Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
.... best football player ever!!!
He was good, but not great
Either you are fishing, or you were born after 1980.Dude was GREAT. He did it all, and did it all well. I don't idolize athletes, but Payton's death was one of the rare times that I was sad about an athlete passing.gotta be fishing. he was about as good as it gets, now or then.
And I'm agreeing with a packer fan and Bears fans so that REALLY says something about him!
You tubeWhen they needed a blocking fullback during the pro bowl he jumped up. He liked hitting people.He was good, but not great
Either you are fishing, or you were born after 1980.
Dude was GREAT. He did it all, and did it all well.
I don't idolize athletes, but Payton's death was one of the rare times that I was sad about an athlete passing.
I was joking, guy. As was the dude I quoted, I assume.Lott said:Adebisi said:Balance said:He was good, but not great
Oh, and he had the best and most appropriate nickname in the history of football. Sweetness.....personified him perfectly.
I'm not sure how this makes LT a ######. Walter liked to run people over. LT uses his elusiveness to make defenders miss. They both used what worked for them. Not to mention that defenders are much bigger, stronger, and faster today, than they were in the 70s. IMO, it doesn't make LT a ######, it makes him intelligent to avoid those big hits. How many times have we seen him make that defender miss and then scamper for a 50 yard touchdown? Tell me....had he tried to put a hit on that LB/safety, what are the odds he scored that TD?Instead of making posts bashing on current players (exception: TO...bash all you want), why don't you express your love for Payton is a more constructive way. Calling people "young punks" and such just makes you sound like a bitter old man. We're sorry it's not still 1975....get over it.
What happens when a player does act like a young punk? I have no issue with LT2 (and its 2, it may not be 1985 anymore, but there still is only one LT, and LT2 has not come close to usurping that moniker) going out of bounds to preserve his body - that helps his team. I have a BIG issue with his pouting and distance from the team on the sidelines. That is rather punkish, whatever decade it is, or isn't.
I actually agree with everything you said (except, perhaps, where you seem to not give Montana and Rice their due credit), and I think it's a travesty that Emmitt Smith broke the all-time rushing record record. I am neither blind nor ignorant - I think you may need to lighten up a bit and learn to pick up on a joke when you hear it, my friend.The reality is:Walter did not get the privilege to run behind great or elite OLs throughout his career like Emmit Smith didWalter was not a function of a system like say Joe Montana and Jerry Rice were. EVERYONE knew Walter was gonna get the ball and they still could not stop him. The Bears had no QBs until Mcmahon and the passing games were not as advanced then. It was T formation all the time....come and stop him if you can. And no one could yet do it.Walter did not have some stupid end zone celebration when he got there ... and he got there A LOT. Always acted with class, unlike the TOs of the world today.Walter did not sulk and pout and cry when he did not get the ball for the TD in the Superbowl unlike how the a-holes of today do.Walter did not dash the sideline when he had the ball, he would cut back in to hit the LB so that the next time he had the ball, the LB would be scared, unlike the ###### RBs of today (see LT2).Walter was all class all the time on and off the field, and was not a selfish prima donna like say Brett Favre. The team was above everything else for him.There is a reason he is mentioned in every conversation when peeps talk about the best football player ever.Oh, and he had the best and most appropriate nickname in the history of football. Sweetness.....personified him perfectly.Adebisi must be blind or an ignorant, young punk who thinks he knows everything, like most young football fans these days.
He was most definitely better than Emmitt. That is easy because Walter did everything better than Smith. I happen to think LT is great as well. He doesn't block as well as Walter and I think Walter ran with a little more power , but he is/was more explosive and has better hands. LT's nose for the end zone is where he shows good power as well. Jim Brown must also be in the conversation. Different era, but Brown was clearly the most dominant runner (like a man running with boys)I think Bo had the ability to be the best we ever saw, but his injury ruined that.The reality is:Walter did not get the privilege to run behind great or elite OLs throughout his career like Emmit Smith didWalter was not a function of a system like say Joe Montana and Jerry Rice were. EVERYONE knew Walter was gonna get the ball and they still could not stop him. The Bears had no QBs until Mcmahon and the passing games were not as advanced then. It was T formation all the time....come and stop him if you can. And no one could yet do it.Walter did not have some stupid end zone celebration when he got there ... and he got there A LOT. Always acted with class, unlike the TOs of the world today.Walter did not sulk and pout and cry when he did not get the ball for the TD in the Superbowl unlike how the a-holes of today do.Walter did not dash the sideline when he had the ball, he would cut back in to hit the LB so that the next time he had the ball, the LB would be scared, unlike the ###### RBs of today (see LT2).Walter was all class all the time on and off the field, and was not a selfish prima donna like say Brett Favre. The team was above everything else for him.There is a reason he is mentioned in every conversation when peeps talk about the best football player ever.Oh, and he had the best and most appropriate nickname in the history of football. Sweetness.....personified him perfectly.Adebisi must be blind or an ignorant, young punk who thinks he knows everything, like most young football fans these days.
