Emmitt Smith ready to call it quits

[greasywheels121]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=1981383

 

Rushing leader wants to go out a Cowboy

ESPN.com news services

 

Running back Emmitt Smith, the NFL's all-time leader rushing, will retire this offseason, sources told ESPN's John Clayton and Chris Mortensen.

 

A league source told Mortensen it was possible that Smith could announce his retirement Thursday in Jacksonville.

 

Smith, 35, played 13 seasons for the Dallas Cowboys, and the last two seasons with the Arizona Cardinals. He becomes an unrestricted free agent in March.

 

Smith was in Jacksonville Monday, where he was at a dinner to honor past Super Bowl MVPs. When asked about retiring, he told the Dallas Morning News that he wanted to retire as a Cowboy, but stopped short of saying he would retire this offseason.

 

"I will, in some way, shape or form," Smith said about retiring as a Cowboy. "There's always a chance (of not playing in 2005). Somebody has got to want me, and if they don't want me, then what? ... I want to play. I want to do what I want to do."

 

Smith may sign some sort of ceremonial one-day deal with Dallas. In recent years, other veteran star players have returned to the teams where they spent their glory days.

 

The St. Paul (Minnesota) Pioneer Press speculated that Smith could join an investment group that is trying to buy the Vikings.

 

After an injury-plagued first season with the Cardinals in 2003, Smith rushed for 937 yards and nine touchdowns last season in 15 starts.

[WilliamTell]

I think that's ok if he retires. He's had a great run. I never liked the Cowboys but I grew to respect the things he did.

[AngelasDaddy0427]

Shame it's two years too late...

[GoodAsGould]

lol id say its 4 years too late.

[ZoomSlowik]

I'm just going to say in advance that I know this is going to sound bitter. Emmitt is a very good runningback that had a hell of a run with the Cowboys. But he held on too long due in large part to getting the all-time rushing title and wasn't even the best RB of his generation (Sanders). He gets credit for being one of the best runningbacks ever, but I really can't put him in the same class as Walter, Brown, and Sanders. I think he is going to be the Nolan Ryan or Pete Rose of football, a guy that is mentioned with the very best because he holds a couple of career records, while people fail to notice that he played quite a few more games than the previous record holders or played on a stellar team with an awesome line for most of his career. Much like Pete Rose and Nolan Ryan, I don't think Emmitt is the peer of the other greats at their position. I won't argue that he is a hall of famer, and I would probably grudgingly have to put him at #4 on my best RB's list (there seems to be a hell of a dropoff after those top 3 in my book at least). But when I here the greatest RB of all-time talk, I'm going to get a little nautious(probably spelled wrong) and start questioning the speaker's credibility.

[GoodAsGould]

eh id say after barry sanders their is a big drop off. I know im a big Walter Payton fan and all but Sanders was utterly amazing and on a bad team too. Also idonno about your Nolan Ryan comparison i hold Ryan in higher regard than i do Emmit. Mainly because Ryan might of played a long time but he was good the whole time.

[The Bones]

I'm just going to say in advance that I know this is going to sound bitter. Emmitt is a very good runningback that had a hell of a run with the Cowboys. But he held on too long due in large part to getting the all-time rushing title and wasn't even the best RB of his generation (Sanders). He gets credit for being one of the best runningbacks ever, but I really can't put him in the same class as Walter, Brown, and Sanders. I think he is going to be the Nolan Ryan or Pete Rose of football, a guy that is mentioned with the very best because he holds a couple of career records, while people fail to notice that he played quite a few more games than the previous record holders or played on a stellar team with an awesome line for most of his career. Much like Pete Rose and Nolan Ryan, I don't think Emmitt is the peer of the other greats at their position. I won't argue that he is a hall of famer, and I would probably grudgingly have to put him at #4 on my best RB's list (there seems to be a hell of a dropoff after those top 3 in my book at least). But when I here the greatest RB of all-time talk, I'm going to get a little nautious(probably spelled wrong) and start questioning the speaker's credibility.

 

Great post. I also don't think he was at the same level as those three.

 

I can't blame him for staying around as long as he could though. If I were a professional athlete or just doing something I enjoy my whole life I wouldn't want to give it up either. I don't understand why people think that athletes need to go out on top before they "tarnish" their legacy. I just think that if a team still wants a player, even if they aren't as great as they used to be, that player has every right to hang on until the very end.

