and a lot more consistent...thus earning the designation of being considered for G.O.A.T.

That's my two cents anyways.

Neat thread though...certainly sparks some debate and I give OP credit for having the stones to go out on a limb and risk getting flamed for taking such a ballsy stance!

 

[Catbird]

So you are starting a football team and you can choose between Peyton and Deion, both rookies, knowing what their careers will be like ... and you are going to take Sanders? I am not deep in the Manning man-love camp and that's just wrong. I think there are a couple dozen players I would take over Sanders to build my team. Another year or two of Revis playing like last year and he's one of them. Not being willing/able to stick a guy in the open field is a huge flaw for a DB - and IMO brings an all-world talent down to being an dominant but flawed one. That gets you into the Hall, but doesn't let you sniff BOAT.

 

[ADP]

Jerry Rice

-

Walter Payton

These are the two best "football" players ever.

 

[cr8f]

Jim Brown is the greatest football player ever, but I like your hutzpah!

Deion certainly one of the best ever, he changed the game like few players can. Peyton, he is doing things that even older generations can appreciate to the point of being amazed by just watching him do something in a game that is background noise. But Peyton will never be as good a football player than Jim Brown was. Brown was a man among boys, he is the standard and we can just hope another one of him comes along someday in our lifetimes.

I don't.

Players that change how the game is played are one criteria I agree. Lawrence Taylor is one of those as is Jim Brown.

Walter Payton played for bad teams most of his career and it one of the best.

Jerry Rice.

I would vote Brown because he was a man among boys when he played.

Sammy Baugh should be mentioned here. You can seriously argue that he was the greatest football player of all time.

The guy led the league in various passing statistics (att, comp, comp %, yards, TDs) over the course of his career. As a defensive back, he led the league in interceptions in 1943. He also led the league in punting average four times.

Very true. Don Hutson was too.

I wouldn't take too many defensive players but would take LT before Deion.

Revis destroyed the best WR's last year. If he keeps it up Deion will be a footnote.

 

[GregR_2]

...

In 1992, Dallas beat San Francisco in the NFC Championship game.

In 1993, Dallas beat San Francisco in the NFC Championship game.

In 1994, the Niners realized something had to change to get over the hump against the Cowboys. So they signed Deion Sanders and promptly beat Dallas in the Championship game that year, then destroyed San Diego in the Super Bowl. Now the tables had been turned, and it was up to Dallas to get the edge on San Francisco. So the Cowboys went out and signed ..... Deion Sanders.

Later that year, Dallas beat Pittsburgh in the Super Bowl and they were back on top.

...

Here's how those teams did head to head in all matchups with Sanders involved:1992-93 (no Sanders) Cowboys 3-0 against 49ers.

1994 49ers (Sanders) win twice. (including the only playoff game between the two teams with Sanders on a roster)

1995 Cowboys (Sanders) lose to 49ers.

1996 Cowboys (Sanders) beat 49ers.

1997 Cowboys (Sanders) lose to 49ers.

Sanders team was 3-2 in games he played in, while the 49ers as a group were 4-1, and more without him than with him. And he wasn't the only big addition when it turned around for the 49ers... that same year they added two players who would be 7 time pro bowlers in Bryant Young and Dana Stubblefield as their starting tackles.

I'm just saying it's one of those things that if you flip flop between head to head games and playoff results you can make an impressive picture. But if you don't flip flop like that it loses some luster. The 49ers won 80% of their games against the Cowboys, Sanders or no.

It was the Packers that the 49ers had problems matching up with in the years when Sanders was in Dallas. Packers were 4-0 against them including 3 playoff wins.

 

[dwyadog]

"I would vote Brown because he was a man among boys when he played."

I would vote against Brown for the same reason. Players in developed sports no longer enjoy that level of physical dominance, its just impossible in the modern era. My vote would to to Walter Payton.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I'll take Jerry Rice.

Sanders was great, but not that great.

 

[cobalt_27]

Cowboys fan and a huge Deion Sanders fan here, and even I can't say he's the best defensive player in the history of the game. You could make a good argument (and Michael Lewis has) that Lawrence Taylor changed the game on both sides of the ball.

