Who is the greatest running back of all time? (1 Viewer)

[supersecretid]

The main problem with this thread is that no one has really set out what we mean by "best."

If you mean "most accomplished" then it's not very hard to go look up the stats and see who has done the most (likely Emmitt Smith).

If you mean "most talented" then guys like Bo Jackson and Adrian Peterson, who are getting limited mention, need to be very close to the top.

If you want some combination of talent and accomplishment, then you simply pull the guys who are high on both lists. You also need to define whether or not we're adjusting for the period they played in. I would assume that we are because otherwise it's a pretty boring discussion.

 

[supersecretid]

PS - When you say best, I think the most reasonable application is "most talented" with a small factor of "most accomplished." Emmitt is a great example of why using purely "most accomplished" is a bad way to approach the question of best running back.

If we're going by most talented then you're all criminally underrating Peterson and Jackson, as I said before.

 

[Angus82]

Emmitt doesn't get the credit he deserves in these conversations. People need to figure longevity into their "greatest ever" equations a little more heavily.Catch 22 baby!

Longevity definitely factors in for career totals and to show a players durability. Using longevity alone would mean that Testaverde is a top 3 QB. That's not even close. Having said that, of the RB's that I have seen play Emmitt was an all around threat. The Giants game where he screwed up his shoulder and kept on playing will be talked about for as long as they play football.My personal list would be of players that I was able to see play. (On tv or at The Ralph. That would be Buffalo to those who have not been to football's holiest shrine. LOL)1) Sweetness The guy did it all without trying to show anyone up. TOTAL CLASS!!2) Barry INSANE!! That is what his moves were and that is how he made opponents feel.3) Dickerson Incredible blend of speed and power. Maybe AP can be similar. MAYBE.4) Marshall The Rams do not win anything without this guy. Also, he did ok in Indy.5) Thurman Highly underrated. He was the guy who allowed the Bills to run No-Huddle.Of players that I have never seen.1) Jim Brown 'Nuff said. (Regards to Stan Lee.)2) Gale Sayers If you could visualize poetry, he would be it.3) Marion Motley UNSTOPPABLE. He also did something insignificant like help to reintegrate pro football (My tongue is firmly in cheek.)4) Bronko Nagurski An absolutely devastating runner. The guy couldn't be stopped.5) Jim Thorpe Not really sure about this but I just had to mention the greatest American athlete ever!!!!

 

[-primetime-]

rush/receive yards per game

127 - LT

125.5 - Jim Brown

118.9 - Barry Sanders

111.9 - Walter Payton

108.8 - Marshall Faulk

105.5 - Eric Dickerson

95.5 - Emmitt Smith

92.1 - Gale Sayers

rush/receive TDs per game

1.16 - LT

1.07 - Jim Brown

0.77 - Emmitt Smith

0.72 - Marshall Faulk

0.71 - Gale Sayers

0.71 - Barry Sanders

0.66 - Walter Payton

0.65 - Eric Dickerson

hmmthis should be enough information for people...

is LT already....the GOAT?????

 

[Captain Spaulding]

The best I've ever seen play was probably Barry Sanders and Walter Payton (I can't decide). They seemed to excel without much passing game or O-line support. I remember watching Tony Dorsett, Terrell Davis, Eric Dickerson & Emmitt run behind some tremendous O-line that would open up massive alleys for them quite frequently. In fact if I recall (although I was a young lad so I might be off here) the year Dickerson went to Indy...didn't a RB named Charles White lead the NFL in rushing (and played for the Rams)???? That would definitely prove the O-line had alot to do with Eric's success.

All I have on Campbell, Brown, OJ, Sayers is NFL films and such. I can't really comment on them since I didn't watch them play.

