ESPN's TOP 10 football Players

[Five-ofan]

Updated: Sep. 5, 2005, 1:29 PM ET
Top 10 NFL playersESPN.com


Editor's note: Last preseason, with Jerry Rice entering his 20th season we decided it was time to determine ESPN.com's greatest all-time NFL player. This ranking was compiled using top 10 lists from a panel of ESPN NFL experts. The voters were: John Clayton (JC), Len Pasquarelli (LP), Sean Salisbury (SS), Mark Schlereth (MS), Joe Theismann (JT), Randy Mueller (RM), Sal Paolantonio (SP), Greg Garber (GG), Merril Hoge (MH), Peter Lawrence-Riddell (PLR) and James C. Black (JB).

Players received 10 points for a first-place vote, nine points for second and so on down to one point for a 10th-place vote.

Top 10 NFL players
Player/Voter JC LP SS MS JT RM SP GG MH PLR JB Total
1. Jim Brown 10 9 10 9 9 9 8 10 9 10 9 102
2. Jerry Rice 8 10 4 6 5 6 7 7 -- 9 10 72
3. J. Montana 6 7 8 -- 7 7 10 -- 7 7 6 65
4. W. Payton 2 6 7 8 8 5 5 4 10 5 -- 60
5. L. Taylor 7 5 6 7 -- 8 -- 8 -- 6 8 55
6. J. Unitas 9 8 5 -- -- -- -- 9 -- 8 7 46
7. John Elway -- -- 9 10 6 10 1 -- 8 1 -- 45
8. D. Butkus 4 -- -- -- -- 4 9 2 2 3 4 28
9. R. White -- 2 -- 5 -- -- -- -- -- 4 5 16
10t. S. Baugh 5 -- -- -- 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- 15
10t. D. Jones -- -- 3 -- -- -- 6 3 -- -- 3 15
Others receiving votes (points): Anthony Munoz (12), Jack Lambert (10), Dan Marino (9), Jim Parker (8), Dick "Night Train" Lane (7), Ray Lewis (7), Mel Blount (6), Barry Sanders (5), Mike Webster (4), Deion Sanders (4), Rod Woodson (4), Ronnie Lott (3), Bart Starr (2), Bob Lilly (2), Emmitt Smith (1), Joe Greene (1)



Brown
1. RB Jim Brown -- Cleveland Browns, 1957-1965
Forty years after his shocking retirement at the peak of his career, and now only seventh on the all-time rushing list, Brown still ranks as the standard against which all other running backs are measured. In only nine seasons, and playing largely with a 12-game schedule, he rushed for 12,312 yards. His 5.2-yard average remains the best among the game's top 20 all-time rushers. An awesome combination of brute force inside the tackles, absolutely punished tacklers, but still could outrun defenders in the secondary.
-- Len Pasquarelli




Rice
2. WR Jerry Rice -- 49ers, Raiders, Seahawks, 1985 -- 2004
Everyone knows the numbers that Jerry Rice has put up -- among them NFL records in touchdowns (205), receptions (1,519) and receiving yards (22,466). But what set Rice apart was his work ethic. Rice's work ethic was, and still is at 41, unparalleled and that's a major reason why he's one of the greatest players in the history of the NFL. He not only made big catches in the games that didn't matter, he also made them when the games mattered. -- Sean Salisbury




Montana
3. QB Joe Montana -- 49ers, Chiefs, 1979-1994
I've heard it all. I've heard that Joe Montana was the product of a system and that he couldn't have thrived anywhere else. I've heard that Montana wasn't even the best quarterback of his system. My reply to the critics is simple -- look at the rings on his fingers! Montana might not have been the prototypical quarterback, but he found ways to win and was arguably the best fourth-quarter quarterback in the history of the game. If I had to start a team with a proven winner, it would probably start with Montana.
-- Sean Salisbury



Payton
4. RB Walter Payton -- Bears, 1975-1987
In 13 seasons, many of them played with a subpar Bears team, the man known as "Sweetness" missed just one start. What he missed even more rarely was any kind of crease through which he could slither. It is difficult to define Payton's style, because he was a rare amalgam of a runner, a guy who could rip through linebackers but also avoid taking the tough hit with subtle and deft cuts. He carried 3,838 times in his career and there were probably only a handful of attempts where he didn't finish the run, or bleed every ounce of yardage possible out of the hole he was provided.
-- Len Pasquarelli