For me, it's

1. Jerry Rice

2. Lawrence Taylor

3. Jim Brown

4. Joe Montana

5. Deion Sanders

 

[crnerblitz]

It starts and ends with Sammy Baugh. Payton who?? Jim what? Jerry whazit? Slinging Sammy.

 

[Deadman31]

Sammy Baugh.

 

[Mentos]

"I would vote Brown because he was a man among boys when he played."I would vote against Brown for the same reason. Players in developed sports no longer enjoy that level of physical dominance, its just impossible in the modern era. My vote would to to Walter Payton.

I have long felt that Brown was the better runner, but Payton was the better all-around back. Payton was a better blocker. He saved his QBs from getting pummelled on blitzes quite a few times. Payton also threw some TDs and was a better receiver than Brown.It felt good when I read Steve Sabol's guest appearance in MMQB this past week and saw that he has the same opinion.

 

[jurb26]

Someone who is downright afraid of contact can't even be mentioned in the same breath as some of the TRUE all-time greats.

Just about every great QB is also afraid of contact. Should they not be mentioned either? Sanders need for contact was about just as high... Of course I'm exaggerating a bit but I think you get the point.

 

[Montana16]

Jim Brown is the greatest football player ever, but I like your hutzpah! Deion certainly one of the best ever, he changed the game like few players can. Peyton, he is doing things that even older generations can appreciate to the point of being amazed by just watching him do something in a game that is background noise. But Peyton will never be as good a football player than Jim Brown was. Brown was a man among boys, he is the standard and we can just hope another one of him comes along someday in our lifetimes.

LOLOLOLOL at jim brown being called the best player ever when this isnt even a discussion! Its not even a debate! 2 words...JERRY RICE! Calling brown the best player is like calling wilt chamberlain the best basketball player. Different era, different game. I only see chamberlain sleepwalking his way past a bunch of goofy white guys and coal miners. I know thats not exactly the case and he had SOME competition but you get my point. Jim brown is fantastic but its debateable that hes even the best RB. Its common knowledge and widely accepted that Jerry Rice is the overall best football player ever. Untouchable stats+Big game wins in the SB era=Top of the mountain.

So how do you feel about Jerry Rice?

I assume this is some sort of "geeze we get it, u love jerry." rhetoric response but its def not. Im not even a jerry rice fan. I just know that its pretty much a known fact that jerry is the best player ever considering the sport and the fact that the positions are all so different in relation to eachother. Its just consensus that jerry is the top. In the same way that jordan is known as the best bball player. I had no idea there was this much debate!

 

[Catbird]

I've never thought Rice was the best and don't see that as common perception. I think there are WRs that were better in their prime (Sterling Sharpe, Jefferson, arguably even TO in terms of taking over a game - and I hate the guy). Rice was great every day for decades and holds all the records. I guess you could say he had the best WR career ever because of that. But best player to me is the guy who was the most dominant when he was at his best. Rice never felt to me like he dominated games to that extent. Being the lead receiver for 2 HoF QBs is nothing to sneeze at (but as always with WRs, how much is QB)? IMO, no way you get to be the best ever as a WR or CB. And if you could, neither Deion or Rice were the most dominant ever at their positions.

 

[Raider Nation]

THIS says more than my words ever could. The video quality goes from poor to good, so hang in there.

 

[Gary Davenport]

"I would vote Brown because he was a man among boys when he played."I would vote against Brown for the same reason. Players in developed sports no longer enjoy that level of physical dominance, its just impossible in the modern era. My vote would to to Walter Payton.

If you've watched the way he ran....really watched it...he could go for 5 yards a carry (he and Sanders (Barry, not the Sissy) are the only two in NFL history to average it) today the same as he did back then...nevermind that he's also the greatest lacrosse player ever.Jim Brown was a transcendent, once in a lifetime athlete stuck playing in an era that's left what he acheived underappreciated as hell.

 

[Raider Nation]

"I would vote Brown because he was a man among boys when he played."

I would vote against Brown for the same reason. Players in developed sports no longer enjoy that level of physical dominance, its just impossible in the modern era. My vote would to to Walter Payton.

