Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
you left out some HOFers from the mid 70s.. not on my top 10 list but HOFers non the less;
Larry Csonka
Franco Harris
John Riggins who was an enigma.. he seemed to have 2 careers.. one with the Jets and one with the Redskins..
Dorsett and Campbell began their careers in the 70s but made most of there yards in the 80s.
you can never drive a car with 3 flat tire...... that what barrys team were like ....... he was the only weapon ........ and only got a qb late in his career.....so a race 4 tire against 1 tire..... barry had no chance against better teams that focus on him and hype up with playoff mojo....
How does a (1 Tire) team even make it to the playoffs?? For that matter, how does a (1 tire) team ever win a game? No doubt Sanders was hampered by a less than stellar offense during some of his seasons in Detroit but I think it was more like a slow leak in one of the tires vs 3 flats..
No objective person would say Curtis Martin is a top 10 back. Much less that he is better than OJ.
Martin played in 53 more games and had over 1100 more carries than OJ... Yet only has 25 more TDs and 3K more yards... this comparison is a joke.
It's obvious you are prejudice for Martin over OJ. And even when faced with undeniable facts, you continue to try and justify your unrational preference by using unmeasurable reasons. Like heart and work ethic.
Unassistedsports.com (Blog) --> this guy has Shaun Alexander in the top 10. Bwaahaaahaaa
Suite101 (Blog) --> he's in there because of he doesnt turn the ball over. Guess BenJarvus Jeremy Green-Ellis should be in too since he has never fumbled...
Business Insider (Blog) --> this dude has Barry Sander #7... lol.
those are great reputable writers!
Now, you know I can post several links where OJ is higher... and more reputable sources.
Ironically... The Lions were better than the Cowboys originally. They beat the Cowboys and went to the NFC Championship the year before Emmit and Aikman won. And decisively...
Here is the game summary from the '91 Playoffs when the Lions beat the Aikman led Cowboys against the dreadful Lions passing attack you speak of...
Quarterback Erik Kramer led the Lions to their first and only postseason victory since 1957 by completing 29 out of 38 passes for 341 yards and 3 touchdowns. Kramer completed a 31-yard score to wide receiver Willie Green, a 6-yarder to Green, and a 7-yarder to wide receiver Herman Moore. Detroit defensive back Melvin Jenkins returned an interception 41-yard for a touchdown, kicker Eddie Murray added a 36-yard field goal, and running back Barry Sanders rushed for a 47-yard touchdown. The Cowboys' only scores were two 28-yard field goals by kicker Ken Willis. Dallas quarterback Steve Beuerlein was held to just 7 of 13 completions for 91 yards, with 1 interception.
Detroit Lions 38, Dallas Cowboys 6
You're telling me that the Lions beat the Aikman team, then you give me stats of Dallas' QB Steve Beuerlein. If the Lions beat the Cowboys it was based on them being scared of the RUSHING game which opened up the passing game for an "average at best" qb. Thank you for proving my point even more. Barry (the supreme rb) opened up the rest of the offense which was at best average.
You're telling me that the Lions beat the Aikman team, then you give me stats of Dallas' QB Steve Beuerlein. If the Lions beat the Cowboys it was based on them being scared of the RUSHING game which opened up the passing game for an "average at best" qb. Thank you for proving my point even more. Barry (the supreme rb) opened up the rest of the offense which was at best average.
No it's idiocy...
First you complain... No whine, about how much better the Cowboys were since '89... Then I point out that the Lions were better in '91 and you wanna say that proves your point.
You're telling me that the Lions beat the Aikman team, then you give me stats of Dallas' QB Steve Beuerlein. If the Lions beat the Cowboys it was based on them being scared of the RUSHING game which opened up the passing game for an "average at best" qb. Thank you for proving my point even more. Barry (the supreme rb) opened up the rest of the offense which was at best average.
Yes Beuerlein did start that playoff game against the Lions and was ineffective. The time Aikman came in the damage was already done. Aikman played better than Beuerlein but playing from behind is extremely difficult and he was like 11 for 16 for 114 yds 1 Int and no TD's. But I agree.....
That year the Lions were better than Da Boys. They met up in week 9 and the Lions destroyed them 34-10.
So they beat them twice 34-10 and 38-6 and in the first meeting the Lions were all banged up. The Lions were 9-0 at home that year, played great against the Boys but sucked against the Skins losing 45-0 and 41-10 in the NFC Champ Game
First you complain... No whine, about how much better the Cowboys were since '89... Then I point out that the Lions were better in '91 and you wanna say that proves your point.
Yea ok buddy.
If you re-read all of my and your statements, I comment that Emmitt had a better bunch of guys during his career. All you did was point out 1 year and told me Detroit was better then. Please, read between the lines. I'll make it easy. During the course of both of their total careers, Emmitt's team had much better players to help him out. If you want to argue about one year, it just shows that you are petty. It's not about me complaining or whining. It's about you being a Dallas fan and losing an argument about your star running back. The point: Barry was better than Emmitt during his career!
Barry Sanders was a great RB, one of the best ever and easy to see how some have him rated above Emmitt Smith..
But for those who think Sanders was WAY better than Emmitt, I remind them...
Sanders had -1 yards in a playoff game.. -1! Barry was all or nothing. Home run or strikeout...
In fairness they were two different types of runners and its hard for me to say this one was better than that one. Barry got his yards in gulps.. Emmitt got his yards in sips.. I do agree that Emmitt was on a better team and no doubt that helped his numbers but I wouldn't say that Emmitt yards were not earned.. Emmitt was the KEY player on that Cowboys team.. KEY player, not just one of them key players. Take away Emmitt from that team and not only do they NOT win any Super Bowls, they don't play in any and probably don't make many playoffs.. Their entire offense, especially in the early 90s was EMMITT... Aikman to Irvin or Novacek certainly forced teams to respect the pass but all you have to do is look at Aikman's passing stats during those SB runs and you realize that offense was keyed around EMMITT... Emmitt was the BEST running back in the NFL from 1991 - 1995, hands down.... He led the league in rushing 4 times, averaged over 100 yards per game and scored over 100 TDs in that span... When you throw in the 3 Super Bowls, it was probably the greatest 5 year span for a running back in NFL history..
Its just hard to sit idly by while folks throw out terms like 'not in the same leaue' 'no where near as good' 'not even in the top 10'. It makes you think those folks never watched Emmitt and perhaps they were born after the fact.. ???
Last edited by mco65; 06-26-2012 at 06:17 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
