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

[CrossEyed]

Argue all you want, but Bettis is a lock for the HOF. And deservedly so.

 

[Class Dismissed]

Kordell=Bettis TD vulture

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Late to the party and I don't feel like reading all the replies so I'll just say.Bettis came into the league where big backs were still liked by many teams/HCs in the league. He outlasted and outproduced them all. Having a career as long as he did with his style of running is amazing. The fact that he came off the bench last season to take over the Steelers running game at the age of 32 with the punishment he's taken was nothing short of great IMO. He'll probably be the last good big back for a long while, since that style of back is outdated.Yeah he doesn't "look" as good as the other RBs of his era, but that's because he played a completely different game than them.If he gets in for those reasons, I won't feel bad about it.

 

[kevinray]

One of the most important features of Bettis is that the Steelers literaly built their offense around him. Bettis/Defense was the Steelers persona for years and years. Now there are not many running backs who have offenses built to fit them, many backs are interchangable. We saw that Bettis was unlike any back in the NFL, took him in, and made him our main man. In these years, the steelers have one of the best records in the nfl over this span. As somebody mentioned before, with some pretty shotty qbs. it didnt matter that much though, cause the game plan was bettis. also as the original poster mentioned, he is the epitimy of what the NFL wants in its players. great person, great for our community of pittsburgh, team player, etc. there is no question in my mind that he should be in the hall, completly unbiased.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I think Bettis and Curtis Martin established themselves as hall of fame locks with their amazing 2004 seasons.

Amazing 2004 season? Um, since when is rushing for 941 yards and averaging 3.8 YPC an amazing season?

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.

Sorry. but Pro Bowl berths mean nothing. Those selections are way too subjective. Why do you think ever year, there is complaining left and right about deserving people not making it and undeserving people making it on reputation? If you want to look at numbers and stats, that is fine, but Pro Bowl berths are meaningless when discussing how worthy someone is of being a HoFer. Consider, too, that players can make the Pro Bowl if other players selected ahead of him were hurt. Look at last year. Bettis had a below average YPC and didn't even rush for 1000 yards. That is a Pro Bowl year? I think not.

 

[oso diablo]

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.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

[Ghost Rider]

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.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Heh...Gotta love 'The Princess Bride' quotes.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

I think Bettis and Curtis Martin established themselves as hall of fame locks with their amazing 2004 seasons.

Amazing 2004 season? Um, since when is rushing for 941 yards and averaging 3.8 YPC an amazing season?

I guess you didn't get the memo about Duce Staley being the starting RB in 2004 and Bettis getting the 1 yard TD run duties?Bettis didn't start until week 9 when Duce Staley was out.

Over the last 8 games his stats were: 812 and 4.1 YPC and 5 TDs.

 

[ren hoek]

I guess you didn't get the memo about Duce Staley being the starting RB in 2004 and Bettis getting the 1 yard TD run duties?

Uh, yeah. Perhaps Staley was the starter because Jerome Bettis isn't even the best running back on his own team? I think if any other player did exactly what Bettis did in the 2nd half and got into the Pro Bowl, it'd be an outrage. A good half of a season isn't Pro Bowl-worthy.

 

[Stillers Jr.]

I guess you didn't get the memo about Duce Staley being the starting RB in 2004 and Bettis getting the 1 yard TD run duties?

Uh, yeah. Perhaps Staley was the starter because Jerome Bettis isn't even the best running back on his own team? I think if any other player did exactly what Bettis did in the 2nd half and got into the Pro Bowl, it'd be an outrage. A good half of a season isn't Pro Bowl-worthy.

h8erplain

and

simple

 

[BigRed]

Call him a compiler if you want but he is the best big back the NFL has seen since Jim Brown retired.

...which is also not a reason to put him in the HOF. You don't (or shouldn't) get in by being a good "niche" player - ie he shouldn't get in because he's one of the best BIG backs around, but one of best backs of his day, period. PS stats and longevity are all well and fine and I'm not saying they don't matter, but there are way too many stat-heads who put way too much emphasis on it. If you didn't see a player play much, you don't really know if he's HOF material or not, because being truly great is about way more than stats. And lmao @ mentioning pro bowls - they have always been of debatable value, but now they're just a popularity contest and meaningless.

Bettis had some very good years, don't get me wrong. But I really question if he's HOF material.

 

[cstu]

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.

at blaming him for not winning a rushing title during the prime of two of the top 5 RB's of all-time, Emmitt and Barry. The same goes for the MVP which normally goes a QB and Bettis barely lost out to Emmitt in the one year it went to a RB (1993). The SB is a team game and Barry was voted in so that shouldn't be a factor.

 

[cstu]

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.

Gimme a break. Instead of rattling off nonsense, name them. GL.

 

[cstu]

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.

He wasn't great in 93, 96 and 97? I beg to differ and think you either didn't seem him play back then or don't remember how good he was.

