A few years of dominance vs. a career of being very good (1 Viewer)

[Ghost Rider]

These two are always hotly debated as far as the Hall of Fame goes, so I thought it would be interesting to see who people think is more worthy of the two.

I gotta go with Davis.

Davis has one regular season MVP award and one Super Bowl MVP award. Bettis has none.

Davis was an All-Pro three times. IIRC, Bettis was never an All-Pro.

Davis and Bettis, despite Bettis playing almost twice as long as Davis, both finished in the top three in rushing yards. Davis finished first in '98, something Bettis never did.

Davis' career YPC was 4.6 Bettis' career YPC was 3.9

Bettis scored 94 touchdowns in 192 games. Davis scored 65 touchdowns in 81 NFL games.

Bettis is 5th all-time in rushing yards, but the argument can definitely be made that he compiled those stats simply from playing for so many years. He rushed for under 1,000 yards in 5 of his 13 NFL seasons and if we move the benchmark up 100 yards, he rushed for under 1,100 yards in 8 of his 13 NFL seasons. Plus, it is likely that by the time he is eligible for the Hall of Fame, several other backs will have passed him. Besides, compiling numbers does not always make a player worthy, unless you think Vinny Testaverde, who is 6th all-time in passing yards and 9th all-time in touchdown passes, is worthy, too.

I am not taking Pro Bowl berths into consideration, since I think they are overrated. For example, Bettis made the Pro Bowl in 2004 as an alternate despite running for only 941 yards. He also made it in 2001 despite not even finishing in the top 10 in rushing.

The postseason is where Davis really takes over:

In 8 playoff games, Davis:

-Ran for 1,120 yards.

-Scored 12 touchdowns.

-Averaged 5.6 YPC

-Had 7 consecutive games with 100 rushing yards or more, which is an NFL record.

In 13 playoff games, Bettis:

-Ran for 674 yards.

-Scored 9 touchdowns.

-Averaged 3.4 YPC.

-Had 3 games with 100 rushing yards or more.

I should point out, too, that I do not think either guy should be a lock to make it or should be a lock not to make it. Both are borderline candidates, IMO. I just think Davis is the more worthy candidate.

 

[Punchie]

there's more to the hall than stats. Bettis is the modern face of the Steelers, he gets in on that alone (rightly or wrongly)

 

[Sheriff66]

Make no mistake, Bettis is a 100% first ballot HOFer, like it or not...

Davis on the other hand is not....but I believe he is going to get in eventually.

 

[Tough As Nails]

Davis was the better player.

Bettis had the better career.

The HoF is about more than just being a great player. Impact, leadership, longevity, etc. Bettis has them all...Davis is missing a piece or two.

 

[David Yudkin]

This is the epic battle of a very good player that played longer than most other players at his position vs the dominant player that played better than all other players at his position who did not play very long.

No matter how you slice it, Davis was elite for three years and excellent his first year. But that sadly was about it. His playoff numbers were better than any other RBs, but he still had basically a 4 year career as a top performer and not much else. IMO, the success of subsequent Denver RBs hurts his cause, as they have produced decent replacements for Davis over the years.

If Davis gets in, then so should people like Holmes, Warner, Sharpe, etc. I concur that I would rather see dominant players in the HOF than compilers but at least for this year the voters did not deem Davis HOF worthy.

 

[jetpack]

What's with all the ex-Steeler analysis? Can we do another thread that hasn't been done to death already? I pick Jack Youngblood vs. Ricky Jackson vs. Derrick Thomas vs. Harry Carson.

 

[redman]

Davis was the better player.Bettis had the better career. The HoF is about more than just being a great player. Impact, leadership, longevity, etc. Bettis has them all...Davis is missing a piece or two.

Davis' pieces aren't missing, they're just floating around in his knee. Davis is the modern equivalent to Gale Sayers, except that his postseason career is far more impressive. I do agree that Sayers was the more athletic runner of the two (comparable to Barry Sanders), but the bottom line is that both were dominant for short periods of time. To me, Bettis is the equivalent of John Riggins. Bettis gets in because he contributed so much for so long to teams playing in important games. It's the same basic rationale for Art Monk frankly.

 

[thesurfshop19]

This is an issue where I changed positions in the last few years.

In the past, I'd strongly argue that TD should get in over Bettis due to the sheer level of dominance, but I think that the Hall of Fame in theory is more about players who changed and impacted the game.

TD was amazing and was the primary component to Denver winning 2 titles, but the Broncos didn't necessarily place their identity in him (obviously it was Elway). On the other hand, you could argue that Bettis was the face of the Steelers for a decade.

It's close. I'm not even sure that I strongly believe what I just wrote.

I personally feel that the 3-year span that TD had from 1996-1998 is the best we've ever seen from any Bronco player and any running back in history, but clearly his dominance (regular and especially post season) contributed to his lack of longevity.

 

[Ghost Rider]

IMO, the success of subsequent Denver RBs hurts his cause, as they have produced decent replacements for Davis over the years.

I never like that argument. That would be like saying that the success of Steve Young and Jeff Garcia in San Francisco denigrated what Joe Montana did when he was there. Of course, Young and Garcia were not as successful overall as Montana was, but no Denver RB since Davis has come close to doing what he did there, either.

