The most overrated player in NFL history

I think there's an extremely high possibility that Franco Harris was highly overrated. I think the mention of Shaun Alexander is apt -- Alexander ran behind possibly the best Guard-Tackle tandem of the last 15 years. No one gives a crap about him now.

If you look up highlight videos of running backs of the 60s, 70s, 80s, etc you'll see a lot of Jim Brown, Gale Sayers, OJ, Earl Campbell, Walter Payton, Barry Sanders and Bo Jackson (with a little bit of Marcus Allen and Eric Dickerson mixed in). You're not going to catch much of Franco Harris.

BTW, the guy with the most impressive highlights is probably Earl Campbell.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Russell Wilson is well on his way to this honor.

lol? maybe in his first few season, but last couple of years that defense hasn't been good, no running game either, and Russell has been carrying them. don't like the midgets personality, but can't deny his skill.

If by overrated, do we mean a player who accomplished a lot of stats and fame but think he was more of a product of the talent and system around him or do we think of a player everyone talks about being great but if you look at the numbers, he really isn't?

If it is option #1, then I would say Emmitt Smith. Dude wouldn't come close to the stats he had if he wasn't behind one of the most dominant run blocking offensive lines in the history of the NFL. Honestly, I think Frank Gore has greater running and screen catching ability than Smith does and Gore would be unreal behind that DAL offensive line.

If it is option #2, I must say Eli Manning. No other player that I can think of has won multiple championships but is very dull when you look at the statistical accomplishments along with the fact that he doesn't really make people better than him.

Tom Brady

Originally posted by Joecool:
If by overrated, do we mean a player who accomplished a lot of stats and fame but think he was more of a product of the talent and system around him or do we think of a player everyone talks about being great but if you look at the numbers, he really isn't?

If it is option #1, then I would say Emmitt Smith. Dude wouldn't come close to the stats he had if he wasn't behind one of the most dominant run blocking offensive lines in the history of the NFL. Honestly, I think Frank Gore has greater running and screen catching ability than Smith does and Gore would be unreal behind that DAL offensive line.

If it is option #2, I must say Eli Manning. No other player that I can think of has won multiple championships but is very dull when you look at the statistical accomplishments along with the fact that he doesn't really make people better than him.

If anything Aikman, Smith and that OL / Irving made Aikman.

Eli? Do people consider him great or something? He can't be overrated unless there's a perception around him that he's really good, or that he carries himself that way.

For me its Aikman, Bradshaw and Swann. Though, Swann probably would've put up better numbers if he didn't have Bradshaw throwing him the ball.

HOF: Franco "I'm 230 pounds and literally the least powerful RB to ever play in the NFL" Harris
HOF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNa3gZfQfH0

Not HOF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzD_7X2eK4o

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:

Originally posted by SoCold:

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:
I feel kind of bad saying this, because he seems like a really nice guy, but the most overrated player in NFL history, bar none, is:

Franco Harris.

I don't know how many people here have ever really watched old Steelers games (why would you?), but I binge watched them on Youtube several months ago.

Let me just say this: Franco Harris is not a Top 500 running back in NFL history. Not in terms of performance on the field, he wasn't. I am not even kidding: Derek Loville was a better running back than Franco Harris.

You think I'm being hyperbolic? I'm not.

Let me put it this way: Every single person on this forum could tackle Franco Harris when he played. Every single able-bodied person on planet earth could tackle Franco Harris. That is not an exaggeration.

You see, here's how a Franco Harris carry went: Bradshaw hands it off to Franco Harris. He hits the designed hole. The very first guy to touch him was the guy who tackled him. As soon as he was so much as clipped by a nickel or dime back, he went down. He got what was there and nothing more.

Newspapers at the time referred to it as, "unlike Jim Brown, he goes out of bounds." No, he wasn't going out of bounds. He was just going down to the very first guy who got him every single time.

The late Dave Duerson once described hitting Harris as, "he was soft. Like a sponge."

Now maybe you're going to try to object, because, "but but but but, he gained a lot of rushing yards! And rings! He got 4 rings! He must have done something well to keep starting, like...vision! Yeah, vision!"

