Steeler fans are about to hate me, but... (1 Viewer)

[Raider Nation]

I know, I know..... blasphemy. Hear me out with an unbiased ear.

Everyone seems to think that it's a mere formality that Jerome Bettis will be wearing a yellow jacket in Canton five years after he retires. Sadly, this is almost certainly true. But should Bettis be a Hall of Famer?

As most of you probably do, I have my personal "I know a Hall of Famer when I see a Hall of Famer" criteria. The eye test, if you will. When I watched Jerry Rice play, I knew I was watching a future Hall of Famer. When I watched Lawrence Taylor play, I knew I was watching a future Hall of Famer. Same for Dan Marino and John Elway and Tomlinson, in today's NFL. Bettis is a tough guy. Bettis is a guy no defender wants to tackle, especially in the 4th quarter. But Bettis never shouted GREATNESS to me when I watched him roll (literally) over defenders for his yards. I suppose the best thing I could say about him is that he's a poor man's Earl Campbell. And I'm talking a street bum's Earl Campbell. I'm uncomfortable even mentioning him in the same sentence as the Tyler Rose.

Now I know what you're going to tell me. Bettis has 13,000+ career yards, and he will retire as the 5th-leading rusher in NFL history. Blah, blah, blah. I understand that.

If the all-time hits leader is not in the baseball HoF, the sun will still rise if the 5th-leading rusher in NFL history is not in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Those yards, plus the fact that the media LOVES Bettis, are the only things to which anyone can point in order to justify his Hall of Fame candidacy. If those yards, and the fact that he is a good guy in the community is enough for you to consider him to be a legit HoF candidate, then you can stop reading right now.

To me, Bettis was never a special player. He is a compiler. He is Rafael Palmiero and Harold Baines in shoulder pads. If you play long enough at a respectable level, you will put up numbers. But "respectable" shouldn't get you a bust in Canton.

Think there's more to him than just yards? Look at the REAL numbers of import.

Everyone views Bettis as this TD machine -- a beast at the goal line, right???

Compare him to certain Hall of Famers Emmitt Smith and LaDainian Tomlinson, and to a fringe Hall of Fame candidate in Priest Holmes.

In his 13 seasons, Bettis has 87 TDs.

In his first 13 seasons, Emmitt had 165 TDs.

In his career (not even 5 full seasons)... LT has 79 TDs already.

In the equivalent of his last 4 full seasons, Priest Holmes has 76 TDs.

Jerome's TDs don't look impressive at all by comparison.

- Bettis was never a receiving threat. The most receptions he had in his entire career was 26, and that was in his rookie season with the Los Angeles Rams.

- Bettis has no rings. If you hold it against Marino, hold it against Bettis as well.

- Bettis has reached 1200 yards rushing only ONCE in the last EIGHT YEARS!

- Bettis has not rushed for 1000 yards in five years. See a trend? He's hanging on. He is a compiler. Kudos to him for loving the game, but a Hall of Famer he is not.

 

[Lemmiwinks]

Longevity is important, my man. While I agree that Bettis was never the best runningback in the NFL, or really close, his longevity and consistent level of production through out his career is enough.

 

[ThisGuy]

Comparing Jerome Bettis to Pete Rose?!? Bettis has/had moves for a big back. He did some damage as a Ram too. Bettis lasted a lot longer than players just like him. He proved he could take a pounding week in and week out. Big backs like him never last very long and he lasted long enough to be the 5th leading rusher in NFL history. Pretty impressive career to me. He might not be first ballot...but he will be enshrined.Of course I think Harry Carson should be enshrined too, but that might never happen either.

 

[Sopranos]

Longevity is important, my man. While I agree that Bettis was never the best runningback in the NFL, or really close, his longevity and consistent level of production through out his career is enough.

Agree. Who says you have to be a E Smith Holmes or LT2 to get in. It would be a very small group if that was the standard..

 

[ren hoek]

I know, I know..... blasphemy. Hear me out with an unbiased ear.

...

He is a compiler. Kudos to him for loving the game, but a Hall of Famer he is not.

I couldn't agree more. People are going to say I'm biased too, but here's a post I made on another forum making this exact same argument:

Statistically Bettis is one of the top six at his position to ever play the game, and the media loves him. He is a lock, and deserves to be in the Hall. Manning isn't a lock because he could go out and have a career ending injury over the next year or two and still not make it in. However, if it happens next year and the Colts win the Super Bowl this season, Manning is pretty much a lock.

