how is Emmitt behind Payton in "Legacy Score"

[spyoutofthecold]

Re: how is Emmitt behind Payton in "Legacy Score"

Stack Barry's 10 years against Smith's 10 best years. Aside from TDs, Barry obliterates him in every single category.

[bucky60]

Re: how is Emmitt behind Payton in "Legacy Score"

Barry sanders did not have to run for his lif all the time inhe backfield.

How old are you. I actually watched Sanders play, and Payton. Sanders didn't have great lines to run behind. The Packers didn't have great teams back then and GB would stuff the Lions O-line. Sanders would make great runs. Two great RB's with different styles and strengths (Sanders and Smith). But Payton was better than both. So was Jim Brown. After Payton, the next best running back I personally saw (was too young for Brown and Sayers) was Earl Campbell. Campbell is another back that other teams FEARED. Earl probably had the best combination of power and speed that I've ever seen in a RB. BO Jackson just didn't last long enough or he may have been. And Campbell was pretty much Houston's only option back then.

That's just a myth from people who didn't actually watch him play back then and see highlights on YouTube as proof of his greatness.

There are a ton of articles as to why Barry is overrated.

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/508030-barry-sanders-is-the-most-overrated-running-back-in-nfl-history

I did watch them play. And you can find articles on the Internet saying anything. BleacherReport?

"BUT in the playoffs:
-Had a -1 yard rushing game @Green Bay

Did you even watch that game? I did. The Offensive Coordinator was an idiot and only ran Sanders just a few over 10 attempts. 12, 13? Years later, the offensive coordinator said in an interview he blew that game and didn't use Sanders correctly. As a Packer fan, I'm glad the guy did make that mistake.

-Averaged around 40 yards rushing per game on the road in the playoffs
-Had an all pro LT and 2 all pro WR's.
-Won ONE playoff game in his career
-Had an average defense his whole career

He had subpar offensive lineman. Only one all pro lineman. They had good receivers for a few years, but they had Erik Hipple and Scott Mitchel at QB. Along with the sub par O-Line.

Dallas had the better team and better O-Line. But you do have a much better argument with Sanders VS. Smith than you do with Payton VS Smith.

"As a individual talent he was not overrated, but as a TEAM player he was Mr. Selfish. He kind of had the MJ syndrome, without the league talent drop off to provide titles, in that while he was individually spectacular his style of play was not conducive to winning.

Here you are just being ridiculous. But if you are the same guy that was doing the insulting name calling before, I'm not surprised.

The RB on winning teams, especially back then, was required to do more than hit the home run.

What, like have a better team around him? Or gain .8 less yards a carry over his career?

It required that if a coach calls for a dive with the expectation of a 3.5 yard gain on 1st down the back hits the whole and takes the 3.5 and leave 2nd 6.5(a very manageable down). Barry never really accepted that and instead of taking the 3 or 4 yd. guaranteed gain he would bounce two sometimes even 3 holes trying to hit a home run. Well guess what most of the time you don't hit home runs and you tend to lose lots of yards.

He didn't have 2,3 holes to choose from before bouncing outside. And he wasn't a power back. Getting the short yardage wasn't really his role. That doesn't mean he wasn't effective, with teammates that weren't nearly as good as Dallas. Sanders role was to be that score at anytime threat to keep 8, 9 guys in the box so guys like Eric Hipple and Scott Mitchel could complete passes to guys like Brett Perriman. Sanders opened up the Lions passing attack. But you keep with that laughable SELFISH angle.

Here's a typical Barry Sanders scenario:

1st &10- barry refuses to take hole bounces and loses 2 yards on the play.
2nd & 12- behind the chains lions chose to throw the ball
3rd & 12- mandatory pass situation d sends the house
4th &12 - Punt

Now if you insert championship backs like Emmit or Thurman Thomas it works out completely differently. they take the hole for 2 or 3 yards leave a second and 7 which keeps the whole playbook open. Why is this important? Because it prevents the D-coordinator and his players from keying on your offense.

If you put Smith on those Detroit teams, he doesn't end up with a 4.2 average. Smith was a between the tackles runner, and the holes weren't there very often between the tackles.

Both RB's were good for there respective teams and fit there teams. Dallas didn't need someone shifty that was a home run threat. They had a very good O-Line and a very good passing attack.

I would take several other backs in that era before Barry as winning is the objective and his style of running has never won titles in the league."

That would all depend on what kind of team you have. What personnel was around the RB. In Detroit, I wouldn't take Smith.

Hopefully I helped open peoples mind instead of being a mind controlled drooling puppet infatuated with his sanders highlights.

Dude, your the one that needs to have an open mind.