Yeah, no. Hitting a designed hole is not "vision." Vision is hitting a cutback lane. It's seeing the big picture and making moves accordingly.

Harris was a big robot. See designed hole, go to designed hole...touched, robot shut down.

Harris was the worst running back on the Steelers every year he played for them. The best running back the Steelers had in the 70s was Sidney Thornton. He actually had some decent power. Rocky Bleier was also basically a hack, but even he was better than Harris, and occasionally would fight for some extra yardage/break a tackle.

Was there anything Harris did well besides do what the coaches asked of him as far as hitting the designed hole? Well, for a guy his size, he had decent straight line speed. But I'm talking about for a guy his size...in the 1970s. That's why he was drafted - he was a 230 pound guy who ran in the 4.6-4.7 range. He wasn't the feature back at Penn State...Lydell Mitchell was.

"But if he's so bad, how could he gain so many yards? Are you saying the Steelers' offensive line was the GOAT line?"

Here's something you might not be aware of - and if you're ever trash talking with some Steelers fans who suck off their 70s teams, be sure to bring it up: The Steelers' offensive linemen were all juicing. They were roid freaks. It was an open secret that was exposed by Steve Courson years later.

Their offensive linemen dominated the off-season NFL weight lifting competitions. Mike Webster was the "strongest man in the NFL."

So in terms of effectiveness, they were certainly way up there. Why wouldn't they be? They had a huge physical edge.

It's funny...if you were to poll the average fan and ask them who was overrated from the 70s Steelers, they would say Terry Bradshaw...but he has been called overrated so much that he's actually now underrated. Bradshaw was basically the equal to Elway: Mobility, strong arm, could make all the throws...played in some bad offensive systems that made his numbers look worse.

My thoughts on some of their others:

Lambert: Lives up to the hype for the most part. Funny enough, fans were saying he was overrated and Ham was underrated. I don't see it. Ham after 1974 or so didn't do much for me. Lambert was everywhere. Their scheme had he and Ham getting deep pass drops, and he was on basically everything sideline-to-sideline or straight ahead. Never seemed to miss a tackle.

Greene: Great interior pass rusher, especially in his peak years. Not exceptional vs. the run at the point. Not as "mean" as they say, unless they mean he'll punch Broncos' offensive linemen in the gut and not get ejected. Then yeah, he was mean in that way.

Greenwood: Good pass rusher.

Ham: More impressive in 1974 and prior. More of a role player later on. Pass to the flat and he'd be on it, fast. Huge roles in coverage in their scheme.

Blount: He's lucky he played in the era he did. Not a great actual cover guy. Squatted on routes against primitive passing attacks and collected the INTs. Good run support player, though.

Donnie Shell: Don't get the hype.

Stallworth: Surprised me with his RAC ability. Could break tackles after the catch. Good on the leaping grab as well. Primitive routes.

Swann: Tremendous leaping ability. Pretty special hands, considering nobody wore gloves then. Slow as molasses. I doubt he could crack 4.75. Yeah, he caught deep balls like basically every other receiver of that era, but he did it because the corners of the time were almost entirely 6'0"+ plodders. Teams of that era used almost exclusively bigger corners because of the different rules (the "Mel Blount rule" was instituted in 1977), thinking the bigger corners could maul the receivers they faced. Ugly, primitive routes. Also good after the catch. Watching he and Stallworth, you realize how much we overrate our own receivers' RAC ability. RAC was expected of a WR before pussies like Marvin Harrison and Torry Holt decided the catch was the end of the story because they didn't want to injure their vaginas.

I think 1974 was their best defense, which was Lambert's rookie year. I don't think he ever played better than that, despite not getting the Pro Bowl/all pro honors that year (he did win DROY though).

lol Harris was a big fast RB for that era. Won Rookie of the year. Only played 14 game seasons like his first 6 years and he had 1200+ all purpose yards in 5 of those. 9 pro bowls in a row to start his career. lol Derek Loville bwahahaha

He didn't need to run people over or fight for yards. His running style prob allowed him to play and extra few year in the league.

lol

First John Taylor now this. Man your posts are entertaining me. Keep up the good work.

