In my opinion the Jerome Bettis and Keenan McCardells of the world are not Hall of Fame worthy, but obviously others disagree. I'm not looking for any paticular player but rather, what do you look for to determine hof eligibility? Career stats? Someone who plays every year at a very good, very steady rate? Somebody who is more of a shooting star-brilliant yet brief? What in your minds does it take?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
What is HOF material? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter iSnitch
- Start date
David Yudkin
Footballguy
It seems to me that there are really three types of potential HOFers (at least from what we've seen til now).BUCKET A: Guys that were dominant almost all of their careers and played for a reasonable amount of time (from the recent era, say 10 years). Examples will be guys like Sanders, Rice, Marino, Emmitt, etc.BUCKET B: Guys that had a smattering of dominant years but played longer than most to accumulate some lofty career totals. Guys like Martin and Tim Brown.BUCKET C: Guys that just seemed to play forever and were essentially compilers. Guys like Bettis, Monk, etc.I have a problem with guys that end up with big career numbers only because they played for 15-18 years. But what do I know.I'd try to limit the HOF to buckets A + B, but maybe that's just me . . .
I agree with you. Guys who were dominant throughout their careers are an automatic ticket into the Hall. I'd say let SOME guys from Bucket B in but not all. Bucket C? Thanks for playing, here's your parting gift. C type players are above average guys who played for a really long time, and since we can mostly agree injuries are rather flukish, why reward somebody simply because they were lucky?
Tau837
Footballguy
Almost every player in every bucket that ultimately makes the HOF was "lucky" with respect to injury and situation. Jerry Rice was lucky not to suffer serious injury early in his career... lucky to play with Joe Montana and Steve Young for one of the most talented and well managed franchises in the league during his career... and he was very talented in his own right. And he is justly considered the best ever at his position and one of the few best players ever in the history of the game. I don't really see your "lucky" factor as relevant to the discussion.
Tau837
Footballguy
I think it is unfair to characterize Bettis as simply a compiler. That is our impression now because he has managed to successfully extend his career well beyond his prime. This makes it easy to forget that he made 6 Pro Bowls and 2 All Pro teams... so he had multiple dominant seasons. That combined with his current top 8 rank in rushes, rushing yards, and rushing TDs puts him in your Bucket B IMO.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
I would think being a top 5 player at your position over approximately a 10-year span or so is a good start.
Csonka4life
Footballguy
Swan is troubling to me, yes he was great but for how long? His career numbers weren't great even for the 70's power football game. Maynard and Bambi both got 10K in career yards when nobody threw much. Swannie caught about 6500? He is the equivalent of maybe Kirby Puckett. But with weaker numbers........
Godsbrother
Footballguy
In the 1970s Lynn Swann was considered one of the best, if not the best, WRs in the game. Even now he is still one of the best "big game" receivers of all time. He was also a helluva blocker and made some of the most acrobatic catches I have ever seen.The problem I have is when people look at a player 25-30 years later and conclude the guy doesn't belong in the HOF, based solely on his numbers. Many of these people never even seen these guys play.Throw Swann out if you want but then you must also throw out guys like Gale Sayers, whose numbers and longevity are even more questionable than Swann's. And Sayers never even played in a post season game. To me the HOF is more than just about numbers. You have to look at the player and consider whether the guy was a great football player and whether or not he added something special to the game. Anyone that saw Swann play knew that he was one of the great players in the league at the time. I also think Bettis belongs because he was/is a special player -- big backs like him are just not supposed to take the punishment he has for as long as he has and still be effective. Bettis is a unique player and for that he belongs in the HOF and in his case he does have the numbers to justify it.That's my 2 cents anyway...
David Yudkin
Footballguy
I am old enough to have seen Swann's big games and circus catches. He may have been one of the most ATHLETIC receivers of his generation, but IMO he was not a go to WR every week. Big game player? Absolutely. But he was not dominant week to week, down to down.He ranked in the Top 5 in receiving yards once and receiving TD twice. He also pnly played for 9 years, so he doesn't have the luxury of having great career numbers. He does not rank in the Top 50 in any significant category. He does have 4 rings, which is what got him in.