Taylor
5. LB Lawrence Taylor -- Giants, 1981-1993
He recorded 132.5 career sacks in 13 seasons with the New York Giants - a quaint number by today's standards set by Bruce Smith and Reggie White - but don't let the numbers fool you. Lawrence Taylor revolutionized the art of sacking the quarterback. He was a 6-foot-3, 250-pound outside linebacker with scintillating speed and power. "He is completely reckless," Patriots head coach Bill Belichick once said of his former charge. "I have never seen a player sell out so completely to make a play."
-- Greg Garber



Unitas
6. QB Johnny Unitas -- Colts, Chargers, 1956-1973
Although not blessed with the strongest arm, Unitas, in his trademark black, high-top cleats, redefined the quarterback position. Long before Joe Montana, he was the master of the two-minute drill, and his performance in the 1958 overtime NFL title game remains legendary. Had a great feel for reading defenses, for when to go up top with the long ball, when to audible out of a play. Remarkably, he no longer rates, according to the NFL system, among the top 20 passers of all-time. But his skills, uncanny accuracy, and unfailing attention to detail supercede statistics, as does his toughness.
-- Len Pasquarelli




Elway
7. QB John Elway -- Broncos, 1983-1998
Never in my life have I seen a quarterback consistently carry a team like John Elway could. I'm not talking about carrying a team for a few games or half a season when someone went down. I'm talking about carrying a team with only himself as a viable Super Bowl team three times. That's what Elway did in the 1980's. He didn't have flashy offensive players to go with him and he didn't have great defenses. He simply found ways to win through his great mind and fabulous athleticism.
-- Mark Schlereth



Butkus
8. LB Dick Butkus -- Bears, 1965-1973
Dick Butkus epitomized what the National Football League is all about. It's contact. It's hustle. It's intimidation. Nobody did that better than Butkus. His weekly highlights of bone-jarring tackles came at a time when the NFL was just selling itself to a budding television audience. He would line up behind his defensive linemen and chase down and punish anyone carrying the ball. After Ray Lewis ends his career, maybe Lewis will knock Butkus out of the top 10 because he is a better athlete and has healthier knees. No one, though, will take away the memories of a defender who taught generations of fans the right way to play football.
-- John Clayton



White
9. DL Reggie White -- Eagles, Packers, Panthers, 1985-1998, 2000
Some people forget that he spent the early part of his career with the Memphis franchise of the USFL, or his career sack total, 198, would be significantly higher. His "hump" move, which probably generated more than half his sacks, was the trademark that has now been often copied. For as many sacks as he got as an upfield rusher, he probably got almost as many moving down inside to tackle on third down. A relentless rusher but, especially early in his career, also a force versus the run. Helped to resurrect the Green Bay franchise when he signed with the Packers as a free agent.
-- Len Pasquarelli



Baugh
10t. QB Sammy Baugh -- Redskins, 1937-1952
So often, the greats of the past are forgotten because their highlights can't be easily seen on TV. Sammy Baugh can't be forgotten. He was a passing quarterback in a running era. His nickname said it all -- "Slinging" Sammy Baugh. Baugh and Otto Graham were the pocket passers of their era. Baugh played 16 seasons. He was among the greatest punters of all-time. He played some defense. But he was known for his throwing. Whether it's Baugh or Graham, those names can't be totally forgotten when new greats enter the Hall of Fame. Baugh was good enough he could have done well in this era. As it stands, he threw for 21,886 yards and 187 touchdowns.
-- John Clayton



Jones
10t. DL Deacon Jones -- Rams, Chargers, Redskins, 1961-1974
Hate is a strong word. But Deacon Jones often used it to describe what was stirring in his heart and soul as he attacked the quarterback. He did not dislike the quarterback. No, that was not quite strong enough. After all, this was the man who invented the head slap. On TV all the time now, they talk about "difference makers." Deacon Jones, who put the fear in the Fearsome Foursome, was the first difference maker. He registered 173½ sacks in just 14 years. Now, that's making a difference.
--Sal Paolantonio



