Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Earl Campbell: Today’s running backs look average « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 ... 5

BucDaFackUp

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4360
Online
« : August 03, 2012, 04:32:49 PM »

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/08/03/earl-campbell-todays-running-backs-look-average/

Earl Campbell: Today’s running backs look average
Posted by Josh Alper on August 3, 2012, 4:14 PM EDT



Jim Brown grabbed some attention this offseason when he called Browns first-round pick Trent Richardson an “ordinary” running back.

One of Brown’s fellow Hall of Famers doesn’t think Richardson is the only back out there deserving of the label. Earl Campbell told NFL.com that he doesn’t see any dominant backs in today’s game, largely because of the way the game is played.

“I think it’s because the way the game has changed, to where all of them just look like they’re average backs because they pass the ball so much,” Campbell said. “I don’t think there’s a runner in pro football you could say was like a Jim Brown.”

This sounds a bit like a cranky old man saying things were better in the old days, but Campbell’s not really knocking the backs of today as much as the style of football. You don’t have many backs in the NFL right now who carry a workload remotely like the ones that Brown and Campbell carried back in the day and the shift to pass-happier offenses has also changed line play to focus on pass blocking at the expense of three yards and a cloud of dust. That means teams have a harder time holding onto leads by running out the clock on the ground than they did in the past and, as a result, the league moves more toward passing.

Could some of today’s backs have thrived in the style that Brown and Campbell rode to Canton? Probably, but there doesn’t seem to be a high likelihood that they’ll get the chance in today’s NFL.


Beatles123

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 9117
Offline
« #1 : August 03, 2012, 04:35:13 PM »

Has he not seen AP? Sproles? Blount?

This space for rent....*sigh* I trusted you coach.

anterrabae33

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4429
Offline
« #2 : August 03, 2012, 05:00:39 PM »

Has he not seen AP? Sproles? Blount?

Those guys pale in comparison. AP would be a broken man if he played the style that Brown and Campbell did.

Boid Fink

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 53768
Offline
« #3 : August 03, 2012, 06:24:19 PM »

Has he not seen AP? Sproles? Blount?

Those guys pale in comparison. AP would be a broken man if he played the style that Brown and Campbell did.
I disagree.

I think AP would have easily rushed for 2k every year that he played back then.  He is a mystical blend of speed and unearthly power, and it comes from a leaner physique.  He would have ran circles around them slower defenders.  There weren't any atheltes like AP back then, and if there were, they were a very very small group.

I think MJD would have been more apropos than Sproles would have been. 



Ladyfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6757
Offline
« #4 : August 03, 2012, 06:34:01 PM »

If you've never seen Jim Brown play in person, you missed  a lot of football lore.  He played at Manhasset High School on Long Island and was a Junior when I was a Freshman.  His style of running was so exciting its like Blount jumping over people for 100 yards over and over again.  He shed players right and left and barely slowed play after play.  Once you saw his play, other RBs looked pathetic.  He wasn't that big a guy really, but solid with a passion.  He revealed once that he hated to be touched and that was one thing that made him "go".  I'm glad I had that experience for a couple of high school years.  Went to Syracuse for a couple of games but never saw him in the NFL in person.  Too bad. It must have been a thrill.


McCoy93

****
Starter

Posts : 785
Offline
« #5 : August 03, 2012, 06:52:52 PM »

Players like Mcfadden, Peterson and Lesean mccoy would have success during the time of the great jim brown; hell throw in a young brian westbrook too

youngone

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 12199
Offline
« #6 : August 03, 2012, 06:54:28 PM »

I wonder what Earl Campbell thinks about the defensive lineman and linebackers of today?

anterrabae33

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4429
Offline
« #7 : August 03, 2012, 06:56:53 PM »

Has he not seen AP? Sproles? Blount?

Those guys pale in comparison. AP would be a broken man if he played the style that Brown and Campbell did.
I disagree.

I think AP would have easily rushed for 2k every year that he played back then.  He is a mystical blend of speed and unearthly power, and it comes from a leaner physique.  He would have ran circles around them slower defenders.  There weren't any atheltes like AP back then, and if there were, they were a very very small group.

I think MJD would have been more apropos than Sproles would have been.