Bo Jackson - I used to think he was the most spectacular RB I have ever seen. Now with all of the recent revelations in sports, I am fairly convinced that he was probably juicing up, so I've really stopped touting him as much. Possibly TD as well (the Romo/Shannon Sharpe juicing influences plus the O-line in Denver was awesome)

Marshall Faulk - he was a great all around athelete but I think he benefited from that wide open offense and spectacular downfield passing attack that St. Louis ran.

LT - He's definitely up there

Adrian Peterson...showing early signs he could be next

Next to Earl Campbell...Bettis has to be the 2nd best "big back" of all time.

My one-year-wonder that no one has mentioned yet - Jamal Anderson. That 1-2 years span, he was awesome. Big/powerful up the middle, but also had that explosive burst around the corner as well to get the TD's by the pylon. Very short duration, but I just threw him out there because I didn't see him mentioned.

 

[WiDDoW_MaKeR]

rush/receive yards per game

127 - LT

125.5 - Jim Brown

118.9 - Barry Sanders

111.9 - Walter Payton

108.8 - Marshall Faulk

105.5 - Eric Dickerson

95.5 - Emmitt Smith

92.1 - Gale Sayers

rush/receive TDs per game

1.16 - LT

1.07 - Jim Brown

0.77 - Emmitt Smith

0.72 - Marshall Faulk

0.71 - Gale Sayers

0.71 - Barry Sanders

0.66 - Walter Payton

0.65 - Eric Dickerson

hmmthis should be enough information for people...

is LT already....the GOAT?????

No, this doesn't factor in players who played beyond their primes, like Emmit Smith. Emmitt played for about 4 years being hardly used, so his numbers took a huge hit during those times. You can't pluck someone out of the middle of their prime years, and compare their numbers against someone who played for twice as many years.

 

[NoFBinLA]

I think alot of folks around this thread are looking through team colored glasses.

Haven't seen enough of anyone before the 80s myself -- therefore, it;s hard to place guys like Brown in a spot.

Sanders was exciting. Smith was a workhorse.

I can't choose between those guys - it's like choosing my favorite ice cream.

All I can say is, I enjoyed watching Sanders run way more than Emmit.

Beyond that, we can crunch numbers all day and even that is subject to nothing more than opinion.

I mean, I enjoy the exercise - but everyone needs to stop with the 'end of story' stuff. This is a subject that should and is debated all day long with no conclusion. It comes down to opinion and preference. Stop making it about your answer being right, and enjoy hearing what others think here.

None of you are right. None of you are wrong. Just about everyone mentioned has a foot in the debate.

 

[TC]

1. Certainly Jim Brown

2. Perhaps OJ Simpson

 

[craxie]

LT vs Historical Greats

Yards from Scrimmage - http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/521/yfs3mk5.png

Rush/Receive TDs - http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/4012/td3gw8.png

(be sure to zoom in)

 

[WiDDoW_MaKeR]

LT vs Historical Greats

Yards from Scrimmage - http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/521/yfs3mk5.png

Rush/Receive TDs - http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/4012/td3gw8.png

(be sure to zoom in)

Once again... that seriously throws all of the advantage in LT's favor. The man is in the prime of his career. You are pitting his average numbers per game up against someone like Emmitt Smith, who played past his prime, and was hardly used in many of the games over the last 4 years or so of his career. You have to take their best years... their prime years and then match them together. Take the first 7 years of Emmitt's career vs the first 7 years of LT's career... then it would make more sense.

 

[craxie]

LT vs Historical Greats

Yards from Scrimmage - http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/521/yfs3mk5.png

Rush/Receive TDs - http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/4012/td3gw8.png

(be sure to zoom in)

Once again... that seriously throws all of the advantage in LT's favor. The man is in the prime of his career. You are pitting his average numbers per game up against someone like Emmitt Smith, who played past his prime, and was hardly used in many of the games over the last 4 years or so of his career. You have to take their best years... their prime years and then match them together. Take the first 7 years of Emmitt's career vs the first 7 years of LT's career... then it would make more sense.

i'm not sure you understand the charts, it shows exactly what you're sayingit shows Emmitt's first 6 years and LT's first 6 years and how LT's first 6 years are better