 

[Sidewinder16]

... but he still had basically a 4 year career as a top performer and not much else.

Not much else? Show me any RB with a 4-year stretch of numbers (regular and post season) and accolades (NFL AP MVP, 2 Super Bowl rings, Super Bowl MVP, 3 All-Pro selections, 3 Pro Bowl selections, 2-time AP OPOY, '90's All-Decade Team, to name the "major" ones) and I'll show you a current or future HOFer. You can even find RBs with a career worth of accolades equivalent to those if you want.

IMO, the success of subsequent Denver RBs hurts his cause, as they have produced decent replacements for Davis over the years.

I still don't totally get this. It looks to me like Mike Anderson had one season that was Davis-like and then Clinton Portis was Davis-like for two seasons. So, a back who may or may not be a viable NFL RB and a back who is a really good NFL RB were able to have similar successes in the same offense as Davis and this is supposed to be a knock against Davis?

If Davis gets in, then so should people like Holmes, Warner, Sharpe, etc.

Again, these guys may have some dominant numbers, and may in fact be worthy of inductions themselves, but they still fall short of the entire resume that Davis has, IMO.

 

[Sidewinder16]

IMO, the success of subsequent Denver RBs hurts his cause, as they have produced decent replacements for Davis over the years.

I never like that argument. That would be like saying that the success of Steve Young and Jeff Garcia in San Francisco denigrated what Joe Montana did when he was there. Of course, Young and Garcia were not as successful overall as Montana was, but no Denver RB since Davis has come close to doing what he did there, either.

GR said what I tried to, but much better.

 

[David Yudkin]

IMO, the success of subsequent Denver RBs hurts his cause, as they have produced decent replacements for Davis over the years.

I never like that argument. That would be like saying that the success of Steve Young and Jeff Garcia in San Francisco denigrated what Joe Montana did when he was there. Of course, Young and Garcia were not as successful overall as Montana was, but no Denver RB since Davis has come close to doing what he did there, either.

Gary, Droughns, Portis, Anderson, et al have done well. Yes, David overall did better, but the other guys still did well.For example, in Davis' 4 big years he averaged 124 yards from scrimmage and 1.0 TD per game over those 4 seasons. Portis averaged 130 yards from scrimmage and 1.1 TD per game in his two years in Denver--and they traded him away.Does this mean that Portis was better than Davis? Probably not. Does this mean Portis is a HOF running back on his own? Maybe. But if we went through the past 10 years of Denver RB production the fact of them atter is that several guys have done well or exceptionally well, and IMO that won't help Davis' candidacy any.

 

[David Yudkin]

... but he still had basically a 4 year career as a top performer and not much else.

Not much else? Show me any RB with a 4-year stretch of numbers (regular and post season) and accolades (NFL AP MVP, 2 Super Bowl rings, Super Bowl MVP, 3 All-Pro selections, 3 Pro Bowl selections, 2-time AP OPOY, '90's All-Decade Team, to name the "major" ones) and I'll show you a current or future HOFer. You can even find RBs with a career worth of accolades equivalent to those if you want.

By "not much else" I meant IN OTHER SEASONS other than those 4 years. No one will argue what he did in those years, it's the other ones where he was constantly hurt that I was referring to.

 

[thesurfshop19]

The only TD-like seasons from subsequent backs were Mike Anderson in 2000 and Clinton Portis in 2002 and 2003.

I wouldn't even bring up Gary, Droughns, or Tatum Bell because it dilutes the otherwise solid point.

I don't necessarily believe that TD : Anderson/Portis :: Montana : Young/Garcia. QB is a different position entirely with more responsibility and arguably more impact on wins.

The success of Mike Anderson is the real key in my mind. His two big seasons, 2000 and 2005, you could argue that the Broncos were an equally good rushing team as the 1996-1998 team. That is, IMO, a pretty big question mark against TD, and again, I'm a Broncos fan.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Gary, Droughns, Portis, Anderson, et al have done well. Yes, David overall did better, but the other guys still did well

Anderson and Gary both had one very good or great season. Droughns did just as well his first year in Cleveland than he did in Denver. Portis has continued to prove in Washington that he is a top RB (when healthy), so being as good or a bit better than Portis is a pretty big compliment.

For example, in Davis' 4 big years he averaged 124 yards from scrimmage and 1.0 TD per game over those 4 seasons. Portis averaged 130 yards from scrimmage and 1.1 TD per game in his two years in Denver--and they traded him away.

Greatness over a 4 year-span > greatness over a 2-year span

Does this mean that Portis was better than Davis? Probably not. Does this mean Portis is a HOF running back on his own? Maybe. But if we went through the past 10 years of Denver RB production the fact of them atter is that several guys have done well or exceptionally well, and IMO that won't help Davis' candidacy any.

I agree with your last statement. Davis IS going to have a tough getting in, simply because so many focus on that argument.

 

[Ghost Rider]

The success of Mike Anderson is the real key in my mind. His two big seasons, 2000 and 2005, you could argue that the Broncos were an equally good rushing team as the 1996-1998 team.