Yeah, he didn't "need" to run people over or fight for yards BECAUSE ALL HE DID WAS ENTER THE HOLE AND GO DOWN TO THE FIRST GUY WHO TOUCHED HIM. What part of that don't you understand? Literally every single running back in NFL history could have gained the same number of yards as him, unless you find a back who played in the NFL who was somehow as soft (there never was such a back as far as I'm aware of, and I've been watching football obsessively for probably longer than you've been alive) and who runs worse than 4.6-4.7 in the 40.

His "running style" was hitting the designed hole and going down to the first guy who TOUCHED HIM every single carry of his career. That is not what a good NFL running back does. He wasn't even average. He was a flat-out bad football player. And he's in the HOF. That's why he is hands down the most overrated player in NFL history. It's not even close.

Those reasons are silly. You can pull up his highlights and watch guys bounce off of him as he runs 50 yards for a TD.
The very first play of this video shows a dude just bounce off him.


I'm over 40 so you must be really old. lol
He was a super bowl MVP. #15 all time leading rusher in history. That's a big reason he's in the HOF.

You don't have to be a tackle breaking yards after contact back when you can just outrun the D to the endzone lol.


I don't think anyone is calling him one of the best backs ever. To say he's not even a top 500 back because he's soft is just silly.

Jim Harbaugh

Originally posted by SoCold:

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:

Originally posted by SoCold:

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:
I feel kind of bad saying this, because he seems like a really nice guy, but the most overrated player in NFL history, bar none, is:

Franco Harris.

I don't know how many people here have ever really watched old Steelers games (why would you?), but I binge watched them on Youtube several months ago.

Let me just say this: Franco Harris is not a Top 500 running back in NFL history. Not in terms of performance on the field, he wasn't. I am not even kidding: Derek Loville was a better running back than Franco Harris.

You think I'm being hyperbolic? I'm not.

Let me put it this way: Every single person on this forum could tackle Franco Harris when he played. Every single able-bodied person on planet earth could tackle Franco Harris. That is not an exaggeration.

You see, here's how a Franco Harris carry went: Bradshaw hands it off to Franco Harris. He hits the designed hole. The very first guy to touch him was the guy who tackled him. As soon as he was so much as clipped by a nickel or dime back, he went down. He got what was there and nothing more.

Newspapers at the time referred to it as, "unlike Jim Brown, he goes out of bounds." No, he wasn't going out of bounds. He was just going down to the very first guy who got him every single time.

The late Dave Duerson once described hitting Harris as, "he was soft. Like a sponge."

Now maybe you're going to try to object, because, "but but but but, he gained a lot of rushing yards! And rings! He got 4 rings! He must have done something well to keep starting, like...vision! Yeah, vision!"

Yeah, no. Hitting a designed hole is not "vision." Vision is hitting a cutback lane. It's seeing the big picture and making moves accordingly.

Harris was a big robot. See designed hole, go to designed hole...touched, robot shut down.

Harris was the worst running back on the Steelers every year he played for them. The best running back the Steelers had in the 70s was Sidney Thornton. He actually had some decent power. Rocky Bleier was also basically a hack, but even he was better than Harris, and occasionally would fight for some extra yardage/break a tackle.

Was there anything Harris did well besides do what the coaches asked of him as far as hitting the designed hole? Well, for a guy his size, he had decent straight line speed. But I'm talking about for a guy his size...in the 1970s. That's why he was drafted - he was a 230 pound guy who ran in the 4.6-4.7 range. He wasn't the feature back at Penn State...Lydell Mitchell was.

"But if he's so bad, how could he gain so many yards? Are you saying the Steelers' offensive line was the GOAT line?"

Here's something you might not be aware of - and if you're ever trash talking with some Steelers fans who suck off their 70s teams, be sure to bring it up: The Steelers' offensive linemen were all juicing. They were roid freaks. It was an open secret that was exposed by Steve Courson years later.

Their offensive linemen dominated the off-season NFL weight lifting competitions. Mike Webster was the "strongest man in the NFL."

