Tomlinson retires

[bigpern23]

I think he was better than Emmitt.

1. Brown
2. Payton
3. Sanders
4. Faulk
5. Tomlinson

I can't argue with that list.

And I will say, that as much as I despised him, Emmitt Smith's shoulder game against the Giants might be the best game I've ever seen by a running back.

 

[KYSportsWriter]

I don't care if your entire offensive line is HOF players, 4,400 carries is a toll the human body wasn't built to take.

Also, by 1998 the Cowboys line was Larry Allen and a collection of washed up former greats and spare parts. Yet Smith went for 4,900 yards from 1998-2001. The guy missed like seven games in 13 seasons while averaging 312 carries each season. That's absurd.

Barry Sanders had the best 10-year stretch of any back ever. But then he just walked away. It was like a novel without the last two chapters. I know many will disagree, but I hold that against him in these all-time arguments.

LT is walking away after just one more year than Sanders. Are you holding that against him?

 

[Mizzougrad96]

I don't care if your entire offensive line is HOF players, 4,400 carries is a toll the human body wasn't built to take.

Also, by 1998 the Cowboys line was Larry Allen and a collection of washed up former greats and spare parts. Yet Smith went for 4,900 yards from 1998-2001. The guy missed like seven games in 13 seasons while averaging 312 carries each season. That's absurd.

Barry Sanders had the best 10-year stretch of any back ever. But then he just walked away. It was like a novel without the last two chapters. I know many will disagree, but I hold that against him in these all-time arguments.

LT is walking away after just one more year than Sanders. Are you holding that against him?

Bad comparison. LT could have squeezed out another 1-2 mediocre seasons, but he was essentially done...

Sanders was still one of the best backs in the league and was on the verge of breaking the rushing record when he walked away.

 

[Steak Snabler]

I don't care if your entire offensive line is HOF players, 4,400 carries is a toll the human body wasn't built to take.

Also, by 1998 the Cowboys line was Larry Allen and a collection of washed up former greats and spare parts. Yet Smith went for 4,900 yards from 1998-2001. The guy missed like seven games in 13 seasons while averaging 312 carries each season. That's absurd.

Barry Sanders had the best 10-year stretch of any back ever. But then he just walked away. It was like a novel without the last two chapters. I know many will disagree, but I hold that against him in these all-time arguments.

LT is walking away after just one more year than Sanders. Are you holding that against him?

Bad comparison. LT could have squeezed out another 1-2 mediocre seasons, but he was essentially done...

Sanders was still one of the best backs in the league and was on the verge of breaking the rushing record when he walked away.

Yeah, if you compare Sanders to anyone, it's Jim Brown.

Tomlinson's ending is more like O.J. Simpson's. Let's just hope he never kills his ex-wife and a waiter.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

I don't care if your entire offensive line is HOF players, 4,400 carries is a toll the human body wasn't built to take.

Also, by 1998 the Cowboys line was Larry Allen and a collection of washed up former greats and spare parts. Yet Smith went for 4,900 yards from 1998-2001. The guy missed like seven games in 13 seasons while averaging 312 carries each season. That's absurd.

Barry Sanders had the best 10-year stretch of any back ever. But then he just walked away. It was like a novel without the last two chapters. I know many will disagree, but I hold that against him in these all-time arguments.

LT is walking away after just one more year than Sanders. Are you holding that against him?

Bad comparison. LT could have squeezed out another 1-2 mediocre seasons, but he was essentially done...

Sanders was still one of the best backs in the league and was on the verge of breaking the rushing record when he walked away.

Yeah, if you compare Sanders to anyone, it's Jim Brown.

Tomlinson's ending is more like O.J. Simpson's. Let's just hope he never kills his ex-wife and a waiter.

Very similar... Down to the final two seasons with a different team...

 

[LongTimeListener]

Knowing what we know now, it's pretty hard to hold it against anyone who walks away early. And in Sanders' case it wasn't tremendously early, it was just earlier than we wanted him to leave. But he certainly has the best chance of being 60 years old and still walking on his own legs without a cane.

 

[Steak Snabler]

I don't care if your entire offensive line is HOF players, 4,400 carries is a toll the human body wasn't built to take.