Does anyone else think that it is wrong that the best franchise in the NFL has no one on the list? Also in the others receiving votes list how the hell is ray lewis ahead of emmit smith? Emmit has to be on this list, Im sorry but he just has to be. Payton was not better than emmit. They have nearly identical numbers but emmit has 3 rings. In every other conversation the tie goes to the player with rings, but when it involves cowboys, that argument just isnt used. I hate cursing to make an argument on the internet but this is very close to making me curse. This is the stupidest %^%ing list I have seen since the top 10 pfs list. ESPN needs to give up the friggin top 10 list things because they suck at it. One person had emmit on there ballot at 10th. He should be 4th or 5th at the lowest. You can make every bit the argument for him being number 1 that you can for rice. I dont have a problem with rice being above him but emmit just has to be on this list. There are some others that should be close, I would put randy white ahead of ray lewis. BTW they say that rice going into his 20th season made them think about this, Emmit is the most underappreciated nationally athlete there is. He is the 2nd best rb ever behind brown. This list just makes me mad.

[alby]

it is a shame that there are that many ranked in front of the leading rusher of all time..

[Five-ofan]

I guess if you go all time best coaches then damn it just has to go Landry then Johnson 1-2 if they won so much with all of these other people having better players than they did. I still want to know how emmit was only on one ballot and was 10th on that ballot. If he had put up the same numbers on a losing team maybe I could see it, but he was the best player on teams that won 3 superbowls. Yes he was the best of the triplets.

[alby]

its just another espn article, you shouldnt take those too seriously.. =P

[Five-ofan]

I dont but alot of people think that these are accurate rankings. Then they use it to show that they are right. It is these same idiots that vote on the hall of fame and i dont care what john clayton says there is an anti cowboy bias. The cowboys should have the most players in the hall of fame. They are the nfl's best franchise and the most popular.

[snoop]

no emmit no brett farve this is a stupid east coast article

[yukmunky]

The running back rankings are about perfect(Brown,Payton,Sanders,Smith), although I might even put Sanders ahead of Payton. If you are relying on stats or rings to determine that Emmitt was betten than Payton, you simply must have never watched Walter Payton in his hayday. He put up HOF numbers with zero help for almost the entire prime of his career. But if you want to look at stats, even with perhaps the best offensive line ever, Emmitt had a lower YPC average for his career than Payton. Payton was able to do this because he had the whole package as a RB (speed, power, elusiveness).

The Favre omission is a rather big one though.

[Five-ofan]

sanders was not better than emmit. they played at the same time and until about 97 there was no question emmit was always the best rb in the nfl. Sanders has the most carries for negative yards in nfl history. YPC is overrated. Troy hambrick had a 5.2 ypc average one year. About barry -2, -3, 2, punt, 2, -3, 3 punt 75 comes out as a great average but its not really that helpful. I would put emmits prime 92-96 against anyone in history. Payton was great no disputing that but in any other case a player with similar stats the tie goes to the guy with more rings. Emmit was also the best running back ever at getting into the endzone which is the job of any running back. Emmit didnt have the full skill set? I havent looked it up but i know he had at least 1 60 reception season. He was also a great blocker at picking up the blitz. My point about the rings statistically marino is number 1 qb wise by alot. However he doesnt have rings so people with rings get ranked ahead of him and his teams had no talent either. I know payton has a ring and this isnt meant as a knock on him but seeing emmit the last couple of years must have made you forget about his heyday because he was as good as it gets for a long time.

Im assuming you want favre to replace baugh which is fine but hes not better than the first 3. If anything I woulda put elway first montana second and unitas 3rd but thats just me. No real problem with how they did it there.

