The Storybook King (Part 2 Repost)

#WBC

Link to Full Blog

————————————————

Considering Era

★ So, I set to watching film. After doing this over the course of about an hour for each player, (and I must say, it was very difficult to find an hour of film for Jim Brown on videos that weren’t just highlight reels) I had seen enough. It was blatantly obvious Henry has significantly better everything: superior form, more speed, more power, more athleticism, a competition that had much better tackling—the whole nine yards.

At that point, any casual would end the argument and confidently state that Henry was better. And I was starting to think so too—maybe it was that easy. It didn’t matter if Brown’s era had MUCH more lenient rules when it came to roughness, and it didn’t matter that Brown’s era was a much more run-heavy league when it came to the defense’s game plan when the difference was that clear.

On some of Brown’s best plays, a defender would run up to him to merely drop his shoulder into Brown’s hip in hopes that would be enough to bring the beast. Brown would obviously take advantage of this, shrug off the meek blow, and take it to the house. When specifically looking at Brown’s form, how he reacted to things, and his overall balance and athleticism in situations, I just wasn’t impressed when comparing it to things that Henry would do.

On one of Henry’s best plays, specifically during his week five game versus the Bills, the blocking was immediately penetrated in the middle so Henry bounced it to the outside and quite literally threw a starting NFL defender flying backward to pick up the first down. I mean, don’t get me wrong, Brown did a lot of what Henry was doing—specifically when both would continue churning forward even with two or three defenders on their backs. But Henry was doing things like that much more often than Brown was, and what he was doing just looked more impressive.

There, I almost closed my case. I began to close my tabs, and in a last-ditch effort to salvage some argument for Brown, I checked to see if anyone had said anything that would offer a new perspective. As a result, that’s when something caught my eye.

————————————————

Modern Training

In the comments of my poll, a that goes by the name ‘Superstar’ said this: “Easily Brown, especially when you consider runningbacks could hardly even reach 1k back then. Give him modern-day training and all that and he’s probably similar to Henry.” While some of this comment is a bit irrelevant, specifically the first half, the second offers an interesting opinion. In a debate where you’re comparing skill and talent, how can you diss the ability of the player with inferior training?

Let’s say, for the sake of the argument, someone kidnapped one-month-old Jim Brown and transported him to the year 1994. Given the great conditions (actually great conditions, not some Marv Marinovich laboratory environment), modern training, modern nutrition—the whole nine yards. And in this scenario, Jim Brown has no unforeseen negative repercussions, putting him in virtually the same conditions that Derrick Henry was raised in.

In this sci-fi hypothetical involving time travel and a lot of “ifs”, I believe Brown would be in the same class of sheer dominance and skill over the competition as Henry is. Due to his era, it’s hard to tell exactly what type of weight Brown was lifting back in ‘da day, but from just looking at film it’s clear Brown had what it took to succeed at a similar level to Henry.

Not only that, but Brown formulated his play-style in response to his coaching and opposition around him since Pop Warner, so it was also unfair to undermine him because of that aspect lacking by today’s standards. Give him a similar opposition and miles advanced coaching techniques, and I guarantee we see a much more mechanically sound Jim Brown.

Unfortunately for Brown, that was never the question. When I asked “who was the BETTER rusher,” I was simply asking which runningback would be better at football, not which running back had more physical potential. Due to this, while it is a bit cheap to Jim Brown, Derrick Henry’s case opens up a lot more.

————————————————

My Verdict

In reflection, I feel like I’ve been semi-unfair to Brown throughout this entire debate. Don’t get me wrong, ‘First Down’ Brown is still lightyears ahead of The King on the legendary scale, and ages in front on the dominance ranking also. However, as much as I tried, I simply couldn’t find a just way to put Brown ahead of Henry when weighing who was the better player.

Sure, you can argue that the comparison is fundamentally flawed due to how different these players’ eras were, and you’d have a solid defense. Still, at the end of the day, the quarrel at its core reverts to those lunch-table debates with friends—a true meaningless yet wholesome critical thinking exercise within the game.

In short, despite the common consensus, I believe Derrick Henry trumps Jim Brown in the ‘betterness realm of football. As shocking and unpopular as it may seem, that’s just my honest opinion. Despite his relatively short time playing, I believe we already have enough evidence to make that claim. And for those that disagree, Henry is still in his prime, so there’s much more time for him to build upon his case. Until then, we’ll have to wait in anticipation to hear the next legendary tale that The Storybook King stiff-arms his way into.