Best Running Backs Ever?

[miloofcroton]

I was spurred by these articles:

Reggie Bush, Todd Gurley among best RB prospects I've scouted

Gil Brandt's greatest NFL running backs of all time

to ask myself, "who is my 'best' running back of all time?" The way I answer such a question is, in many ways, something like the prototype that I would seek for that position. This accounts for a couple things, such as a player who plays on a bad team and other unfortunate circumstances such as injuries. I'm not one to put older football players on a pedestal, and plus I don't know nearly as much about them, so my catalog is approximately from 2000 to present, although there are exceptions.

With all of that being said, my ideal running back is somewhere between Marshall Faulk and Ladanian Tomlinson, and it got me thinking... Which one was better? Any opinions on that?

Also, in general, who do you think are the best running backs of all time and why?

I think I would have to pick Faulk as the best overall running back that I ever had the fortune to watch play football.

 

[supafly]

Where in the hell is that popcorn emoji when you need it?

 

[supafly]

I think you could start with Jim Brown, Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, Tony Dorsett, and Eric ****erson. Add in the all time leading rusher in history, Emmitt Smith, and there are 6 of the most solid backs the NFL has ever seen.

Granted, only a couple played in your post-2000 timeframe and that was at the end of their careers, so if you're speaking only post-2000, then I suppose that guys like Faulk and Tomlinson would be up there. Of course, that speaks to the lack of talent in the past 15 or so years, because neither one of them could hold a candle to the half dozen that I named above.

I'm in my early 40s, so I didn't get to see Brown play, but I can certainly vouch for the other five guys as some of the best RBs the NFL has ever seen.

 

[miloofcroton]

I think you could start with Jim Brown, Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, Tony Dorsett, and Eric ****erson. Add in the all time leading rusher in history, Emmitt Smith, and there are 6 of the most solid backs the NFL has ever seen.

Granted, only a couple played in your post-2000 timeframe and that was at the end of their careers, so if you're speaking only post-2000, then I suppose that guys like Faulk and Tomlinson would be up there. Of course, that speaks to the lack of talent in the past 15 or so years, because neither one of them could hold a candle to the half dozen that I named above.

I'm in my early 40s, so I didn't get to see Brown play, but I can certainly vouch for the other five guys as some of the best RBs the NFL has ever seen.

How do you account for slower and smaller defenses in that estimation? Sure, Sanders and Smith are recent history, but the others go back to another era, which makes things harder to compare.

Also, Brown, Dorsett, and ****erson stand out as being much different in style. Long striders, thinner in the middle but sometimes with more inertia (mass), and generally less capable as receivers. Part of the fun in this exercise, for me, is picking out the style that is most successful and repeatable. Again, eras make this different, but in the modern era, receiving is super valuable for running backs, so that is important in my evaluation. And as defenses have gotten bigger and faster, being the guy on the field who's faster and bigger than everyone is impossible. It's hard to imagine, but guys like The Nigerian Nightmare and Earl Campbell played at a time when they were not much smaller than the linemen on the field. And likewise, DBs were no match for someone like Dorsett, whereas we now regularly have 220+ lb safeties that play in the box. For them, I say that they were great for their time, but they wouldn't have the same advantages in today's NFL.

 

[signbabybrady]

JAMES WHITE!

 

[borg]

What was impressive about the old-timers and their accomplishments was the fact that defenses knew most every play was a hand off and yet these guys still dominated.
Interesting though, Jim Brown averaged only 20 rushes per game which is far less than I would have expected. His QB was throwing the ball about 20 times a game as well....and total team offensive plays was 60-65. A different era. Game times must have flown by.

 

[DarrylS]

I became an NFL fan because of the influence of a friends father who was a Cleveland Browns Fan, so I cut my teeth on all things Jim Brown.. it is difficult to compare the game of the late 50's to today.. but Jim Brown was the man without a doubt, but close behind are Gale Sayers, Walter Payton and OJ..

IMO to mention Tomlinson in the group as #5 dilutes the quality of the rest of the list.. Brown, Sayers, Payton and OJ could control the game.. not sure LaDamian could do the same thing.

One of my fandom highlights was to have met Jim Brown at a dinner for his "Amer-I-Can" program and had my pix taken with him, unfortunately at that time (2001) could have done the same with BB at that function, but I thought was just another journeyman coach.. sigh!!!

 

[anditsgood]

Barry Sanders, you have to look at him run/play and not at stats, and remember he played for the only team that eventually went 0-16 as a franchise

 

[BTTA]

Of course, that speaks to the lack of talent in the past 15 or so years, because neither one of them could hold a candle to the half dozen that I named above.

How do you account for slower and smaller defenses in that estimation? Sure, Sanders and Smith are recent history, but the others go back to another era, which makes things harder to compare.
... whereas we now regularly have 220+ lb safeties that play in the box. For them, I say that they were great for their time, but they wouldn't have the same advantages in today's NFL.

I don't think we can legitimately compare RB's across era's, for these reasons and more. The arguments are too compelling in both directions.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I don't think we can legitimately compare RB's across era's, for these reasons and more. The arguments are too compelling in both directions.