So in terms of effectiveness, they were certainly way up there. Why wouldn't they be? They had a huge physical edge.

It's funny...if you were to poll the average fan and ask them who was overrated from the 70s Steelers, they would say Terry Bradshaw...but he has been called overrated so much that he's actually now underrated. Bradshaw was basically the equal to Elway: Mobility, strong arm, could make all the throws...played in some bad offensive systems that made his numbers look worse.

My thoughts on some of their others:

Lambert: Lives up to the hype for the most part. Funny enough, fans were saying he was overrated and Ham was underrated. I don't see it. Ham after 1974 or so didn't do much for me. Lambert was everywhere. Their scheme had he and Ham getting deep pass drops, and he was on basically everything sideline-to-sideline or straight ahead. Never seemed to miss a tackle.

Greene: Great interior pass rusher, especially in his peak years. Not exceptional vs. the run at the point. Not as "mean" as they say, unless they mean he'll punch Broncos' offensive linemen in the gut and not get ejected. Then yeah, he was mean in that way.

Greenwood: Good pass rusher.

Ham: More impressive in 1974 and prior. More of a role player later on. Pass to the flat and he'd be on it, fast. Huge roles in coverage in their scheme.

Blount: He's lucky he played in the era he did. Not a great actual cover guy. Squatted on routes against primitive passing attacks and collected the INTs. Good run support player, though.

Donnie Shell: Don't get the hype.

Stallworth: Surprised me with his RAC ability. Could break tackles after the catch. Good on the leaping grab as well. Primitive routes.

Swann: Tremendous leaping ability. Pretty special hands, considering nobody wore gloves then. Slow as molasses. I doubt he could crack 4.75. Yeah, he caught deep balls like basically every other receiver of that era, but he did it because the corners of the time were almost entirely 6'0"+ plodders. Teams of that era used almost exclusively bigger corners because of the different rules (the "Mel Blount rule" was instituted in 1977), thinking the bigger corners could maul the receivers they faced. Ugly, primitive routes. Also good after the catch. Watching he and Stallworth, you realize how much we overrate our own receivers' RAC ability. RAC was expected of a WR before pussies like Marvin Harrison and Torry Holt decided the catch was the end of the story because they didn't want to injure their vaginas.

I think 1974 was their best defense, which was Lambert's rookie year. I don't think he ever played better than that, despite not getting the Pro Bowl/all pro honors that year (he did win DROY though).

lol Harris was a big fast RB for that era. Won Rookie of the year. Only played 14 game seasons like his first 6 years and he had 1200+ all purpose yards in 5 of those. 9 pro bowls in a row to start his career. lol Derek Loville bwahahaha

He didn't need to run people over or fight for yards. His running style prob allowed him to play and extra few year in the league.

lol

First John Taylor now this. Man your posts are entertaining me. Keep up the good work.

Yeah, he didn't "need" to run people over or fight for yards BECAUSE ALL HE DID WAS ENTER THE HOLE AND GO DOWN TO THE FIRST GUY WHO TOUCHED HIM. What part of that don't you understand? Literally every single running back in NFL history could have gained the same number of yards as him, unless you find a back who played in the NFL who was somehow as soft (there never was such a back as far as I'm aware of, and I've been watching football obsessively for probably longer than you've been alive) and who runs worse than 4.6-4.7 in the 40.

His "running style" was hitting the designed hole and going down to the first guy who TOUCHED HIM every single carry of his career. That is not what a good NFL running back does. He wasn't even average. He was a flat-out bad football player. And he's in the HOF. That's why he is hands down the most overrated player in NFL history. It's not even close.

Those reasons are silly. You can pull up his highlights and watch guys bounce off of him as he runs 50 yards for a TD.
The very first play of this video shows a dude just bounce off him.


I'm over 40 so you must be really old. lol
He was a super bowl MVP. #15 all time leading rusher in history. That's a big reason he's in the HOF.

You don't have to be a tackle breaking yards after contact back when you can just outrun the D to the endzone lol.


I don't think anyone is calling him one of the best backs ever. To say he's not even a top 500 back because he's soft is just silly.

