View Full Version : Greatest RB of all-time
racosun
07-30-2006, 04:05 PM
Who (in your opinion) is the NFL's greatest running back of all-time?
12th man seahawks fan
07-30-2006, 11:56 PM
I think Marshal Faulk is the greatest all purpose RB of all time. He was dangerous in his prime, and I don't like how the rest of his career is shaping up so far this season.
racosun
07-31-2006, 08:02 AM
Marshall truly was a fantastic back in his prime. It's a shame watching a star RB go lame after so many good years in the league. I think that's why Jim Brown and Barry Sanders decided to hang them up early, they didn't want to do what Faulk is doing.
I voted for Barry Sanders. Yes, I'm a Lions fan, but also a fan of the game. What Barry did year after year with the personnel he had is simply amazing. I remember one play, when about eight guys piled on top of him, and Barry somehow squirted out of the pile and scampered for a touchdown. That was sweet.
tdk1984
07-31-2006, 12:28 PM
Jim Brown. He posted all his records and retired by age 29. To accomplish what he did before the age of 30 is amazing. Imagine what he could've done had he not retired so early. Those stats could be records so far out of reach it would be ridiculous.
racosun
07-31-2006, 03:12 PM
I'm sure many of you guys already heard this, but Jim Brown was and always will be the favorite running back of all-time for at least one person: Barry Sanders' father. I found that a bit stunning when I first heard it many years ago, and still find it silly today. It's your kid, man! WTF?!? If my kid was that close in comparison to a legend like Brown, I'd give the kid the nod. Barry could have taken the rushing record to an unbreakable mark. He was one season away from passing Walter Payton, and barring injury Barry would have gained nearly 25,000 yards on the ground! He was as unstoppable in his last season as he was in his first.
I won't argue with anybody as to who's better, but I still haven't seen anybody that can do the things Barry did. How many times was he accused of spraying silicon on his jersey because it was so hard to grab onto him? He had to switch jerseys in the middle of games while league officials tested the one he started with. Of course it was always a clean jersey, which only added to his legend. One thing for Jim Brown, though: he got his ring. Barry never had a team or coaching staff good enough to help him out.
ATLFalcons
07-31-2006, 04:09 PM
Jim Brown. Not only was he a great running back, but he was a great athlete, the guy played basketball, lacrosse, baseball, and track. If he would have played longer his records would still be standing.
ktss12
07-31-2006, 05:34 PM
Watching Walter Payton play, it was very easy to see why he was called "Sweetness" But Jim Brown averaged over 100 yards per game for his career. That makes him the best, in my book.
Snake
07-31-2006, 08:25 PM
Ooh, an easy one. Jim Brown, hands down. Not only the greatest NFL RB, but also the greatest College RB, and greatest College Lacrosse player. Never missed a game, averaged over 5 yds per carry, had 100 yds every game; does anybody else even come close?
I will say that I loved to watch Barry Sanders though, probably the #2 all time greatest RB in NFL. If he would have had the line that Emmitt Smith had, he would of set every record there was.
gridiron
08-01-2006, 07:51 PM
Brown over Saunders. Granted Brown's averages would have fallen had he played into his thirties, but for much of his career he was hampered by his coaches. He had to run the called play. It was only after Lombardi and Taylor showed the effectiveness of "run to daylight" that Paul Brown unleashed Jim Brown to daylight instead of the called play, hole or no hole. Had Jim been able to go with the holes earlier in his career, he might (might, not probably) still hold the yardage and TD records, and his average per carry would be beyond belief.
I'd say Sanders was the best runner I saw play in my lifetime but given all that I've read/seen the honour of greatest of all time would have to go to Jim Brown, the numbers compiled over a such a short period of time are just awe inspiring.
redbuck
08-04-2006, 07:17 PM
Glad to see so many people are choosing Brown. Certainly my choice. So dominating...
Payton was special and Sanders was certainly good for the short time he played, but I'd not reward a player with such a voluntarily short career.
Sanders was certainly good for the short time he played, but I'd not reward a player with such a voluntarily short career.
I'd rather reward a player who left early because he lost the passion to play than a guy who keeps holding on so he can break a record or two.
Willie
08-04-2006, 11:05 PM
Glad to see so many people are choosing Brown. Certainly my choice. So dominating...
Payton was special and Sanders was certainly good for the short time he played, but I'd not reward a player with such a voluntarily short career.
I also voted for Brown.
I couldn't let this go, though.
Brown also voluntarily retired early. He played nine seasons; Sanders played ten.
football junkie
08-07-2006, 08:06 PM
My father always tells me it was Jim Brown because they were at Syracuse University at about the same time.
But I have no doubt in my mind that the greatest I ever saw was and still is Barry Sanders. Had he not voluntarily retired early, he'd hold every rushing record in the book.
Seattle1
12-02-2006, 07:54 PM
Jim Brown......
boomer
12-03-2006, 09:10 AM
Jim Brown...an incredible athlete and competitor. If he had played for 5 more seasons the career numbers he would have posted would have been beyond belief. JB did have one break as far his durability, he was bigger than any db's of that era and equally as big as the linebackers. But in the 50's & 60's, defensive players could get away with a lot more late hits and cheap shots than they can today.
gridiron
12-04-2006, 05:32 AM
Paul Brown always said Jim Brown said that Jim would return for the 1966 season, but then Jim got tied up filming The Dirty Dozen and couldn't make it back on time. Can't blame him for jumping at the chance to act, despite the limits to his thespian talents.
