We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Lawrence Taylor

CB_fierce said:
I know it may be hard to believe, but Im actually not very biased. I give my honest opinions on players regardless of where they play. Also, there is a very big difference in the NFL elite, NFL Great players, and NFL flash in the pan players. If you look at numbers, His numbers are pretty comparable to the other players you mentioned, and he was dominant for more than 3-4 years I believe, he just didnt get the press in the beginning because of the team he was on. He has been in the league for 9 seasons, 7 of those seasons he has rushed for over 1200 yds. His last 2 seasons have been his lowest season totals, and to no surprise, has been his fewest touches in his career (go figure, if he doesnt get the ball, he cant get yardage...who knew).

7 consecutive great rushing seasons (8 consecutive good seasons considering his 1100 yd 08 seson) does not equal a flash player.

On a side note, if one looks and analyzes pretty closely, they will see that football is a cycle. There were great QBs for a period that dominated, defenses had to start building around this, so they get CBs and defend passes. After defenses build this, teams have to figure out ways to beat it...in comes the time of great running backs. A few running backs will come out and be dominant for a while (I believe this is where we have been the previous to the 08 season). Teams then start to build running defenses and focus on running backs...QBs start to air the ball out again, and they emerge as the dominant offensive position (this is where the game has been moving the past year or two).




I liked Taylor personally, I didnt know about his off field problems until later in life though. But he was Insane to watch play. They year they won the superbowl he played with a separated shoulder...He revolutionized the LB position, and there have been many many phenomenal LBs to come out since him (OLB probably to me more specific).

Phenomenal players change the way the other team has to plan and play. Taylor was one of these...Tomlinson as well...

edit: just noting that im not arguing here, just enjoy a good debate :D I dont want anything to come accross wrong
Click to expand...

You sir get it and know how to debate and we are glad to have you here. I disagree about Tomlinson as a career great, but he was and is certainly a great back. I would NO WAY call him one of the 2 best dual threat backs of all time. Not even close. But some young fans do not realize that the NFL existed before the nineties. (not you)

And I agree that he is in NO Way the real LT, that belonged to Mr. Taylor.
 
One thing I want to add before taking this way off topic, is, you cannot really believe that the NFL defenses have keyed on the running game and that is the reason that his numbers are down. Take a look at total rushing yards for the past 3 years when Tomlinson has been average at best. We have had MONSTER years by some backs and total rushing is the same or up from previous years. Since quitting on his team, his numbers have been down because they realized the little guy could run too and Tomlinson's burst was not the same.
 
Last thing and then I am done with it. I dont in anyway think Tomlinson changed the way the RB position was played. How was he any different than what Faulk did or a dozen guys did before him. He was a dual threat and a very good one...Perhaps the best at his time for about a 5 year period. But revolutionary...NOT EVEN CLOSE. A great player for a period does not make a revolutionary player.

He is a great player (was) and will most likely be a hall of fame player, but he is not in the top 5 best backs ever (unless you are young and did not see Jim Brown, Payton, OJ, etc play). Taylor was in a class by himself for an entire decade, won rings, disturbed the game like no other....Ended careers, etc..

The youngsters will come on today with their opinion, and that is fine, but to have a truly educated opinion, people must realize that the game started decades ago and just like with the other sports, there are people with more rings than Jordan (by a lot), more hits than Jeter and A-Rod, more yards, than Tomilinson, etc...The history of the sports dictate how the game is played now and before someone calls a player revolutionary and the best ever, perhaps they need to understand that the game has been going on for more than 15 years.
 
JB said:
One thing I want to add before taking this way off topic, is, you cannot really believe that the NFL defenses have keyed on the running game and that is the reason that his numbers are down. Take a look at total rushing yards for the past 3 years when Tomlinson has been average at best. We have had MONSTER years by some backs and total rushing is the same or up from previous years. Since quitting on his team, his numbers have been down because they realized the little guy could run too and Tomlinson's burst was not the same.
Click to expand...

Oh in no way am I saying that. I didnt mean to give that impression with that statement, only stating what seems to be the cycle of the NFL, and how the game changes back and forth over the years from passing dominance to running dominance (dominance referring to what you see more of in the league, good RB or QB).