No, you most certainly can not pull up highlights of him bouncing off dudes. You are resorting to just making stuff up now.

Outrun the D to the endzone? He only had 5 touchdowns of 40+ yards in his entire career, and only 11 of 20+.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HarrFr00/touchdowns/

For comparison's sake, Jerome freak'n Bettis had 5 touchdowns of 40+ yards in his career. He was a real burner, that Bettis.

For comparison's sake, here are the number of 40+ and 20+ yard touchdowns some other backs scored for their careers, in comparison to Harris:

(Franco Harris: 5, 11)

Adrian Peterson: 19, 28
Barry Sanders: 22, 34
Tony Dorsett: 13, 29
Emmitt Smith: 7, 23
Walter Payton: 13, 24
Frank Gore: 9, 19
LaDainian Tomlinson: 14, 28
Eric Dickerson: 8, 14
Marshall Faulk: 12, 19
O.J. Simpson: 18, 29
Tiki Barber: 11, 17
Steven Jackson: 8, 16

So what you have here is a big, slow running back who was literally the least powerful runner to ever play the game.

Now do you see why he was so bad? The only thing he had going for him was "good speed FOR HIS SIZE, FOR THAT ERA." But "speed for his size" is only considered valuable because you expect a guy with more size to be more powerful. He wasn't - he was exactly the opposite - the least powerful back to ever play professional football. He was literally the least powerful running back in the history of the game.

Find me a less powerful running back than Franco Harris. I bet you you can't. I bet you I could find more broken tackles from any back with 500 or more career carries than Harris had in his entire career.

So you would be better off getting a 170 pound scat back who had 4.4 speed instead of his 4.7 speed, and that scat back would also have better power. Even the most finesse scat back ever was more powerful than Harris.

Harris wasn't "big and fast," he was only big. He had absolutely nothing else going for him. Not a thing. He was absolutely awful in every facet of the game. He didn't even protect the football well, although fumbles were much more common in that era.

When I say "good speed FOR HIS SIZE, FOR THAT ERA," I'm talking about Fred Beasley-type "speed for his size for that era." He was the kind of athlete for the 70s that Beasley was for the late 90s/early 2000s. Oh, and Fred Beasley was also a better rusher than Harris.

You want to really put this in perspective? TERRY BRADSHAW WAS A BETTER RUSHER THAN HARRIS. No, I don't simply mean, "he was a really good running quarterback." I mean, if you were to line Terry Bradshaw up at running back, he would have been better than Harris. He was stronger, faster, quicker, and more elusive. You can see this every time he takes off. He broke WAY more tackles than Harris. He was noticeably faster and quicker.

Rocky Bleier was a freak'n 16th round pick (from freak'n Notre Dame...meaning he simply wasn't that good) and he was better than Harris. He was a "real life Rocky" story (no name pun intended), and he was clearly a better back than Harris.

Harris seems to be a really sweet guy but he was an AWFUL football player. Utterly awful. Stop pretending a guy who was HORRID at his profession was good at it.

Stop saying ridiculous things like, "You don't have to be a tackle breaking yards after contact back when you can just outrun the D to the endzone lol" when you post a gif of a guy waltzing in UNTOUCHED to the endzone.

Yeah, no s**t, you don't have to break tackles when your blockers wipe out all of the defenders and you can just waltz in untouched. Waltzing in untouched when your defenders wipe out all the defenders does not make you a great running back. Every single skill position player in the history of the NFL could do that.

What defines greatness is when you can do things others can't do.

And again, if you're trying to make the argument that Harris was good because he was a SPEED BACK, that's just utterly laughable. Speed backs don't have the 11th most carries in NFL history and only 5 40+ yard touchdowns in their entire career (and only 4 of them rushing) out of only 11 career 20+ yard touchdowns (only 8 of those rushing).

What this means is that when he did get out in the open, he got caught from behind. That's because his speed was nothing special either. He was just drafted because teams saw that he was 230 pounds and assumed he would be powerful, and that "4.6-4.7 is pretty good for a guy THAT big," and they found out he was the exact opposite - the least powerful back to ever put on pads at this level. So all the got was a slow, unfathomably soft running back.