I would not call 2005 a big season for Anderson. He barely broke the 1,000-yard mark. And his YPC was nothing special. Now, the combined numbers of Anderson and Bell were damn impressive, but those are numbes Davis was putting up by himself back in the late 90's.

 

[David Yudkin]

I don't have the time to really get into this (and for the resord I have argued both for and against Davis on numerous occasions), but here goes.

Here were the Denver totals for RB production in the past 10 or so years.

Year, Total yards from RBs, Total TD from RBs

95: 2350/15

96: 2687/18

97: 2590/18

98: 2585/29

99: 2143/12

00: 2367/21

01: 1996/8

02: 2810/26

03: 2783/21

04: 2595/17

05: 2745/28

06: 2272/11

AS A TEAM, it does not appear that the total production has noticed much of a drop off post Davis. In fact, in some years it went up. Now I am fully aware that there's a huge difference in one player getting all the pie vs. multiple players splitting it. But overall, the TEAM'S production didn't really seem to drop off any.

In theory, if Davis was the one that was special and a once in a lifetime talent, wouldn't one expect that the team totals would have suffered a massive hit once he left/retired? I could run the same numbers for other teams when their stud was out of the picture (don't have time right now), but I suspect that the Lions fell off without Sanders, the Cowboys fell off without Emmitt, the Bears dropped off without Payton, etc.

 

[Iron Mike Tomczak]

These two are always hotly debated as far as the Hall of Fame goes, so I thought it would be interesting to see who people think is more worthy of the two.

I gotta go with Davis.

Davis has one regular season MVP award and one Super Bowl MVP award. Bettis has none.

Davis was an All-Pro three times. IIRC, Bettis was never an All-Pro.

Davis and Bettis, despite Bettis playing almost twice as long as Davis, both finished in the top three in rushing yards. Davis finished first in '98, something Bettis never did.

Davis' career YPC was 4.6 Bettis' career YPC was 3.9

Bettis scored 94 touchdowns in 192 games. Davis scored 65 touchdowns in 81 NFL games.

Bettis is 5th all-time in rushing yards, but the argument can definitely be made that he compiled those stats simply from playing for so many years. He rushed for under 1,000 yards in 5 of his 13 NFL seasons and if we move the benchmark up 100 yards, he rushed for under 1,100 yards in 8 of his 13 NFL seasons. Plus, it is likely that by the time he is eligible for the Hall of Fame, several other backs will have passed him. Besides, compiling numbers does not always make a player worthy, unless you think Vinny Testaverde, who is 6th all-time in passing yards and 9th all-time in touchdown passes, is worthy, too.

I am not taking Pro Bowl berths into consideration, since I think they are overrated. For example, Bettis made the Pro Bowl in 2004 as an alternate despite running for only 941 yards. He also made it in 2001 despite not even finishing in the top 10 in rushing.

The postseason is where Davis really takes over:

In 8 playoff games, Davis:

-Ran for 1,120 yards.

-Scored 12 touchdowns.

-Averaged 5.6 YPC

-Had 7 consecutive games with 100 rushing yards or more, which is an NFL record.

In 13 playoff games, Bettis:

-Ran for 674 yards.

-Scored 9 touchdowns.

-Averaged 3.4 YPC.

-Had 3 games with 100 rushing yards or more.

I should point out, too, that I do not think either guy should be a lock to make it or should be a lock not to make it. Both are borderline candidates, IMO. I just think Davis is the more worthy candidate.

Youre obviously a Bronco fan. First off Bettis was in the probowl....A LOT. 1993, 1994, 1996, 1999,2001, 2004. Never an AllPro? You were never paying attention then. I dont have time to argue every little point, but Ill state the facts. Bettis had a much better career, with 30 more TDs (makes a large difference) and longevity on his side. He will be a first ballot guy.

Davis was surely one of the greats during his SHort career, Had he hung in there and played good-average football for a few more seasons after his dominating seasons, this would be an argument. Unfortunately the man played a handful of seasons which just isnt good enough to stack up to the candidates coming up (curtis martin, tiki barber etc). Davis's best shot is a veteren's committee decision 20-40 years from now when they see his Superbowl achievements. Other than that hes not even an afterthought.

 

[Sidewinder16]

Youre obviously a Bronco fan. First off Bettis was in the probowl....A LOT. 1993, 1994, 1996, 1999,2001, 2004. Never an AllPro? You were never paying attention then.

Pro Bowl and All-Pro selections are two different things. You're right, that Bettis was a Pro Bowler multiple times. As of yet, I haven't found any evidence that he was ever selected as an AP All-Pro.

 

[phthalatemagic]

I think Bettis was regarded as among the best in his position perhaps once or twice in his career. He hung around a long period of time and racked up the solid seasons necessary to have all time great numbers.

I'm a fan of a HOFer blowing an argument away, and I don't see it with Bettis. I think his case is a tough argument, and for that reason he shouldn't be in.

Same with TD though, he's got a big knock on him, I don't really care what could have been if his injuries hadn't shortened his career, I only care about what he did do. That wasn't enough to warrant HOF status IMO.

(edit, clarity)

 

[thesurfshop19]

The success of Mike Anderson is the real key in my mind. His two big seasons, 2000 and 2005, you could argue that the Broncos were an equally good rushing team as the 1996-1998 team.