The media loves him? Well I guess they should put Rudy in the college football hall of fame, because everybody loved him too. Bettis does have a ####load of yardage in his career, but that's because he's shown incredible longevity over the years. Here, let's play some Jerome Bettis Jeopardy:-Jerome Bettis has won this many MVP awards.

-Jerome Bettis has led the league in yardage this many times.

-Jerome Bettis has celebrated a Super Bowl championship this many times.

Here, I'll go ahead and give you the answer: what is zero?

Not to mention that he's never led the league in anything besides carries. He's a decent player, but his argument for the Hall of Fame is weak, and he is the very definition of a compiler. Manning, on the other hand, has had one of the best 8-year stretches of any QB in the history of the game.

He's been top 5 in passing yardage and passing TDs every year he's been in the league. Bettis has been to 6 pro bowls in his 13 year career, and Manning has been to 5 (and likely 6 if this year is included) during his 8-year career. Sure, if Manning's career ended today, he might not get in, but if Bettis' career ended when it should have, he wouldn't either.

 

[gman8343]

I don't think Bettis should get in either.

 

[Keys Myaths]

If the all-time hits leader is not in the baseball HoF, the sun will still rise if the 5th-leading rusher in NFL history is not in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

Pete Rose would undoubtedly be in the hall of fame if he hadn't been banned from baseball. I like your argument, but Rose is a bad comparison for keeping ANYONE out of the Hall in any sport, unless they've been banned from their respective sport.

 

[Raider Nation]

Longevity is important, my man. While I agree that Bettis was never the best runningback in the NFL, or really close, his longevity and consistent level of production through out his career is enough.

Well then it should be called the "Hall of Pretty Darned Good Longtime Players"...

 

[Raider Nation]

If the all-time hits leader is not in the baseball HoF, the sun will still rise if the 5th-leading rusher in NFL history is not in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

Pete Rose would undoubtedly be in the hall of fame if he hadn't been banned from baseball. I like your argument, but Rose is a bad comparison for keeping ANYONE out of the Hall in any sport, unless they've been banned from their respective sport.

My point was, the world will still go on.

 

[Keys Myaths]

If the all-time hits leader is not in the baseball HoF, the sun will still rise if the 5th-leading rusher in NFL history is not in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

Pete Rose would undoubtedly be in the hall of fame if he hadn't been banned from baseball. I like your argument, but Rose is a bad comparison for keeping ANYONE out of the Hall in any sport, unless they've been banned from their respective sport.

My point was, the world will still go on.

The world will still go on if Babe Ruth wasn't in the baseball Hall of Fame, but it doesn't mean he doesn't belong.

 

[Raider Nation]

Longevity is important, my man. While I agree that Bettis was never the best runningback in the NFL, or really close, his longevity and consistent level of production through out his career is enough.

Agree. Who says you have to be a E Smith Holmes or LT2 to get in. It would be a very small group if that was the standard..

If you had one football game to win to save your life, and you could pick ANY running back who has ever played in the NFL to be the starter on your team, and they would be in their prime, how many names do you figure you'd rattle off before you got to Bettis?30?

40?

More?

 

[Raider Nation]

If the all-time hits leader is not in the baseball HoF, the sun will still rise if the 5th-leading rusher in NFL history is not in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

Pete Rose would undoubtedly be in the hall of fame if he hadn't been banned from baseball. I like your argument, but Rose is a bad comparison for keeping ANYONE out of the Hall in any sport, unless they've been banned from their respective sport.

My point was, the world will still go on.

The world will still go on if Babe Ruth wasn't in the baseball Hall of Fame, but it doesn't mean he doesn't belong.

Just telling you the reasoning behind my mention of Pete Rose.It wasn't meant to be suggest that their circumstances are similar, of course.

 

[Jack Splat]

If you are going to use John Elway, Dan Marino, LT1 and 2 and Emmitt Smith as your benchmarks, there are a whole lot of guys who are in and will be in the future who wouldn't qualify.Bettis has more rushing yards and more touchdowns than Tony Dorsett in the same number of seasons (12 as of beginning of this year). Let's yank Tony's ### out of there while we're at it. And how about the finest example of longevity getting you in - George Blanda.My point isn't to beat down those guys, just that not everyone in the Hall is Marino, Elway or Emmitt. That doesn't mean they don't deserve to be in there.

