Fred Taylor - A Hall of Famer or not? (1 Viewer)

[David Yudkin]

Over the course of his career he has averaged 18 carries a game. Which fits right in with contemporaries like Barber(14), Bettis (18), Martin (20), Faulk (16), Dillon (17), Tomlinson (21), Edge (22), and Smith (19).

Using this logic, wouldn't it stand to reason that Taylor should have had peripheral stats similar to these other backs and similar accolades?

 

[Ripleys]

because fred has done very little in the post season, i doubt he makes it into the hall.

 

[Wadsworth]

Over the course of his career he has averaged 18 carries a game. Which fits right in with contemporaries like Barber(14), Bettis (18), Martin (20), Faulk (16), Dillon (17), Tomlinson (21), Edge (22), and Smith (19).

Using this logic, wouldn't it stand to reason that Taylor should have had peripheral stats similar to these other backs and similar accolades?

Doesn't he have similar career stats to these guys? Again, list the RBs that have reached 10,715 yards with fewer carries than Fred Taylor. And beyond that, take any RB active today and tell me which projects to reaching 10,715 yards with the same or fewer carries. Taylor has done more with less opportunity than any RB in the history of the NFL besides less than a handful of amazing RBs. As far as accolades, it depends on the accolades. How many of those guys have rushed for 9 straight 100 yard games? How many have 8 seasons of 4.6 a carry or better? How many had 17 TDs as a rookie? How many average a 10+ yard rush more often than once per 8 carries? How many are top 5 all time in 50+ yard rushes? Obviously Smith and LT are all time greats and Marshall Faulk was an extremely special player because of his rushing and receiving skills. But Taylor compares very well to everyone else on that list. The HoF is not reserved for the players that had the best season, it's a career honor. And Fred's career stats stack up just fine.

 

[Tau837]

Over the course of his career he has averaged 18 carries a game. Which fits right in with contemporaries like Barber(14), Bettis (18), Martin (20), Faulk (16), Dillon (17), Tomlinson (21), Edge (22), and Smith (19).

Using this logic, wouldn't it stand to reason that Taylor should have had peripheral stats similar to these other backs and similar accolades?

Doesn't he have similar career stats to these guys? Again, list the RBs that have reached 10,715 yards with fewer carries than Fred Taylor. And beyond that, take any RB active today and tell me which projects to reaching 10,715 yards with the same or fewer carries. Taylor has done more with less opportunity than any RB in the history of the NFL besides less than a handful of amazing RBs. As far as accolades, it depends on the accolades. How many of those guys have rushed for 9 straight 100 yard games? How many have 8 seasons of 4.6 a carry or better? How many had 17 TDs as a rookie? How many average a 10+ yard rush more often than once per 8 carries? How many are top 5 all time in 50+ yard rushes? Obviously Smith and LT are all time greats and Marshall Faulk was an extremely special player because of his rushing and receiving skills. But Taylor compares very well to everyone else on that list. The HoF is not reserved for the players that had the best season, it's a career honor. And Fred's career stats stack up just fine.

His career does not stack up just fine. I won't go into Smith, Tomlinson, or Faulk, because they are clearly superior. IMO Bettis and Martin will make the HOF, while Dillon, Barber, and Taylor will not. Because I think Barber and Dillon won't make it, a comparison to them is irrelevant for purposes of HOF worthiness. And Taylor does not compare favorably with Bettis and Martin IMO.1st team All NFLMartin - 2Bettis - 2Taylor - 0All Pro (multiple sources, first or second team, from pfr.com)Martin - 5Bettis - 3Taylor - 0Pro BowlsBettis - 6Martin - 5Taylor - 1 (this year)Career rushing yardsMartin - 14101 (#4 all time)Bettis - 13662 (#5 all time)Taylor - 10715 (#17 all time)Career yards from scrimmageMartin - 17430 (#7 all time)Bettis - 15111 (#13 all time)Taylor - 12978 (#36 all time)Career rushing TDsBettis - 91 (#10 all time)Martin - 90 (#12 all time)Taylor - 61 (#35 all time)Career rushing & receiving TDsMartin - 100 (#19 all time)Bettis - 94 (#22 all time)Taylor - 69 (#76 all time)Other awards/honors:Bettis - 1993 Offensive ROY; 1996 Comeback POY; 2001 NFL Man of the YearMartin - 1995 Offensive ROYTaylor - noneIf that is your definition of comparing very well, then I agree to disagree with you.

