What makes Prime Barry Sanders better than Prime Jim Brown?

[mdonnelly21]

These two imo are 1A & 1B 

[Superduperman]

I didn't see JB live. I saw Barry's whole career live.

All I can say about Barry vs. anyone else, JB or anyone, is: What do you watch sports for? Is it to see guys be consistently great? Or is it to see guys, in their best moments, do things that are beyond just being fast, or strong, or big? Things that make you wonder what you just saw.

Both are good things to watch. But Barry did that second thing more than any other pro athlete I ever saw. Maybe Jordan in his super-athletic years before the championships was on that level, too.

[Jotun_Fan]

I don't think I can knock anything from Jim Brown, there's a reason so many people regard him as the best of all time (possibly best football player of all time.)  The only quasi thing I could say was, he was overpowering players who were much smaller than in current times.  Although, who's to say that he wouldn't be bigger and faster if playing today (monstrous!)  I never got to see him play, I'm not sure how many posters here have seen much of him either.  But he's quite possibly the best player to have ever played in two different sports!

I did get to see Barry play, and there's plenty of youtube highlights available too, so even younger people can get to watch him, of course it's different emotionally than watching it live.  I really do think he was a huge part of the turnaround in Detroit.  I don't like to say players singlehandedly turned a franchise around, but I don't know if you can make a better case than for Barry. 1988 Detroit ranked 28th (last) in yards/attempt.  With Barry they were ranked 1st, 1st, 5th, 8th, 7th, 1st, 3rd, 2nd, 1st, 3rd.  The Lions made the playoffs three times in 30 years prior to his arrival, in the 20+ years since he retired they made the playoffs 4 times.  They made the playoffs 5 times in ten years with him, including their only playoff win.  No offense to Lions fans, but they've been a terrible organization over the last 60 or so years, which I think makes his accomplishments really stand out.

One thing you'll see people post about Barry Sanders is something like "his O-line was terrible, if he had Emmitt's line he'd have had like 20,000 yards."  I don't really agree, his line was probably average to above average most years.   I do think being in a run and shoot style offense really affected his running style, and also left him to fend on his own pretty often.  So many of his great highlights you'll see guys in his face in the backfield, again I think due to the spread run and shoot having holes for defenders to penetrate.  So many draw plays.  I also think it made it easier for good teams to shut him down in the playoffs.  A run and shoot offense would also suggest a higher reliance on good quarterback play, which I really think was lacking.  I guess Scott Mitchell had one or two decent years, but for the most part the Lions really struggled there.  Maybe it could have been different with different coaching, I'm not sure how good of a coach Wayne Fontes was but being a defensive coordinator they seemed to have decent to good defenses.  They also played in a relatively tough division IMO (Vikings with Cris Carter, Packers with Brett Favre, Chicago was still pretty good toward the end of the 80's.)  But I think playing in a more standard offense Barry would have had more touchdowns, more bulk yards, but then probably a lower YPC and also not as many "wow" runs on his highlight reel.   Also Fontes didn't use him in goal line situations even though I think Barry was pretty good in them, just because Barry got hurt once and he didn't want to risk injuring him.

The knocks against Barry are: too much running backward, didn't show up in the playoffs, wasn't used in goal line situations, maybe not the best blocker and pass receiver.  I really think the first two could have been much different had he played in a standard offense.  Maybe most people don't like to do this, but if you watch highlights from his 1988 season in college you don't see any of the hesitation to hit holes or anything, which makes me think a lot of it was learned or coached or a product of his system in the NFL.  I don't think you'll ever see another season like that in college football. One article compared his weekly rushing total to the corresponding week of the current season (2017) of whoever the top rusher was out of the power 5 conferences.  Barry ended up having more yards, and he sat out the 4th quarter pretty often.  I think some guy may have broken his single season TD record, but that was in 14 games versus 11 for Barry (his bowl game stats didn't count toward his totals, 200+ yards and 5 tds I think.)  Hard to believe that the previous season hall of famer Thurman Thomas was the starter and ran for ~1800 rushing yards, and Barry would absolutely destroy those numbers the next season.

[Uncle Buck]

Being a fan of an NFC North team that was terrorized by Barry for his whole career, I have to say that as much respect as I have for him, Jim Brown was probably the better running back.  Barry had great moves, but Brown was more of a North/South type of runner.  If I had to draft one of them with the benefit of hindsight, I'd shed a tear and probably turn in a card with Jim Brown's name on it.

