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

[bighandsray]

As a 37 yr old who never saw Jim Brown play, I would put Peyton as the best.

1. Peyton

2. Reggie White

3. Montana

4. Emmitt

5. Rice

To me Manning makes everyone on his team better. Obviously it is easy for the QB to make offensive players look better. But Manning can string together a 7 minute drive to give the D a rest. He will get his kicker in range for a game winner. He will kill clock with a lead. Calls all of his own plays. He does it all with total command and awareness of every situation during a game.

There is no way I could ever put a DB or WR at the top. They are just not involved with as many plays during the course of a game.

 

[Proud Communist]

...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....

(I have my own thoughts to add later)

 

[Proud Communist]

...

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.

...

More

 

[Proud Communist]

RN, you seem to make 3 main points.

1) Deion Sanders was a shutdown corner, actually the best shutdown corner ever, and the greatest return man ever. And he “took half the field away from the quarterback".

2) SF beat Dallas, when they acquired Sanders in the 1994, after acquiring Sanders. Then, Dallas beat SF when they acquired Sanders in 1995.

3) His lack of tackling is not a big deal.

So, to address your points.

1) Deion was not exactly a shutdown corner, and he certainly is not the greatest corner in NFL history. The greatest corner in NFL history is **** “Night Train” Lane, who was a true shutdown corner and a more complete football player than Sanders ever was. Revis’ year last year as a true shut down corner was better than Sanders ever played in the NFL.

What is the function of a shutdown corner? To shutdown the opposition’s best receiver. This is not what Sanders did. In the defenses that Sanders played, he played the weak side cornerback (in fairness to Sanders, due to his great ability, he needed less over the top help than most CBs in the league). He was not trusted by any of his coaching staffs to play the strong side corner back due his ineptness in the run support. Why does this matter? Typically, a team’s best WR plays the flanker position, which is the strong side WR. Jerry Rice & Michael Irvin were both flankers. So, Sanders mainly played the #2 WR on the team.

Let’s take two examples that you cited: The championship games of 1994 & 1995.

In 1994, the San Francisco 49ers defeated the Dallas Cowboys 38-28. Dallas passed for 380 yards, and Michael Irvin (Dallas’s best WR) caught 12 passes for 192 yards and 2 TDs.

In 1995, the Dallas Cowboys defeated the Green Bay Packers 38-27. Green Bay passed for 307 yards in the game, and Robert Brooks (GB’s best WR) caught 6 passes for 105 yards and 2 TDs.

So, in two of the biggest games in the season, either Sanders was toasted or he didn’t play the opposition’s best WR. Either way, he didn’t contribute much to improving his teams passing defense and in either scenario fails the test as a “shutdown corner”. If he took away 'a half of the field', he was taking away the wrong half because in each case the opposing QB threw for over 300 yards and multiple TDs. In both cases, SF’s and Dallas’ offenses carried the team in their respective victories.

2) Sanders did not contribute much in either the conference championship game or the Super Bowls in 1994 & 1995. His teams offense greatly outplayed opposing teams offense(which still scored 27 & 28 points respectively, not a great defensive showing). He was either toasted or irrelevant in the conference championship games and his presence did not matter in either Super Bowl as both teams would have won the game against inferior opponents with or without his performance.

3) His lack of tackling is a big deal when you are considering GOAT at a position. It is required to be a complete player, which Sanders decidedly was not. When playing the run, his defenses were handicapped by playing with only 10 players. Teams did take advantage of this.

Now, I will acknowledge that he was an outstanding kick returner, only exceeded by Gail Sayers in the annals of NFL history.

To even be in discussion for a shutdown corner, you must at minimum play the opposition’s best WR. Sanders rarely did this. Revis did last year, and he was a true shutdown corner.

 

[Raider Nation]

RN, you seem to make 3 main points.

1) Deion Sanders was a shutdown corner, actually the best shutdown corner ever, and the greatest return man ever. And he "took half the field away from the quarterback".

2) SF beat Dallas, when they acquired Sanders in the 1994, after acquiring Sanders. Then, Dallas beat SF when they acquired Sanders in 1995.

3) His lack of tackling is not a big deal.

Link to where I said this?

 

[Proud Communist]

RN, you seem to make 3 main points.

1) Deion Sanders was a shutdown corner, actually the best shutdown corner ever, and the greatest return man ever. And he "took half the field away from the quarterback".

