Best RB Ever - fun poll...participate or die

[RosettaStoned]

He was 10 lbs lighter than some of his o-line.. lulz

 

[FirstTimer]

A) There were RB's his size when he played.

B) Browns first game was vs the Eagles. The starting DT's were Jess Richardson 6'2 261 lbs, Ed Khayat 6'3 240 lbs.

C) Jim Browns starting o-line was Dick Schafrath 253 lbs, Jim Ray Smith 241 lbs, John Morrow 244 lbs, Gene Hickerson 248 lbs, Mike McCormack 246 lbs.

D) Jim Brown was 6'2 232 lbs, he wasn't as gigantic as others would make him out to be.

E) Vs. his contemporaries, Jim Brown was head and shoulders above all that came before him, and all that played in his day.

F) Walter Payton did not play head and shoulders above the rest of the league, he only lead the NFL in carries once out of 13 years, despite leading the NFL in carries 4 times.

G) Earl Campbell/Eric Dickerson collectively dominated as the league leaders in rushing most of the decade, over Walter. Walter lasted longer, which in it of itself I don't think makes him better. But vs his contemporaries, Walter was not the best RB year-after-year.

If you are judging it by ruhsing yards alone..true..however Walter also played on some of the worst offenses I've watched. Swaer to God the box was stacked against him in ways that other runners of his time didn't see. Plus Walter may have been the best all around player of the modern era.

I don't think he is ahead of Brown but in context of his era he wasn't statistically dominating from a rushing yardage standpoint for qutie a few reasons that weren't really his doing. I believe he made more All Pro teams than any of his contemporaries as well.

Walter also finidhed in the top 5 for yeards from scrimmage 9 times in 13 seasons and when he retired he was first all time.

 

[Shayn•Da•Pain]

If you are judging it by ruhsing yards alone..true..however Walter also played on some of the worst offenses I've watched. Swaer to God the box was stacked against him in ways that other runners of his time didn't see. Plus Walter may have been the best all around player of the modern era.

I don't think he is ahead of Brown but in context of his era he wasn't statistically dominating from a rushing yardage standpoint for qutie a few reasons that weren't really his doing. I believe he made more All Pro teams than any of his contemporaries as well.

Yeah because Earl Campbell and Eric Dickerson played with sooo many pro-bowlers and didn't face a stacked box as often as Walter. Oooo....k....

 

[FirstTimer]

Yeah because Earl Campbell and Eric Dickerson played with sooo many pro-bowlers and didn't face a stacked box as often as Walter. Oooo....k....

Comparitevely.

Come on.

You're not this dense.

 

[FirstTimer]

Objectively.........even though Houston and LA's offenses weren't world beaters I'd rather be on theirs then on Chicago's.

No question.

That's the point. It's not just Pro Bowlers....its decent players in general.

 

[nflman2033]

Yeah some of y'all are selling Brown short judging his feats soley based on his size...if size was the only thing that mattered Brandon Jacobs would be the best back in the NFL....he afterall like Brown, is bigger than anybody else and certainily the biggest back the NFL has ever seen.....no, talent, heart and a whole bunch of other intangibles are also what makes up a great back

Was Wilt Chamberlain any less great because he towered over everyone?

Also we're all going off clips and lore nobody here besides Jeffx has seen Brown play in person lol

Lol, yes Brandon Jacobs is a big back, and there is no question it isn't entirely his size, or even the size of the defenses, he was certainly special especially in terms of speed combined with size which Jacobs doesn't have. Hell Christian Okoye would be a better comparison to talk size.

but if we want to talk Jim Brown Size Speed combo as it relates to todays game, his Average OL was 246lbs, that is only 14lbs heavy than he was.

the current Browns starting OL averages 313lbs.

so if you look at it proportionally Jim Brown in todays game would be 295lbs. he would probably be closer to 6'4.

I don't have 40 times obviously but we can assume that he was probably faster 90% of the league. So imagine Adrian Peterson speed but at 6'4 295lbs, and that would be what a hypothetical Jim Brown would look like in todays game. To me its makes it pretty clear why he dominated the league.

but as I said he is the obviously the best RB of alltime because no other player dominated the game the way he did at the time he did

 

[Shayn•Da•Pain]

Comparitevely.

Come on.

You're not this dense.

No. I'm not this dense obviously, but you're acting rather ignorant by drawing this comparison out. It's either you have no idea what you're talking about, or you're trolling.

