Why I will always dislike Jim Brown...

[Royal Laegotti]

That logic doesn't really make sense. Every decade the competition gets bigger, stronger, and faster. Jim was facing the best of the best in his time just like Emmitt faced the best of the best of his time. Brown couldn't help how superior he was to the competition.

True. But that's what, to me, makes what Emmitt, Walter and Barry did more impressive, against a more level field of competition, than what Brown accomplished against players who were smaller and slower.

 

[The Panch]

True. But that's what, to me, makes what Emmitt, Walter and Barry did more impressive, against a more level field of competition, than what Brown accomplished against players who were smaller and slower.

So if there was a back to come in the league now who was physically superior to his competition in size, speed, and vision, would you take away from what he did??

 

[Royal Laegotti]

So if there was a back to come in the league now who was physically superior to his competition in size, speed, and vision, would you take away from what he did??

I'd have to wait and see.

Quite frankly I've never seen what all the slobbering over Jim Brown was about. I've watched his highlights for years and they aren't really as impressive or as inspiring to me. Now watching some Emmitt's, Walter's and Barry's highlights makes me go WOW. I think most would say that LT is the best RB in this decade and I still don't think he's as good as Emmitt, Payton or Sanders even though he may break Emmitt's record one day, to me his play is great but it's not awe inspiring to me like those 3 were. Really it's just all about opinion and you have mine whether you like it or not.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I'd have to wait and see.

Quite frankly I've never seen what all the slobbering over Jim Brown was about. I've watched his highlights for years and they aren't really as impressive or as inspiring to me. Now watching some Emmitt's, Walter's and Barry's highlights makes me go WOW. I think most would say that LT is the best RB in this decade and I still don't think he's as good as Emmitt, Payton or Sanders even though he may break Emmitt's record one day, to me his play is great but it's not awe inspiring to me like those 3 were. Really it's just all about opinion and you have mine whether you like it or not.

Really its basically the same thing as Chamberlain in basketball. They were men amongst boys.

Brown was just so much more physically dominant over the other players. Just like Chamberlain.

 

[Nav22]

So if there was a back to come in the league now who was physically superior to his competition in size, speed, and vision, would you take away from what he did??

RB John Doe gets drafted this year. He's 280 lbs and runs like a deer. He's just too big, strong, and fast for NFL defenders to handle. He has a remarkable HOF career.

Let's say in 40 years, the average RB is 260-280 lbs. And defenders are also MUCH bigger, stronger, and faster than they are now. DBs are 240, LBs are 280, and DL are 380. If a 280 lbs RB in THIS era has a remarkable HOF career, wouldn't you say it's more impressive than John Doe's career?

That's not take away from Doe's career... but you can't ignore reality. Jim Brown (or the Doe example) was as big or bigger than probably 90% of his competition.

That's my one hang-up with the comparisons between players of different eras... the competition. I don't care how a 25 year old Jim Brown would do against a 2008 NFL defense. But I do care that Brown didn't face the same proportionately sized competition that this eras RBs have to face. That DOES make a difference.

That's why I also believe Kobe's 81 was more impressive than Wilt's 100.

Really its basically the same thing as Chamberlain in basketball. They were men amongst boys.

Brown was just so much more physically dominant over the other players. Just like Chamberlain.

You beat me to it... great minds think alike.

 

[Royal Laegotti]

Really its basically the same thing as Chamberlain in basketball. They were men amongst boys.

Brown was just so much more physically dominant over the other players. Just like Chamberlain.

Yes, that's a good comparison. I guess that's why Jordan and Bird were so impressive to me as well because they were about average size in comparison to their competition and dominated.

 

[The Panch]

That's why I also believe Kobe's 81 was more impressive than Wilt's 100.

And yet if you were to compare Kobe's 81 to to Wilt's 100, you have to take away 7 points from the seven 3-pointers he made cause they didnt count in Wilt's day. So realistically, you'd be comparing 74 to 100.

 

[Nav22]

And yet if you were to compare Kobe's 81 to to Wilt's 100, you have to take away 7 points from the seven 3-pointers he made cause they didnt count in Wilt's day. So realistically, you'd be comparing 74 to 100.

By that standard, I could argue that if there was no 3 point line today, Kobe would not have taken any long outside shots in that game. He'd have attacked the basket instead, and might've scored even more than 81.

 

[Royal Laegotti]

And yet if you were to compare Kobe's 81 to to Wilt's 100, you have to take away 7 points from the seven 3-pointers he made cause they didnt count in Wilt's day. So realistically, you'd be comparing 74 to 100.

:laugh2:
Had they counted in Wilt's day Wilt would've just stood outside the 3 point arch himself and reached over to the basket and dropped them in and none of the midget's in comparison could've done anything about it.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Lets be quite frank here, guys and quit beating around the bush.

Due to segregation and general racism many superior athletes were kept off of the football field in Browns day. Granted the first black NFL player was in 1946 but it wasnt until the 50s and when Brown started playing that black players really started to get a chance to play.

Brown was playing against inferior talent and had it not been for segregation, the talent level would have been much higher.

The same held true with Chamberlain. It was just the time period.

You can make up hypotheticals all day long but no one is going to last 9 years and average 100 yards a game and 5 YPC over that time period. Just like no one is ever going to touch Chamberlains 50 pts per game season or his 50 rebound game.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

By that standard, I could argue that if there was no 3 point line today, Kobe would not have taken any long outside shots in that game. He'd have attacked the basket instead, and might've scored even more than 81.

and they would have packed the lane. not too mention that you cannot lay a hand on the perimeter anymore. go watch players like Dr J and George Gervin's film and you see them getting mauled over and over again. go watch wilts film. hed have 3 guys hanging on him he just happened to be 7 feet tall and 300 punds which pretty much outweighed everyone by 70 lbs.