 

[cstu]

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.

Bettis was a BEAST early in his career. I'm sure if you asked the defensive players who tried to stop him back they would say he deserves to be in the HOF. I'm actually at a loss for words over the people who think he was some kind of average back. His YPC may have went down over his career, but if you need a guy to pound through the line for a first down or TD there aren't many guys who you'd want.

 

[Wreckincrew]

I would vote no, but then I feel they let too many in anyway. With Hines Ward becoming the leading receiver in Pittsburg does that make him a lock since two Steeler WR's are already in?

 

[Ghost Rider]

I think Bettis and Curtis Martin established themselves as hall of fame locks with their amazing 2004 seasons.

Amazing 2004 season? Um, since when is rushing for 941 yards and averaging 3.8 YPC an amazing season?

I guess you didn't get the memo about Duce Staley being the starting RB in 2004 and Bettis getting the 1 yard TD run duties?Bettis didn't start until week 9 when Duce Staley was out.

Over the last 8 games his stats were: 812 and 4.1 YPC and 5 TDs.

Scoring a bunch of 1 yard touchdowns and then having a nice second half of a season does not = an amazing season, in my book. Perhaps you should ask yourself why Bettis wasn't the starter in Pittsburgh last year. Duce Staley, hardly a HoFer, put up just as good a numbers when healthy the first half of last year. Did he have an amazing season, too?

 

[kevinray]

One of the most important features of Bettis is that the Steelers literaly built their offense around him. Bettis/Defense was the Steelers persona for years and years. Now there are not many running backs who have offenses built to fit them, many backs are interchangable. We saw that Bettis was unlike any back in the NFL, took him in, and made him our main man. In these years, the steelers have one of the best records in the nfl over this span. As somebody mentioned before, with some pretty shotty qbs. it didnt matter that much though, cause the game plan was bettis. also as the original poster mentioned, he is the epitimy of what the NFL wants in its players. great person, great for our community of pittsburgh, team player, etc. there is no question in my mind that he should be in the hall, completly unbiased.

I repeat

 

[Ghost Rider]

One of the most important features of Bettis is that the Steelers literaly built their offense around him. Bettis/Defense was the Steelers persona for years and years. Now there are not many running backs who have offenses built to fit them, many backs are interchangable. We saw that Bettis was unlike any back in the NFL, took him in, and made him our main man. In these years, the steelers have one of the best records in the nfl over this span. As somebody mentioned before, with some pretty shotty qbs. it didnt matter that much though, cause the game plan was bettis. also as the original poster mentioned, he is the epitimy of what the NFL wants in its players. great person, great for our community of pittsburgh, team player, etc. there is no question in my mind that he should be in the hall, completly unbiased.

I repeat

While Kordell Stewart ended up declining as an NFL QB, he had a few good years. In fact, the best years the Steelers have had with Bettis were '97, '01 and '04. Stewart was great in '97 and '01 (he was a serious MVP candidate in '01). What does it mean? That this talk that Bettis always produced despite having shoddy QB play is inaccurate. Steelers' quarterbacks have had good years. Heck, even though Tommy Maddox is horrible now, he did have a really good season back in '02. As for being a great person and great for your community, that is all nice and pretty. but it means nothing as far as being a more worthy HoF candidate. Bettis has always been a great team player, though, there is no doubt about that.

 

[stevec]

It's all about career value versus peak value. This gets debated in baseball circles a lot. Bettis actually has both.He was a top 3 RB for 3-4 years, and has been been steadily putting up a number of seasons where he is well above NFL average RB and replacement value, which is what really matters to me.Please note: NFL average RB is the average of all NFL RB's. Not starting RB's. Not HoF RB's.I think the crucial differences between Monk & Bettis are:1. You had to gameplan for Bettis.2. WR's just catch the ball, that role has expanded, but not really changed. RB roles have changed much more than WR have during thos 2 guys' careers.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

One of the most important features of Bettis is that the Steelers literaly built their offense around him.  Bettis/Defense was the Steelers persona for years and years.  Now there are not many running backs who have offenses built to fit them, many backs are interchangable.  We saw that Bettis was unlike any back in the NFL, took him in, and made him our main man.  In these years, the steelers have one of the best records in the nfl over this span.  As somebody mentioned before, with some pretty shotty qbs.  it didnt matter that much though, cause the game plan was bettis.  also as the original poster mentioned, he is the epitimy of what the NFL wants in its players.  great person, great for our community of pittsburgh, team player, etc.  there is no question in my mind that he should be in the hall, completly unbiased.

I repeat

While Kordell Stewart ended up declining as an NFL QB, he had a few good years. In fact, the best years the Steelers have had with Bettis were '97, '01 and '04. Stewart was great in '97 and '01 (he was a serious MVP candidate in '01). What does it mean? That this talk that Bettis always produced despite having shoddy QB play is inaccurate. Steelers' quarterbacks have had good years. Heck, even though Tommy Maddox is horrible now, he did have a really good season back in '02. As for being a great person and great for your community, that is all nice and pretty. but it means nothing as far as being a more worthy HoF candidate. Bettis has always been a great team player, though, there is no doubt about that.

