The Top 100 Greatest NFL Players.

[Warner2BruceTD]

I just never, ever, ever hear anything about him. I know he had an amazing 1984 and wasn't as great after.

Also, is it interesting to anyone else that in both 1984 and 2009 we had such stupendous seasons by QBs and RBs? Not that everyone was so great in 1984 or 2009, but...

Marino set the passing yards and TDs record in 1984 and Dickerson set the rushing record.

And then in 2009, Brees had a great season (not as good as 2008, admittedly... but Matt Schaub and Peyton Manning, amongst others, also had great seasons) and Chris Johnson became CJ2K.

Dickerson led the NFL in rushing twice after 1984, including a 1800+ yard season in 1986. He probably would have led the league a third time in 1987 if not for being traded mid season and being eased into the Colts lineup. He laso led the league in yards from scrimmage twice, went to three Pro Bowls, and was a two time All Pro.

As for Brees, his 2009 blew away his 2008. 2008 Drew Brees was one of the most overated seasons ever. He choked away multiple games with AWFUL fourth quarters, and probably cost the Saints a playoff spot.

 

[Fox1994]

Dickerson led the NFL in rushing twice after 1984, including a 1800+ yard season in 1986. He probably would have led the league a third time in 1987 if not for being traded mid season and being eased into the Colts lineup. He laso led the league in yards from scrimmage twice, went to three Pro Bowls, and was a two time All Pro.

He's clearly a great. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve praise. He clearly does. I just never hear about him. That's apparently a damned shame, because before you said all that, I never knew any of it. :2thumbs:

As for Brees, his 2009 blew away his 2008. 2008 Drew Brees was one of the most overated seasons ever. He choked away multiple games with AWFUL fourth quarters, and probably cost the Saints a playoff spot.

I agree. But if all you ever saw were the passing numbers, you might think differently.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Dickerson led the NFL in rushing twice after 1984, including a 1800+ yard season in 1986. He probably would have led the league a third time in 1987 if not for being traded mid season and being eased into the Colts lineup. He laso led the league in yards from scrimmage twice, went to three Pro Bowls, and was a two time All Pro.

As for Brees, his 2009 blew away his 2008. 2008 Drew Brees was one of the most overated seasons ever. He choked away multiple games with AWFUL fourth quarters, and probably cost the Saints a playoff spot.

After '84.

In total, he was a 5 time All Pro and 6 time Pro Bowler.

 

[dave]

Part 1- Numbers (100-91)
http://justin.tv/stealthshotdotnet5/b/269502254
Part 2- Numbers (90-81)
http://justin.tv/stealthshotdotnet5/b/269673847
Part 3- Numbers (80-71)
http://justin.tv/stealthshotdotnet5/b/270241897
Part 4- Numbers (70-61)
http://justin.tv/stealthshotdotnet5/b/270680152
Part 5- Numbers (60-51)
http://justin.tv/stealthshotdotnet5/b/271120159

Thank you for posting this.
I knew the series was on, I just haven't had a chance to watch any of it.
Your links are priceless.

If I could thank you 10 times in 1 post, I would.

 

[citizenerased]

He's clearly a great. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve praise. He clearly does. I just never hear about him. That's apparently a damned shame, because before you said all that, I never knew any of it. :2thumbs:



I agree. But if all you ever saw were the passing numbers, you might think differently.

Really?

All 2008 has is a whole lot of garbage yards and pass attempts.

2009 Brees had the same amount of touchdowns on 121 less attempts (and he sat the entire final game as well), a higher YPA, the highest completion percentage in NFL history and a 13.4 increase in QB Rating from 2008.

 

[Fox1994]

Check out his first 8 seasons

He averaged over 1500 yards over that span, which is just unheard of.

After '84.

In total, he was a 5 time All Pro and 6 time Pro Bowler.

Like I said, he's clearly deserving of praise, but until this moment I've never heard him get enough. That's all I'm saying.

Really?

All 2008 has is a whole lot of garbage yards and pass attempts.

