Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

sure in College he was electric.

Sanders played on artificial turf/synthetic grass which enhanched his cutting abilities even more,making him damn near untouchable at times. Eric Metcalf before his injury was damn near untouchable to.If looking just at highlight reels Sanders video stands out. Watching the games however many,many X he went 25yds and ended up where the ball was snapped. Good convo in front of a fireplace on a long winter night

a) 2,850 rushing yards and 42 rushing touchdowns in 12 games. he was a buck fifty short of 3,000 rushing yards and he ran for more touchdowns in a single 12 game season than most guys get in an entire college career. that was the greatest single season we've ever seen from any player in the history of the sport. should count for something.

b) his numbers on grass were better than his numbers on turf. just listen to some of the greatest defensive players in history talk about having to face him. they pretty much all say bar none he was the best back they ever played against. Reggie White said the only player he feared on the football field was....Barry Sanders. John Randle said bar none he was the best offensive player he ever played against and the toughest guy to tackle. Darren Woodson said he had nightmares before the game and couldn't sleep any time he was playing Barry Sanders. Rod Woodson said Barry was the best back he ever played against. Barry popped Rod Woodson's ACL and Rod Woodson never even touched him.

Okay, I guess anyone with a 99-yard TD run is "the best."

Only if you overweight YPC, which... You have a tendency to do, IMHO. 

To answer your question directly... No. If a player is only on the field for one carry, and that one carry happens to be a 99-yard touchdown, and he never plays another snap... He's not in the conversation due to lack of sample size. He *might* be the best, but nobody is going to put their reputation behind claiming it because we can never truly know. 

I think it is a sliding scale, yes. You have to account for situation, and offensive scheme, and the level of the players around him on a team, and the level of the competition he was facing on the other side of the ball, etc...

For example, look at Calvin Johnson. In his top year, he was 14th in receptions, 9th in receiving yards, T2 in receiving TDs. Overall pretty darn good, but not by any means a world-beating statistical season. And yet anyone who watched him on the field knew he was a man amongst boys. His production was limited by Reggie Ball and an option offense. But everyone could see with their eyes that he was special. 

That same year Graham Harrell and Colt Brennan were the top of the heap statistically at the QB position. They were both good, but did anyone think they were all that special? Nope. They were system quarterbacks. 

That same year rushing was led by Ray Rice-Rutgers (attempts), Garrett Wolfe-NIU (yards), Anthony Alridge-Houston (ypc), and Ian Johnson-Boise (TDs). Again, they were good, but did anyone think they were all that special? Ray Rice made a name for himself at the next level, but he never got a nickname like Megatron--he was ultimately most famous for punching his fiancée. 

I wasn't paying attention to college football during Barry Sanders' year. I've never really studied tape or looked at the history during that time. So I have no opinion on him, either way. But he did win the Heisman, so at least SOMEONE thought he was pretty fucking good. Despite only playing one year. 

b) his numbers on grass were better than his numbers on turf. just listen to some of the greatest defensive players in history talk about having to face him. they pretty much all say bar none he was the best back they ever played against. Reggie White said the only player he feared on the football field was....Barry Sanders. John Randle said bar none he was the best offensive player he ever played against and the toughest guy to tackle. Darren Woodson said he had nightmares before the game and couldn't sleep any time he was playing Barry Sanders. Rod Woodson said Barry was the best back he ever played against. Barry popped Rod Woodson's ACL and Rod Woodson never even touched him.

College, please.

Only if you overweight YPC, which... You have a tendency to do, IMHO.
 How did you determine that? lol

To answer your question directly... No. If a player is only on the field for one carry, and that one carry happens to be a 99-yard touchdown, and he never plays another snap... He's not in the conversation due to lack of sample size. He *might* be the best, but nobody is going to put their reputation behind claiming it because we can never truly know.
 Oh, let's not bring people's ego into this, lol.  So 1 carry is too few.  How many isn't too few?

