Originally Posted by RedBlackAttack
Hypocritical post of the day? Somehow, playing 30 years ago is perfectly acceptable in any sports debate, but 40-50 years is absurd.
If you want to rank players by era, that is fine, but to arbitrarily cut-off the point at which a player can be considered is mind-numbing.
What was that magic year wherein everything changed? Specifically. Just so I know for any future discussion.
Everybody knows Barry was 5x the athlete anybody in Jim Brown's era was. Plain and simple, you give Barry 20 carries how many times would he even have been tackled? No more than 10. Jim Brown's level of competition was inferior by miles so if you can't understand that than don't bother replying. When you judge players you have to rank them on how they did against their peers and Barry put up betters numbers in an era which its competition was clearly superior.