Who, in pro football history, could possibly have a case for being a better player than Jim Brown? I submit that if Brown had played in the Super Bowl era, there would be no question of his status as the greatest player-player, not just running back-in the history of football. He is the Babe Ruth and Michael Jordan of his respective sport. That he in fact did play before the advent of the Super Bowl does not diminish his standing as the superior and defining player of his sport. --Akronite
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Akronite)</div><div class='quotemain'>Who, in pro football history, could possibly have a case for being a better player than Jim Brown? I submit that if Brown had played in the Super Bowl era, there would be no question of his status as the greatest player-player, not just running back-in the history of football. He is the Babe Ruth and Michael Jordan of his respective sport. That he in fact did play before the advent of the Super Bowl does not diminish his standing as the superior and defining player of his sport. --Akronite</div> Easily. Walter Payton was better. A lot better. Brown ran the ball a little bit better, but Payton was a far better recever, a better blocker, a better teammate. Also, a much better man. Jim brown has done some good works in his life, but his abuse of women is deplorable. I have little respect for the man.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Akronite)</div><div class='quotemain'>Who, in pro football history, could possibly have a case for being a better player than Jim Brown? I submit that if Brown had played in the Super Bowl era, there would be no question of his status as the greatest player-player, not just running back-in the history of football. He is the Babe Ruth and Michael Jordan of his respective sport. That he in fact did play before the advent of the Super Bowl does not diminish his standing as the superior and defining player of his sport. --Akronite</div> First of all, welcome to the forums. There are some that say it is a good thing Brown played before the Super Bowl era, because he would have looked much more mortal with a higher consistent level of competition. The other semi-valid criticism is that back in his era, there were few feature backs, especially at a top level. Committees were popular, even with starts like Taylor and Horning. Additionally, there were few backs that logged more than 10-15 carries, much less the 20+ that Brown saw. That does nothing to take away from Brown though. Personally, my memory only goes back to the mid-to-late 70s, so I really saw nothing of players like Brown or Sayers (or many before them) and little of Simpson. So I can't really compare Brown against more modern backs. Against his competition, he was certainly tops.
Jim Brown was the best player ever in my opinion. He was the size of a LB but played RB with 4.4 speed and was way ahead of his time in terms of physical attributes. Brown in my opinion is probably the best ever and definately in my opinion the best RB ever ahead of Payton, Sanders, and Smith. He retired rather early and still had all the records.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (porky88)</div><div class='quotemain'>Jim Brown was the best player ever in my opinion. He was the size of a LB but played RB with 4.4 speed and was way ahead of his time in terms of physical attributes. Brown in my opinion is probably the best ever and definately in my opinion the best RB ever ahead of Payton, Sanders, and Smith. He retired rather early and still had all the records.</div> I saw jim brown run in film, he didnt run a 4.4 more like a 4.7
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (porky88)</div><div class='quotemain'>Jim Brown was the best player ever in my opinion. He was the size of a LB but played RB with 4.4 speed and was way ahead of his time in terms of physical attributes. Brown in my opinion is probably the best ever and definately in my opinion the best RB ever ahead of Payton, Sanders, and Smith. He retired rather early and still had all the records.</div> I saw jim brown run in film, he didnt run a 4.4 more like a 4.7</div> He was timed at a 4.48 40 I believe. Then again most players are slower when they put on pads and Browns pretty much just ran over everyone and never really had to use his speed to break away.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bakes781)</div><div class='quotemain'>If only we could get a time machine & have them all do a combine workout. </div> Yeah, I can just see it now. Walter Payton has a bad day, runs a 4.6 and drops to the 3rd round. Gotta love those combines.