[ZoomSlowik]

eh id say after barry sanders their is a big drop off.  I know im a big Walter Payton fan and all but Sanders was utterly amazing and on a bad team too.  Also idonno about your Nolan Ryan comparison i hold Ryan in higher regard than i do Emmit.  Mainly because Ryan might of played a long time but he was good the whole time.

 

Nolan was a great pitcher, but I don't think he should be mentioned among the top 5 or so pitchers like he often is. I know he was stuck on some bad teams most of his career and that affects his wins and loses, but he wasn't really dominant as people think. He led the league in walks as many times as he led it in strikeouts and only won 1 ERA title. He's probably in the team picture, but I can't put him in the same class as Walter Johnson, Sandy Koufax in his prime (absolutely unhittable for about 5 years), Lefty Grove(doesn't get the credit he should), Tom Seaver, Christy Mathewson, and Warren Spahn.

[qwerty]

Nolan was a great pitcher, but I don't think he should be mentioned among the top 5 or so pitchers like he often is. I know he was stuck on some bad teams most of his career and that affects his wins and loses, but he wasn't really dominant as people think. He led the league in walks as many times as he led it in strikeouts and only won 1 ERA title. He's probably in the team picture, but I can't put him in the same class as Walter Johnson, Sandy Koufax in his prime (absolutely unhittable for about 5 years), Lefty Grove(doesn't get the credit he should), Tom Seaver, Christy Mathewson, and Warren Spahn.

 

I believe ed walsh has the lowest era of all time at 1.82. He twice pitched 400 innings in a season. The only thing that hurt him is he only pitched seven full years. If he would have pitched probally three more years he would be mentioned in the top five list i believe. At least he would be on mine.

[Soxbadger]

Part of being a running back is being able to handle the work load year in and year out.

 

Sanders and Brown may have been more talented, but they quit.

 

So we can say what might have been, or what should of been, but Smith will always be remembered because he never gave up, and maybe it took him longer, but he accomplished it.

 

Also I believe he was the person that Walter Payton would of wanted to have the record, maybe not the most talented guy, but the guy who would out work every other player to make sure that when it was time to play that they never missed a down.

 

::Shrugs::

 

There is a lot of Payton in the way Smith played, and maybe hes not a top 5 back, but he certainly is a top 10. And when you think of how many RB's there have been in the history of the NFL, does it really matter if some think hes top 10 as opposed to top 5?

 

SB

[ZoomSlowik]

Part of being a running back is being able to handle the work load year in and year out.

 

Sanders and Brown may have been more talented, but they quit.

 

So we can say what might have been, or what should of been, but Smith will always be remembered because he never gave up, and maybe it took him longer, but he accomplished it.

 

Also I believe he was the person that Walter Payton would of wanted to have the record, maybe not the most talented guy, but the guy who would out work every other player to make sure that when it was time to play that they never missed a down.

 

::Shrugs::

 

There is a lot of Payton in the way Smith played, and maybe hes not a top 5 back, but he certainly is a top 10. And when you think of how many RB's there have been in the history of the NFL, does it really matter if some think hes top 10 as opposed to top 5?

 

SB

 

Actually, before he died Walter stated that he would rather have Sanders break the record than Emmitt. I can't really say that Sanders quit, the guy played 10 seasons. That's a lot longer than most players. He stopped playing when he wanted to. He may have left under strange circumstances, but he gutted it out a lot longer than Ricky. I definitely can't fault Brown, the guy didn't have anything left to accomplish. He had the titles, and he owned every rushing record known to man when he quit. I don't think that there is any doubt that they could have played longer, neither of them left because of injury. The difference is that Emmitt was stubborn enough to stick around when he wasn't the same player.

 

Yeah, it does matter where your place in history is, even if it is just to pundits and sports superfreaks. A player's legacy determines who is going to be remembered 40 years from now. Statistically there isn't much difference between guys like Mel Ott and Stan Musial and guys like Ted Williams and Mickey Mantle, but there is a definite difference in their stature. There's a big difference between being mentioned with the absolute elite and being grouped together with Tony Dorsett, Marcus Allen, Earl Campbell, and some of the others.

[Soxbadger]

Slowik,

 

Can you find that about Walter wanting Barry to break it?

 

Smith and Payton were really tight, Smith even had Payton's family at the game where he broke it I believe.

 

Also Jared talked about Smith in very high regards.

 

Ive never heard of any Sanders Payton connection though.

 

Smith and Paytons Family

 

Also I dont think many would consider Smith out classed by Campbell, Dorsett, etc.