2009 Brees had the same amount of touchdowns on 121 less attempts (and he sat the entire final game as well), a higher YPA, the highest completion percentage in NFL history and a 13.4 increase in QB Rating from 2008.

No doubt. More recently it's become an inflation game.

 

[Senser81]

It's all well and good thinking that today's superior athletes would rip up the old game but remember that they would have to try and maintain that athleticism on a diet of beer and cigarettes and while working a regular job for seven months of the year.

Not only are training habits different, but the game itself is different. You had different rules, different strategies, different equipment, different stadiums. Put Randy Moss in the 1960's, and he'd get shoved around the field like a pinball because the pass interference rules were much different. Speed was important, but you also had to be tough. Its not a coincidence that the two best WRs of the 1960's were actually running backs in college (Paul Warfield & Lance Alworth). It was a much different game.

 

[Senser81]

Bart Starr; 104.8 postseason passer rating, 9-1 in playoffs, 5-0 in Championship Games

Roger Staubach; 76.0 postseason passer rating, 12-7 playoffs, 2-2 in Championship games

Terry Bradshaw; 83.0 postseason passer rating, 14-5 playoff record, 4-0 in Championship games

Don't see how/why Staubach, Bradshaw > Starr, however you want to cut it.

I think Staubach and Starr are clearly better than Bradshaw. I think that people could make the case that Staubach was the best QB of the 1970's, but I think its more difficult to make the case that Starr was the best QB of the 1960's (most people would think Unitas over Starr). If I were making a list, I would have Starr over Staubach, but I wouldn't take issue if someone had those rankings reversed.

 

[FirstTimer]

Didn't like Staubach over Starr... REALLY don't like Bradshaw over Starr.

I think Staubach and Starr are clearly better than Bradshaw. I think that people could make the case that Staubach was the best QB of the 1970's, but I think its more difficult to make the case that Starr was the best QB of the 1960's (most people would think Unitas over Starr). If I were making a list, I would have Starr over Staubach, but I wouldn't take issue if someone had those rankings reversed.

These two.

Bradshaw and Namath are the two most overrated QB's of all-time

 

[relaxedanderson]

Not only are training habits different, but the game itself is different. You had different rules, different strategies, different equipment, different stadiums. Put Randy Moss in the 1960's, and he'd get shoved around the field like a pinball because the pass interference rules were much different. Speed was important, but you also had to be tough. Its not a coincidence that the two best WRs of the 1960's were actually running backs in college (Paul Warfield & Lance Alworth). It was a much different game.

True.

Also I don't think the whining and crying of some of the pampered modern players would go down too well in the hairy-backed, raw meat-eating atmosphere of the old locker rooms either.

Different times, different game.

 

[Fox1994]

These two.

Bradshaw and Namath are the two most overrated QB's of all-time

:yep: Though I do think it's somewhat accepted that Bradshaw was just the quarterback on a winning team... Like Trent Dilfer 2000 for a whole career.

And I think people accept that Namath wasn't that great statistically, but his legacy is built from the audacity of his prediction against the Colts.

 

[StealthShot]

Update forget to DVR it, JTV banned my other channel so all the old ones are gone only have part 6 now.

 

[Shayn•Da•Pain]

These two.

Bradshaw and Namath are the two most overrated QB's of all-time

Agreed, though you have to admit they are both worthy of their HOF status.

I just have to ask you though for some perspective. I'd just like to know how/where you rate these two QB's.

 

[FirstTimer]

Agreed, though you have to admit they are both worthy of their HOF status.

I just have to ask you though for some perspective. I'd just like to know how/where you rate these two QB's.

Not in the Top 10 all time. That's for sure.

 

[Shayn•Da•Pain]

Not in the Top 10 all time. That's for sure.

Of course not. It's been a long long time since I ever heard somebody say either of them were top 10.

Namath isn't even top 30 IMO. Bradshaw was obviously better and I used to think of him as top 10. I'm not sure if it was my homerism which I honestly try not to feed into or the emergence of so many great QB's over the last few decades that push him further and further down.