If you've watched the way he ran....really watched it...he could go for 5 yards a carry (he and Sanders (Barry, not the Sissy) are the only two in NFL history to average it) today the same as he did back then...nevermind that he's also the greatest lacrosse player ever.

Wow, lacrosse. I heard Brian Sipe was an excellent Backgammon player.Way to leave out the part about "Deion the sissy" hitting a MLB home run and scoring a TD in the NFL in the same week. He is also the only man to play in the World Series and Super Bowl. You know, since we're bringing up facts that have nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

 

[Gary Davenport]

"I would vote Brown because he was a man among boys when he played."

I would vote against Brown for the same reason. Players in developed sports no longer enjoy that level of physical dominance, its just impossible in the modern era. My vote would to to Walter Payton.

If you've watched the way he ran....really watched it...he could go for 5 yards a carry (he and Sanders (Barry, not the Sissy) are the only two in NFL history to average it) today the same as he did back then...nevermind that he's also the greatest lacrosse player ever.

Wow, lacrosse. I heard Brian Sipe was an excellent Backgammon player.Way to leave out the part about "Deion the sissy" hitting a MLB home run and scoring a TD in the NFL in the same week. He is also the only man to play in the World Series and Super Bowl. You know, since we're bringing up facts that have nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

Deion Sanders was a great cornerback, but if you honestly think...that of all the great players....Where he rank in baseball, since you brought it up?

And actually, Sipe was world-class at UNO Mr. Smart Guy.

 

[Godsbrother]

I would take Rod Woodson over Deion Sanders.

 

[dwyadog]

"I would vote Brown because he was a man among boys when he played."I would vote against Brown for the same reason. Players in developed sports no longer enjoy that level of physical dominance, its just impossible in the modern era. My vote would to to Walter Payton.

If you've watched the way he ran....really watched it...he could go for 5 yards a carry (he and Sanders (Barry, not the Sissy) are the only two in NFL history to average it) today the same as he did back then...nevermind that he's also the greatest lacrosse player ever.Jim Brown was a transcendent, once in a lifetime athlete stuck playing in an era that's left what he acheived underappreciated as hell.

Ive seen as much tape as is possible for a regular guy to have of brown. I stand by what I said. Put walter on that championship, stacked dynasty of a team and he would have exceeded brown, especially as a complete back not even counting the passing. For transcendent athletes, i look to thorpe before brown and it isnt close to me but thats getting a bit too far off topic. Deion was great but he wasnt the best of all time.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I've never thought Rice was the best and don't see that as common perception. I think there are WRs that were better in their prime (Sterling Sharpe, Jefferson, arguably even TO in terms of taking over a game - and I hate the guy). Rice was great every day for decades and holds all the records. I guess you could say he had the best WR career ever because of that. But best player to me is the guy who was the most dominant when he was at his best. Rice never felt to me like he dominated games to that extent. Being the lead receiver for 2 HoF QBs is nothing to sneeze at (but as always with WRs, how much is QB)? IMO, no way you get to be the best ever as a WR or CB. And if you could, neither Deion or Rice were the most dominant ever at their positions.

When did you start watching football?

 

[FavreCo]

Someone who is downright afraid of contact can't even be mentioned in the same breath as some of the TRUE all-time greats.

Just about every great QB is also afraid of contact. Should they not be mentioned either? Sanders need for contact was about just as high... Of course I'm exaggerating a bit but I think you get the point.

I don't get the point. A QB isn't supposed to make contact. A DB is.

 

[Snotbubbles]

Deion Sanders didn't tackle. No tackle, no best player.

If I were starting a franchise, and I was picking a defensive back, I'd take Troy Polamalu over Deion Sanders.

 

[Snotbubbles]

I've never thought Rice was the best and don't see that as common perception. I think there are WRs that were better in their prime (Sterling Sharpe, Jefferson, arguably even TO in terms of taking over a game - and I hate the guy). Rice was great every day for decades and holds all the records. I guess you could say he had the best WR career ever because of that. But best player to me is the guy who was the most dominant when he was at his best. Rice never felt to me like he dominated games to that extent. Being the lead receiver for 2 HoF QBs is nothing to sneeze at (but as always with WRs, how much is QB)? IMO, no way you get to be the best ever as a WR or CB. And if you could, neither Deion or Rice were the most dominant ever at their positions.

