Jump to content

Most Dominant NFL Player Ever


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

Sanders did about half of what Jim Brown could do.  He had a style of running that haven't seen since including Sanders.

 

Supposedly too football wasn't even Browns best sport, his best was Lacrosse.

For some reason this post makes me want to add Jesse Owens and Jim Thorpe to the mix.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 4merper4mer said:

For some reason this post makes me want to add Jesse Owens and Jim Thorpe to the mix.

 

Well they were even before my time.  Actually Brown retired about the first year I started following football, maybe was around 8 years old.  But still saw plenty of highlights of him back then.  He was at a different level and retired close to his prime to become an actor.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, hondo in seattle said:

Babe Ruth is the most dominant professional athlete in major American sports history.  When he hit 54 homers in the 1920, the next best guy - a star in his own right - only hit 19.  Babe was hitting at another level: a staggering 184% better than the next greatest long ball hitter that year.  The next year, the story was pretty much the same: Babe was 146% better than the next biggest star.  

 

But what about football?  The NFL doesn't have a Babe Ruth.  Brady is great because he's been one of the top 5 QBs in the league since our own star QB, Josh Allen, was in kindergarten.  Yet Brady was never - statistically anyway - far and away the best QB in the league in any particular season.   Not the same way Babe was.  

 

There are, though, two NFL players who do come to mind when I think about dominance.  You've got to go back a few years back to the time when the best athletes became RBs and defenses were designed to stop & destroy those backs.  In 1973, OJ had 75% more yards than the next best RB.  Ten years earlier, Jim Brown had 70% more yards than the #2 guy.  Both these guys were transcendent, mind-boggling talents.  

 

In Brady's most dominant season, 2007, he only finished with 8.7% yards more than the next best guy.  Brady might be the GOAT.  But in their prime, OJ and Jim Brown were more dominant.  

 

What many sports fans aren't aware of is how dominant Babe Ruth was as a pitcher. For example,  3.0, 0.87 ERA in 3 WS series games with the Red Sox (https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/r/ruthba01.shtml).  He is easily the most dominant baseball player of all time. 

 

In football I'll go with LT for most dominant on defense. TB on offense.

 

Hockey it's Gretzky.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, ControllerOfPlanetX said:

Steve Carlton won 27 games in 1972…..and his team only won 59 that year.

 

Carlton was great. In his era Gibson and Seaver were better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SinceThe70s said:

 

What many sports fans aren't aware of is how dominant Babe Ruth was as a pitcher. For example,  3.0, 0.87 ERA in 3 WS series games with the Red Sox (https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/r/ruthba01.shtml).  He is easily the most dominant baseball player of all time. 

 

In football I'll go with LT for most dominant on defense. TB on offense.

 

Hockey it's Gretzky.

 

 

 

 

Carlton was great. In his era Gibson and Seaver were better.

They literally changed the playing field because of Gibson.  Good call.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

If sports had died before TV was invented would TV have saved sports?  
 

Even if much of it is legend, there has been much written about Ruth’s impact on baseball and sports in general.  Are you denying that?  
 

One example:  https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/how-babe-ruth-changed-baseball-51810018/

 

Care to link to an article from the Smithsonian or another equally credible source about how Brady changed the sport of football?  One?

 

Choppy films notwithstanding, Ruth’s statistics can be compared to his contemporaries. They dwarf them in a manner unmatched to this day.  Are you denying that?

 

I won’t deny that a part of Ruth’s legacy is allegory and legend a la Paul Bunyan and that those days are over.  Yes, he was in the right place at the right time to have the societal impact that he had.  But he had it.  To deny this out of some weird loyalty to Tom Brady is awkward at best.  Yes era to era comparisons are tough because things change.  Was Jimmy Carter a more significant president than George Washington because the economy was larger under Carter?

 

I have already said Ruth saved baseball.  Doesn't change that had he not existed, there would have been no sports in existence to make it to the TV era.  That's just ridiculous.  Have someone nearby you read it out loud if you're not sure of this.

 

Brady didn't change sports or football.  You're confabulating and fabricating arguments to rail against--- once again gone off the deep end in your patriots paranoia.  

 

But...as a former performer, this is all more likely just an act....an ongoing troll job.  No one would truly think this way...

27 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:


Are you seriously saying that the wooden bats aren’t a lot better today?  Are you really saying that?  

 

Its not a testament of strength hitting 500 foot homeruns with looser baseballs?  Do you not understand how much tighter baseballs are wound today and the huge difference it makes?  Have you ever talked to someone who has taken BP in major league fields?  

 

 

a few years ago there were too many HRs--they blamed the balls

 

Now there are far fewer...they are blaming the balls.

 

You make it sound like they were tossing sawdust filled socks back then.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Ruth was the outlier for his era, obviously. Chamberlain was likely the greatest athlete to play a major pro sport.  And he dominated against better competition than Ruth in his day. 

 

 

That's a testament to the inane power these guys have, not a massive change in wooden bat tech.  Ruth was a great hitter, plain and simple.  

