Enter your username and password below to sign in to your PewterReport account.
x close
I'd like someone that is knowledgable on the subject to tell me what the avg size of the d-lineman and backers were during Brown's era. To my recollection, there were no 300+ Warren Sapps will cat like quickness playing back then. There were no Ray Lewis's..... 250+ that covered sideline to sideline. I read somewhere that Jack Lambert, in his prime, was about 220 lbs. He wouldn't even make an NFL roster today at that weight..... maybe at safety.
it's not an embarrassment but rather an observation from watching many many highlights of his, and unless you are old as dirt you probably never watched him play live yourself to be so sure about it.
This argument always is heard in just about every sport. "greatest" means so many different things to different people. Athletes continue to get better as the years go by. Based on the competition he played against, Jim Brown was the best RB in history. How he would do vs. today's competition is almost irrelevant.
He was big, quick, tough and durable. He must be considered within the context of his times, not this one. If you put bigger linemen against him, you must also put bigger linemen for him, more sophistication in offensive schemes and most importantly the opportunity to be even stronger given better nutrition and knowledge.He went over 1,000 yards rushing in seven of nine years (942 and 996) and never missed a game. At 104 YPG, he would have averaged 1,684 yards rushing per season if he was able to hold up that long (which there's no evidence he would not have). Five times over 5.0 YPC and yet never really got the ball that often (20.0 CPG, which is equal to Sanders and far less than Tomlinson's 21.3; it's more than Smith's 19.5, which is deceivingly driven down by his numbers over his last six years).So Brown, if he isn't the best ever, is on a short list. But I'd rank him No. 1.