 

[phrozen]

Bettis will get in while people like Art Monk (who led in receptions in both a season and all-time) will continue to get hosed. Monk played on three superbowl championship teams (although he was hurt in 1982 and didn't play in the SB). Monk was a great player and a person. He never spoke out just did his job and did it well.It is a travesty that he still is not in.Rant over

 

[Raider Nation]

Bettis will get in while people like Art Monk (who led in receptions in both a season and all-time) will continue to get hosed. Monk played on three superbowl championship teams (although he was hurt in 1982 and didn't play in the SB). Monk was a great player and a person. He never spoke out just did his job and did it well.

It is a travesty that he still is not in.

Rant over

Heard something about Monk today. I forget if it was on Sirius NFL Radio, or ESPN Radio. Anyway, the reporter said he spoke to several NFL personnel men and coaches about Monk. To a man, they all said basically the same thing, which was "we never gameplanned to stop Art Monk. Never. We were more concerned with Gary Clark (at the time), or the running game."Monk strikes me as another guy who played a long time at a high level, and consequently put up some nice numbers. Doesn't mean he was one of the best.

Furthermore, the same personnel men were asked about Michael Irvin and Andre Reed compared to Monk. The general feeling was that the pecking order was:

1) Irvin

2) Reed

3) Monk

 

[Ghost Rider]

If you had one football game to win to save your life, and you could pick ANY running back who has ever played in the NFL to be the starter on your team, and they would be in their prime, how many names do you figure you'd rattle off before you got to Bettis?

30?

40?

More?

At least that many. I agree with you. Bettis is not a Hall of Fame player. He has always been a very good player, but never a great one. His longevity is admirable, but not enough to make him a HoFer.

 

[AnonymousBob]

Longevity is important, my man.  While I agree that Bettis was never the best runningback in the NFL, or really close, his longevity and consistent level of production through out his career is enough.

Agree. Who says you have to be a E Smith Holmes or LT2 to get in. It would be a very small group if that was the standard..

So? Isn't the point of the hall of fame to say look here-these guys are the elite of the all stars. By nature shouldn't the Hall of Fame be a small group? Not everyone is truly great, hence not everyone should get in. It's the greatness that makes these limited few so worthy of the HOF, not their very goodness.

 

[Raider Nation]

Longevity is important, my man. While I agree that Bettis was never the best runningback in the NFL, or really close, his longevity and consistent level of production through out his career is enough.

Agree. Who says you have to be a E Smith Holmes or LT2 to get in. It would be a very small group if that was the standard..

So? Isn't the point of the hall of fame to say look here-these guys are the elite of the all stars. By nature shouldn't the Hall of Fame be a small group? Not everyone is truly great, hence not everyone should get in. It's the greatness that makes these limited few so worthy of the HOF, not their very goodness.

Bingo.

 

[BigRed]

Bettis was never a special player. He is a compiler. He is Rafael Palmiero and Harold Baines in shoulder pads. If you play long enough at a respectable level, you will put up numbers. But "respectable" shouldn't get you a bust in Canton.

Exactly. Well said.But in this era of over-emphasis on stats, you're spitting in the wind. He's a lock.

Also hanging out a long time should not matter THAT much. Based on that hey let's get Otis Anderson in there, and Vinny T while we're at it.

 

[Idiot Boxer]

You're right....I do hate you.

 

[BigRed]

So? Isn't the point of the hall of fame

YES. Duh. Nice to know somebody gets it.

 

[Bojang0301]

Am I allowed to say Emmitt was a compiler and played on a special team that allowed him to become what he did become?

 

[Koya]

Am I allowed to say Emmitt was a compiler and played on a special team that allowed him to become what he did become?

Sure. I agree with you. He was a very good RB in the perfect situation. Had a heart like no other and a lot of skill - but on the wrong team not sure if he would have made the hall... though he is definately a HoF back.Bettis is marginal, which to me, means no. But he will get in. When has Bettis been one of the best two or three backs in the league, for a good 5 years plus?

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

I don't have the time to look into stats, top 10 finishes etc. but Bettis' niche is that he is the only "big-back" among the top rushers in NFL history. Jim Brown would probably also be considered a big back but he is in his own class, big and fast (maybe Bo would have been there too). Big, punishing RBs don't last long in the NFL...see Campbell, Okoye, Means, Eddie George, etc. Bettis is not and will never be Barry Sanders or even Emmitt Smith. Call him a compiler if you want but he is the best big back the NFL has seen since Jim Brown retired. He's never won a Super Bowl but since his arrival in Pittsburgh the Steelers are 95-60-1. Nobody is more responsible for that record than Bettis.

