how is Emmitt behind Payton in "Legacy Score"

[bucky60]

Stated like a true biased Cowboys fan.

Quote: Originally Posted by Dwaresacksqb

Barry sanders holds the record for the most negative yards in NFL history. The man never fought for a tough hard earned yard up the middle is his life. He hurt his team more than he helped them.

Neither player hurt their team. They were just different types of backs. One a home run hitter, the other a shorter yardage, move the chains guy. Sander's teams were not anywhere near the same level as the Cowboys teams.

Quote: Originally Posted by Dwaresacksqb

He was the most selfish egotistical player I have ever watched play the game. Had no love for football whatsoever

Prove it. I would say he hated LOSING.

Quote: Originally Posted by Dwaresacksqb

Walter on the other hand was great from the little bit of highlights/games and stories I have come across. But yes E.A. Obviously used personal opinion when determining the legacy score. Otherwise Emmitt would clearly be on top.

It's not personal opinion. It's reality. And Emmit would not clearly be on top. Emmit is no where near as good as Payton or Jim Brown. But keep on Cowboy homering.

Quote: Originally Posted by Dwaresacksqb

One more thing. So many widereceivers are and were faster, could jump higher, was stronger and was more exciting to watch than Jerry rice. But NOBODY disrespects him like they do emmitt. Why is that? It's a crying shame and people end up looking like idiots.

Jerry Rice is the greatest receiver with Don Hutson next. Nobody is disrespecting Emmit Smith. Your just over-rating him.

[Dwaresacksqb]

Bucky60 your mentally challenged lol. How is continuously putting your team in 3rd and long situations NOT hurting your team!? And no it is personall opinion to give Payton the higher legacy score because emmitt has achieved so much more which if you play cc that's what your legacy score is based on. If after 4 pages of talking about this we still can't help you understand how ea used personal opinion than I'm sorry for making fun of a seriously handicap person. Or maybe you don't under what opinion means? I'm done arguing about this and making fun of the unfortunate now.

[tuck243]

I think everyone need to calm down... Secondly, you can't talk football with Cowboy's fans... They don't understand how someone team/player is better... It's simple ish and you don't need stats to tell you...

For starters, when players a as great as Payton, Smith, and Sanders their numbers will almost look identical... If Sanders continued his career as long as Emmitt did the Cowboy's fans on this thread wouldn't have the "numbers" as an excuse... What people need to do is look at the tape... It's videos on these guys on YouTube... Watch it... I've said this so many times, the best RB I've seen with my own 2 eyes was Barry Sanders... The reason he had negative yards?? He had to juke a defender in the back field A LOT... As soon as he touch the ball... Barry wasn't that damn fast... He only wanted to get to the outside because all the lanes were cut off... You can't find me one game film where Barry had an open hole and he decided to bounce outside... That whole not wanting to run up the gut is non sense...

I like Emmitt, but he wasn't fast, quick, or very strong... He didn't juke you, he was a very steady RB that found a hole and ran through it... BUT EVERYONE and I mean EVERYONE comment on how much room he had to run... Terrell Davis is another RB I remember that had holes for days to run through... These guys were already at the second level before they even got touched... It's cool that he owns the record, but don't you guys jump in here talking non sense... I think he's rated just fine, Jimmy Johnson don't get enough credit either...

[Dwaresacksqb]

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

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

"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.

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

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.

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."

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

[Jimi XIII]

Quote: Originally Posted by Dwaresacksqb

Barry sanders holds the record for the most negative yards in NFL history. The man never fought for a tough hard earned yard up the middle is his life. He hurt his team more than he helped them. He would continue to put his team in bad position because he always tried to bounce it outside. Who cares if he would break a couple. By that time the damage was most likely already done and the team wasn't making a comeback. Everyone just like the highlights he gave us. He was the most selfish egotistical player I have ever watched play the game. Had no love for football whatsoever and people would actually rather have this guy over emmitt because they lack some serious football I.Q.

Do you know what type of offense the Lions ran then and do you know how bad their o-line was?

Spoiler

To answer the first question, they ran a run & shoot which typically consisted of 4 WRs, no FB, no TE, just their bad offensive line. The fact that he could be as good as he was with that little bit of help is amazing. The Houston Oilers & Atlanta Falcons also ran the run & shoot then, there ground game was much worse and had some better decent RBs but it was not made for the run at all.

[marginwalker12]

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.

[marginwalker12]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jimi XIII

Do you know what type of offense the Lions ran then and do you know how bad their o-line was? Spoiler To answer the first question, they ran a run & shoot which typically consisted of 4 WRs, no FB, no TE, just their bad offensive line. The fact that he could be as good as he was with that little bit of help is amazing. The Houston Oilers & Atlanta Falcons also ran the run & shoot then, there ground game was much worse and had some better decent RBs but it was not made for the run at all.

Lomas Brown and Kevin Glover were chop liver, right?

[ajk49er]

the legacy score stuff is a bit off. players who are current stars have almost insane level of points especially on D

OL. DL. OLB, CB, S

you never see people make the hall from cpu teams simming the games. they come up short even with multiple super bowls, 20 awards, so on.

I hope that is adjusted, its frustrating seeing a guy set the record for sacks in a career(JPP) actually SOMEHOW even with super bowls, and those same 20 some awards, miss the hall.(because hes active, if he was drafted it wouldnt be the 7800 legacy he had, it woiuld be like 6500)

frustrating that its so hard to get someone who say you drafted, and have them go to the hall on defense unless you are a MLB.