The end.

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:

Originally posted by SoCold:

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:

Originally posted by SoCold:

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:
I feel kind of bad saying this, because he seems like a really nice guy, but the most overrated player in NFL history, bar none, is:

Franco Harris.

I don't know how many people here have ever really watched old Steelers games (why would you?), but I binge watched them on Youtube several months ago.

Let me just say this: Franco Harris is not a Top 500 running back in NFL history. Not in terms of performance on the field, he wasn't. I am not even kidding: Derek Loville was a better running back than Franco Harris.

You think I'm being hyperbolic? I'm not.

Let me put it this way: Every single person on this forum could tackle Franco Harris when he played. Every single able-bodied person on planet earth could tackle Franco Harris. That is not an exaggeration.

You see, here's how a Franco Harris carry went: Bradshaw hands it off to Franco Harris. He hits the designed hole. The very first guy to touch him was the guy who tackled him. As soon as he was so much as clipped by a nickel or dime back, he went down. He got what was there and nothing more.

Newspapers at the time referred to it as, "unlike Jim Brown, he goes out of bounds." No, he wasn't going out of bounds. He was just going down to the very first guy who got him every single time.

The late Dave Duerson once described hitting Harris as, "he was soft. Like a sponge."

Now maybe you're going to try to object, because, "but but but but, he gained a lot of rushing yards! And rings! He got 4 rings! He must have done something well to keep starting, like...vision! Yeah, vision!"

Yeah, no. Hitting a designed hole is not "vision." Vision is hitting a cutback lane. It's seeing the big picture and making moves accordingly.

Harris was a big robot. See designed hole, go to designed hole...touched, robot shut down.

Harris was the worst running back on the Steelers every year he played for them. The best running back the Steelers had in the 70s was Sidney Thornton. He actually had some decent power. Rocky Bleier was also basically a hack, but even he was better than Harris, and occasionally would fight for some extra yardage/break a tackle.

Was there anything Harris did well besides do what the coaches asked of him as far as hitting the designed hole? Well, for a guy his size, he had decent straight line speed. But I'm talking about for a guy his size...in the 1970s. That's why he was drafted - he was a 230 pound guy who ran in the 4.6-4.7 range. He wasn't the feature back at Penn State...Lydell Mitchell was.

"But if he's so bad, how could he gain so many yards? Are you saying the Steelers' offensive line was the GOAT line?"

Here's something you might not be aware of - and if you're ever trash talking with some Steelers fans who suck off their 70s teams, be sure to bring it up: The Steelers' offensive linemen were all juicing. They were roid freaks. It was an open secret that was exposed by Steve Courson years later.

Their offensive linemen dominated the off-season NFL weight lifting competitions. Mike Webster was the "strongest man in the NFL."

So in terms of effectiveness, they were certainly way up there. Why wouldn't they be? They had a huge physical edge.

It's funny...if you were to poll the average fan and ask them who was overrated from the 70s Steelers, they would say Terry Bradshaw...but he has been called overrated so much that he's actually now underrated. Bradshaw was basically the equal to Elway: Mobility, strong arm, could make all the throws...played in some bad offensive systems that made his numbers look worse.

My thoughts on some of their others:

Lambert: Lives up to the hype for the most part. Funny enough, fans were saying he was overrated and Ham was underrated. I don't see it. Ham after 1974 or so didn't do much for me. Lambert was everywhere. Their scheme had he and Ham getting deep pass drops, and he was on basically everything sideline-to-sideline or straight ahead. Never seemed to miss a tackle.

Greene: Great interior pass rusher, especially in his peak years. Not exceptional vs. the run at the point. Not as "mean" as they say, unless they mean he'll punch Broncos' offensive linemen in the gut and not get ejected. Then yeah, he was mean in that way.

Greenwood: Good pass rusher.

Ham: More impressive in 1974 and prior. More of a role player later on. Pass to the flat and he'd be on it, fast. Huge roles in coverage in their scheme.

Blount: He's lucky he played in the era he did. Not a great actual cover guy. Squatted on routes against primitive passing attacks and collected the INTs. Good run support player, though.