I was joking, guy. As was the dude I quoted, I assume.Lott said:Adebisi said:Balance said:
By alright I meant top 5 all time. Always fun to see people with their panties in a wad over differing opinions regarding their favorite athletes. 
My thoughts on Payton.
He WAS the offense
QBs he played with: Bob Avellini, Bobby Douglass, Gary Huff, Virgil Carter, Vince Evans, Mike Phipps, Jim McMahon, Steve Fuller, Greg Landry, Rusty Lisch, Mike Tomczak, Doug Flutie, Jim Harbaugh. Heck, Payton himself lined up at QB a few times. Basically, Jim McMahon was the best he played with. That's not saying much.
Payton played with 1 Pro Bowl QB in 13 seasons: McMahon in 1985. (And why exactly did McMahon make the Pro Bowl? The Bears passing offense was 22nd in yards and 23rd in TDs... McMahon threw for 2392 yards and 15 TDs.
Not only did he never play with a 1000 yard receiver, he never even played with a 900 yard receiver. In fact, only 3 times in his 13 year career did any Bears receiver top 800 yards, and only 3 other times did any Bears receiver top 700 yards. And there were no good receiving TEs, either. It should come as no surprise that no Bears WR or TE made the Pro Bowl during Payton's career.
To reinforce this, consider Chicago's pass yardage ranks during Payton's career: 23 (of 26), 28 (of 28), 21, 26, 26, 28, 28, 22, 17, 26, 22, 24, 14. They finished in the bottom quarter of the league 10 times in Payton's career.
Payton himself led the Bears in receptions 6 times, and had the second highest total on the team 5 other times.
In his last few years, his offensive lines were pretty good, but for most of his career it wasn't. Two of Payton's linemen made the Pro Bowl a total of 5 times in his 13 seasons, all in his final 3 seasons: Jim Covert (1985, 1986), and Jay Hilgenberg (1985, 1986, 1987).
Compared to Jim Brown
Brown is the only back I would consider comparing to Payton, and I admit I didn't see him play, so that may bias my opinion. That said, consider that Brown joined a dynasty.
1950-56 (pre-Brown): 63-20-1 (.759), 6 postseason appearances in 7 years, 6 championship games, 3 championships
1957-1965 (with Brown): 79-34-5 (.699), 5 postseason appearances in 9 years, 3 championship games, 1 championship
Now compare that to Payton and the Bears:
1968-1974 (pre-Payton): 31-66-1 (.320), no postseason appearances
1975-1987 (with Payton): 111-83 (.572), 6 postseason appearances, 1 championship
How about a supporting cast comparison? Payton's is addressed above. It seems very hard to support the notion that the Browns were not already a very, very good team when Brown joined them, which naturally implies that he was surrounded by a talented group of teammates. Remember, there was no free agency (or draft?) at that time, so it would be very hard for me to see how the talent level of a team that appeared in 6 championship games in the 7 years prior to Brown's rookie season had suddenly dropped to average or worse. This is supported by the number of Pro Bowlers Brown played with:
- Browns QBs made the Pro Bowl 4 times in Brown's 9 seasons: Milt Plum (1960, 1961), Frank Ryan (1964, 1965).
- Browns WRs made the Pro Bowl 5 times in Brown's 9 seasons: Ray Renfro (1957, 1960), Bobby Mitchell (1960), Paul Warfield (1964), and Gary Collins (1965).