YFS after 6 years

12076 - LT

10907 - Emmitt

Rush/Receive TDs after 6 years

111 - LT

100 - Emmitt

 

[PantherPower]

AP

 

[WiDDoW_MaKeR]

LT vs Historical Greats

Yards from Scrimmage - http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/521/yfs3mk5.png

Rush/Receive TDs - http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/4012/td3gw8.png

(be sure to zoom in)

Once again... that seriously throws all of the advantage in LT's favor. The man is in the prime of his career. You are pitting his average numbers per game up against someone like Emmitt Smith, who played past his prime, and was hardly used in many of the games over the last 4 years or so of his career. You have to take their best years... their prime years and then match them together. Take the first 7 years of Emmitt's career vs the first 7 years of LT's career... then it would make more sense.

i'm not sure you understand the charts, it shows exactly what you're sayingit shows Emmitt's first 6 years and LT's first 6 years and how LT's first 6 years are better

YFS after 6 years

12076 - LT

10907 - Emmitt

Rush/Receive TDs after 6 years

111 - LT

100 - Emmitt

Well.. it shows how the last couple of his years were better.... but as I said.. it has to be taken as a whole. We are going to have to wait and see how LT's career pans out. He is a great player, obviously. However, I don't think that he is the greatest that ever played.

 

[Tornacl]

Emmitt was a given for 3-4 yards, because there was never anyone in the backfield hitting him. Most of the time, Emmitt didn't get touched until the second layer of defense.

Some pretty bad revisionist history about Emmitt and the Cowboys OL in this post.In 1993 when Emmitt held out the first two games of the season, the team lost both and averaged a mere 13 points per game. When Emmitt ended his hold out, they went 15-2, won the Super Bowl and averaged over 26 points a game.

If an offensive line let any NFL RB run "untouched until the second level" they'd be getting 5 yards before contact. So if the Cowboys OL was so awesome and Emmitt was just a product of the system, then why did the entire offense tank without him? Reason: Emmitt was awesome and he made the OL look good, not the other way around.

Exactly... actually all you have to do is actually watch him play to see how many tackles he broke, and how his cutbacks, and vision is what broke him out into the open most of the time. His line was very good... but so was Barry's.

Talk about revisionist history. As a Lions fan, that's the first I've heard of the Lions having a good OL.And I suppose the Cowboys would've won those SBs in the '90s even if they weren't the beneficiary of the most lopsided trade in sports history.

 

[nashua55]

Too me, Walter Payton and Barry Sanders are #1 and #2. Though Emmitt was great, he didn't have to run behind suspect offensive lines like Payton and Sanders did early in thier careers. I am another person who always thought Sanders was a better back than Emmitt when they where playing. Emmitt might have the rushing record, but everyone knows if Sanders didnt retire , Sanders would have the rushing record.

I didn't put Jim Brown up at #1 or #2 because I never saw him play. Jim Brown to many people is like the Babe Ruth of the NFL, but I can only comment on the guys I saw. So Payton and Sanders are my picks.

 

[hotdampepperman]

no doubt, Jim Brown.

 

[pizzatyme]

For my money and a turjerken, Barry Sanders. Sweetness a close 2nd. Bo Jackson 3rd. Jim Brown 4th. Eric Dickerson 5th. Emmitt Smith 6th.

If you're going to put Bo Jackson on the list that high despite the brevity of his career, I don't see how you could exclude Earl Campbell.

I have EC in my personal top 10 as well. Dominant runner indeed!

 

[Monty Burns]

If you remember how Larry Johnson demolished defenses that second half of the season a few years ago after Priest got hurt, that is what Jim Brown did over a CAREER. He was refered to then as a man among boys. I only saw him play a few times as back then you only got your 1 "local" game each week, but he is all he is cracked up to be by us "old timers", and then some.