Probably I would rank Payton in the top ten, but certainly not ahead of Barry Sanders, who was superior to Payton. Taking nothing away from Payton, of course, who was top notch. If Jim Brown plays a full career, his records would still be intact. I don't think it's a question of whether he's the best RB, but the best player of all time.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Akronite)</div><div class='quotemain'>If Jim Brown plays a full career, his records would still be intact. I don't think it's a question of whether he's the best RB, but the best player of all time.</div> True but you can argue if Barry Sanders plays a full career he breaks Jim Browns record then. If Sanders had kept on playing he may of hit 20,000 yards rushing.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (porky88)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Akronite)</div><div class='quotemain'>If Jim Brown plays a full career, his records would still be intact. I don't think it's a question of whether he's the best RB, but the best player of all time.</div> True but you can argue if Barry Sanders plays a full career he breaks Jim Browns record then. If Sanders had kept on playing he may of hit 20,000 yards rushing.</div> Both valid points, but who is to say that Browns body would have ever lasted that long? A lot of great power backs hit the wall at about 30, about where Brown left off. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Akronite)</div><div class='quotemain'>Probably I would rank Payton in the top ten, but certainly not ahead of Barry Sanders, who was superior to Payton.</div> For any one play, Sanders was more dangerous to me. His ability to break a long one always had me more scared that playing against Payton. Payton on the other hand, scared me more in controlling the game. Relying on the running game to make a good drive, I would pick Payton.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Akronite)</div><div class='quotemain'>Probably I would rank Payton in the top ten, but certainly not ahead of Barry Sanders, who was superior to Payton. Taking nothing away from Payton, of course, who was top notch. If Jim Brown plays a full career, his records would still be intact. I don't think it's a question of whether he's the best RB, but the best player of all time.</div> Barry sanders broke some records even if he didnt break peytons. most carries for a loss. So far ahead of any other back in history it is ridiculous. too much dancing for one long run. Killed more drives than any back ever. Thats why qbs were so bad in detriot. They face more 2nd and 12 and 3 and 10s than any other qb in league. Barry hurt his team by being a feature back. He would have been better used as a third down back. Of course, his catching #s were never that great, which makes me doubt him in that aspect also. The best thing about barry was he never fumbled. Wasnt a great blocker, wasnt a consistent rusher, and not a great pass catcher. He is hype with #s. Vick without having the stat he hurt team with actually showing up on sports page.
those great players, at one point in thier career they reach a platue, a level of greatest that can't really be measured, you'd have to put payton and brown together, and maybe sanders
One reason Barry had to dance so much is for the majority of his career he was on a lousy team that just gave him the ball and watched him try to win the game for them. I think Brown was one of the greats which makes me still believe that when the Packers shut him down to basically no yards in the 65 championship game(I think) was one of the most impressive games in GB history by a defence
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CanadianFavreFan)</div><div class='quotemain'>One reason Barry had to dance so much is for the majority of his career he was on a lousy team that just gave him the ball and watched him try to win the game for them. I think Brown was one of the greats which makes me still believe that when the Packers shut him down to basically no yards in the 65 championship game(I think) was one of the most impressive games in GB history by a defence</div> Thats the dumbest defense of barry sanders I have ever heard. He was on a 12-4 team that threw for 4000 yards and had a couple pro bowl o-lineman. HE STILL LEAD LEAGUE in getting caught for a loss because of all his sissy pussfaced dancing. He is NOT a feature back, he made lions money, never won games. His style loses football games. If you want to rate a loser as best back in history you are a moron
Barry was a classy guy that showed mercy to Peyton's rushing record. By the way, Barry's lifetime avg. per carry was 5.0. Walter's was 4.4. Pretty good for a ballerina.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (kcgsc)</div><div class='quotemain'>Barry was a classy guy that showed mercy to Peyton's rushing record. By the way, Barry's lifetime avg. per carry was 5.0. Walter's was 4.4. Pretty good for a ballerina.</div> Not saying it wasnt productive for hype, just not for winning
him and barry just left us wanting more..unfortuanate, as now emmit smith is widely regarded as the best ever...he has nothing on "sweetness" or barry or jb....(except the rushing title..lol)
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (kcgsc)</div><div class='quotemain'>Barry was a classy guy that showed mercy to Peyton's rushing record. By the way, Barry's lifetime avg. per carry was 5.0. Walter's was 4.4. Pretty good for a ballerina.</div> Not saying it wasnt productive for hype, just not for winning</div> 5.0 per carry isn't hype. It's production. The Lions had a lot of problems, but Barry Sanders wasn't one of them. I just hate to see a Barry vs Walter debate. They were two different backs with two distinctive styles. I loved watching both of them.