Donnie Shell: Don't get the hype.

Stallworth: Surprised me with his RAC ability. Could break tackles after the catch. Good on the leaping grab as well. Primitive routes.

Swann: Tremendous leaping ability. Pretty special hands, considering nobody wore gloves then. Slow as molasses. I doubt he could crack 4.75. Yeah, he caught deep balls like basically every other receiver of that era, but he did it because the corners of the time were almost entirely 6'0"+ plodders. Teams of that era used almost exclusively bigger corners because of the different rules (the "Mel Blount rule" was instituted in 1977), thinking the bigger corners could maul the receivers they faced. Ugly, primitive routes. Also good after the catch. Watching he and Stallworth, you realize how much we overrate our own receivers' RAC ability. RAC was expected of a WR before pussies like Marvin Harrison and Torry Holt decided the catch was the end of the story because they didn't want to injure their vaginas.

I think 1974 was their best defense, which was Lambert's rookie year. I don't think he ever played better than that, despite not getting the Pro Bowl/all pro honors that year (he did win DROY though).

lol Harris was a big fast RB for that era. Won Rookie of the year. Only played 14 game seasons like his first 6 years and he had 1200+ all purpose yards in 5 of those. 9 pro bowls in a row to start his career. lol Derek Loville bwahahaha

He didn't need to run people over or fight for yards. His running style prob allowed him to play and extra few year in the league.

lol

First John Taylor now this. Man your posts are entertaining me. Keep up the good work.

Yeah, he didn't "need" to run people over or fight for yards BECAUSE ALL HE DID WAS ENTER THE HOLE AND GO DOWN TO THE FIRST GUY WHO TOUCHED HIM. What part of that don't you understand? Literally every single running back in NFL history could have gained the same number of yards as him, unless you find a back who played in the NFL who was somehow as soft (there never was such a back as far as I'm aware of, and I've been watching football obsessively for probably longer than you've been alive) and who runs worse than 4.6-4.7 in the 40.

His "running style" was hitting the designed hole and going down to the first guy who TOUCHED HIM every single carry of his career. That is not what a good NFL running back does. He wasn't even average. He was a flat-out bad football player. And he's in the HOF. That's why he is hands down the most overrated player in NFL history. It's not even close.

Those reasons are silly. You can pull up his highlights and watch guys bounce off of him as he runs 50 yards for a TD.
The very first play of this video shows a dude just bounce off him.


I'm over 40 so you must be really old. lol
He was a super bowl MVP. #15 all time leading rusher in history. That's a big reason he's in the HOF.

You don't have to be a tackle breaking yards after contact back when you can just outrun the D to the endzone lol.


I don't think anyone is calling him one of the best backs ever. To say he's not even a top 500 back because he's soft is just silly.

No, you most certainly can not pull up highlights of him bouncing off dudes. You are resorting to just making stuff up now.

Outrun the D to the endzone? He only had 5 touchdowns of 40+ yards in his entire career, and only 11 of 20+.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HarrFr00/touchdowns/

For comparison's sake, Jerome freak'n Bettis had 5 touchdowns of 40+ yards in his career. He was a real burner, that Bettis.

For comparison's sake, here are the number of 40+ and 20+ yard touchdowns some other backs scored for their careers, in comparison to Harris:

(Franco Harris: 5, 11)

Adrian Peterson: 19, 28
Barry Sanders: 22, 34
Tony Dorsett: 13, 29
Emmitt Smith: 7, 23
Walter Payton: 13, 24
Frank Gore: 9, 19
LaDainian Tomlinson: 14, 28
Eric Dickerson: 8, 14
Marshall Faulk: 12, 19
O.J. Simpson: 18, 29
Tiki Barber: 11, 17
Steven Jackson: 8, 16

So what you have here is a big, slow running back who was literally the least powerful runner to ever play the game.

Now do you see why he was so bad? The only thing he had going for him was "good speed FOR HIS SIZE, FOR THAT ERA." But "speed for his size" is only considered valuable because you expect a guy with more size to be more powerful. He wasn't - he was exactly the opposite - the least powerful back to ever play professional football. He was literally the least powerful running back in the history of the game.

