Author Topic: NFL Rushing Attack..Who best running back..ever? (Read 28656 times)

Irongrip400 · « **Reply #100 on:** December 30, 2012, 04:54:15 PM »

Adrian Peterson almost had it. It must sting to get that close and not have any control over it. I think he will be the best when all is said and done.

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #101 on:** January 01, 2013, 05:50:16 AM »

Quote from: Irongrip400 on December 30, 2012, 04:54:15 PM

Adrian Peterson almost had it. It must sting to get that close and not have any control over it. I think he will be the best when all is said and done.

He's a freak for sure. To be challenging the running record in a year people were unsure he could even come back from an acl tear? Holy fucking shit is all I can say. Injury wise, same thing goes for Peyton Manning. A whole year off, multiple surgeries and this is what he does his first year back? fucking wow.

Oldschool Flip · « **Reply #102 on:** January 26, 2013, 03:35:53 PM »

I personally know Rob Brown (starting DE for Packers from 82-92) and when I asked him how many times he personally tackled (or even assisted in tackling) Barry Sanders, he said ZERO. I asked how many times he touched him, he said once when he grabbed for his jersey.
He stated that Sanders was so small and fast, it was very hard trying to square up to tackle him. IMO, that says something because 10 years is a long time to play against a team 20 times and only touch the guy once.

Option D · « **Reply #103 on:** January 28, 2013, 08:27:17 AM »

Quote from: vascsurgeon on December 01, 2012, 12:03:39 PM

1- Jim Brown
2- Jim Brown
3- All of the above.

Football wasn't even his best sport yet he was the best who ever played.

thank you..

Jim Brown was before his time

UPINTHEMGUTS · « **Reply #104 on:** January 28, 2013, 11:05:41 AM »

Brown wouldn't be as dominant in today's NFL. Jim Brown was the best of his ERA, not of all time.

The athletes today are way faster, stronger, and more intelligent then when Jim Brown played.

Option D · « **Reply #105 on:** January 28, 2013, 12:16:16 PM »

Quote from: UPINTHEMGUTS on January 28, 2013, 11:05:41 AM

Brown wouldn't be as dominant in today's NFL. Jim Brown was the best of his ERA, not of all time.

The athletes today are way faster, stronger, and more intelligent then when Jim Brown played.

brown was big and fast for his and our time..
6'2 232 is a big back right now

Lynch is 5'11 215 and runs tough

Do the math

Mr Nobody · « **Reply #106 on:** January 29, 2013, 06:56:29 PM »

Hershel Walker

vascsurgeon · « **Reply #107 on:** January 30, 2013, 10:24:32 AM »

Quote from: UPINTHEMGUTS on January 28, 2013, 11:05:41 AM

Brown wouldn't be as dominant in today's NFL. Jim Brown was the best of his ERA, not of all time.

The athletes today are way faster, stronger, and more intelligent then when Jim Brown played.

How much better would he be with todays training methods?
How long could he have played?
One will never know, we all have our opinion I guess.

UPINTHEMGUTS · « **Reply #108 on:** January 30, 2013, 12:53:02 PM »

Quote from: Option D on January 28, 2013, 12:16:16 PM

brown was big and fast for his and our time..
6'2 232 is a big back right now

Lynch is 5'11 215 and runs tough

Do the math

The athletes today are still bigger and stronger. Brown is not as fast as the present day NFL rb's on average. Brown would still likely be good, but not dominant.

Not trying to be a hater....but the encouragment and constant search for bigger, faster, stronger players every year accelerates the physical evolution process.

vascsurgeon · « **Reply #109 on:** January 30, 2013, 01:12:49 PM »

Quote from: UPINTHEMGUTS on January 30, 2013, 12:53:02 PM

The athletes today are still bigger and stronger. Brown is not as fast as the present day NFL rb's on average. Brown would still likely be good, but not dominant.
[/quote

Did you ever see him play?
These debates are fun, he played over 50 yrs ago and he is still in the conversation, thats says it all.
Would Payton, Simpson, Dickerson,Sayers,Harris be as dominant? How about Earl Campbell. Ever hear of Marion Motley. I am not old enough to have seen Motley but have heard plenty, check out his stats, very impressive.

UPINTHEMGUTS · « **Reply #110 on:** January 30, 2013, 01:33:59 PM »

Quote from: vascsurgeon on January 30, 2013, 01:12:49 PM

Quote from: UPINTHEMGUTS on January 30, 2013, 12:53:02 PM
The athletes today are still bigger and stronger. Brown is not as fast as the present day NFL rb's on average. Brown would still likely be good, but not dominant.
[/quote

Did you ever see him play?
These debates are fun, he played over 50 yrs ago and he is still in the conversation, thats says it all.
Would Payton, Simpson, Dickerson,Sayers,Harris be as dominant? How about Earl Campbell. Ever hear of Marion Motley. I am not old enough to have seen Motley but have heard plenty, check out his stats, very impressive.