OK, then let me ask you this. In the last 20 years or so, what RBs are more HOF worthy than Bettis? I'll give you Curtis Martin, Emmitt Smith, Barry Sanders as three gimmes. Who else? Don't throw out LT2 or Alexander, as we have no idea yet how their careers will end. I'm talking career achievements here.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I'll make this easier for you - I went through the top 10 rushers each year since 1986 and picked out any guys that you might even possibly consider to be HOF worthy (Dickerson and Payton made a couple of appearances between them - but both are already in.) Here are the guys I found :Roger CraigThurman ThomasMarshall FaulkRicky WattersTerrell DavisEddie GeorgePriest HolmesThat's about it. Out of that list, which of these players do you consider to me more HOF-worthy than Bettis?

 

[Ghost Rider]

OK, then let me ask you this. In the last 20 years or so, what RBs are more HOF worthy than Bettis? I'll give you Curtis Martin, Emmitt Smith, Barry Sanders as three gimmes. Who else? Don't throw out LT2 or Alexander, as we have no idea yet how their careers will end. I'm talking career achievements here.

I'll make this easier for you - I went through the top 10 rushers each year since 1986 and picked out any guys that you might even possibly consider to be HOF worthy (Dickerson and Payton made a couple of appearances between them - but both are already in.) Here are the guys I found :

Roger Craig

Thurman Thomas

Marshall Faulk

Ricky Watters

Terrell Davis

Eddie George

Priest Holmes

That's about it. Out of that list, which of these players do you consider to me more HOF-worthy than Bettis?

The fact that you do not consider Marshall Faulk a gimme over Bettis just shows your Steelers bias. Faulk is much more of a no-brainer than Curtis Martin. Thomas is a no-brainer, as well.

I would not call Watters, George or Holmes HoFer's, either.

I would have to look up Craig's numbers before making a judgement on him.

Davis, despite having an incredible three years, had too short of a career.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

OK, then let me ask you this.  In the last 20 years or so, what RBs are more HOF worthy than Bettis?  I'll give you Curtis Martin, Emmitt Smith, Barry Sanders as three gimmes.  Who else?  Don't throw out LT2 or Alexander, as we have no idea yet how their careers will end.  I'm talking career achievements here.

I'll make this easier for you - I went through the top 10 rushers each year since 1986 and picked out any guys that you might even possibly consider to be HOF worthy (Dickerson and Payton made a couple of appearances between them - but both are already in.)  Here are the guys I found :

Roger Craig

Thurman Thomas

Marshall Faulk

Ricky Watters

Terrell Davis

Eddie George

Priest Holmes

That's about it.  Out of that list, which of these players do you consider to me more HOF-worthy than Bettis?

The fact that you do not consider Marshall Faulk a gimme over Bettis just shows your Steelers bias. Faulk is much more of a no-brainer than Curtis Martin. Thomas is a no-brainer, as well.

I would not call Watters, George or Holmes HoFer's, either.

I would have to look up Craig's numbers before making a judgement on him.

Davis, despite having an incredible three years, had too short of a career.

Or you could say I value longevity more than a few huge years, rather than automatically assuming it's Steeler bias. Martin is #4 on the all-time rushing list, so to me, it's pretty much a given that he'll get in. However, you could call him a compiler too, same as Bettis. So let's say Emmitt, Sanders, Thurman Thomas, and Faulk are mortal locks in your estimation. I'll also assume that you prefer Martin to Bettis. So, according to that, Bettis, in your estimation, is the 6th most-worthy candidate to play in the last 2 decades. Yet, he doesn't belong?Just how exclusive is the Hall of Fame supposed to be? If the criteria were as stringent as that, there would be a total of 10 RBs in the Hall of Fame from the entire Super Bowl era.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Or you could say I value longevity more than a few huge years, rather than automatically assuming it's Steeler bias. Martin is #4 on the all-time rushing list, so to me, it's pretty much a given that he'll get in. However, you could call him a compiler too, same as Bettis. So let's say Emmitt, Sanders, Thurman Thomas, and Faulk are mortal locks in your estimation. I'll also assume that you prefer Martin to Bettis. So, according to that, Bettis, in your estimation, is the 6th most-worthy candidate to play in the last 2 decades. Yet, he doesn't belong?

Just how exclusive is the Hall of Fame supposed to be? If the criteria were as stringent as that, there would be a total of 10 RBs in the Hall of Fame from the entire Super Bowl era.