Walter also played on some of the worst offenses I've watched. Swaer to God the box was stacked against him in ways that other runners of his time didn't see.

:whut:

Nobody is here disagreeing with you that Walter was in some real shitty offenses. But so was Earl Campbell and Eric Dickerson. In fact, all three backs were basically the only offensive weapon on their teams for most of their careers, and likewise they all saw a significant amount of stacked boxes. Your statement that the box was stacked against Walter in ways that other runners (Earl & Eric) didn't see, is ignorant if not asinine.

Objectively.........even though Houston and LA's offenses weren't world beaters I'd rather be on theirs then on Chicago's.

No question.

That's the point. It's not just Pro Bowlers....its decent players in general.

The best player Earl played with was maybe Ken Stabler who was over the hill and threw 13 tds and 28 ints in his first year with Earl, and was replaced by an over the hill Archie Manning, who was then replaced by Gifford Nielson. Gifford fucking Nielson man. Come on! The best WR on his team was Ken Burrough who was already on the decline, and I'm fairly confident 99% of VSD doesn't even recognize his name.

When Dickerson came into the league Walter had Jim McMahon (who wasn't completely fucking terrible), Dickerson had Vince Ferragamo, Jeff Kemp, Dieter Brock, Steve Dils, Steve Bartkowski and the rookie Jim Everett in his first four seasons when he lead the NFL in rushing three times. His best WR? Henry Ellard. I mean this was just a horrible horrible offense. Dickerson was traded to the Colts where he again lead the NFL in rushing once with a shitty Chris Chandler, and WR Bill Brooks was the next best weapon, if you could call him a weapon. This was a horrid offense as well.

So come on man, they were all on shitty teams.

It's not about who had the more decent players, it's the simple fact that all three were literally the ONLY offensive weapon that mattered on their teams, for nearly their entire careers. And yet Walter only lead the league in rushing once. Still, Walter had great consistency, durability, drive, longevity, and was overall throughout his career an awesome running back for the better part of 13 years.

I don't want to lock horns on this subject, as I consider Walter the second best RB of all time. I'm bolding this because I want you to know, I think the world of Walter Payton, so this is not a hate rant. He was a great running back. But there were players who had higher peeks during his career, in relatively the same situations. Where as nobody could hold a candle to Jim Brown at any point of his career.

 

[Aso]

Earl Campbell and Eric Dickerson played with some good players in their time. Definitely can't say they played with shit around them.

Earl Campbell played with Dan Pastorini... by the time Ken Stabler was on the Oilers he was a piece of shit.

I don't think you understand how good some of those players actually were...

 

[Shayn•Da•Pain]

Earl Campbell and Eric Dickerson played with some good players in their time. Definitely can't say they played with shit around them. Shayn says: Name names. Because I think they played with shit almost every year, especially during their prime.

Earl Campbell played with Dan Pastorini... by the time Ken Stabler was on the Oilers he was a piece of shit.

I don't think you understand how good some of those players actually were..
Shayn says: Wait, are you saying Dan Pastorini was good? I just want to get that clear before we move on.

 

Pastorini: 50.9% completion, 103 career TDs, 161 Career INT, best season=2473 yards 16 td 17 int 54.1% Good? :nope:

 

[FirstTimer]

No. I'm not this dense obviously, but you're acting rather ignorant by drawing this comparison out. It's either you have no idea what you're talking about, or you're trolling.

No, I'm just pointing out you're being a retard.

I didn't imply Dickerson and Campbell were playing with HOFers All Pro's or even Pro Bowlers. What I did say is they ahd better offensive players around them than Payton did until Payton's 8th or 9th season.

Get it yet?

But so was Earl Campbell and Eric Dickerson.

Both of whom for as "shitty" as the offenses were aroudn them I would have traded either of their talent for what ayton had for the first 8-9 seasons of his career. Easily. Without a doubt.

Your statement that the box was stacked against Walter in ways that other runners (Earl & Eric) didn't see, is ignorant if not asinine.

It's actually not.

. Gifford fucking Nielson man.

Yeah, I can name the shitty QB's and WR's and OL that Payton played with as well. Don't be a clown. Some of those houston teams were seen as some of the better squads to not make the Super Bowl because they couldn't get past the Steelers. The Bears as a team were awful until Ditka showed up in 1982..and started getting better.