I would not call 2005 a big season for Anderson. He barely broke the 1,000-yard mark. And his YPC was nothing special. Now, the combined numbers of Anderson and Bell were damn impressive, but those are numbes Davis was putting up by himself back in the late 90's.

No argument here.My point is that you could argue that the 2000 and 2005 teams were just as good at running the ball, overall, as the 1997 and 1998 teams, with above average but not great RBs. Not sure that I believe it, but you could make a case for it.

 

[David Yudkin]

Youre obviously a Bronco fan. First off Bettis was in the probowl....A LOT. 1993, 1994, 1996, 1999,2001, 2004. Never an AllPro? You were never paying attention then.

Pro Bowl and All-Pro selections are two different things. You're right, that Bettis was a Pro Bowler multiple times. As of yet, I haven't found any evidence that he was ever selected as an AP All-Pro.

Bettis was an All Pro in 93 and 96. Even with a much shorter career, Davis had more All Pro selections (96, 97, and 98).

 

[phthalatemagic]

Youre obviously a Bronco fan. First off Bettis was in the probowl....A LOT. 1993, 1994, 1996, 1999,2001, 2004. Never an AllPro? You were never paying attention then.

Pro Bowl and All-Pro selections are two different things. You're right, that Bettis was a Pro Bowler multiple times. As of yet, I haven't found any evidence that he was ever selected as an AP All-Pro.

First - I don't think making the pro bowl 6 times is ALOT for a HOFer. I bet it's actually on the low side.Second - I think Bettis made All-Pro in 1993 and 1996. I'm also unsure if that's low or high for a HOF running back, but I bet for recent times, it's low.

 

[David Yudkin]

Since it was brought up, IIRC, here are all players with multiple All Pro selections:

Jim Brown 8

Barry Sanders 7

Walter Payton 7

Eric Dickerson 5

OJ Simpson 5

Gayle Sayers 5

Emmitt Smith 4

Leroy Kelly 4

Lenny Moore 4

Frank Gifford 4

Ollie Matson 4

Terrell Davis 3

Priest Holmes 3

Earl Campbell 3

Marshall Faulk 3

Doak Walker 3

Dan Towler 3

Chuck Foreman 2

Ottis Anderson 2

Jerome Bettis 2

Curtis Martin 2

Thuman Thomas 2

LaDainian Tomlinson 2

Marcus Allen 2

John Brockington 2

Larry Brown 2

Jim Taylor 2

Paul Hornung 2

Hugh McElheny 2

Eddie Price 2

 

[phthalatemagic]

Since it was brought up, IIRC, here are all players with multiple All Pro selections:Jim Brown 8Barry Sanders 7Walter Payton 7Eric Dickerson 5OJ Simpson 5Gayle Sayers 5Emmitt Smith 4Leroy Kelly 4Lenny Moore 4Frank Gifford 4Ollie Matson 4Terrell Davis 3Priest Holmes 3Earl Campbell 3Marshall Faulk 3Doak Walker 3Dan Towler 3Chuck Foreman 2Ottis Anderson 2Jerome Bettis 2Curtis Martin 2LaDainian Tomlinson 2Marcus Allen 2John Brockington 2Larry Brown 2Jim Taylor 2Paul Hornung 2Hugh McElheny 2Eddie Price 2

Am I blind? Or do I not see Thurman Thomas on that list at all?I'm certain he made it twice or so..... am I crazy?edit - did Marion Motley pre-date this honor? I find it hard to believe he didn't make a single one..

 

[David Yudkin]

Am I blind? Or do I not see Thurman Thomas on that list at all?I'm certain he made it twice or so..... am I crazy?edit - did Marion Motley pre-date this honor? I find it hard to believe he didn't make a single one..

No, you're not. He should have been on the list. I since added him in. I'm not sure about Motley.

 

[Sidewinder16]

In theory, if Davis was the one that was special and a once in a lifetime talent, wouldn't one expect that the team totals would have suffered a massive hit once he left/retired? I could run the same numbers for other teams when their stud was out of the picture (don't have time right now), but I suspect that the Lions fell off without Sanders, the Cowboys fell off without Emmitt, the Bears dropped off without Payton, etc.

I don't think one has to, or should, assume that a team has to get measurably worse just because a (potential) HOFer leaves the team.I don't think the Lions would be a good comp because the team/coaches changed a good bit at the end of Sanders' career and just after it. So anyone after Sanders wasn't performing "in the same system". I think the same can be said for Emmitt, but if someone disagrees and wants to dig up the numbers I'd be happy to see 'em.

The Bears however kept pretty much "the same system" up to 5 years after Payton left (again, I'm mainly going by memory and the fact that Ditka was still coach for the 5 years after Payton left; I'm open to being corrected). Here are the rushing numbers for the Bears with Payton and 5 years without (* strike years noted).