[BleedTheClock]

Jim Brown was basically a mutant playing amongst children. If you like “ooh’s” and “ahhh’s,” you’ll probably like Barry Sanders. Better player? Jim Brown. 
 

So often, people say that these old timers couldn’t hang in today’s NFL. Jim Brown is an exception. He ran a 100 yard dash in the same time Ted Ginn did. He was basically Adrian Peterson with a better ability to churn and find the hidden yards. 

[Hunter2_1]

If you're looking at it relatively (which I argue you should), Jim Brown today would be, what, something like a Derrick Henry/Brandon Jacobs hybrid with more speed than most defenders and the tackle bust ability of Josh Jacobs?

But if you're doing that with JB you've got to do it with sanders, but relatively, he'd still be a similar player today wouldn't he. It's less of a jump.

If you scale everything up to the same factor (player ability, research, culture, conditioning, medical etc etc) - JB is possibly the most unplayable player in history on offense. That's not to say Sanders wouldn't be. We know he was mostly unplayable - it wasn't that long ago. Still though, it was like watching men vs boys at times.

Edited June 8, 2020 by Hunter2_1

[Jotun_Fan]

How much is Jim Brown's legacy enhanced by the fact that he played for a team that won a championship and competed for others? He played with multiple hall of famers on offense, multiple lineman who were hall of famers, and maybe the greatest coach of all time.

How would his career be perceived if he had played for the Steelers? Or Cardinals? What if Barry played for the 49ers? What if OJ had won a championship (and not allegedly murdered people?)

I also wonder how long it would have taken for lacrosse to change their rules had Jim Brown not played.

[THE DUKE]

Imagine if Chris Henry had the agility and vision of Walter Payton and the speed of Chris Johnson.  That's Jim Brown.

Edited June 8, 2020 by THE DUKE

[patriotsheatyan]

Brown never had a rival at any point in his career. He is the best ever at the position.

[Mr Bad Example]

4 hours ago, patriotsheatyan said:

Brown never had a rival at any point in his career. He is the best ever at the position.

Jim Taylor was the #2 rusher over that span, and he's like 3000 or 4000 yds behind Brown. 

[Chuck80]

On 6/8/2020 at 9:56 PM, Mr Bad Example said:

Jim Taylor was the #2 rusher over that span, and he's like 3000 or 4000 yds behind Brown. 

Right I'm gonna go with Jim Brown and the elite oline didn't matter with Jim he still broke 7 tackles per quarter with ease and with players intentionally trying to hurt him (also hurling racist slurs at him) and he ironically ended careers just running over people

 

p.s. there's a few YouTube videos of Jim carrying three guys on him while two more try to tackle him and he still got 20 yards before going down 

Edited June 10, 2020 by Chuck80

[fortdetroit]

Where would Barry Sanders go in the 2021 NFL draft, given the how devalued running backs are in the league today?  

[Chargers]

How good were Jim Brown's hands? Sanders ability to catch would be more impactful in this era than the 90s. You also got to wonder if Brown could take the hits delivered by modern NFL players that have been training to be football players their whole lives. 

[Mr Bad Example]

13 minutes ago, Classic said:

How good were Jim Brown's hands? Sanders ability to catch would be more impactful in this era than the 90s. You also got to wonder if Brown could take the hits delivered by modern NFL players that have been training to be football players their whole lives. 

I feel like that's a woulda/coulda/shoulda. What sort of beast would Brown be if he'd been training to max out his enormous physical ability? 

 

Bottom line is you can't really deal in that sort of hypothetical; Brown was significantly outgaining the #2 rusher almost every season he played. It wasn't quite the Hutsonian double/triple up on the #2 guy, but that sort of dominance speaks for itself. 

 

And I say this as someone who, in 30+ yrs of watching the NFL, thinks Sanders is the most talented back I've ever seen. 

Edited June 10, 2020 by Mr Bad Example

[Mr Bad Example]

19 minutes ago, Classic said:

How good were Jim Brown's hands? 

Brown averaged 2.2 rec/g in the slugfest-oriented 1960s. Sanders averaged 2.3 rec/g in the much more passing-friendly 90s (and spent a few years in a run-and-shoot offense). Brown also averaged 9.5 yds/rec vs 8.3 for Sanders. I don't think worrying about Brown's "hands" makes Sanders look that good.