Longevity is important, but being good to very good over an entire career like Bettis has simply is not Hall of Fame-worthy, IMO. This year, Shaun Alexander already has his 5th season over 1200 yards in just 7 seasons. James is about hit his 6th season over 1200 yards in 8 seasons. Tomlinson is about to hit his 5th straight 1200 yard season in just as many seasons. Bettis has only gone over the 1200 yard mark 4 times in 13 seasons.

At this rate, I would put Alexander, James and Tomlinson all in ahead of Bettis (and that is not even taking into account their far superior numbers as a receiver).

In his first 12 NFL seasons, Bettis has averaged 1108 yards per season. He has averaged 72 rushing yards per game. 72! You really think that is a Hall of Fame back?

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

He has averaged 72 rushing yards per game. 72! You really think that is a Hall of Fame back?

If you want to cherry pick stats, then I can play too.Yes, I do think it is, since HOF'er Csonka only averaged 55.3 rushing yards per game.

 

[Ghost Rider]

He has averaged 72 rushing yards per game. 72! You really think that is a Hall of Fame back?

If you want to cherry pick stats, then I can play too.Yes, I do think it is, since HOF'er Csonka only averaged 55.3 rushing yards per game.

The difference, of course, being that Bettis has played in an era where numbers and yardage are higher than they were decades ago, so your argument loses crediblity when taking that into account. And you all keeping talking about Bettis being this big and bad workhorse, but he has only carried the ball over 300 times 5 times in his 13 seasons and not once since 2000. Look at his numbers of the last four seasons. He has managed to hang on and pad his numbers while being a part-time player.

Oh, and the league average for YPC has around 4.1 - 4.2, give or take, for years now. Bettis has only averaged over 4.0 YPC four times and only once in the last 8 years!

You can call it cherry-picking if you want, but these are important numbers that tell the tale of Bettis' career.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Or you could say I value longevity more than a few huge years, rather than automatically assuming it's Steeler bias.  Martin is #4 on the all-time rushing list, so to me, it's pretty much a given that he'll get in.  However, you could call him a compiler too, same as Bettis.  So let's say Emmitt, Sanders, Thurman Thomas, and Faulk are mortal locks in your estimation.  I'll also assume that you prefer Martin to Bettis.  So, according to that, Bettis, in your estimation, is the 6th most-worthy candidate to play in the last 2 decades.  Yet, he doesn't belong?

Just how exclusive is the Hall of Fame supposed to be?  If the criteria were as stringent as that, there would be a total of 10 RBs in the Hall of Fame from the entire Super Bowl era.

Longevity is important, but being good to very good over an entire career like Bettis has simply is not Hall of Fame-worthy, IMO. This year, Shaun Alexander already has his 5th season over 1200 yards in just 7 seasons. James is about hit his 6th season over 1200 yards in 8 seasons. Tomlinson is about to hit his 5th straight 1200 yard season in just as many seasons. Bettis has only gone over the 1200 yard mark 4 times in 13 seasons.

At this rate, I would put Alexander, James and Tomlinson all in ahead of Bettis (and that is not even taking into account their far superior numbers as a receiver).

In his first 12 NFL seasons, Bettis has averaged 1108 yards per season. He has averaged 72 rushing yards per game. 72! You really think that is a Hall of Fame back?

Tony Dorsett averaged 73 yards per game for his career. Does he not belong?Emmitt Smith averaged a whopping 81 yards per game for his career. Does that 9 yards per game make the difference between an all-time great and a guy who doesn't deserve HOF consideration?

How many running backs even last 12 years in the NFL?

How many running backs average over 1,100 yards a season in their careers ?(this is INCLUDING time missed due to injury or splitting time - if you factor in only games missed without even considering games not started, his average season is 1,225 yards)

Look, you can spin the stats any way you want, but your memory doesn't seem to go back far enough. You're comparing Alexander and Tomlinson in their primes to Bettis now. Bettis in his prime was a pretty strong back, as well. In fact, if you look earlier in his career - in his prime, he had 7 full seasons out of his first 8 (the Rams nailed him to the bench in '95 before trading him to Pittsburgh) in which he was the unquestioned starter and played all 16 games, same as Alexander and Tomlinson do now. In those 7 seasons, he broke 1,300 yards 4 times, 1,400 yards twice, and 1,600 once. He averaged 1,310 yards rushing and 154 yards receiving per season and scored 49 TDs (even with Stewart, Morris, and others there to vulture TDs from him) in those 7 years. That's pretty solid.

Add to this that he will retire in the top 5 all-time in rushing yards, and in the top 10 all-time in both TDs and yards froms crimmage, and I can't see anyone believeing he has no place among the all-time greats. You're getting a little carried away by what you're seeing from some of today's top backs, but let's see how many of them are still doing it in 4 years, let alone 7 or 8.