Packer Backer
12-06-2006, 09:39 PM
I voted for Sanders... Maybe because I saw him at his prime... If he could have hung on a few more years, he should have shattered some rushing records. What a shame.
Ladder
12-07-2006, 07:03 AM
Jim Brown is my pick.
Wolverine
12-08-2006, 09:37 AM
Jim Brown.
In his first four seasons the league was playing a 12 game schedule, then went to 14 games in 1961. Brown only played in 118 games in his career.
Sanders (5.0 yards per carry) played in 153. Payton played in 190 (4.4). Faulk (4.3) has played 176 through last year.
Brown had the best average rush (5.2), though his average probably would have dropped had he played another four or five years. He was remarkably durable, but some of that may be attributed to the shorter seasons.
football junkie
12-08-2006, 02:06 PM
Brown didn't have to run through sets of 330 lbs defensive tackles. Sanders did. Brown didn't have to play against 275 lbs defensive ends who run the 40 in 4.55. Sanders did. Brown didn't have to get hit by safties packing 25 more lbs of muscle on their frames than he had on his body. Sanders did.
Brown is 6'2" and played at 230 lbs.
Sanders is 5'8" and played at just under 200 lbs,
just something to keep in mind when comparing Brown's 5.2 career average per rush to Sanders' 5.0.
And don't give me the argument that Sanders played in the era of the vertical passing game and that somehow made the game easier for him. That would be a valid argument had Sanders played with John Elway or Steve Young or even Boomer Esiason. Instead the Sanders' years were wasted with lousy QBs like Erik Kramer, Bob Gagliano, Rodney Peete and Charlie Batch.
Brown at least spent a lot of his career with Frank Ryan at QB.
Wolverine
12-08-2006, 02:52 PM
Brown played 50 of his 118 games with Ryan (42.4%).
Sanders played around 62 (there is some overlap) with Dave Krieg and Scott Mitchell (40.5%).
Krieg and Michell in 1994-97 were about on a par with Ryan in 1962-65.
Batch's stats for Sander's last year are about the same as Ryan's first year with Brown.
football junkie
12-09-2006, 12:45 AM
And if you weren't so married to the stat mentality that permeates other sports you might know that Frank Ryan was a much better QB than either Scott Mitchell or Dave Krieg -- who played in a passer-friendly era.
This isn't BBF.
boomer
12-09-2006, 08:14 AM
Paul Brown always said Jim Brown said that Jim would return for the 1966 season, but then Jim got tied up filming The Dirty Dozen and couldn't make it back on time. Can't blame him for jumping at the chance to act, despite the limits to his thespian talents.
Paul Brown was gone from Cleveland by then, was fired by Art Modell after 1962. Modell said something similar, basically told Brown that if he couldn't make it back in time for the start of the season, he didn't want him. Nobody threatens Jim Brown with anything, plus it wasn't like he was making an enourmous amount of money, he could make more acting. Modell should have had enough sense to make an exception.
One wonders if Brown ever had doubts once his acting career took off. Outside of The Dirty Dozen, who remembers what he was in? He made some blaxploitation stuff, and that was pretty much it. Maybe the NFL was too confining for him, a very powerful voice and strong-minded individual.
Payton is my alltime favorite player and the only athlete of any sport whose jersey I purchased. And, while the Lions are the only one of my hometown teams I'm not an avid fan of, Sanders made me watch them closer than before. I've never seen another back like him. And Faulk could do it all. And Emmitt was grace personafied. If Jerry Rice was a running back, he'd be Emmitt Smith.
But Jim Brown was, is and will always be the man.
football junkie
12-10-2006, 10:30 AM
Jim Brown was in one of the worst, in my opinion, movies of all time. Riot starring Jim Brown and Gene Hackman debuted in 1969. It's a cheesy movie about a prison riot being used to conceal a prison break. Catch it sometime if you get a chance. It's worth a good laugh.
But in my book, Brown gets a pass for all that horrible "acting" because of his work in the civil rights movement.
I still think Sanders was the better running back.
Jim Brown was in one of the worst, in my opinion, movies of all time. Riot starring Jim Brown and Gene Hackman debuted in 1969. It's a cheesy movie about a prison riot being used to conceal a prison break. Catch it sometime if you get a chance. It's worth a good laugh.
But in my book, Brown gets a pass for all that horrible "acting" because of his work in the civil rights movement.
I still think Sanders was the better running back.
They showed the blaxploitation parody, I'm Gonna Git You Sucka, over the weekend. Brown was pretty funny in that, but his role was limited.
I could live with Sanders, but he got trapped a lot. Imagine his numbers if Mike Utley hadn't gotten injured and Eric Andolsek lived. He would have had a great line and maybe would have shattered quite a few more records.
gridiron
12-20-2006, 04:32 AM
I'll give Saunders most creative because he never worried about blocking, but for Brown a0 he wasn't allowed tro run to daylight for a good chucnk of his career and b) he didn't score all those touchdowns because the opposition wanted him to, he earned them, often in short yardage situations when everyone knew he was getting the ball.