Originally Posted by ttplaya

the answer is Jim Brown.

In today's game it is important for RB to be able to catch the football because they are alot more involved in the passing game than in previous decades. So holding that against RBs from previous era's is kinda redic imo.

edit: GTFO noob

Not to mention Brown's "seasons" were only 14 games. Try adding that to your formula.

 

Originally Posted by snaggs

Not to mention Brown's "seasons" were only 14 games. Try adding that to your formula.

fwiw, jim brown's #'s extrapolated into a 16 game season:

1669 rush, 338 receiving, 17 tds

 

Originally Posted by R_U_Nuts

I'm a Cowboys fan so take my ranking fwiw

1 Jim Brown
2 Barry Sanders
3 Walter Payton
4 Emmit Smith
5 Eric dickerson

Obviously a respectable list. Personally though, I just feel like there's a certain point where LT just has soooooooo many more yards per season and soooooo many more TDs per season than people like payton, emmit etc., that it becomes absurd to not put him ahead of them.

However, it looks like LT is pretty much done for the most part, and if he puts together some mediocre seasons to end his career, maybe i'll feel differently. It looks as if the Chargers are probably done with him though, and he may just end up getting Marvin Harrisonned with him not wanting to take a pay cut, and teams probably not wanting to pay that much for a 31 year old RB.

Yeah Brown was a freak and ahead of his time, he was too fast for the lineman and too strong for the secondary.

The NFL had never seen a big back with high end speed, he was literally like Terrell Davis or Bo Jackson playing against guys that were the size of high school players today.

Repost

and your list is laughable

I never saw Brown play but I have seen game footage and from stats and what people that have played against him have said, he is my #1.

Everyone else on my list are backs that I have seen play. Sanders and Peyton are the 2 best I have seen and it is debatable who was better, but I personally go with Sanders.

4-10 can be placed in pretty much any order imo because they all were great backs and I just think its too close to say who was better then the other. Like I said these are not in any order, just who I would personally have in my top 10:

LT

Earl Campbell

Emmit Smith

Dickerson

Marshall Faulk

Curtis Martin

Tony Dorsett

I also think that at least a few more RBs that are playing now will be in my top 10 when their careers are over.

Not trying to be a jerk, but dividing yards/TDs by number of seasons is an incredibly shortsighted and skewed way of showing the best.

There's a fairly significant difference between being the statistical best and the skilled best RBs out there.

FWIW, I like R U Nuts' list the best and would probably rank them the exact same way.

LaDainian shouldn't even be mentioned in that group, IMO.

 

Originally Posted by RoyalCrusher

its wayyy too hard to evaluate running backs and not worth it to argue them imo.  barry sanders and AP are the most impressive backs i have seen just in terms of the eye test but <span>ive heard from a lot of ppl i consider smart that barry was hella overrated</span>, so who knows

I have never once heard this from ANYONE.  IMO he is the best every just because he was literally the only thing the D had to key on and still did his thing.  Yeah I know Herman Moore and Brett Perryman, but seriously?  

With that said, I must admit Brown's numbers are crazy good.

Anybody that ever called Sanders overrated was smoking sherm stick or crack (possibly both at the same time)

Sanders has a career avg of 5 yds plus which is totally insane considering that he had to run against 30 men in the box on practically every play. Because defenses keyed on him so hard he had a lot of negative carries but more often than not he would turn what shoulda been a 5 yard loss into a 50 yard scamper.

I used to say he ran like a crab because he could change directions so fast. Chris Johnson reminds me a lil bit of Barry because of his ability to make so many people miss.

the arguments ive heard against barry (not necessarily saying that i agree) are that he was next to worthless in the red zone/3rd and short, is the alltime leader in negative yards from scrimmage, constantly put his offense into 3rd and longs, was a poor pass blocker, and choked in the playoffs (lol sample size)

 

Originally Posted by slizza420

He just played for a horrible team. If he had played for Dallas he woulda put up the most ridiculous numbers ever.

Blocking wasn't exactly his strength but he was certainly an adequate blocker and his red zone shortcomings were mainly due to teams stacking 600 men in the box.

LOL their offense was always in 3rd and long that certainly wasn't Barry's fault. Without him they might not have ever even won a game during those years. 

Word.  Choking in the playoffs?  Really?  His team was AWFUL, and they were playing playoff caliber opponents.  

 

Originally Posted by Sneakers OToole

I'm sorry, but that's totally rational.

FYP

 

Originally Posted by jerichoholic

lameass, i really hope your posts in this thread are 100% exagerated, otherwise you should seek anger management.

the guy posted a fkn list he made to create a discussion. whether you agree or not, your comments are retarded and irrational.

Serious jeri is Serious.

barry.

well, i only defend because he put some effort in his thread. its not like he posted a 4.40 rail call or a jfgi post.