 

[Keys Myaths]

I don't have the time to look into stats, top 10 finishes etc. but Bettis' niche is that he is the only "big-back" among the top rushers in NFL history. Jim Brown would probably also be considered a big back but he is in his own class, big and fast (maybe Bo would have been there too). Big, punishing RBs don't last long in the NFL...see Campbell, Okoye, Means, Eddie George, etc. Bettis is not and will never be Barry Sanders or even Emmitt Smith.

Call him a compiler if you want but he is the best big back the NFL has seen since Jim Brown retired. He's never won a Super Bowl but since his arrival in Pittsburgh the Steelers are 95-60-1. Nobody is more responsible for that record than Bettis.

and good argument.

 

[Raider Nation]

I don't have the time to look into stats, top 10 finishes etc. but Bettis' niche is that he is the only "big-back" among the top rushers in NFL history. Jim Brown would probably also be considered a big back but he is in his own class, big and fast (maybe Bo would have been there too). Big, punishing RBs don't last long in the NFL...see Campbell, Okoye, Means, Eddie George, etc.

That's a fair point, but would that distinction necessarily add to his HoF appeal?

 

[BoltBacker]

Longevity is important, my man. While I agree that Bettis was never the best runningback in the NFL, or really close, his longevity and consistent level of production through out his career is enough.

Agree. Who says you have to be a E Smith Holmes or LT2 to get in. It would be a very small group if that was the standard..

If you had one football game to win to save your life, and you could pick ANY running back who has ever played in the NFL to be the starter on your team, and they would be in their prime, how many names do you figure you'd rattle off before you got to Bettis?30?

40?

More?

Fair enough, but if you were the GM of an NFL franchise and you could draft any RB to have for his entire career based on how he actually performed over his entire career can you honestly say there are 40 RB's you'd take ahead of Bettis?20?

10?

I think the HOF is measuring a players career rather than a great season or certainly a single game.

 

[Jack Ham & Eggs]

Those yards, plus the fact that the media LOVES Bettis, are the only things to which anyone can point in order to justify his Hall of Fame candidacy.

Aren't "those yards" the primary thing you use to assess the effectiveness of ANY running back? This is like saying "Take away the sacks and Reggie White wasn't a very good defensive lineman". Or saying "Take away the boobs and Pamela Anderson is flat chested".

Compare him to certain Hall of Famers Emmitt Smith and LaDainian Tomlinson, and to a fringe Hall of Fame candidate in Priest Holmes.

In his 13 seasons, Bettis has 87 TDs.

In his first 13 seasons, Emmitt had 165 TDs.

In his career (not even 5 full seasons)... LT has 79 TDs already.

In the equivalent of his last 4 full seasons, Priest Holmes has 76 TDs.

Jerome's TDs don't look impressive at all by comparison.

If you're cherry picking three of the most prolific touchdown producers ever, you can make almost ANY running back look unimpressive by comparison. Coming into the 2005 season, Bettis had the 11th most rushing TDs in NFL history.

 

[Raider Nation]

Longevity is important, my man. While I agree that Bettis was never the best runningback in the NFL, or really close, his longevity and consistent level of production through out his career is enough.

Agree. Who says you have to be a E Smith Holmes or LT2 to get in. It would be a very small group if that was the standard..

If you had one football game to win to save your life, and you could pick ANY running back who has ever played in the NFL to be the starter on your team, and they would be in their prime, how many names do you figure you'd rattle off before you got to Bettis?30?

40?

More?

Fair enough, but if you were the GM of an NFL franchise and you could draft any RB to have for his entire career based on how he actually performed over his entire career can you honestly say there are 40 RB's you'd take ahead of Bettis?20?

10?

I think the HOF is measuring a players career rather than a great season or certainly a single game.

I understand your point, but you just helped make my point as well.The fact that nobody in his right mind would take Bettis anywhere near the top of the list of all-time RBs indicates my very contention -- that he isn't an "elite" back. You'd hear the usual cast of characters... Brown, Sanders, Simpson, Emmitt, Payton, Sayers, etc., and dozens more before you'd even THINK of Bettis. Hell, Terrell Davis would go before Jerome 9.5 times out of 10.

In fact, a guy like TD who was stellar for a short period of time, but got hurt, to me was a better player than a guy who hangs seasons year after year.