[yukmunky]

Walter Payton and Emmitt Smith are my two favorite backs ever and to me there is no question Walter is the better back. It is not even close in my mind. Emmitt was a great back, but he also capitalized on a very great opporunity he was given. Walter Payton really had no such great opportunity of playing behind the best line in the league and along side of 2 other future HOF'ers(name a great offensive player that Walter teamed up with, bet you can't). In spite of that, Payton rushed for 1,852 yards in a 14-game season. Emmitt never managed that in a 16 game season. Give Payton all those 1-yd opportunities that Emmitt had and there'd be an endless highlight reel of Payton's signature dive over the top. Emmitt was no better at punching in the ball than Walter(both were great), was no better at blocking than Walter (a strong suit for both), nor was he a better receiver(Payton had 4 seasons of 2,000 combined yardage to Emmitt's 2). Walter Payton even passed for 8 TD's in his career. And if it were all about rings then Terry Bradshaw would need to be on that list because he is the only QB with 4 of them.

[endtroducing]

Barry Sanders was a MUCH better running back than Emmitt Smith. Barry retired at the top of his game and would've ran LAPS around Emmitt while he was on his little tour of duty to break the rushing record...

plus, Emmitt played behind one of the best OLs in recent memory. his individual talent was not as incredible as Barry OR Walter

[yukmunky]

To follow up on one of my points...

Walter Payton didn't have a single teammate on offense go to the Pro Bowl his first 10 years in the league.

Emmitt had Aikman, Irvin, Novacek, Newton, Stepnoski, Darryl Johnston, Erick Williams, Tuinei, Larry Allen, and Ray Donaldson all in his first 6 season.

[Five-ofan]

well were gonna have to agree to disagree about walter and emmit which i dont really have much of a problem with. However i will vehemently disagree about barry. I just dont think that barry was better. He could and should have the yardage record but that style of runner just isnt as good as emmit's style of runner as far as being valuable. Emmit had several thousand yard seasons behind offensive lines that were horrible. 97 and after the cowboys oline was horrible yeah larry was good and erik went to the pro bowl though he shouldnt have but as a whole those olines were horrible and emmit still consistently got 1000 yards so dont act like it was all the line. Emmit won i believe 4 straight rushing titles and was the dominant back of the early 90s while barry was never the best back in the nfl for more than 1 year at a time. The mvp split year which he shoulda won by himself was the only year that he was the best runner in the nfl. Early 90s emmit was better late 90s terrel was better. I will never believe that barry was better than emmit. Walter and Emmit i see as a pick em and personally i pick emmit. However walter was 4th on this list and emmit was 10th on one ballot there is damn sure not that much difference between the two.

[dude1394]

I think emmitt should call scoreboard on this one.

[#1MavsFan]

Originally posted by: Five-ofan
well were gonna have to agree to disagree about walter and emmit which i dont really have much of a problem with. However i will vehemently disagree about barry. I just dont think that barry was better. He could and should have the yardage record but that style of runner just isnt as good as emmit's style of runner as far as being valuable. Emmit had several thousand yard seasons behind offensive lines that were horrible. 97 and after the cowboys oline was horrible yeah larry was good and erik went to the pro bowl though he shouldnt have but as a whole those olines were horrible and emmit still consistently got 1000 yards so dont act like it was all the line. Emmit won i believe 4 straight rushing titles and was the dominant back of the early 90s while barry was never the best back in the nfl for more than 1 year at a time. The mvp split year which he shoulda won by himself was the only year that he was the best runner in the nfl. Early 90s emmit was better late 90s terrel was better. I will never believe that barry was better than emmit. Walter and Emmit i see as a pick em and personally i pick emmit. However walter was 4th on this list and emmit was 10th on one ballot there is damn sure not that much difference between the two.

Barry had a horrible line and still carried his whole freaking team by himself. Even than most thought Barry was better than Emmit. Not trying to degrade #22 in anyway but there’s way too much cowboy’s bias in your post. Barry was the better back, Emmit more durable.

Emmit had several thousand yard seasons behind offensive lines that were horrible.

Please. The cowboys line looked like all world compared to (the other) D-towns line. Emmit also had so many other weapons to take the pressure off of him while Barry was always the main focus of the opposing defenses.

Such bias...[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-disgusted.gif[/img]

[dalmations202]

Funny thing about people's view on Running backs.....everyone wants to see the good sides of the ones they like, and they overlook the bad sides.