75: 1653/11

76: 2363/20

77: 2811/18

78: 2526/19

79: 2486/17

80: 2440/22

81: 2171/13

82: 988/5*

83: 2727/14

84: 2974/22

85: 2761/27

86: 2700/21

87: 1954/13*

88: 2319/25

89: 2287/22

90: 2436/22

91: 1949/18

92: 1871/15

Here are Neal Anderson's numbers the three years just after Payton.

| Rushing | Receiving |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD || 1988 chi | 16 | 249 1106 4.4 12 | 39 371 9.5 0 || 1989 chi | 16 | 274 1275 4.7 11 | 50 434 8.7 4 || 1990 chi | 15 | 260 1078 4.1 10 | 42 484 11.5 3 |Not too shabby.So, just one other somewhat similar situation, but I believe it goes to show that you just can't write off the success of one player simply because others came after him and had success in the same system.

 

[Sidewinder16]

Terrell Davis [ 16 ] ** [50.00%]Jerome Bettis [ 16 ] ** [50.00%]Interesting. I had assumed there were more Davis detractors around here.Or maybe there's just an equal number of Bettis detractors.

 

[David Yudkin]

Terrell Davis 	 [ 16 ]	  ** [50.00%]Jerome Bettis 	 [ 16 ] 	 ** [50.00%]

Interesting. I had assumed there were more Davis detractors around here.Or maybe there's just an equal number of Bettis detractors.

The poll is missing two options . . . BOTH and NEITHER.

 

[Sidewinder16]

Terrell Davis 	 [ 16 ]	  ** [50.00%]Jerome Bettis 	 [ 16 ] 	 ** [50.00%]

Interesting. I had assumed there were more Davis detractors around here.Or maybe there's just an equal number of Bettis detractors.

The poll is missing two options . . . BOTH and NEITHER.

Agreed.I null voted.

 

[Godsbrother]

I just think Davis is the more worthy candidate.

Thanks for clearing that up. I would have never have guess it by your post.

 

[Gr00vus]

Terrell Davis 	 [ 16 ]	  ** [50.00%]Jerome Bettis 	 [ 16 ] 	 ** [50.00%]

Interesting. I had assumed there were more Davis detractors around here.Or maybe there's just an equal number of Bettis detractors.

The poll is missing two options . . . BOTH and NEITHER.

Agreed.I null voted.

Same here. Neither of these guys belong in the HOF.Here are the current modern era RBs in the HOF from profootballhof.com:

Modern Era: Halfbacks-Fullbacks (24)Marcus Allen (RB) 1982-1997Jim Brown (FB) 1957-1965Earl Campbell (RB) 1978-1985Larry Csonka (FB) 1968-1979Eric Dickerson (RB) 1983-1993Tony Dorsett (RB) 1977-1988Frank Gifford (HB-FL) 1952-1960, 1962-1964Franco Harris (RB) 1972-1984Paul Hornung (HB) 1957-1962, 1964-1966John Henry Johnson (FB) 1954-1966Leroy Kelly (RB) 1964-1973Ollie Matson (HB) 1952, 1954-1966 	Hugh McElhenny (HB) 1952-1964Lenny Moore (HB) 1956-1967Marion Motley (FB) 1946-1953, 1955Walter Payton (RB) 1975-1987Joe Perry (FB) 1948-1963John Riggins (RB) 1971-1979, 1981-1985Barry Sanders (RB) 1989-1998Gale Sayers (HB) 1965-1971O.J. Simpson (RB) 1969-1979Jim Taylor (FB) 1958-1967Charley Trippi (HB) 1947-1955Doak Walker (HB) 1950-1955

On that list there are 9 guys who played the bulk of their careers after 1970. Think about that. If you're saying Bettis or Davis are HOFers you're basically saying that they're one of the 10 best backs of the last 37 years. I can't get on board with that.

 

[phthalatemagic]

I think neither deserve it, however the question was which was more deserving. I voted TD. I'd however not vote TD in the HOF, but that wasn't the question.

David Yudkin - thanks for the clarification man I thought for sure Thomas made one or two.... he sure deserved it in the early 90s, those Bills teams were amazing.

 

[phthalatemagic]

According to this link, Marion Motley made All-Pro selections in 1948 and 1950. That's twice in his 8 year career.

 

[DrJ]

Terrell Davis 	 [ 16 ]	  ** [50.00%]Jerome Bettis 	 [ 16 ] 	 ** [50.00%]

Interesting. I had assumed there were more Davis detractors around here.Or maybe there's just an equal number of Bettis detractors.

The poll is missing two options . . . BOTH and NEITHER.

Agreed.I null voted.

Same here. Neither of these guys belong in the HOF.Here are the current modern era RBs in the HOF from profootballhof.com:

Modern Era: Halfbacks-Fullbacks (24)Marcus Allen (RB) 1982-1997Jim Brown (FB) 1957-1965Earl Campbell (RB) 1978-1985Larry Csonka (FB) 1968-1979Eric Dickerson (RB) 1983-1993Tony Dorsett (RB) 1977-1988Frank Gifford (HB-FL) 1952-1960, 1962-1964Franco Harris (RB) 1972-1984Paul Hornung (HB) 1957-1962, 1964-1966John Henry Johnson (FB) 1954-1966Leroy Kelly (RB) 1964-1973Ollie Matson (HB) 1952, 1954-1966 	Hugh McElhenny (HB) 1952-1964Lenny Moore (HB) 1956-1967Marion Motley (FB) 1946-1953, 1955Walter Payton (RB) 1975-1987Joe Perry (FB) 1948-1963John Riggins (RB) 1971-1979, 1981-1985Barry Sanders (RB) 1989-1998Gale Sayers (HB) 1965-1971O.J. Simpson (RB) 1969-1979Jim Taylor (FB) 1958-1967Charley Trippi (HB) 1947-1955Doak Walker (HB) 1950-1955

On that list there are 8 guys who played the bulk of their careers after 1970. Think about that. If you're saying Bettis or Davis are HOFers you're basically saying that they're one of the top 9 or 10 backs of the last 37 years. I can't get on board with that.