This is almost on par with someone like Deion Branch (should he go on to get more rings with the Pats). Do many people consider Branch a future HOFer at this point?
With Bettis, he also had a handful of Top 5 years in key categories--but he's played for 13 years so he SHOULD have had some great seasons.
By comparison, I think someone like Terrell Davis was a more dominant force than Bettis was--yet Davis didn't last anywhere near as long. Same goes for Priest Holmes.
Bettis:
78 total yards, 0.49 TD per game over his career
59 total yards, 0.67 TD per game (post season)
Davis:
110 total yards, 0.84 TD per game over his career (regular season)
159 total yards, 1.5 TD per game (post season)
Holmes
102 total yards, 0.87 TD per game over his career (regular season)
64 total yards, 0.5 TD per game (post season) but only 1 game as a starter
I'm not saying Bettis won't be a HOFer, but there are several players from recent years that are getting high on the career rankings that IMO are not HOFers (McCardell and Testeverde for example).
Franknbeans
Footballguy
MarshallRob
Footballguy
Maynard and Alworth played in the 1960's AFL and the teams in that league threw a lot. A whole lot more than any team in the 1970's. NFL passing numbers from 1970-1977 are historically low and I think you have to go back to the pre-WWII era to find worse. AFL scoring is historically high. Swann was probably the best receiver in the NFL from 1975-1978. His numbers in those years are actually very good if you compare them to his contemporaries, even without his postseason heroics. Whether that's enough to earn HOF statuts is another thing. And I'd put Tim Brown in Yudkin's "Bucket C". I don't think Brown was ever a dominant receiver.
Godsbrother
Footballguy
As I said earlier, in the mid and late 70's Swann was considered to be one of the best if not THE best receiver in the game. I don't think that too many people think of Branch that way.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
I'm not saying Swann wasn't talented or gifted. But I am wondering if we can't take this "when his number" was called thing a bit too far. For example, Bo Jackson or Herschel Walker were both great backs--yet their numbers were not called as often as other backs. So do we consider them HOF worthy?IMO, it's one thing to be great when you need to be, but you also have to play a more vital role on a consistent basis. This argument could be used on any player that plays for a great team. Roger Craig "would" have had better stats if the 49ers needed him more.
Say Miami keeps the RBBC approach they have and Ronnie Brown and Ricky Williams both put up good numbers for 6, 8, even 10 years but obviously producing at a fraction of what a full time RB would have accumulated over that time. Are they HOF worthy because their team opted to give each guy 175-200 carries instead of 350?
MarshallRob
Footballguy
Here are the "triple crown" numbers for all of the top receivers for the 1975-1978 period:
B. Chandler 220/2896/25
D. Pearson 196/3212/19
K. Burrough 194/3435/25
Carmichael 192/2879/27
Lynn Swann 188/2966/32
C. Branch 179/3253/28
N. Moore 173/2740/30
Mel Gray 166/3265/22
I. Curtis 152/2775/18
Swann caught just about as many passes as anyone (only Bob Chandler has significantly more), he ranks fifth in receving yards, and he caught more TD's than anyone over the 4-year time span, all on a primarily run-first offense. That group of receivers he competed with does not strike me as particularly weak. Adding in his postseason performances for that same time frame, I think he was clearly the best receiver in football. Whether or not that should be enough for the Hall of Fame I don't know, but Swann was a great receiver.
B. Chandler 220/2896/25
D. Pearson 196/3212/19
K. Burrough 194/3435/25
Carmichael 192/2879/27
Lynn Swann 188/2966/32
C. Branch 179/3253/28
N. Moore 173/2740/30
Mel Gray 166/3265/22
I. Curtis 152/2775/18
Swann caught just about as many passes as anyone (only Bob Chandler has significantly more), he ranks fifth in receving yards, and he caught more TD's than anyone over the 4-year time span, all on a primarily run-first offense. That group of receivers he competed with does not strike me as particularly weak. Adding in his postseason performances for that same time frame, I think he was clearly the best receiver in football. Whether or not that should be enough for the Hall of Fame I don't know, but Swann was a great receiver.