AP is one of the only guys that has a skill set like Campbell but the NFL was a lot rougher (most plays would be have penalties today) back then. AP might have been able to get 2K back then but who knows how many yards Campbell could have rushed for in today's game with all the advancements in training and exercise. The man trucked linebackers and not even the Barrett Ruud Hey how ya doin? Come on in kind of  linebackers, the nasty ones who actually tackled.

1sparkybuc

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 7267
Offline
« #8 : August 03, 2012, 07:06:03 PM »

Jim Brown would look ordinary in today's game. He had a HUGE advantage in size and speed in his era. That would not be the case today. Blount and Freeman would both have been linemen in Jim Brown's time. Most players had offseason jobs and the season was much shorter. There are HOF players that couldn't make the PS on most teams today. There are exceptions of course, but think about it. When Unitas signed with the Colts, he was 6' 2" and 155 pounds. No decent college team would consider a QB that size, forget about a pro team.

Jim Brown was bigger than some DLmen and EVERYONE behind them, combined with more speed than most DBs. Now there are LBs who could match him in size and speed. These guys train year round and have a diet plan to fit their body types. It's simly not possible to make a fair comparison. I'm old enough to remember Brown's career and that era. I should have a bias in favor of that time, but I don't. The truth is too obvious. Life was harder back then and many of the players were raised on farms. They got their strength from manual labor. Anyone that was 6' 9" worked in a sideshow for Barnum & Bailey. Nowadays it's not common, but it's not unusual either. Jim Brown could probably play in today's game, but he wouldn't be anything special, and the vast majority of RBs from his era would not be playing at all.

youngone

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 12199
Offline
« #9 : August 03, 2012, 07:08:51 PM »

^ that

NotDeadYet

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 6790
Offline
« #10 : August 03, 2012, 08:31:15 PM »

    The big difference in football today vs. 50 years ago is the sheer number of tremendous athletes playing the game. WAY more $$$ out there for them than back then, which has vastly improved sports training, science and medicine.
    Jim Brown was just a superior athlete for his time and few individual defenders could stay with his combination of speed and power. And yes, it was a MUCH rougher game then than now, BUT fewer games (12-14). You could pretty much hit an opponent any way you wanted.
    The writer's comment  "Campbell’s not really knocking the backs of today as much as the style of football" is spot on!! But is Trent Richardson "average"?  We won't know for a while, but the Browns would be very disapppointed if so...

Hate

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 39932
Offline
« #11 : August 03, 2012, 08:37:55 PM »

Has he not seen AP? Sproles? Blount?

Those guys pale in comparison. AP would be a broken man if he played the style that Brown and Campbell did.

Completely disagree..... and i love me some Earl Campbell. He top 3 RBs to ME!!

-------------------------------------------------------
   

 I thought Lovie said he wanted quickness & speed, even at the QB position?

1sparkybuc

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 7267
Offline
« #12 : August 03, 2012, 09:00:03 PM »

    The big difference in football today vs. 50 years ago is the sheer number of tremendous athletes playing the game. WAY more $$$ out there for them than back then, which has vastly improved sports training, science and medicine.
    Jim Brown was just a superior athlete for his time and few individual defenders could stay with his combination of speed and power. And yes, it was a MUCH rougher game then than now, BUT fewer games (12-14). You could pretty much hit an opponent any way you wanted.
    The writer's comment  "Campbell’s not really knocking the backs of today as much as the style of football" is spot on!! But is Trent Richardson "average"?  We won't know for a while, but the Browns would be very disapppointed if so...

Jim Brown would be lucky to be as "ordinary" as Trent Richardson in today's game. He would have NO advantage over any defense in the league. Defenders have caught up to him in both size and speed. He probably could play. He just wouldn't be anything special.

Hate

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 39932
Offline
« #13 : August 03, 2012, 09:01:11 PM »

Imagine Ray Ray in his prime meeting Jim Brown at the LOS.

-------------------------------------------------------
   

 I thought Lovie said he wanted quickness & speed, even at the QB position?

youngone

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 12199
Offline
« #14 : August 03, 2012, 09:07:45 PM »

Imagine Ray Ray in his prime meeting Jim Brown at the LOS.
I was thinking the same thing. It would probably look like what he did to Eddie George. Ray Lewis use to tee off on that guy every time they played, and Eddie George was a big dude.
  Page: 1 2 3 ... 5
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Earl Campbell: Today’s running backs look average « previous next »
:  

Hide Tools Show Tools