There is a lot of uninformed nonsense being spoken about Brown at the moment, about his talent and whether he's a great back.
The word 'great' is the most overused phrase in the world of sports. It defines a generation of athletes, yet it’s used with wanton disregard for history or analysis.
Look back the sporting moments that have defined your lives, the players that have defined your memories. Jerry Rice was great. So was Barry Sanders. So was Dan Marino. And Lawrence Taylor. Deion Sanders was great.
These are the standard bearers for greatness. Decade defining performers. Truly deserving of the word 'great'.
Take a look round at the league. Take running back for example. Look at the two best backs in the league – in my opinion –Tomlinson and Larry Johnson. Tomlinson is headed to the Hall of Fame. Johnson strikes me as the back most likely to run for 2000+ yards. In fact I see a lot of similarities between Ronnie and Larry. Johnson, like Brown, has been hampered by poor line play this season.
But are they ‘great’? Tomlinson probably is. Johnson? I don’t think so. He has the potential for greatness, but is he stand-alone great? No. Look at the last back to run for 2000 yards, Jamal Lewis. Is he great?
No.
So what we’re saying is that in a league of 32 teams, with each team having a minimum of 3 backs, that out of a minimum of 96 players, there is 1 ‘great’ one?
Look elsewhere. Chuck in Tom Brady, Peyton and Walter Jones, Champ Bailey, maybe Shawne Merriman. That’s great right there. I’m happy with that. But great should be defined by whether we look back and fondly remember their 'greatness' in 2 decades time. I look back now and remember some of the great plays by Taylor, the great runs of Sanders. I can still remember being in my bedroom and listening to Jerry Rice go 96 yards against the Chargers on Armed Forces Radio as though it were yesterday. I remember Marino to Ferrell Edmonds backed up on our goaline against the Chiefs in the playoffs and the Al Michaels 'mano y mano' commentary on the Mark Clayton winning catch against Albert Lewis in the right flat, all as though they were this morning. And yet other than the names on here, I’m not sure we could list a lot of others playing now as truly 'great'.
Harsh, but ultimately fair when you contextualise greatness.
So onto Brown. He’s certainly better than mediocre. Is he very good? No. He’s good. But why ONLY good? Well, he’s only played 20 games in his pro career. Look at the body of work – 292 carries, 1185 yards, at 4.1 a pop and 7 scores. That’s not bad. In fact that’s pretty good. Look back at him last year. What I saw was a big back, who flashed good speed, flashed good vision, flashed remarkable power – remember the Cleveland run - good hands, excellent blocking ability. But 'flashed' is the key word. I saw lots of 'great plays', just not enough to consider him anything other than good.
Yet.
Can he be very good ? Yes, absolutely and I completely believe he will be. Will he be 'great'? I’m not sure. But in a league of 1 great back in 96, being very good isn’t such a bad thing.
The word 'great' is the most overused phrase in the world of sports. It defines a generation of athletes, yet it’s used with wanton disregard for history or analysis.
Look back the sporting moments that have defined your lives, the players that have defined your memories. Jerry Rice was great. So was Barry Sanders. So was Dan Marino. And Lawrence Taylor. Deion Sanders was great.
These are the standard bearers for greatness. Decade defining performers. Truly deserving of the word 'great'.
Take a look round at the league. Take running back for example. Look at the two best backs in the league – in my opinion –Tomlinson and Larry Johnson. Tomlinson is headed to the Hall of Fame. Johnson strikes me as the back most likely to run for 2000+ yards. In fact I see a lot of similarities between Ronnie and Larry. Johnson, like Brown, has been hampered by poor line play this season.
But are they ‘great’? Tomlinson probably is. Johnson? I don’t think so. He has the potential for greatness, but is he stand-alone great? No. Look at the last back to run for 2000 yards, Jamal Lewis. Is he great?
No.
So what we’re saying is that in a league of 32 teams, with each team having a minimum of 3 backs, that out of a minimum of 96 players, there is 1 ‘great’ one?
Look elsewhere. Chuck in Tom Brady, Peyton and Walter Jones, Champ Bailey, maybe Shawne Merriman. That’s great right there. I’m happy with that. But great should be defined by whether we look back and fondly remember their 'greatness' in 2 decades time. I look back now and remember some of the great plays by Taylor, the great runs of Sanders. I can still remember being in my bedroom and listening to Jerry Rice go 96 yards against the Chargers on Armed Forces Radio as though it were yesterday. I remember Marino to Ferrell Edmonds backed up on our goaline against the Chiefs in the playoffs and the Al Michaels 'mano y mano' commentary on the Mark Clayton winning catch against Albert Lewis in the right flat, all as though they were this morning. And yet other than the names on here, I’m not sure we could list a lot of others playing now as truly 'great'.
Harsh, but ultimately fair when you contextualise greatness.
So onto Brown. He’s certainly better than mediocre. Is he very good? No. He’s good. But why ONLY good? Well, he’s only played 20 games in his pro career. Look at the body of work – 292 carries, 1185 yards, at 4.1 a pop and 7 scores. That’s not bad. In fact that’s pretty good. Look back at him last year. What I saw was a big back, who flashed good speed, flashed good vision, flashed remarkable power – remember the Cleveland run - good hands, excellent blocking ability. But 'flashed' is the key word. I saw lots of 'great plays', just not enough to consider him anything other than good.
Yet.
Can he be very good ? Yes, absolutely and I completely believe he will be. Will he be 'great'? I’m not sure. But in a league of 1 great back in 96, being very good isn’t such a bad thing.