 

[gman8343]

Or you could say I value longevity more than a few huge years, rather than automatically assuming it's Steeler bias.  Martin is #4 on the all-time rushing list, so to me, it's pretty much a given that he'll get in.  However, you could call him a compiler too, same as Bettis.  So let's say Emmitt, Sanders, Thurman Thomas, and Faulk are mortal locks in your estimation.  I'll also assume that you prefer Martin to Bettis.  So, according to that, Bettis, in your estimation, is the 6th most-worthy candidate to play in the last 2 decades.  Yet, he doesn't belong?

Just how exclusive is the Hall of Fame supposed to be?  If the criteria were as stringent as that, there would be a total of 10 RBs in the Hall of Fame from the entire Super Bowl era.

Longevity is important, but being good to very good over an entire career like Bettis has simply is not Hall of Fame-worthy, IMO. This year, Shaun Alexander already has his 5th season over 1200 yards in just 7 seasons. James is about hit his 6th season over 1200 yards in 8 seasons. Tomlinson is about to hit his 5th straight 1200 yard season in just as many seasons. Bettis has only gone over the 1200 yard mark 4 times in 13 seasons.

At this rate, I would put Alexander, James and Tomlinson all in ahead of Bettis (and that is not even taking into account their far superior numbers as a receiver).

In his first 12 NFL seasons, Bettis has averaged 1108 yards per season. He has averaged 72 rushing yards per game. 72! You really think that is a Hall of Fame back?

Tony Dorsett averaged 73 yards per game for his career. Does he not belong?Emmitt Smith averaged a whopping 81 yards per game for his career. Does that 9 yards per game make the difference between an all-time great and a guy who doesn't deserve HOF consideration?

How many running backs even last 12 years in the NFL?

How many running backs average over 1,100 yards a season in their careers ?(this is INCLUDING time missed due to injury or splitting time - if you factor in only games missed without even considering games not started, his average season is 1,225 yards)

Look, you can spin the stats any way you want, but your memory doesn't seem to go back far enough. You're comparing Alexander and Tomlinson in their primes to Bettis now. Bettis in his prime was a pretty strong back, as well. In fact, if you look earlier in his career - in his prime, he had 7 full seasons out of his first 8 (the Rams nailed him to the bench in '95 before trading him to Pittsburgh) in which he was the unquestioned starter and played all 16 games, same as Alexander and Tomlinson do now. In those 7 seasons, he broke 1,300 yards 4 times, 1,400 yards twice, and 1,600 once. He averaged 1,310 yards rushing and 154 yards receiving per season and scored 49 TDs (even with Stewart, Morris, and others there to vulture TDs from him) in those 7 years. That's pretty solid.

Add to this that he will retire in the top 5 all-time in rushing yards, and in the top 10 all-time in both TDs and yards froms crimmage, and I can't see anyone believeing he has no place among the all-time greats. You're getting a little carried away by what you're seeing from some of today's top backs, but let's see how many of them are still doing it in 4 years, let alone 7 or 8.

Great points, but I think what he was trying to say was that in his prime, Bettis was nowhere near as productive as guys like Tomlinson and Alexander are. He was never the #1 or #2 RB, he was just very good for a long time.His overall numbers are very good, but so are Vinny Testeverde's yardage totals.

To me an all time great is you had to be the dominant player at your position for a period of years. Bettis was never that, there were always a few RBs better than him every year.

Someone mentioned Tim Brown as a comparison earlier in the thread, and I agree - Tim Brown was never the best, he was just very good for a long time, which I guess makes him great in many people's eyes. Sterling Sharpe was much better than Tim Brown IMO, but he didn't have the longevity.

 

[Sinrman]

Not going to bother reading the replies...He is a Hall of Famer. Might not get in the very first time around, but he will get in. Deal with it...

 

[Evilgrin 72]

To me an all time great is you had to be the dominant player at your position for a period of years. Bettis was never that, there were always a few RBs better than him every year.

This is true, but he did finish in the top 3 in the NFL in rushing 3 times in his first 4 full seasons as a starter. Also placed in the top 10 two other times and made 6 Pro Bowls, so it's not like he was never dominant at all.I agree that he's not one of the 5-10 best backs of all time, despite the career numbers. What I do believe is that he possesses more than enough qualifications to get into the Hall of Fame. If you deny Bettis, you have to take 2/3 of the backs in there out, at least.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Not going to bother reading the replies...

He is a Hall of Famer. Might not get in the very first time around, but he will get in. Deal with it...

Exactly. I even believe he may be a first-ballot player, depending on who else is eligible when he becomes so.

 

[MarshallRob]

He has averaged 72 rushing yards per game.  72!  You really think that is a Hall of Fame back?

If you want to cherry pick stats, then I can play too.Yes, I do think it is, since HOF'er Csonka only averaged 55.3 rushing yards per game.

Comparing Csonka to Bettis is unfair because they didn't play the same position. Csonka was a Fullback. He blocked for Mercury Morris and Jim Kiick in addition to carrying the ball. Csonka would only get around 200 carries a season.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

He has averaged 72 rushing yards per game.  72!  You really think that is a Hall of Fame back?