 

SB

[ZoomSlowik]

I feel a little bit better now. ESPN has a poll: Who is the greatest runningback of all time? Emmitt is getting only 8.6% of the vote. Barry is leading at 38.6%, Payton is at 32.2%, Brown is at 20.4%.

[ZoomSlowik]

Slowik,

 

Can you find that about Walter wanting Barry to break it?

 

Smith and Payton were really tight, Smith even had Payton's family at the game where he broke it I believe.

 

Also Jared talked about Smith in very high regards.

 

Ive never heard of any Sanders Payton connection though.

 

Smith and Paytons Family

 

Also I dont think many would consider Smith out classed by Campbell, Dorsett, etc.

 

SB

 

No, I can't. I read it a long time ago. One of my friends constantly reminds me about it, but I have no idea where it was. I never said he was outclassed by those guys, I mentioned them because those are the guys generally considered to be a tier below Payton, Sanders, and Brown.

 

A quick search is not yielding any results. I wish I could remember where I saw it.

Edited February 1, 2005 by ZoomSlowik

[Soxbadger]

I think your friend is wrong.

 

Smith and Payton were really good friends, and most saw Smith as the Payton type runner.

 

IE

 

The guy who worked his ass off over the off season, ran up coal etc.

 

As opposed to Sanders, the player blessed with god given talent who did not put in the hours of a Smith and Payton.

 

SB

[ZoomSlowik]

Here's an interesting question, do you think anyone is going to break the rushing record? It's going to be tough. I don't think most of the players that are playing now would play long enough. Smith is finally retiring at 35, I don't think most runningbacks are going to play that long. Tomlinson and Portis would have the best shot, but they have to play at least 8 more years each and kick some ass. If Curtis Martin is dedicated to breaking it he might make it. He's a little less than 5000 yards short, but is 31 already, and I'm not sure he can get 1000 yards a year for 4 more years.

[Soxbadger]

I doubt anyone breaks the record for a long time, they will have to be a conditioning freak like Payton and Smith, and have enough talent and durability to survive.

 

Also:

 

Smith

 

Contrary to what others believe, Smith also didn't outstay his welcome in the NFL or play beyond his years in order to rack up records. Last season he rushed for nearly 1,000 yards (937) and ran for nine touchdowns. If Smith had retired after nine seasons as Brown did he would have more yards and touchdowns than the Cleveland Browns great. If he had called it a career after 13 seasons as Payton did he would also have more rushing yards and touchdowns than Sweetness. But most wouldn't even put No. 22 in their class.

 

Puts things in perspective considering he would of broken the record any way you try and argue it.

 

Thanks for the memories Emmitt.

 

SB

[ZoomSlowik]

Number of season's played is a poor measure for how much the person actually played. All things are not equal in that comparison. Brown played in an era where the league played 12 and 14 game seasons, and so did Walter for his first 3 years. Walter also played in a strike shortened 1982 season. Emmitt was a very good back, but in an average game he produced quite a bit less than the other three, touchdowns notwithstanding. As I said before his team helped a bit with that. The writer of that article likes to compare career numbers, but that can be misleading. Do we really think that Pete Rose is the best hitter ever because he has the hits record, or is it more likely that we would pick Ty Cobb because of his career batting average ? Remember that none of these players missed large portions of time because of injury when looking at the numbers.

 

games /yards per game /TD's per game /Rec YD per game /YPC

Emmitt 226 /81.21 /.725 /14.26 /4.2

Brown 118 /104.33 /.898 /21.17 /5.2

Payton 190 /88.03 /.579 /23.88 /4.4

Sanders 153 /99.79 /.647 /19.09 /5.0

 

Also, rushing for nearly 1,000 yards this past year doesn't really mean anything. Basically any starting RB that is healthy the whole year gets it unless they are horrendous. 18 RB's did it this year, and several others were close, including Michael Vick. One only needs to rush for a little over 60 yards per game to reach it. Plus that 3.5 yards per carry wasn't all that impressive. Emmitt clearly wasn't himself for those last few years.

[Soxbadger]

You keep comparing Smith to Rose.

 

Rose owns 1 record.

 

Smith owns almost every single rushing record in existence.

 

Its clear that you dont like the guy.

 

But outside of Brown, Sanders, and Payton there is no back that Smith does not completely blow out of the water. Smith may be a step below Sanders, Brown, Payton (something I do not believe), but those are the only 3 who can even be said in the same breath as him without being completely blown away.