 

[David Yudkin]

Taylor has fared very well per game yardage wise (not so much scoring wise) when compared to other RBs with 10,000 yards from scrimmage. However, for him to get the career numbers some are suggesting his average very well may go down (as with most RBs in their 30s).

LT 126.3

Jim Brown 125.5

Barry Sanders 118.9

Edgerrin James 116.2

Marshall Faulk 108.9

Eric Dickerson 105.5

Curtis Martin 103.7

Ricky Watters 103.4

Fred Taylor 102.2

Tiki Barber 101.6

Jamal Lewis 101.1

OJ Simpson 99.1

Priest Holmes 98.5

Walter Payton 97.2

Emmitt Smith 95.5

Tony Dorsett 94.1

Shaun Alexander 91.9

Thurman Thomas 90.8

Eddie George 89.8

Earl Campbell 88.8

Ahman Green 87.8

Corey Dillon 87.7

Warrick Dunn 85.5

Franco Harris 83.3

Garrison Hearst 79.6

Marcus Allen 79.5

Roger Craig 79.4

Jerome Bettis 78.7

Terry Allen 78.6

Lenny Moore 78.4

Jim Taylor 78.4

John Riggins 76.8

Freeman McNeil 76.7

Charlie Garner 73.5

Ottis Anderson 73.2

James Brooks 71.5

Herschel Walker 70

Joe Perry 64.9

Earnest Byner 61

 

[Ghost Rider]

because fred has done very little in the post season, i doubt he makes it into the hall.

Three 100-yard performances in five games, not to mention what I am pretty sure is the longest TD run in post-season history is very little?

 

[Joe T]

Absolutely a HOFer.

 

[Anarchy99]

Absolutely a HOFer.

Because . . . WHY?And more importantly, of the RBs that played in his tenure, who would you EXCLUDE if Taylor is an ABSOLUTE.

 

[Joe T]

Absolutely a HOFer.

Because . . . WHY?And more importantly, of the RBs that played in his tenure, who would you EXCLUDE if Taylor is an ABSOLUTE.

Taylor = SpeedHe's a great back who has been on a bad team in a bad market. His skills have been very underrated.

 

[Anarchy99]

Absolutely a HOFer.

Because . . . WHY?And more importantly, of the RBs that played in his tenure, who would you EXCLUDE if Taylor is an ABSOLUTE.

Taylor = SpeedHe's a great back who has been on a bad team in a bad market. His skills have been very underrated.

Bad team? Since Taylor arrived on the scene, in the regular season the Jags have gone:11-514-27-96-106-105-119-712-48-811-5TOTAL: 89-71 (.556)

 

[redman]

Pro Bowls

Bettis - 6

Martin - 5

Taylor - 1 (this year)

In a world where Clinton Portis has only one Pro Bowl appearance after six seasons, that standard doesn't carry much water for me.

 

[ShadowMaster]

NOT EVEN CLOSE

 

[Wadsworth]

Over the course of his career he has averaged 18 carries a game. Which fits right in with contemporaries like Barber(14), Bettis (18), Martin (20), Faulk (16), Dillon (17), Tomlinson (21), Edge (22), and Smith (19).

Using this logic, wouldn't it stand to reason that Taylor should have had peripheral stats similar to these other backs and similar accolades?

Doesn't he have similar career stats to these guys? Again, list the RBs that have reached 10,715 yards with fewer carries than Fred Taylor. And beyond that, take any RB active today and tell me which projects to reaching 10,715 yards with the same or fewer carries. Taylor has done more with less opportunity than any RB in the history of the NFL besides less than a handful of amazing RBs. As far as accolades, it depends on the accolades. How many of those guys have rushed for 9 straight 100 yard games? How many have 8 seasons of 4.6 a carry or better? How many had 17 TDs as a rookie? How many average a 10+ yard rush more often than once per 8 carries? How many are top 5 all time in 50+ yard rushes?