 

[Raider Nation]

Those yards, plus the fact that the media LOVES Bettis, are the only things to which anyone can point in order to justify his Hall of Fame candidacy.

Aren't "those yards" the primary thing you use to assess the effectiveness of ANY running back? This is like saying "Take away the sacks and Reggie White wasn't a very good defensive lineman". Or saying "Take away the boobs and Pamela Anderson is flat chested".

If I drove a truck for a living, 600 miles a day, I'd have a LOT of miles under my belt in 10-12 years. But I would rather have been driving a Lamborghini for six years.

 

[Jack Ham & Eggs]

If you had one football game to win to save your life, and you could pick ANY running back who has ever played in the NFL to be the starter on your team, and they would be in their prime, how many names do you figure you'd rattle off before you got to Bettis?

30?

40?

More?

This is probably your most compelling argument. The list of guys you'd rather have for ONE game is probably at least a couple dozen.Having said that, if you were starting a franchise from scratch and drafting from all NFL running backs to ever play the game how many would you take ahead of him? By this I mean you have to take durability into consideration. Gale Sayers on any given Sunday would be far preferable to Bettis. But for a career? Five glorious years or take The Bus and watch him rumble for over a decade. And Sayers only had more than 10 TDs in a season during his rookie year. He's another guy "unimpressive" by comparison to Emmitt, LT, or Priest.

 

[Jack Ham & Eggs]

Those yards, plus the fact that the media LOVES Bettis, are the only things to which anyone can point in order to justify his Hall of Fame candidacy.

Aren't "those yards" the primary thing you use to assess the effectiveness of ANY running back? This is like saying "Take away the sacks and Reggie White wasn't a very good defensive lineman". Or saying "Take away the boobs and Pamela Anderson is flat chested".

If I drove a truck for a living, 600 miles a day, I'd have a LOT of miles under my belt in 10-12 years. But I would rather have been driving a Lamborghini for six years.

I see your point. But if driving a truck 600 miles a day was your JOB, don't you see the value of having a piece of transportation that got you where you were going for 12 years or more? The Lamborghini would be nice for those six years and maybe it would make the next six when you were unemployed and on welfare worth it. But maybe it wouldn't. I think there is a valid point to be made for either argument. I personally think you have to give a man credit for what he accomplished whether you like it or not. Bettis was never sexy, you're right. But you don't get 13,000 + yards by just being some oaf that keeps showing up for work every day.

 

[AnonymousBob]

Those yards, plus the fact that the media LOVES Bettis, are the only things to which anyone can point in order to justify his Hall of Fame candidacy.

Aren't "those yards" the primary thing you use to assess the effectiveness of ANY running back? This is like saying "Take away the sacks and Reggie White wasn't a very good defensive lineman". Or saying "Take away the boobs and Pamela Anderson is flat chested".

If I drove a truck for a living, 600 miles a day, I'd have a LOT of miles under my belt in 10-12 years. But I would rather have been driving a Lamborghini for six years.

I see your point. But if driving a truck 600 miles a day was your JOB, don't you see the value of having a piece of transportation that got you where you were going for 12 years or more? The Lamborghini would be nice for those six years and maybe it would make the next six when you were unemployed and on welfare worth it. But maybe it wouldn't. I think there is a valid point to be made for either argument. I personally think you have to give a man credit for what he accomplished whether you like it or not. Bettis was never sexy, you're right. But you don't get 13,000 + yards by just being some oaf that keeps showing up for work every day.

You're right-Bettis has been very, very good and extremely reliable. He has not, however, been great. Longevity certainly should play a role in determining HOF status but it should not be the only factor. Terrell Davis? Great, but not for enough years.

Jerome Bettis? Extremely good (never great) for many years.

I'd be happy with either on my team but IMO, HOF players need to have both-longevity AND greatness. Not just one or the other.

 

[trader jake]

the bus should be in, but i also believe ricky watters should be in...so what the hell do i know?

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

One other point that hasn't been mentioned is Bettis' ability to move the chains, particularly when the Steelers have a lead late in games. Many of the RBs mentioned above stand out because of spectacular runs but few could close a game like Bettis in his prime. I believe Cowher's record when he has a lead of 10+ is near 50-1. Why? Because a RB like Bettis controls the clock by moving the chains and holding onto the football. There is no razzle dazzle on the highlights but what he does is every bit as defeating to a defense as a 70 yard run by another RB. In his prime Bettis closed games like Mariano Rivera.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

To me Bettis has always been an average RB. There may have been a couple years when you could consider him a top 5 RB, but thats around it. When the Hall of Fame votes average players in, it cheapens all the great players.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

if you had to list the best big RBs of all-time, I imagine Bettis would be included in the top 2 or 3. He's a unique player...a halfback in a fullback's body...and it's pretty tough to compare him to other RBs who are much different players than he is.His career is certainly impressive, but I agree that he is more like the Art Monk of RBs - a compiler who was rarely if ever considered one of the elite at his position while he played.