 

[pizzatyme]

For my money and a turjerken, Barry Sanders. Sweetness a close 2nd. Bo Jackson 3rd. Jim Brown 4th. Eric Dickerson 5th. Emmitt Smith 6th.

Love the Bo Jackson props!he was special...

For my money L. Tomlinson TRUMPS everyone on this list, by the time he's finished he'll be the greatest ever, and he'll own many of the records by then...

and what about Earl Campbell?

Tomlinson will be up there once he retires. I don't like to include guys who are active since they aren't done writing their legacy.And I just posted that Campbell is in my top 10. But, then again, I also like John Riggins and Larry Czonka(sp?).

 

[nashua55]

For my money and a turjerken, Barry Sanders. Sweetness a close 2nd. Bo Jackson 3rd. Jim Brown 4th. Eric Dickerson 5th. Emmitt Smith 6th.

If you're going to put Bo Jackson on the list that high despite the brevity of his career, I don't see how you could exclude Earl Campbell.

I have EC in my personal top 10 as well. Dominant runner indeed!

I too am a big fan of Earl, he is an example of what a devasting toll the pounding of the NFL could do to a back. After 4 years he was basically done. He is a prime example of a running back hitting the wall. I know Jerome Bettis was not very flashy, but too me I think he is a HOF, how he lasted so many years as a power back amazes me. It is not like he avoided contact when he was running.

 

[craxie]

to quash complaints about not comparing backs 'in their prime', here is a comparison of everyone's FIRST SIX YEARS

Games

-------

95 LT

93 Emmitt Smith

93 Marshall Faulk

90 Eric Dickerson

89 Walter Payton

89 Barry Sanders

76 Jim Brown

YFS

----

12076 LT

11337 Eric Dickerson

10907 Emmitt Smith

10553 Marshall Faulk

10454 Barry Sanders

10177 Walter Payton

09022 Jim Brown

YFS/game

-----------

127.1 LT

126.0 Eric Dickerson

118.7 Jim Brown

117.5 Barry Sanders

117.3 Emmitt Smith

114.3 Walter Payton

113.5 Marshall Faulk

TDs

-----

111 LT

100 Emmitt Smith

081 Jim Brown

078 Eric Dickerson

070 Walter Payton

068 Barry Sanders

063 Marshall Faulk

TDs/game

------------

1.17 LT

1.08 Emmitt Smith

1.07 Jim Brown

0.87 Eric Dickerson

0.79 Walter Payton

0.76 Barry Sanders

0.68 Marshall Faulk

any way you look at, LTs first six years in the league (and now seven really) are the greatest first six years in NFL history

whether you look at production or production/game or even durability, no one has surpassed the first six years LT has put together

 

[Chunky Soup]

ADP

 

[nashua55]

to quash complaints about not comparing backs 'in their prime', here is a comparison of everyone's FIRST SIX YEARSGames-------95 LT93 Emmitt Smith93 Marshall Faulk90 Eric Dickerson89 Walter Payton89 Barry Sanders76 Jim BrownYFS----12076 LT11337 Eric Dickerson10907 Emmitt Smith10553 Marshall Faulk10454 Barry Sanders10177 Walter Payton09022 Jim BrownYFS/game-----------127.1 LT126.0 Eric Dickerson118.7 Jim Brown117.5 Barry Sanders117.3 Emmitt Smith114.3 Walter Payton113.5 Marshall FaulkTDs-----111 LT100 Emmitt Smith081 Jim Brown078 Eric Dickerson070 Walter Payton068 Barry Sanders063 Marshall FaulkTDs/game------------1.17 LT1.08 Emmitt Smith1.07 Jim Brown0.87 Eric Dickerson0.79 Walter Payton0.76 Barry Sanders0.68 Marshall Faulkany way you look at, LTs first six years in the league (and now seven really) are the greatest first six years in NFL historywhether you look at production or production/game or even durability, no one has surpassed the first six years LT has put together

