NFL 100 All-Time Team

[JohnTurney]

TOp 100 players----is it players? Complete players?

I would bet, but I could be wrong, Dickerson makes teh final 12 and Marshall Faulk does not.

I would give Dickerson the edge as pure runner, though close. He was smooth, a joy to watch.

But if you were building a team, which is the better football player?

I think it's Faulk by a long shot.

Faulk the far, far better receiver, far better blocker. And better in goalline and short yardage
Dick was poor receiver after rookie year, fair (at best) blocker and though good on short yardage
I swear he failed more than most----just seemed like he could be stuffed. Faulk, lower to ground
was better. Also, Dick a fumbler, Faulk was not

So, the little you lose in running you makeup for in all those other things. What I wonder is if
those picking these 12 our of the 24 will consider that

Payton and LT are like Faulk, Payton even a bit better because he also lead blocked well
but Barry Sanders gets far more ink and he was often taken out in short yardage, was a so-so
receiver and blocker.

Jim Brown actualy had decent receiving numbers...and I still think is #1---but Payton, to me
is close because of all the other things.

We'll see if this is just a pick of highlight guys or if some scouting reports and overall talent
were taken into account

[Reaser]

TOp 100 players----is it players? Complete players?

Payton and LT are like Faulk, Payton even a bit better because he also lead blocked well
but Barry Sanders gets far more ink and he was often taken out in short yardage, was a so-so
receiver and blocker.

We'll see if this is just a pick of highlight guys or if some scouting reports and overall talent
were taken into account

On the previous page when I saw the complaint about Allen as a finalist, I thought like the above. Not that he should be in the Top 12 (wouldn't be in my Top 12) but if we're talking complete players he's twice the football player someone like Bettis is and there's a lot more to his game than "only three 1,000 rushing seasons". In the same category as Payton, Faulk, LT -clearly not as good as them, in my opinion- with the running, receiving, blocking, football IQ/'like having another QB on the field' and so on. That type of player. Gets underrated, in that respect. A level down from the three mentioned but it puts him above some on the list and obviously above many not on the list of finalists.

[JohnTurney]

On the previous page when I saw the complaint about Allen as a finalist, I thought like the above. Not that he should be in the Top 12 (wouldn't be in my Top 12) but if we're talking complete players he's twice the football player someone like Bettis is and there's a lot more to his game than "only three 1,000 rushing seasons". In the same category as Payton, Faulk, LT -clearly not as good as them, in my opinion- with the running, receiving, blocking, football IQ/'like having another QB on the field' and so on. That type of player. Gets underrated, in that respect. A level down from the three mentioned but it puts him above some on the list and obviously above many not on the list of finalists.

WOuld agree. Allen was a slot in the nickel, and could throw. Excellent pass pro and good pass pro...excellent receiver. Running, when healthy was excellent...wuuld take Allen on my team over Bettis anyday. And head of plenty of "runners only"

Earl Campbell may be top 5 ever in highlight film. But stats--3 great years 2 good ones. Useless in the passing game. DOn't know much about pass pro because not on field on 3rd and long...

[SixtiesFan]

Getting to the more topical matter of the running backs. Here's how I'd rate their likelihood of making the team:

Locks: Brown, OJ, Payton, Sanders, Emmitt, LT

Should be in: SVB, Motley, Dickerson, AP

Coin flip: Moore, Taylor, Faulk

Will make it over someone more deserving because the company line loves him: Nagurski

Low chance: Campbell, Clark, Grange, Dorsett, Sayers

No chance: Allen, Bettis, Harris, McElhenny, Thomas

Have a feeling one of the two receiving backs may get the shaft for Bronko; Moore's stats don't pop out on either side until you consider them total from scrimmage (at which point he greatly outproduces Motley and Taylor), and Faulk played in an era when so many RBs were so great that he may be overlooked. I think one of them will make it though. Grange may have a higher chance than I'm giving him here too. I'm truly confused at McElhenny making the nominees but not Joe Perry.

I was glad to see Jim Taylor on the list as in the past he hasn't been mentioned as one of the great backs. The numbers Taylor put up in the early 60's (first to have five straight 1000 yard seasons) were better than anybody except Jim Brown at the time. Taylor was a good receiver also and good in big games. Jim Taylor may not be in the top 12 but he's in the top 24.

[Reaser]

WOuld agree. Allen was a slot in the nickel, and could throw. Excellent pass pro and good pass pro...excellent receiver. Running, when healthy was excellent...wuuld take Allen on my team over Bettis anyday. And head of plenty of "runners only"

I was editing -to add- when you responded so will just add here ... Meant wouldn't be on my 12 if I was picking this NFL 100 team but if I was picking an actual team and/or players I would want on my team he would shoot way up the list of "RB's". We saw what he could do in the NFL (running, receiving, passing, blocking in pass pro and as lead-blocker for a period, too), and his college career is known, I've seen some of his HS HL's, QB and Safety, could throw, run, intercept passes (went to USC as a DB), etc. In other words, a football player. Would have made a fantastic single-wing TB in a previous era, and if it was during the single-platoon era he obviously had the DB skills.