Find me a less powerful running back than Franco Harris. I bet you you can't. I bet you I could find more broken tackles from any back with 500 or more career carries than Harris had in his entire career.

So you would be better off getting a 170 pound scat back who had 4.4 speed instead of his 4.7 speed, and that scat back would also have better power. Even the most finesse scat back ever was more powerful than Harris.

Harris wasn't "big and fast," he was only big. He had absolutely nothing else going for him. Not a thing. He was absolutely awful in every facet of the game. He didn't even protect the football well, although fumbles were much more common in that era.

When I say "good speed FOR HIS SIZE, FOR THAT ERA," I'm talking about Fred Beasley-type "speed for his size for that era." He was the kind of athlete for the 70s that Beasley was for the late 90s/early 2000s. Oh, and Fred Beasley was also a better rusher than Harris.

You want to really put this in perspective? TERRY BRADSHAW WAS A BETTER RUSHER THAN HARRIS. No, I don't simply mean, "he was a really good running quarterback." I mean, if you were to line Terry Bradshaw up at running back, he would have been better than Harris. He was stronger, faster, quicker, and more elusive. You can see this every time he takes off. He broke WAY more tackles than Harris. He was noticeably faster and quicker.

Rocky Bleier was a freak'n 16th round pick (from freak'n Notre Dame...meaning he simply wasn't that good) and he was better than Harris. He was a "real life Rocky" story (no name pun intended), and he was clearly a better back than Harris.

Harris seems to be a really sweet guy but he was an AWFUL football player. Utterly awful. Stop pretending a guy who was HORRID at his profession was good at it.

Stop saying ridiculous things like, "You don't have to be a tackle breaking yards after contact back when you can just outrun the D to the endzone lol" when you post a gif of a guy waltzing in UNTOUCHED to the endzone.

Yeah, no s**t, you don't have to break tackles when your blockers wipe out all of the defenders and you can just waltz in untouched. Waltzing in untouched when your defenders wipe out all the defenders does not make you a great running back. Every single skill position player in the history of the NFL could do that.

What defines greatness is when you can do things others can't do.

And again, if you're trying to make the argument that Harris was good because he was a SPEED BACK, that's just utterly laughable. Speed backs don't have the 11th most carries in NFL history and only 5 40+ yard touchdowns in their entire career (and only 4 of them rushing) out of only 11 career 20+ yard touchdowns (only 8 of those rushing).

What this means is that when he did get out in the open, he got caught from behind. That's because his speed was nothing special either. He was just drafted because teams saw that he was 230 pounds and assumed he would be powerful, and that "4.6-4.7 is pretty good for a guy THAT big," and they found out he was the exact opposite - the least powerful back to ever put on pads at this level. So all the got was a slow, unfathomably soft running back.

The end.

k

You don't have to be a tackle breaking yards after contact back when you can just outrun the D to the endzone lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kL64XDmALE

Originally posted by Sourball:

Troy Aikman
Dude was an average QB who played on a stacked Cowboys team yet he's in the HOF.
54th in all time passer rating
Montana, Elway, Favre or Marino could have had 6 additional Super Bowl rings had they played on that team

This. And I'd also like to add emmit smith to that. He ran behind the best offensive line in history. He wasn't even touched until a few yards past the LOS. Anyone could have ran behind that line.

So are we all in agreement.....FRANCO HARRIS, greatest human being EVER

Seriously though, there seems like some deep rooted personal issue between Franco and the OP.

Brett Favre. For being mentioned as one of the all-time greats, he's only got one super bowl title to his credit and for all the times they talk about the most consecutive starts and passes completed, they fail to mention he's got the all-time most interceptions, sacks, and fumbles by an NFL player.

f**k that guy.

In today's NFL, I'd say most overrated is Kirk Cousins. He was talked about like the hottest free agent commodity in centuries, but he can't win games. He's mediocre.

Originally posted by Niners816:

So are we all in agreement.....FRANCO HARRIS, greatest human being EVER

Seriously though, there seems like some deep rooted personal issue between Franco and the OP.

Odd because Franco is not a woman