[bucky60]

Re: how is Emmitt behind Payton in "Legacy Score"

So the consensus is that Barry Sanders is better because he had more highlights? Come on! Opening round of the 1994 playoffs, Barry Sanders 13 attempts... -1 yards.

Did you watch the game? I did. And the consensus isn't that Sanders was better, just that they were different and filled different roles. I'd say they were both on par with each other both being the type of back that each team needed at the time.

Emmitt Smith was money when it mattered. Keeping drives alive. And actually finishing in the red zone! He played a whole half with a dislocated shoulder against the Giants in 1993 when the division and a bye was on the line. So what if Barry was faster and more agile. Emmitt got it done. 12 playoff wins in six years.

Smith was on a better team, with a better O-Line.

Emmitt willed you to death. And that's why Dallas won. They went on long sustained drives that beat defenses up and wore them down. And when they got inside the 20 you gave 22 the ball and got out of the way!

Dallas won because they had better teams. HOF QB, HOF WR, HOF RB, plus. The Dallas TEAMS were by far better than the Lions teams.

Barry's runs were insane. But did they really add to the cause? They were terribly inefficient for his defense. Sure you got 7, but your defense only had to trot out that much quicker. Not to mention all those drives that stalled out inside the 20 when the Lions didn't have enough belief to give him the ball. Not to mention the times he took negative yards on first downs, putting the Lions in obvious passing downs.

What did he really add to the cause? He helped open up the passing game. He made guys like Eric Hipple and Scott Mitchel be successful. And he did that with a sub par O-Line.

So given all that, who really is the better RB? A highlight reel of a player that lights up youtube, or a running back who plays for the reason you play the game. And if you forgot, you play to win the game.

I got them both about the same and both behind Brown, and Payton.

True stat, Barry Sanders had more negative plays in one game, then Smith had all of the 1993 season.

True stat, Barry had almost an entire yard per carry more than Smith. So what? Your true stat means nothing to me. They both had different styles of running and different teams surrounding them.

[SoxFan01605]

Re: how is Emmitt behind Payton in "Legacy Score"

It's funny how every thread devolves into a debate that has swerved from the actual topic. As others have alluded, the topic isn't about who is better, it's a question about how the legacy score is determined. I'd be curious to know as well.

I would say that Emmit Smith holds the greater legacy as his accomplishments outweigh Sanders. Whether or not that makes Emmit Smith "better" than Barry Sanders doesn't really matter.

Spoiler

It doesn't IMO. I'm a Cowboys fan and still don't know that I'd even put Emmit in my top 3 RBs, whereas Sanders is

It's not debatable that Emmit had the better career accomplishments. That is supposedly the point of the legacy score (to see how careers stack up), which is why it would interest me to see how it's calculated.

Perhaps they calculate some type of subjective aspect or weigh surrounding talent, I don't know. I don't think it's unreasonable to question just what the hell EA used to measure it though (especially considering how arbitrarily their ratings seem calculated). It wouldn't surprise me to find out that it was something like whoever implemented it just arbitrarily threw out rankings.

[eival]

Re: how is Emmitt behind Payton in "Legacy Score"

take Barry Sanders' only 10 years in the league,
and then take Emmitt Smith's 10 best in the league...


And Barry Wins every time. Sad though if the Lions management was competent Barry would have played longer and the record would have been his, cause he was only a 1,000 or so yards away from it in 10 years. Best RB ever Barry Sanders.

Emmitt out rushed Barry every year after his rookie season, which was Barry's 2nd, from 1991 to 1995 while also winning league MVP, Superbowl MVPs and both of them were in their primes

Barry only led the league 4 times, the same as Emmitt and 3 of those came later in the 90s when the Lions were meaningless and he just waste time padding stats which resulted in that meaningless 2000 yard season in 97 which Barry finally won his MVP that Emmitt had won 5 years prior

[tuck243]

Re: how is Emmitt behind Payton in "Legacy Score"

So the consensus is that Barry Sanders is better because he had more highlights? Come on! Opening round of the 1994 playoffs, Barry Sanders 13 attempts... -1 yards. Emmitt Smith was money when it mattered. Keeping drives alive. And actually finishing in the red zone! He played a whole half with a dislocated shoulder against the Giants in 1993 when the division and a bye was on the line. So what if Barry was faster and more agile. Emmitt got it done. 12 playoff wins in six years.

Emmitt willed you to death. And that's why Dallas won. They went on long sustained drives that beat defenses up and wore them down. And when they got inside the 20 you gave 22 the ball and got out of the way!