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

Staubach/Namath/Bradshaw

I dont see how any of these guys are better than Tarkenton and some others without the postseason. Thats where they all made there names and reps. I dont think any of them are overrated. Bradshaw and Staubach particularly were some tough as balls guys who were bonafide leaders back when QBs were asked to be genuine captains.


Tomlinson/Faulk

Faulk-8/10 times I put Faulk at my no.5 all time. Outside of Randy Moss he's the single best pure weapon Ive seen on a football field. 90% of backs run rinky dink routes designed for backs and are rarely asked to adjust. Faulk consistently ran option routes both out of the backfield and lined up wide. He wasnt matched up against slow linebackers he was matched up against speed OLBers and Nickel backs. By no means do I think Payton/OJ/Sayers couldnt have been plugged in and done the same. But Faulk was asked to do it and did it..spectacularly. He wasnt just some numbers back padding his stats on a bad team.((which btw passes the prerequisite coulda woulda shoulda garbage)). He was part of the greatest offense of his era and part of an all time team.
Please remember his early years were spent with Emmitt/Barry taking shifts with the rushing title. Thurman and Watters were on the premiere teams and were getting the pub as all purpose guys. Yet even with that the question every off season was can Faulk crack 2000 ? Is this guy the next Dickerson ? For a fuckin Colt to get pub with the gluttony of backs already in the spotlight is impressive.
Physically his first step is as quick as anyones Ive ever seen. He got to top speed quicker than anyone outside of Sayers.

Tomlinson-
I dont see what you guys are seeing. Sorry. I cant put him over Faulk. Tomlinson was outshined by Alexander , Holmes , and Jamal Lewis. He had one super season. The rest there was always another back as comparable. He was an emmitt clone physically and style wise. Just half a step slower , almost as good in short yardage, but in the playoffs ....Tomlinson was a bum. Outside of Barry I cant name another Top RB do so well in the regular season and completely let his team down in the playoffs. The most stark image of Tomlinson in a big game is him on the bench or on the sideline.

I dont judge guys attitude unless it has a clear help/hurt effect on the field. Tomlinson was a workehorse and a baby. Faulk was a workhorse and field general.

How anyone ranks LT ahead of Faulk is beyond me.


Dickerson--
What an enigma. Only guy you can rank from 2-10 and make an equal argument as to why he should/shouldnt be there. The yardage he put up is ridiculous. Under appreciated.



Glad to see Mackey over TG.

When Computer AIs take over the world. When they play madden with lab created cloned humans. When they decide to play "all time NFL vs!".
Who the fuck is going to beat the Pittsburgh Steelers ?
How would anyone pass on Mel Blount and Rod Woodson ?

 

[Shayn•Da•Pain]

Staubach/Namath/Bradshaw

I dont see how any of these guys are better than Tarkenton and some others without the postseason. Thats where they all made there names and reps. I dont think any of them are overrated. Bradshaw and Staubach particularly were some tough as balls guys who were bonafide leaders back when QBs were asked to be genuine captains.

I agree with what I think you're saying. That Tark wasn't as good as these guys. Agreed.

Moving on, the thing I think most people don't understand about Bradshaw is how brilliant he was as a tactician. I love how Miller put it, "He's dumb like a fox." and "He is smarter than a married pimp." He plays dumb when he's really not, even today. The thing about that is he called his own plays on offense and won championships doing it. Bradshaw hat total control over the offense, and was humble enough to ride his horses running the ball and win when most QB's in that position would have aired it out for stats.

