Best Running Backs Ever?

[RayClay]

Jim Brown was great but was physically overpowering in his age. If he played now, at 6'2", 230, he'd be good but would have a much different career with the size and speed of linebackers and offensive linemen. Highlight videos show him running over and away from much smaller men. That would not be the case today.

For my money, Barry Sanders, Earl Campbell, and Eric ****erson were the consistently best backs I've ever seen over a 3+ year career.

Yeah, but if he played today, he'd be 6'4" and 245.

 

[RayClay]

Eye test

I posted a video above of a running back with 23 carries for 278 yards you can see with your eyes. That's 12 actual yards a carry, not statistics.

By the way, do your eyes turn a 198 LB guy into a 230 Lber who could take NFL pounding for a decade or more?

 

[goheels22002]

I posted a video above of a running back with 23 carries for 278 yards you can see with your eyes. That's 12 actual yards a carry, not statistics.

By the way, do your eyes turn a 198 LB guy into a 230 Lber who could take NFL pounding for a decade or more?

Jim Brown played at 232 lbs with the Browns. See this link: Jim Brown Stats | Pro-Football-Reference.com

Yeah, but if he played today, he'd be 6'4" and 245.

Not sure of your point. Jim Brown is 6'2" and played at 232 lbs. Jim Brown Stats | Pro-Football-Reference.com

College linebackers today are the size of the pros Brown played against. - WalterFootball.com: 2017 NFL Draft: Inside Linebacker Rankings

Ray Nitschke, LB for the Packers during Brown's era was 6'3" 232 lbs.
**** Butkus, the biggest, baddest LB at the end of Brown's era was 6'3" 245. **** Butkus Stats | Pro-Football-Reference.com

By comparison, D'onta Hightower is 6'2" 266 lbs. Hightower is not an aberration for this era.

What I'm saying is that Jim Brown was the best of his era, by far. But he'd have a much different career in today's NFL of larger, faster players. If you put Barry Sanders in the first half of the 1960s, he'd be even more effective than he was in 1990s.

 

[RayClay]

Jim Brown played at 232 lbs with the Browns. See this link: Jim Brown Stats | Pro-Football-Reference.com

Gale Sayers. I watched Jim Brown, pretty sure he wasn't 198



Not sure of your point. Jim Brown is 6'2" and played at 232 lbs. Jim Brown Stats | Pro-Football-Reference.com

College linebackers today are the size of the pros Brown played against. - WalterFootball.com: 2017 NFL Draft: Inside Linebacker Rankings

Ray Nitschke, LB for the Packers during Brown's era was 6'3" 232 lbs.
**** Butkus, the biggest, baddest LB at the end of Brown's era was 6'3" 245. **** Butkus Stats | Pro-Football-Reference.com

By comparison, D'onta Hightower is 6'2" 266 lbs. Hightower is not an aberration for this era.

What I'm saying is that Jim Brown was the best of his era, by far. But he'd have a much different career in today's NFL of larger, faster players. If you put Barry Sanders in the first half of the 1960s, he'd be even more effective than he was in 1990s.

Everyone had to play against who they played. You can't assume time machines.Brown might not have been taller, but he sure would have had better nutrition, medicine and physical training.

 

[jmt57]

I think the problem with this argument is that numbers to not sufficiently describe ability, particularly for running backs catching the ball. Case in point, Jim Brown was probably by far the best player on those Browns teams. Why wouldn't they dump it off to him as much as possible? And considering how dominant he was at breaking tackles, dump-offs could easily account for 10 ypc.

NFL football was a very different game back then compared to today, particularly in the passing game. Defenders could hit would-be pass catchers all they wanted, as far downfield as they wanted to. Linemen could not extend their arms at all to block, resulting in difficulties for quarterbacks wanting to throw. Pass interference was rarely called, and unless the QB was rendered unconscious a flag for roughing the passer would not be thrown. Result was more defenders up close to the line. Screen passes may be a safe play call today, but not back then.

These are actually relatively accurate depictions of how offensive linemen were expected to block back then, which made pass protection difficult to say the least.

In contrast, a guy like Faulk was able to line up in the slot (and split out wide) and actually find a way to get himself open. And not only that, but he had the body control to contort for tough catches, and he had the soft hands to be reliable. And then, after all that, he was still the great open field runner that was a threat to take it the distance.

I don't think it's even a fair comparison. Faulk would be much more useful in a modern offense that moves a running back around than Brown, who likely would have been limited to the backfield, much like other modern running backs (even great ones) who are sort of one-trick ponies such as Adrian Peterson.

The thread is about who are the best running backs ever. Now the goal posts have been moved a bit, to who would be the best running back in today's NFL.

By the same token, how would Faulk have fared in another era? Look at how well the Patriots were able to get him off his game by being physical with him in Super Bowl 36. Now expand that to what defenses were able to do back in, for example, the fifties or sixties. I don't know if Faulk would even make a roster, much less be productive. My guess is that he would be out of the league within three seasons. On the other hand players like Brown (or ****erson, Dorsett, Campbell, Riggins, etc.) would most likely still be a valuable part of a team in 2017.

 

[patsfan13]

1) Jim Brown
2) whatever.....

 

[woodheadwow]

This won't be popular but single best RB I ever saw was Terrell Davis.