Only problem with the first 6 years, is that for years 6, 7,8,9, Barry Sanders rushed for 1883 yds, 5.3 ypc, 1500 yds 4.8 ypc, 1553 yds 5.1 ydc, 2053 yds 6.1 ypc, 1491 yds 4.3 ypc. An argument can be made for Sanders that his prime years were years 6, 7,8,9 which were his best years. The first 6 year theory helps Emmitt Smith, but after 6 years Emmitt Smith's production drops off alot while Barry Sanders production increased until year 10 his final year. Time will tell if LT can keep up the pace.Sorry , I misread the post I quoted. Can't argue the facts about LT. The question is whether he can hold up and produce at the same rate or better in years 7,8,9,10. Looking at the numbers Emmitt Smith and Eric Dickerson fell off while Barry Sanders and Marshall Faulk seemed to have peek years during that time.

 

[nashua55]

How these guys stack up in years 6,7,8,9,10. During these years M. Faulk and Barry Sanders thrived, W. Payton held steady, and Emmitt Smith and E. Dickerson declined noticeably. Looks like a strong case for M. Faulk moving up the list on the greatest Rb of all time.

Games

80 B. Sanders

78 E. Smith

73 W. Payton

69 M. Faulk

55 E. Dickerson

YFS

9902 B. Sanders

9363 M. Faulk

8415 W. Payton

7932 E. Smith

5447 E. Dickerson

YFS/Game

135.7 M. Faulk

123.8 B. Sanders

115.3 W. Payton

101.7 E. Smith

99.04 E. Dickerson

TD's

72 E. Smith

72 M. Faulk

49 B. Sanders

35 W. Payton

31 E. Dickerson

 

[nashua55]

A comparison of years 7,8,9,10 show how far Emmitt Smith and Eric Dickerson had fallen off.

Games

64 B. Sanders

62 E. Smith

57 W. Payton

53 M. Faulk

52 E. Dickerson

YFS

7736 B. Sanders

6934 M. Faulk

6588 W. Payton

5784 E. Smith

5132 E. Dickerson

YFS/Game

130.8 M. Faulk

120.9 B. Sanders

115.6 W. Payton

98.7 E. Dickerson

93.3 E. Smith

TD's

60 M. Faulk

47 E. Smith

41 B. Sanders

30 E. Dickerson

28 W. Payton

 

[slayer666]

Jim Brown.

 

[General Tso]

I know it's "popular" to say Jim Brown, but come on now. Any of you see him play???? How the heck can you comment on someone unless you saw theM? For me, best RB I ever saw was Barry Sanders. Like a jitterbug on acid that one. Second best was Earl Campbell. Like a big black freight train with an attitude.

 

[Sea Bass]

no doubt, Jim Brown.

 

[Sea Bass]

I know it's "popular" to say Jim Brown, but come on now. Any of you see him play???? How the heck can you comment on someone unless you saw theM? For me, best RB I ever saw was Barry Sanders. Like a jitterbug on acid that one. Second best was Earl Campbell. Like a big black freight train with an attitude.

I saw him play and he is the best ever.

 

[dparker713]

I know it's "popular" to say Jim Brown, but come on now. Any of you see him play???? How the heck can you comment on someone unless you saw theM? For me, best RB I ever saw was Barry Sanders. Like a jitterbug on acid that one. Second best was Earl Campbell. Like a big black freight train with an attitude.

I saw him play and he is the best ever.

Brown had the benefit of being larger than many of the linemen in the league. He was a monster and dominated, but in large part because he had a body from now playing back in the 50s. The physical gap between him and his competition may have been the biggest mismatch in the history of the NFL. Seeing as I think were closer to the peak of human performance now, I place greater weight on players that are able to dominate the current NFL.

 

[captbly]

Barry Sanders with out a doubt.

