However, I think you can argue Payton, Smith, and Sanders all you want for 2-4, and no one can come up with a definitive answer. The only real definitive I think is Jim Brown. There just hasn't been another RB ever like him.
However, I think you can argue Payton, Smith, and Sanders all you want for 2-4, and no one can come up with a definitive answer. The only real definitive I think is Jim Brown. There just hasn't been another RB ever like him.
Agreed. Too many people go strictly by career yards. It is obvious that Jim Brown would have had well beyond 18,300 yards had he carried the ball and stayed around as much as Emmitt. For those that say we can never tell, there is no way there could be that much drop. He retired at the peak of his career.
For my money I've got to really say that it's a toss up between Walter Peyton and Jim Brown as who the best all time is at the RB position. If I'm not mistaken, when Brown retired, his records far outpaced anyone else's at that time, much like Babe Ruth's records in baseball until recently. Peyton simply did it. Hurt, not hurt, good team, bad team, he simply performed all of the time.
I think that Smith and Sanders follow but to play devil's advocate here, what would people's perceptions be on this arguement if Sanders had continued playing? Don't forget, he was well ahead of Smith in yardage when he chose to retire and would have broken Peyton's record before Smith. Had he chosen to, there's a good chance that he could have continued to hold of Smith and remain the all time leading rusher.
I like simple pleasures, like butter in my ass, lollipops in my mouth. That's just me.
Even if Sanders had more yards than Emmitt, Emmitt's still the better running back in my mind, simply because Barry Sanders' running style could not be trusted.
On 3rd and 1, 4th and 1, or on the goal-line, Emmitt Smith was nearly unstoppable, meanwhile Barry Sanders would usually go sit on the bench in those situations because the coaching staff knew there's a good chance he could lose some yardage.
As spectacular as Barry was, his running style just simply wasn't condusive to winning football games.
bagobonez wrote:Even if Sanders had more yards than Emmitt, Emmitt's still the better running back in my mind, simply because Barry Sanders' running style could not be trusted.
On 3rd and 1, 4th and 1, or on the goal-line, Emmitt Smith was nearly unstoppable, meanwhile Barry Sanders would usually go sit on the bench in those situations because the coaching staff knew there's a good chance he could lose some yardage.
As spectacular as Barry was, his running style just simply wasn't condusive to winning football games.
Then if you are going by how effective someone is on 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1, Jim Brown gets the edge. No one could stop him, he was too powerful.
bagobonez wrote:Even if Sanders had more yards than Emmitt, Emmitt's still the better running back in my mind, simply because Barry Sanders' running style could not be trusted.
On 3rd and 1, 4th and 1, or on the goal-line, Emmitt Smith was nearly unstoppable, meanwhile Barry Sanders would usually go sit on the bench in those situations because the coaching staff knew there's a good chance he could lose some yardage.
As spectacular as Barry was, his running style just simply wasn't condusive to winning football games.
So if that's the criteria, Marcus Allen is the man hands down, correct? I mean, he was never stopped at the goalline, when it counts the most.
I think a case can be made that Sanders running wasn't "trusted" because his coaches misused him. I still think that it was laughable when they would pull him out of and goal situations. Why remove your biggest threat from the field. Of course, Wayne Fontes isn't in the NFL anymore either, is he?
I like simple pleasures, like butter in my ass, lollipops in my mouth. That's just me.
I don't understand why some teams do that. Like if you watch Ravens games, sometimes Jamal Lewis drives the team down the field, then is pulled when they get in the red zone. Granted, he must be tired, but he is the best offensive weapon on the team and shouldnt be taken out.
Look at what the steelers did with Duce Staley in the beginning of this year. No one thought that Jerome Bettis would have the kind of season he did, and Staley was running all over teams. But inside the 10 Bettis would come in and Staley out, not rewarding him for getting the team there.
bagobonez wrote:Even if Sanders had more yards than Emmitt, Emmitt's still the better running back in my mind, simply because Barry Sanders' running style could not be trusted.
On 3rd and 1, 4th and 1, or on the goal-line, Emmitt Smith was nearly unstoppable, meanwhile Barry Sanders would usually go sit on the bench in those situations because the coaching staff knew there's a good chance he could lose some yardage.
As spectacular as Barry was, his running style just simply wasn't condusive to winning football games.
Then if you are going by how effective someone is on 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1, Jim Brown gets the edge. No one could stop him, he was too powerful.
But Brown didn't have the yards or prove that he had the longevity that Emmitt has. Emmitt's the total package. You can't find a flaw in his game.
For that matter, we might as well say Terrell Davis is the greatest ever, because he was on pace to break everyone's records before he got hurt. Who knows if Jim Brown would have got hurt or not?
bagobonez wrote: For that matter, we might as well say Terrell Davis is the greatest ever, because he was on pace to break everyone's records before he got hurt. Who knows if Jim Brown would have got hurt or not?
You can't possibly use Terrell Davis in your argument. He had 4 great years. Jim Brown had 9. He didn't get injured, he retired at the peak of his career. Jim Brown played long enough, unlike Terrell Davis, to be considered as one of the all time greats. And his numbers prove that he is the best. Just look at the yards per carry. A whole yard ahead of Emmitt.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by JayM09 » Wed Feb 02, 2005 10:14 pm 