If you want to cherry pick stats, then I can play too.Yes, I do think it is, since HOF'er Csonka only averaged 55.3 rushing yards per game.

Comparing Csonka to Bettis is unfair because they didn't play the same position. Csonka was a Fullback. He blocked for Mercury Morris and Jim Kiick in addition to carrying the ball. Csonka would only get around 200 carries a season.

Good point. How about John Riggins and his 64.8 yard per game average. Does he belong in the HOF?

 

[Koya]

I'll make this easier for you - I went through the top 10 rushers each year since 1986 and picked out any guys that you might even possibly consider to be HOF worthy (Dickerson and Payton made a couple of appearances between them - but both are already in.)  Here are the guys I found :

Roger Craig

Thurman Thomas

Marshall Faulk

Ricky Watters

Terrell Davis

Eddie George

Priest Holmes

That's about it.  Out of that list, which of these players do you consider to me more HOF-worthy than Bettis?

In Faulk

Thomas

_______

Out

Craig

Bettis

Watters

George

Davis

Holmes

Edit to add: These are my personal choices. During Bettis' career, you also have Curtis Martin, Emmitt and Sanders whom would be HoF ahead of him, especially Emmit and Sanders. If you take late in his career, you have backs that could end up in the HoF, such as LT2, maybe S. Alex.

Either way, there was not a 5 year span where he was one of the top couple backs. He had a three year span where he was top 5. That doesnt cut it for the hall, imo.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

He has averaged 72 rushing yards per game. 72! You really think that is a Hall of Fame back?

If you want to cherry pick stats, then I can play too.Yes, I do think it is, since HOF'er Csonka only averaged 55.3 rushing yards per game.

Comparing Csonka to Bettis is unfair because they didn't play the same position. Csonka was a Fullback. He blocked for Mercury Morris and Jim Kiick in addition to carrying the ball. Csonka would only get around 200 carries a season.

I completely understand the distinction. Keep in mind I'm just responding to the "someone with only X yards per game is not HOF worthy" argument. There are some valid points as to why JB should not hit the hall of fame, but this is certainly not one of them.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

Also, for whatever it's worth...some older discussions on this:

Is Jerome Bettis a Hall of Famer?, Please look beyond the numbers

Jerome Bettis, hall of famer???

Forget Vinny, does BETTIS make the HoF?

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

I think Bettis and Curtis Martin established themselves as hall of fame locks with their amazing 2004 seasons.

Amazing 2004 season? Um, since when is rushing for 941 yards and averaging 3.8 YPC an amazing season?

for a RB of his size and age and mileage who was in serious danger of being released before the season began, a 250 carry, 941 yard, 13 TD season on a team that went 15-1 qualifies as amazing for me.

 

[gman8343]

To me an all time great is you had to be the dominant player at your position for a period of years. Bettis was never that, there were always a few RBs better than him every year.

This is true, but he did finish in the top 3 in the NFL in rushing 3 times in his first 4 full seasons as a starter. Also placed in the top 10 two other times and made 6 Pro Bowls, so it's not like he was never dominant at all.I agree that he's not one of the 5-10 best backs of all time, despite the career numbers. What I do believe is that he possesses more than enough qualifications to get into the Hall of Fame. If you deny Bettis, you have to take 2/3 of the backs in there out, at least.

No denying he'll get in, I'm not disputing that. I personally prefer guys who were THE dominant player at their position (even if for a shorter period) over someone who was very good for a long time. To me Bettis was a very good running back. Not great, but very good. He just happened to last a long time, which is what he's being rewarded for. Guys like Emmitt, Faulk, Sanders and even Terrell Davis and Priest Holmes were much more dominant in their prime (as are LT2 and Alexander).

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

I'll make this easier for you - I went through the top 10 rushers each year since 1986 and picked out any guys that you might even possibly consider to be HOF worthy (Dickerson and Payton made a couple of appearances between them - but both are already in.)  Here are the guys I found :

Roger Craig

Thurman Thomas

Marshall Faulk

Ricky Watters

Terrell Davis

Eddie George

Priest Holmes

That's about it.  Out of that list, which of these players do you consider to me more HOF-worthy than Bettis?

all of the aboveThurman and Faulk are locks. I don't think any of the others will get in, yet I think Bettis definitely will.

 

[cstu]

To me an all time great is you had to be the dominant player at your position for a period of years. Bettis was never that, there were always a few RBs better than him every year.

This is true, but he did finish in the top 3 in the NFL in rushing 3 times in his first 4 full seasons as a starter. Also placed in the top 10 two other times and made 6 Pro Bowls, so it's not like he was never dominant at all.I agree that he's not one of the 5-10 best backs of all time, despite the career numbers. What I do believe is that he possesses more than enough qualifications to get into the Hall of Fame. If you deny Bettis, you have to take 2/3 of the backs in there out, at least.