Tomlinson/Faulk

Faulk-8/10 times I put Faulk at my no.5 all time. Outside of Randy Moss he's the single best pure weapon Ive seen on a football field. 90% of backs run rinky dink routes designed for backs and are rarely asked to adjust. Faulk consistently ran option routes both out of the backfield and lined up wide. He wasnt matched up against slow linebackers he was matched up against speed OLBers and Nickel backs. By no means do I think Payton/OJ/Sayers couldnt have been plugged in and done the same. But Faulk was asked to do it and did it..spectacularly. He wasnt just some numbers back padding his stats on a bad team.((which btw passes the prerequisite coulda woulda shoulda garbage)). He was part of the greatest offense of his era and part of an all time team.
Please remember his early years were spent with Emmitt/Barry taking shifts with the rushing title. Thurman and Watters were on the premiere teams and were getting the pub as all purpose guys. Yet even with that the question every off season was can Faulk crack 2000 ? Is this guy the next Dickerson ? For a fuckin Colt to get pub with the gluttony of backs already in the spotlight is impressive.
Physically his first step is as quick as anyones Ive ever seen. He got to top speed quicker than anyone outside of Sayers.

Barry Sanders had a quicker first step. Some others off the top of my head, Bo Jackson, Chris Johnson, Marcus Allen, Jamaal Charles, Gale Sayers, Walter Payton, hell I even think Ricky Waters was as quick. Maybe you remember him being quick because he played his entire career for teams indoors and on turf. He was quick to be sure, but not as quick as you make him out to be...2nd quickest RB of all time? No way.

What I'll always remember about Faulk is that he wasn't as fast or quick as say Barry Sanders, but he was the smartest RB alive, ran the best routes, had the best hands, superior vision and patients running the ball. Most of his best runs were not made because of his quick step, most of his best runs were made through vision and patients, hitting the hole at the right time and bursting up field. He was as good as any RB in open field, which is why he was so great in the rams offense because teams couldn't set 8 in the box on them, so he got plenty of room to move.

Tomlinson-
I dont see what you guys are seeing. Sorry. I cant put him over Faulk. Tomlinson was outshined by Alexander , Holmes , and Jamal Lewis. He had one super season. The rest there was always another back as comparable. He was an emmitt clone physically and style wise. Just half a step slower , almost as good in short yardage, but in the playoffs ....Tomlinson was a bum. Outside of Barry I cant name another Top RB do so well in the regular season and completely let his team down in the playoffs. The most stark image of Tomlinson in a big game is him on the bench or on the sideline.

I dont judge guys attitude unless it has a clear help/hurt effect on the field. Tomlinson was a workehorse and a baby. Faulk was a workhorse and field general.

How anyone ranks LT ahead of Faulk is beyond me.

I don't like your comparisons of players. Tomlinson was obviously faster than Emmitt Smith. Tomlinson set a 4.38 40 at the combine. Smith ran 4.56 at his combine and 4.6 and 4.7 at his pro-day workout. Smith was considered slow for a RB. And Tomlinson had more than just one great season. 8 strait 1k seasons. 1815, 1683, 1645, 1474, 1462, 1335, 1236, and 1110 yds. He's never had fewer than 10 TDs in a season, and he's 2nd all-time in rushing touchdowns. He's been consistently good is all I'm saying.

But I still have to agree with you that Faulk was better than Tomlinson. IMO anyhow.

Dickerson--
What an enigma. Only guy you can rank from 2-10 and make an equal argument as to why he should/shouldnt be there. The yardage he put up is ridiculous. Under appreciated.

Dickerson was sick. He had breakaway speed and was hard to wrap up. He got the yardage because in the 4 seasons he had amazing numbers he averaged 390 carries per year. He didn't score nearly as often as Tomlinson. Tomlinson has only 27 fumbles so far in 2936 carries while Dickerson had 78 fumbled on 2996 carries in his career. That's a security issue that I just don't like. But Dickerson is a top 10 RB IMO. Somewhere between 4-10 I think.

When Computer AIs take over the world. When they play madden with lab created cloned humans. When they decide to play "all time NFL vs!".
Who the fuck is going to beat the Pittsburgh Steelers ?
How would anyone pass on Mel Blount and Rod Woodson ?

I thank you for this alone. Yeah who the fuck is going to beat them Steelers? :saythat:

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

Barry Sanders had a quicker first step. Some others off the top of my head, Bo Jackson, Chris Johnson, Marcus Allen, Jamaal Charles, Gale Sayers, Walter Payton, hell I even think Ricky Waters was as quick. Maybe you remember him being quick because he played his entire career for teams indoors and on turf. He was quick to be sure, but not as quick as you make him out to be...2nd quickest RB of all time? No way.