Last edited by a moderator:
Franknbeans
Footballguy
It's hard to argue for Bo when he only played 4 seasons. Herschel could certainly be argued for HOF inclusion and I think Roger Craig should get in. It is really hard to argue hypothetical situations but most would agree (including Jerry Rice) who watched Swann back in the day that he was one of, if not the best, receiver in the league. Sure it would make it less controversial had he put up the numbers players do today on a consistent basis but the emphasis in the league back then was not on the pass.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
I need excellence at the position for two years or more, with a career that lasted at least the norm for the position, and with the player's numbers in those ascending and descending years being very good at the position. Additionally I need for that player to be an integral part of his franchises history, as well as an integral part of the 'story' of football overall.The 'story' of the NFL can not be told without Sayers, Hornung, Taylor, Swan, Rice, Brady. It can be told without Bo Jackson, Sterling Sharpe (though I love his game) and Jerome Bettis. (as for Bettis he could concievably change that this playoffs, we will see.)BTW, this is the reason I believe the HOF will be a sham so long as Jerry Kramer is not inducted. He was an integral part of 5 championships. He was the roadgrader who cleared the way for the culminating touchdown in the Ice Bowl. It was upon his shoulder that Lombardi rode in superbowl triumph and his hands that carried Lombardi's casket. It was his voice that gave us Instant Replay and Distant Replay.
Pat Patriot
Footballguy
Dont any of you guys LOOK at a player and know he is a HOFer without the numbers? I saw Lynn Swann play. He is a HOF football player. Now governor of Pennsylvania? Thats another story. I love the Pats and Deion Branch is a big game player, but he is no Lynn Swann.Bettis. I disagree with whomever said he was special. I dont see him as special at all.Moss . A pain in the ### for sure but one of the best WR to ever play the position. HOFerTim Brown. Nothing special about him.Terrell Davis and Priest Holmes. My gut says no one or the other will make it but not both. Art Monk. Another compiler. Nothing special about him.Andre Reed. Not special enough.
Last edited by a moderator:
David Yudkin
Footballguy
I brought up Deion Branch only because of some similarities to Lynn Swann . . .- WR on a team that won multiple SBs
- WR on a team that had many other offensive options so the "number calling" was greatly reduced
- Played big in the post season
- Made some big catches in big moments
Do I think Branch is HOF worthy? Of course not. My point was that the argument that Swann was rarely asked to contribute poses problems in that other players from that point forward were also "talented" should then be considered Hall-worthy if they, too, did not get a huge workload. For example, Hershel Walker.
Last edited by a moderator:
Godsbrother
Footballguy
That was me. If you can, take a look at the clip of Bettis running over Urlacher a few weeks ago then consider that he's been doing this for 13 years. There is no RB in NFL history that I am aware of that has taken (and given out) that much punishment over a career. Then factor in Bettis' stats and it is pretty clear to me that he is special and deserves to be in the HOF.
MarshallRob
Footballguy
I wrote a (sadly ignored) post above responding directly to this argument. Swann was not "rarely asked to contribute". When Swann was in his prime he caught the ball just as much as any of the NFL's best receivers. His workload does not appear to be below average. Here's the triple crown numbers for the 1975-1978 period (I added a couple of guys I forgot in the original list): B. Chandler 220/2896/25
D. Pearson 196/3212/19
K. Burrough 194/3435/25
Carmichael 192/2879/27
Lynn Swann 188/2966/32
C. Branch 179/3253/28
N. Moore 173/2740/30
H. Jackson 167/2946/24
Mel Gray 166/3265/22
I. Curtis 152/2775/18
Stallworth 114/2116/22
Swann is 5th in catches (with only one player catching substantially more balls), 5th in yards, and 1st in TD's. Based solely on his actual production (ignoring his talent, postseason performance, team tendencies and other intangibles) you could argue Swann was the best receiver over that four-year period.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
But that's over a 4 year period. He played 9 years. The seasons not included were years with 11, 41, 44, 34, and 18. And the last 4 were in the 16-game era. And in those 4 years, the league leader had 82, 89, 88, and 60 receptions.Overall, Swann had one year with 50 receptions and another with 61. And as I mentioned, he played only 9 seasons when other HOF WR played many more.
I don't have time to look into it now, but I suspect that there are a lot of WR that ranked Top 5 over a 4-year stretch with regard to receptions, yardage, and TD that are not in the HOF and never will be. Sterling Sharpe and Herman Moore are the first that comes to mind.
