Interesting Emmitt Smith Fact

Doomsday101

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
Super_Kazuya said:
When you lie, you get called a liar. And putting me on ignore won't stop me from pointing them out.
Barry did not have "3 all pro OL when he came in". His OL earned exactly one All-Pro nomination combined for his entire 10 year career.
Click to expand...

Barry was the best pure runner no doubt he was not a blocker in pass protection he was not a great short yardage back or goal line RB. He could create on his own and could take it the distance even when things broke down. Great individual player but he was not going to hang in and block effectively and did not have the power to grind out the tough yards. That is not being a homer that is looking at 2 great RB in Smith and Sanders
 
Super_Kazuya

Super_Kazuya

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,074
Reaction score
9,113
Doomsday101 said:
Barry was the best pure runner no doubt he was not a blocker in pass protection he was not a great short yardage back or goal line RB. He could create on his own and could take it the distance even when things broke down. Great individual player but he was not going to hang in and block effectively and did not have the power to grind out the tough yards. That is not being a homer that is looking at 2 great RB in Smith and Sanders
Click to expand...
I don't have a problem with that take, but there are a lot of anecdotes, subjective scouting reports, twinkles in memory, or a bunch of other things flying around in threads like these that really can't be proven. Barry played long before the days of Sunday Ticket in everyone's home, so the vast majority of people here (including myself) saw a small fraction of his games. Objectively, Sanders carried the ball over 3,000 times, more than all but 6 backs who ever lived, so the idea that he was some kind of specialist who ran around in the backfield in circles on 1st and 2nd down losing yards every play is laughable. He was an every down back who blocked, ran in short yard situations, and caught passes out of the backfield.
 
cowboyec

cowboyec

Well-Known Member
Messages
33,579
Reaction score
40,418
Super_Kazuya said:
I don't have a problem with that take, but there are a lot of anecdotes, subjective scouting reports, twinkles in memory, or a bunch of other things flying around in threads like these that really can't be proven. Barry played long before the days of Sunday Ticket in everyone's home, so the vast majority of people here (including myself) saw a small fraction of his games. Objectively, Sanders carried the ball over 3,000 times, more than all but 6 backs who ever lived, so the idea that he was some kind of specialist who ran around in the backfield in circles on 1st and 2nd down losing yards every play is laughable. He was an every down back who blocked, ran in short yard situations, and caught passes out of the backfield.
Click to expand...
he wasn't as effective a blocker as Emmitt or Walter Payton,in my opinion.
and tho he was a helluva back...he did come up short in big games...and was prone to lose yardage.
Living here in Oklahoma,saw alot of Barry Sanders games.
Great back.
If forced to choose....Id take Emmitt or Payton.
More complete backs in my opinion.
 
Super_Kazuya

Super_Kazuya

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,074
Reaction score
9,113
cowboyec said:
he wasn't as effective a blocker as Emmitt or Walter Payton,in my opinion.
and tho he was a helluva back...he did come up short in big games...and was prone to lose yardage.
Living here in Oklahoma,saw alot of Barry Sanders games.
Great back.
If forced to choose....Id take Emmitt or Payton.
More complete backs in my opinion.
Click to expand...
He did not come up short in big games. The Lions had a really hard time in one particular game against the Packers that is blown out of proportion where the entire team only gained 170 yards. If you remove that game, Barry is his normal five yards per carry self. His biggest problem was playing on a lousy team that couldn't regularly get him to the playoffs, and when they did the game situation quickly turned to where he could not be used. He was very underutilized in the playoffs, only averaging about 15 carries per game, in contrast to his usual 20 carries per game for his career.
As far as losing yardage, all backs lose yardage. Emmitt lost a ton of yardage. As a matter of fact, if we had the actual data to prove it (we don't) I would bet a large amount of money that Emmitt is the all time leader in negative yardage... by a mile.
 
viman96

viman96

Thread Killer
Messages
21,396
Reaction score
22,349
Super_Kazuya said:
He did not come up short in big games. The Lions had a really hard time in one particular game against the Packers that is blown out of proportion where the entire team only gained 170 yards. If you remove that game, Barry is his normal five yards per carry self. His biggest problem was playing on a lousy team that couldn't regularly get him to the playoffs, and when they did the game situation quickly turned to where he could not be used. He was very underutilized in the playoffs, only averaging about 15 carries per game, in contrast to his usual 20 carries per game for his career.
As far as losing yardage, all backs lose yardage. Emmitt lost a ton of yardage. As a matter of fact, if we had the actual data to prove it (we don't) I would bet a large amount of money that Emmitt is the all time leader in negative yardage... by a mile.
Click to expand...

Sanders came up short in big games. He is 0-4 playing outside in the postseason. He leads the league in negative yards (-952).
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
45,051
Reaction score
47,852
Super_Kazuya said:
He did not come up short in big games. The Lions had a really hard time in one particular game against the Packers that is blown out of proportion where the entire team only gained 170 yards. If you remove that game, Barry is his normal five yards per carry self. His biggest problem was playing on a lousy team that couldn't regularly get him to the playoffs, and when they did the game situation quickly turned to where he could not be used. He was very underutilized in the playoffs, only averaging about 15 carries per game, in contrast to his usual 20 carries per game for his career.
As far as losing yardage, all backs lose yardage. Emmitt lost a ton of yardage. As a matter of fact, if we had the actual data to prove it (we don't) I would bet a large amount of money that Emmitt is the all time leader in negative yardage... by a mile.
Click to expand...
I think you'd lose. Emmit had very very few long runs. And very very few lost yardage runs. He regularly ripped through for 2-6 yds.
 