Yeah I saw Jim Brown play.......mainly against inferior competition...he was juking and plowing over mostly shay whiteys.

vascsurgeon · « **Reply #111 on:** January 31, 2013, 08:24:27 AM »

Quote from: UPINTHEMGUTS on January 30, 2013, 01:33:59 PM

Yeah I saw Jim Brown play.......mainly against inferior competition...he was juking and plowing over mostly shay whiteys.

Brilliant

UPINTHEMGUTS · « **Reply #112 on:** January 31, 2013, 09:50:49 AM »

Quote from: vascsurgeon on January 31, 2013, 08:24:27 AM

Brilliant

Just stating the facts dude...

Option D · « **Reply #113 on:** January 31, 2013, 10:29:22 AM »

Quote from: UPINTHEMGUTS on January 31, 2013, 09:50:49 AM

Just stating the facts dude...

You might have a point. I think its more fair to rate players by era.. Because we will keep running into this same issue when crossing eras

vascsurgeon · « **Reply #114 on:** January 31, 2013, 10:49:52 AM »

Quote from: Option D on January 31, 2013, 10:29:22 AM

You might have a point. I think its more fair to rate players by era.. Because we will keep running into this same issue when crossing eras

True, but, some athletes transcend their era, Brown, Ruth, Ali there are many.

UPINTHEMGUTS · « **Reply #115 on:** January 31, 2013, 11:06:12 AM »

Quote from: Option D on January 31, 2013, 10:29:22 AM

You might have a point. I think its more fair to rate players by era.. Because we will keep running into this same issue when crossing eras

I totally agree. You should always rate NFL players by era. Jim was king of the mountain during his time. But best all time? I don't think that's fair to say given the way the game and its players have evolved.

vascsurgeon · « **Reply #116 on:** January 31, 2013, 02:43:35 PM »

Quote from: UPINTHEMGUTS on January 31, 2013, 11:06:12 AM

I totally agree. You should always rate NFL players by era. Jim was king of the mountain during his time. But best all time? I don't think that's fair to say given the way the game and its players have evolved.

So big Ben is better than Bradshaw?
Aikman was better than Stabauch?
Kapernick(spelling) is better than Young and Montana?

I think Montana was better than all but maybe Unitas, Stabauch was much better than Aikman and Bradshaw was better than Ben.

Eras have something to do with the equation but not very much with the best players.

UPINTHEMGUTS · « **Reply #117 on:** February 01, 2013, 08:00:37 AM »

Quote from: vascsurgeon on January 31, 2013, 02:43:35 PM

So big Ben is better than Bradshaw?
Aikman was better than Stabauch?
Kapernick(spelling) is better than Young and Montana?
I think Montana was better than all but maybe Unitas, Stabauch was much better than Aikman and Bradshaw was better than Ben.

Eras have something to do with the equation but not very much with the best players.

Yes.
Yes.
Fuck no. But time will tell.

vascsurgeon · « **Reply #118 on:** February 01, 2013, 11:11:32 AM »

Quote from: UPINTHEMGUTS on February 01, 2013, 08:00:37 AM

Yes.
Yes.
Fuck no. But time will tell.

Wrong
Wrong
Never

tu_holmes · « **Reply #119 on:** February 01, 2013, 11:23:22 AM »

Quote from: UPINTHEMGUTS on February 01, 2013, 08:00:37 AM

Yes.
Yes.
Fuck no. But time will tell.

I think this post may highlight some insanity on your part.

Football is not a game of "Eras"... Players cycle in and out over time... They span decades at times.

Sure... comparing today against the 50s may be silly, but today against the 80s seems fair enough.

UPINTHEMGUTS · « **Reply #120 on:** February 01, 2013, 11:28:47 AM »

Quote from: vascsurgeon on February 01, 2013, 11:11:32 AM

Wrong
Wrong
Never

I disagree
I disagree
we agree

Option D · « **Reply #121 on:** February 01, 2013, 01:14:06 PM »

Quote from: vascsurgeon on January 31, 2013, 02:43:35 PM

So big Ben is better than Bradshaw?
Aikman was better than Stabauch?
Kapernick(spelling) is better than Young and Montana?

I think Montana was better than all but maybe Unitas, Stabauch was much better than Aikman and Bradshaw was better than Ben.

Eras have something to do with the equation but not very much with the best players.

Yes
Yes
Fuck no