 

[Jack Ham & Eggs]

To me Bettis has always been an average RB. There may have been a couple years when you could consider him a top 5 RB, but thats around it. When the Hall of Fame votes average players in, it cheapens all the great players.

The thing is that "average" running backs don't run for 13,000 yards. In this debate it is somehow getting spun to make it sound like any fool can inevitably pile up those kind of numbers if he only sticks around long enough. No, he doesn't dazzle you. But, in the history of football how many RBs have there been? I mean all the people that ever suited up and ran Pop Warner, JV, HS, college, whatever. This guy has the 5th most yards EVER at the most elite level! There is not a single thing, other than his speed, that can accurately be characterized as "average" about Jerome Bettis the football player.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

There is not a single thing, other than his speed, that can accurately be characterized as "average" about Jerome Bettis the football player.

his hands are well below average

 

[Jack Ham & Eggs]

There is not a single thing, other than his speed, that can accurately be characterized as "average" about Jerome Bettis the football player.

his hands are well below average

Yes, but that isn't average. It's "well below" average. Anyway, we both know you're nitpicking. John Stockton couldn't dunk either. Big deal. When you can do what Bettis did/does as well as he did/does it, then you can have a few holes in your game. My point is that he is an exceptional player and to call him "average" is a complete insult to him. Jonathan Wells is an "average" running back. Jerome Bettis, whether a Hall of Famer or not, is exceptional.

 

[Raider Nation]

My point is that he is an exceptional player and to call him "average" is a complete insult to him. Jonathan Wells is an "average" running back. Jerome Bettis, whether a Hall of Famer or not, is exceptional.

Bettis is exceptionally fat.

 

[Raider Nation]

There is not a single thing, other than his speed, that can accurately be characterized as "average" about Jerome Bettis the football player.

his hands are well below average

Yes, but that isn't average. It's "well below" average. Anyway, we both know you're nitpicking. John Stockton couldn't dunk either. Big deal.

The nutter shorts were weighing him down.Incidentally, that is a silly analogy. Point guards have two primary duties: pass the ball and shoot the ball. Stockton did both quite well. RBs have two primary duties: run the ball and catch the ball. Bettis did only one of those well, so he is by definition an incomplete running back. If Pittsburgh is faced with a 3rd & 3 or more, Bettis is on the sidelines. Just about every RB mentioned in this thread, as well as the majority of RBs already in the Hall would be on the field on a 3rd & 8 play.

 

[Chaka]

Not sure I agree RAIDERNATION.Throwing out 1995, where he was in the doghouse in LA for some reason, Bettis had an eight year 10,000+ yard stretch that was as impressive as anyones. Five times in the top 10 rushing yards (3 x in the top 3).If the HoF is NOT going to punish guys like Gale Sayers for being fragile or Earl Campbell for not being able to sustain his pace, then I don't see how they CAN punish a guy like Bus who was dominant during his prime and able to be an above average contributor during his later years.Earl had five productive seasons that put him in the HoF. 7,758 yards, 67 TDs (4.5 ypc) Bettis' five most productive seasons netted him 7,051 yards 36 TDs (4.3 ypc). So should the hall view 31 TDs & 0.2 ypc as being more important than 3 additional 1,000 yard seasons + another 941 yard 13+ TD season at the age of 32? Personally I do not think so.Sayers entire career rushing+receiving numbers do not even match Bettis' best 5 year stretch rushing, though Sayers would have a 12 TD edge.So Bettis' only knock IMO is that he did not compile a ton of TDs, though four more TDs would tie him with Dickerson.You cannot punish a guy for being durable, Bettis belongs in the HoF.

 

[tommyboy]

you cannot bust on Bettis here for his "compiling" as you say. The guy played for the Steelers for petes sake. How good are Terry Bradshaw's numbers? How good are John Stallworth and Lynn Swanns numbers? Pittsburgh has never had statistical mindblowers, other than team defense. The team has had 2 coaches in over 30 years and both coaches would like 3 yards and a cloud of dust while his teams won a lot of games and divsion titles, made it to the AFC championship game 4 or 5 times and the superbowl once, with QB's named O' Donnell and Kordell. You say Elway was a HOF because he took chumps around him on offense and made them winners, well you might as well use that same argument for Bettis, because Pittsburgh had a lot of chumps at QB, WR and TE during the Bettis years yet they still won a ton of games.

