NFL Network's Top 100 players. - Page 11

FUNBUNCHER · 10-25-2010, 05:48 AM

For anyone to put the words 'Marino' and 'easily the most overrated sporting entity in American pro sports history' in the same sentence really needs to step back from the keyboard and re-read carefully what they just wrote, IMO.

It's beyond disrespectful. It's stupidity and naked arrogance by someone who's trying to make a name for himself by ripping on someone who's actually ACCOMPLISHED something in their lives.

Honestly, why would someone feel the need to read this person's 'analysis' of Marino's career after that initial statement??

Survey the guys who actually played against Marino in the '80s and '90s and try to pull out that BS statistical argument, and watch how quickly these so-called 'experts' on Marino's career are escorted to the door.

Marino is still the prototypical dropback NFL QB, but he's always going to be a step below the great ones who put it all together and won SBs.

Really I think these revisionist arguments stem from the fact that 20something 'geniuses' look at the completion percentage of a guy like Marino, compare him to the QBs of today without considering the rule changes since implemented that favor the passing game ( and higher completion rates), and assume, wrongly, that the guy simply wasn't that good.

I'm open to any argument about any football player and believe in very few NFL sacred cows, but it's ridiculous for anyone to call Marino overrated.
Not the greatest of alltime, but he was a GREAT QB and one of the best pure passers in NFL history.

Ness · 10-25-2010, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER

For anyone to put the words 'Marino' and 'easily the most overrated sporting entity in American pro sports history' in the same sentence really needs to step back from the keyboard and re-read carefully what they just wrote, IMO.

It's beyond disrespectful. It's stupidity and naked arrogance by someone who's trying to make a name for himself by ripping on someone who's actually ACCOMPLISHED something in their lives.

Honestly, why would someone feel the need to read this person's 'analysis' of Marino's career after that initial statement??

Survey the guys who actually played against Marino in the '80s and '90s and try to pull out that BS statistical argument, and watch how quickly these so-called 'experts' on Marino's career are escorted to the door.

Marino is still the prototypical dropback NFL QB, but he's always going to be a step below the great ones who put it all together and won SBs.

Really I think these revisionist arguments stem from the fact that 20something 'geniuses' look at the completion percentage of a guy like Marino, compare him to the QBs of today without considering the rule changes since implemented that favor the passing game ( and higher completion rates), and assume, wrongly, that the guys simply wasn't that good.

I'm open to any argument about any football player and believe in very few NFL sacred cows, but it's ridiculous for anyone to call Marino overrated.
Not the greatest of alltime, but he was a GREAT QB and one of the best pure passers in NFL history.

Rod Woodson was adamant the other day about Tom Brady being ranked higher than Elway and Marino. He said something to the effects of:

"I played against all three of them! And I'll tell you that Brady is not better than Marino and Elway!"

boknows34 · 10-25-2010, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ness

Rod Woodson was adamant the other day about Tom Brady being ranked higher than Elway and Marino. He said something to the effects of:

"I played against all three of them! And I'll tell you that Brady is not better than Marino and Elway!"

Here's the video link to that quote.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-networ...21-of-all-time

Complex · 10-25-2010, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER

For anyone to put the words 'Marino' and 'easily the most overrated sporting entity in American pro sports history' in the same sentence really needs to step back from the keyboard and re-read carefully what they just wrote, IMO.

It's beyond disrespectful. It's stupidity and naked arrogance by someone who's trying to make a name for himself by ripping on someone who's actually ACCOMPLISHED something in their lives.

Honestly, why would someone feel the need to read this person's 'analysis' of Marino's career after that initial statement??

Survey the guys who actually played against Marino in the '80s and '90s and try to pull out that BS statistical argument, and watch how quickly these so-called 'experts' on Marino's career are escorted to the door.

Marino is still the prototypical dropback NFL QB, but he's always going to be a step below the great ones who put it all together and won SBs.

Really I think these revisionist arguments stem from the fact that 20something 'geniuses' look at the completion percentage of a guy like Marino, compare him to the QBs of today without considering the rule changes since implemented that favor the passing game ( and higher completion rates), and assume, wrongly, that the guy simply wasn't that good.

