Where would you rank Emmitt Smith? (1 Viewer)

[Concept Coop]

Some people need a life. Posted on my profile:

“Yikes, for someone who says he isn't offended or taking things personally, you sure got butt-hurt over a little gentle razzing. Accuse me of deflecting, but when people are tearing down your arguments left and right, you looked for the first opportunity to divert to me "making fun of" you.

Once again, deep breaths.”

@Despyzer, obviously.

 

[Despyzer]

Some people need a life. Posted on my profile:

“Yikes, for someone who says he isn't offended or taking things personally, you sure got butt-hurt over a little gentle razzing. Accuse me of deflecting, but when people are tearing down your arguments left and right, you looked for the first opportunity to divert to me "making fun of" you.

Once again, deep breaths.”

I posted it on your profile to keep this thread on-topic. Let me just throw this out here instead: The average YPC during Emmitt's career was 4.0. Emmitt averaged 4.2. Despite having a line that boasted mulitple all-pros and and elite run-blocking TE and FB, he could barely surpass what the average running back of his era was producing. You can bring up this "unbalanced" attack that actually resulted in more passing attempts than running attempts all you like, but if Emmitt didn't hang on long enough to win the career rushing title, we'd likely consider him to be the equivalent of a more-versatile Curtis Martin or Jerome Bettis. He'd still be in the HOF, but only Cowboys fans would think he deserved to be mentioned in the top ten, and probably a lot of them who saw Dorsett play would say Tony was better.

 

[Concept Coop]

I posted it on your profile to keep this thread on-topic. Let me just throw this out here instead: The average YPC during Emmitt's career was 4.0. Emmitt averaged 4.2. Despite having a line that boasted mulitple all-pros and and elite run-blocking TE and FB, he could barely surpass what the average running back of his era was producing. You can bring up this "unbalanced" attack that actually resulted in more passing attempts than running attempts all you like, but if Emmitt didn't hang on long enough to win the career rushing title, we'd likely consider him to be the equivalent of a more-versatile Curtis Martin or Jerome Bettis. He'd still be in the HOF, but only Cowboys fans would think he deserved to be mentioned in the top ten, and probably a lot of them who saw Dorsett play would say Tony was better.

We're back on track!

Even excluding the career numbers, and just sticking to what he did in his prime, he was a clear first ballot HOFer and top 10 all time:

First 10 years of Emmitt's Career:
8x Pro Bowls
4x 1st team All-Pro selections
1x NFL MVP
1x SB MVP
1x ROY
Single season rushing TD record
4.3 YPC

As for his offense being unbalanced: During the dynasty years:

Year: Passing Rank - Rushing Rank (Attempts)
1992: 12th - 4th
1993: 24th - 6th
1994: 26th - 1st
1995: 28th - 4th
1996: 23th - 10th

It sounds like we do disagree on Emmitt - and that's cool. 

 

[Despyzer]

First 10 years of Emmitt's Career:

Single season rushing TD record

It is a little telling that in order to make your point you have to remove a whole third of his career and include a record that he doesn't actually hold, but many of those stats are impressive nonetheless (other than YPC, which even in his prime isn't much above the league average). I did concede that he is a legitimate HOFer, but I insist that if you take away that rushing title he's simply thought of as a really good back who ran behind some of the best blockers ever assembled on one team.
 

Also, you might want to look into the definition of "unbalanced." An 11:9 ratio might be slightly off-balance, but not in the direction you are arguing.

 

[Concept Coop]

It is a little telling that in order to make your point you have to remove a whole third of his career and include a record that he doesn't actually hold, but many of those stats are impressive nonetheless (other than YPC, which even in his prime isn't much above the league average). I did concede that he is a legitimate HOFer, but I insist that if you take away that rushing title he's simply thought of as a really good back who ran behind some of the best blockers ever assembled on one team.
 

Also, you might want to look into the definition of "unbalanced." An 11:9 ratio might be slightly off-balance, but not in the direction you are arguing.

Emmitt doesn't currently hold that record, but did at the time.

I only removed the last years in response to you saying, "...if Emmitt didn't hang on long enough to win the career rushing title...".  

