Durability: Emmitt vs Julius

[johnnybluestar]

The offensive line is not the difference when comparing Emmitt's durability to Julius'. Toughness may not even be the culprit. What Emmitt had was very rare. He had this innate ability to almost always miss the big hit. He may have been the best ever. Whether it was turning his shoulder at the last second or simply knowing when to go down, he never got popped or jacked up as ESPN calls it, except for the lick Roy put on him. Throughout his career he always found a way to make people miss the rock solid hit. When ever the big hit was coming he somehow made it a glancing blow instead. I'm noit saying he didn't take any hits over hos career, because he did. I'm just saying he didn't take very many.
Julius on the other hand gets popped pretty good, pretty often. I don't think he has made Jacked Up yet, but he does get hit hard and solid. And as another poster mentioned he is always holding his ribs, limping a bit, shaking his hand or something. He doesn't miss plays because of those things, (he learned that lesson in his first pre-season), so he is not quite made of glass either. What happened with Julius' ankle is not a result of big hit or injury pronensess. He just got rolled up on in a way that legs don't bend.
I don't think I'm ready to say that Julius is injury prone and we need to be concerned, but he does take some good hits and he is only human. I think we are just a little spoiled around here. The last guy was just the most durable back in the history of the NFL.

 

[burmafrd]

Emmitt was a great back that hung in there even when injured- but I am not saying he is the MOST durable back- Sweetness has that locked up.

 

[EveryoneElse]

Ayy way you slice it, Jones has been prone to getting injured(guess it sounds better than injury prone) since he's been in the NFL. Will it pass? I sure hope so. It's not dumb or ridiculous to point out that it's been a problem thus far. I love Julius Jones and what he brings when he's healthy, but he's gotta STAY healthy to make a difference on this team.

 

[lane]

Emmitt was a great back that hung in there even when injured- but I am not saying he is the MOST durable back- Sweetness has that locked up.

we will never see the likes of sweetness again.

 

[Rack]

Emmitt was a great back that hung in there even when injured- but I am not saying he is the MOST durable back- Sweetness has that locked up.

Emmitt missed 12 games due to injury (plus 2 others in a holdout) in 15 years in the league.

Payton missed 8 games in 13 years in the league.

I wouldn't say Payton "has that locked up", especially considering Emmitt only missed 5 games due to injury in the same amount of years that Payton played (first 13 seasons).

 

[Nors]

JJ in 2 years is starting to miss a lot of games.

 

[burmafrd]

8 for 13 vs 12 for 15- pretty solid edge to me. AND for many of those years Payton was all the Bears had- there were no other offensive threats on the team. He got more attention then Emmitt did for our top years- and Payton's first 5 years were with a REALLY lousy team. Emmitt only played for a bad team his first year- and they were getting better- and did not have a bad team untill list last few years.

 

[BadKarma]

So you're telling us that having a dominant line versus a mediocre line makes no difference in a running back's durability? Tell that to a player who get's stood up by some 300lb linemen at the LOS and gets stuck by 3 or 4 trying to finish you off.

 

[Rack]

8 for 13 vs 12 for 15- pretty solid edge to me.

Like I said, Emmitt only missed 5 games in his first 13 seasons.

ANd I didn't say either had the edge over the other, I just don't think it's so "clear cut".

 

[zrinkill]

Emmitt was a great back that hung in there even when injured- but I am not saying he is the MOST durable back- Sweetness has that locked up.

but he died at 45 ........... ironic isnt it

 

[burmafrd]

The good die young.
When I look at some of the real garbage around that lives to be 80+, sometimes it makes you wonder.
Payton had a lousy team, a lousy line and a lousy coach his first 5 years. THAT is when he took a beating. Emmitt- except for the first year- was on a winning team his first 6 years. And his O line was VERY good, with a top QB, and FB, for his first 8 years. BIG DIFFERENCE.

 

[zrinkill]

So does that make Jerry Rice NOT the best Wide Reciever?

I always here people say all these BUTS about Emmitt when he is called the best of all time ............ but I never hear it about Jerry Rice or Joe Montana.

funny huh?

 

[lane]

The good die young.
When I look at some of the real garbage around that lives to be 80+, sometimes it makes you wonder.
Payton had a lousy team, a lousy line and a lousy coach his first 5 years. THAT is when he took a beating. Emmitt- except for the first year- was on a winning team his first 6 years. And his O line was VERY good, with a top QB, and FB, for his first 8 years. BIG DIFFERENCE.

i agree, emmitt will be the first to tell you that without moose ..... he would not have the rushing title.

 

[jksmith269]

8 for 13 vs 12 for 15- pretty solid edge to me. AND for many of those years Payton was all the Bears had- there were no other offensive threats on the team. He got more attention then Emmitt did for our top years- and Payton's first 5 years were with a REALLY lousy team. Emmitt only played for a bad team his first year- and they were getting better- and did not have a bad team untill list last few years.

So your saying we had a good team under Campo and Gailey, your also insuaiting that E wasn't the focus of our Offense during those years and during those years under those coaches he still played when hurt.

E was the most duriable back in my mind after the game against the G-men with the seperated shoulder over 150 yards rushing like 6 catches with one arm. Man that was something to see and I doubt you will ever see any player do that again.

 

[zrinkill]

No answer huh?

 

[SkinsandTerps]

Shouldnt even be a question. Jones first of all, hasnt had enough time to develop a pattern, Smith on the other hand is retired and a proven warrior.

 

[Hostile]

No answer huh?

I'd answer if I knew what the heck point you were trying to make.

 

[zrinkill]

Is it really that complicated?

People always complain that Emmitt shouldnt be considered the best because he had a line, a good leadblocker, a good offensive balance ect ect

But Jerry Rice had the same advantages .......... and people never complain when he is called the best ........... why is that?

same thing with Joe Montana ........... why is Emmitt the only one who's legacy is punished for having other good people on his team?

 

[Trip]

So does that make Jerry Rice NOT the best Wide Reciever?

I always here people say all these BUTS about Emmitt when he is called the best of all time ............ but I never hear it about Jerry Rice or Joe Montana.

funny huh?

Ultimate greatness in a QB is judged by championships. Period. It's just how it is.

Rice is so far ahead of every other WR it's pretty hard to debate.

Many great RB's have played it in the league, and there's a lot of players closer to Emmitt than either of the other two.

 

[zrinkill]

But the same excuses that people try to pin on Emmitt would and should apply to them also .......... esp since they played with each other for years and years ..........


My point is that EVERY great player in Football has other great players helping them ......... or they dont become legendary ......... just good.