Monday, November 13, 2006
The Great Barry vs. Emmitt Debate
So over the weekend I had a chance to take a peek at a classic Cowboys game from 1993. This was the Week 16 encounter between the 'Boys and the New York Giants to determine the NFC East division champions. It was also the famous game where Emmitt basically carved up the Giants defense but injured his shoulder. Now before I get to my main point I have to say that after watching the game memories flooded back as I vaguely recall watching said game when it first aired. I used to have this big ass old TV in the living room and i'd sit right up in front of it and watch sports or play my video games. It was kind of a melancholy moment to remember back to those days. It was also interesting to see how violent and physical the game was. The crowd at the Meadowlands was also jacked up. It was a very college football like crowd in many ways.
Ok well time to get to the main point of this post.....
One of the great debates on message boards and indeed between football fans is "who was better? Emmitt or Barry?" I was always firmly entrenched in the "If Barry had Emmitt's support he'd have broken Payton's record long ago" camp. Sanders had the terrible luck to be on a team that didn't have all that great of a line while Smith had probably the best O-Line of the 1990s in front of him.
After watching the NYG/Cowboys game this past weekend I have come to the conclusion that Emmitt was better then Barry. One thing that Emmitt had was that he could completely change the complexion of a game. Yes, he was only a cog in that Cowboys machine but if you take Emmitt out of the lineup then defenses can concentrate on blitzing and getting in Aikman's face. Remember Aikman was not the most mobile QB in the world and while that line was very good it was still a line that was more geared run blocking more then anything else. This is why whenever Emmitt was out of the lineup the Cowboys didn't do nearly as well as they would if he was in the lineup.
The Lions on the other hand were a different kind of team. They were mostly a passing team. They loved to spread the ball around and keep defenses off-balanced that way. Sanders was just icing on the cake for them as he was the ultimate RB for the type of O-line they had. He could dance around and make defenders miss and that's what opened the passing game for the Lions. I tend to think that if you plugged in another scat type of back in there that it wouldn't hurt the Lions as much as losing Emmitt would hurt the Cowboys. Yeah, the Lions wouldn't be nearly as explosive but they'd still have a very good offense.
It's still a very tough choice either way. None of those guys get my nod for best RB ever anyways as that goes to Walter Payton who could just plow over you, run around you, and dance around with the best of em when needed. It's just that i've now seen "the light" when it comes to Emmitt Smith. As I said on OS right after watching the game, Emmitt was the straw the stirred the drink for the Cowboys.
Ok well time to get to the main point of this post.....
One of the great debates on message boards and indeed between football fans is "who was better? Emmitt or Barry?" I was always firmly entrenched in the "If Barry had Emmitt's support he'd have broken Payton's record long ago" camp. Sanders had the terrible luck to be on a team that didn't have all that great of a line while Smith had probably the best O-Line of the 1990s in front of him.
After watching the NYG/Cowboys game this past weekend I have come to the conclusion that Emmitt was better then Barry. One thing that Emmitt had was that he could completely change the complexion of a game. Yes, he was only a cog in that Cowboys machine but if you take Emmitt out of the lineup then defenses can concentrate on blitzing and getting in Aikman's face. Remember Aikman was not the most mobile QB in the world and while that line was very good it was still a line that was more geared run blocking more then anything else. This is why whenever Emmitt was out of the lineup the Cowboys didn't do nearly as well as they would if he was in the lineup.
The Lions on the other hand were a different kind of team. They were mostly a passing team. They loved to spread the ball around and keep defenses off-balanced that way. Sanders was just icing on the cake for them as he was the ultimate RB for the type of O-line they had. He could dance around and make defenders miss and that's what opened the passing game for the Lions. I tend to think that if you plugged in another scat type of back in there that it wouldn't hurt the Lions as much as losing Emmitt would hurt the Cowboys. Yeah, the Lions wouldn't be nearly as explosive but they'd still have a very good offense.
It's still a very tough choice either way. None of those guys get my nod for best RB ever anyways as that goes to Walter Payton who could just plow over you, run around you, and dance around with the best of em when needed. It's just that i've now seen "the light" when it comes to Emmitt Smith. As I said on OS right after watching the game, Emmitt was the straw the stirred the drink for the Cowboys.
# posted by Chris Fung @ 5:22 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
OK, even by your own admission Smith "probably had the best O-Line of the 1990s..." With that said in 73 less career games Sanders only had 3,086 less yards than Smith. Granted, that does sound like a lot, but when you consider Barry averaged 1,527 (And 5 yards per carry, as opposed to 4.2 for Emmitt) yards per season it's not implausible that he could have had the same number of yards Smith currently has within the next two seasons. Also in Sanders' ten year career only once was the passing offense better than the rushing offense. In Emmitt's career with the Cowboys the rushing offense was better than the passing offense 10 times, so I would say that that would pretty much be a wash. All things considered, in my opinion anyways, Barry was the better running back, but it is at least semi-close.
Post a Comment
# posted by 
: 2:01 AM
: 2:01 AM << Home