I'm open to any argument about any football player and believe in very few NFL sacred cows, but it's ridiculous for anyone to call Marino overrated.
Not the greatest of alltime, but he was a GREAT QB and one of the best pure passers in NFL history.

Same could be said for old people that hold players from the 40s,50s,60s, and 70s on a pedestal. They can't face the fact that the modern day players are better than the people that played in black and white.

boknows34 · 10-28-2010, 09:10 AM

Barry Sanders #17

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-networ...-Barry-Sanders

Check out that highlight reel of runs. Should have been Top 10.

Ravens1991 · 10-28-2010, 09:48 AM

I am shocked that Sanders is at 17 wow. I am getting nervous my hero Ray Lewis wont be on this list.

Jughead10 · 10-28-2010, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravens1991

I am shocked that Sanders is at 17 wow. I am getting nervous my hero Ray Lewis wont be on this list.

Won't be on the list? Ed Reed made 80 something. If he is that high, Lewis is definitely up there.

wonderbredd24 · 10-28-2010, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Complex

Same could be said for old people that hold players from the 40s,50s,60s, and 70s on a pedestal. They can't face the fact that the modern day players are better than the people that played in black and white.

Dominance is dominance.

Jim Brown is #1 and that's not because old people can't face the fact that modern players are better. He's simply the greeatest of all time.

yourfavestoner · 10-28-2010, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Complex

Same could be said for old people that hold players from the 40s,50s,60s, and 70s on a pedestal. They can't face the fact that the modern day players are better than the people that played in black and white.

Define better.

terribletowel39 · 10-28-2010, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jughead10

Won't be on the list? Ed Reed made 80 something. If he is that high, Lewis is definitely up there.

Still makes you wonder how these idiots can come up with 16 players better than the best RB of all time. But then again, these list has been horrible since Namath.

wonderbredd24 · 10-28-2010, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by terribletowel39

Still makes you wonder how these idiots can come up with 16 players better than the best RB of all time. But then again, these list has been horrible since Namath.

There aren't going to be 16 people ahead of Jim Brown.

terribletowel39 · 10-28-2010, 10:54 AM

I didn't quote and acknowledge you for a reason. Let me say it again, there is no way 16 players should be ahead of the greatest RB of all time, Barry David Sanders.

wonderbredd24 · 10-28-2010, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by terribletowel39

I didn't quote and acknowledge you for a reason. Let me say it again, there is no way 16 players should be ahead of the greatest RB of all time, Barry David Sanders.

As compelling as adding his middle name is, I remain unconvinced.

Pick any metric you want.

Yards per carry? Jim Brown is #1 all time at 5.22
Average per game? Jim Brown #1 all time at 104.3
Never missed a game
Left with pretty much every record
Led the league in rushing every year he was in the league save 1.

terribletowel39 · 10-28-2010, 11:06 AM

Don't bring records into this. Gale Sayers is usually regarded as a Top 5-7 RB. I am looking at what they did on the field.

boknows34 · 10-28-2010, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wonderbredd24

Dominance is dominance.

Jim Brown is #1 and that's not because old people can't face the fact that modern players are better. He's simply the greeatest of all time.

While I disagree with Brown being the best ever he is certainly the most dominant RB ever and in a Clear Top 3 with Payton and Sanders with everyone else well behind. However I do feel that players from the early-mid 20th century are somewhat put on a pedastal.

To use a boxing analogy I feel that to surpass many of these greats from the 50s and 60s, a modern day player has to record a knockout victory as you know there's no way he's going to win on points while fighting in front of the champion's hometown crowd. Its like Dick Butkus being regarded as the best MLB ever and no matter what Ray Lewis does he'll never surpass him.

Nobody had ever seen a RB like Brown before. Same for Don Hutson at WR and a razzle dazzle RB like Sayers. When they burst on the scene they seemed super human in comparison to their peers. They raised the bar to a height which at the time seemed incredible and untouchable but the modern greats that followed like Rice, Payton and Sanders not only reached those same heights but eventually surpassed them imo. I just think Sanders averaging 99.8 yds per game and 5.0 ypc in the 90s with the Lions is more impressive than Brown's 104.8 and 5.2 while on a very good Browns team with 3 HOF linemen in the 50s and 60s.

wonderbredd24 · 10-28-2010, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by terribletowel39

Don't bring records into this. Gale Sayers is usually regarded as a Top 5-7 RB. I am looking at what they did on the field.

