I'll comment to your post [MENTION=555]Omen[/MENTION] because it makes a valid arguement vs. just stating someones sucks just because. I think you make a very valid point and Rice been on those horrid teams he would have been recognized as an incredible talent who probably would have done better statistically had he had decent QB's throwing to him. Seems like the same argument could be made for Larry Fitzgerald. while Warner was here, there was nobody in the NFL better than Fitz at WR. Warner retires and his skills are still there, but no longer can he be put at the top of the totem poll when you have Stafford throwing to Megatron, Schaub to Johnson, etc. So yeah, I agree with you.
Uh....no. Aikman spreading it around to the WR's made Smith's numbers that more impressive? I think the caverns opened up by the guards and tackles had more to do with it.
I will say this is incorrect. The 90's cowboy's lived and died on the ground. If they weren't running, the we're throwing to Irvin. Novecheck was a nice clutch TE, but he wasn't in the the class of a Sharpe, Gonzales or Witten. Or even Ben Coates. And who played WR opposite Irvin. A one trick pony named Harper and a Kevin Williams. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
Not for nothing but high draft picks like Blair Thomas, Derrick Lassic, and Sherman Williams had a hard time getting more then 3 yards a carry in some of there starting opportunities. The back up Dallas had in Smiths prime years that played at a starter level was Chris Warren, who himself was an All Pro HB Smiths had a great line, but let's not act like his line made him Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
Also Dallas great lines were 92 and 93. After Step left and Williams got there was a big drop off in play there. The rep didn't match the production. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
It didn't completely with those tree trunks always moving forward. But to dismiss other RB's who didn't have those lines does make one wonder how their careers might have shown "better" stats had they run behind the Cowboy's O-Line. Just a pure guess as is who's the best.
but you don't understand that he gets the ball less because he isn't the only weapon. therefore its harder to accomplish that feat
As a Cowboy fan there is no way I would want Sanders on that team over Smith even if I consider Sanders better. Sanders was an undisciplined sloppy runner who shrank in big games. Now if we are talking Payton. Yes. Thurman. Possibly Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
Like I said. Smith had an A+ two years really. 92/93. 94/95/96 He had maybe a B line. SF,GB and maybe even Pittsburgh had better OLs those years. When Big E hecked his back, and Step and Gogan left that line was borderline patchworked. Luckily for us LA grew up quick and Donaldson had a solid year Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
The book on Emmit was that he had amazing vision. Rare lower body strengh. While somewhat slow, hit the whole extremely quick. Won't be denied short yardage. Incredible durable and effective when he played though pain. What puts him below backs like Payton and Brown is that he lacked great athleticism and couldn't create when a play broke down. Never a great perimeter runner. Reliable hands, but again because he wasn't a guy that can make people miss, was never more then a check down type WR Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
For me it's Barry,but I have a different perspective.When NFL first started to be shown on TV in Australia we would only get 1 game per week in replay on a Tuesday night,and a brief highlights package.After a short while the fans kept writing to the network asking for more Lions games,the reason is pretty obvious.Barry Sanders did more than any other player to win fans over to NFL in the early days in Australia.
YouTube has probably bumped Sanders up two or 3 spots. Right now I would put him behind Payton, Brown, twinkyerson. Dorset and Smith would be right after Sanders. Followed by Thurman, Faulk, Tomlinson, Campbell, Bettis, Franco, Martin and Riggins Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
Um, aren't you the same guy that says trent Richardson is a stud? i no longer trust your insight. Seriously, though, i think Peterson needs to be mentioned as a future possibility, depending how the rest of his career plays out. If he keeps running with this much success for several more years, he will definitely be in the conversation.
For me, my problem with Sanders is that he could not run between the tackles. If you don't believe me, just look at footage of him.
Only played 6 years because of shredded knees,but had he not messed his knees up,no question he would be in the question of greatest back ever!
when you look at the absolute crap line he had to run behind it is a major miracle he could make it anywhere! emmitt had one of the best ever lines to run behind,as did riggins,and earl campbell,sanders and payton had crapty lines to run behind most of their careers.