- Brown played with the following Pro Bowl offensive linemen: Art Hunter (1959), Mike McCormack (1957, 1960, 1961, 1962), Jim Smith (1958, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962), John Morrow (1961, 1963), #### Schafrath (1963), Gene Hickerson (1965), John Wooten (1965). That's 7 different linemen for a total of 15 times in 9 seasons, and only one season without a Pro Bowler--1964. In 6 of his seasons, Brown had 2 or more Pro Bowlers on the line.
To be fair, there were fewer teams when Brown played, so it stands to reason he would have played with more Pro Bowlers. Still, the difference is too big to be accounted for simply by that IMO.
The fewer teams also made it easier for Brown to lead the NFL in rushing, to win awards, etc.--less competition. Brown played when there were only 12-14 teams. In Payton's first season, there were 26 teams; for the rest of his career there were 28. As one example, Brown was 1st team All NFL 8 times, Payton 7 times. It is also true that as many as 4 RBs were selected to 1st team All NFL in Brown's career. Only 3 times was he selected as 1 of only 2 RBs chosen. Meanwhile, Payton made it 4 times as 1 of 2 RBs selected, and from a much bigger RB pool. So I am more impressed with Payton's 7 times, given the number of RBs he competed with was at least twice as many as Brown.
Also, BlueOnion posted this in an older thread:
I certainly can't verify whether these are valid points, but I found them interesting.Brown was obviously an all time great player. I just don't see evidence that Brown was better than Payton. Again, I admit that could be because I never saw him play with my own eyes, while I did see Payton play often.
Conclusion
Payton's accomplishments are more impressive than Jim Brown's (or any other RB's), IMO.
In that case apologies are due. I did not catch the humor.....just saw your 2nd post clarifying it too. Sorry!!!I actually agree with everything you said (except, perhaps, where you seem to not give Montana and Rice their due credit), and I think it's a travesty that Emmitt Smith broke the all-time rushing record record. I am neither blind nor ignorant - I think you may need to lighten up a bit and learn to pick up on a joke when you hear it, my friend.The reality is:Walter did not get the privilege to run behind great or elite OLs throughout his career like Emmit Smith didWalter was not a function of a system like say Joe Montana and Jerry Rice were. EVERYONE knew Walter was gonna get the ball and they still could not stop him. The Bears had no QBs until Mcmahon and the passing games were not as advanced then. It was T formation all the time....come and stop him if you can. And no one could yet do it.Walter did not have some stupid end zone celebration when he got there ... and he got there A LOT. Always acted with class, unlike the TOs of the world today.Walter did not sulk and pout and cry when he did not get the ball for the TD in the Superbowl unlike how the a-holes of today do.Walter did not dash the sideline when he had the ball, he would cut back in to hit the LB so that the next time he had the ball, the LB would be scared, unlike the ###### RBs of today (see LT2).Walter was all class all the time on and off the field, and was not a selfish prima donna like say Brett Favre. The team was above everything else for him.There is a reason he is mentioned in every conversation when peeps talk about the best football player ever.
Gale Sayers too....He was most definitely better than Emmitt. That is easy because Walter did everything better than Smith. I happen to think LT is great as well. He doesn't block as well as Walter and I think Walter ran with a little more power , but he is/was more explosive and has better hands. LT's nose for the end zone is where he shows good power as well. Jim Brown must also be in the conversation. Different era, but Brown was clearly the most dominant runner (like a man running with boys)I think Bo had the ability to be the best we ever saw, but his injury ruined that.The reality is:
Walter did not get the privilege to run behind great or elite OLs throughout his career like Emmit Smith did
Walter was not a function of a system like say Joe Montana and Jerry Rice were. EVERYONE knew Walter was gonna get the ball and they still could not stop him. The Bears had no QBs until Mcmahon and the passing games were not as advanced then. It was T formation all the time....come and stop him if you can. And no one could yet do it.
Walter did not have some stupid end zone celebration when he got there ... and he got there A LOT. Always acted with class, unlike the TOs of the world today.
Walter did not sulk and pout and cry when he did not get the ball for the TD in the Superbowl unlike how the a-holes of today do.
Walter did not dash the sideline when he had the ball, he would cut back in to hit the LB so that the next time he had the ball, the LB would be scared, unlike the ###### RBs of today (see LT2).