Ok...

Jim Brown played 118 career games
Yards per carry (5.2)
126 total touchdowns (1.06 per game)
12,312 rushing yards (104.3 per game)
2,499 receiving yards (21.2 per game)
Best season rushing average (6.4 in '63)

Barry Sanders played 152 career games
Yards per carry (5.0)
109 total touchdowns (.71 per game)
15,269 rushing yards (99.8 per game)
2,921 receiving yards (19.1 per game)
Best season rushing average (6.1 in '98)

What am I missing?

Jughead10 · 10-28-2010, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boknows34

Nobody had ever seen a RB like Brown before. Same for Don Hutson at WR and a razzle dazzle RB like Sayers. When they burst on the scene they seemed super human in comparison to their peers. They raised the bar to a height which at the time seemed incredible and untouchable but the modern greats that followed like Rice, Payton and Sanders not only reached those same heights but eventually surpassed them imo. I just think Sanders averaging 99.8 yds per game and 5.0 ypc in the 90s with the Lions is more impressive than Brown's 104.8 and 5.2 while on a very good Browns team with 3 HOF linemen in the 50s and 60s.

To play devils advocate, Brown never played with the complicated passing systems we have today or in the 90's. Nor did they throw nearly as often. Defenses were keyed on stopping the run and in this case Jim Brown. And despite all that the man ran for 1500 yards in a 12 game season.

wonderbredd24 · 10-28-2010, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boknows34

I just think Sanders averaging 99.8 yds per game and 5.0 ypc in the 90s with the Lions is more impressive than Brown's 104.8 and 5.2 while on a very good Browns team with 3 HOF linemen in the 50s and 60s.

McCormack, Hickerson, and who?

FUNBUNCHER · 10-28-2010, 11:22 AM

Sanders is the most dynamic, arguably most elusive RB to ever play the game, and was a killer in the open field, but to say he was the 'best ever'??
I think people are choosing Barry's style over the substance of so many other great RBs who played the game.

Forget yards or TDs, for my money Walter Payton, Dickerson, Earl Campbell and Emmitt Smith were every bit the game-changers that Sanders was.

If you had to win ONE game, which RB in his prime would you want in your backfield to carry the ball 30 times??

Obviously I'm not including Jim Brown because for his era he was basically an alien life-form in football pads.

terribletowel39 · 10-28-2010, 11:23 AM

?????

By on the field, I mean Jim Brown weighed more than most defensive lineman and played with a hell of an offensive line. And Barry Sanders played with one of the worst offensive lines in the last 20 years.

Like I stated before, which you quoted, don't bring stats up. Look at the entire picture and realize which was the more special.

FUNBUNCHER · 10-28-2010, 11:31 AM

That's a myth that Barry Sanders played with one of the 'worst' Olines in the NFL during his career.
They were average to marginally good, they surely gave Scott Mitchell enough time to turn Herman Moore into a pro bowler.
No, they weren't the Oline unit that Emmitt ran behind, but they weren't the worst in the league either.
To say they were one of the worst of the last 20 years is just pure hyperbole.

terribletowel39 · 10-28-2010, 11:35 AM

Yeah, it was the Oline that gave him time to get Moore the ball. Not the 9 people in the box selling out almost every play to try and stop Barry. That line was crappy to slightly above crappy.

Complex · 10-28-2010, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yourfavestoner

Define better.

More highly skilled or adept

Complex · 10-28-2010, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wonderbredd24

McCormack, Hickerson, and who?

Now name a member from Barry Sanders HOF line

njx9 · 10-28-2010, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER

That's a myth that Barry Sanders played with one of the 'worst' Olines in the NFL during his career.
They were average to marginally good, they surely gave Scott Mitchell enough time to turn Herman Moore into a pro bowler.
No, they weren't the Oline unit that Emmitt ran behind, but they weren't the worst in the league either.
To say they were one of the worst of the last 20 years is just pure hyperbole.

they were terrible. they had a decent LT and a decent C. and herman moore was a very good receiver for a few years.

i'm not sure i'd take barry over payton/dickerson in your "one game" question, but i'd take barry with a broken leg over emmitt.