Super_Kazuya

Super_Kazuya

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,074
Reaction score
9,113
viman96 said:
Sanders came up short in big games. He is 0-4 playing outside in the postseason. He leads the league in negative yards (-952).
Click to expand...
0-4? Is he a starting pitcher? Now RBs have the fake stat of wins and losses in addition to the QB? Get out of here with that...

There is no proof on the negative rushing stuff. It's an old wive's tale. The data doesn't exist that far back.
 
Aviano90

Aviano90

Go Seahawks!!!
Messages
16,758
Reaction score
24,485
Aviano90

Aviano90

Go Seahawks!!!
Messages
16,758
Reaction score
24,485
Super_Kazuya said:
It's just a staff story... it cannot be corroborated by existing data or even viman96's blurb. Who is 2 through 5? As I said, logic overwhelmingly points to Emmitt being the all-time negative yardage leader.
Click to expand...
Why would you think the data is not available? The data exists. It may not be easily obtainable by us on the internet, but the records do exist. Is there any reason why you are skeptical of the data that was provided on a link 6 years ago other than the fact that you believe in your mind Emmitt would have been the leader?
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
45,051
Reaction score
47,852
Super_Kazuya said:
It's just a staff story... it cannot be corroborated by existing data or even viman96's blurb. Who is 2 through 5? As I said, logic overwhelmingly points to Emmitt being the all-time negative yardage leader.
Click to expand...
It doesn't. One of Emmit's strengths was that he almost always gained positive yards. Logic actually points toward it being someone else.
 
Super_Kazuya

Super_Kazuya

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,074
Reaction score
9,113
Aviano90 said:
Why would you think the data is not available? The data exists. It may not be easily obtainable by us on the internet, but the records do exist. Is there any reason why you are skeptical of the data that was provided on a link 6 years ago other than the fact that you believe in your mind Emmitt would have been the leader?
Click to expand...
I said it cannot be corroborated, not that it doesn't exist (though i don't really believe it exists either) I'm skeptical of the data because I've seen so many different numbers over the years. Mind you, I am not debating that Sanders lost a lot of yards... he carried the ball over 3,000 times, I have no doubt he is right there at the top. I just don't see any credible reason that the guy who is also known for a fact to have lost tons of yards but carried the ball 50% times more than Sanders isn't at the top. It has nothing to do with back quality... it just happens if you carry the ball enough.
 
Toruk_Makto

Toruk_Makto

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,231
Reaction score
17,331
John813 said:
@Toruk_Makto

This thread is for you lol.

The point the OP brings up was one of two reasons why I was against taking a back at #4. The second reason was that you could find close enough backs, in terms of talent, in day 2/3 of the draft.

I understood that they wanted that triplet back next to Romo and Dez for one last push, but long term it stinks taking a player that high with the thought in the back of your head that he may not be worth re-signing after his rookie ELC due to declining in his mid to late 20's.
Usually don't have to worry about that for OL/DL/QB/LB/DBs etc.
Click to expand...
Don't get me started LOL.

There are people who still to this day believe it was the correct move over Ramsey.
 
viman96

viman96

Thread Killer
Messages
21,396
Reaction score
22,349
Super_Kazuya said:
0-4? Is he a starting pitcher? Now RBs have the fake stat of wins and losses in addition to the QB? Get out of here with that...

There is no proof on the negative rushing stuff. It's an old wive's tale. The data doesn't exist that far back.
Click to expand...

So Barry the most awesomist eva RB did not contribute to the Lions crappy postseason play?

He gained more than 100 yds once and scored just 1 TD. He played enough playoff games to have better stats. Not to mention a bell cow RB of his caliber is expected to produce in the postseason.
 
Aviano90

Aviano90

Go Seahawks!!!
Messages
16,758
Reaction score
24,485
Super_Kazuya said:
I said it cannot be corroborated, not that it doesn't exist (though i don't really believe it exists either) I'm skeptical of the data because I've seen so many different numbers over the years. Mind you, I am not debating that Sanders lost a lot of yards... he carried the ball over 3,000 times, I have no doubt he is right there at the top. I just don't see any credible reason that the guy who is also known for a fact to have lost tons of yards but carried the ball 50% times more than Sanders isn't at the top. It has nothing to do with back quality... it just happens if you carry the ball enough.
Click to expand...
Well, can't argue with that. When someone's mind is made up, it's made up. Sorry I interjected.
 
Super_Kazuya

Super_Kazuya

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,074
Reaction score
9,113
kskboys said:
It doesn't. One of Emmit's strengths was that he almost always gained positive yards. Logic actually points toward it being someone else.
Click to expand...
Nope, Emmitt lost tons of yards... we know he at least lost 756. But we can't fill in the data ourselves because of missing box score data.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top