2) SF beat Dallas, when they acquired Sanders in the 1994, after acquiring Sanders. Then, Dallas beat SF when they acquired Sanders in 1995.

3) His lack of tackling is not a big deal.

Link to where I said this?

It was implied when you acknowledged this fact without discussing how it impacts his GOAT consideration. By not either explaining why it is not a big deal or it is a big deal, you discount it as a factor in Sander's favor.

 

[Raider Nation]

RN, you seem to make 3 main points.

1) Deion Sanders was a shutdown corner, actually the best shutdown corner ever, and the greatest return man ever. And he "took half the field away from the quarterback".

2) SF beat Dallas, when they acquired Sanders in the 1994, after acquiring Sanders. Then, Dallas beat SF when they acquired Sanders in 1995.

3) His lack of tackling is not a big deal.

Link to where I said this?

It was implied when you acknowledged this fact without discussing how it impacts his GOAT consideration. By not either explaining why it is not a big deal or it is a big deal, you discount it as a factor in Sander's favor.

Look, the guy clearly wasn't **** Butkus when it came to wrapping up ball carriers. But people act as if he curled up into the fetal position when a RB came near him. Watch that ten minute video I posted earlier in the thread. He put some SHOTS on people which may surprise some of you. To be honest, when you can do the dynamic things on a football field that Deion could do, I don't think most of his coaches or teammates cared very much that he wasn't a "form" tackler. If anything, it will just increase the odds of him getting hurt and that does nobody any good.

 

[Proud Communist]

RN, you seem to make 3 main points.

1) Deion Sanders was a shutdown corner, actually the best shutdown corner ever, and the greatest return man ever. And he "took half the field away from the quarterback".

2) SF beat Dallas, when they acquired Sanders in the 1994, after acquiring Sanders. Then, Dallas beat SF when they acquired Sanders in 1995.

3) His lack of tackling is not a big deal.

Link to where I said this?

It was implied when you acknowledged this fact without discussing how it impacts his GOAT consideration. By not either explaining why it is not a big deal or it is a big deal, you discount it as a factor in Sander's favor.

Look, the guy clearly wasn't **** Butkus when it came to wrapping up ball carriers. But people act as if he curled up into the fetal position when a RB came near him. Watch that ten minute video I posted earlier in the thread. He put some SHOTS on people which may surprise some of you. To be honest, when you can do the dynamic things on a football field that Deion could do, I don't think most of his coaches or teammates cared very much that he wasn't a "form" tackler. If anything, it will just increase the odds of him getting hurt and that does nobody any good.

What about the first two points I made, which I backed up with statistics?

 

[Proud Communist]

...

Look, the guy clearly wasn't **** Butkus when it came to wrapping up ball carriers. But people act as if he curled up into the fetal position when a RB came near him. Watch that ten minute video I posted earlier in the thread. He put some SHOTS on people which may surprise some of you. To be honest, when you can do the dynamic things on a football field that Deion could do, I don't think most of his coaches or teammates cared very much that he wasn't a "form" tackler. If anything, it will just increase the odds of him getting hurt and that does nobody any good.

This is not about him being liked by his teammates, it is about your claim that he was the GOAT.From everything I heard, wherever he played, whether the NFL or MLB, his teammates loved him. He was a warm personable guy that naturally drew people to him. However, whether his teammates liked him or not has no bearing on whether he was GOAT and I thought that was the point we were discussing.

 

[Raider Nation]

RN, you seem to make 3 main points.

1) Deion Sanders was a shutdown corner, actually the best shutdown corner ever, and the greatest return man ever. And he "took half the field away from the quarterback".

2) SF beat Dallas, when they acquired Sanders in the 1994, after acquiring Sanders. Then, Dallas beat SF when they acquired Sanders in 1995.

3) His lack of tackling is not a big deal.

Link to where I said this?

It was implied when you acknowledged this fact without discussing how it impacts his GOAT consideration. By not either explaining why it is not a big deal or it is a big deal, you discount it as a factor in Sander's favor.

Look, the guy clearly wasn't **** Butkus when it came to wrapping up ball carriers. But people act as if he curled up into the fetal position when a RB came near him. Watch that ten minute video I posted earlier in the thread. He put some SHOTS on people which may surprise some of you. To be honest, when you can do the dynamic things on a football field that Deion could do, I don't think most of his coaches or teammates cared very much that he wasn't a "form" tackler. If anything, it will just increase the odds of him getting hurt and that does nobody any good.