Also, by 1998 the Cowboys line was Larry Allen and a collection of washed up former greats and spare parts. Yet Smith went for 4,900 yards from 1998-2001. The guy missed like seven games in 13 seasons while averaging 312 carries each season. That's absurd.

Barry Sanders had the best 10-year stretch of any back ever. But then he just walked away. It was like a novel without the last two chapters. I know many will disagree, but I hold that against him in these all-time arguments.

LT is walking away after just one more year than Sanders. Are you holding that against him?

Bad comparison. LT could have squeezed out another 1-2 mediocre seasons, but he was essentially done...

Sanders was still one of the best backs in the league and was on the verge of breaking the rushing record when he walked away.

Yeah, if you compare Sanders to anyone, it's Jim Brown.

Tomlinson's ending is more like O.J. Simpson's. Let's just hope he never kills his ex-wife and a waiter.

Very similar... Down to the final two seasons with a different team...

And both were done at 32. The main difference is that O.J.'s career got off to a slower start due to injury. But his prime was just as good.

 

[93Devil]

Neither Sanders nor Tomlinson won a Super Bowl. They suck. [/93Devil]

;D

Hey, I am not the biggest supporter of Sanders.

I just hate rushes for loss. Freaking drive killers.

 

[93Devil]

I think Emmitt Smith gets discounted because he wasn't as fast or flashy and had great offensive lines the first half of his career. There's something that is undeniably all-time great about 4,409 carries. Who else has ever been that durable at that position?

Just as Bo doesn't get credit for what he didn't do, Barry and Jim Brown shouldn't either.

Smith's game against the Giants with the bad shoulder was amazing. Either he is one of the toughest SOBs to ever step on the field or he was on enough drugs to make Anna Nicole Smith envious.

 

[Cubbiebum]

Oh, Cubbiebum, you and your stats. It is how you end up sucking off Fred Taylor as one of the great running backs. If you want to believe Edgerrin James in 1999 and 2000 was more dominant than Earl Campbell in 1980, go right ahead. You're only showing how little you know.

The original post was best season and best season only. The definition is pretty vague honestly. It doesn't equate 100 percent to just dominance in my book.

Anyways, explain to me how those seasons weren't? More yards and touchdowns. In many cases it isn't even close (300+ yards and 5+ TD difference).

As for Fred Taylor, I never got into that debate much that I remember. I do believe that he COULD have been but injuries killed it. He's a borderline HOFer to me. If he gets in, fine, if he doesn't, fine.

 

[3OctaveFart]

Priest Holmes scored 94 touchdowns in only 113 games.
If Davis ever does make it in, I don't see how they could justify keeping Holmes out.

 

[Cubbiebum]

If you are measuring their best season, and only their best season, Campbell is easily on the list. For an entire career, probably not.

Actually he probably wouldn't be. There are plenty of individual seasons better than is 1,900+ yard 13 TD season.

There weren't then and for a long time after. Now, with actual defense having been outlawed, they're more commonplace.

Before there was ...

Simpson's 1973 (2073 total yards 12 TDs)
Simpson's 1975 (2243 yards 23 TDs)
Brown's 1958 (1665 yards 18 TDs in 12 games)
Brown's 1963 (2131 yards 15 TDs)
Brown's 1965 (1872 yards 21 TDs)
Payton's 1977 (2121 yards 16 TDs)

Before all the rule changes there were a bunch more than would drop him off the list.

Dickerson 1983, 1984
Sanders 1997
Terrell Davis 1997, 1998
Jamal Anderson 1998
Emmit 1992, 1995
Marcus Allen 1985
Edgerrin James 1999, 2000
Roger Craig 1985
Faulk 1999, 2000, 2001



Those are just the ones I got from the obvious names and seasons I remember. Could be more.

You're comparing total yards to what Campbell did rushing only in his best season.

Because all that counts for a RB is rushing? It's the most important but if a RB is big in the passing game it serves just as much value.

I'm not sure if you meant to say I am counting rushing/receiving for everyone except for Campbell I'm using just rushing. If that is what you meant, then you are mistaken. It's just that Campbell had a whopping 47 receiving yards and no receiving TD's that year.