The reason there are so few after 1970 is because we haven't had enough time for many in the later decades to make it yet.By decade drafted it breaks down as follows:1950's: 9 HOF RB's drafted1960's: 5 HOF RB's drafted (L Kelly, C Taylor, G Sayers, L Csonka, OJ Simpson)1970's: 5 HOF RB's drafted (J Riggins, F Harris, W Payton, T Dorsett, E Campbell)1980's: 3 HOF RB's drafted (M Allen, E Dickerson, B Sanders)And Thurman Thomas will go from the 80's. So, you have 4-5 HOF RB's drafted every decade. They don't have to be the greatest of all time, they have to be the greatest amongst their peers. Is Terrell Davis among the top 4-5 RB's of the 90's? I say yes. He's as good among his peers as Csonka, Riggins, Harris, L Kelley etc were among theirs.

 

[David Yudkin]

Terrell Davis 	 [ 16 ]	  ** [50.00%]Jerome Bettis 	 [ 16 ] 	 ** [50.00%]

Interesting. I had assumed there were more Davis detractors around here.Or maybe there's just an equal number of Bettis detractors.

The poll is missing two options . . . BOTH and NEITHER.

Agreed.I null voted.

Same here. Neither of these guys belong in the HOF.Here are the current modern era RBs in the HOF from profootballhof.com:

Modern Era: Halfbacks-Fullbacks (24)Marcus Allen (RB) 1982-1997Jim Brown (FB) 1957-1965Earl Campbell (RB) 1978-1985Larry Csonka (FB) 1968-1979Eric Dickerson (RB) 1983-1993Tony Dorsett (RB) 1977-1988Frank Gifford (HB-FL) 1952-1960, 1962-1964Franco Harris (RB) 1972-1984Paul Hornung (HB) 1957-1962, 1964-1966John Henry Johnson (FB) 1954-1966Leroy Kelly (RB) 1964-1973Ollie Matson (HB) 1952, 1954-1966 	Hugh McElhenny (HB) 1952-1964Lenny Moore (HB) 1956-1967Marion Motley (FB) 1946-1953, 1955Walter Payton (RB) 1975-1987Joe Perry (FB) 1948-1963John Riggins (RB) 1971-1979, 1981-1985Barry Sanders (RB) 1989-1998Gale Sayers (HB) 1965-1971O.J. Simpson (RB) 1969-1979Jim Taylor (FB) 1958-1967Charley Trippi (HB) 1947-1955Doak Walker (HB) 1950-1955

On that list there are 8 guys who played the bulk of their careers after 1970. Think about that. If you're saying Bettis or Davis are HOFers you're basically saying that they're one of the top 9 or 10 backs of the last 37 years. I can't get on board with that.

The reason there are so few after 1970 is because we haven't had enough time for many in the later decades to make it yet.By decade drafted it breaks down as follows:1950's: 9 HOF RB's drafted1960's: 5 HOF RB's drafted (L Kelly, C Taylor, G Sayers, L Csonka, OJ Simpson)1970's: 5 HOF RB's drafted (J Riggins, F Harris, W Payton, T Dorsett, E Campbell)1980's: 3 HOF RB's drafted (M Allen, E Dickerson, B Sanders)And Thurman Thomas will go from the 80's. So, you have 4-5 HOF RB's drafted every decade. They don't have to be the greatest of all time, they have to be the greatest amongst their peers. Is Terrell Davis among the top 4-5 RB's of the 90's? I say yes. He's as good among his peers as Csonka, Riggins, Harris, L Kelley etc were among theirs.

The 80s will probably end up with Allen, Dickerson, Sanders, and Thomas inthe HOF. The only other two guys fraftd in the 80s that I see as even remotely worth a mention are Roger Craig and Herschel Walker.THe 90s has a lot more to offer including Emmitt Smith, Jerome Bettis, Marshall Faulk, Curtis Martin, and Edgerrin James. I can't see how those 5 don't make it in. Besides Terrell Davis, some of these other players will at least get mentioned: Ricky Watters, Eddie George, Warrick Dunn, Tiki Barber, Corey Dillon, Fred Taylor, Ahman Green, and Priest Holmes. Obsviously some of those players aren't done so it's hard to evaluate them.

 

[Gr00vus]

THe 90s has a lot more to offer including Emmitt Smith, Jerome Bettis, Marshall Faulk, Curtis Martin, and Edgerrin James. I can't see how those 5 don't make it in. Besides Terrell Davis, some of these other players will at least get mentioned: Ricky Watters, Eddie George, Warrick Dunn, Tiki Barber, Corey Dillon, Fred Taylor, Ahman Green, and Priest Holmes. Obsviously some of those players aren't done so it's hard to evaluate them.

