The Greatest Running Back of All-Time

[jjgman21]

....oh, that's right. Emmitt broke the rushing record in Dallas. he only hung on with the Cardinals to break Walter's yards from scrimmage record.

 

and he still never blocked.

[jjgman21]

 

Would Payton have had the same number of yards if he had a better QB and receiving corp? In fact, he may have had less because his team would have had other options.

 

Isn't it telling that Dallas had a HOF QB, a receiver who likely gets there one day, and yet he was still the first option most of the time?

 

 

I think this example of your football knowledge speaks for itself, although I don't think you really think this and are only using it to prop up a weak argument that Smith is one of the greatest running backs of all time.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

....oh, that's right. Emmitt broke the rushing record in Dallas. he only hung on with the Cardinals to break Walter's yards from scrimmage record.

 

and he still never blocked.

 

He was an ok blocking back. Surely not the greatest, but in Dallas' schemes with Moose Johnston on board, he wasn't asked to stay behind and block much.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Barry Sanders had a chance to surpass Walter as the greatest, but he quit. Sorry Barry.

...

Walter created most of his yardage despite playing on poor offenses year after year. Same argument can be made for Barry, but he's a quitter.

 

That's harsh. Barry Sanders is one of the most humble professional athletes in history as well as being one of the most talented. Barry walked away from the game partly because Payton's rushing record meant very little to him. He did the same in high school when he got within 30 yards or so of the league's rushing title. He felt Rodney Peete deserved the Heisman. While playing, he was notorious for not cashing paychecks and lived in a $175,000 home. Barry Sanders was a lot of things, a quitter is not one of them.

[UMFan83]

I think any RB pre-1980 would love to see how they could do with 300 LB lineman opening holes for them. For that alone, I pick Jim Brown, no disrespect to Payton, who was great in his own right

[Outshined_One]

Hall of "What Could Have Beens"

 

Barry Sanders

Bo Jackson

James Brown (remember, he retired at 29!)

Gale Sayers

 

What about Terrell Davis?

 

In all truth, given the way Denver seems to produce 1,000 yard backs like an assembly line, I'd be curious to see what he would have done in a different system. He clearly is better than any of the RBs they've had during that stretch, but I have to wonder how much better.

[jjgman21]

I think any RB pre-1980 would love to see how they could do with 300 LB lineman opening holes for them. For that alone, I pick Jim Brown, no disrespect to Payton, who was great in his own right

 

see my point earlier about Brown. I wonder how all the post 1970 RB's would like to play against defenses that didn't have a single player bigger than he was.

[BigSlick]

 

Most overrated:

Emmitt Smith- a great back with great legs, but Matt Suhey could have rushed for 1000+ with some of his Cowboy lines.

 

It's hard to over-rate when you have the most yardage from scrimmage by a RB, most rushing yards, and most rushing TD's.

 

Saying Smith is over-rated would be the same as saying Hank Aaron is over-rated. You can do it, but it's pretty ridiculous.

 

Hank Aaron is overrated. He had incredible longevity and consistency, but he never had ridiculous years like Babe Ruth, Barry Bonds, etc. had. I don't think he ever had more than ~45 homers in a season, not saying thats not great, but he isn't the best home run hitter of all time. Just for some comparison, Aaron had 40 more homers than Babe Ruth in 4,000 more at bats.

 

BTW, just to add to the discussion, Payton is the best, end of discussion.

 

C'mon, Emmitt Smith isn't better, don't be ridiculous.

[adamb0719]

Barry Sanders had a chance to surpass Walter as the greatest, but he quit. Sorry Barry.

...

Walter created most of his yardage despite playing on poor offenses year after year. Same argument can be made for Barry, but he's a quitter.

 

That's harsh. Barry Sanders is one of the most humble professional athletes in history as well as being one of the most talented. Barry walked away from the game partly because Payton's rushing record meant very little to him. He did the same in high school when he got within 30 yards or so of the league's rushing title. He felt Rodney Peete deserved the Heisman. While playing, he was notorious for not cashing paychecks and lived in a $175,000 home. Barry Sanders was a lot of things, a quitter is not one of them.

 

I agree. I have more respect for Barry walking away from the game, than I do for Smith hanging on too long and breaking the records.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

 

Most overrated:

Emmitt Smith- a great back with great legs, but Matt Suhey could have rushed for 1000+ with some of his Cowboy lines.

 

It's hard to over-rate when you have the most yardage from scrimmage by a RB, most rushing yards, and most rushing TD's.

 

Saying Smith is over-rated would be the same as saying Hank Aaron is over-rated. You can do it, but it's pretty ridiculous.