And for the record I should state Campbell is one of my favorite RBs. I just don't let that blind me. There are a bunch of seasons better than Campbell's best.

 

[Cubbiebum]

Priest Holmes scored 94 touchdowns in only 113 games.
If Davis ever does make it in, I don't see how they could justify keeping Holmes out.

Priest played a full ten years, including 45 more games. Priest was handcuffed by not getting to the NFL until he was 24 and then riding the pine in Baltimore for a long time. Yes, injuries cost him some seasons but it's not the same as Davis. Priest had enough time to compile enough stats to make the HOF.

 

[3OctaveFart]

Priest Holmes scored 94 touchdowns in only 113 games.
If Davis ever does make it in, I don't see how they could justify keeping Holmes out.

Priest played a full ten years, including 45 more games. Priest was handcuffed by not getting to the NFL until he was 24 and then riding the pine in Baltimore for a long time. Yes, injuries cost him some seasons but it's not the same as Davis. Priest had enough time to compile enough stats to make the HOF.

Holmes lost years playing part-time for Mickey Mouse offenses.
What's fair to one is fair to the other.
Holmes and Davis belong in the Hall of Short-Term Brilliance.

 

[outofplace]

If you are measuring their best season, and only their best season, Campbell is easily on the list. For an entire career, probably not.

Actually he probably wouldn't be. There are plenty of individual seasons better than is 1,900+ yard 13 TD season.

There weren't then and for a long time after. Now, with actual defense having been outlawed, they're more commonplace.

Before there was ...

Simpson's 1973 (2073 total yards 12 TDs)
Simpson's 1975 (2243 yards 23 TDs)
Brown's 1958 (1665 yards 18 TDs in 12 games)
Brown's 1963 (2131 yards 15 TDs)
Brown's 1965 (1872 yards 21 TDs)
Payton's 1977 (2121 yards 16 TDs)

Before all the rule changes there were a bunch more than would drop him off the list.

Dickerson 1983, 1984
Sanders 1997
Terrell Davis 1997, 1998
Jamal Anderson 1998
Emmit 1992, 1995
Marcus Allen 1985
Edgerrin James 1999, 2000
Roger Craig 1985
Faulk 1999, 2000, 2001



Those are just the ones I got from the obvious names and seasons I remember. Could be more.

You're comparing total yards to what Campbell did rushing only in his best season.

Because all that counts for a RB is rushing? It's the most important but if a RB is big in the passing game it serves just as much value.

I'm not sure if you meant to say I am counting rushing/receiving for everyone except for Campbell I'm using just rushing. If that is what you meant, then you are mistaken. It's just that Campbell had a whopping 47 receiving yards and no receiving TD's that year.


And for the record I should state Campbell is one of my favorite RBs. I just don't let that blind me. There are a bunch of seasons better than Campbell's best.

That is what I meant. You didn't use his total yards.

That said, I still don't see it as a fair comparison. Not that receiving yards shouldn't count for a running back, but not as much as rushing yards. That is often determined by the player's role in the offense rather than how good they are. The game has also changed dramatically. You look at somebody like Roger Craig and the way he was used. Nobody used running backs that way when Campbell was in his prime.

 

[Cubbiebum]

If you are measuring their best season, and only their best season, Campbell is easily on the list. For an entire career, probably not.

Actually he probably wouldn't be. There are plenty of individual seasons better than is 1,900+ yard 13 TD season.

There weren't then and for a long time after. Now, with actual defense having been outlawed, they're more commonplace.

Before there was ...

Simpson's 1973 (2073 total yards 12 TDs)
Simpson's 1975 (2243 yards 23 TDs)
Brown's 1958 (1665 yards 18 TDs in 12 games)
Brown's 1963 (2131 yards 15 TDs)
Brown's 1965 (1872 yards 21 TDs)
Payton's 1977 (2121 yards 16 TDs)

Before all the rule changes there were a bunch more than would drop him off the list.

Dickerson 1983, 1984
Sanders 1997
Terrell Davis 1997, 1998
Jamal Anderson 1998
Emmit 1992, 1995
Marcus Allen 1985
Edgerrin James 1999, 2000
Roger Craig 1985
Faulk 1999, 2000, 2001



Those are just the ones I got from the obvious names and seasons I remember. Could be more.