I could see just 3 or 4 of those guys going - I'd figure James and Bettis would be on the bubble. Probably not even Bettis - though I don't think he's HOF material, nobody with as many yards as he has who is HOF eligible has failed to make it before. I can't put my finger on exactly why Bettis doesn't seem like HOF material as opposed to say Curtis Martin. Bettis was pretty dynamic when with the Rams early in his career. It just seemed like later on he was getting yards by default rather than any innate skill other than being, ahem, LARGE.I can't see any of those other guys making it, including Davis.

 

[David Yudkin]

Edge has had four seasons with 1,500 rushing yards and already has over 10,000 rushing yards and 13,000 yards from scrimmage.

As I said, I can't see Emmitt, Faulk, Bettis, Martin, or Edge not making it. All the other guys are debatable and IMO are not getting in as of today.

 

[Iron Mike Tomczak]

Warrick Dunn?

Come on now. 43 Rushing TDs in 10 seasons is 4.3 per season. Thats not HOF.

Averaging 943 yards a season over 10 years is decent. He'd have to really pick it up to get to HOF status.

Eddie George only played 9 seasons, and had success in 6 of the 9 seasons. His statistics are forgettable. No way he makes the hall of fame, no ring, no records, nothing. Hes been out of football since 2004, I think the ruling is in that George is not a considerable candidate.

Ricky Watters just didnt have good enough #s. 78 rushing Tds and 10643 yards over 10 seasons just isnt worthy. Yeah he averaged 1000 yards a year with 7 tds. Thats good, but not HOF. A few more seasons and maybe he gets in, I dont know, he may sneak in, but it would surprise me.

As for the Barber and Holmes I can agree they get consideration. Barber may suffer the same fate as Terrell Davis, the not long enough career problem, and he also had only 10000 total rushing yards. He benefits most from being #10 all time in total yards from scrimmage and excellent recieving #s. He didnt ever win a superbowl nor did he eclipse 70 TDs, which may hurt him.

Holmes may suffer from the "Great til he got replaced" fate, which is that if he never plays again I dont think he gets in. He is 14th all time in Rushing TDs, but he only played in 108 games. He needs to stack up a better career, reach 100 TDs and I think hes in.

Out of all the candidates mentioned I think Priest is the most worthy of HOF consideration.

EDIT: To back up Jerome Bettis, he had 3600 more yards and 20 TDs more than all of these guys. That is why hes HOF no doubt, hes in a league of his own in comparison. (13662 rush yards 91 rush TDs)

 

[Gr00vus]

Edge has had four seasons with 1,500 rushing yards and already has over 10,000 rushing yards and 13,000 yards from scrimmage.As I said, I can't see Emmitt, Faulk, Bettis, Martin, or Edge not making it. All the other guys are debatable and IMO are not getting in as of today.

I put Edge on the bubble only because he hasn't finished out his career yet. If he didn't play another down he'd be on the bubble for me. I realistically assume he'll be around another three/four years at least and will thus end up with a couple thousand more yards rushing, which would get him up to or inside the top 10, at which point he's probably a lock for HOF. It would have helped him a bit if he had won anything teamwise at the NFL level - which I don't see happening with him now in AZ.

 

[David Yudkin]

Warrick Dunn?Come on now. 43 Rushing TDs in 10 seasons is 4.3 per season. Thats not HOF.Averaging 943 yards a season over 10 years is decent. He'd have to really pick it up to get to HOF status.Eddie George only played 9 seasons, and had success in 6 of the 9 seasons. His statistics are forgettable. No way he makes the hall of fame, no ring, no records, nothing. Hes been out of football since 2004, I think the ruling is in that George is not a considerable candidate.Ricky Watters just didnt have good enough #s. 78 rushing Tds and 10643 yards over 10 seasons just isnt worthy. Yeah he averaged 1000 yards a year with 7 tds. Thats good, but not HOF. A few more seasons and maybe he gets in, I dont know, he may sneak in, but it would surprise me.As for the Barber and Holmes I can agree they get consideration. Barber may suffer the same fate as Terrell Davis, the not long enough career problem, and he also had only 10000 total rushing yards. He benefits most from being #10 all time in total yards from scrimmage and excellent recieving #s. He didnt ever win a superbowl nor did he eclipse 70 TDs, which may hurt him.Holmes may suffer from the "Great til he got replaced" fate, which is that if he never plays again I dont think he gets in. He is 14th all time in Rushing TDs, but he only played in 108 games. He needs to stack up a better career, reach 100 TDs and I think hes in.Out of all the candidates mentioned I think Priest is the most worthy of HOF consideration.

I didn't say that these guys all were great options, only that they merited at least an honorable mention. While Dunn has rarely been an uber studd, he does have over 13,000 yards from scrimmage. I doubt he plays for much longer, but with two more decent seasons he could sniff the Top 10 in yards from scrimmage.Of course, he'd have to pass Barber who currently is ranked 10th in that category. Barber's career numbers are very impressive but many people don't see him with much chance of getting in.

 

[Iron Mike Tomczak]

If edge keeps up his pace i think he will be a lock.