 

[AnonymousBob]

I don't think there's one person in here calling him merely average as much as they're saying he's very good but not great.

 

[The Man With No Name]

Does Larry Centers 827 receptions-tops among running backs, get him into the Hall? No. Bettis could make it in just because of his totals, not because he has been great.

 

[azcards33]

I believe that I remember alot of Raiders players saying the same thing about Marcus Allen, when he was a member of the Chiefs.I clearly remember that Allen had a chance to break a TD record, I believe, against his former team, and all they were saying was "So what?, when a guy plays the game for so long", as Allen did, "of course he's going to break a few records along the way", and obviously attempted to downplay the significance of his achievementI see Bettis the same way, he was never a dominant or game-breaking back, he was merely a guy who was lucky enough to have longevity, and play the game for a long, long time. Definately not a Hall Of Famer in my opinion, just as I don't believe that Vinny Testaverde should be a Hall-Of-Famer, despite the numbers that he may have compiled throughout the years, and where he ranks on many of NFL's all-time passing statistics in many different categoriesRAIDERNATION: Don't you feel that the same exact argument that you made against Bettis can be made against your boy, Tim Brown though? He never struck me as a great player, just a guy who played the game for a long time

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

I think Bettis and Curtis Martin established themselves as hall of fame locks with their amazing 2004 seasons. But, I think Martin is much more deserving of the honor than Bettis as I think Martin has been more consistently great throughout his entire career.

Seems to me that 2 of the HOF RBs most comparable to Bettis in terms of their ability would be Larry Csonka and John Riggins.

Let's take a look at their numbers:

Larry Csonka (6'3", 237):

5-time Pro Bowler (1970-1974)

Played for 11 years, had 3 1000 yard seasons

Finished top-5 in rushing 4 times

All-time rank: 29th in rushing yards

Super Bowl MVP

career numbers: 1891 carries for 8081 yards (4.3 y/a) 64 TD; 106 receptions for 820 yards 4 TDs

John Riggins (6'2", 230):

1-time Pro Bowler (1975)

Played for 14 years, had 5 1000 yard seasons

Finished top-10 in rushing 4 times

All-time rank: 13th in rushing yards

Super Bowl MVP

career numbers: 2916 carries for 11352 yards (3.9 y/a) 104 TD; 250 receptions for 2090 yards 12 TDs

Jerome Bettis (5'11", 255):

6-time Pro Bowler (1993, 1994, 1996, 1997, 2001, 2004)

Played for 13 years, had 8 1000 yard seasons

Finished top-10 in rushing 5 times (including 3 top-5s)

All-time rank: 5th in rushing yards

career numbers: 3428 carries for 13467 yards (3.9 y/a) 84 TD; 197 receptions for 1425 yards 3 TDs

Based on that comparison, Bettis stacks up pretty nicely. The only key thing he is missing is a Super Bowl win and his TD totals are pretty low for a power RB.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I think Bettis and Curtis Martin established themselves as hall of fame locks with their amazing 2004 seasons. But, I think Martin is much more deserving of the honor than Bettis as I think Martin has been more consistently great throughout his entire career.

Seems to me that 2 of the HOF RBs most comparable to Bettis in terms of their ability would be Larry Csonka and John Riggins.

Let's take a look at their numbers:

Larry Csonka (6'3", 237):

5-time Pro Bowler (1970-1974)

Played for 11 years, had 3 1000 yard seasons

Finished top-5 in rushing 4 times

All-time rank: 29th in rushing yards

Super Bowl MVP

career numbers: 1891 carries for 8081 yards (4.3 y/a) 64 TD; 106 receptions for 820 yards 4 TDs

John Riggins (6'2", 230):

1-time Pro Bowler (1975)

Played for 14 years, had 5 1000 yard seasons

Finished top-10 in rushing 4 times

All-time rank: 13th in rushing yards

Super Bowl MVP

career numbers: 2916 carries for 11352 yards (3.9 y/a) 104 TD; 250 receptions for 2090 yards 12 TDs

Jerome Bettis (5'11", 255):

6-time Pro Bowler (1993, 1994, 1996, 1997, 2001, 2004)

Played for 13 years, had 8 1000 yard seasons

Finished top-10 in rushing 5 times (including 3 top-5s)

All-time rank: 5th in rushing yards

career numbers: 3428 carries for 13467 yards (3.9 y/a) 84 TD; 197 receptions for 1425 yards 3 TDs

Based on that comparison, Bettis stacks up pretty nicely. The only key thing he is missing is a Super Bowl win and his TD totals are pretty low for a power RB.

