Zeke v. Saquon shades of Emmitt v. Barry

[LACowboysFan1]

Unless you could turn back the clock and have Barry play with Dallas, and Emmitt with Detroit, trying to say one was "better" than the other is an exercise in futility.

Barry had more moves, Emmitt made tougher yards, and other differences make a determination of who was better very difficult. It depends on what you mean by better "running back", are you talking ypc, total yards, receptions and rushes, or what combination of those?

I guess it would come down for me to the fact that Emmitt's teams won 3 SBs, Barry's none, and that holds true for me even if Barry didn't have the same quality of team, again because it's not possible to switch them. Results are all we have.

Everyone had their own opinion, and that's all they have, okay to disagree but nobody here is THE authority on naming the better back...

 

[Aviano90]

Unless you could turn back the clock and have Barry play with Dallas, and Emmitt with Detroit, trying to say one was "better" than the other is an exercise in futility.

Barry had more moves, Emmitt made tougher yards, and other differences make a determination of who was better very difficult. It depends on what you mean by better "running back", are you talking ypc, total yards, receptions and rushes, or what combination of those?

I guess it would come down for me to the fact that Emmitt's teams won 3 SBs, Barry's none, and that holds true for me even if Barry didn't have the same quality of team, again because it's not possible to switch them. Results are all we have.

Everyone had their own opinion, and that's all they have, okay to disagree but nobody here is THE authority on naming the better back...

Yep, these are pointless exercises. Really the only thing I care about is Emmitt was part of a team that won 3 SB titles, not that he is regarded as the best RB. If it makes people happy to say Barry Sanders was better then I'll let them remain happy.

 

[Zeke-2K-Yards]

I disagree, the fact you think Barry was an every down back tells me all I need to know.

He was an every down back. The lions started to take him out in goal line situations and 3rd and short bc they didn’t want him getting hurt. No one, even Barry agreed with it. His 1st 3 years he averaged around 16 tds a year when he was playing every down

 

[hornitosmonster]

Emmitt, Barry, and Saquon are better than Zeke. Doesn't mean Zeke is not good, he is just the #2 RB in the league right now.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Wishing he was "not particularly effective" at anything doens't make it true either.

I wish he was more effective. I posted the objective data that shows he was not.

Some men accept the world for how it is and not how they wish it to be and then there is you.

 

[Big_D]

Now Barkley can’t run between the tackles or isn't as good in short yardage?. LOL Some go to great lengths to make Zeke better when he's not.

 

[Future]

I wish he was more effective. I posted the objective data that shows he was not.

Some men accept the world for how it is and not how they wish it to be and then there is you.

You mean the data that totally didn't account for....context? Yea, that tells a real story.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

You mean the data that totally didn't account for....context? Yea, that tells a real story.

Define didn't account for context.

This will be rich.

 

[Future]

Define didn't account for context.

This will be rich.

I assume you're talking about that trash 538 article about WPA...the one that said Gio Bernard is the second-best red zone back in the league and that Jordan Wilkins is the best "short yardage open field runner" in the league.

It did not account for any context (defensive quality, OL execution, scheme, playcall, defensive alignment...anything) and had a ridiculous range of sample sizes. That article accomplished the rare feat of being objective and completely useless.

It was a dumb, page click article with dumb, page click data.

 

[Dale]

It's strange to me how the Giants wasted away Beckham's career and, so far, are doing the same with Barkley.

Two supremely gifted offensive players who don't really impact their ability to win or lose games.

 

[hornitosmonster]

It's strange to me how the Giants wasted away Beckham's career and, so far, are doing the same with Barkley.

Two supremely gifted offensive players who don't really impact their ability to win or lose games.

They can't part way with Eli

 

[mldardy]

“I watched something enough to know that it is true” followed by “Do some research” may be the most unintentionally hilariously thing said in here in some time. I’m going to guess you are not a scientist.
You didn’t watch anything, stop lying and provide some proof for your garbage assertions or expect to be called out for them.

No. what is hilarious is that you stated that he ran behind a terrible line when there were two Pro Bowlers on it that's hilarious and delusional. How do you make a statement like that? Ridiculous.
What's also hilarious is you telling me what I watched or in this case what I didn't watch. That's really funny.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

No. what is hilarious is that you stated that he ran behind a terrible line when there were two Pro Bowlers on it that's hilarious and delusional. How do you make a statement like that? Ridiculous.
What's also hilarious is you telling me what I watched or in this case what I didn't watch. That's really funny.

He ran behind a line that had two current Pro Bowlers exactly one time in his ten seasons. Would you like to compare that to Emmitt? You wonder why someone would question what you watch, when you sound like you’ve never watched a football game at all, much less one with Barry Sanders in it. Stop lying on the internet and stop embarrassing yourself pretending to know what you’re talking about.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

I assume you're talking about that trash 538 article about WPA...the one that said Gio Bernard is the second-best red zone back in the league and that Jordan Wilkins is the best "short yardage open field runner" in the league.