 

[Catbird]

I think there's a big difference between who had the most productive career and who was the greatest back. One critical game, in his prime, who ya gonna take? That's what interests me most. I saw Jim Brown play on TV several times - although I was young. Haven't seen anyone I felt was as totally dominant since. Stronger, faster, better balance than ANYONE else in the game. Mind numbing explosion. I don't know how well you can compare eras. If the rest of the league he played against was as good is I think the NFL it is now, Brown might seem almost human. But as guys go against their competition, IMO only Bo Jackson in his brief prime ever even compared. Brown was as dominant as Vince Young looked against USC, every game, against the best in the world.

That said, IMO Sweetness, Campbell and Sanders were also truly superior to their competiton for long, long stretches. People are down on Barry because maybe the main things they know are that he led all time in carries for loss and retired when he didn't want to play any more, not when everyone else might have wanted him to. At the same time, he averaged 5+ yards for his CAREER. That means when the OL wasn't letting guys into the background to stop him, he was averaging something like 6 or 6.5 yards per carry!! That means every touch he didn't lose ground (which might have been 2-3 per game) he sliced off 6+ yards with never better than a passable line. Less power and goalline than the others, but he could do more with just a crack to slice through or in the open field than anyone else on the lists. Sweetness was a joy for his great heart along with being great in everything he did, every aspect of the game. Campbell was the closest in style and dramatic speed/force to Brown of the great ones. Might have been as good, but maybe just didn't look as good because the competition by then was better? All these guys are the dream of any franchise.

Honorable mention to Sayers for being Sweetness with even more glide and fluidity. Less power, but that same beautiful motion. I would rather watch Sayers than any other back - although who wouldn't love to watch any of these guys? Ever. Honorable mention to Emmitt for all the numbers and longevity. I don't put his talent with the greatest, but with the great. Its hard to say he wasn't the most productive back ever. And to LT for all he's done, although its too early to say for him whether the's great, or something greater.

 

[Truman]

OJ Simpson. 2000 yards @ 6 a carry on the worst passing team in the league.

Imagine if he didn't play in Buffalo.

 

[Liquid Tension]

Agreed, but you have to downgrade Brown for lack of longevity compared to some others. if not (or depending on where you draw the line Bo Jackson was the best ever).I honestly believe LT2 is at the top as well because he can do everything and do it extremely well/great. Note, I am not one to choose modern players often.Walter was in this top group as well with Barry Sanders (although getting out early knocks him down). I think Emmitt is in the next groupingBrownLT2, Sweetness, Barry SandersEmmitt, Earl Campbell (maybe OJ here?), edited to add Marshall Faulk as he is what everyone thought Reggie Bush could beBo Jackson (hard to know where to put him because he was probably the best, but lack of playing time probably drops him into this tier) If you asked if you could have a guy for the amount of years he played on a neutral team (which is probably the way to look at it), Bo would drop further.Earl Campbell was an absolute beast and if his OL was as good as guys like OJ, Emmitt and Dickerson he would have been at the tip of most people's tongues.

I think 9 great years from a running back constitutes longevity. Brown only played one fewer season than Sanders and Brown's career was exactly as long as Earl Campbell's (and Campbell only had three great seasons). I don't think O-line problems had anything to do with Campbell's decline after 1980. He was "an absolute beast" as you say. From 1978-1980 he was as great as any back I've ever seen. Dude just took too many shots in those three years and he was never the same player after that. Unfortunately, the effects of all that punishment on Campbell's body are sadly apparent these days. It's a tough job. Payton and Emmitt Smith are the only two backs I believe who exhibited real greatness after the age of 30 (I could be wrong). Good rankings.

You make a good point about the amount of years and I guess I was looking a little more at touches/carries (Browns years had less games). But, your point is correct that the beating Campbell took maybe could have been avoided by another type of back (although having a weak OL makes it tougher to go 10 yards and get tackled by a DB rather than getting crunched by lineman.You just brought up greatness after 30 and the guy who came to mind and never seemed to have great physical talent, but had great vision, instincts and heart was Curtis Martin. He should be in that next tier of guys, along with Thurman Thomas, the best player on the bills offense during their SB visits.