MarshallRob
Footballguy
I'm not arguing Swann should be in the HOF, I'm just pointing out that at his peak his stats are comparable to his contemporaries. (And his 11 and 18-catch seasons are his rookie season and his final year, a strike season). A four-year period seems fair to measure peak performance. There's no question Swann's career numbers are very weak even adjusting for his era though I'm not sure most football fans realize how low passing and receiving numbers were in the 1970's. It looks like Swann's production dropped off from 1979-1981 because he missed three games each year. He might well have had a 1000-yard season in 1979 had he played in all 16 games. His YPC stayed high each year though his catch totals those latter seasons were unimpressive. Swann suffered a number of concussions leading to his early retirement. And Stallworth had a huge year in 1979, so there might have been fewer balls to go around as well. NFL passing numbers exploded from 1983-1985. Had Swann hung around he might have put up some big late career numbers like Stallworth did though both receivers were past their prime.
I'm sure you're right about Sharpe and Moore. Other guys who might be on that list are Andre Rison, Mark Clayton, and Gary Clark. Sharpe was easily on track for the Hall until his injury. Neither he nor Swann stuck around to pad his career totals but Swann got the chance dominate in the Super Bowl while Sharpe left just before Green Bay became a contender.
Last edited by a moderator:
Gayle Sayers meant more to the game than Lynn Swann and he was more dominant of a player. He was also a rb. That said I think you can make a strong argument to keep Sayers out of the HOF.Also, Ray Berry is in the HOF. What? Just because Johnny U was his qb.
Last edited by a moderator:
Pat Patriot
Footballguy
Are you kidding me? Ever see Earl Campbell play? Ever see the highlights of Jim Brown? Ever see Walter Payton play? These guys gave out real punishment. Bettis has NEVER been GREAT. I go by what I see and I have seen Bettis play since he was at Notre Dame. A lifetime 3.9 yard average doesnt impress me. The fact that he was easily neutralized in any playoff game I saw him also plays into my opinion that he is not a HOFer. There have been MANY more RB's that I would rather have on my team than Bettis through his career.
Pat Patriot
Footballguy
Wow!! One look at Sayers tells me he is a HOFer. I dont need to look at his stats. He was one of the GREATEST football players of all time.Ray Berry? I have seen minimal clips on him but heard a lot about him when he was coaching the Pats. Best route running in the NFL. Best hands in the NFL. These were things that were said about him. I didnt see him play. I was told he was great. I cant really argue Berry with you.
Nihilist Pig
Footballguy
I don't necessarily think Swann deserves to be there on production alone, even though it has been shown above that for half a decade or so he was among the league's most productive.I don't necessarily think he deserves to be there based on postseason production, even though the history books clearly show that he was among the best of an entire decade, there.
But both?
Take Sterling and Moore, as you did. Neither guy belongs right now, granted. Now, give them each four Super Bowl rings. How does that affect your opinion? Now, give them each a SB MVP, too. Add it all up, and where do you see their HOF resumes? Good? Better? Stone cold locks?
MarshallRob
Footballguy
Swann was the subject of a long Hall of Fame controversy before his eventual selection. Sayers was not. He was a first-ballot selection and he's also on the NFL's 75th anniversary team (with Brown, Motley, Nagurski, Payton, Simpson, and VanBuren).
MarshallRob
Footballguy
I agree completely. People have forgotten how great Sharpe was. The guy was All-Pro three times, the same amount of times as Cris Carter (2), Michael Irvin (1), Tim Brown (0), and Andre Reed (0) combined. (The same as Herman Moore though).
gman8343
What would Lemmy do?
Very true, and take a look at this, Tim Brown's seasons among the league's top 10 compared to Sharpe's.
Sharpe was top 5 in receptions 4 times (1st 3 times), top 5 in yds 4 times (1st once), top 5 in TDs 4 times (1st twice).Brown was top 5 in receptions 2 times (1st once), top 5 in yds 4 times, and top 5 in TDs 2 times.
Sharpe played 7 years, Brown 17, yet Sharpe still placed in the top 5 in the major categories more times than Brown.
