Best College RB You've Seen Since Barry Sanders?

[Muck]

Originally Posted by cincibuck

How soon we forget Jim Brown. Sorry, end of discussion. Now you move on to the second best.

Jim Brown may not have even been the best back to ever play for 'Cuse...let alone all of college football.

[methomps]

Lendale Bush

[AKAKBUCK]

Originally Posted by Muck

Jim Brown may not have even been the best back to ever play for 'Cuse...let alone all of college football.

Yeah, well, Ernie Davis couldn't hold Brown's jock on the Lacrosse field.

[BUCKYLE]

I had a dream last night where Eddie punched me in the eye for betraying him, and then Beanie showed up and got all up in Eddie's face. I was like "GUYS! You're both great RB's", and they high fived, and Eddie appologized.

[cincibuck]

Originally Posted by Muck

Jim Brown may not have even been the best back to ever play for 'Cuse...let alone all of college football.

Floyd Little? Ernie Davis? We'll never know about Davis, and I only saw Brown on TV once while he played for the Orangemen, against Penn State, but he could not have gotten that much better between the end of his college career and his rookie year with the Browns. Power, speed, balance, shiftiness, durability, goal line, third and long, posseession time, outlet pass, between the tackles, ouside the tackles, put the ball in Jim Brown's hands. Nothing like him before or since.

Too many writers, coaches, players who saw him and those who followed in the 70's - thru today agree that Brown is in a class of his own for me to disagree.

[jlb1705]

Originally Posted by cincibuck

Floyd Little? Ernie Davis? We'll never know about Davis, and I only saw Brown on TV once while he played for the Orangemen, against Penn State, but he could not have gotten that much better between the end of his college career and his rookie year with the Browns. Power, speed, balance, shiftiness, durability, goal line, third and long, posseession time, outlet pass, between the tackles, ouside the tackles, put the ball in Jim Brown's hands. Nothing like him before or since.

Too many writers, coaches, players who saw him and those who followed in the 70's - thru today agree that Brown is in a class of his own for me to disagree.

I'm not directing this at you, but if people are gonna keep Clarett off of any list like this because of his personna and off field behavior, don't you have to do the same for Jim Brown? Or at least keep him off for his part in ADVISING Clarett?

[AKAKBUCK]

Originally Posted by jlb1705

I'm not directing this at you, but if people are gonna keep Clarett off of any list like this because of his personna and off field behavior, don't you have to do the same for Jim Brown? Or at least keep him off for his part in ADVISING Clarett?

Well, Clarett's persona/off field behavior is easily impeachable here comparatively... in the sense that it actually kept him off the field.

[mross34]

Originally Posted by jlb1705

I'm not directing this at you, but if people are gonna keep Clarett off of any list like this because of his personna and off field behavior, don't you have to do the same for Jim Brown? Or at least keep him off for his part in ADVISING Clarett?

Personally, I'd keep Clarett off the list because the body of work was too small for me to gauge how he compared to these backs. He was only really healthy for the first 7 games of his freshman year and then he went down with his stinger.

I know Washington State was good and Texas Tech was decent, but it's not like either team was known for their defense. Wisconsin was down for a few years at the time.

True, the guy did explode onto the scene like few in history have, but is 7 games really a large enough sample size to put him in the discussion as one of the best of the past 20 years?

[BB73]

Originally Posted by jlb1705

If you talk about "similar reasons", then why did the Fridge get the rock on the goalline in the Super Bowl instead of Payton? It certainly wasn't because Patyon wasn't a great back, and I think the same goes for Reggie Bush and Carroll's failure to include him on that important play.

There's something to be said for otherwise great coaches having occasional brain farts.

That Super Bowl was long over at that point - the Bears had completely dominated the game. The Fridge scoring thing wasn't about trying to win the game, it was just letting him score to have fun. A completely different scenario than Bush not being on the field when they're trying to get a first down to win the game.

It's too bad that Payton didn't score in his only Super Bowl, but he may be the most complete football player of any RB ever. He was a great receiver (I'm pretty sure he held the most career receptions by a RB record for a while), an excellent blocker, and was extremely effective throwing the ball on the option pass.

And there's a difference between not even being on the field and not getting the handoff. Woody gave the ball to Champ Henson and Pete Johnson most of the time near the goal line, but the defense had to honor the threat of Archie taking a pitch.

Bush didn't get a ton of carries, and didn't have to prove very often that he could take a pounding. The 1-play highlights that, but the 1 play isn't the only reason that I don't consider him an all-time elite, complete RB.

[Smooth Olaf]

I voted for Adrian Peterson. He looked like an NFL Pro Bowler as a freshman.

[BayBuck]

Thurman Thomas was a pretty great college RB from the same time as Sanders, good enough to keep Barry from starting at OKSt until his Heisman year.

[ulukinatme]

Originally Posted by jlb1705

If you talk about "similar reasons", then why did the Fridge get the rock on the goalline in the Super Bowl instead of Payton? It certainly wasn't because Patyon wasn't a great back, and I think the same goes for Reggie Bush and Carroll's failure to include him on that important play.

There's something to be said for otherwise great coaches having occasional brain farts.

Agree here. Not Bush's fault he wasn't carrying the ball on the 4th and 2 that cost USC the national championship. Lendale had the ball, and you'd hope your bruiser back could get you 2. USC didn't account for the adjustment by the Texas D, so it got stuffed.

[mross34]

Originally Posted by ulukinatme

Agree here. Not Bush's fault he wasn't carrying the ball on the 4th and 2 that cost USC the national championship. Lendale had the ball, and you'd hope your bruiser back could get you 2. USC didn't account for the adjustment by the Texas D, so it got stuffed.

Picking up a 4th and 2 against a defense as good as 2005 Texas isn't a real sure bet when you're just ramming your battering ram into the line. Norm Chow was a good enough coordinator to have used a different option if he thought it was better. The fact that he didn't think Bush belonged on the field that play is just a microcosm for a larger weakness in Bush's game.

[t_BuckeyeScott]

Chow was in Tennessee by then. That was Kiffin.

[mross34]

Point tooken.

Argument is null and void then. And by association, the Vols are [censored]ed.