What about the first two points I made, which I backed up with statistics?

You make fine points and present them expertly. Doesn't change my mind though.

 

[Raider Nation]

...

Look, the guy clearly wasn't **** Butkus when it came to wrapping up ball carriers. But people act as if he curled up into the fetal position when a RB came near him. Watch that ten minute video I posted earlier in the thread. He put some SHOTS on people which may surprise some of you. To be honest, when you can do the dynamic things on a football field that Deion could do, I don't think most of his coaches or teammates cared very much that he wasn't a "form" tackler. If anything, it will just increase the odds of him getting hurt and that does nobody any good.

This is not about him being liked by his teammates, it is about your claim that he was the GOAT.From everything I heard, wherever he played, whether the NFL or MLB, his teammates loved him. He was a warm personable guy that naturally drew people to him. However, whether his teammates liked him or not has no bearing on whether he was GOAT and I thought that was the point we were discussing.

You seem almost angry about my assessment. Tell me who YOU think is the greatest ever. I promise not to get mad.

 

[Proud Communist]

...

Look, the guy clearly wasn't **** Butkus when it came to wrapping up ball carriers. But people act as if he curled up into the fetal position when a RB came near him. Watch that ten minute video I posted earlier in the thread. He put some SHOTS on people which may surprise some of you. To be honest, when you can do the dynamic things on a football field that Deion could do, I don't think most of his coaches or teammates cared very much that he wasn't a "form" tackler. If anything, it will just increase the odds of him getting hurt and that does nobody any good.

This is not about him being liked by his teammates, it is about your claim that he was the GOAT.From everything I heard, wherever he played, whether the NFL or MLB, his teammates loved him. He was a warm personable guy that naturally drew people to him. However, whether his teammates liked him or not has no bearing on whether he was GOAT and I thought that was the point we were discussing.

You seem almost angry about my assessment. Tell me who YOU think is the greatest ever. I promise not to get mad.

If you would have read my post, I already posted it. But, for you GB, I will repeat. **** "Night Train" Lane was the greatest cornerback of all time. He was a true shutdown cornerback(Sanders was not). And, Revis' year last year was better than any year Sanders every played on defense. Revis was consistently matched up against opposing teams best WR and shut them down. Also, he was an asset to the defense in the running game.

 

[Raider Nation]

...

Look, the guy clearly wasn't **** Butkus when it came to wrapping up ball carriers. But people act as if he curled up into the fetal position when a RB came near him. Watch that ten minute video I posted earlier in the thread. He put some SHOTS on people which may surprise some of you. To be honest, when you can do the dynamic things on a football field that Deion could do, I don't think most of his coaches or teammates cared very much that he wasn't a "form" tackler. If anything, it will just increase the odds of him getting hurt and that does nobody any good.

This is not about him being liked by his teammates, it is about your claim that he was the GOAT.From everything I heard, wherever he played, whether the NFL or MLB, his teammates loved him. He was a warm personable guy that naturally drew people to him. However, whether his teammates liked him or not has no bearing on whether he was GOAT and I thought that was the point we were discussing.

You seem almost angry about my assessment. Tell me who YOU think is the greatest ever. I promise not to get mad.

If you would have read my post, I already posted it. But, for you GB, I will repeat. **** "Night Train" Lane was the greatest cornerback of all time.

I did read it. You said Lane is the greatest CB ever. I asked you who is the greatest football player ever.

 

[Proud Communist]

...

I did read it. You said Lane is the greatest CB ever. I asked you who is the greatest football player ever.

Mea culpa. I think it comes down to Walter Payton and Jim Brown. They could play any skill position on either offense or defense, and were complete football players. They could run, throw, block, tackle, and catch. That is a 5 tool player. I give the slight edge to Payton because he did not have the size advantage that Brown had, but I certainly can't dispute the claim that Brown is the GOAT.

They both could have played LB, CB or safety on defense, and either RB, TE or WR on offense, and been very good if not great at any of them. They had the skill, the size, the drive and the intelligence. QB is a very unique position, and while they both could throw the ball, I am unsure whether either could master the touch to be more than average as passing QBs.