When Dickerson came into the league Walter had Jim McMahon (who wasn't completely fucking terrible)

This is fucking retarded. Obviously late in Payton's career he had betetr players but for the bulk of it Dickerson and Campbell had better players..which isn't saying much...but it's still better than what Payton had. Quit being obtuse. You know the point. You're being intentionally stupid right now.

 

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

Yeah some of y'all are selling Brown short judging his feats soley based on his size...if size was the only thing that mattered Brandon Jacobs would be the best back in the NFL....he afterall like Brown, is bigger than anybody else and certainily the biggest back the NFL has ever seen.....no, talent, heart and a whole bunch of other intangibles are also what makes up a great back

Was Wilt Chamberlain any less great because he towered over everyone?

Also we're all going off clips and lore nobody here besides Jeffx has seen Brown play in person lol

He was a next level athlete in an era when next level athletes were few and far in between. To the Browns credit, they weren't dumb, they ran the fuck out of that beast...the only guy that ran the rock close to Brown's sheer volume of carries to compare was Jim Taylor for a portion of Brown's career.

Today, he'd be a next level athlete in an era with nothing but next level athletes.

Different ball games, my man.

 

[DJ Rhude]

He was a next level athlete in an era when next level athletes were few and far in between.

Today, he'd be a next level athlete in an era with nothing but next level athletes.

Different ball games, my man.

I understand that but we're talking greatest back of all time......it's not fair to judge Brown in this era IMO....that devalues the poll if we start comparing athletes across time because like you said and I agree 100%, totally different ball games

For the sake of argument what if we put Jacobs back in Brown's era, you think he'd be just as good as Brown? I don't think any of us could accurately answer that, it's too subjective

When I voted, I was judging Brown solely off his feats and not how he would do in this time

If comparing athletes from different eras was the standard then we would require all types of asteriks next to records.....

 

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

I understand that but we're talking greatest back of all time......it's not fair to judge Brown in this era IMO....that devalues the poll if we start comparing athletes across time because like you said and I agree 100%, totally different ball games

For the sake of argument what if we put Jacobs back in Brown's era, you think he'd be just as good as Brown? I don't think any of us could accurately answer that, it's too subjective

When I voted, I was judging Brown solely off his feats and not how he would do in this time

If comparing athletes from different eras was the standard then we would require all types of asteriks next to records.....

If you put a player like Brandon Jacobs in Jim Brown's era, he's probably a very successful back.

That isn't devaluing Brown, but its just stating, the players of this era are on another level athletically. Brown is a player that is of this era physically and he's in discussion if not universally accepted that he's the GOAT back. So, throw a back like Jacobs or Jackson or Taylor or another equal sized back for comparisons sake and you might be talking about them as GOAT because they are physically just bigger, faster, stronger than everyone else...and add to that, they can play.

Put it this way, Brandon Jacobs would be as big as some of the biggest d-linemen...Gene Lipscomb and Rosey Grier have beat out marginally. He hulks over Gino Marchetti.

 

[Aso]

 

Pastorini: 50.9% completion, 103 career TDs, 161 Career INT, best season=2473 yards 16 td 17 int 54.1% Good? :nope:

You're not taking into account the era. Stats aren't what they used to be. In todays NFL an 85 QB rating is considered an average starting QB. In 1978 that led the league.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1978/passing.htm

I mean, he was #11 in the league in passer rating in 1978. Not too shabby.

 

[uncle whiskers]

Smith doesn't belong on this list at all. Anyway, my vote is for Brown.

 

[Shayn•Da•Pain]

You're not taking into account the era. Stats aren't what they used to be. In todays NFL an 85 QB rating is considered an average starting QB. In 1978 that led the league.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1978/passing.htm

I mean, he was #11 in the league in passer rating in 1978. Not too shabby.

HAHAHA passer rating. You serious bra?

 

[Aso]

HAHAHA passer rating. You serious bra?

Now you're just being dumb. Ok, how about this:

14 in completion %
15 in Y/A
10 in TD %
12 in INT %
1 in Sack % (he avoided sacks/got rid of the ball quicker than any other QB)
He had 6 4QC/GW drives in that year alone

Again, he wasn't that bad at all. He wasn't a great QB but he had a pretty good year in 78 and he made the plays more often than not, when they needed to be made. He had 2 4QC and 4 GW drives in 79.

 

[Rayman]

:megatroll:

 

[krulmichael]

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

:smugrussell: