Fred Taylor (1 Viewer)

[SuperJohn96]

Dude's missed a lot of games early in his career, but over the course of 121 games over 9 1/2 seasons, he's put up some pretty good numbers

Single game averages:

20 Touches per game

101 Rush/Rec Yards per game

0.5 TDs per game

It's no easy feat to get his numbers, especially when people call you Fragile Fred.

 

[Wadsworth]

Dude's missed a lot of games early in his career, but over the course of 121 games over 9 1/2 seasons, he's put up some pretty good numbersSingle game averages:20 Touches per game101 Rush/Rec Yards per game0.5 TDs per gameIt's no easy feat to get his numbers, especially when people call you Fragile Fred.

Don't forget a 4.6 per carry career average and some 2,200 receiving yards. He's been over 1,000 yards every season that he's played over 11 games and been over 1,500 combined yards 5 times. His best season was likely 2000 where inspite of only playing in 13 games he had over 1,600 combined yards and 14 TDs. Zero Pro Bowls. Yea, I'd say it was a pretty quiet 10,000 for Fred. Welcome to small market football.

 

[nxmehta]

For such a long career, those a great numbers. Does anyone know how these compare to other great RBs of the past? Does Fred even have a remote shot at the HoF? Zero Pro Bowls has gotta hurt...

 

[Wadsworth]

For such a long career, those a great numbers. Does anyone know how these compare to other great RBs of the past? Does Fred even have a remote shot at the HoF? Zero Pro Bowls has gotta hurt...

I can't imagine a player with zero Pro Bowls getting into the HoF.

 

[Raider Nation]

Seems like he's gotten 40 yards per game over 2,500 games.

 

[David Yudkin]

For such a long career, those a great numbers. Does anyone know how these compare to other great RBs of the past? Does Fred even have a remote shot at the HoF? Zero Pro Bowls has gotta hurt...

All time rankings . . .Rushes: 23t Rushing yards: 21 Rushing TDs: 38 Yards from scrimmage: 39 IMO, there are so many RBs from the past 15 years or so that I have a hard time seeing Taylor getting much HOF consideration (unless he were to keep compiling ho-hum numbers for a few more seasons to climb up the all time leaderboard lists.

 

[SuperJohn96]

For such a long career, those a great numbers. Does anyone know how these compare to other great RBs of the past? Does Fred even have a remote shot at the HoF? Zero Pro Bowls has gotta hurt...

All time rankings . . .Rushes: 23t Rushing yards: 21 Rushing TDs: 38 Yards from scrimmage: 39 IMO, there are so many RBs from the past 15 years or so that I have a hard time seeing Taylor getting much HOF consideration (unless he were to keep compiling ho-hum numbers for a few more seasons to climb up the all time leaderboard lists.

Yeah, I was gonna post his numbers, but when I started comparing them, they seemed kind of just good, not HOF worthy so I didn't even want to bring them up.

 

[Wadsworth]

Fred continues to impress rasing his per carry averge to 4.9 on the season. I think it fair to imagine he could finish the season with 10,700 career yards, good for 16th on the all time list(at least until LT2 catches him). I think it's also fair to project that he could have another 2,100 yards in his career considering his situation and performance. That would give him 12,800 career yards, good for 7th place all time currenty, likely 8th place as LT2 should pass him at some point. I think it's also fair to project that Fred could miss the Pro Bowl in this and all his remaining years.

At that point do the HoF voters dismiss Fred Taylor as a compiler in spite of a career per carry averge of 4.6? Could he ever be a legit HoF candiadte with 0 Pro Bowls?

 

[moleculo]

Fred continues to impress rasing his per carry averge to 4.9 on the season. I think it fair to imagine he could finish the season with 10,700 career yards, good for 16th on the all time list(at least until LT2 catches him). I think it's also fair to project that he could have another 2,100 yards in his career considering his situation and performance. That would give him 12,800 career yards, good for 7th place all time currenty, likely 8th place as LT2 should pass him at some point. I think it's also fair to project that Fred could miss the Pro Bowl in this and all his remaining years. At that point do the HoF voters dismiss Fred Taylor as a compiler in spite of a career per carry averge of 4.6? Could he ever be a legit HoF candiadte with 0 Pro Bowls?

I think that they determine the initial HOF ballot by pro-bowl selections. with 0 pro-bowl appearances, he's gonna have a tough time getting in as a write-in candidate.

 

[Jason Wood]

Fred continues to impress rasing his per carry averge to 4.9 on the season. I think it fair to imagine he could finish the season with 10,700 career yards, good for 16th on the all time list(at least until LT2 catches him). I think it's also fair to project that he could have another 2,100 yards in his career considering his situation and performance. That would give him 12,800 career yards, good for 7th place all time currenty, likely 8th place as LT2 should pass him at some point. I think it's also fair to project that Fred could miss the Pro Bowl in this and all his remaining years. At that point do the HoF voters dismiss Fred Taylor as a compiler in spite of a career per carry averge of 4.6? Could he ever be a legit HoF candiadte with 0 Pro Bowls?

As we've discussed many times in the past about HOF worthiness...it's really as much about his contemporaries and the scarcity of inductees as anything else. By themselves, Taylor's numbers are impressive but against his contemporaries, it would be difficult if not impossible to see him inducted unless the committee were to reverse decades of history and start putting a lot more people in the hall from each era.

 

[GroveDiesel]

To me, a HOFer has to be considered one of the best players at his position for most of his career. And while he has been consistently very good, he's never been elite. I think that offensive numbers in general have been going up for a while now. So just compiling numbers isn't good enough IMO.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

To me, a HOFer has to be considered one of the best players at his position for most of his career. And while he has been consistently very good, he's never been elite. I think that offensive numbers in general have been going up for a while now. So just compiling numbers isn't good enough IMO.

This is basically what I came in here to post. Taylor is a very good player, fairly consistent and consistently underrated. But no way is he a Hall of Famer. There's no statistical plateau of X yards that gets you in.

 

[softball]

Fred continues to impress rasing his per carry averge to 4.9 on the season. I think it fair to imagine he could finish the season with 10,700 career yards, good for 16th on the all time list(at least until LT2 catches him). I think it's also fair to project that he could have another 2,100 yards in his career considering his situation and performance. That would give him 12,800 career yards, good for 7th place all time currenty, likely 8th place as LT2 should pass him at some point. I think it's also fair to project that Fred could miss the Pro Bowl in this and all his remaining years. At that point do the HoF voters dismiss Fred Taylor as a compiler in spite of a career per carry averge of 4.6? Could he ever be a legit HoF candiadte with 0 Pro Bowls?

As we've discussed many times in the past about HOF worthiness...it's really as much about his contemporaries and the scarcity of inductees as anything else. By themselves, Taylor's numbers are impressive but against his contemporaries, it would be difficult if not impossible to see him inducted unless the committee were to reverse decades of history and start putting a lot more people in the hall from each era.

If I can compare FT to a Baseball player that made the HOF, but had no business doing so:Eddie MurryMurry was a good player for a longer time than most who played his position, but he never was dominant, never took over the sport, never raised the level of play around him.He was a "Compilor" of statistics that looked better than others that played his position. Not HOF material.And, I'd add if Otis Anderson is not a HOF'er then Freddie isn't even a discussion.JMO

 

[TommyGilmore]

Remember when he was Fragile Freddy?

 

[Wadsworth]

Fred continues to impress rasing his per carry averge to 4.9 on the season. I think it fair to imagine he could finish the season with 10,700 career yards, good for 16th on the all time list(at least until LT2 catches him). I think it's also fair to project that he could have another 2,100 yards in his career considering his situation and performance. That would give him 12,800 career yards, good for 7th place all time currenty, likely 8th place as LT2 should pass him at some point. I think it's also fair to project that Fred could miss the Pro Bowl in this and all his remaining years. At that point do the HoF voters dismiss Fred Taylor as a compiler in spite of a career per carry averge of 4.6? Could he ever be a legit HoF candiadte with 0 Pro Bowls?

As we've discussed many times in the past about HOF worthiness...it's really as much about his contemporaries and the scarcity of inductees as anything else. By themselves, Taylor's numbers are impressive but against his contemporaries, it would be difficult if not impossible to see him inducted unless the committee were to reverse decades of history and start putting a lot more people in the hall from each era.

Comtemporaries like Curtis Martin? Who has about 3,500 more yards currently on half again as many carries as Taylor (Martin=3,518, Taylor 2,253). And Martin does have 90 TDs compared to Fred's 59, but when you factor in the carries Fred scores about every 38 carries and Martin averaged 1 per 39 attempts. And isn't Martin a sure fire HoF'ers? I'm not ragging on Martin, just trying to understand when Taylor's lack of opportunity would figure into the equation. How many of his comtemporaries average 4.6+ per carry for their careers?

 

[TommyGilmore]

Fred continues to impress rasing his per carry averge to 4.9 on the season. I think it fair to imagine he could finish the season with 10,700 career yards, good for 16th on the all time list(at least until LT2 catches him). I think it's also fair to project that he could have another 2,100 yards in his career considering his situation and performance. That would give him 12,800 career yards, good for 7th place all time currenty, likely 8th place as LT2 should pass him at some point. I think it's also fair to project that Fred could miss the Pro Bowl in this and all his remaining years. At that point do the HoF voters dismiss Fred Taylor as a compiler in spite of a career per carry averge of 4.6? Could he ever be a legit HoF candiadte with 0 Pro Bowls?

As we've discussed many times in the past about HOF worthiness...it's really as much about his contemporaries and the scarcity of inductees as anything else. By themselves, Taylor's numbers are impressive but against his contemporaries, it would be difficult if not impossible to see him inducted unless the committee were to reverse decades of history and start putting a lot more people in the hall from each era.

Comtemporaries like Curtis Martin? Who has about 3,500 more yards currently on half again as many carries as Taylor (Martin=3,518, Taylor 2,253). And Martin does have 90 TDs compared to Fred's 59, but when you factor in the carries Fred scores about every 38 carries and Martin averaged 1 per 39 attempts. And isn't Martin a sure fire HoF'ers? I'm not ragging on Martin, just trying to understand when Taylor's lack of opportunity would figure into the equation. How many of his comtemporaries average 4.6+ per carry for their careers?

Martin and Bettis are right at the cutoff for HOF. Taylor needs 2500 yards and 30 TDs to catch them and realistically he only has 2 seasons left to do it.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

There are obviously metrics you can use to make Taylor look better than guys who are likely HOFers. But even vs. someone like Curtis Martin, who will not be a storied RB in the grand scheme, at least he led the league in rushing and played in the Super Bowl. Pro Bowl voting isn't a fair barometer. But neither is "lack of opportunity." What does Taylor have besides very good, mostly consistent numbers? Nothing that puts him over the top and into Hall contention, if you ask me.

 

[Wadsworth]

Seems like he's gotten 40 yards per game over 2,500 games.

Actually it's more like 86 yards per game. Martin averged about 85 per to hold that comparison.

 

[Sweet Love]

Fred continues to impress rasing his per carry averge to 4.9 on the season. I think it fair to imagine he could finish the season with 10,700 career yards, good for 16th on the all time list(at least until LT2 catches him). I think it's also fair to project that he could have another 2,100 yards in his career considering his situation and performance. That would give him 12,800 career yards, good for 7th place all time currenty, likely 8th place as LT2 should pass him at some point. I think it's also fair to project that Fred could miss the Pro Bowl in this and all his remaining years. At that point do the HoF voters dismiss Fred Taylor as a compiler in spite of a career per carry averge of 4.6? Could he ever be a legit HoF candiadte with 0 Pro Bowls?

As we've discussed many times in the past about HOF worthiness...it's really as much about his contemporaries and the scarcity of inductees as anything else. By themselves, Taylor's numbers are impressive but against his contemporaries, it would be difficult if not impossible to see him inducted unless the committee were to reverse decades of history and start putting a lot more people in the hall from each era.

Comtemporaries like Curtis Martin? Who has about 3,500 more yards currently on half again as many carries as Taylor (Martin=3,518, Taylor 2,253). And Martin does have 90 TDs compared to Fred's 59, but when you factor in the carries Fred scores about every 38 carries and Martin averaged 1 per 39 attempts. And isn't Martin a sure fire HoF'ers? I'm not ragging on Martin, just trying to understand when Taylor's lack of opportunity would figure into the equation. How many of his comtemporaries average 4.6+ per carry for their careers?

Isn't he at least partially responsible for his lack of opportunities? To continue the Martin comparison, Fred was injured a lot earlier in his career. More so, that past continued to haunt him as guys like James Stewart, Greg Jones and MJD continued to take a significant amount of carries away from him even when he was healthy. I know this may be partially coaching philosophy, but guys like LT and Martin kept very good backups on the bench (Turner and Jordan), because their level of play made it impossible for their coaches to take them out. I am not saying Taylor is not impressive, but he never consistently ran at a level where his play forced his coach's hand to give him more playing time.

 

[moleculo]

Here is a post I made earlier this year when we were discussing the greatest RB's of all time:

all right - I just did an interesting historical comparison. I looked at the top 50 career rushing leaders, from pro-football-reference.com. For each player, I awarded 1 point for a 10th place finish, 2 for a 9th, 3 for an 8th, etc. Some of the data is incomplete - rankings only go back to 1960. All I could find before then was actual league leaders. For Jim Brown, it didn't matter because he led the league for every year he played before 1960, but I suspect that Leroy Kelly and Joe Perry are getting short changed here.

I like this ranking methodology because it can compare across eras - dominant is dominant: a top 5 in 2006 is just as impressive as a top 5 in 1961. Also - this doesn't account for number of games per season, etc. However, I do think that many players are being left of the list - anyone who didn't have enough career yards to crack the present top 50 was not evaluated.

So - here's the top 20:

1 Jim Brown 87

1 Barry Sanders 87

3 Walter Payton 71

4 emmitt smith 65

5 Eric Dickerson 60

6 Jim Taylor 53

6 OJ Simpson 53

8 Tony Dorsett 47

9 Curtis Martin 44

10 gale sayers 43

10 Thurman Thomas 43

12 Earl Campbell 40

12 Franco Harris 40

14 Leroy Kelly 36

15 Edgerrin James 33

16 Terrell Davis 30

17 Eddie George 29

17 Jerome Bettis 29

19 LaDanian Tomlinson 28

20 Larry Csonka 27

These rankings could also be averaged over a players career - basically, come up with the average "points" the player put up. This would reward the short, brilliant career type players. Here's career averages:

1 Jim Brown 9.7

2 Barry Sanders 8.7

3 gale sayers 8.6

4 Walter Payton 6.5

5 Terrell Davis 6.0

6 Eric Dickerson 6.0

7 Earl Campbell 5.7

8 Jim Taylor 5.3

9 OJ Simpson 5.3

10 Edgerrin James 4.7

11 LaDanian Tomlinson 4.7

12 emmitt smith 4.3

13 Curt Warner 4.2

14 Priest Holmes 4.0

15 Curtis Martin 4.0

16 Tony Dorsett 3.9

17 Shaun Alexander 3.9

18 Leroy Kelly 3.6

19 Thurman Thomas 3.6

20 Franco Harris 3.3

note: average defined by total points divided by # of seasons where the player played in 8 games or more. 8 games was selected as the denominator to screen out strike shortened seasons, and to not count injury shortened seasons.

for comparison sake, FTaylor has 16 points in this system, or 1.78 in a per season basis. That leaves FTaylor far short of even those RB's considered marginal HOF caliber players. He's been a good player but never cracked top 5 RB. He's been pretty good in the playoffs too, but only 5 games isn't enough to help his cause.

 

[dgreen]

I'm intrigued by this Taylor/Martin comparison. I still favor Martin, but before looking at the stats closer, I would have HEAVILY favored Martin and given Taylor no shot.

Rushing yard per game

Martin: 83.9

Taylor: 83.7

Even

Yards from scrimmage per game

Martin: 103.8

Taylor: 101.8

Slight edge to Martin

TDs per game

Martin: 0.60

Taylor: 0.54

Advantage Martin

Touches per TD

Martin: 40.0

Taylor: 37.7

Advantage Taylor

Unfortunately, Taylor doesn't have a big playoff resume. However, he's done well in his limited opportunity. Martin's playoff performances are nice.

Martin's ROY honors and five PBs are a big advantage over Taylor's zero PBs. Plus, I believe Martin and Barry Sanders are the only players with 10 straight 1000-yard seasons.

Taylor's YPC is pretty impressive. He averaged 3.9 YPC in 2001 in only two games and 4.1 YPC in 2005. But, in every other year, he's had at least a 4.6 YPC.

 

[Wadsworth]

Just for the sake of clarification, I in no way consider Taylor a HoF'er currently and agree that he'll need at least 2 more good seasons to even be considered. My problem is that many seem to consider Taylor a complier. Meaning someone who isn't very good but ends up with big career stats simply because he hung around a long time. Even if Fred plays the rest of this season and every game the next 2 seasons averging 500 carries a season over the next 2 he'll still end up with fewer games and rushing attempts than Bettis or Martin. So yea, injuries and limited use by coaches might have hurt his HoF chances, but don't mistke Fred for someone that is average but got a lot of chances. In all likelihood it will end up quite the opposite.

 

[Wadsworth]

I'm intrigued by this Taylor/Martin comparison. I still favor Martin, but before looking at the stats closer, I would have HEAVILY favored Martin and given Taylor no shot.

Rushing yard per game

Martin: 83.9

Taylor: 83.7

Even

Yards from scrimmage per game

Martin: 103.8

Taylor: 101.8

Slight edge to Martin

TDs per game

Martin: 0.60

Taylor: 0.54

Advantage Martin

Touches per TD

Martin: 40.0

Taylor: 37.7

Advantage Taylor

Unfortunately, Taylor doesn't have a big playoff resume. However, he's done well in his limited opportunity. Martin's playoff performances are nice.

Martin's ROY honors and five PBs are a big advantage over Taylor's zero PBs. Plus, I believe Martin and Barry Sanders are the only players with 10 straight 1000-yard seasons.

Taylor's YPC is pretty impressive. He averaged 3.9 YPC in 2001 in only two games and 4.1 YPC in 2005. But, in every other year, he's had at least a 4.6 YPC.

My numers are slightly different but I'm guessing that's because I used starts instead of games. Fred has has played in 4 games he didn't start, Martin just 2.

 

[Lash]

you don't "compile" at 4.6 a clip

please quit referring to him as a compiler

he is an explosive, yet frequently injured, back who would be a HOF shoo-in if healthy his entire career

unfortunately his was not and so HOF is much in doubt, if not unattainable

(although a nice playoff run in 2007 mixed in with him being the hero in knocking off NE on their way to a SB appearance would make freddy open for HOF business )

 

[GroveDiesel]

I don't care how "explosive" a guy is. Tell me, in how many years can you say that Fred Taylor was definitely among the top 3 RBs that season? This isn't the Hall of the Very Good. There hasn't been a single year that you could argue that Fred Taylor was the best RB in the NFL that year.

All of this Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis talk is ridiculous too. Neither one of them belong in the HOF either. If there was a Hall of Very Good For a Long Time they'd both be shoe ins. But neither guy was an elite player.

 

[Wadsworth]

I don't care how "explosive" a guy is. Tell me, in how many years can you say that Fred Taylor was definitely among the top 3 RBs that season? This isn't the Hall of the Very Good. There hasn't been a single year that you could argue that Fred Taylor was the best RB in the NFL that year.

All of this Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis talk is ridiculous too. Neither one of them belong in the HOF either. If there was a Hall of Very Good For a Long Time they'd both be shoe ins. But neither guy was an elite player.

In 2000 Fred Taylor had over 1,600 combined yards and 14 TDs in 13 games including 9 straight 100+ yard games. In 2003 he had 1,942 combined yards. Maybe he wasn't the best RB those years but he was pretty close. Obviously B. Sanders and E. Smith are HoF'ers. Other than LT2 who are the HoF RBs since Sanders/Smith?

 

[Bills Fan]

Not to highjack, but Jacksonville actually chose taylor with the 1st rounder they received from the Bills for Rob freakin' Johnson...would have been a nice replacement for Thurman...

 

[moleculo]

I don't care how "explosive" a guy is. Tell me, in how many years can you say that Fred Taylor was definitely among the top 3 RBs that season? This isn't the Hall of the Very Good. There hasn't been a single year that you could argue that Fred Taylor was the best RB in the NFL that year.

All of this Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis talk is ridiculous too. Neither one of them belong in the HOF either. If there was a Hall of Very Good For a Long Time they'd both be shoe ins. But neither guy was an elite player.

In 2000 Fred Taylor had over 1,600 combined yards and 14 TDs in 13 games including 9 straight 100+ yard games. In 2003 he had 1,942 combined yards. Maybe he wasn't the best RB those years but he was pretty close. Obviously B. Sanders and E. Smith are HoF'ers. Other than LT2 who are the HoF RBs since Sanders/Smith?

the following have as good (or better ) claim as fred taylor:edgerrin james

jamal lewis

clinton portis

ahman green

shaun alexander

tiki barber

Marshal faulk

corey dillon

deuce mcallister

priest holmes

rudi johnson

larry johnson

 

[Wadsworth]

I'm intrigued by this Taylor/Martin comparison. I still favor Martin, but before looking at the stats closer, I would have HEAVILY favored Martin and given Taylor no shot.

Rushing yard per game

Martin: 83.9

Taylor: 83.7

Even

Yards from scrimmage per game

Martin: 103.8

Taylor: 101.8

Slight edge to Martin

TDs per game

Martin: 0.60

Taylor: 0.54

Advantage Martin

Touches per TD

Martin: 40.0

Taylor: 37.7

Advantage Taylor

Unfortunately, Taylor doesn't have a big playoff resume. However, he's done well in his limited opportunity. Martin's playoff performances are nice.

Martin's ROY honors and five PBs are a big advantage over Taylor's zero PBs. Plus, I believe Martin and Barry Sanders are the only players with 10 straight 1000-yard seasons.

Taylor's YPC is pretty impressive. He averaged 3.9 YPC in 2001 in only two games and 4.1 YPC in 2005. But, in every other year, he's had at least a 4.6 YPC.

I found the ROY comment interesting and it's a nice parallel to the debate in general. Martin won ROY in 1995 starting 15 games, with 1,487 rushing yards on 368 attempts. He had 14 rushing TDs, and 1 receiving TD with 261 receiving yards. Taylors' rookie season he had 1,223 yards on 264 attempts with 12 starts. He also had 14 rushing TDs and added 3 receiving TDs with 421 receiving yards. So Taylor had more TDs and around 200 fewer yards on more than 100 fewer rushes.

Other than the TDs, that's pretty much how their entire careers progressed.

 

[The Man Who Met Andy Griffith]

Obviously B. Sanders and E. Smith are HoF'ers. Other than LT2 who are the HoF RBs since Sanders/Smith?

Marshall Faulk.If you were choosing a young RB and could select anybody post-Sanders/Smith, and injuries were deemed unpredictable, I think Taylor would go pretty high. After LT, after Faulk, after C Mart, after Westbrook, probably after LJ, but right in the hunt in the next group.But that's not HOF territory, and besides you don't ignore injury when evaluating for the HOF.

 

[dgreen]

the following have as good (or better ) claim as fred taylor:

Definitely agree with:

edgerrin jamesshaun alexandertiki barberMarshal faulkpriest holmescorey dillon

Still have some work to do, but are on their way:

clinton portis larry johnson

Disagree with:

ahman greenrudi johnsondeuce mcallister

On the fence about:

jamal lewis

 

[Wadsworth]

Fred to the Pro Bowl Video highlights

 

[Sinrman]

Gotta hand it to him... with all his been through with the injuries, that's impressive.. congrats!

 

[caul]

people have short memories. In fred's first couple years, he looked like he could be one of the most dominant HB's to ever play. He might have been the fastest runner in the league, and was also a 230 pound bull. He got hurt alot early in his career and it definatly diminished his talent, in addition to never putting together the one killer year people remember when he was still at his peak. Throw in some terrible coaching decisions (james stewart?) and you have what you see now - People calling fred a good consistent, but never great, back. It was actually the opposite. He was dynamite, but totally inconsistent on when he'd be on the field(from injuries or getting pulled at the goal line for no good reason). He never made a pro bowl not cause he never had the talent of one of the elite backs in the game, but because of injury shortened seasons or goalline vultures. Yea, those things count when all is said and done, but it doesnt say anything about his talent

Not saying he should/shouldnt get into the hall, but people have forgotten how fred taylor in his youth ran the ball.

 

[mozzy84]

I don't care how "explosive" a guy is. Tell me, in how many years can you say that Fred Taylor was definitely among the top 3 RBs that season? This isn't the Hall of the Very Good. There hasn't been a single year that you could argue that Fred Taylor was the best RB in the NFL that year.

All of this Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis talk is ridiculous too. Neither one of them belong in the HOF either. If there was a Hall of Very Good For a Long Time they'd both be shoe ins. But neither guy was an elite player.

