Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Your list proves nothing. None of those guys is as good as the 3 listed.
Well, since Barry Saunders
never played RB in the NFL, I'd say all of them are better than him
. Seriously, though, I'd take Gore, Turner, Foster, McCoy (even though he's a di*k), Forte, Rice, and MJD over Smith. That guy was a decent, toug, durable one-cut back who happened to play behind the most dominant run-blocking OL in NFL history. Add to that that he played in an offense with great run-pass balance, and he rarely had to run against a stacked box. He dropped into the perfect situation for a RB, and I think any of those guys could have had the same numbers or better in his place.
Also, I believe part of the point behind the list was thaat the current
trend in the NFL is that good backs are found later because less of them get drafted early and the game is more focused on passing offense. Referencing stars from a bygone era is unfair in two ways: 1) their carreers are complete, thus more impressive; 2) RBs were more important and held greater value, so they were picked earlier. The era of the feature back is nearly gone, as RB-by-committee seems to be the way of the world, unless you have an MJD or a healthy Gore, both of whom do everything than any other back on their respective teams.