 

Can’t agree with your argument that Ruth faced worse competition…there were fewer teams and baseball was far and away the dominant team sport back then…the great athletes weren’t being diverted to basketball or pro football, although there was of course the color barrier, which was certainly a big deal, and few if any Latino players…

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

I have already said Ruth saved baseball.  Doesn't change that had he not existed, there would have been no sports in existence to make it to the TV era.  That's just ridiculous.  Have someone nearby you read it out loud if you're not sure of this.

 

Brady didn't change sports or football.  You're confabulating and fabricating arguments to rail against--- once again gone off the deep end in your patriots paranoia.  

 

But...as a former performer, this is all more likely just an act....an ongoing troll job.  No one would truly think this way...

 

 

 

I was not alive at the same time as Ruth but am aware sports did not play nearly the same role in the culture before Ruth than it has since.  It’s something called history and people are able to read about it.  He is not the entire reason for the role sports plays today but denying he was a major contributor is simply silly.

 

The original topic of this thread was dominance.  One way to measure that is by using statistics of a player compared to his contemporaries.  You assert Brady has been more dominant than Ruth but the statistics disagree.  From a team standpoint it is certainly arguable despite the Yankees never having been caught cheating, but hardly cut and dried and would invite Bill Russell to join.  
 

Arguing that Brady has been more dominant than Ruth by some measures can be seen as close, by other measures is inarguably silly.  Choose your measure and you either tie or get stomped.  In the aggregate you must lose.

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1508392-major-league-baseball-the-case-for-babe-ruth-as-the-best-ever

 

 

Edited by 4merper4mer
  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, IronMaidenBills said:

If Allen keeps piecing things together, I’m fairly confident he will be the GOAT. 

I feel bad for Josh already, he’s been screwed out of 1 super bowl already by bad coaching. 

 

Allen is near the top of the league right now,  but he is a LONG way from GOAT status.  Not even in the remote discussion at this point. 

 

Brady had 2 Superbowls in 4 seasons, and he didn't play in one of those seasons.  He added a 3rd Superbowl in his 5th season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

a few years ago there were too many HRs--they blamed the balls

 

Now there are far fewer...they are blaming the balls.

 

You make it sound like they were tossing sawdust filled socks back then.  


This is really your argument?  This is a case of you arguing for the sake of arguing.  You don’t know what you’re talking about lol.

 

I am not in any way making it sound like baseballs were sawdust bags.  But you’re talking about baseballs made 100 years ago to now.  Baseballs our wound tighter, much tighter than they were back then.  Baseballs are made and today in temperature controlled facilities and kept at constant tension to avoid soft spots on the ball. 
 

Not only that, pitchers could scuff up the balls and spit on them.  They use 100+ baseballs a game now.  Any issue with a ball, get rid of it.  Back then, that baseball was no longer white, it was brown.  A white pearl is easier to pick up the laces than a dirty brown one.  But I’m sure you knew that.
 

You seem to know that bat technology hasn’t improved either.  I’m assuming that you have visited factories that make bats like I have.  Or have a friend like mine that’s a baseball enthusiast, has a lathe in his garbage and makes his own bats…which I’ve helped.  Where does your bat knowledge come from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jerry Rice has 5000 more yards than the next guy, and 40 more touchdowns.

 

plus he played for 15 years in a non pass happy league where WR could get hit and defensive pass interference was not called every 3rd play.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, iccrewman112 said:

Jerry Rice has 5000 more yards than the next guy, and 40 more touchdowns.

 

plus he played for 15 years in a non pass happy league where WR could get hit and defensive pass interference was not called every 3rd play.

Thank you, this is the right answer.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Brady is the guy that has your daughter home by 12.

Allen is the guy that tells you I will bring her back when I feel like it, and has her sneaking out of the house. Then when you decide to go on vacation, does dirty things in your bed. 

 

Nah, Allen is a gentleman. He would never be throwing a trophy like Brady.

Edited by chongli
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, chongli said:

 

Nah, Allen is a gentleman. He would never be throwing a trophy like Brady.

I didn’t mean it in the physical sense, but in terms of his talent abilities. Allen’s playing talents are akin to the dangerous dude you don’t want in your family, but its the thrill that keeps the attention. Allen is baaaaad things as a QB. His ceiling talent wise is much higher than Brady’s. 

Edited by IronMaidenBills
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allen is the Bruuuce of QBs. When you watch him throw, you just know trouble is coming. Brady never had that vibe. He was deceptively good, but I was never thought as him as the type that could completely take over a game regardless of who is on his team. You put Brady on the Jets and I doubt he’s even a perennial contender. If you put Allen on the Jets, and they are still in super bowl discussions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool thread. If you're basing dominance on comparing the player statistically to the next best player in the same role, which I think is a fine way to do it, then I wouldn't doubt if Justin Tucker belongs in the conversation somewhere. I think I've seen some crazy stats about his long-term FG% being well beyond that of other kickers.

Edited by Nelius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

I didn’t mean it in the physical sense, but in terms of his talent abilities. Allen’s playing talents are akin to the dangerous dude you don’t want in your family, but its the thrill that keeps the attention. Allen is baaaaad things as a QB. His ceiling talent wise is much higher than Brady’s. 

 

Ahhh...gotcha! And agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...