 

[miloofcroton]

The thread is about who are the best running backs ever. Now the goal posts have been moved a bit, to who would be the best running back in today's NFL.

That's just how I interpret the question. Otherwise, you have to submit yourself to a bunch of ultimately ******** statistics and rely on their "success" (despite it being a team sport) as a gauge for their greatness. I'd rather just scout the player as if I were scouting any other player, and with that comes my assumptions and knowledge of the modern game.

 

[conway]

That stud running back for the Browns. What was his name?

Marion Motley

In his books The Thinking Man's Guide to Pro Football and The New Thinking Man's Guide To Pro Football, football writer Paul Zimmerman of Sports Illustrated called Motley the best player in the history of the sport.[40] He was named to the NFL's 75th Anniversary All-Time Team in 1994.[41]​

 

[The Gr8est]

Jim Brown
Walter Payton
Barry Sanders
Earl Campbell
O.J. Simpson
Eric ****erson

If those guys aren't on your list, your list isn't worth reading. Gale Sayers and Bo Jackson have career length issues which could justify keeping them off, or else I'd add them to the list of guys who need to be on the list.

No one was more dominant for two years than Earl Campbell, but OJ Simpson was the best RB I ever watched.

 

[The Gr8est]

I want to give a shout out to another RB, Larry Csonka.

He was a bettering ram with legs. If you had a 3rd or 4th and short, he was getting the 1st down.

 

[Ring 6]

Jim Brown played at 232 lbs with the Browns. See this link: Jim Brown Stats | Pro-Football-Reference.com



Not sure of your point. Jim Brown is 6'2" and played at 232 lbs. Jim Brown Stats | Pro-Football-Reference.com

College linebackers today are the size of the pros Brown played against. - WalterFootball.com: 2017 NFL Draft: Inside Linebacker Rankings

Ray Nitschke, LB for the Packers during Brown's era was 6'3" 232 lbs.
**** Butkus, the biggest, baddest LB at the end of Brown's era was 6'3" 245. **** Butkus Stats | Pro-Football-Reference.com

By comparison, D'onta Hightower is 6'2" 266 lbs. Hightower is not an aberration for this era.

Yes he is. Please show me all of the 260 LBs who are not just DEs standing up in a 34.

 

[Ring 6]

I haven't read the whole thread yet but have to add this.

Two things happened in the 90's that dramatically changed the game and pretty much ended the great running back era. The Salary cap and the offensive rule changes that heavily favored the passing game.

Prior to that there were some monster teams. Similar to the NBA's super teams today. The NFC seemed to have most of the super teams during the 80s and 90's and if I recall correctly the NFC won 13 SB's in a row or something like that.

Anyways it was a different game back then. A good to great running back was a must. The great running backs from the non salary cap era were freaking great.

If I were to choose which great RB from that era that could be transplanted into this era:

Sanders, OJ, Sayers, Payton and ****erson because they either had elite elusiveness or incredible acceleration. They always found a gap or created one.

Earl Campbell, Bo Jackson, and maybe Franco Harris as power backs. Campbell was just a beast of a runner and probably had the biggest legs I've seen on a running back.

I never saw Jim Brown play but pretty sure he fits somewhere on this list. Everybody who saw him play says he was the best. I mean I've never heard anyone who saw him play say otherwise. He must have been something else.

Another rule change is that if players blocked like they do today in the 60s-80s there would be half a dozen holding calls on every play.

 

[scott99]

Barry Sanders is the best running back I've ever seen, and #1 IMO. #2 is Jim Brown. The only 2 RB's who AVERAGED 5.0+ yards per carry for their whole career. Sanders did it behind a suspect line. I can only imagine what Sanders would've done behind the Cowboys line that Smith got to run behind in the 1990's.

 

[jmt57]

Poll added.

 

[neuronet]

Maroney!

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

54 years old here, I didn't see Jim Brown or Jim Taylor in person but have seen enough film to appreciate them

my top 20

1) Jim Brown
2) Walter Payton
3) tied- Barry Sanders, Eric ****erson, OJ Simpson, Emmitt Smith, Earl Campbell
8) tied- Adrian Petersen, Tony Dorsett, Marcus Allen, Gayle Sayers*
12) tied- Marshall Faulk, Lady T, Terrell Davis
15) tied- Jim Taylor, Franco Harris, Curtis Martin, John Riggins, Jerome Bettis, Bo Jackson**


* Sayers would be higher if not for an injury-shortened career
** Bo would be much higher if he had played only football (full seasons) and if not for an injury-shortened career.

 

[doesntmatter1]

I wasn't alive(soon to be 27) for most of these hof careers. But over the last 15 years or so, I haven't seen a running back run as hard as Clinton Portis. Portis was trapped behind pathetic offensive lines.

 

[sb1]

Other than 2004 with Dillon... I think A Smith might be the best back this team has had in the Brady/BB era. He isn't a HOFer but so underrated.

I'd credit him with a lot of Brady's success in the first few years. Might have even been the unsung MVP of SB36.

 

[Ring 6]

Other than 2004 with Dillon... I think A Smith might be the best back this team has had in the Brady/BB era. He isn't a HOFer but so underrated.

I'd credit him with a lot of Brady's success in the first few years. Might have even been the unsung MVP of SB36.

Smith in 2001 was decent. Nothing special but took what was there. After 2001 he was one the worst (starting)RBs in the league and possibly THE slowest.