It did not account for any context (defensive quality, OL execution, scheme, playcall, defensive alignment...anything) and had a ridiculous range of sample sizes. That article accomplished the rare feat of being objective and completely useless.

It was a dumb, page click article with dumb, page click data.

So Zeke was efficient per carry relative to almost anyone else you'd consider a top back.

What makes you think he's so good then? The eye test?

Well what did your eyes tell you last Sunday?

 

[TNCowboy]

Nailed it TN.

Have you been to any of the Vols games yet? My wife is from the area. Love it there.

Not this year. They stink to high Heaven. Too painful to sit in the hot sun and watch bad football.

I might go later this year when the weather is cooler if I can get club tickets.

 

[mldardy]

He ran behind a line that had two current Pro Bowlers exactly one time in his ten seasons. Would you like to compare that to Emmitt? You wonder why someone would question what you watch, when you sound like you’ve never watched a football game at all, much less one with Barry Sanders in it. Stop lying on the internet and stop embarrassing yourself pretending to know what you’re talking about.

Another lie. Kevin Glover and Lomas Brown mad the Pro Bowl 3 and 6 times in their career. All but 1 with the Lions. Brown's other Pro Bowl was with the Cardinals. The Lions also had Jeff Hartings and Bill Fralic who although they didn't make Pro Bowls as Lions they were Pro Bowl players. Just stop man you don't what you are talking about at all. He didn't play with some crap oline. None of those olineman on the Cowboys made any kind of Pro Bowls until Emmitt because a Cowboy. Tuinei, Step, Gogan, Newton were not making Pro Bowls pre-Emmitt. So who made who better? With that, you can strongly argue and I am that Emmitt made those guys Pro Bowlers because he didn't take risks like Sanders did and ran where he was supposed to run. Now you can continue to reply to me with your 'no substance' posts because I'm done going back and forth. I've provided facts and you've provided well by telling me what I didn't watch in my life as a football fan.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Another lie. Kevin Glover and Lomas Brown mad the Pro Bowl 3 and 6 times in their career. All but 1 with the Lions. Brown's other Pro Bowl was with the Cardinals. The Lions also had Jeff Hartings and Bill Fralic who although they didn't make Pro Bowls as Lions they were Pro Bowl players. Just stop man you don't what you are talking about at all. He didn't play with some crap oline. None of those olineman on the Cowboys made any kind of Pro Bowls until Emmitt because a Cowboy. Tuinei, Step, Gogan, Newton were not making Pro Bowls pre-Emmitt. So who made who better? With that, you can strongly argue and I am that Emmitt made those guys Pro Bowlers because he didn't take risks like Sanders did and ran where he was supposed to run. Now you can continue to reply to me with your 'no substance' posts because I'm done going back and forth. I've provided facts and you've provided well by telling me what I didn't watch in my life as a football fan.

How many times did they play together? Once. I said current on the same team... you are making up stuff like crazy out of sheer ignorance. Did Jameis Winston and Cam Newton look like Pro Bowlers last night simply because they made the Pro Bowl in 2015 and it’s a lifetime tag?
I’ll say it again, since you clearly are having trouble with it: Sanders ran behind a line that had two current Pro Bowlers exactly one time in his ten seasons. Would you like to compare that to Emmitt?

 

[Future]

So Zeke was efficient per carry relative to almost anyone else you'd consider a top back.

What makes you think he's so good then? The eye test?

Well what did your eyes tell you last Sunday?

Efficient for an RB is dependent entirely on context. On third and 1, getting hit in the backfield against a 9-man front and getting the first down is going to go in the metrics as less efficient than a 5-yard run against a 7-man front.

He is so good because he finishes every play going forward and has elite vision and timing. If you're using anything but the eye test for RBs you're doing it wrong. Analytics has its place, but they're in no accurate for comparing RBs.

Last Sunday he was alright. Looked sluggish.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Efficient for an RB is dependent entirely on context. On third and 1, getting hit in the backfield against a 9-man front and getting the first down is going to go in the metrics as less efficient than a 5-yard run against a 7-man front.

He is so good because he finishes every play going forward and has elite vision and timing. If you're using anything but the eye test for RBs you're doing it wrong. Analytics has its place, but they're in no accurate for comparing RBs.

Last Sunday he was alright. Looked sluggish.

The analysis was contextualized for situation.

Nice try.

And wow what a statement...."if you're using anything but the eye test for RB you're doing it wrong."

Yikes.

 

[Future]

The analysis was contextualized for situation.

Nice try.

And wow what a statement...."if you're using anything but the eye test for RB you're doing it wrong."

Yikes.

No, the 538 article, wasn't. It did not account for defense, playcall, blocking execution, whether or not the RB got hit in the backfield, etc. etc. etc. It was half context. It accounted for static things, like down and distance, but that doesn't even tell half the story of whether or not a run play was successful. Saquon didn't even make it onto those lists, how are we supposed to take them seriously?

Analytics for RBs are absolute trash. Outside of YAC, none of them are useful, and even that is only barely passable.