And, they both possessed the skills to be great return men, even though they were too valuable to their teams to be allowed to play there. Payton average 31.7 yards per return for his career, with only 17 returns. Brown averaged 22.3 return yards on only 29 returns.

 

[Raider Nation]

...

I did read it. You said Lane is the greatest CB ever. I asked you who is the greatest football player ever.

Mea culpa. I think it comes down to Walter Payton and Jim Brown. They could play any skill position on either offense or defense, and were complete football players. They could run, throw, block, tackle, and catch. That is a 5 tool player. I give the slight edge to Payton because he did not have the size advantage that Brown had, but I certainly can't dispute the claim that Brown is the GOAT. They both could have played LB, CB or safety on defense, and either RB, TE or WR on offense, and been very good if not great at any of them. They had the skill, the size, the drive and the intelligence. QB is a very unique position, and while they both could throw the ball, I am unsure whether either could master the touch to be more than average as passing QBs.

And, they both possessed the skills to be great return men, even though they were too valuable to their teams to be allowed to play there. Payton average 31.7 yards per return for his career, with only 17 returns. Brown averaged 22.3 return yards on only 29 returns.

Nonsense. List all the 5'10" tight ends in NFL history, especially since 1975.

 

[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.

When did you start watching football?

Sorry to take so long. I didn't think the OP and topic had enough credibility to follow the discussion more closely.When? Really avidly with the Namath Superbowl, but I was finishing high schoool by then. I watched every season of Rice's career in CA where he and the 49ers were supreme. Some may have seen more of him - but probably not a big number of people. He was very, very good for a very, very, very long time. I didn't think his peak was ever as the most dominant WR talent. Give Randy Moss those two QB and a good career work ethic and I see a better top end. IMO Rice = best WR career, but not best WR ever.

 

[Proud Communist]

...

I did read it. You said Lane is the greatest CB ever. I asked you who is the greatest football player ever.

Mea culpa. I think it comes down to Walter Payton and Jim Brown. They could play any skill position on either offense or defense, and were complete football players. They could run, throw, block, tackle, and catch. That is a 5 tool player. I give the slight edge to Payton because he did not have the size advantage that Brown had, but I certainly can't dispute the claim that Brown is the GOAT. They both could have played LB, CB or safety on defense, and either RB, TE or WR on offense, and been very good if not great at any of them. They had the skill, the size, the drive and the intelligence. QB is a very unique position, and while they both could throw the ball, I am unsure whether either could master the touch to be more than average as passing QBs.

And, they both possessed the skills to be great return men, even though they were too valuable to their teams to be allowed to play there. Payton average 31.7 yards per return for his career, with only 17 returns. Brown averaged 22.3 return yards on only 29 returns.

Nonsense. List all the 5'10" tight ends in NFL history, especially since 1975.

Good point. For Payton, I will concede the TE position. But Deion Sanders certainly could not play TE either.

 

[Proud Communist]

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?

Sorry to take so long. I didn't think the OP and topic had enough credibility to follow the discussion more closely.When? Really avidly with the Namath Superbowl, but I was finishing high schoool by then. I watched every season of Rice's career in CA where he and the 49ers were supreme. Some may have seen more of him - but probably not a big number of people. He was very, very good for a very, very, very long time. I didn't think his peak was ever as the most dominant WR talent. Give Randy Moss those two QB and a good career work ethic and I see a better top end. IMO Rice = best WR career, but not best WR ever.

He has pretty much agreed he has not, and he is agreeing with all criticisms about Sanders that don't qualify him as GOAT, yet while not offering any counter arguments or any data to support his claim. He just "believes" it. It is like trying to argue with a fundamentalist Christian that the earth is older than 4K years.

 

[Raider Nation]

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?

Sorry to take so long. I didn't think the OP and topic had enough credibility to follow the discussion more closely.When? Really avidly with the Namath Superbowl, but I was finishing high schoool by then. I watched every season of Rice's career in CA where he and the 49ers were supreme. Some may have seen more of him - but probably not a big number of people. He was very, very good for a very, very, very long time. I didn't think his peak was ever as the most dominant WR talent. Give Randy Moss those two QB and a good career work ethic and I see a better top end. IMO Rice = best WR career, but not best WR ever.