In 2000 Fred Taylor had over 1,600 combined yards and 14 TDs in 13 games including 9 straight 100+ yard games. In 2003 he had 1,942 combined yards. Maybe he wasn't the best RB those years but he was pretty close. Obviously B. Sanders and E. Smith are HoF'ers. Other than LT2 who are the HoF RBs since Sanders/Smith?

the following have as good (or better ) claim as fred taylor:edgerrin james

jamal lewis

clinton portis

ahman green

shaun alexander

tiki barber

Marshal faulk

corey dillon

deuce mcallister

priest holmes

rudi johnson

larry johnson

 

[Wadsworth]

I don't care how "explosive" a guy is. Tell me, in how many years can you say that Fred Taylor was definitely among the top 3 RBs that season? This isn't the Hall of the Very Good. There hasn't been a single year that you could argue that Fred Taylor was the best RB in the NFL that year.

All of this Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis talk is ridiculous too. Neither one of them belong in the HOF either. If there was a Hall of Very Good For a Long Time they'd both be shoe ins. But neither guy was an elite player.

In 2000 Fred Taylor had over 1,600 combined yards and 14 TDs in 13 games including 9 straight 100+ yard games. In 2003 he had 1,942 combined yards. Maybe he wasn't the best RB those years but he was pretty close. Obviously B. Sanders and E. Smith are HoF'ers. Other than LT2 who are the HoF RBs since Sanders/Smith?

the following have as good (or better ) claim as fred taylor:edgerrin james

jamal lewis

clinton portis

ahman green

shaun alexander

tiki barber

Marshal faulk

corey dillon

deuce mcallister

priest holmes

rudi johnson

larry johnson

I think Faulk and Alexander are the only 2 on that list that you can give the nod to over Taylor. And Alexander soley on his amazing ability to find the endzone. Fred and Shaun actually have about the same number of career carries with Fred having about 1,000 more yards and Alexander having about 40 more TDs. I think Fred compares favorably to the other backs and some like Larry Johnson and Portis aren't really in the same generation of RBs as Taylor. Fred per carry average is better than everyone on that list besides Tiki. A big question becomes how much credit do you give guys like Lewis who had one huge year and not so much other than that.

 

[candy bar]

people have short memories. In fred's first couple years, he looked like he could be one of the most dominant HB's to ever play. He might have been the fastest runner in the league, and was also a 230 pound bull. He got hurt alot early in his career and it definatly diminished his talent, in addition to never putting together the one killer year people remember when he was still at his peak. Throw in some terrible coaching decisions (james stewart?) and you have what you see now - People calling fred a good consistent, but never great, back. It was actually the opposite. He was dynamite, but totally inconsistent on when he'd be on the field(from injuries or getting pulled at the goal line for no good reason). He never made a pro bowl not cause he never had the talent of one of the elite backs in the game, but because of injury shortened seasons or goalline vultures. Yea, those things count when all is said and done, but it doesnt say anything about his talent

Not saying he should/shouldnt get into the hall, but people have forgotten how fred taylor in his youth ran the ball.

Taylor is anything but a compiler. He was one of the very best players in the game, let alone running backs, in the beginning of his career. You can count on one hand the number of "good but not great" RBs that rushed for over 225 yards and four TDs in a game.

Taylor's in pretty good company on the list of RBs with 2,000 carries and a YPC average of 4.4:

NAME				   POS	  YRs		 G	 RSH	 RSHYD   YD/RSH  RSHTD1	Barry Sanders		  rb	1989--1998	153	3062	15269	4.99	 99	2	Tiki Barber			rb	1997--2006	154	2216	10448	4.71	 55  3	O.J. Simpson		   rb	1969--1979	135	2404	11236	4.67	 61	4	Fred Taylor			rb	1998--2007	125	2253	10457	4.64	 59	5	LaDainian Tomlinson	rb	2001--2007	108	2315	10371	4.48	112	6	Eric Dickerson		 rb	1983--1993	146	2996	13259	4.43	 90	7	Walter Payton		  rb	1975--1987	190	3838	16726	4.36	110

 

[Wadsworth]

people have short memories. In fred's first couple years, he looked like he could be one of the most dominant HB's to ever play. He might have been the fastest runner in the league, and was also a 230 pound bull. He got hurt alot early in his career and it definatly diminished his talent, in addition to never putting together the one killer year people remember when he was still at his peak. Throw in some terrible coaching decisions (james stewart?) and you have what you see now - People calling fred a good consistent, but never great, back. It was actually the opposite. He was dynamite, but totally inconsistent on when he'd be on the field(from injuries or getting pulled at the goal line for no good reason). He never made a pro bowl not cause he never had the talent of one of the elite backs in the game, but because of injury shortened seasons or goalline vultures. Yea, those things count when all is said and done, but it doesnt say anything about his talent

Not saying he should/shouldnt get into the hall, but people have forgotten how fred taylor in his youth ran the ball.

Taylor is anything but a compiler. He was one of the very best players in the game, let alone running backs, in the beginning of his career. You can count on one hand the number of "good but not great" RBs that rushed for over 225 yards and four TDs in a game.

Taylor's in pretty good company on the list of RBs with 2,000 carries and a YPC average of 4.4:

NAME				   POS	  YRs		 G	 RSH	 RSHYD   YD/RSH  RSHTD1	Barry Sanders		  rb	1989--1998	153	3062	15269	4.99	 99	2	Tiki Barber			rb	1997--2006	154	2216	10448	4.71	 55  3	O.J. Simpson		   rb	1969--1979	135	2404	11236	4.67	 61	4	Fred Taylor			rb	1998--2007	125	2253	10457	4.64	 59	5	LaDainian Tomlinson	rb	2001--2007	108	2315	10371	4.48	112	6	Eric Dickerson		 rb	1983--1993	146	2996	13259	4.43	 90	7	Walter Payton		  rb	1975--1987	190	3838	16726	4.36	110

Wow, if Fred continues at his current pace 7 games into next season his career stats will almost identical to OJ Simpson's career stats with both having 135 games.

 

[Paddy O'Seanessy]

I don't care how "explosive" a guy is. Tell me, in how many years can you say that Fred Taylor was definitely among the top 3 RBs that season? This isn't the Hall of the Very Good. There hasn't been a single year that you could argue that Fred Taylor was the best RB in the NFL that year.

All of this Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis talk is ridiculous too. Neither one of them belong in the HOF either. If there was a Hall of Very Good For a Long Time they'd both be shoe ins. But neither guy was an elite player.

In 2000 Fred Taylor had over 1,600 combined yards and 14 TDs in 13 games including 9 straight 100+ yard games. In 2003 he had 1,942 combined yards. Maybe he wasn't the best RB those years but he was pretty close. Obviously B. Sanders and E. Smith are HoF'ers. Other than LT2 who are the HoF RBs since Sanders/Smith?

the following have as good (or better ) claim as fred taylor:edgerrin james

jamal lewis

clinton portis

ahman green

shaun alexander

tiki barber

Marshal faulk

corey dillon

deuce mcallister

priest holmes

rudi johnson

larry johnson

I don't understand he question. Because he's not a Hall of Famer his great career is quiet? This list is nonsense. Between his fragile years Fred Taylor was huge. He competed with Marshall Faulk for best in the league (I can't remember where Terrell Davis was timewise.) Tiki & Priest finished with a few great years and Alexander was a great runner who never participated in the passing game and no one else on this list deserves comparison. I want to give Edge more credit, but his Arizona tenure raises questions.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

Deuce McAllister = lolz

 

[moleculo]

I don't care how "explosive" a guy is. Tell me, in how many years can you say that Fred Taylor was definitely among the top 3 RBs that season? This isn't the Hall of the Very Good. There hasn't been a single year that you could argue that Fred Taylor was the best RB in the NFL that year.

All of this Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis talk is ridiculous too. Neither one of them belong in the HOF either. If there was a Hall of Very Good For a Long Time they'd both be shoe ins. But neither guy was an elite player.

In 2000 Fred Taylor had over 1,600 combined yards and 14 TDs in 13 games including 9 straight 100+ yard games. In 2003 he had 1,942 combined yards. Maybe he wasn't the best RB those years but he was pretty close. Obviously B. Sanders and E. Smith are HoF'ers. Other than LT2 who are the HoF RBs since Sanders/Smith?

the following have as good (or better ) claim as fred taylor:edgerrin james

jamal lewis

clinton portis

ahman green

shaun alexander

tiki barber

Marshal faulk

corey dillon

deuce mcallister

priest holmes

rudi johnson

larry johnson

I don't understand he question. Because he's not a Hall of Famer his great career is quiet? This list is nonsense. Between his fragile years Fred Taylor was huge. He competed with Marshall Faulk for best in the league (I can't remember where Terrell Davis was timewise.) Tiki & Priest finished with a few great years and Alexander was a great runner who never participated in the passing game and no one else on this list deserves comparison. I want to give Edge more credit, but his Arizona tenure raises questions.

Ok, I'll back off on Rudi - he really shouldn't be in this conservation.however - everyone on that list has done something that Fred has never done> finish in the top 5 in rushing yards. Everyone on that list outside of Mcallister and Jamal has done it multiple times. These guys are all contemporaries of Fred Taylor. I'm not saying these guys are HOF worthy, but they have a better claim to the HOF then Fred.

When did Fred ever compete for best in the league? At his best, he finished 6th in the league.

Regarding yards from scrimmage that Wadsworth mentioned - he had a good season in 2003 when he had 1942 yards. That put him behind LT, Jamal Lewis, Ahman Green, McAllister (yes, Mcallister), and Priest Holmes.

 

[jonboltz]

I don't care how "explosive" a guy is. Tell me, in how many years can you say that Fred Taylor was definitely among the top 3 RBs that season? This isn't the Hall of the Very Good. There hasn't been a single year that you could argue that Fred Taylor was the best RB in the NFL that year.

All of this Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis talk is ridiculous too. Neither one of them belong in the HOF either. If there was a Hall of Very Good For a Long Time they'd both be shoe ins. But neither guy was an elite player.

In 2000 Fred Taylor had over 1,600 combined yards and 14 TDs in 13 games including 9 straight 100+ yard games. In 2003 he had 1,942 combined yards. Maybe he wasn't the best RB those years but he was pretty close. Obviously B. Sanders and E. Smith are HoF'ers. Other than LT2 who are the HoF RBs since Sanders/Smith?

the following have as good (or better ) claim as fred taylor:edgerrin james

jamal lewis

clinton portis

ahman green

shaun alexander

tiki barber

Marshal faulk

corey dillon

deuce mcallister

priest holmes

rudi johnson

larry johnson

I don't understand he question. Because he's not a Hall of Famer his great career is quiet? This list is nonsense. Between his fragile years Fred Taylor was huge. He competed with Marshall Faulk for best in the league (I can't remember where Terrell Davis was timewise.) Tiki & Priest finished with a few great years and Alexander was a great runner who never participated in the passing game and no one else on this list deserves comparison. I want to give Edge more credit, but his Arizona tenure raises questions.

Ok, I'll back off on Rudi - he really shouldn't be in this conservation.however - everyone on that list has done something that Fred has never done> finish in the top 5 in rushing yards. Everyone on that list outside of Mcallister and Jamal has done it multiple times. These guys are all contemporaries of Fred Taylor. I'm not saying these guys are HOF worthy, but they have a better claim to the HOF then Fred.

When did Fred ever compete for best in the league? At his best, he finished 6th in the league.

Regarding yards from scrimmage that Wadsworth mentioned - he had a good season in 2003 when he had 1942 yards. That put him behind LT, Jamal Lewis, Ahman Green, McAllister (yes, Mcallister), and Priest Holmes.

Just because McAllister, Lewis and Ahman each had their single career year the same year as Freddy T doesn't mean they deserve to be mentioned as being his equal...

 

[delusional]

pro bowl should have no involvement in HOF..its a joke really

 

[Paddy O'Seanessy]

I don't care how "explosive" a guy is. Tell me, in how many years can you say that Fred Taylor was definitely among the top 3 RBs that season? This isn't the Hall of the Very Good. There hasn't been a single year that you could argue that Fred Taylor was the best RB in the NFL that year.

All of this Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis talk is ridiculous too. Neither one of them belong in the HOF either. If there was a Hall of Very Good For a Long Time they'd both be shoe ins. But neither guy was an elite player.

In 2000 Fred Taylor had over 1,600 combined yards and 14 TDs in 13 games including 9 straight 100+ yard games. In 2003 he had 1,942 combined yards. Maybe he wasn't the best RB those years but he was pretty close. Obviously B. Sanders and E. Smith are HoF'ers. Other than LT2 who are the HoF RBs since Sanders/Smith?

the following have as good (or better ) claim as fred taylor:edgerrin james

jamal lewis

clinton portis

ahman green

shaun alexander

tiki barber

Marshal faulk

corey dillon

deuce mcallister

priest holmes

rudi johnson

larry johnson

I don't understand he question. Because he's not a Hall of Famer his great career is quiet? This list is nonsense. Between his fragile years Fred Taylor was huge. He competed with Marshall Faulk for best in the league (I can't remember where Terrell Davis was timewise.) Tiki & Priest finished with a few great years and Alexander was a great runner who never participated in the passing game and no one else on this list deserves comparison. I want to give Edge more credit, but his Arizona tenure raises questions.