LT did not quit on his team...his organization (not his team) quit on him. They fired a coach that went 14-2 (regardless of what people like to say about Marty's post-season issues, he is notorious for taking poor teams, and turning them into championship caliber teams) for personal reasons. Norv Turner is one of the worst head coaches in history, but at the same time, he is one of the greatest QB coaches in history. The past 2 years, not 3, have been average. Well, not even that really. In 2007 he rushed for 1474 with a 4.7 average...that is only an average season for him maybe, but not an average running back. 2008 he ran for just over 1100, that is pretty average overall, and last year he ran for a dismal 730. Looking at the past 2 years, these were the only years in his career he had under 300 carries. Now I am going to make a possible odd comparison here, but, when you go out to play golf, one of the things you need to establish before your round is your rythm. If your rythm is off, you generally will not score good. Football is the same way, and players, as well as teams, set rythms for games. Tomlinson always started seasons slow, mostly due to not playing in pre-season. He took a bit to establish his rythm and get going. But after he did, it was almost like watching a squirrel in the backfield (almost, that title still goes to Sanders). With fewer carries, it is/was tough for him to get warmed up and in rythm. Norv is going to throw the ball, and throw it deep, which is shown by their passing numbers the past few years.

maybe I watch waaayyy too much football...I may need to pass on the sunday ticket this year...
 
JB said:
Last thing and then I am done with it. I dont in anyway think Tomlinson changed the way the RB position was played. How was he any different than what Faulk did or a dozen guys did before him. He was a dual threat and a very good one...Perhaps the best at his time for about a 5 year period. But revolutionary...NOT EVEN CLOSE. A great player for a period does not make a revolutionary player.

He is a great player (was) and will most likely be a hall of fame player, but he is not in the top 5 best backs ever (unless you are young and did not see Jim Brown, Payton, OJ, etc play). Taylor was in a class by himself for an entire decade, won rings, disturbed the game like no other....Ended careers, etc..

The youngsters will come on today with their opinion, and that is fine, but to have a truly educated opinion, people must realize that the game started decades ago and just like with the other sports, there are people with more rings than Jordan (by a lot), more hits than Jeter and A-Rod, more yards, than Tomilinson, etc...The history of the sports dictate how the game is played now and before someone calls a player revolutionary and the best ever, perhaps they need to understand that the game has been going on for more than 15 years.
Click to expand...


I want one more thing and then be done too :)

I do not believe he revolutionized the RB position, Im not sure if I said that or gave that impression. To revolutionize, you have to be the first do do something, and there is only one. Taylor definitely revolutionized the OLB position. Though Im not convinced that some of the players listed did that. Maybe OJ, payton, and sayers. As I recall the FB was the primary carrier before their days. Sanders was just phenomenal at the position, and Smith was great, but also played on one of the greatest all around teams ever (he could run a straight line for 20 yards and never even see a defender through his helmet).

Also, Ive had this type of discussion in the past with different sports (Jordan, Tiger, etc...). I never really like the term greatest ever for one person. "One of the greatest" Im ok with. But I prefer greatest of their time. Too much changes in sports for a single person to be considered the greatest ever.

Was Jordan better than Dr. J, Maravich, or Chamberlan? who knows, they were all the best of their time.

Tiger better than Jack or Jones? They were the best of their time

However, those that were the best of their time, are usually considered "one of the best ever"


Still very disappointed in #56 who was a revolutionary :\
 
JB said:
Your clearly young! Short memories are a great thing. Try going back a few decades and realize that the NFL did not start in the nineties. Tomlinson has been nothing more than a flash in the pan. A great running back for a few years. Comparing him to all time greats such as Smith, Payton, Sanders, Sayers, OJ, and the list could go on is an embarrassment to the game of football. Your age is clearly coming out now!
Click to expand...
I said one of the best dual-threat running backs. And it's him and Faulk. What's the issue?

