BR1986FB wrote: Terry Bradshaw

His interception to TD ratio was 1:1 and his completion % was 51%.

He was a winner, but his stats didn't show it.

I'm no Bradshaw fan and I'm certainly not a Steelers fan, but I disagree. Bradshaw was horrid his first five years in the league (-32 in TD:INT during that time as well) and was basically forced into a role as the "hand off to Harris, throw 15 times a game" type to keep the team competitive.

But after 1977, he was the Steelers offense and played extremely well. They don't win in 1978 and 1979 without him running the offense.

Couldn't agree more with Emmitt Smith. There were, IMO, 5-10 backs in that era that would have put up better numbers with those Cowboy team than Smith.

I always thought Lynn Swan lived off a couple of great catches in the Super Bowl too. JMO

NNN wrote:

BR1986FB wrote: Terry Bradshaw

His interception to TD ratio was 1:1 and his completion % was 51%.

He was a winner, but his stats didn't show it.

I'm no Bradshaw fan and I'm certainly not a Steelers fan, but I disagree. Bradshaw was horrid his first five years in the league (-32 in TD:INT during that time as well) and was basically forced into a role as the "hand off to Harris, throw 15 times a game" type to keep the team competitive.

But after 1977, he was the Steelers offense and played extremely well. They don't win in 1978 and 1979 without him running the offense.

I DID say he was a "winner" but his stats were pedestrian.

Well if Jim Brown is considered the GOAT by some, then SQ is certainly right in saying he's overrated. Being the 4th or 5th best back of all time is still fucking awesome, but when you're considered the GOAT and you're not (IMO of course, and SQ's as well), then he fits on this list.

Don't get me wrong, I love Jim, and I really wish I could have seen him play, but I don't think he's the GOAT. I think that title is reserved for Emmit or Barry.

said_aouita wrote:

LTrain23 wrote:

Dirk Nowitzki is another guy who is vastly overrated by a lot of people.. I remember hearing people say he could be/was better than Larry Bird...

Yeah.... NO!

I'd take Dirk over Bird. What is Dirk, like four inches taller then Bird?


Over rated= Karl Malone.

Wow, this may be the craziest post ever. Nowitski over Bird? Are you kidding me?

slcoach wrote: Couldn't agree more with Emmitt Smith. There were, IMO, 5-10 backs in that era that would have put up better numbers with those Cowboy team than Smith.

I couldn't disagree more. 11 straight 1000 yard seasons is awesome, I don't care what team you played for. The Cowboys didn't have great teams all 11 of those years.

lhslep134 wrote: Well if Jim Brown is considered the GOAT by some, then SQ is certainly right in saying he's overrated. Being the 4th or 5th best back of all time is still fucking awesome, but when you're considered the GOAT and you're not (IMO of course, and SQ's as well), then he fits on this list.

Don't get me wrong, I love Jim, and I really wish I could have seen him play, but I don't think he's the GOAT. I think that title is reserved for Emmit or Barry.

Saying someone is overrated automatically flips a switch in some peoples head and they think you're saying they aren't good or something--in other words, they take it to an extreme. Overrated can still mean that you're one of the best ever, or very good, etc.

You apparently agree with me here, and I would have loved to watch Brown play as well. I've seen as much video of him running as I could probably hope to watch, so I've seen plenty what he accomplished on the field. I've seen the stats. The biggest thing for me is the size--and while he can't help that, it is what it is--it's something that should be taken into consideration IMO. Brown was bigger than some of the linemen blocking for him, bigger than most of the guys trying to tackle him. Fast as hell along with the size and power. He was the total package for sure. I give him credit for being what he was, but when people say he's the GOAT (which is the opinion of a lot of people) I feel like they ignore the fact that he was one of those athletes that was before his time. I feel like if you could take Adrian Peterson back to Brown's day, he would have dominated more than Brown. I think Brown could play today, but he wouldn't be nearly as good. I mean, it's just something that can't be ignored. Like I said, it's nothing he could help and it's not like he'd change it if he could--why would you? But I feel like some other running backs get overlooked because that doesn't come into consideration.

bucks36 wrote: Scottie Pippen. Take Jordan away from him and he is average at best. Didn't he make the top 50 of all time list? Does he do that without Jordan?

u serious? Pippen is one of the best defenders of all time

SQ_Crazies wrote:

lhslep134 wrote: Well if Jim Brown is considered the GOAT by some, then SQ is certainly right in saying he's overrated. Being the 4th or 5th best back of all time is still fucking awesome, but when you're considered the GOAT and you're not (IMO of course, and SQ's as well), then he fits on this list.