Their offense was unbalanced, if you use league average as the baseline. They ran it a lot more than most teams and threw it a lot less than most teams. A balanced offense today is different than a balanced offense 50 years ago. It makes sense to compare to league average. 

I'm sure we've ruined the thread by now, for everyone else. We really should move on. I think it's clear where we disagree and I don't see that changing. 

 

[Despyzer]

Totals: 6,233 pass/5,160 rush

League average over the same time-span is 6,771 passes and 5,382 rushes over a 13-year span (which is probably more significant than a hand-picked five-year stretch). 

Those ratios are both in the neighborhood of 55:45% - not significant enough to matter.

 

[Despyzer]

Wow... I just noticed that in 7 of his 15 years, he finished at or below the league average for YPC, including the year he won Rookie of the Year and went to his first Pro-Bowl.

 

[nittanylion]

This is a ridiculous statement, just as it always is when one says that a star player of a distant past generation would be the same if playing today, as if they wouldn't have been affected by today's improvements in training, medicine, nutrition, etc. That is particularly true for Sayers, since his career would not be ended by injury in today's world in the same manner as it was.

Referencing the bolded, one of the greatest 'what might have been' stories has to be that of Atlanta Falcons RB William Andrews,  In the 5 seasons spanning 1979-1983, he was the NFL's most productive all-purpose RB, and his punishing style was cast from the same mold as Jim Brown and Earl Campbell, and that's not hyperbole. The knee injury he suffered in the 1984 preseason kept him out of the NFL for 2 years, and when he returned, he wasn't the same, and retired a year later. Same injury/recovery/return might have been 1 year at most, with a return to full strength and ability in this day and age.

I 'woke up' to college and pro football at the age of 10, in 1978, when I went all-in and started following it avidly, and William Andrews was one of the first NFL rookies I fell in love with. First time I really felt a tangible 'sense of loss' for an injured player, when he went down. Had he not gotten hurt, I firmly believe he'd be in everyone's Top 10 all-time list. The guy was an absolute beast.

 

[Biabreakable]

FWIW my cousin doesn't think Emmitt would make his top 20 list.

He still hates the Cowboys more than I do though.

For me the original question was where would you rank Emmitt all time.

To me all time means who had the best career. Thats Emmitt.

All these hypotheticals about if Barry played for Dallas or if Emmitt played for the Lions do not really matter as far as my understanding of the original question.

 

[CalBear]

I posted it on your profile to keep this thread on-topic. Let me just throw this out here instead: The average YPC during Emmitt's career was 4.0. Emmitt averaged 4.2. Despite having a line that boasted mulitple all-pros and and elite run-blocking TE and FB, he could barely surpass what the average running back of his era was producing. You can bring up this "unbalanced" attack that actually resulted in more passing attempts than running attempts all you like, but if Emmitt didn't hang on long enough to win the career rushing title, we'd likely consider him to be the equivalent of a more-versatile Curtis Martin or Jerome Bettis. He'd still be in the HOF, but only Cowboys fans would think he deserved to be mentioned in the top ten, and probably a lot of them who saw Dorsett play would say Tony was better.

As I posted up-thread, Emmitt's 5-year peak ranks with the best 5-year peaks of all time. He dominated his peers. Tony Dorsett never led the league in any positive statistic. (He did lead in fumbles in 1978). Bettis, similarly, never led the league in any statistic. Curtis Martin led the league in rushing once. 

Emmitt led the league in rushing four times, in rushing/total TDs three times, in yards/attempt once, and in yards from scrimmage twice. 

And comparing YPC for backs who get 350+ carries with backs like Bo Jackson who get 100 is silly. For YPC in seasons with 350+ carries, Emmitt has two of the top 20, and five of the top 50 of all time. He has two seasons better than Walter Payton's best in that statistic. Barry Sanders doesn't show up because he never got 350 carries. (And the seasons he got 343 and 342 were both below Emmitt's two best YPC years in 350+ carry seasons).

 

[Despyzer]

All these hypotheticals about if Barry played for Dallas or if Emmitt played for the Lions do not really matter as far as my understanding of the original question.