I said his first step.
Barrys ability to go from 60-0 was more impressive than his ability to from 0-60. Faulks first step was insane.
Sayers and OJ are comparable not the others.

What I'll always remember about Faulk is that he wasn't as fast or quick as say Barry Sanders, but he was the smartest RB alive, ran the best routes, had the best hands, superior vision and patients running the ball. Most of his best runs were not made because of his quick step, most of his best runs were made through vision and patients, hitting the hole at the right time and bursting up field. He was as good as any RB in open field, which is why he was so great in the rams offense because teams couldn't set 8 in the box on them, so he got plenty of room to move.

Faulk was faster than Barry. Barrys movement and agility were unparalleled but his straight line speed isnt GOAT.
Faulk ,Dickerson, Dorsett ,Johnson, Simpson and others were all faster. Again his ability to stop on a dime and redirect is like 110 on a 100 scale.

I don't like your comparisons of players. Tomlinson was obviously faster than Emmitt Smith. Tomlinson set a 4.38 40 at the combine. Smith ran 4.56 at his combine and 4.6 and 4.7 at his pro-day workout. Smith was considered slow for a RB. And Tomlinson had more than just one great season. 8 strait 1k seasons. 1815, 1683, 1645, 1474, 1462, 1335, 1236, and 1110 yds. He's never had fewer than 10 TDs in a season, and he's 2nd all-time in rushing touchdowns. He's been consistently good is all I'm saying.

lol Jerry Rice ran a 4.7 dont see your point.
Emmitt was quicker period. You can throw 40 times out all you want but Emmitt in a box was quicker in the box by a good margin.

His numbers simply did not stand out against his peers.
3 guys broke TD records , guys like Ricky W , Holmes ,Martin and others all had 16-1800 yard type seasons.


Its like bragging about a 100 yard receptions or 4000 yard passer. Its takes alot more to be special. LT had one special season and a history of total crap off season play.

I give him credit for the TDs. He faced more 8 man fronts in the redzone than the others and didnt benefit from a spread offense until later in his career. I just think theres a bigger gap than 1. Im not sure LTs in my top 10. Faulk is in my top 5-6.

Dickerson was sick. He had breakaway speed and was hard to wrap up. He got the yardage because in the 4 seasons he had amazing numbers he averaged 390 carries per year. He didn't score nearly as often as Tomlinson. Tomlinson has only 27 fumbles so far in 2936 carries while Dickerson had 78 fumbled on 2996 carries in his career. That's a security issue that I just don't like. But Dickerson is a top 10 RB IMO. Somewhere between 4-10 I think.

Fumbles , attitude , and mid-late career issues seem to come up more often than not when talking Dickerson.
Man what a runner though.

 

[trojan49er]

ya, Lewis, Holmes, Martin, Alexander, etc had similar seasons...for one or two years, Tomlinson has been the most consistently great back in the league over the course of his career. Hes also a much better receiver than any of the RBs mentioned above. His combination of breakaway speed and power is pretty much unmatched over the course of his career. There are guys that are faster, there are guys that are stronger, but I cant really think of anyone that is both with the exception of maybe Adrian Peterson who isnt nearly as complete a back, nor does he protect the ball anywhere near as well as Tomlinson.

 

[Shayn•Da•Pain]

I said his first step.
Barrys ability to go from 60-0 was more impressive than his ability to from 0-60. Faulks first step was insane.
Sayers and OJ are comparable not the others.

I saw what you wrote, I just disagree. Faulk was very quick sure but he wasn't the quickest RB in the league. Barry Sanders, Ricky Waters, and Warrick Dunn were all quicker than Faulk.

Again Faulk looked real quick because he played on turf most of his career, on grass he was clearly not as quick. Everybody looks quicker on turf. Saying a pig looks good in a dress doesn't make it so.