I agree.

50s and 60s- Brown
70s and 80s - Sweetness
90s- Emmitt/Sanders
2000s- Tomlinson
2010s- Peterson

 

[BTTA]

I agree.

50s and 60s- Brown
70s and 80s - Sweetness
90s- Emmitt/Sanders
2000s- Tomlinson
2010s- Peterson

Still painful to leave some guys off: Sayers, ****erson, Campbell, Simp...can't type it out.

 

[RayClay]

I think Dillon would fit in there easily. You'd need a lot of imagination to project Bo Jackson and Gale Sayers ahead of Dillon. He averaged around 30 receptions his first six years in Cinci, was fast and elusive, could hit like a truck and owns the 4th and 16th best single game rushing.

Politics is a hell of a thing.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Still painful to leave some guys off: Sayers, ****erson, Campbell, Simp...can't type it out.

Agree.

You could sub in/replace any top10 rb and get little argument from me.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I think Dillon would fit in there easily. You'd need a lot of imagination to project Bo Jackson and Gale Sayers ahead of Dillon. He averaged around 30 receptions his first six years in Cinci, was fast and elusive, could hit like a truck and owns the 4th and 16th best single game rushing.

Politics is a hell of a thing.

Dillon was incredible. You could argue once he got here he had already lost 1/2 a step and still ran for 1600 yds

I always wonder if Bo Jackson had a 10 year career healthy in the NFL....

 

[p8ryts]

I was spurred by these articles:

Reggie Bush, Todd Gurley among best RB prospects I've scouted

Gil Brandt's greatest NFL running backs of all time

to ask myself, "who is my 'best' running back of all time?" The way I answer such a question is, in many ways, something like the prototype that I would seek for that position. This accounts for a couple things, such as a player who plays on a bad team and other unfortunate circumstances such as injuries. I'm not one to put older football players on a pedestal, and plus I don't know nearly as much about them, so my catalog is approximately from 2000 to present, although there are exceptions.

With all of that being said, my ideal running back is somewhere between Marshall Faulk and Ladanian Tomlinson, and it got me thinking... Which one was better? Any opinions on that?

Also, in general, who do you think are the best running backs of all time and why?

I think I would have to pick Faulk as the best overall running back that I ever had the fortune to watch play football.

Unfortunately I'm old enough to have seen them all. Jim Brown wasn't flashy but defenses put everything into stopping him. His power, toughness and doggedness were off the charts Gale Sayers was unbelievable, flash, power, athleticism. He would have been the greatest if not for injuries. Never crazy about Barry Sanders. Hardest to tackle because of his shiftiness. I just never thought of him as a complete running back. Earl Campbell, hardest runner ever, it was like the defender was standing on a railroad track trying to stop a train at full speed. I loved Bo Jackson, my favorite athlete. Like Gale Sayers, injury robbed him of his greatness.

 

[p8ryts]

I think Dillon would fit in there easily. You'd need a lot of imagination to project Bo Jackson and Gale Sayers ahead of Dillon. He averaged around 30 receptions his first six years in Cinci, was fast and elusive, could hit like a truck and owns the 4th and 16th best single game rushing.

Politics is a hell of a thing.

No imagination required, when they were healthy, he wasn't in their league.

 

[Family]

The two RBs who carried their team the most for multiple years were Jim Brown and Earl Campbell. Of course Sanders, Payton, Peterson, and others were great, but I never felt they elevated their teams as much as Brown/Campbell did.

They were as valuable as a top QB. I don't know if that can be said about any other except for maybe Emmitt and he had tons of help.

 

[patsfan13]

The list is very good.


Jim Brown is the best I've ever seen. Surprised that Jim Taylor is on the list but not Paul Horning.

 

[Bruins29]

I was spurred by these articles:

Reggie Bush, Todd Gurley among best RB prospects I've scouted

Gil Brandt's greatest NFL running backs of all time

to ask myself, "who is my 'best' running back of all time?" The way I answer such a question is, in many ways, something like the prototype that I would seek for that position. This accounts for a couple things, such as a player who plays on a bad team and other unfortunate circumstances such as injuries. I'm not one to put older football players on a pedestal, and plus I don't know nearly as much about them, so my catalog is approximately from 2000 to present, although there are exceptions.

With all of that being said, my ideal running back is somewhere between Marshall Faulk and Ladanian Tomlinson, and it got me thinking... Which one was better? Any opinions on that?

Also, in general, who do you think are the best running backs of all time and why?

I think I would have to pick Faulk as the best overall running back that I ever had the fortune to watch play football.

You have been here a few months and you are cementing your legacy here

The other day you are cutting Malcom Mitchell to keep Austin Carr and Coady Hollester and today its this nonsense.

Are you 8 years old?

 

[RayClay]

No imagination required, when they were healthy, he wasn't in their league.

Look up their stats. Jackson had zero 1,000 yard seasons, Sayers had 2 in 7 seasons, three of which he played 14 games [full season] and a 13 and 9 games.