[SixtiesFan]

I honestly didn't check who was nominated when I developed this. This is my prediction of what they will do:

RB (12): J. Brown, Payton, B. Sanders, E. Smith, G. Sayers, E. Dickerson, Van Buren, L. Tomlinson, M. Motley, M. Faulk, Nagurski, Grange

When in doubt, I went with players named Willie (4) or peaked at ChrisBabcock's list. I'm still working on my own 100.

I'm sure the Blue-Ribbon panel has addressed Simpson's unique situation and has concluded that what happened 15 years after he retired from football should have no bearing on his place on the top 100 list. I realize it is still (and will always be) somewhat politically incorrect to acknowledge what a great running back he was, but he is still in my opinion one of the ten greatest running backs I have ever seen; it just makes me uncomfortable to discuss it publicly because it sounds like I am defending him for what has happened in his post-football career. I know people will complain about his being there, but I would be very surprised if he is not on the Top 100 list because he belongs there.

I've observed pro football for around 60 years. Yes, O.J. Simpson belongs on the list. I always rated Jim Brown ahead of him. Brown was a fine pass receiver and never missed playing time, consistent. O.J. wasn't as good a receiver. Still Simpson is in the top 10-12.

[SixtiesFan]

On the previous page when I saw the complaint about Allen as a finalist, I thought like the above. Not that he should be in the Top 12 (wouldn't be in my Top 12) but if we're talking complete players he's twice the football player someone like Bettis is and there's a lot more to his game than "only three 1,000 rushing seasons". In the same category as Payton, Faulk, LT -clearly not as good as them, in my opinion- with the running, receiving, blocking, football IQ/'like having another QB on the field' and so on. That type of player. Gets underrated, in that respect. A level down from the three mentioned but it puts him above some on the list and obviously above many not on the list of finalists.

WOuld agree. Allen was a slot in the nickel, and could throw. Excellent pass pro and good pass pro...excellent receiver. Running, when healthy was excellent...wuuld take Allen on my team over Bettis anyday. And head of plenty of "runners only"

Earl Campbell may be top 5 ever in highlight film. But stats--3 great years 2 good ones. Useless in the passing game. DOn't know much about pass pro because not on field on 3rd and long...

The Oilers would take Campbell out of the game in passing situations. You could call this telegraphing the play.

[SixtiesFan]

TOp 100 players----is it players? Complete players?

I would bet, but I could be wrong, Dickerson makes teh final 12 and Marshall Faulk does not.

I would give Dickerson the edge as pure rummer, though close. He was smooth, a joy to watch.

But if you were building a team, which is the better football player?

I think it's Faulk by a long shot.

Faulk the far, far better receiver, far better blocker. And better in goalline and short yardage
Dick was poor receiver after rookie year, fair (at best) blocker and though good on short yardage
I swear he failed more than most----just seemed like he could be stuffed. Faulk, lower to ground
was better. Also, Dick a fumbler, Faulk was not

So, the little you lose in running you makeup for in all those other things. What I wonder is if
those picking these 12 our of the 24 will consider that

Payton and LT are like Faulk, Payton even a bit better because he also lead blocked well
but Barry Sanders gets far more ink and he was often taken out in short yardage, was a so-so
receiver and blocker.

Jim Brown actualy had decent receiving numbers...and I still think is #1---but Payton, to me
is close because of all the other things.

We'll see if this is just a pick of highlight guys or if some scouting reports and overall talent
were taken into account

You could rate Marshall Faulk ahead of O.J. Simpson for the same reason as with Eric Dickerson.

[Reaser]

You could rate Marshall Faulk ahead of O.J. Simpson for the same reason as with Eric Dickerson.

I've done that each time we've had Top-[x] RB lists here. Many years ago we did Top-10 at every position and for RB I put Brown and Payton top-2 and I had Faulk 3rd or 4th. Not many liked my list though because I believe I was the only one without Sanders in the Top-10, who I think is more suited for a Top-10 Highlight Reel's or exciting players list because watching full games (instead of just highlights) I never thought of him at the level of many backs. Could just be me, though.

A few months ago I believe it was a Top-4 RB list thread we had and I believe I only did a Top-3 with Brown and Payton Top-2 with Faulk 3rd, and then added that I liked players like LT and Allen.

[JameisLoseston]

With OJ, I feel like we often forget that, well, he was found not guilty way back when. Not saying he's some great guy, but he did call out AB on Twitter this year, so props to that. If we continue to hold the trial against him, we're doing so only in the court of public opinion, and let's just say that the court of public opinion is what is continuing to keep AB and Kaepernick out of football, and got Kareem Hunt cut from a team that would very much be winning more football games with him on its roster this year, so it has less than zero merit. He's an undisputed top 10 RB, I may argue top five, and by 75 he had definitely learned how to catch the ball. He will make the team.