I agree. Barry vs. Emmitt is only related to the topic if you consider them the top two backs of all-time. What's interesting though, is among the people I used to talk football with while both players were in their prime, we always thought the better discussion was Emmitt vs. Thurman.

 

[JohnnyU]

I agree. Barry vs. Emmitt is only related to the topic if you consider them the top two backs of all-time. What's interesting though, is among the people I used to talk football with while both players were in their prime, we always thought the better discussion was Emmitt vs. Thurman.

Not sure I understand why there is a conversation between Smith and Sanders.  That's like comparing my wife to Adriana Lima

 

[Biabreakable]

I agree. Barry vs. Emmitt is only related to the topic if you consider them the top two backs of all-time. What's interesting though, is among the people I used to talk football with while both players were in their prime, we always thought the better discussion was Emmitt vs. Thurman.

Yeah Thurman Thomas was like Faulk before Faulk. He didn't score TD as much as he could have though.

Barry was no doubt the most exciting RB of that time. He has more class than Emmitt. He retired still in his prime unlike Emmitt, so its hard for me to say he had the best career.

Thurman Thomas definitely belongs in the conversation though. Which is I guess why my Cousin could come up with 20 guys he thinks were better than Emmitt. There have been a lot of great players. 

 

[Despyzer]

For YPC in seasons with 350+ carries, Emmitt has two of the top 20, and five of the top 50 of all time.

Considering only 57 players have ever been burdened with this many carries in a season, it seems like a small sample size. Still, it shows how well he did when placed under that kind of impact. It's impressive. However, it excludes players who might be considered in the upper echelon, like Payton, Jim Brown, OJ, or anyone who played the best parts of their career before the NFL expanded its schedule to 16 games.

 

[CalBear]

I agree. Barry vs. Emmitt is only related to the topic if you consider them the top two backs of all-time. What's interesting though, is among the people I used to talk football with while both players were in their prime, we always thought the better discussion was Emmitt vs. Thurman.

Thurman, along with Marcus Allen, were the prototypes for the now-common two-way RB. He was a better receiver than Emmitt and led the league in yards from scrimmage four times. But, and it's a big but, he never scored more than 13 TDs in a season, and only had more than 10 rushing TDs once. And the one season where he had 350 carries he only managed 3.7 YPC. 

And with the exception of the Wide Right game (15/135/1), he was terrible in Buffalo's Super Bowl losses.  10/13, 11/19, and 16/37 rushing in those games. Smith was 22/108/1, 30/132/2, and 18/49/2 in the three Super Bowl wins. And overall, more effective in the postseason than the regular season (4.54 YPC, with 21 TDs in 17 games). 

 

[Despyzer]

Which is I guess why my Cousin could come up with 20 guys he thinks were better than Emmitt. There have been a lot of great players. 

FWIW, Emmitt would probably the be on the cusp of my top ten.

 

[JohnnyU]

Yeah Thurman Thomas was like Faulk before Faulk. He didn't score TD as much as he could have though.

....and Chuck Foreman and Lydell Mitchell were Thurman Thomas before Thurman Thomas.....and Lenny Moore was Chuck Forman and Lydell Mitchell before Chuck Foreman and Lydell Mitchell ....OK I'll stop now

 

[Despyzer]

And with the exception of the Wide Right game (15/135/1), he was terrible in Buffalo's Super Bowl losses.

Am I remembering this correctly? Wasn't there one game where he missed an entire offensive series because he couldn't find his helmet?

 

[Biabreakable]

My cousin has been looking up college numbers on these guys.

Barry was amazing at the college level.

 

[Biabreakable]

....and Chuck Foreman and Lydell Mitchell were Thurman Thomas before Thurman Thomas.....and Lenny Moore was Chuck Forman and Lydell Mitchell before Chuck Foreman and Lydell Mitchell ....OK I'll stop now

I'm a Vikings fan but even I haven't seen that much of Chuck Foreman playing. Before my time.

I have heard he was very good though and he is ok as a local media source.

 

[Despyzer]

And overall, more effective in the postseason than the regular season (4.54 YPC, with 21 TDs in 17 games). 

THAT might be the most impressive stat I've seen in Emmitt's favor.

 

[JohnnyU]

I'm a Vikings fan but even I haven't seen that much of Chuck Foreman playing. Before my time.