No denying he'll get in, I'm not disputing that. I personally prefer guys who were THE dominant player at their position (even if for a shorter period) over someone who was very good for a long time. To me Bettis was a very good running back. Not great, but very good. He just happened to last a long time, which is what he's being rewarded for. Guys like Emmitt, Faulk, Sanders and even Terrell Davis and Priest Holmes were much more dominant in their prime (as are LT2 and Alexander).

Jesus, he played in his prime at the same time at Emmitt, Barry, Curtis, Thurman, Faulk and T. Davis, don't throw him under the bus just because he didn't always outrush those guys. He rushed for 1000 yards or more in 8 of his first 9 seasons with over 4 YPC and was instrumental in getting his team to the playoffs.

 

[crazyhorse]

Go back to your black hole.Bettis is w/o any doubt a HOFer.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Quick bump after yesterday's 101 yard, 2 TD performance. 100 yards in the second half against the NFL's #1 defense, giving him 61 100-yard games in his career. Also upped his career TD total to 90.

 

[Bojang0301]

To me an all time great is you had to be the dominant player at your position for a period of years. Bettis was never that, there were always a few RBs better than him every year.

This is true, but he did finish in the top 3 in the NFL in rushing 3 times in his first 4 full seasons as a starter. Also placed in the top 10 two other times and made 6 Pro Bowls, so it's not like he was never dominant at all.I agree that he's not one of the 5-10 best backs of all time, despite the career numbers. What I do believe is that he possesses more than enough qualifications to get into the Hall of Fame. If you deny Bettis, you have to take 2/3 of the backs in there out, at least.

No denying he'll get in, I'm not disputing that. I personally prefer guys who were THE dominant player at their position (even if for a shorter period) over someone who was very good for a long time. To me Bettis was a very good running back. Not great, but very good. He just happened to last a long time, which is what he's being rewarded for. Guys like Emmitt, Faulk, Sanders and even Terrell Davis and Priest Holmes were much more dominant in their prime (as are LT2 and Alexander).

Jesus, he played in his prime at the same time at Emmitt, Barry, Curtis, Thurman, Faulk and T. Davis, don't throw him under the bus just because he didn't always outrush those guys. He rushed for 1000 yards or more in 8 of his first 9 seasons with over 4 YPC and was instrumental in getting his team to the playoffs.

...also, who is the one still able to carry the load when needed?

 

[Ghost Rider]

Quick bump after yesterday's 101 yard, 2 TD performance. 100 yards in the second half against the NFL's #1 defense, giving him 61 100-yard games in his career. Also upped his career TD total to 90.

Congratulations. He managed to jack his season YPC up to 3.4 and is now on pace to run for a whopping 353 yards this season. Mighty impressive! But hey, it is the first good game he has had this year, so I can understand your excitement.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Quick bump after yesterday's 101 yard, 2 TD performance.  100 yards in the second half against the NFL's #1 defense, giving him 61 100-yard games in his career.  Also upped his career TD total to 90.

Congratulations. He managed to jack his season YPC up to 3.4 and is now on pace to run for a whopping 353 yards this season. Mighty impressive! But hey, it is the first good game he has had this year, so I can understand your excitement.

He's a part-time player, man... I don't expect him to roll up 150 yards every week - the guy is in his mid 30s, an age at which 99% of RBs have long since retired.This was meant to address the assertions of some that the guy is "hanging around and padding his stats." I'd say running for 100 yards in a HALF against the vaunted Bears defense shows that the guy still has a little bit of game, that's all. He's still a contributor, he's not just hanging around for the sake of beefing up his numbers.

 

[Steelers4Life]

Jerome Bettis is only 1 year removed from running for 941 yards and 13 TDs for a 15-1 football team.

To make that even impressive, he ran 198 times for 812 yards (4.1 per carry) and 5 TDs in weeks 9-17 last year!

He's a role player this year because his body probably can't take the pounding of being the starter with his running style for an entire season, but he still has enough left to have occasional games like this, which is remarkable.

We're talking about one of the most punishing RBs in NFL history who is now 33 years old, playing a position where his longevity and consistency is just about impossible to explain.

I disagree completely with the notion that he's just around padding his stats, and he's a lock for the Hall of Fame.

 

[Ghost Rider]

He's a part-time player, man... I don't expect him to roll up 150 yards every week - the guy is in his mid 30s, an age at which 99% of RBs have long since retired.

This was meant to address the assertions of some that the guy is "hanging around and padding his stats." I'd say running for 100 yards in a HALF against the vaunted Bears defense shows that the guy still has a little bit of game, that's all. He's still a contributor, he's not just hanging around for the sake of beefing up his numbers.

Bettis obviously still has a good game in him here and there, but even though I doubt he is playing JUST to beef up his numbers, that is what is happening. Odds are he is still playing hoping to get a ring.