 

Hank Aaron is overrated. He had incredible longevity and consistency, but he never had ridiculous years like Babe Ruth, Barry Bonds, etc. had. I don't think he ever had more than ~45 homers in a season, not saying thats not great, but he isn't the best home run hitter of all time. Just for some comparison, Aaron had 40 more homers than Babe Ruth in 4,000 more at bats.

 

BTW, just to add to the discussion, Payton is the best, end of discussion.

 

C'mon, Emmitt Smith isn't better, don't be ridiculous.

 

And by what metric do you support this?

 

I'm not being ridiculous.

 

Smith: #1 Rushing TD's.

Smith: #1 Rushing yards.

Smith: #1 Yards from scrimmage by a RB.

Smith: #1 TD's by a RB.

 

He was the most productive RB in the history of the NFL. Sure that was due to longevitiy which should be a credit to him. Look at the average career of an NFL running back. The fact that Smith showed the toughness to stick it out and be productive through all those seasons is a testament to his greatness.

 

The same could be said about Aaron in baseball. He was remarkably consistent in hitting HR's. Whether or not he is the greatest HR hitter, I'm not sure, but he certainly isn't overrated.

[hawkeyecub]

I think any RB pre-1980 would love to see how they could do with 300 LB lineman opening holes for them. For that alone, I pick Jim Brown, no disrespect to Payton, who was great in his own right

 

see my point earlier about Brown. I wonder how all the post 1970 RB's would like to play against defenses that didn't have a single player bigger than he was.

 

He also could outrun those guys that were smaller or the same size as him. Obviously you're comparing different era's, but Jim Brown was a man amongst boys like Babe Ruth was in baseball. He had the total package as a runner and had some insane production.

 

1. Jim Brown

2. Walter Payton

3. Barry Sanders

4. Emmit Smith

 

That's it, that's the list.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

My list:

 

1. Smith

2. Payton

3. Brown

4. Sanders

[jjgman21]

I think any RB pre-1980 would love to see how they could do with 300 LB lineman opening holes for them. For that alone, I pick Jim Brown, no disrespect to Payton, who was great in his own right

 

see my point earlier about Brown. I wonder how all the post 1970 RB's would like to play against defenses that didn't have a single player bigger than he was.

 

He also could outrun those guys that were smaller or the same size as him. Obviously you're comparing different era's, but Jim Brown was a man amongst boys like Babe Ruth was in baseball. He had the total package as a runner and had some insane production.

 

1. Jim Brown

2. Walter Payton

3. Barry Sanders

4. Emmit Smith

 

That's it, that's the list.

 

like I said earlier, the better comparison for Jim Brown is George Mikan. Mikan completely dominated basketbal...but he was 6-8 inches taller than the next tallest guy on the court. same with Brown.

 

Brown would have been great in any era, but to assume he would dominate like he did in the 50's against the defenses of the 70's - 00's is absurd. not a single guy could tackle Brown by himself when he was playing. most linebackers playing today could bring him down no problem.

[jjgman21]

 

And by what metric do you support this?

 

 

just doesn't get it.

 

Andruw Jones was clearly the NL mvp last year because he led the league in RBI.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I think any RB pre-1980 would love to see how they could do with 300 LB lineman opening holes for them. For that alone, I pick Jim Brown, no disrespect to Payton, who was great in his own right

 

see my point earlier about Brown. I wonder how all the post 1970 RB's would like to play against defenses that didn't have a single player bigger than he was.

 

He also could outrun those guys that were smaller or the same size as him. Obviously you're comparing different era's, but Jim Brown was a man amongst boys like Babe Ruth was in baseball. He had the total package as a runner and had some insane production.

 

1. Jim Brown

2. Walter Payton

3. Barry Sanders

4. Emmit Smith

 

That's it, that's the list.

 

like I said earlier, the better comparison for Jim Brown is George Mikan. Mikan completely dominated basketbal...but he was 6-8 inches taller than the next tallest guy on the court. same with Brown.

 

Brown would have been great in any era, but to assume he would dominate like he did in the 50's against the defenses of the 70's - 00's is absurd. not a single guy could tackle Brown by himself when he was playing. most linebackers playing today could bring him down no problem.

 

And that right there is why the "what-if" game is somewhat ridiculous here.

 

We don't know what if, we do know what happened.

 

Successful = productivity.

 

Emmit Smith was the most productive back in history. That's true if you look at yardage or touchdowns. He even has the championships as well.