Barry's runs were insane. But did they really add to the cause? They were terribly inefficient for his defense. Sure you got 7, but your defense only had to trot out that much quicker. Not to mention all those drives that stalled out inside the 20 when the Lions didn't have enough belief to give him the ball. Not to mention the times he took negative yards on first downs, putting the Lions in obvious passing downs.

So given all that, who really is the better RB? A highlight reel of a player that lights up youtube, or a running back who plays for the reason you play the game. And if you forgot, you play to win the game.

True stat, Barry Sanders had more negative plays in one game, then Smith had all of the 1993 season.

No one is saying highlights is the reason why he better... It's true that Emmitt was clearly a better North to South runner... But what made him great is that he followed his blocks and drained everything out of a run... He by no means WOULDN'T be able to do what Barry did in Detriot that's the whole reason he left Florida early... Moose is also a BIG reason why Emmitt is so far up that list too... I just like how Cowboys "fans" also forget to mention his HOF lead blocker every time this issue come up... People aren't disrespecting Emmitt, but to say he is better than Payton, Sanders, Jim Brown, (even a healthy AP) is as T.I. say "That's Ludacris"... He wouldn't be able to play in another run scheme without a solid line and lead blocks... He had a very limited repertoire as he couldn't make a lot of ppl miss in the open field...

This isn't a "great" way to measure Emmitt compared to his peers, but it's something... The guy who did it explains it in the beginning...

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/extra-points/2010/was-emmitt-smith-really-product-his-line

[eival]

Re: how is Emmitt behind Payton in "Legacy Score"

EDIT- in reguards to the guy directly below, read this post again, it shows the players direct production for their teams, nothing about their defence or other intangibles which they didnt have a hand in.

they were both the main focal point of their teams offense and the accomplishments based on that are listed below. feel free to take out any accomplishments you want, head to head in each type of accomplishment or category there's no argument to be made

==============================

to quote the great Skip Bayless "in a vacuum" which of these 2 players would you rather have on your team


between 1989 and 1996

player A played in only 108 games got 10,160 yards of total offense and scored 690 points for his team single handedly, while also leading the league in rushing 4 times, winning a league MVP, Superbowl MVP and winning 2 other Superbowls after also helping his team win their division 5 straight years(which had 2 other recent superbowl teams in it) and 3 of those years ending with the best record in the entire league as the main focal point of the offence.


meanwhile

player B played in 121 games(13 more) put up 11,736 yards of offence and only scored 546 points for his team and only lead the league 2 of those seasons, only won the division 2 times and could only lead his team to win 1 of the 5 playoff games they played as the main focal point of the offence.

*total offence is the combined rushing, receiving and minus negative yards

[tuck243]

Re: how is Emmitt behind Payton in "Legacy Score"

to quote the great Skip Bayless "in a vacuum" which of these 2 players would you rather have on your team


between 1989 and 1996

player A played in only 108 games got 10,160 yards of total offense and scored 690 points for his team single handedly, while also winning a league MVP, Superbowl MVP and winning 2 other Superbowls in that time.


meanwhile

player B played in 121 games put up 11,736 yards of offence but only scored 546 points for his team and they won 1 playoff game

*total offence is the combined rushing, receiving and minus negative yards

I think you have lost all credibility for your argument when you mentioned Skip Bayless... He by far is one the most BIAS analysts on television (and very disrespectful towards players)... Cris Carter haven't won a SB, Randy Moss, or Calvin Johnson... Are they worse that Wes Welker??? Dion Branch??? Come on man... You know damn well Barry simply didn't have the supporting cast like Emmitt did... You couldn't place 8 in the box versus the Cowboys back then... You simply couldn't, say what you want but Emmitt fit very well in that offense and had HOF around him everywhere... FB, QB, WR, TE... That line was BIG... He had a HOF coach, he had a great defense as well... Please don't bring up that again...

[Swanson HD]

Re: how is Emmitt behind Payton in "Legacy Score"

Stats isn't the only logical way it can be determined.

How many idiots are going to come into this thread and comment without any clue what this is really about.

OP is saying that since this IS a video game, they MUST use nothing but facts to determine the legacy score. Facts ARE concrete, is an opinion concrete? No, are statistics (facts)? YES.

This is not intended to be a debate of the better RB, it's a question on how can they use opinion to determine the higher legacy score, when the user has not way of achieving a higher or lower opinion for their respective legacy score. Because based SOLELY off statistics Emmit clearly should have the higher legacy score, but that is not the case in M13.

Does that make enough sense to the morons who keep trying to compare they're favorite players.

KEEP IT ON TOPIC PEOPLE, YOU WANT TO COMPARE THE TWO MAKE YOUR OWN THREAD AND STOP HIJACKING OTHERS.