Ok, I'll back off on Rudi - he really shouldn't be in this conservation.however - everyone on that list has done something that Fred has never done> finish in the top 5 in rushing yards. Everyone on that list outside of Mcallister and Jamal has done it multiple times. These guys are all contemporaries of Fred Taylor. I'm not saying these guys are HOF worthy, but they have a better claim to the HOF then Fred.

When did Fred ever compete for best in the league? At his best, he finished 6th in the league.

Regarding yards from scrimmage that Wadsworth mentioned - he had a good season in 2003 when he had 1942 yards. That put him behind LT, Jamal Lewis, Ahman Green, McAllister (yes, Mcallister), and Priest Holmes.

and in his rookie year, 1998, he finished 10th 1223 & 14 td's where every one of the 9 ahead of him are better than the ones you list here.1999-fragile

2000- 6th in rushing (even with Dillon) & 6th in rushing TDs (Dillon not on short list)

2001- fragile

2002- returning from injury 9th in rushing

2003- 6th

2004- 10th

2005- 24th

2006- 14th

Dillon, Green & McCallister came and left during this career. This doesn't cover the fact that he was fast & could catch. He might not be HOF and I mentioned the guys "better" than him, but this is a career -- and not a quiet one. He's ahead of Earl Campbell on the all time list (as is Dillon) but no one on your list can carry the Tyler Rose's jock strap.

 

[switz]

All of this Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis talk is ridiculous too. Neither one of them belong in the HOF either. If there was a Hall of Very Good For a Long Time they'd both be shoe ins. But neither guy was an elite player.

Then how did Emmitt Smith get in?

 

[jonboltz]

All of this Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis talk is ridiculous too. Neither one of them belong in the HOF either. If there was a Hall of Very Good For a Long Time they'd both be shoe ins. But neither guy was an elite player.

Then how did Emmitt Smith get in?

Led the NFL in rushing 4 times, won 3 Super Bowl Titles, League MVP honors in 1993, the Super Bowl MVP Award (XXVIII), and has been selected to the Pro Bowl 8 times down?

 

[moleculo]

I don't care how "explosive" a guy is. Tell me, in how many years can you say that Fred Taylor was definitely among the top 3 RBs that season? This isn't the Hall of the Very Good. There hasn't been a single year that you could argue that Fred Taylor was the best RB in the NFL that year.

All of this Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis talk is ridiculous too. Neither one of them belong in the HOF either. If there was a Hall of Very Good For a Long Time they'd both be shoe ins. But neither guy was an elite player.

In 2000 Fred Taylor had over 1,600 combined yards and 14 TDs in 13 games including 9 straight 100+ yard games. In 2003 he had 1,942 combined yards. Maybe he wasn't the best RB those years but he was pretty close. Obviously B. Sanders and E. Smith are HoF'ers. Other than LT2 who are the HoF RBs since Sanders/Smith?

the following have as good (or better ) claim as fred taylor:edgerrin james

jamal lewis

clinton portis

ahman green

shaun alexander

tiki barber

Marshal faulk

corey dillon

deuce mcallister

priest holmes

rudi johnson

larry johnson

I don't understand he question. Because he's not a Hall of Famer his great career is quiet? This list is nonsense. Between his fragile years Fred Taylor was huge. He competed with Marshall Faulk for best in the league (I can't remember where Terrell Davis was timewise.) Tiki & Priest finished with a few great years and Alexander was a great runner who never participated in the passing game and no one else on this list deserves comparison. I want to give Edge more credit, but his Arizona tenure raises questions.

Ok, I'll back off on Rudi - he really shouldn't be in this conservation.however - everyone on that list has done something that Fred has never done> finish in the top 5 in rushing yards. Everyone on that list outside of Mcallister and Jamal has done it multiple times. These guys are all contemporaries of Fred Taylor. I'm not saying these guys are HOF worthy, but they have a better claim to the HOF then Fred.

When did Fred ever compete for best in the league? At his best, he finished 6th in the league.

Regarding yards from scrimmage that Wadsworth mentioned - he had a good season in 2003 when he had 1942 yards. That put him behind LT, Jamal Lewis, Ahman Green, McAllister (yes, Mcallister), and Priest Holmes.

and in his rookie year, 1998, he finished 10th 1223 & 14 td's where every one of the 9 ahead of him are better than the ones you list here.[boring stats]

Dillon, Green & McCallister came and left during this career. This doesn't cover the fact that he was fast & could catch. He might not be HOF and I mentioned the guys "better" than him, but this is a career -- and not a quiet one. He's ahead of Earl Campbell on the all time list (as is Dillon) but no one on your list can carry the Tyler Rose's jock strap.

agreed about Earl. He actually made the prow-bowl 5/9 seasons and finished 5th or better in rushing yards an impressive 4x, including leading the league three years in a row. Earl, IMO, is the definition of a short, brilliant HOF career.I'm confused as to what you are arguing - are you claiming Freddy is HOF material?

 

[moleculo]

I don't care how "explosive" a guy is. Tell me, in how many years can you say that Fred Taylor was definitely among the top 3 RBs that season? This isn't the Hall of the Very Good. There hasn't been a single year that you could argue that Fred Taylor was the best RB in the NFL that year.

All of this Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis talk is ridiculous too. Neither one of them belong in the HOF either. If there was a Hall of Very Good For a Long Time they'd both be shoe ins. But neither guy was an elite player.

In 2000 Fred Taylor had over 1,600 combined yards and 14 TDs in 13 games including 9 straight 100+ yard games. In 2003 he had 1,942 combined yards. Maybe he wasn't the best RB those years but he was pretty close. Obviously B. Sanders and E. Smith are HoF'ers. Other than LT2 who are the HoF RBs since Sanders/Smith?

the following have as good (or better ) claim as fred taylor:edgerrin james

jamal lewis

clinton portis

ahman green

shaun alexander

tiki barber

Marshal faulk

corey dillon

deuce mcallister

priest holmes

rudi johnson

larry johnson

I don't understand he question. Because he's not a Hall of Famer his great career is quiet? This list is nonsense. Between his fragile years Fred Taylor was huge. He competed with Marshall Faulk for best in the league (I can't remember where Terrell Davis was timewise.) Tiki & Priest finished with a few great years and Alexander was a great runner who never participated in the passing game and no one else on this list deserves comparison. I want to give Edge more credit, but his Arizona tenure raises questions.