Faulk was faster than Barry. Barrys movement and agility were unparalleled but his straight line speed isnt GOAT.
Faulk ,Dickerson, Dorsett ,Johnson, Simpson and others were all faster. Again his ability to stop on a dime and redirect is like 110 on a 100 scale.

HAHAHA you just said Faulk was faster than Barry Sanders. What a joke. I just watched a youtube video of Marshall Faulk where Rod Woodson said, and I quote "Everybody said Marshall didn't have the speed but he made a lot of big plays and you never really seen him get chased down from the backside." Everybody in the world knows Faulk wasn't GOAT fast. Here's the video of Marshall Faulk, watch from :58 seconds if you want to hear the quote.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhD9ihzQU3U[/ame]

lol Jerry Rice ran a 4.7 dont see your point.
Emmitt was quicker period. You can throw 40 times out all you want but Emmitt in a box was quicker in the box by a good margin.

That's just completely untrue. I've seen Emmitt Smith run more than any other RB and he wasn't as quick as you say, and he damn sure wasn't a "good margin" quicker than Tomlinson. Tomlinson at one time had an elite explosive first step to the line of scrimmage.

His numbers simply did not stand out against his peers.
3 guys broke TD records , guys like Ricky W , Holmes ,Martin and others all had 16-1800 yard type seasons.

'01 - 9th with 1236 yds *rookie
'02 - 2nd with 1683 yds
'03 - 3rd with 1645 yds
'04 - 7th with 1335 yds *missed one game
'05 - 6th with 1458 yds
'06 - 1st with 1815 yds
'07 - 1st with 1474 yds
'08 - 10th with 1110 yds
'09 - fell completely off...
'10 - averaging 6.1 ypc with the Jets.

He stacked up well, never leaving the top 10 in rushing total until last year. This season he looks to be back on track though.

Its like bragging about a 100 yard receptions or 4000 yard passer. Its takes alot more to be special. LT had one special season and a history of total crap off season play.

I don't discount Tomlinson for his crap off season play. "Marty Ball" was the most predictable offensive strategy in the history of the NFL yet his first playoff game was ok against the leagues #5 D in the Jets and the next season he had 123 yards rushing 2 TDs, and another 64 receiving playing for Marty. They still lost however. From then on Tomlinson played with Norv Turner who has no clue how to run the ball. No wonder Tomlinson only averaged 9 carries per playoff game under Norv. Because Norv has never been able to run the football. It's no wonder that Tomlinson had 1800 yards in his last year with Marty, and steady declined in productivity under Norv. And now with a coach who actually knows how to run the ball LT is averaging 6.1 per carry and is 5th in rushing yards so far this season. Hell Barry Sanders had shit post season success as well. Sometimes it's the coaches strategy and/or player personnel around him not the player.

I give him credit for the TDs. He faced more 8 man fronts in the redzone than the others and didnt benefit from a spread offense until later in his career. I just think theres a bigger gap than 1. Im not sure LTs in my top 10. Faulk is in my top 5-6.

Faulk - lead the NFL in rushing zero times.
Tomlinson - twice.

Faulk - lead the NFL in all-purpose yards twice.
Tomlinson - Once.

Faulk - 12279 career rushing yards.
Tomlinson - 12831 and still playing.

Faulk - 19154 career all purpose yards
LT - 16868 and still playing.

Faulk - 136 total career TDs
LT - 156 total career TDs and still playing.

Faulk - 4.3 career ypc.
LT - 4.4

Faulk - 36 fumbles in 3603 touches
LT - 27 fumbles in 3478 touches

Faulk - 0 for 2 passing.
LT - 8 for 12, 7 tds, 143 yards. lol doesn't really matter...but he was obviously a better passer as well. Versatile yes.

It was fun but honestly it's close IMO. Tomlinson when it's all said and done I think will be better than Faulk who I would drop somewhere in the 5-9 range of alltime backs today. Who knows where LT will end up but he will most certainly be higher than Faulk on that list.