Walter was all class all the time on and off the field, and was not a selfish prima donna like say Brett Favre. The team was above everything else for him.
There is a reason he is mentioned in every conversation when peeps talk about the best football player ever.
Adebisi must be blind or an ignorant, young punk who thinks he knows everything, like most young football fans these days.
Not a problem. WP was one of the great ones - on the field and in person.In that case apologies are due. I did not catch the humor.....just saw your 2nd post clarifying it too. Sorry!!!I actually agree with everything you said (except, perhaps, where you seem to not give Montana and Rice their due credit), and I think it's a travesty that Emmitt Smith broke the all-time rushing record record. I am neither blind nor ignorant - I think you may need to lighten up a bit and learn to pick up on a joke when you hear it, my friend.The reality is:Walter did not get the privilege to run behind great or elite OLs throughout his career like Emmit Smith didWalter was not a function of a system like say Joe Montana and Jerry Rice were. EVERYONE knew Walter was gonna get the ball and they still could not stop him. The Bears had no QBs until Mcmahon and the passing games were not as advanced then. It was T formation all the time....come and stop him if you can. And no one could yet do it.Walter did not have some stupid end zone celebration when he got there ... and he got there A LOT. Always acted with class, unlike the TOs of the world today.Walter did not sulk and pout and cry when he did not get the ball for the TD in the Superbowl unlike how the a-holes of today do.Walter did not dash the sideline when he had the ball, he would cut back in to hit the LB so that the next time he had the ball, the LB would be scared, unlike the ###### RBs of today (see LT2).Walter was all class all the time on and off the field, and was not a selfish prima donna like say Brett Favre. The team was above everything else for him.There is a reason he is mentioned in every conversation when peeps talk about the best football player ever.
Indeed - have you ever heard Bill Cosby's rants about how absurdly good Sayers was? Hilarious...Gale Sayers too....He was most definitely better than Emmitt. That is easy because Walter did everything better than Smith. I happen to think LT is great as well. He doesn't block as well as Walter and I think Walter ran with a little more power , but he is/was more explosive and has better hands. LT's nose for the end zone is where he shows good power as well. Jim Brown must also be in the conversation. Different era, but Brown was clearly the most dominant runner (like a man running with boys)I think Bo had the ability to be the best we ever saw, but his injury ruined that.The reality is:
Walter did not get the privilege to run behind great or elite OLs throughout his career like Emmit Smith did
Walter was not a function of a system like say Joe Montana and Jerry Rice were. EVERYONE knew Walter was gonna get the ball and they still could not stop him. The Bears had no QBs until Mcmahon and the passing games were not as advanced then. It was T formation all the time....come and stop him if you can. And no one could yet do it.
Walter did not have some stupid end zone celebration when he got there ... and he got there A LOT. Always acted with class, unlike the TOs of the world today.
Walter did not sulk and pout and cry when he did not get the ball for the TD in the Superbowl unlike how the a-holes of today do.
Walter did not dash the sideline when he had the ball, he would cut back in to hit the LB so that the next time he had the ball, the LB would be scared, unlike the ###### RBs of today (see LT2).
Walter was all class all the time on and off the field, and was not a selfish prima donna like say Brett Favre. The team was above everything else for him.
There is a reason he is mentioned in every conversation when peeps talk about the best football player ever.
Adebisi must be blind or an ignorant, young punk who thinks he knows everything, like most young football fans these days.
People can say what they want about the defensive players, but why didn't other RB's do even close to what he did?This doesn't mean very much, but my dad (who was as crazy a fan as I was) never used to say any of the older players were better or in the league of the present ball players; except Jim Brown. He said Brown was so much better than anyone else he would have been great anytime.My favorite football player ever. Old post on him:
My thoughts on Payton.
He WAS the offense
QBs he played with: Bob Avellini, Bobby Douglass, Gary Huff, Virgil Carter, Vince Evans, Mike Phipps, Jim McMahon, Steve Fuller, Greg Landry, Rusty Lisch, Mike Tomczak, Doug Flutie, Jim Harbaugh. Heck, Payton himself lined up at QB a few times. Basically, Jim McMahon was the best he played with. That's not saying much.
Payton played with 1 Pro Bowl QB in 13 seasons: McMahon in 1985. (And why exactly did McMahon make the Pro Bowl? The Bears passing offense was 22nd in yards and 23rd in TDs... McMahon threw for 2392 yards and 15 TDs.)
