- Thread starter
- #1
Absurd voting
Jim Brown - More complete RB, more complete player, better stats, better work ethic, better attitude and had a better and more consistent ability to show up in the big games
I never saw Brown play except highlights and anyone can look good in highlights. He was, as others said, a man among boys. Very good, but he wasn't really playing against matched competition.
Barry Sanders is the best running back I have ever seen. He played on teams that had no business winning anything with crappy coaches and he could do anything they gave him the opportunity to do. Everyone wants to bring up his 13 for -1 playoff game, and if anyone cares to watch that game there's a reason why. They guy never had a fucking chance the entire game. AP and JB or any others weren't going to fair any better on that team either. The Packers Defense was all over them that day, they knew the running plays better than Detroit's offensive line did.
anyway, Sanders had the best moves i've seen from any running back. He had the quickness, the start, stop, start as fast as anyone i've seen. He had power, he could run in confined spaces, he was un-catchable in the open field. People can compare stats all day, and over a career, I think they give a decent idea, but they aren't the whole picture.
Disagree with the bold. Not sure how you came to those conclusions.
Another falsehood, he played on some decent teams. In his 10 seasons the Lions made the playoffs 5 times. They did not make the playoffs his final season but oddly enough did the year after he quit! The Lions during the Barry years were also the first team to have 2 receivers both go over 100 receptions.
This argument that Barry played on terrible teams is old and tired and simply not true.
Another falsehood, he played on some decent teams. In his 10 seasons the Lions made the playoffs 5 times. They did not make the playoffs his final season but oddly enough did the year after he quit! The Lions during the Barry years were also the first team to have 2 receivers both go over 100 receptions.
This argument that Barry played on terrible teams is old and tired and simply not true.
Yeah and in the 46 years before and after Barry they went to the playoffs another 5 times. Those 10 years they went to the playoffs 50% of the time and the surrounding 46 years since their last championship they went to the playoffs roughly 10% of the time. What could it have been about those 10 years that was responsible for them reaching the playoffs 5 times as often ? Maybe it was Scott Mitchell ? Or perhaps Wayne Fontes coaching brilliance ? Damn I'm stumped.![]()
His last season with the team they didn't make the playoffs, the first year without him they did, guess it was all him...
Not sure what those other season have to do with anything? How does the fact the team sucked in all those other years have anything to do with Sanders? Sanders get all the praise and none of the blame. I guess he's all Lions fans have so I can understand.
Another falsehood, he played on some decent teams. In his 10 seasons the Lions made the playoffs 5 times. They did not make the playoffs his final season but oddly enough did the year after he quit! The Lions during the Barry years were also the first team to have 2 receivers both go over 100 receptions.
This argument that Barry played on terrible teams is old and tired and simply not true.
as a viking fan, I assume you watched the lions a fair amount during that time, you think they were good? You think Barry benefited from those around him? or do you think he lifted those around him? I watched them. I watched them a lot and he took those teams places they shouldn't have gone. Kind of like Peterson did once with the vikings and a pretty good defense.