[eival]

Re: how is Emmitt behind Payton in "Legacy Score"

I think you have lost all credibility for your argument when you mentioned Skip Bayless... He by far is one the most BIAS analysts on television (and very disrespectful towards players)... Cris Carter haven't won a SB, Randy Moss, or Calvin Johnson... Are they worse that Wes Welker??? Dion Branch??? Come on man... You know damn well Barry simply didn't have the supporting cast like Emmitt did... You couldn't place 8 in the box versus the Cowboys back then... You simply couldn't, say what you want but Emmitt fit very well in that offense and had HOF around him everywhere... FB, QB, WR, TE... That line was BIG... He had a HOF coach, he had a great defense as well... Please don't bring up that again...

first, i like how you try to disregard the facts and go off on Skip and then you vaguely talk about something about how Wes Welker is being called better than Moss just cause he won a ring. when clearly my post singles out THEIR production for said teams but you just try to gloss over that with the old fantasy vision that basically:
"emmitt was just an undrafted scrub from some Div2 league college who was lucky to get signed to the already dynasty cowboys who had never lost a game at any point before he even got there and cakewalk his entire career but barry was on the poor detroit lions who went 0-16 each year and a division with a bunch of superbowl contenders like the Vikings, Bears and Packers at that time and if you switched them Barry would of scored every time he touched the ball" bawww fest

the old, give Barry credit for all the good things they did to get to 5 playoff games, but not when he doesnt help them win in those playoff games, cliche right?

i love how lions/barry fans seem to forget that Herman Moore still holds all the lions records, last i checked, you cant set records as a reciever if the only thing your team has is a running game which apparently was hindered because of no passing attack to take the focus off him...LOL

that same offensive line and defense which is so bad beat the Cowboys in 91 and got to the NFC championship game where they lost to the eventual Superbowl champ Redskins

yet they couldnt even make it past the wild card round in their next 5 playoff appearances, they were losing in the first round to other teams who also didnt win anything either in the 90s, so you're good enough to be in their class, but still have excuses for why you cant beat any of THOSE teams, none of which even won the next round after beating YOU.

bottomline, the discussion is about PRODUCTION, most of their playoff losses were close games, you couldnt break off a highlight TD in any of those games? how bout instead of a highlight TD...just get the team within field goal range a few times.

[bucky60]

Re: how is Emmitt behind Payton in "Legacy Score"

How many idiots are going to come into this thread and comment without any clue what this is really about.

I know what this is really about, but thanks for the insult.

OP is saying that since this IS a video game, they MUST use nothing but facts to determine the legacy score. Facts ARE concrete, is an opinion concrete? No, are statistics (facts)? YES.

And facts go beyond someones statistics. You would have to measure the team around the player and make adjustments for that. The other guy didn't want to because it would take some effort. It sounds like whoever assigned the legacy scores took that into consideration and tried to quantify some how. That is part of the discussion. But you keep calling people idiots.

This is not intended to be a debate of the better RB, it's a question on how can they use opinion to determine the higher legacy score, when the user has not way of achieving a higher or lower opinion for their respective legacy score.

And I'm saying they don't have to use opinion. They could quantify the team around the player and make adjustments.

Because based SOLELY off statistics Emmit clearly should have the higher legacy score, but that is not the case in M13.

And this is where you are in error. It should not be based SOLELY off personal statistics. They should have a much more accurate way to access legacy players. Because a LEGACY RATING, if done right, should rank by who was really better. But you stick with calling people idiots.

Does that make enough sense to the morons who keep trying to compare they're favorite players.

My favorite running back is Paul Hornung, and I haven't even mentioned him. Personal statistics doesn't determine who was better and should not be the SOLE tool in ranking Legacy players. Does that make enough sense to you?

KEEP IT ON TOPIC PEOPLE, YOU WANT TO COMPARE THE TWO MAKE YOUR OWN THREAD AND STOP HIJACKING OTHERS.

Talking about how Legacy Ratings should be determined is on topic. Do you know what "on topic" means?