Don't get me wrong, I love Jim, and I really wish I could have seen him play, but I don't think he's the GOAT. I think that title is reserved for Emmit or Barry.

Saying someone is overrated automatically flips a switch in some peoples head and they think you're saying they aren't good or something--in other words, they take it to an extreme. Overrated can still mean that you're one of the best ever, or very good, etc.

You apparently agree with me here, and I would have loved to watch Brown play as well. I've seen as much video of him running as I could probably hope to watch, so I've seen plenty what he accomplished on the field. I've seen the stats. The biggest thing for me is the size--and while he can't help that, it is what it is--it's something that should be taken into consideration IMO. Brown was bigger than some of the linemen blocking for him, bigger than most of the guys trying to tackle him. Fast as hell along with the size and power. He was the total package for sure. I give him credit for being what he was, but when people say he's the GOAT (which is the opinion of a lot of people) I feel like they ignore the fact that he was one of those athletes that was before his time. I feel like if you could take Adrian Peterson back to Brown's day, he would have dominated more than Brown. I think Brown could play today, but he wouldn't be nearly as good. I mean, it's just something that can't be ignored. Like I said, it's nothing he could help and it's not like he'd change it if he could--why would you? But I feel like some other running backs get overlooked because that doesn't come into consideration.

Couldnt the same be said for Lebron?

An opinion is subjective. Perception is based on only what has been observed or delivered in information. It's not incorrect based on that information. It's not rated at all. Certainly not overly rated.

If someone believes an athlete is the greatest of all time....he is, to them. That's not incorrect.

2quik4u wrote: Couldnt the same be said for Lebron?

Lebron is playing at a time where he might not even be the most athletic guy on his team (a bunch of people think it could be Moon, Lebron is just a lot stronger, and obviously a LOT better). There are athletes in the league who are similar to Lebron in athleticism, but the same cannot be said for Brown. Lebron, athletically, is not really ahead of his time compared to how much so Brown was. Obviously I know there's never been someone quite like Lebron, with the size, speed, strength, but the point I'm trying to make is that he's not that much of an outlier relative to his league as Brown was.


A similar comparison to Jim Brown would be Oscar Roberson in the time that he played in the NBA.

lhslep134 wrote: ...

A similar comparison to Jim Brown would be Oscar Roberson in the time that he played in the NBA.

That is a very good observation.

lhslep134 wrote:

2quik4u wrote: Couldnt the same be said for Lebron?

Lebron is playing at a time where he might not even be the most athletic guy on his team (a bunch of people think it could be Moon, Lebron is just a lot stronger, and obviously a LOT better). There are athletes in the league who are similar to Lebron in athleticism, but the same cannot be said for Brown. Lebron, athletically, is not really ahead of his time compared to how much so Brown was.


A similar comparison to Jim Brown would be Oscar Roberson in the time that he played in the NBA.

[size=xx-large]LOL[/size]


give some names that are similar to lebron in athleticism

Sergio Garcia- Supposed to be the next big thing, but cannot putt.
Michelle Wie- AKA the hype machine. Her parents may have ruined her
Andy Roddick- Great serve....then it gets ugly

lhslep134 wrote:

slcoach wrote: Couldn't agree more with Emmitt Smith. There were, IMO, 5-10 backs in that era that would have put up better numbers with those Cowboy team than Smith.

I couldn't disagree more. 11 straight 1000 yard seasons is awesome, I don't care what team you played for. The Cowboys didn't have great teams all 11 of those years.

1000 yard seasons do nothing for me. 1000 yards in a season is 62.5 yards a game. Hardly what I would consider a huge milestone. Smith had only one season with a yard per carry better than 4.7. Barry did it 6 times in 10 seasons. Smith had 1 in 15 seasons.

Emmitt was at best the 3rd best back in his era. (Thomas and Sanders). Throw in Bettis (Who's from Detroit by the way) and Faulk and I just don't think Smith was near the player he is thought to have been.

2quik4u wrote:

lhslep134 wrote:

2quik4u wrote: Couldnt the same be said for Lebron?

Lebron is playing at a time where he might not even be the most athletic guy on his team (a bunch of people think it could be Moon, Lebron is just a lot stronger, and obviously a LOT better). There are athletes in the league who are similar to Lebron in athleticism, but the same cannot be said for Brown. Lebron, athletically, is not really ahead of his time compared to how much so Brown was.


A similar comparison to Jim Brown would be Oscar Roberson in the time that he played in the NBA.