I think it is a sliding scale, yes. You have to account for situation, and offensive scheme, and the level of the players around him on a team, and the level of the competition he was facing on the other side of the ball, etc...
Okay so what % for eye test and what % for stats?  50/50?  80/20?  

For example, look at Calvin Johnson. In his top year, he was 14th in receptions, 9th in receiving yards, T2 in receiving TDs. Overall pretty darn good, but not by any means a world-beating statistical season. And yet anyone who watched him on the field knew he was a man amongst boys. His production was limited by Reggie Ball and an option offense. But everyone could see with their eyes that he was special.
 Absolutely, he probably maximized his context.  Comparing him to other WRs in option offenses is easier than comparing him to air raid beneficiary WRs.  

That same year Graham Harrell and Colt Brennan were the top of the heap statistically at the QB position. They were both good, but did anyone think they were all that special? Nope. They were system quarterbacks.

That same year rushing was led by Ray Rice-Rutgers (attempts), Garrett Wolfe-NIU (yards), Anthony Alridge-Houston (ypc), and Ian Johnson-Boise (TDs). Again, they were good, but did anyone think they were all that special? Ray Rice made a name for himself at the next level, but he never got a nickname like Megatron--he was ultimately most famous for punching his fiancée.

I wasn't paying attention to college football during Barry Sanders' year. I've never really studied tape or looked at the history during that time. So I have no opinion on him, either way. But he did win the Heisman, so at least SOMEONE thought he was pretty fucking good. Despite only playing one year.
No one is suggesting he wasn't "pretty fucking good."  

Despite what Mr mdot says, carries matter, and it seems as if everyone is cool with 344 (or 373) as enough to determine "the best."  I don't think I've once criticized that, just questioned it.  

So it's not 200, from Bush's 8.7 ypc Heisman season.  Not Harvin's 194 career carries @ 9.5 per.
Sanders is 37th in career ypc, behind guys like IU's Coleman, Stanford's Love, Etienne from Clemson, a bunch of option guys like Sims and Rozier, FSU's Warrick Dunn, etc.

They had as many career carries with higher ypc averages.  
Sanders was fun to watch and went ballistic for one season.  But other guys did a tiny bit better over a career with as many carries.

This seems to me to come down to the fact Sanders did it mostly in 1 season.  His 1 season blows away anyone else's.  A special peak.  That's great.  
But was it the best season + 3 games ever?  The best season and a half?  
If a RB's 2nd-best season was much better than Sanders', does that count for anything?  And if his 3rd-best season blows Sanders' out of the water...does that matter even a little bit?

I find it odd that there doesn't seem to be any kind of sliding scale with peak vs career, especially with the RB position.  
And the 1-season peak seems to be most special.  Tidy.  Complete.  Easy.

Only if you overweight YPC, which... You have a tendency to do, IMHO.

How did you determine that? lol

So it's not 200, from Bush's 8.7 ypc Heisman season.  Not Harvin's 194 career carries @ 9.5 per.
Sanders is 37th in career ypc, behind guys like IU's Coleman, Stanford's Love, Etienne from Clemson, a bunch of option guys like Sims and Rozier, FSU's Warrick Dunn, etc.

They had as many career carries with higher ypc averages. 
Sanders was fun to watch and went ballistic for one season.  But other guys did a tiny bit better over a career with as many carries.

Again, throughout many years on this board, you've constantly talked about ypc. It's been one of the stats you continually highlight for RBs. We had that debate many years ago about ypc vs number of carries where you stated your belief (looking at backfields with two backs, and the one with fewer carries had higher ypc) that coaches should dial back number of carries for the lead guy to increase his ypc. 

And right here you state that "other guys did a tiny bit better over a career with as many carries"--defining "a tiny bit better" as higher ypc. 

That's why I say you overweight ypc. Which is also why--and my assertion supported by--you cherry picked a guy with one carry and a 99 yard TD, so the absolute maximum career ypc, as your extreme case. 

Taylor>Gordon>Ball>Dayne>Sanders

COLLEGE

I'd say there are a lot of variables that could be weighted differently depending on ... a lot of variables.