He has pretty much agreed he has not, and he is agreeing with all criticisms about Sanders that don't qualify him as GOAT, yet while not offering any counter arguments or any data to support his claim. He just "believes" it. It is like trying to argue with a fundamentalist Christian that the earth is older than 4K years.

Ranking certain players really is 90% dependant on the "eye test" and feel. Cornerbacks are hard to quantify in the grand scheme beyond the numbers I've already provided. It's not like handily looking up Mike Schmidt's on-base percentage or Mark Price's shooting percentage to determine a player's value.Telling me that Jim Brown "could have played linebacker" is meaningless. If you are going to let me start a team with a just-out-of-college Deion Sanders who will lock down half a football field AND return kicks and punts expertly, that's a pretty damn good start. Though I already admitted it would be very difficult to pass on Manning.

 

[Proud Communist]

...Telling me that Jim Brown "could have played linebacker" is meaningless. If you are going to let me start a team with a just-out-of-college Deion Sanders who will lock down half a football field AND return kicks and punts expertly, that's a pretty damn good start. Though I already admitted it would be very difficult to pass on Manning.

Then what is the relevance of this quote from your OP:

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.

 

[Proud Communist]

...

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.

...

Also, the bolded is not true or due to punctuation is misleading. In 1996, his receiving stats were 36 catches/475 yards/1 TD. He had 3 receiving TDs in his entire 14-season career NFL career. He caught 36 passes in one year, but only 24 passes in his other 13 years in the league. If he was so good at doing this, why didn't he do it more, especially since he played for the Cowboys for 3 more years after his 36 pass reception year?

 

[GregR_2]

I realize you are probably talking at the height of their career, but I'm still going to ask you Raider Nation... if you could have Deion for his entire career, or you could have Rod Woodson for his entire career, who would you take for your football team?

I don't think I'd take Deion. The guy was very bad to have in the locker room. He got by on physical talent. There are stories of him not being willing to study the game. He was a cancer in the Washington Redskins locker room and selected by ESPN as the 10th worst free agent signing in all of sports, not just football, while the fan poll had him as the 5th worst of all time.

Woodson in my opinion was both physically talented and a student of the game, to the point that when both of them started to lose some physical ability, Deion retires (after daring the Redskins to cut him so he could jump up and click his heels together because they'll be paying him for doing nothing)... while Woodson puts his knowledge of the game to use to reinvent his game as a safety and go on to play several more pro bowl seasons... ending his career with 11 pro bowls to Sanders 8, while both of them had the same number of all pro selections.

If you had to pick one corner for a single game, I might take Deion. But if I had to have a football player on my team and take the good with the bad and have him through his career, I don't think Deion is at the top of his position.

 

[Frostillicus]

He was a pretty terrible center fielder.

 

[Raider Nation]

I realize you are probably talking at the height of their career, but I'm still going to ask you Raider Nation... if you could have Deion for his entire career, or you could have Rod Woodson for his entire career, who would you take for your football team?

The people have spoken on this one already:http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...16&hl=deion

Deion being the first pick finishes #1 and #2 in the poll. If you're here long enough, there are topics on EVERYTHING!

 

[Raider Nation]

...

Telling me that Jim Brown "could have played linebacker" is meaningless. If you are going to let me start a team with a just-out-of-college Deion Sanders who will lock down half a football field AND return kicks and punts expertly, that's a pretty damn good start. Though I already admitted it would be very difficult to pass on Manning.

Then what is the relevance of this quote from your OP:

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.

Deion actually played wide receiver. Brown at LB is purely speculative.

 

[Raider Nation]

...

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....

Also, the bolded is not true or due to punctuation is misleading. In 1996, his receiving stats were 36 catches/475 yards/1 TD. He had 3 receiving TDs in his entire 14-season career NFL career. He caught 36 passes in one year, but only 24 passes in his other 13 years in the league. If he was so good at doing this, why didn't he do it more, especially since he played for the Cowboys for 3 more years after his 36 pass reception year?

It was a poorly written sentence. I meant 3 career TDs .............. and 475 yards in 1996.If there is anything else you can think of to bust my balls about, I'll be home in four hours.

 

[Proud Communist]

...

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....

Also, the bolded is not true or due to punctuation is misleading. In 1996, his receiving stats were 36 catches/475 yards/1 TD. He had 3 receiving TDs in his entire 14-season career NFL career. He caught 36 passes in one year, but only 24 passes in his other 13 years in the league. If he was so good at doing this, why didn't he do it more, especially since he played for the Cowboys for 3 more years after his 36 pass reception year?