[size=xx-large]LOL[/size]


give some names that are similar to lebron in athleticism

Josh Smith, Dwight Howard, Amare Stoudemire

Red_Skin_Pride wrote: And before anyone says anything, i put this on this forum and not the pro sports forum because this forum gets way more discussion.

that still doesn't make this the right forum for it.

lhslep134 wrote:

2quik4u wrote:

lhslep134 wrote:

2quik4u wrote: Couldnt the same be said for Lebron?

Lebron is playing at a time where he might not even be the most athletic guy on his team (a bunch of people think it could be Moon, Lebron is just a lot stronger, and obviously a LOT better). There are athletes in the league who are similar to Lebron in athleticism, but the same cannot be said for Brown. Lebron, athletically, is not really ahead of his time compared to how much so Brown was.


A similar comparison to Jim Brown would be Oscar Roberson in the time that he played in the NBA.

[size=xx-large]LOL[/size]


give some names that are similar to lebron in athleticism

Josh Smith, Dwight Howard, Amare Stoudemire

He is stronger then all those guys cept maybe D12, way faster, and has more agility. There is no one close to lebrons athleticism. He has it all size, speed, power, agility.

slcoach wrote: ...
1000 yard seasons do nothing for me. 1000 yards in a season is 62.5 yards a game. Hardly what I would consider a huge milestone. Smith had only one season with a yard per carry better than 4.7. Barry did it 6 times in 10 seasons. Smith had 1 in 15 seasons.

...

Some good points regarding Sanders.

Jim Brown averaged greater than 5 yards per carry for his entire career.

slcoach wrote:

lhslep134 wrote:

slcoach wrote: Couldn't agree more with Emmitt Smith. There were, IMO, 5-10 backs in that era that would have put up better numbers with those Cowboy team than Smith.

I couldn't disagree more. 11 straight 1000 yard seasons is awesome, I don't care what team you played for. The Cowboys didn't have great teams all 11 of those years.

1000 yard seasons do nothing for me. 1000 yards in a season is 62.5 yards a game. Hardly what I would consider a huge milestone. Smith had only one season with a yard per carry better than 4.7. Barry did it 6 times in 10 seasons. Smith had 1 in 15 seasons.

Emmitt was at best the 3rd best back in his era. (Thomas and Sanders). Throw in Bettis (Who's from Detroit by the way) and Faulk and I just don't think Smith was near the player he is thought to have been.

And how many of those players are the leading rusher at all time? At some point you've got to consider the fact that he played for so long, as durability to me is a major factor in a running back. I don't think Smith is the GOAT, I just disagree that he's overrated. I personally think Barry Sanders is the best running back to put on pads, and I think he easily could have been the leading rusher of all time, but he put his life first, as did Brown.

2quik4u wrote:

lhslep134 wrote:

2quik4u wrote:

lhslep134 wrote:

2quik4u wrote: Couldnt the same be said for Lebron?

Lebron is playing at a time where he might not even be the most athletic guy on his team (a bunch of people think it could be Moon, Lebron is just a lot stronger, and obviously a LOT better). There are athletes in the league who are similar to Lebron in athleticism, but the same cannot be said for Brown. Lebron, athletically, is not really ahead of his time compared to how much so Brown was.


A similar comparison to Jim Brown would be Oscar Roberson in the time that he played in the NBA.

[size=xx-large]LOL[/size]


give some names that are similar to lebron in athleticism

Josh Smith, Dwight Howard, Amare Stoudemire

He is stronger then all those guys cept maybe D12, way faster, and has more agility. There is no one close to lebrons athleticism. He has it all size, speed, power, agility.

You didn't ask who was more athletic, you asked who was similar. If you re-read my edited post, I said obviously there's no one quite like Lebron.

And I answered you with people are ARE similar.

http://www.countdown2lebron.com/home/node/50

Obviously out of 190 players the majority picked Lebron, but the fact that other players were even named means they're similar.

lhslep134 wrote:

2quik4u wrote:

lhslep134 wrote:

2quik4u wrote:

lhslep134 wrote:

2quik4u wrote: Couldnt the same be said for Lebron?

Lebron is playing at a time where he might not even be the most athletic guy on his team (a bunch of people think it could be Moon, Lebron is just a lot stronger, and obviously a LOT better). There are athletes in the league who are similar to Lebron in athleticism, but the same cannot be said for Brown. Lebron, athletically, is not really ahead of his time compared to how much so Brown was.


A similar comparison to Jim Brown would be Oscar Roberson in the time that he played in the NBA.