[tuck243]

Re: how is Emmitt behind Payton in "Legacy Score"

first, i like how you try to disregard the facts and go off on Skip and then you vaguely talk about something about how Wes Welker is being called better than Moss just cause he won a ring. when clearly my post singles out THEIR production for said teams but you just try to gloss over that with the old fantasy vision that basically:
"emmitt was just an undrafted scrub from some Div2 league college who was lucky to get signed to the already dynasty cowboys who had never lost a game at any point before he even got there and cakewalk his entire career but barry was on the poor detroit lions who went 0-16 each year and a division with a bunch of superbowl contenders like the Vikings, Bears and Packers at that time and if you switched them Barry would of scored every time he touched the ball" bawww fest

the old, give Barry credit for all the good things they did to get to 5 playoff games, but not when he doesnt help them win in those playoff games, cliche right?

i love how lions/barry fans seem to forget that Herman Moore still holds all the lions records, last i checked, you cant set records as a reciever if the only thing your team has is a running game which apparently was hindered because of no passing attack to take the focus off him...LOL

that same offensive line and defense which is so bad beat the Cowboys in 91 and got to the NFC championship game where they lost to the eventual Superbowl champ Redskins

yet they couldnt even make it past the wild card round in their next 5 playoff appearances, they were losing in the first round to other teams who also didnt win anything either in the 90s, so you're good enough to be in their class, but still have excuses for why you cant beat any of THOSE teams, none of which even won the next round after beating YOU.

bottomline, the discussion is about PRODUCTION, most of their playoff losses were close games, you couldnt break off a highlight TD in any of those games? how bout instead of a highlight TD...just get the team within field goal range a few times.

Why do you continue to bring up Herman Moore??? He isn't in the HOF at all... Period... That Cowboys team has at least 6 HOF's on it with Aikman and Irving setting records for their franchise as well...

Let's be clear here... In every Super Bowl the Cowboys were in their DEFENSE was a big contributor in it... Even that Super Bowl MVP Emmitt got should have went to that defense holding a very potent offense to 13 points and committing 2 meaningful turnovers, one of them was for a score... No one is saying he sucks (and by mentioning Welker I'm not saying he is either) I'm just saying he isn't better than Barry simply...

And yes I will look past what Skip Bayless said because majority of the time he doesn't make any sense or tell half truths... Winning in Football is a collective thing... No one man can do it all himself, this isn't basketball...

Check this out, Skip managed to give you stats for 89-96 seasons... Why??? Because he wanted to keep one year where Emmitt wasn't even in the league '89 and wanted to leave out the year Emmitt was mediocre and Barry was dominate '97...

Here are the actual numbers from '90-'97:

Barry:

122 Games, 2,439 attempts, 12,308 yards, 5.04 YPC... Just 81 TD's

Emmitt:

124 Games, 2,595 attempts, 11,234 yards, 4.3 YPC... 112 TD's

If you watched games back then you know the Lions weren't in the red zone that much, so that's a big reason why the TD stats have a big disparity... But if you want to take that then go ahead...

YPC means A LOT... The most realistic stat to measure a RB's effectiveness... Simply put if Barry was on that Cowboys team those awards and accolades would be his as well... I'm not saying Emmitt was a scrub, but someone that maximized his situation very well...

You see why I said Skip just destroyed your whole argument??? Don't ever use him as a reference again...

[AmericasTeam]

Why all the arguing and name calling in here? Can't we all just admit that all of these RBs were great? Nobody can can say player x was the greatest of all time and expect it to be a fact. All of our opinions are just subjective.

Barry was just a true joy to watch. The best pure runner to have ever played. Nobody has or will ever move like he did. As a football fan, I was saddened when he retired. He was a one of a kind folks.

Emmitt had the heart of a lion and a work ethic to match. Everyone talks about how good the team was and that Emmitt was just a product of that. Don't forget when he held out 2 games in 1993. The Cowboys went 0-2 and looked lost. Jerry was dead set on not restructuring his contract until the 2nd loss. The Cowboys went 12-2 the remainder of the year and won the Superbowl. If the o-line was as good as everyone is making it out to be, then why did the team collapse like it did? The team was just average without him in the lineup.

You see, I feel that Emmitt is the best running back of all time. Does that mean he was the best pure runner, the fastest, the best receiving back, the best blocker, etc? No, but he he did all of the things required at the position well. A lot of athletes are talented, but it's the ones with heart and drive that set themselves apart.

Again, this is my opinion. Is his the end all be all on this subject? Does this make Emmitt the best running back in history? No, just in my eyes. I can't convince someone that believes different than I do and neither can anyone else in here. It's not going to happen guys.

Sent from my SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

[texranger]

Re: how is Emmitt behind Payton in "Legacy Score"

Being a diehard Cowboys fan here...I have to say IMHO that Barry Sanders was the best I've ever seen.

Don't get me wrong, I love Emmit...but he's not even my favorite Cowboys RB (That would be Tony D.)

Although if you look at Stats (I'm too young to have seen him play live), I would pick Jim Brown as prolly the best of all-time. (118 games 12k+ yards, AVERAGED more than a 100+ yards and a TD per game etc etc...that's just nuts.

Of course I would have loved to have seen what Barry would have done on the Cowboys teams of the nineties...