Thanks for saving me the trouble of doing this, Aaron, as I was about to have to go to the numbers.Come on, people. I'll be the first to admit that at no point in his career was Bettis widely regarded the best RB in football, but how many players are? Compiler or not, one needs to look no further than the 6 Pro Bowls. Pro Bowl selections aren't based on a comilation of stats, it's based on performance within a given season. 6 times he was deemed one of the best backs in the NFL. Can anyone out there tell me how many other backs in NFL history have made 6 Pro Bowls? I imagine that list would be pretty star-studded.

Bettis is a mortal lock for the Hall of Fame, and that's exactly as it should be. He's been the face of one of the NFL's most storied franchises for over a decade. Over that time, the Steelers are either first or second in wins, and Bettis is more responsible for that feat than any one single player. His lack of a Super Bowl ring is one knock against him, but Barry Sanders and Dan Marino also have no rings and you cannot deny their qualifications. You don't have to have won a championship to be a great player. Football is a team sport.

 

[Steelers4Life]

I think Bettis and Curtis Martin established themselves as hall of fame locks with their amazing 2004 seasons. But, I think Martin is much more deserving of the honor than Bettis as I think Martin has been more consistently great throughout his entire career.

Seems to me that 2 of the HOF RBs most comparable to Bettis in terms of their ability would be Larry Csonka and John Riggins.

Let's take a look at their numbers:

Larry Csonka (6'3", 237):

5-time Pro Bowler (1970-1974)

Played for 11 years, had 3 1000 yard seasons

Finished top-5 in rushing 4 times

All-time rank: 29th in rushing yards

Super Bowl MVP

career numbers: 1891 carries for 8081 yards (4.3 y/a) 64 TD; 106 receptions for 820 yards 4 TDs

John Riggins (6'2", 230):

1-time Pro Bowler (1975)

Played for 14 years, had 5 1000 yard seasons

Finished top-10 in rushing 4 times

All-time rank: 13th in rushing yards

Super Bowl MVP

career numbers: 2916 carries for 11352 yards (3.9 y/a) 104 TD; 250 receptions for 2090 yards 12 TDs

Jerome Bettis (5'11", 255):

6-time Pro Bowler (1993, 1994, 1996, 1997, 2001, 2004)

Played for 13 years, had 8 1000 yard seasons

Finished top-10 in rushing 5 times (including 3 top-5s)

All-time rank: 5th in rushing yards

career numbers: 3428 carries for 13467 yards (3.9 y/a) 84 TD; 197 receptions for 1425 yards 3 TDs

Based on that comparison, Bettis stacks up pretty nicely. The only key thing he is missing is a Super Bowl win and his TD totals are pretty low for a power RB.

Thanks for saving me the trouble of doing this, Aaron, as I was about to have to go to the numbers.Come on, people. I'll be the first to admit that at no point in his career was Bettis widely regarded the best RB in football, but how many players are? Compiler or not, one needs to look no further than the 6 Pro Bowls. Pro Bowl selections aren't based on a comilation of stats, it's based on performance within a given season. 6 times he was deemed one of the best backs in the NFL. Can anyone out there tell me how many other backs in NFL history have made 6 Pro Bowls? I imagine that list would be pretty star-studded.

Bettis is a mortal lock for the Hall of Fame, and that's exactly as it should be. He's been the face of one of the NFL's most storied franchises for over a decade. Over that time, the Steelers are either first or second in wins, and Bettis is more responsible for that feat than any one single player. His lack of a Super Bowl ring is one knock against him, but Barry Sanders and Dan Marino also have no rings and you cannot deny their qualifications. You don't have to have won a championship to be a great player. Football is a team sport.

He compares favorably to a lot of RBs already in the Hall.

It makes his accomplishments even more special when you consider that he spent his prime playing with Mike Tomczak, Kordell Stewart, and Tommy Maddox under center. That, to a large degree, explains the lack of TDs and the lack of a Super Bowl ring. It's a shame, too.