 

Smith may not be as pretty to watch, but if you watched him you would know that its no slight to any of the others mentioned that Smith beat them, its just a testament to the fact that some times its mind over matter.

 

SB

[ZoomSlowik]

How does 2 records equal virtually every record in the book? He clearly doesn't have the record for yards per game or yards per carry as I illustrated. Rose and Smith are similar because they played far more games than their peers at the position and own a career record in that area. I'll agree Emmitt was solid and deserves credit, but I think the long time that he played skews some people's opinion of how good he really was. As for other backs, take a look at Eric Dickerson's career numbers. His per game rushing averages are very similar to Walter Payton's, but he doesn't get as much pub because he wasn't on stellar teams. I'm also a big Sayers fan, but injuries obviously stunted his career, so we'll never know how good he really was.

 

I don't have a problem with Emmitt personally, I just have a problem with over-glorifying one or two career records of a guy that played for a really long time on excellent teams for most of their career like Emmitt and Rose. I also throw Ryan in that group even though his teams weren't good because he just played forever. I'm also not a huge Bill Russell fan. Yes, he has the rings, but he often overshadows Chamberlain's dominance because of the great teams he played on. I'm confident he'd be considered nowhere near the best center ever if the Hawks hadn't traded him to the Celtics. Yes, these were great players that belong in the HOF but I don't think it's right to say that a player is better than their predecessors because they broke their records without digging deeper into what they have done.

[Soxbadger]

2 records...

 

also the NFL’s career leader for rushing touchdowns (155) and rushing attempts (4,142) … second in league annals in total touchdowns with 166, trailing only all-time leader Jerry Rice (205) … first player in NFL history to post five consecutive seasons over 1,400 yards rushing … Smith and legendary Cleveland Brown runner Jim Brown are the only players in NFL history to post seven consecutive 10-touchdown seasons to begin their careers … 1,021 yards rushing in 2001 made him the first player in NFL history to rush for 1,000 yards in 11 consecutive seasons and the first to post 11 1,000-yard career rushing seasons … passed Payton’s NFL-record career-carry total of 3,838 week three in 2002 … NFL-record 25 rushing touchdowns in 1995 gave him 100 career touchdowns in just six seasons (93 games), equalling Brown for fastest to that plateau

 

second only to Brown’s 0.90 among all-time NFL rushing touchdown scorers (Ram Marshall Faulk is next at 0.64

 

owns a number of NFL postseason records—rushing yards (1,586), rushing touchdowns (19), consecutive games with rushing touchdowns (9), and 100-yard rushing games (7) … shares the NFL total playoff touchdown mark of 21 with ex-Bill Thurman Thomas

 

on the NFL lists for yards from scrimmage (20,537) and combined yardage list (20,537 yards), ranks third and fourth

 

I count:

 

Leading rusher, leading rushing touchdowns, 1,000 yards 11 consecutive seasons, career carries leader, fastest to 100 touchdowns.

 

Post season records: rushing yards, touchdowns, 100 yard games, total touchdowns.

 

Then he has a bunch of 2,3,4 place finishes.

 

Rose and Smith are nothing alike, and you keep saying the long time that he played. Season wise he was equal to Payton and Brown as mentioned above, although he played more games during that time, thats much the same as players in Baseball and every other sport that has a longer schedule.

 

You keep saying played a longer time, not more games. Maybe he played more games, but Payton, Sanders, and Brown, chose to not play more games. Nothing wrong with that, but Smith played those games, took the punishment, and now is not worthy of the accolades he deserved?

 

Its not that big of a deal that you keep under cutting his records and what hes done, but its not just 1 record, its a slew of records, and probably the most prolific playoff back ever.

 

Not exactly something to scoff at.

 

And would you say Jordan is over rated, because he played on great teams and was the beneficiary of that?

 

SB

[ZoomSlowik]

I forgot the touchdown's in a season, didn't know about the carries although I should have figured it out. Most of those other things don't really qualify as "records" persay. Fastest to something isn't really a record in team sport's terms, and as you said, a lot of that was 2,3,4. Also, those playoff records are based in large part on number of opportunities in the playoffs, which were much more plentiful for that loaded Cowboys team. Brown didn't play in the Super Bowl Era, Payton's Bears only had two worthy teams, and Sanders only had a couple of playoff games also. Yes, he's done some impressive things, but if I wanted to I could do the same thing with a lot of players.