Obviously Smith and LT are all time greats and Marshall Faulk was an extremely special player because of his rushing and receiving skills. But Taylor compares very well to everyone else on that list. The HoF is not reserved for the players that had the best season, it's a career honor. And Fred's career stats stack up just fine.

His career does not stack up just fine. I won't go into Smith, Tomlinson, or Faulk, because they are clearly superior. IMO Bettis and Martin will make the HOF, while Dillon, Barber, and Taylor will not. Because I think Barber and Dillon won't make it, a comparison to them is irrelevant for purposes of HOF worthiness. And Taylor does not compare favorably with Bettis and Martin IMO.Other awards/honors:

Bettis - 1993 Offensive ROY; 1996 Comeback POY; 2001 NFL Man of the Year

Martin - 1995 Offensive ROY

Taylor - none

If that is your definition of comparing very well, then I agree to disagree with you.

Since I said career stats I'll ignore the season stats you listed and since Fred is still playing I'll refer to the per game stats with which he obviously compares very well against Bettis and Martin. I would like to comment on the ROY award because I find it a good example of why rating players based on such "honors" is not always valid. All three RBs had between 1,650 and 1,750 yards from scimage their rookie seasons. Bettis had 7 TDs, Martin had 15 and Taylor had 17. Martin had 386 carries, Bettis had 294, and Taylor had 264. So while Martin had about 100 more yards, he had fewer TDs and over 120 more carries. Also, Taylor only played 15 games and only started 12. All three certainly had very good rookie seasons, but it would be pretty easy to make a case that Fred's was the best yet he's the only one without the ROY, as Randy Moss was busy running away with the honor Fred's rookie season. Missed time, limited carries, and just missing individual awards despite excellent performance; I guess his rookie year was indeed a hint of things to come.

 

[Tau837]

Over the course of his career he has averaged 18 carries a game. Which fits right in with contemporaries like Barber(14), Bettis (18), Martin (20), Faulk (16), Dillon (17), Tomlinson (21), Edge (22), and Smith (19).

Using this logic, wouldn't it stand to reason that Taylor should have had peripheral stats similar to these other backs and similar accolades?

Doesn't he have similar career stats to these guys? Again, list the RBs that have reached 10,715 yards with fewer carries than Fred Taylor. And beyond that, take any RB active today and tell me which projects to reaching 10,715 yards with the same or fewer carries. Taylor has done more with less opportunity than any RB in the history of the NFL besides less than a handful of amazing RBs. As far as accolades, it depends on the accolades. How many of those guys have rushed for 9 straight 100 yard games? How many have 8 seasons of 4.6 a carry or better? How many had 17 TDs as a rookie? How many average a 10+ yard rush more often than once per 8 carries? How many are top 5 all time in 50+ yard rushes?

Obviously Smith and LT are all time greats and Marshall Faulk was an extremely special player because of his rushing and receiving skills. But Taylor compares very well to everyone else on that list. The HoF is not reserved for the players that had the best season, it's a career honor. And Fred's career stats stack up just fine.

His career does not stack up just fine. I won't go into Smith, Tomlinson, or Faulk, because they are clearly superior. IMO Bettis and Martin will make the HOF, while Dillon, Barber, and Taylor will not. Because I think Barber and Dillon won't make it, a comparison to them is irrelevant for purposes of HOF worthiness. And Taylor does not compare favorably with Bettis and Martin IMO.Other awards/honors:

Bettis - 1993 Offensive ROY; 1996 Comeback POY; 2001 NFL Man of the Year

Martin - 1995 Offensive ROY

Taylor - none

If that is your definition of comparing very well, then I agree to disagree with you.

Since I said career stats I'll ignore the season stats you listed and since Fred is still playing I'll refer to the per game stats with which he obviously compares very well against Bettis and Martin. I would like to comment on the ROY award because I find it a good example of why rating players based on such "honors" is not always valid. All three RBs had between 1,650 and 1,750 yards from scimage their rookie seasons. Bettis had 7 TDs, Martin had 15 and Taylor had 17. Martin had 386 carries, Bettis had 294, and Taylor had 264. So while Martin had about 100 more yards, he had fewer TDs and over 120 more carries. Also, Taylor only played 15 games and only started 12. All three certainly had very good rookie seasons, but it would be pretty easy to make a case that Fred's was the best yet he's the only one without the ROY, as Randy Moss was busy running away with the honor Fred's rookie season. Missed time, limited carries, and just missing individual awards despite excellent performance; I guess his rookie year was indeed a hint of things to come.