Ok, I'll back off on Rudi - he really shouldn't be in this conservation.however - everyone on that list has done something that Fred has never done> finish in the top 5 in rushing yards. Everyone on that list outside of Mcallister and Jamal has done it multiple times. These guys are all contemporaries of Fred Taylor. I'm not saying these guys are HOF worthy, but they have a better claim to the HOF then Fred.

When did Fred ever compete for best in the league? At his best, he finished 6th in the league.

Regarding yards from scrimmage that Wadsworth mentioned - he had a good season in 2003 when he had 1942 yards. That put him behind LT, Jamal Lewis, Ahman Green, McAllister (yes, Mcallister), and Priest Holmes.

Just because McAllister, Lewis and Ahman each had their single career year the same year as Freddy T doesn't mean they deserve to be mentioned as being his equal...

McAllister, Lewis and Ahman (at their best)> Fred Taylor (at his best).HTH.

 

[jonboltz]

I don't care how "explosive" a guy is. Tell me, in how many years can you say that Fred Taylor was definitely among the top 3 RBs that season? This isn't the Hall of the Very Good. There hasn't been a single year that you could argue that Fred Taylor was the best RB in the NFL that year.

All of this Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis talk is ridiculous too. Neither one of them belong in the HOF either. If there was a Hall of Very Good For a Long Time they'd both be shoe ins. But neither guy was an elite player.

In 2000 Fred Taylor had over 1,600 combined yards and 14 TDs in 13 games including 9 straight 100+ yard games. In 2003 he had 1,942 combined yards. Maybe he wasn't the best RB those years but he was pretty close. Obviously B. Sanders and E. Smith are HoF'ers. Other than LT2 who are the HoF RBs since Sanders/Smith?

the following have as good (or better ) claim as fred taylor:edgerrin james

jamal lewis

clinton portis

ahman green

shaun alexander

tiki barber

Marshal faulk

corey dillon

deuce mcallister

priest holmes

rudi johnson

larry johnson

I don't understand he question. Because he's not a Hall of Famer his great career is quiet? This list is nonsense. Between his fragile years Fred Taylor was huge. He competed with Marshall Faulk for best in the league (I can't remember where Terrell Davis was timewise.) Tiki & Priest finished with a few great years and Alexander was a great runner who never participated in the passing game and no one else on this list deserves comparison. I want to give Edge more credit, but his Arizona tenure raises questions.

Ok, I'll back off on Rudi - he really shouldn't be in this conservation.however - everyone on that list has done something that Fred has never done> finish in the top 5 in rushing yards. Everyone on that list outside of Mcallister and Jamal has done it multiple times. These guys are all contemporaries of Fred Taylor. I'm not saying these guys are HOF worthy, but they have a better claim to the HOF then Fred.

When did Fred ever compete for best in the league? At his best, he finished 6th in the league.

Regarding yards from scrimmage that Wadsworth mentioned - he had a good season in 2003 when he had 1942 yards. That put him behind LT, Jamal Lewis, Ahman Green, McAllister (yes, Mcallister), and Priest Holmes.

Just because McAllister, Lewis and Ahman each had their single career year the same year as Freddy T doesn't mean they deserve to be mentioned as being his equal...

McAllister, Lewis and Ahman (at their best)> Fred Taylor (at his best).HTH.

The situations for those 3 backs (team, line, carries) in single years of their career caused their best year to be better than anything Taylor has done. Congrats to them, they still aren't better RBs and frankly Ahman is the only one of the 3 that is even close.

 

[Blueb]

I don't care how "explosive" a guy is. Tell me, in how many years can you say that Fred Taylor was definitely among the top 3 RBs that season? This isn't the Hall of the Very Good. There hasn't been a single year that you could argue that Fred Taylor was the best RB in the NFL that year.

All of this Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis talk is ridiculous too. Neither one of them belong in the HOF either. If there was a Hall of Very Good For a Long Time they'd both be shoe ins. But neither guy was an elite player.

In 2000 Fred Taylor had over 1,600 combined yards and 14 TDs in 13 games including 9 straight 100+ yard games. In 2003 he had 1,942 combined yards. Maybe he wasn't the best RB those years but he was pretty close. Obviously B. Sanders and E. Smith are HoF'ers. Other than LT2 who are the HoF RBs since Sanders/Smith?

the following have as good (or better ) claim as fred taylor:edgerrin james

jamal lewis

clinton portis

ahman green

shaun alexander

tiki barber

Marshal faulk

corey dillon

deuce mcallister

priest holmes

rudi johnson

larry johnson

I don't understand he question. Because he's not a Hall of Famer his great career is quiet? This list is nonsense. Between his fragile years Fred Taylor was huge. He competed with Marshall Faulk for best in the league (I can't remember where Terrell Davis was timewise.) Tiki & Priest finished with a few great years and Alexander was a great runner who never participated in the passing game and no one else on this list deserves comparison. I want to give Edge more credit, but his Arizona tenure raises questions.

Ok, I'll back off on Rudi - he really shouldn't be in this conservation.however - everyone on that list has done something that Fred has never done> finish in the top 5 in rushing yards. Everyone on that list outside of Mcallister and Jamal has done it multiple times. These guys are all contemporaries of Fred Taylor. I'm not saying these guys are HOF worthy, but they have a better claim to the HOF then Fred.

When did Fred ever compete for best in the league? At his best, he finished 6th in the league.

Regarding yards from scrimmage that Wadsworth mentioned - he had a good season in 2003 when he had 1942 yards. That put him behind LT, Jamal Lewis, Ahman Green, McAllister (yes, Mcallister), and Priest Holmes.

Just because McAllister, Lewis and Ahman each had their single career year the same year as Freddy T doesn't mean they deserve to be mentioned as being his equal...

McAllister, Lewis and Ahman (at their best)> Fred Taylor (at his best).HTH.

The situations for those 3 backs (team, line, carries) in single years of their career caused their best year to be better than anything Taylor has done. Congrats to them, they still aren't better RBs and frankly Ahman is the only one of the 3 that is even close.

Not sure Fred Taylor's 10,000 are queiter than Warrick Dunn's...