You're comparing total yards to what Campbell did rushing only in his best season.

Because all that counts for a RB is rushing? It's the most important but if a RB is big in the passing game it serves just as much value.

I'm not sure if you meant to say I am counting rushing/receiving for everyone except for Campbell I'm using just rushing. If that is what you meant, then you are mistaken. It's just that Campbell had a whopping 47 receiving yards and no receiving TD's that year.


And for the record I should state Campbell is one of my favorite RBs. I just don't let that blind me. There are a bunch of seasons better than Campbell's best.

That is what I meant. You didn't use his total yards.

That said, I still don't see it as a fair comparison. Not that receiving yards shouldn't count for a running back, but not as much as rushing yards. That is often determined by the player's role in the offense rather than how good they are. The game has also changed dramatically. You look at somebody like Roger Craig and the way he was used. Nobody used running backs that way when Campbell was in his prime.

Plenty of RB's got 300-500 yards in receiving when Campbell played including Payton, Otis Anderson, Billy Sims, Tony Dorsett ... etc. Campbell just wasn't a good receiver. Don't need to be as a RB but when talking best seasons a RB receiving numbers should be factored in.

 

[outofplace]

If you are measuring their best season, and only their best season, Campbell is easily on the list. For an entire career, probably not.

Actually he probably wouldn't be. There are plenty of individual seasons better than is 1,900+ yard 13 TD season.

There weren't then and for a long time after. Now, with actual defense having been outlawed, they're more commonplace.

Before there was ...

Simpson's 1973 (2073 total yards 12 TDs)
Simpson's 1975 (2243 yards 23 TDs)
Brown's 1958 (1665 yards 18 TDs in 12 games)
Brown's 1963 (2131 yards 15 TDs)
Brown's 1965 (1872 yards 21 TDs)
Payton's 1977 (2121 yards 16 TDs)

Before all the rule changes there were a bunch more than would drop him off the list.

Dickerson 1983, 1984
Sanders 1997
Terrell Davis 1997, 1998
Jamal Anderson 1998
Emmit 1992, 1995
Marcus Allen 1985
Edgerrin James 1999, 2000
Roger Craig 1985
Faulk 1999, 2000, 2001



Those are just the ones I got from the obvious names and seasons I remember. Could be more.

You're comparing total yards to what Campbell did rushing only in his best season.

Because all that counts for a RB is rushing? It's the most important but if a RB is big in the passing game it serves just as much value.

I'm not sure if you meant to say I am counting rushing/receiving for everyone except for Campbell I'm using just rushing. If that is what you meant, then you are mistaken. It's just that Campbell had a whopping 47 receiving yards and no receiving TD's that year.


And for the record I should state Campbell is one of my favorite RBs. I just don't let that blind me. There are a bunch of seasons better than Campbell's best.

That is what I meant. You didn't use his total yards.

That said, I still don't see it as a fair comparison. Not that receiving yards shouldn't count for a running back, but not as much as rushing yards. That is often determined by the player's role in the offense rather than how good they are. The game has also changed dramatically. You look at somebody like Roger Craig and the way he was used. Nobody used running backs that way when Campbell was in his prime.

Plenty of RB's got 300-500 yards in receiving when Campbell played including Payton, Otis Anderson, Billy Sims, Tony Dorsett ... etc. Campbell just wasn't a good receiver. Don't need to be as a RB but when talking best seasons a RB receiving numbers should be factored in.

I did not say running backs didn't gain yards as receivers then. I said they were used differently, which is how guys like Roger Craig ended up with seasons over 2,000 total yards. Heck of a player, but no, not in Campbell's class.

 

[Piotr Rasputin]

It's never surprising when a Cubs fan can't identify what great players, seminal achievement, and greatness itself look like.

 

[LongTimeListener]

I figure he thinks Shaun Alexander was the BEST!!!! because of the two dozen times he got to tippy-toe in from the 1 that year.

 

[Mark2010]

Shaun had a few really great seasons with Seattle.

And I agree Roger Craig had some great years with San Francisco as well. Only 10 can make a legit top 10 list.

People often forget that Craig and Marcus Allen started as fullbacks before switching to halfback.