Not only did he never play with a 1000 yard receiver, he never even played with a 900 yard receiver. In fact, only 3 times in his 13 year career did any Bears receiver top 800 yards, and only 3 other times did any Bears receiver top 700 yards. And there were no good receiving TEs, either. It should come as no surprise that no Bears WR or TE made the Pro Bowl during Payton's career.
To reinforce this, consider Chicago's pass yardage ranks during Payton's career: 23 (of 26), 28 (of 28), 21, 26, 26, 28, 28, 22, 17, 26, 22, 24, 14. They finished in the bottom quarter of the league 10 times in Payton's career.
Payton himself led the Bears in receptions 6 times, and had the second highest total on the team 5 other times.
In his last few years, his offensive lines were pretty good, but for most of his career it wasn't. Two of Payton's linemen made the Pro Bowl a total of 5 times in his 13 seasons, all in his final 3 seasons: Jim Covert (1985, 1986), and Jay Hilgenberg (1985, 1986, 1987).
Compared to Jim Brown
Brown is the only back I would consider comparing to Payton, and I admit I didn't see him play, so that may bias my opinion. That said, consider that Brown joined a dynasty.
1950-56 (pre-Brown): 63-20-1 (.759), 6 postseason appearances in 7 years, 6 championship games, 3 championships
1957-1965 (with Brown): 79-34-5 (.699), 5 postseason appearances in 9 years, 3 championship games, 1 championship
Now compare that to Payton and the Bears:
1968-1974 (pre-Payton): 31-66-1 (.320), no postseason appearances
1975-1987 (with Payton): 111-83 (.572), 6 postseason appearances, 1 championship
How about a supporting cast comparison? Payton's is addressed above. It seems very hard to support the notion that the Browns were not already a very, very good team when Brown joined them, which naturally implies that he was surrounded by a talented group of teammates. Remember, there was no free agency (or draft?) at that time, so it would be very hard for me to see how the talent level of a team that appeared in 6 championship games in the 7 years prior to Brown's rookie season had suddenly dropped to average or worse. This is supported by the number of Pro Bowlers Brown played with:
- Browns QBs made the Pro Bowl 4 times in Brown's 9 seasons: Milt Plum (1960, 1961), Frank Ryan (1964, 1965).
- Browns WRs made the Pro Bowl 5 times in Brown's 9 seasons: Ray Renfro (1957, 1960), Bobby Mitchell (1960), Paul Warfield (1964), and Gary Collins (1965).
- Brown played with the following Pro Bowl offensive linemen: Art Hunter (1959), Mike McCormack (1957, 1960, 1961, 1962), Jim Smith (1958, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962), John Morrow (1961, 1963), #### Schafrath (1963), Gene Hickerson (1965), John Wooten (1965). That's 7 different linemen for a total of 15 times in 9 seasons, and only one season without a Pro Bowler--1964. In 6 of his seasons, Brown had 2 or more Pro Bowlers on the line.
To be fair, there were fewer teams when Brown played, so it stands to reason he would have played with more Pro Bowlers. Still, the difference is too big to be accounted for simply by that IMO.
The fewer teams also made it easier for Brown to lead the NFL in rushing, to win awards, etc.--less competition. Brown played when there were only 12-14 teams. In Payton's first season, there were 26 teams; for the rest of his career there were 28. As one example, Brown was 1st team All NFL 8 times, Payton 7 times. It is also true that as many as 4 RBs were selected to 1st team All NFL in Brown's career. Only 3 times was he selected as 1 of only 2 RBs chosen. Meanwhile, Payton made it 4 times as 1 of 2 RBs selected, and from a much bigger RB pool. So I am more impressed with Payton's 7 times, given the number of RBs he competed with was at least twice as many as Brown.
Also, BlueOnion posted this in an older thread:
I certainly can't verify whether these are valid points, but I found them interesting.Brown was obviously an all time great player. I just don't see evidence that Brown was better than Payton. Again, I admit that could be because I never saw him play with my own eyes, while I did see Payton play often.
Conclusion
Payton's accomplishments are more impressive than Jim Brown's (or any other RB's), IMO.
He was good, but not great