[hawkeyecub]

I think any RB pre-1980 would love to see how they could do with 300 LB lineman opening holes for them. For that alone, I pick Jim Brown, no disrespect to Payton, who was great in his own right

 

see my point earlier about Brown. I wonder how all the post 1970 RB's would like to play against defenses that didn't have a single player bigger than he was.

 

He also could outrun those guys that were smaller or the same size as him. Obviously you're comparing different era's, but Jim Brown was a man amongst boys like Babe Ruth was in baseball. He had the total package as a runner and had some insane production.

 

1. Jim Brown

2. Walter Payton

3. Barry Sanders

4. Emmit Smith

 

That's it, that's the list.

 

like I said earlier, the better comparison for Jim Brown is George Mikan. Mikan completely dominated basketbal...but he was 6-8 inches taller than the next tallest guy on the court. same with Brown.

 

Brown would have been great in any era, but to assume he would dominate like he did in the 50's against the defenses of the 70's - 00's is absurd. not a single guy could tackle Brown by himself when he was playing. most linebackers playing today could bring him down no problem.

 

Most could bring him down no problem? Many linebackers had problems bringing down Jerome Bettis in his prime and he was nowhere near the back that Jim Brown was. I agree that he wouldn't dominate like that against today's defenses. But he was a man amongst boys and if he had access to all of today's supplements and year-round training, he may have been even more of a physical specimen.

 

Also something to consider is that the quality of tackling in the NFL today is not where it was then, so that offsets a little bit of the size differences. With a running back who has the size and force of Brown, that makes a big difference and that was part of what made Bettis so successful.

[Too Tall]

 

Most overrated:

Emmitt Smith- a great back with great legs, but Matt Suhey could have rushed for 1000+ with some of his Cowboy lines.

 

It's hard to over-rate when you have the most yardage from scrimmage by a RB, most rushing yards, and most rushing TD's.

 

Saying Smith is over-rated would be the same as saying Hank Aaron is over-rated. You can do it, but it's pretty ridiculous.

 

Hank Aaron is overrated. He had incredible longevity and consistency, but he never had ridiculous years like Babe Ruth, Barry Bonds, etc. had. I don't think he ever had more than ~45 homers in a season, not saying thats not great, but he isn't the best home run hitter of all time. Just for some comparison, Aaron had 40 more homers than Babe Ruth in 4,000 more at bats.

 

BTW, just to add to the discussion, Payton is the best, end of discussion.

 

C'mon, Emmitt Smith isn't better, don't be ridiculous.

 

And by what metric do you support this?

 

I'm not being ridiculous.

 

Smith: #1 Rushing TD's.

Smith: #1 Rushing yards.

Smith: #1 Yards from scrimmage by a RB.

Smith: #1 TD's by a RB.

 

He was the most productive RB in the history of the NFL. Sure that was due to longevitiy which should be a credit to him. Look at the average career of an NFL running back. The fact that Smith showed the toughness to stick it out and be productive through all those seasons is a testament to his greatness.

 

The same could be said about Aaron in baseball. He was remarkably consistent in hitting HR's. Whether or not he is the greatest HR hitter, I'm not sure, but he certainly isn't overrated.

 

When your not breaking tackles you can play for ever.. If you had the exact same teams who would you rather have at RB? I'd take Payton, Brown and Sanders over Smith any day..

[jjgman21]

I think any RB pre-1980 would love to see how they could do with 300 LB lineman opening holes for them. For that alone, I pick Jim Brown, no disrespect to Payton, who was great in his own right

 

see my point earlier about Brown. I wonder how all the post 1970 RB's would like to play against defenses that didn't have a single player bigger than he was.

 

He also could outrun those guys that were smaller or the same size as him. Obviously you're comparing different era's, but Jim Brown was a man amongst boys like Babe Ruth was in baseball. He had the total package as a runner and had some insane production.

 

1. Jim Brown

2. Walter Payton

3. Barry Sanders

4. Emmit Smith

 

That's it, that's the list.

 

like I said earlier, the better comparison for Jim Brown is George Mikan. Mikan completely dominated basketbal...but he was 6-8 inches taller than the next tallest guy on the court. same with Brown.

 

Brown would have been great in any era, but to assume he would dominate like he did in the 50's against the defenses of the 70's - 00's is absurd. not a single guy could tackle Brown by himself when he was playing. most linebackers playing today could bring him down no problem.

 

And that right there is why the "what-if" game is somewhat ridiculous here.

 

We don't know what if, we do know what happened.

 

Successful = productivity.

 

Emmit Smith was the most productive back in history. That's true if you look at yardage or touchdowns. He even has the championships as well.