When did you start watching football?

Most guys best years wouldn't even be in Jerry Rice's top 5.

 

[Koya]

The next tackle Sanders makes will be his first. (ok, slight exageration, but you get my drift)

Yes, the guy could take away one player from the other team. A truly great team would have more than one option. LT disrupted an entire offense. Running team, passing team, balanced attack. Run at him, away from him - heck, you say how Sanders was picked up to help already very good teams get over the hump and how he would force the opponent to throw to the other side, LT was responsible for Gibbs utilizing the 3 foot drop and changing not only defense, but offense. Now, is LT the greatest player ever? Arguably. Is Sanders? Can't see how an incomplete player with such a flaw in his game could warrant that consideration.

 

[Koya]

Someone who is downright afraid of contact can't even be mentioned in the same breath as some of the TRUE all-time greats.

Just about every great QB is also afraid of contact. Should they not be mentioned either? Sanders need for contact was about just as high... Of course I'm exaggerating a bit but I think you get the point.

Yeesh, we really are turning into a nation of wusses... since when was a cornerbacks need for contact not especially high? I mean really, that's a gaping whole in his game and something an opposing coach absolutely could utilize against Deion's team.The other greats have no such glaring holes... and QBs? Really, you are comparing an offensive player who's purpose is to avoid being tackled with a defensive player whereby tackling is one of the most important elements? Im not sure how someone who is attuned to football could even say this.

 

[Ted Lange as your Bartender]

It would have nice to see what Deion's final numbers would have been if he only played football.

 

[cobalt_27]

Someone who is downright afraid of contact can't even be mentioned in the same breath as some of the TRUE all-time greats.

Just about every great QB is also afraid of contact. Should they not be mentioned either? Sanders need for contact was about just as high... Of course I'm exaggerating a bit but I think you get the point.

Yeesh, we really are turning into a nation of wusses... since when was a cornerbacks need for contact not especially high? I mean really, that's a gaping whole in his game and something an opposing coach absolutely could utilize against Deion's team.

And yet for years this never seemed to be fully exploited. If only head coaches back then had your football acumen.

 

[OddibeMcD]

How can Jerry Rice be #1 all-time when he isn't #1 at his position?

Don Hutson>Jerry Rice.

 

[Koya]

How can Jerry Rice be #1 all-time when he isn't #1 at his position?Don Hutson>Jerry Rice.

Don Hutson was a more dominant receiver in his era, but as much of a Hutson fan as I am, can't put him above Rice as a receiver. Now, as a football player? When you consider Hutson was a dominant defensive player as well? Now you have something.

 

[OddibeMcD]

How can Jerry Rice be #1 all-time when he isn't #1 at his position?

Don Hutson>Jerry Rice.

Don Hutson was a more dominant receiver in his era, but as much of a Hutson fan as I am, can't put him above Rice as a receiver. Now, as a football player? When you consider Hutson was a dominant defensive player as well? Now you have something.

I think more dominant receiver sells Hutson short. He was the Babe Ruth of football. He was compiling more yards than entire teams. Hutson still holds 14 NFL records according to this. Rice appears more times, but the vast majority of his records are dependant on length of a season. Playing 16 games each year gives him an inherent advantage over a guy who never played a season of more than 12 games. Hutson's records are varied and impressive. Most points in a quarter? 29...a record for a half as well until Shaun Alexander put up 30. Hutson ties Rice for number of seasons with at least 6 TD's, made much more impressive that Hutson was playing 10, 11 or 12 game seasons. Hutson had to play at least 4 years to match Rice's opportunities in three.It is more impressive to me for Hutson to have led the NFL in TD's eight times than it is for Rice to have caught at least one TD in 20 seasons. Hutson was no mere complier of statistics (I don't think Rice was as well, but he certainly did at the end of his career.) Hutson dominated the NFL like no one has since and no one save Babe Ruth has done in professional sports.

Hutson's career

 

[Adebisi]

I'd take Troy Polamalu over Deion Sanders.