Jerome Bettis is only 1 year removed from running for 941 yards and 13 TDs for a 15-1 football team.

To make that even impressive, he ran 198 times for 812 yards (4.1 per carry) and 5 TDs in weeks 9-17 last year!

He's a role player this year because his body probably can't take the pounding of being the starter with his running style for an entire season, but he still has enough left to have occasional games like this, which is remarkable.

We're talking about one of the most punishing RBs in NFL history who is now 33 years old, playing a position where his longevity and consistency is just about impossible to explain.

I disagree completely with the notion that he's just around padding his stats, and he's a lock for the Hall of Fame.

I never said he is hanging around just to pad his stats. Duce Staley had equally impressive numbers the first half of 2004 (aside from the TD totals), so before you give too much credit to Bettis for last season, keep in mind that an average back like Staley did virtually the same thing.

I give Bettis a ton of credit for still playing and being somewhat of a contributor, but I still say he was never consistently a top RB and has always been very good as opposed to great. Thus, not a HoF.

Oh, and should I point out again that his lifetime YPC is only 3.9 (the NFL average since he has been in the league is around 4.3) and that he has only averaged over 4.0 four times in his 13 NFL seasons?

 

[Evilgrin 72]

He's a part-time player, man... I don't expect him to roll up 150 yards every week - the guy is in his mid 30s, an age at which 99% of RBs have long since retired.

This was meant to address the assertions of some that the guy is "hanging around and padding his stats."  I'd say running for 100 yards in a HALF against the vaunted Bears defense shows that the guy still has a little bit of game, that's all.  He's still a contributor, he's not just hanging around for the sake of beefing up his numbers.

Bettis obviously still has a good game in him here and there, but even though I doubt he is playing JUST to beef up his numbers, that is what is happening. Odds are he is still playing hoping to get a ring.

Jerome Bettis is only 1 year removed from running for 941 yards and 13 TDs for a 15-1 football team.

To make that even impressive, he ran 198 times for 812 yards (4.1 per carry) and 5 TDs in weeks 9-17 last year!

He's a role player this year because his body probably can't take the pounding of being the starter with his running style for an entire season, but he still has enough left to have occasional games like this, which is remarkable.

We're talking about one of the most punishing RBs in NFL history who is now 33 years old, playing a position where his longevity and consistency is just about impossible to explain.

I disagree completely with the notion that he's just around padding his stats, and he's a lock for the Hall of Fame.

I never said he is hanging around just to pad his stats. Duce Staley had equally impressive numbers the first half of 2004 (aside from the TD totals), so before you give too much credit to Bettis for last season, keep in mind that an average back like Staley did virtually the same thing.

I give Bettis a ton of credit for still playing and being somewhat of a contributor, but I still say he was never consistently a top RB and has always been very good as opposed to great. Thus, not a HoF.

Oh, and should I point out again that his lifetime YPC is only 3.9 (the NFL average since he has been in the league is around 4.3) and that he has only averaged over 4.0 four times in his 13 NFL seasons?

I don't get the YPC argument. The guy is a bludgeoning back, who has gotten scads of short-yardage carries in his career, where the team needed a yard or two against a 9 or 10 (or 11) man front. Those can tend to weigh on your YPC average, which, as you pointed out, is barely below the league average since his career began. You have to consider what type of back you're looking at before determining what stats carry the most merit. He's #4 on the all-time carries list, and #5 on the all-time yardage list, so it's not like his YPC suffers greatly when compared to other top backs in history. Otherwise, he'd be #4 in carries, but #12 in yards, or something to that effect.Do you think John Riggins belongs in the HOF? Or is it to be reserved only for backs who can be considered the best back in the league over a period of 5 years? I'd argue that Bettis had some great seasons - his first two seasons in Pittsburgh alone, he rushed for 3,100 yards. If you take his top 5 seasons, he rushed for over 7,000 yards in those seasons, an average of over 1,410 yards per season. Does this carry less weight because it happened over the course of a 7 or 8 year span, rather than 5 in a row?

 

[Steelers4Life]

Oh, and should I point out again that his lifetime YPC is only 3.9 (the NFL average since he has been in the league is around 4.3) and that he has only averaged over 4.0 four times in his 13 NFL seasons?

Sure, point it out.

And I'll point out that at no point in his career was the 250+ pound Bettis a homerun threat, but he was a consistent 3-4 yards with occasional bursts and rarely got caught in the backfield. That, my friend, is exactly what the Steelers wanted and needed.

He was a RB who played on teams with the passing "threats" of guys like Mike Tomczak and Stewart, always facing 8 man fronts, and still managed to run between the tackles against teams that knew it was coming.

He just didn't have those 50+ yard runs that other RBs have to pad their YPC numbers.

And the offenses he played on were good at what they did, but they weren't able to be high scoring machines due to the system and the QBs. Otherwise, his TDs would've been much, much higher.