I have heard he was very good though and he is ok as a local media source.

Foreman, Mitchell, and Moore were all very good at both rushing and receiving. 

 

[rockaction]

The offensive line was dominant, but so was Emmitt. Defenses stacked the box consistently and Emmitt consistently made defenders miss. 

DAL vs NYG - 1994 (Shoulder Game)

I'm a Jets/Giants fan and I'll never forget that game. Instead of arguing, maybe we should just appreciate greatness for what it is --- great.  

 

[Yenrub]

As I posted up-thread, Emmitt's 5-year peak ranks with the best 5-year peaks of all time. He dominated his peers. Tony Dorsett never led the league in any positive statistic. (He did lead in fumbles in 1978). Bettis, similarly, never led the league in any statistic. Curtis Martin led the league in rushing once. 

Emmitt led the league in rushing four times, in rushing/total TDs three times, in yards/attempt once, and in yards from scrimmage twice. 

And comparing YPC for backs who get 350+ carries with backs like Bo Jackson who get 100 is silly. For YPC in seasons with 350+ carries, Emmitt has two of the top 20, and five of the top 50 of all time. He has two seasons better than Walter Payton's best in that statistic. Barry Sanders doesn't show up because he never got 350 carries. (And the seasons he got 343 and 342 were both below Emmitt's two best YPC years in 350+ carry seasons).

Is 350 carries some sort of magical number?

Barry's 331 carries at 5.7 (1994) and 335 carries at 6.1 (1997)  significantly better than any season Smith put up in terms of YPC

 

[Alex P Keaton]

FWIW my cousin doesn't think Emmitt would make his top 20 list.

He still hates the Cowboys more than I do though.

For me the original question was where would you rank Emmitt all time.

To me all time means who had the best career. Thats Emmitt.

All these hypotheticals about if Barry played for Dallas or if Emmitt played for the Lions do not really matter as far as my understanding of the original question.

Sorry to hear that you lack the gift of context or imagination.

 

[BassNBrew]

Emmitt had 4 seasons where he averaged more than 4.2 yards per carry, and 11 seasons where he averaged 4.2 or below. His career average is 4.2 YPC.

Barry had 10 seasons where he averaged more than 4.2 yards per carry, and 0 seasons where he averaged 4.2 or below. His career average is 5.0 YPC.

At least with these two, I have no idea how it's even close to who was the better RB.

But if you take out his long run.....

 

[CalBear]

Is 350 carries some sort of magical number?

Barry's 331 carries at 5.7 (1994) and 335 carries at 6.1 (1997)  significantly better than any season Smith put up in terms of YPC

350 is arbitrary, of course, as is any number you choose as a cutoff.

My argument isn't that Emmitt is better than Barry. It's that he's an all-time great, along with Barry and a very limited number of others. And that the fact that backs who have enormous workloads have lower YPC than backs who don't, on average. And Emmitt had a workload like few other backs in NFL history.

The one guy who really stands out in that listing is Dickerson. Of course there's his 2105-yard season at 5.55 YPC, but he also had 390/1808 for 4.64, 404/1821 for 4.51, and 388/1659 for 4.28. Only he, Emmitt, TD and Earl Campbell show up in the top 20 more than once. 

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Am I remembering this correctly? Wasn't there one game where he missed an entire offensive series because he couldn't find his helmet?

In his defense, I have often lost my phone. But none of my phones were the size of a football helmet.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

Yeah Thurman Thomas was like Faulk before Faulk. He didn't score TD as much as he could have though.

Barry was no doubt the most exciting RB of that time. He has more class than Emmitt. He retired still in his prime unlike Emmitt, so its hard for me to say he had the best career.

Thurman Thomas definitely belongs in the conversation though. Which is I guess why my Cousin could come up with 20 guys he thinks were better than Emmitt. There have been a lot of great players. 

 

You and your cousin have been smoking too much. 

 

[Tanner9919]

he was awesome. I would probably take LT2,Thurman Thomas, Faulk ahead of him but that's splitting hairs. ADP will eventually be in that conversation.But Emmitt won titles and kicked butt in postseason and that has to mean something.