OK, so you ignored career stats and made an argument about the ROY awards. But you also understandably ignored All NFL/All Pro and Pro Bowl selections... yes, sure, Pro Bowl selections certainly have issues, but All NFL and All Pro selections are much more discriminating.Like I said - agree to disagree with you.

 

[Wadsworth]

Over the course of his career he has averaged 18 carries a game. Which fits right in with contemporaries like Barber(14), Bettis (18), Martin (20), Faulk (16), Dillon (17), Tomlinson (21), Edge (22), and Smith (19).

Using this logic, wouldn't it stand to reason that Taylor should have had peripheral stats similar to these other backs and similar accolades?

Doesn't he have similar career stats to these guys? Again, list the RBs that have reached 10,715 yards with fewer carries than Fred Taylor. And beyond that, take any RB active today and tell me which projects to reaching 10,715 yards with the same or fewer carries. Taylor has done more with less opportunity than any RB in the history of the NFL besides less than a handful of amazing RBs. As far as accolades, it depends on the accolades. How many of those guys have rushed for 9 straight 100 yard games? How many have 8 seasons of 4.6 a carry or better? How many had 17 TDs as a rookie? How many average a 10+ yard rush more often than once per 8 carries? How many are top 5 all time in 50+ yard rushes?

Obviously Smith and LT are all time greats and Marshall Faulk was an extremely special player because of his rushing and receiving skills. But Taylor compares very well to everyone else on that list. The HoF is not reserved for the players that had the best season, it's a career honor. And Fred's career stats stack up just fine.

His career does not stack up just fine. I won't go into Smith, Tomlinson, or Faulk, because they are clearly superior. IMO Bettis and Martin will make the HOF, while Dillon, Barber, and Taylor will not. Because I think Barber and Dillon won't make it, a comparison to them is irrelevant for purposes of HOF worthiness. And Taylor does not compare favorably with Bettis and Martin IMO.Other awards/honors:

Bettis - 1993 Offensive ROY; 1996 Comeback POY; 2001 NFL Man of the Year

Martin - 1995 Offensive ROY

Taylor - none

If that is your definition of comparing very well, then I agree to disagree with you.

Since I said career stats I'll ignore the season stats you listed and since Fred is still playing I'll refer to the per game stats with which he obviously compares very well against Bettis and Martin. I would like to comment on the ROY award because I find it a good example of why rating players based on such "honors" is not always valid. All three RBs had between 1,650 and 1,750 yards from scimage their rookie seasons. Bettis had 7 TDs, Martin had 15 and Taylor had 17. Martin had 386 carries, Bettis had 294, and Taylor had 264. So while Martin had about 100 more yards, he had fewer TDs and over 120 more carries. Also, Taylor only played 15 games and only started 12. All three certainly had very good rookie seasons, but it would be pretty easy to make a case that Fred's was the best yet he's the only one without the ROY, as Randy Moss was busy running away with the honor Fred's rookie season. Missed time, limited carries, and just missing individual awards despite excellent performance; I guess his rookie year was indeed a hint of things to come.

OK, so you ignored career stats and made an argument about the ROY awards. But you also understandably ignored All NFL/All Pro and Pro Bowl selections... yes, sure, Pro Bowl selections certainly have issues, but All NFL and All Pro selections are much more discriminating.Like I said - agree to disagree with you.

I said career stats, All Pro and Pro Bowls are season awards, not career stats. Obviously Fred Taylor does not compare well to 100's of RBs in the history of the NFL if you base it soley on All Pro selections and Pro Bowls. And I didn't ignore career stats, I just don't think comparing totals of a guy that is still playing and has 127 career games with two guys that are retired and have 169 and 192 career games is a legit comparison. Per game or per carry comparison would paint a more accurate picture and as I said, career wise Fred compares well.

 

[craxie]

if Warrick Freaking Dunn can make 3 pro-bowls, what's Fred Taylor's excuse?

 

[redman]

if Warrick Freaking Dunn can make 3 pro-bowls, what's Fred Taylor's excuse?

He's not building enough houses for unwed mothers?