No one can debate that Emmitt Smith is the leader in yards. I really don't think anyone could convince me that he didn't have the best vision between the tackles in the game ever. Is this the criteria you judge a RB for? Brown (who I didn't personally see) is said to be --- but that just means that the media liked him -- his yards per carry is what is impressive though. Sanders was the most explosive and most likely to lose/gain yards player I ever saw. He cost his teams much, but gave them much also. Is this explosiveness what you judge a RB by? Payton was an awesome RB as well, best of the overall explosive/speed/power backs, but how is a RB judged?

IMO, (since the 70's)
If you fail to take into consideration longevity, the best 10 backs of all time, in this order are.
1) Earl Campbell -- didn't do it long, but he had it all. Strength, explosiveness, power, Speed -- and did it 30 times a game
2) Jim Brown -- just seen too much tape, and heard too much.... his yards per carry was awesome.
3) Bo Jackson -- no longevity, but man did he have power, explosiveness, could take it inside or outside... incredible athlete
4) Emmitt Smith -- best vision between the tackles ever -- could always find the crease. longevity made him the rushing champ.
5) Barry Sanders -- most explosive back ever -- more lateral quickness and escapability than anyone.
6) Walter Payton -- Sweetness -- made it look too easy -- the type back most teams will always be looking for.
7) Terrell Davis -- power, between the takles, and explosiveness....... what would have have been without the injuries?
8) Eric Dickerson -- power, between the tackles, and explosiveness ...... wow he was fun to watch
9) OJ Simpson -- power, speed, much like Walter Payton..... solid back who could be awesome and take over games
10) Tony Dorsett -- pure speed.... much like Barry Sanders without as much escapability

Honorable mention -- Marshall Faulk, Franco Harris, John Riggins, Roger Craig

I realize that this is all arguable, and flipping the order depends on who you thought did the better job at what ever aspect of a RB that you are desciding is important. This is my opinion though, of the ones that I have watched. I know their are some older backs that were pretty good as well, but really OJ is about as far back as I go.

[Five-ofan]

Calling Emmitt the second or third best running back ever is biased? Hrmmmm dont think so. I watched alot of lions games and Barry was really fun to watch but that style just doesnt win in the playoffs also about the olines, both players had an oline that was suited to his strengths. I know you will say im nuts/biased but Barry having a bad line actually helped him. Did you watch the UT OSU game? When was vince successful running the ball? When OSU got penetration. Because he could outrun the dline and Linebackers, he ended up being matched up with dbs. Barry was similar. Yes he lost yards because of this sometimes, but it allowed him to get the big runs that he got. Barry was great. He wasnt better than emmitt. Your telling me that in the cowboys glory years you thought barry was better? You must be a detroit fan then because thats the only way. I never saw Brown play but he won 7 out of 9 rushing titles so for that dominance Ill give him number 1. Bo and earl were both great for short time periods. Bo was the most likely person ever to make you say I dont believe what I just saw. I like the cowboys yeah, but to say that putting the alltime rushing yards leader who is far and away the rushing tds leader as well is the second best back in nfl history isnt biased.

[#1MavsFan]

I know you will say im nuts/biased but Barry having a bad line actually helped him.

hmmmm....? little lost from reality?

[jthig32]

Originally posted by: #1MavsFan

hmmmm....? little lost from reality?

He's just a typical Cowboy fan in the Emmit vs Barry debate. People used to use the argument that Barry was all or nothing and he had too many negative yards. Well lo and behold, what happened when Emmits line began to suck and he would get hit behind the line? He started taking losses. Pretty frequently.

Barry Sanders was perfectly capable of doing the things all normal running backs do, including running behind a good line and a fullback. Unfortunately, he never had a line, QB OR coach that was worth a damn.

Bottom line: Switch, Barry on the Boys and Emmit on the Lions, and Barry is the yeards leader and it's not even close, the Cowboys still have three titles, and Emmit, while still great, is not even in the conversation of best RB's of all time.

[#1MavsFan]

Nice post jthig32, it sums it up nicely. And five-o-fan its not that emmit wasn't great since he was but barry had better seasons on way worse teams.

I like the cowboys yeah, but to say that putting the alltime rushing yards leader who is far and away the rushing tds leader as well is the second best back in nfl history isnt biased.