 

Look, Smith played until he was 35, even though he knew that he wasn't the same player. That has nothing to do with durability, that's everything to so with their own desires for life. Obviously he wanted to keep playing. Brown and Payton both went out with their titles and records, Sanders got sick of playing for a floundering franchise that wasn't doing anything to win. If Smith wants to play those extra basically meaningless seasons, that's his perogative, but I don't really call that a major accomplishment. In my book longevity is nowhere near as big a factor in determining a player's greatness as his brilliance during his prime. Emmitt is more impressive in the first area than the other when comparing the truly great backs.

 

There's a world of difference between Jordan and Smith. Jordan was by far the best player on his team. You could make a legitimate argument that Emmitt was behind Aikman, at least in terms of importance to the team (Aikman doesn't compare as well to other QB's on paper however). That offense was also filled with perennial Pro-Bowlers all over the field in Aikman, Irvin, Newton, Williams, and a couple of other linemen during his time whose names escape me. Jordan's teams were basically Jordan until Pippen arrived. There was no flood of All-stars on those teams. Grant, Rodman, and Kukoc were decent, but were role players more than anything. More importantly, Jordan's fame is not based on a career record or two. His body of work is simply overwhelming, and he also happens to own the career scoring average record, not the more questionable most points record that is held by another guy that stuck around forever, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

 

It's obvious that neither of us are doing anything to convince the other, so I'm planning on stopping here.

[RockRaines]

in response to his retirement all I can say is good.

[Soxbadger]

Okay, Smith was the best player on that team, I doubt any one will really argue against that. Even the biggest Aikman fans know that it was Smith's team. The year Smith sat out, they lost every game he did not play, and won every game he did play. Those are not just coincidence, they are because, with out Smith the team could not win. When Aikman was injured, the Cowboys still were able to win with guys like Garret, and other no names who could sub in and hand the ball off.

 

Jordan won 0 championships before Pippen and Grant, I believe he won 0 play off series prior to that point as well. You also discount guys like Oakley, Bill Cartwright, etc.

 

Rodman was an all star when he played for the Bulls, he was the leading rebounder in the NBA. Aikman nor Irvin were considered the best at their position during the time, where as Rodman and Pippen could arguably considered the best PF and SF during that same time period.

 

You compare sheer numbers in terms of pro bowlers / all-star selections, but then use average when it suits you. Jordan's teams were generally comprised of 3/5's all stars, meaning 60% of the starting team was an All-Star. The Cowboys never had close to 60% of their starters in a Pro Bowl.

 

And no we wont ever convince the other, but maybe you will see that you are just arbitarially disliking Smith.

 

I think Jordans the best player, but like Smith he played on the best team for almost half of his career. Where as the Cowboys were only the best team for probably 25% of Smith's career.

 

SB

[ZoomSlowik]

Just correcting a couple of inaccuracies...

 

Rodman was never an All-Star when he was with the Bulls. In fact, while they were winning championships, Jordan and Pippen were the only Bulls to play in the All-Star game, the latter not even making it every year (by some miracle B.J. Armstrong and Horace Grant made it in 1994 when Michael was playing baseball). Technically he did not win a playoff series before Pippen and Grant came (a lot of teams would have lost to those Celtics a couple of times during that period), but I doubt that Pippen really made that much of an impact in the 88 playoffs when they did beat the Hawks. He averaged all of 7.8 points per game. Plus, the Bulls did not have the best record in the league for their whole dynasty, they didn't have homecourt advantage in several of their series, meaning they weren't the BEST team in the league every year. Even assuming they were, those 6 years do not make up half of Michael's career as you claimed. Plus the Cowboys were good for more than just those years they won the title.

 

Either way, there is a major difference between perrennial All-stars and decent players that made it once or twice. Every good team is going to have some solid role players, but not every team puts half their offense in the Pro-Bowl (Aikman, Irvin, Smith, Williams, Newton adds up to 5, and they had other linemen), or has a lineup full of hall of famers like the Celtics. As for calling Rodman the best PF in the league at the time, that's just highly inaccurate. Malone and Barkley were not far behind in terms of quality rebounding and defense, and could actually score. Pippen wasn't the best early in his career either, there was a guy named Larry Bird that was still doing pretty well during those couple of years it took Pippen to really reach his peak. As for who meant more to the Cowboys, it's hard to say because neither missed more than about 4 games at any one time. That's not really a good sample size.

 

As for claiming I arbitrarily dislike Smith, I've provided numerous reasons why I feel that he is not as good as the big 3.