OJ was never a receiving back, I'd be shocked if he ever had more than 40 receptions in a season. Sayers career was cut short, still a good player. Emmitt was never really a great pass catcher, and I saw plenty of him. Barry was the greatest RB of all-time to me, but as a pass catcher his numbers don't compare to Tomlinson or Faulk, especially Faulk, who flat out is probably the best ever as a dual-threat RB.

I don't see the problem...As a pure running back? I take all the names you listed over Tomlinson, with ease. And Curtis Martin.
 
Also throw in Roger Craig as another great dual-threat RB.

But Faulk blows everyone else away in that category.
 
I think JB covered most of the points that I wanted to mention.

Tomnlinson is a great back and IMO a sure thing for the HOF but he lacked the longevity that would put him in the top 5 RBs of all time (my list- 1. Jim Brown, 2. Sweetness, 3.Sayers 4.Barry Sanders 5. Emitt) I think he is a sold top 15 pick and probably squeeks into the top 10... but that isnt enough to compare him to LT (or to take his nickname- as was the initial start of this discussion).

Some other major differences between era's is the number of games played. J.Brown, by the stats, doesnt stand out as the overall #1 RB... but once you think he played less games and retired in the prime of his career then his numbers really start to seperate themselves. That was also in the "3 yards iand a cloud of dust" where he ran against 8, 9 or even 10 man fronts. Different era.

I am also a youngin'- (25) and so you don't need to have seen these people play to appreciate what they did, but you do have to be willing to step outside your own experiences and do a little searching.
 
I like your attitude Gus

RxGus said:
I think JB covered most of the points that I wanted to mention.

Tomnlinson is a great back and IMO a sure thing for the HOF but he lacked the longevity that would put him in the top 5 RBs of all time (my list- 1. Jim Brown, 2. Sweetness, 3.Sayers 4.Barry Sanders 5. Emitt) I think he is a sold top 15 pick and probably squeeks into the top 10... but that isnt enough to compare him to LT (or to take his nickname- as was the initial start of this discussion).

Some other major differences between era's is the number of games played. J.Brown, by the stats, doesnt stand out as the overall #1 RB... but once you think he played less games and retired in the prime of his career then his numbers really start to seperate themselves. That was also in the "3 yards iand a cloud of dust" where he ran against 8, 9 or even 10 man fronts. Different era.

I am also a youngin'- (25) and so you don't need to have seen these people play to appreciate what they did, but you do have to be willing to step outside your own experiences and do a little searching.
Click to expand...
 
Something that I think that needs to be brought up is the simple fact of how the NFL is today and how it's been for the past decade or so.

RB's aren't really allowed to be great for a long period of time anymore, thus they can't rack up HUGE numbers that they might be capable of. When good RB's hit 28 or 29, teams are looking at replacing them. It doesn't matter if that good RB is still running well and producing. When he gets to the magical age of 29 or 30, he's used goods and most teams look to replace him w/ a younger back.

Tomlinson had Sproles there to take his place for two years before they finally kind of pushed him out the door.

Emmit Smith is the last great back to have gotten a chance to stay w/ a team and be the No. 1 back for a long period of time.

That just doesn't happen anymore.
 
He sure as heck looks guility to me and there doesnt seem to be much of an alibi on his part. Its amazing how foolish and downright stupid some athletes have been lately.
 
NikeGolf said:
Something that I think that needs to be brought up is the simple fact of how the NFL is today and how it's been for the past decade or so.

RB's aren't really allowed to be great for a long period of time anymore, thus they can't rack up HUGE numbers that they might be capable of. When good RB's hit 28 or 29, teams are looking at replacing them. It doesn't matter if that good RB is still running well and producing. When he gets to the magical age of 29 or 30, he's used goods and most teams look to replace him w/ a younger back.

Tomlinson had Sproles there to take his place for two years before they finally kind of pushed him out the door.

Emmit Smith is the last great back to have gotten a chance to stay w/ a team and be the No. 1 back for a long period of time.

That just doesn't happen anymore.
Click to expand...

Fred Taylor hitting the bricks in Jacksonville, to not even be used by New England :(


LT isn't a top 5 RB, but he's definitely top 10. Walter Payton is, and always will be #1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top