 

[x260bm]

I don’t think either one belongs in the Hall of Fame.

 

[anguskahn]

The Bears however kept pretty much "the same system" up to 5 years after Payton left (again, I'm mainly going by memory and the fact that Ditka was still coach for the 5 years after Payton left; I'm open to being corrected). Here are the rushing numbers for the Bears with Payton and 5 years without (* strike years noted).

83: 2727/14

84: 2974/22

85: 2761/27

86: 2700/21

87: 1954/13*

88: 2319/25

89: 2287/22

90: 2436/22

91: 1949/18

92: 1871/15

So, just one other somewhat similar situation, but I believe it goes to show that you just can't write off the success of one player simply because others came after him and had success in the same system.

I think that this absolutely supports the theory that if a player is a HOF and replaced by someone merely good that there will be a drop off in #s.

Ditka began coaching in 1983. Payton's last full time year was 1986. 1987-1992 are distinctly lower than 1983-1986

Neal Anderson was good. Payton was great. The #s support it. Davis was good. Mike Anderson was good. Olandis Gary was good. The Denver system and Oline was great. The #s support that too.

 

[BGP]

I wouldn't even call Bettis "very good'. The guy had double digit TDs only twice in his career. Only 5 times did he get above 1100 yards. He had very good years, 93, 96, and 97. But often times he found himself in some RBBC.

I'd say Bettis had a specific role on the team, and in that role he was irreplacable. But there are lots of RBs out there who are far more talented overall. As long as he was there, they always needed that speed back to take it to the outside.

Do I think this gets him in the HOF? I don't even believe in the concept of a hall of fame, so the question is moot.

 

[CalBear]

I don't even believe in the concept of a hall of fame, so the question is moot.

Not surprising, coming from a Browns fan.

 

[phthalatemagic]

I don't even believe in the concept of a hall of fame, so the question is moot.

Not surprising, coming from a Browns fan.

??There sure are some good Browns players in the HOF

 

[BassNBrew]

IMO, the success of subsequent Denver RBs hurts his cause, as they have produced decent replacements for Davis over the years.

I never like that argument. That would be like saying that the success of Steve Young and Jeff Garcia in San Francisco denigrated what Joe Montana did when he was there. Of course, Young and Garcia were not as successful overall as Montana was, but no Denver RB since Davis has come close to doing what he did there, either.

Gary, Droughns, Portis, Anderson, et al have done well. Yes, David overall did better, but the other guys still did well.For example, in Davis' 4 big years he averaged 124 yards from scrimmage and 1.0 TD per game over those 4 seasons. Portis averaged 130 yards from scrimmage and 1.1 TD per game in his two years in Denver--and they traded him away.Does this mean that Portis was better than Davis? Probably not. Does this mean Portis is a HOF running back on his own? Maybe. But if we went through the past 10 years of Denver RB production the fact of them atter is that several guys have done well or exceptionally well, and IMO that won't help Davis' candidacy any.

How did that bum Willie Parker make out this year???

 

[Tau837]

A few things on Bettis.1. As some have posted, he was All Pro twice, in 1993 and 1996.2. He made 6 Pro Bowls. Someone questioned his 2004 selection. From Wikipedia:

Bettis again found himself a back-up to start the 2004 season, this time to Duce Staley. But when an injury held Staley out of action mid-way through the year, Bettis stepped in and gained 100+ yards in each of his seven regular season starts, leading to a Pro-Bowl berth for the sixth time in his career.

Sometimes it's not just about the end of year stat line. I agree that Pro Bowls aren't a great measure, and Bettis may not have deserved 6... but even if he had 1 or 2 fewer he would have had as many or more than almost all other RBs other than the HOF nobrainers (Smith, Sanders, etc.).3. Bettis was considered a leader on his teams, including a Super Bowl winner. As for Davis, I'm not aware that he was ever considered a leader on the Broncos. Not with Elway around.4. IMO Bettis will get more credit than typical backs for compiling, because he did it as a big back with a bruising style not normally conducive to long, productive careers.5. While Davis's MVP and Super Bowl MVP awards are more impressive, Bettis also won some awards that will count towards his HOF resume. Bettis was offensive ROY in 1993; comeback POY in 1996; and Walter Payton Man of the Year in 2001. Bettis was also voted Steelers MVP 3 times.All of those things are icing on the cake to go with his rushing yards, TDs, and Super Bowl ring. Bettis will be in, and deservedly so.With two more healthy seasons, I think Davis would have had a shot... but he needed those two seasons and didn't get them.

 

[renesauz]

I think Bettis was regarded as among the best in his position perhaps once or twice in his career. He hung around a long period of time and racked up the solid seasons necessary to have all time great numbers.I'm a fan of a HOFer blowing an argument away, and I don't see it with Bettis. I think his case is a tough argument, and for that reason he shouldn't be in.Same with TD though, he's got a big knock on him, I don't really care what could have been if his injuries hadn't shortened his career, I only care about what he did do. That wasn't enough to warrant HOF status IMO.(edit, clarity)

I agree wholeheartedly. If their is a hot debate on the worthiness of a candidate, then they shouldn't be in. Neither Bettis nor Davis deserve to be in.