Do you agree with Primetime on his position in the 100 Greatest Players list?

[CommonBeatz]

The voters' panel thing listed "Primetime" Deion Sanders as #34 on the 100 greatest players. On NFL Total Access (NFL Network's main show), Deion was ranting about how he should've been higher on the list. Do you agree with this or not? If the 100 greatest players in NFL history were lined up, would you really put Deion at #34 or would you have him higher or lower?

To me, he can stay right where he's at. And move a certain Rod Woodson up from #41, ahead of Deion and his cocky ego.

Where do you rank Deion Sanders on your top 100 players of all-time?

[55]

Re: Do you agree with Primetime on his position in the 100 Greatest Players list?

I'd put him a bit higher, but then again I have only been watching football for 25 years so I can't really give a fair assessment to all of the guys who played before him.

[CommonBeatz]

Re: Do you agree with Primetime on his position in the 100 Greatest Players list?

I'd put him a bit higher, but then again I have only been watching football for 25 years so I can't really give a fair assessment to all of the guys who played before him.

Same here. I still feel like Rod Woodson was a more complete defensive back though and I would have him higher than Deion. I don't know about all those "old school" cornerbacks. Guys like Mel Blount, Night Train Lane, and all of them.

[Cryolemon]

Re: Do you agree with Primetime on his position in the 100 Greatest Players list?

I'd say he's top 25, but not much higher than that.

[Amoo316]

Re: Do you agree with Primetime on his position in the 100 Greatest Players list?

Tough call. No Doubt Woodson was the better tackler, but Deion made magic happen anytime he touched the ball. I see this as very similar to the TO vs Moss Debate, there are ways Deion affected the game that I just don't think Woodson did. They both won their D-NFLPofY awards in back to back seasons... If you threw it near either guy it was probably getting picked, if you threw it at Deion though, it was probably getting picked, and returned for 6. I think a lot of that perception had to do with Deion being able to play both ways.

To me it would depend on the style of defense I was running, but IMO I would have taken Deion over Woodson on the field.

[bkrich83]

Re: Do you agree with Primetime on his position in the 100 Greatest Players list?

I laughed when he said he never shied away from contact. I have the 1991 Chargers highlight film and there's a great clip of him basically running away from Marion Butts as Butts was dragging guys down the field.

[grunt]

Re: Do you agree with Primetime on his position in the 100 Greatest Players list?

Sanders was the most dominant cover corner in his generation. He was also a great pr and kr. I don't know if he should be higher but few dbs should be higher than Sanders.

[bkrich83]

Re: Do you agree with Primetime on his position in the 100 Greatest Players list?

Sanders was the most dominant cover corner in his generation. He was also a great pr and kr. I don't know if he should be higher but few dbs should be higher than Sanders.

For me the only DB's I would probably put higher.

Mel Blount
Dick Nighttrane Lane
Ronnie Lott
Mike Haynes

[SPTO]

Re: Do you agree with Primetime on his position in the 100 Greatest Players list?

34 seems about right for Sanders. He was never a great physical defender and even when he did attempt to wrap guys up and tackle them it more often then not looked VERY comical. That being said, he's probably one of, if not the greatest cover guy ever.

Sanders probably gets a leg up on some guys at his position because of his PR/KR exploits and his at times successful turns at WR. People sometimes forges that Sanders wasn't all hype. I've seen broadcast footage of his very first Kickoff (or it might've been Punt can't remember for certain) return for a TD. The man became an instant star the moment he stepped onto an NFL field. Few guys have ever had that "IT" stuff right from the jump.

[N51_rob]

Re: Do you agree with Primetime on his position in the 100 Greatest Players list?

I would place him higher. He was one of those rare guys that changed the way his position was drafted after. The SI article on him from way back was a great example of him at his prime taking away a receiver for most of the game. Guys like Revis are playing corner because of Sanders. He is a top 20 guy for me.

[wwharton]

Re: Do you agree with Primetime on his position in the 100 Greatest Players list?

Sanders was the most dominant cover corner in his generation. He was also a great pr and kr. I don't know if he should be higher but few dbs should be higher than Sanders.

I think this is basically what's important. Unlike basketball, the positions don't really blend together so where he rates at his position is more important because otherwise there's a lot of apples and oranges in the same basket. Is the top LB higher than the top DB? Why or why not? No real arguments can be made.

[brayTxiv]

Re: Do you agree with Primetime on his position in the 100 Greatest Players list?

I agree Prime should be higher, but not top 5 like he said he should be. IMO Deion is the best corner to ever play the game. Not only was he the best corner, but arguably the best return specialist ever.

A couple other disagreements I have. Tony Gonzalez(#45) is a all time great, but I would not have him higher than Randy Moss(#65). Where is Ray Lewis going to land? Top 5 will probably be 1. Jim Brown, 2. Jerry Rice 3. Joe Montana, 4. Lawrence Taylor, 5. Johnny Unitas. Interested to see where Favre will land.

[CW McGraw]

Re: Do you agree with Primetime on his position in the 100 Greatest Players list?

Saying that Sanders couldn't tackle is like saying that Mozart couldn't sing. Given his unmatched talent at the most important aspect of his job, his weakness as a tackler is irrelevant. He's unquestionably the greatest cover corner of all time. He dominated despite rules meant to make his job impossible.

I think Deion made some good points. The list has an obvious bias towards QBs and offensive players. Joe Namath and Kurt Warner are both legitimate Hall of Famers, but they had such brief primes that you can't really justify putting them on the list. Guys like Red Grange and Jim Thorpe were tremendously important to the history of the NFL but their on field accomplishments really can't compare to the accomplishments of guys who came even two decades later. I guess it just depends on how you define greatness. If you say greatness is synonymous with historical significance then Namath, Thorpe, and Grange are deserving, but if you're defining greatness as skill on the football field over an extended period of time then there's no way I can put those guys on the list.

[ANDROMADA 1]

Re: Do you agree with Primetime on his position in the 100 Greatest Players list?

Sanders was awesome. I would easily move him ahead to the top ten. He takes away 3/4 of the football field. He is the definition of shutdown corner.

[Scottdau]

Re: Do you agree with Primetime on his position in the 100 Greatest Players list?

I laughed when he said he never shied away from contact. I have the 1991 Chargers highlight film and there's a great clip of him basically running away from Marion Butts as Butts was dragging guys down the field.

Did he even tackle people?