 

[Fallerjw]

Sweetness was the most complete football player to ever play the game. Not only could he have played any position on the field including passing,punting, and kicking, but he could have excelled at them.

Good thing the question wasn't "Who is the most complete football player to ever play the game?".

 

[Fallerjw]

How these guys stack up in years 6,7,8,9,10. During these years M. Faulk and Barry Sanders thrived, W. Payton held steady, and Emmitt Smith and E. Dickerson declined noticeably. Looks like a strong case for M. Faulk moving up the list on the greatest Rb of all time. Games80 B. Sanders78 E. Smith73 W. Payton69 M. Faulk55 E. DickersonYFS9902 B. Sanders9363 M. Faulk8415 W. Payton7932 E. Smith5447 E. DickersonYFS/Game135.7 M. Faulk123.8 B. Sanders115.3 W. Payton101.7 E. Smith99.04 E. DickersonTD's72 E. Smith72 M. Faulk49 B. Sanders35 W. Payton31 E. Dickerson

Jim Brown years 6 - 956 games104.45 yards rushing / game130.4 YPS / game1.125 TD / game

 

[-OZ-]

How these guys stack up in years 6,7,8,9,10. During these years M. Faulk and Barry Sanders thrived, W. Payton held steady, and Emmitt Smith and E. Dickerson declined noticeably. Looks like a strong case for M. Faulk moving up the list on the greatest Rb of all time. Games80 B. Sanders78 E. Smith73 W. Payton69 M. Faulk55 E. DickersonYFS9902 B. Sanders9363 M. Faulk8415 W. Payton7932 E. Smith5447 E. DickersonYFS/Game135.7 M. Faulk123.8 B. Sanders115.3 W. Payton101.7 E. Smith99.04 E. DickersonTD's72 E. Smith72 M. Faulk49 B. Sanders35 W. Payton31 E. Dickerson

Jim Brown years 6 - 956 games104.45 yards rushing / game130.4 YPS / game1.125 TD / game

FWIW, while we're only 29 games into LT's 6-10 years, he's at 137 YFS/G, 1.2 TDs per game - already equal to Payton's total TDs over this period. Actually, looking at that makes me respect MFaulk even more. He maintained over 69 games what LT's done in 29 - albeit with somewhat lesser TDs.

 

[Captain Spaulding]

After mulling over this all weekend, I have to go with Curtis Enis!

 

[TwinTurbo]

For my money, it's Barry Sanders. Plus he was the most fun to watch. If I had to pay for a ticket, I'm paying to watch Barry run.

But I think you could pick anyone of the following backs and be right:

Jim Brown

Barry Sanders

Walter Payton

Marshall Faulk

Eric Dickerson

Emmitt Smith

Gale Sayers

LT

 

[craxie]

I've updated the charts through this year

BE SURE TO ZOOM IN

LT vs Historical Greats

Yards from Scrimmage - http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/5751/yfs2007asj3.png

Rush/Receive TDs - http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/6543/td2007ait7.png

LT vs Contemporaries

Yards from Scrimmage - http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/3893/yfs2007bos6.png

Rush/Receive TDs - http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/349/td2007bpi6.png

http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/charg...30chargers.html

Should he get through today's game without losing the ball, Tomlinson will become the first player since Barry Sanders in 1994 to complete a season with more than 300 touches and no fumbles.

Moreover, Tomlinson has handled the ball 662 times since his last fumble, which could well be an NFL record.

Elias Sports Bureau, which does the official statistics for the NFL, said this week it has no record for consecutive touches without a fumble. Sanders went 486 touches between fumbles in his streak from Nov. 7, 1993, to Sept. 17, 1995.

“It's incredible,” Norv Turner said.

“It's amazing,” Lorenzo Neal said.

“It's unbelievable,” Philip Rivers said.