So do I but I try not to become biased over it. Those records show Emmits longevity more than anything and it also shows that his line protected him early in his career from taking the hard hits Barry was accustomed to taking every Sunday.

[Five-ofan]

I disagree and there is no proof one way or the other. My point is that in any other argument the media gives the nod to the guy with rings. They say brady is as good as/better than manning and really they arent close but because brady wins he gets put in the argument. Emmitt is damn sure close to barry as far as who is better and even if he didnt have rings you could make a damn good argument about him being better. I hate the argument that because emmitt was able to play for a long time that should be used against him. Longevity is part of the game. Ask each of them with truth serum whos career they would rather have had and they would both say emmitts. Payton would too. Emmitt won like 4 straight rushing titles so dont use a palmeiro argument that he was just good for a long time and not great. Emmitt was the definition of greatness in the early 90s. Now later in his career he was above average but not great, but for a while he was great but instead of being like some people that are great and then disappear he was great and then good. This is an opinion question. Stats and rings both say Emmitt. BTW would those of you that are taking barry take marino over montana? Its the exact same argument except marino actually has better stats than montana whereas barry doesnt have better stats than emmitt. Barry had the best individual season either of them ever had (the 2000 yarder) but overall id take emmitt. I think they were both great but I think emmitt was better.

[jthig32]

I haven't seen anyone use the longevity argument. Of course Emmit was great. He had great, great stats. He was a great player. But he also had a great QB, great WR, great Fullback, great TE, and the greatest OLine every assembled, and that isn't even arguable.

Barry had TERRIBLE coaches his entire career (everyone remember Fontes?), had TERRIBLE QB's, and had a very average line. Not only that but he very rarely had the pleasure of running behind a fullback, because the Lions almost always played three wides under Fontes and Ross. Now some people claim this was Barry's best system. That's bs. The fact is this is the ONLY way they could get an extra defender out of the box, by forcing someone out onto the slot receiver and on the TE.

Still, despite ALL these differences in supporting cast, Barry had every bit as productive a career, taking away TD's and rings. The TD's are very much affected by the Lion's offense vs the Cowboys', the obviously the rings are very much affected by the supporting cast.

Now, about the debate of rings being the tie breaker of great players. You'll notice that all of your examples were Quarterbacks. That is because, in general, this is the only position held to the rings standard. That is the position expected to "lead" a team to the playoffs and a ring.

Also, your argument about Manning especially and Marino to a certain extent, does not translate well, because, especially in the case of Manning, you have a team that is very, very talented, and is expected to compete every year, and yet still can not get over the hump against a team with arguably less talent. When, in God's name, were the Lions expected to be contenders or could be considered to have better talent than any of the contenders?

Again, put Barry Sanders on the Cowboys of the mid 90's, and we are not having this debate. Period.

[yukmunky]

Dalmations...OJ Simpson like Walter Payton? OJ was more like another Bear, Gale Sayers, who is easily the most notable exception from your list. If you are going to put guys like Earl Campbell and Bo Jackson on there, Sayers should be there too. OJ and Gale had speed to burn and agility/cut-back ability only rivaled by Barry Sanders.

[dalmations202]

Dalmations...OJ Simpson like Walter Payton? OJ was more like another Bear, Gale Sayers, who is easily the most notable exception from your list. If you are going to put guys like Earl Campbell and Bo Jackson on there, Sayers should be there too. OJ and Gale had speed to burn and agility/cut-back ability only rivaled by Barry Sanders.

I knew I would miss someone. I don't remember much about Sayers though. I don't remember that much about OJ. You are probably absolutely correct, as I really didn't get into football heavy till the mid 70's, and then it was usually the Cowboys or whomever they were playing that week.

[snoop]

I think there were better runners than smith over history, Barry, Walter, Brown and even dickerson. They were brtter runners but Emmitt was a better runningback. People always forget there is more to the position than carrying the ball such as blocking reconizing blitzes, weather to block or go in the flat for a dump pass. Emmitt's leadership made his line better he got in their face when they did bad. His linemen made it to the pro bowl because of Smith not the other way around. I saw Walter run, he was amazing, Sanders was even better but if I need a back to build my team around give me Emmitt.