[size=xx-large]LOL[/size]


give some names that are similar to lebron in athleticism

Josh Smith, Dwight Howard, Amare Stoudemire

He is stronger then all those guys cept maybe D12, way faster, and has more agility. There is no one close to lebrons athleticism. He has it all size, speed, power, agility.

You didn't ask who was more athletic, you asked who was similar. If you re-read my edited post, I said obviously there's no one quite like Lebron.

And I answered you with people are ARE similar.

How are they similar? All those guys play center or pf, Lebron is a sf. Lebron is so much faster then those guys it isnt funny.

slcoach wrote:

lhslep134 wrote:

slcoach wrote: Couldn't agree more with Emmitt Smith. There were, IMO, 5-10 backs in that era that would have put up better numbers with those Cowboy team than Smith.

I couldn't disagree more. 11 straight 1000 yard seasons is awesome, I don't care what team you played for. The Cowboys didn't have great teams all 11 of those years.

1000 yard seasons do nothing for me. 1000 yards in a season is 62.5 yards a game. Hardly what I would consider a huge milestone. Smith had only one season with a yard per carry better than 4.7. Barry did it 6 times in 10 seasons. Smith had 1 in 15 seasons.

Emmitt was at best the 3rd best back in his era. (Thomas and Sanders). Throw in Bettis (Who's from Detroit by the way) and Faulk and I just don't think Smith was near the player he is thought to have been.

First off, 11 straight 1000 yard seasons is an NFL record. When you consider the fact that the average lifespan of NFL players is less than five years and that most running backs don't even last 3 full seasons in the NFL, that's impressive. Also, he is the all-time leading rusher in NFL. I don't care if you had the greatest line of all time or a bunch of 4th graders blocking for you, if you're the all-time leading rusher, it's hard to be overrated.

I would agree that other backs had better individual years or maybe a few years that were better than any individual season of run for Smith, but when you look at his career, there are only a few who can compare. Also, if you look at career yard per carry, Emmitt average 4.2ypg, which is pretty much on par with most of the other greats. Really only Barry Sanders and Jim Brown had a substantially better average as far as the other top running backs all-time are concerned. His average is about middle-of-the-road for the top 20 leading rushers in NFL history (Bettis btw, only averaged 3.9ypc). Also, Emmitt Had 164 touchdowns in his career which is a TON more than anyone else on the list.

Also, outside of Dallas, I don't think that there are many who believe him to be the greatest of all time. Most would likely have him somewhere in the 4-6 range and that seems about right to me.

Brett Favre on the other hand, well that's a different story. One Super Bowl win, tops in the league in INT's almost every year, he's lost his teams almost as many games as he's won it seems, and it's like a cluster **** anytime analysts talk about him to see who can heap on the most praise. I'll never understand it.

2quik4u wrote:

lhslep134 wrote:

2quik4u wrote:

lhslep134 wrote:

2quik4u wrote:

lhslep134 wrote:

2quik4u wrote: Couldnt the same be said for Lebron?

Lebron is playing at a time where he might not even be the most athletic guy on his team (a bunch of people think it could be Moon, Lebron is just a lot stronger, and obviously a LOT better). There are athletes in the league who are similar to Lebron in athleticism, but the same cannot be said for Brown. Lebron, athletically, is not really ahead of his time compared to how much so Brown was.


A similar comparison to Jim Brown would be Oscar Roberson in the time that he played in the NBA.

[size=xx-large]LOL[/size]


give some names that are similar to lebron in athleticism

Josh Smith, Dwight Howard, Amare Stoudemire

He is stronger then all those guys cept maybe D12, way faster, and has more agility. There is no one close to lebrons athleticism. He has it all size, speed, power, agility.

You didn't ask who was more athletic, you asked who was similar. If you re-read my edited post, I said obviously there's no one quite like Lebron.

And I answered you with people are ARE similar.

How are they similar? All those guys play center or pf, Lebron is a sf. Lebron is so much faster then those guys it isnt funny.

And Ty Lawson is faster than Lebron. So what's your point? It's not just about speed. Like I said after I posted the link, the fact that other players were even mentioned means that they deserve to at least be considered similarly, if you're ignorant to that concept then it's unfortunate.

LeBron is a little ahead of his time, but it's not like Jim Browns stats paint him as a clear #1 either. And for the record, I think LeBron is the best player that ever played--but I have no idea if he'll go down as having the best legacy. And the legacy is what people remember, but I think this 2010 LeBron is the best player that has ever played the game. But I'll agree, you COULD say the same about LeBron but not nearly to the extent of Jim Brown.