It was a poorly written sentence. I meant 3 career TDs .............. and 475 yards in 1996.If there is anything else you can think of to bust my balls about, I'll be home in four hours.

Not busting your balls, just wanted to make the post more clear. You even admitted it was poorly written, which of course happens to all of us. You are not even addressing statistical points made about his performance.You are the one who made an outrageous claim, and then have provided very little to support your claim except one post about the "eyeball" test. I have almost convinced that this a pure fishing expedition on your part.

I never heard that Deion would have have been a great(or even quality) NFL WR. If he showed so much promise, why didn't Dallas continue to throw to him while he was on the Cowboys? In the following three years with the Cowboys, he caught 0 passes, 7 passes, and 4 passes(and 0 TDs combined for the 3 years). These statistics are when he played 12, 11, and 14 games so it was not that he was injury riddled. What happened to his WR potential in those years when he was with the same team?

 

[jurb26]

I realize you are probably talking at the height of their career, but I'm still going to ask you Raider Nation... if you could have Deion for his entire career, or you could have Rod Woodson for his entire career, who would you take for your football team?I don't think I'd take Deion. The guy was very bad to have in the locker room. He got by on physical talent. There are stories of him not being willing to study the game. He was a cancer in the Washington Redskins locker room and selected by ESPN as the 10th worst free agent signing in all of sports, not just football, while the fan poll had him as the 5th worst of all time.Woodson in my opinion was both physically talented and a student of the game, to the point that when both of them started to lose some physical ability, Deion retires (after daring the Redskins to cut him so he could jump up and click his heels together because they'll be paying him for doing nothing)... while Woodson puts his knowledge of the game to use to reinvent his game as a safety and go on to play several more pro bowl seasons... ending his career with 11 pro bowls to Sanders 8, while both of them had the same number of all pro selections.If you had to pick one corner for a single game, I might take Deion. But if I had to have a football player on my team and take the good with the bad and have him through his career, I don't think Deion is at the top of his position.

To me, Woodson isn't even in the discussion. If you want to look for a CB outside of Sanders who could do everything then there is a guy who is also a former Steeler who is much more deserving mention than Woodson. Mel Blount. Blount was an absolute marvel for his day and was the most intimidating player on the Steel Curtain D. He just doesn't get as much praise for it because CB is a pretty thankless position in the grand scheme of things and that D had so many other great players that he didn't stand out near as much in contrast as some other great CBs. If Sanders isn't he best CB of all time though, Blount is.

 

[Proud Communist]

...To me, Woodson isn't even in the discussion. If you want to look for a CB outside of Sanders who could do everything then there is a guy who is also a former Steeler who is much more deserving mention than Woodson. Mel Blount. Blount was an absolute marvel for his day and was the most intimidating player on the Steel Curtain D. He just doesn't get as much praise for it because CB is a pretty thankless position in the grand scheme of things and that D had so many other great players that he didn't stand out near as much in contrast as some other great CBs. If Sanders isn't he best CB of all time though, Blount is.

I too think Blount was a better CB than Sanders.

 

[CravenM]

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.

Ditto - Deion was a specialist at several aspects but couldn't tackle.After thinking about it for 8.4 seconds, I'd say:1) Jerry Rice: talented and lasted forever2) Jim Brown: most dominant player for a decade3) Peyton Manning: best QB ever and made everybody on his team better4) Ray Lewis: best MLB ever and made everybody on his team better

 

[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.

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!

 

[zed2283]

I probably shouldn't have stuck my head in here, as I knew I would get upset. So I stopped reading after the first few posts. But all I've got to say is that pretty much everyone else mentioned in this thread (maybe even the ones I didn't read) should be ranked ahead of Deion Sanders as the greatest player of all time. It's not really even a discussion.

How can Deion be ranked above Jerry Rice when Rice torched him for all those years Sanders was in Atlanta? And I'm sorry, you can't be considered a great FOOTBALL player when you don't even tackle. And the 49'ers didn't just add Deion when they won the Super Bowl that year. They revamped the whole defense, also adding standouts like Gary Plummer and the Cowboys own Ken Norton Jr.

ETA: I thnk they also added new HoF'er R.Jackson.