 

[The Panch]

By that standard, I could argue that if there was no 3 point line today, Kobe would not have taken any long outside shots in that game. He'd have attacked the basket instead, and might've scored even more than 81.

But.....he didnt. Kobe doesnt command the paint like Wilt did.

 

[Nav22]

But.....he didnt. Kobe doesnt command the paint like Wilt did.

And the 3 point line.......does exist. And Wilt couldn't shoot the lights out like Kobe can.

Kobe is an average-sized player and dominated. Wilt was a man among boys and dominated.

Pretty clear to me what's more impressive. If they're equally impressive, perhaps I should try to sign up for Pop Warner football. I'll pound those 12 year olds into the ground!

not too mention that you cannot lay a hand on the perimeter anymore.

You also couldn't play any zone defense back then. And "packing the lane" won't stop Kobe because he can do it all. He's as good an all-around scorer as the NBA has ever seen, IMO.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

And the 3 point line.......does exist. And Wilt couldn't shoot the lights out like Kobe can.

Kobe is an average-sized player and dominated. Wilt was a man among boys and dominated.

Pretty clear to me what's more impressive. If they're equally impressive, perhaps I should try to sign up for Pop Warner football. I'll pound those 12 year olds into the ground!You also couldn't play any zone defense back then. And "packing the lane" won't stop Kobe because he can do it all. He's as good an all-around scorer as the NBA has ever seen, IMO.

You are not allowed to touch Kobe on the perimeter.

if you want to see impressive look at Oscar Robertson who averaged a triple double at 6-5 and 205 lbs.

Chabberlain led the league in points rebounds blocks and assists in various seasons.

Heck Chamberlain was just as big as Shaq but much much more agile.

Kobe is good but the league is set up in his favor with the rules allowing no contact out of the paint. Guys like him would be good in the seventies but not that good. Guys like Ray Allen wouldnt stand a chance.

 

[tunahelper]

Jim Brown is a loser. The man makes a living preaching peace when he throws beatings on his own wife?

Its all about a paycheck in his pocket.

 

[superpunk]

You are not allowed to touch Kobe on the perimeter.

if you want to see impressive look at Oscar Robertson who averaged a triple double at 6-5 and 205 lbs.

Chabberlain led the league in points rebounds blocks and assists in various seasons.

Heck Chamberlain was just as big as Shaq but much much more agile.

Kobe is good but the league is set up in his favor with the rules allowing no contact out of the paint. Guys like him would be good in the seventies but not that good. Guys like Ray Allen wouldnt stand a chance.

Check out the rules and scoring throughout the league the year Robertson averaged a triple double. Gets less impressive. NBA stats are completely messed up from about 1959-1970.

 

[PullMyFinger]

Not even close.

Emmitt, Walter and Barry were all better than that old dried up punk. And I'm not just talkin' rushing yards either. Emmitt was the greatest ever IMO, and yes, I'm biased toward him. I'll tell ya this to, if Gayle Sayers had played longer he to would've been better than Brown IMO.

Sorry gonna have to disagree with ya, put Bo Jackson in Gayle's place in that sentence and you've got a winner.

 

[superpunk]

Check out the rules and scoring throughout the league the year Robertson averaged a triple double. Gets less impressive. NBA stats are completely messed up from about 1959-1970.

Just to clarify, I didn't mean to write "rules". Or I did, and was confused. I don't know of any specific rule changes that encouraged scoring. However, scoring was WAY up league wide. I think the Celtics averaged over 120 ppg that season. And it's not because they were nailing all their shots - shooters were pretty atrocious back then. Which in turn led to an exorbitant amount of rebounds - which led to Robertson's juiced triple-double average.

Still impressive, but send Magic back there, or Kidd, or maybe even Kobe, and the result probably would have been the same. The rule changes in recent years benefit point guards more than Bryant - he dominated even in the muscle-ball era when scoring was way down and scorers were getting mugged.

 

[THUMPER]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q8cxAp2am0&feature=related

Can someone explain what Jimmy Brown is doing there?

I think I can.

He knew Thomas had as much ability as he had. Brown was always an ego maniac and I truly believe he submarined Thomas' career out of jealousy. He certainly didn't provide sage wisdom and leadership. And how terribly disrespectful was it of him to cut off the interview as is Thomas was a puppet under his control?

I always blamed Jim Brown's influence on Thomas' demise from pro football. His anger with the establishment and resentment for the way things were (justifiably so in some part) was forced on Duane and made him bitter towards anything that smacked of authority. Thomas could have been a great RB but Brown derailed him and ruined his career IMO.

 

[THUMPER]

Still impressive, but send Magic back there, or Kidd, or maybe even Kobe, and the result probably would have been the same. The rule changes in recent years benefit point guards more than Bryant - he dominated even in the muscle-ball era when scoring was way down and scorers were getting mugged.

Actually, if you put any of those modern players back in that era they would be called for palming, carrying, and traveling on nearly every play. And they would foul out of every game if they played the way they do now by the rules back then.

On the other hand, let Elgin Baylor play under today's rules and he would average 50 points a game easily! The guy was the most amazing athlete I have ever seen play! Give him an extra step or two on his way to the hoop, let him carry the ball and push off like Jordan did and he would drop 70 on everyone.

You can't compare eras, it is a different game now.