 

just doesn't get it. actually, you're a smart guy and I know you do, but you are sticking to your guns for some reason (to be a homer about Smith). let's make it real simple.

 

many baseball statistics measure individual performance (ERA, Ave., OBP, Slg.). some measure team performance (W-L, runs, RBI). the game is one of one on one confrontation, pitcher against batter. we can use the ones that measure individual performance to compare across eras because the game changes little over time.

 

football statistics for the most part measure team performance. it is a game of team on team confrontation. you can't score a touchdown or even gain a yard without 10 other guys. furthermore, we can not use stats to compare players over time in football because the game changes vastly from generation to generation.

 

by your logic, Marino is the greatest QB of all time, and Unitas and Stauback and Bradshaw are not even in the discussion.

 

you have two choices, acknowledge this is true and move on, or start to back people up when they try to argue that W-L is a meaningful measurement of pitcher performance and RBI/Runs is a meaningful measurement of batting performance. anything else is just pure disengenuousness and hypocrisy.

 

edit for this point: because football stats measure team performance and the game changes over time, it is absolutely necessary to play the 'what-if' game, as I already explained to you. because we are not measuring individual performance with stats, we need a way to measure the individual. it is subjective, and it is why there is no SAFR movement, like there is a SABR movement.

Edited July 7, 2006 by jjgman21

[jjgman21]

 

Also something to consider is that the quality of tackling in the NFL today is not where it was then, so that offsets a little bit of the size differences.

 

have you actually seen the old footage of 1950's NFL. you're completely wrong on this point.

 

again, Brown would be great in any era, but I guaranty he wouldn't have averaged over 5 yards per carry. not even close.

[CubinNY]

Brown

 

 

Miles and miles

 

 

 

Sanders = Payton

OJ

 

Ricky Williams = Tony Dorsett

 

 

Many, many other running backs

Emitt Smith

 

If Barry wasn't such a weird humanbeing Emitt wouldn't have the yardage record. And Barry, Walter, and OJ played for some pretty bad teams.

[snoodmonger]

christian okoye was ridiculous in tecmo super bowl. linebackers and cornerbacks literally bounced off of him (about 10 yards too) if they even touched him.

 

I LOVED Okoye and Barry Word. Good stuff. I'd kind of forgotten about them. Thanks for rekindling some memories.

[jjgman21]

Brown

 

 

Miles and miles

 

 

 

Sanders = Payton

OJ

 

Ricky Williams = Tony Dorsett

 

 

 

to me that's like saying

 

Mikan

 

miles and miles

 

Russell

Kareem

Shaq = Chamberlain

[CubinNY]

Brown

 

 

Miles and miles

 

 

 

Sanders = Payton

OJ

 

Ricky Williams = Tony Dorsett

 

 

 

to me that's like saying

 

Mikan

 

miles and miles

 

Russell

Kareem

Shaq = Chamberlain

 

This isn't baskettball. When Miken played, baskettball barely resembles the game that is played today. In football it's not so much the case. No one is hailing Broco Nagursky or "Crazy legs" Hursh.

[bukie]

Question: Was there a year in his whole career that Emmitt Smith was considered the best RB in the NFL?

 

From 90-98, Sanders was the best RB in the NFL. 99-2001 Marshall Faulk/Edgerrin James, maybe. After that, LaDainian Tomlinson.

 

Smith piled up the yards from 91-94, but even then Sanders was right with him on yards, had a better yards per carry average, and did it with a lot less help.

 

I'm looking for sabermetric stats that go back a bit further than 2000 (during which point Smith wasn't top 10 in RBs, let alone arguably the best).

[jjgman21]

Brown

 

 

Miles and miles

 

 

 

Sanders = Payton

OJ

 

Ricky Williams = Tony Dorsett

 

 

 

to me that's like saying

 

Mikan

 

miles and miles

 

Russell

Kareem

Shaq = Chamberlain

 

This isn't baskettball. When Miken played, baskettball barely resembles the game that is played today. In football it's not so much the case. No one is hailing Broco Nagursky or "Crazy legs" Hursh.

 

basketball doesn't resemble the game played today in large part because of Mikan. the up tempo game was invented (and many rules changed) to combat his presence in the lane. I understand your point, but my point is this, both of these athletes owed much of their success to their physical freakishness relative to the other players in the game at the time, as they did to pure talent. that's simply an incontrovertable fact. their accomplishments cannot be viewed in a vacuum. you simply must play the 'what if' game that Vance so vehemently opposes, if you want to have a meaningful discussion of how good these players were.