Godsbrother
Footballguy
I saw Earl Campbell plenty of times and he was heck of a runner. He lasted 9 years but was a shell of himself his final three. He literally broke down which pretty much makes my point that Bettis is unique.As far as rather having Jim Brown (I am old enough to have seen him play too) and Walter Payton on my team -- well duhhh. Who wouldn't? I would rather have Payton and Brown on my team than Franco Harris and Tony Dorsett -- should we throw them out too?
Regarding the Post Season, Bettis has more yards and more TDs on less carries than Earl Campbell did in his postseason career so I guess we can conclude that Campbell was even more easily neutralized in the playoffs.
The bottom line is this: Bettis's numbers, his longevity, and the fact that he is a 6-time Pro Bowler pretty much guarantee he'll be a HOFer whether you consider him to be one or not.
Steelers4Life
Footballguy
LOL, anyone who doesn't consider Bettis a great RB either didn't watch him play much over his career, has no clue what he added to the Steelers, and/or doesn't factor in anything but stats when assessing how good a RB was. Calling him a compiler does a tremendous disservice to what he's accomplished.Bettis spent his prime playing on smashmouth teams without any semblance of a passing attack. Had he played on teams like the Cowboys' teams Emmitt Smith played on, his TD numbers would've been through the roof. The Steelers' offense wasn't built to score a ton of points, but Bettis was a beast of a RB for most of the 90's. He WAS the Steelers' offense, and everyone knew it. For all of those years, the defenses knew what the Steelers would do and were dared to stop it. What he accomplished is remarkable considering everything around him, and sustained excellence is without a doubt one of the most difficult feats in professional sports.Stat geeks may not fully appreciate what he's done, but Hall of Fame voters and people around the NFL sure as hell do.People let the last few years color their opinions of Bettis, but they must forget how good he was for the first 8-9 years of his career. Look at his numbers if you want, but people need to appreciate more about him than stats.
Last edited by a moderator:
FairWarning
Footballguy
Jerome Bettis resume:Jerome BettisRunning BackBorn: 19726-time Pro Bowler: 1993, 1994, 1996, 1997, 2001, 2004 Get the latest Jerome Bettis news at footballguys.com Game-by-game data | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | +--------------------------+-------------------------+ | Rushing | Receiving |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 1993 ram | 16 | 294 1429 4.9 7 | 26 244 9.4 0 || 1994 ram | 16 | 319 1025 3.2 3 | 31 293 9.5 1 || 1995 ram | 15 | 183 637 3.5 3 | 18 106 5.9 0 || 1996 pit | 16 | 320 1431 4.5 11 | 22 122 5.5 0 || 1997 pit | 15 | 375 1665 4.4 7 | 15 110 7.3 2 || 1998 pit | 15 | 316 1185 3.8 3 | 16 90 5.6 0 || 1999 pit | 16 | 299 1091 3.6 7 | 21 110 5.2 0 || 2000 pit | 16 | 355 1341 3.8 8 | 13 97 7.5 0 || 2001 pit | 11 | 225 1072 4.8 4 | 8 48 6.0 0 || 2002 pit | 13 | 187 666 3.6 9 | 7 57 8.1 0 || 2003 pit | 16 | 246 811 3.3 7 | 13 86 6.6 0 || 2004 pit | 15 | 250 941 3.8 13 | 6 46 7.7 0 || 2005 pit | 12 | 110 368 3.3 9 | 4 40 10.0 0 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| TOTAL | 192 | 3479 13662 3.9 91 | 200 1449 7.2 3 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+Seasons among the league's top 10Rushes: 1993-3, 1994-6, 1996-6, 1997-1, 1998-9, 1999-7, 2000-3 Rushing yards: 1993-2, 1994-9, 1996-3, 1997-3, 2000-9 Rushing TDs: 1993-9t, 1996-6t, 2004-4t, 2005-10t Yards from scrimmage: 1993-3, 1996-4, 1997-4 Rush/Receive TDs: 1996-9t, 2004-10t Among the league's all-time top 50Rushes: 4 Rushing yards: 5 Rushing TDs: 8t Yards from scrimmage: 12 Rush/Receive TDs: 21t Postseason dataPlease read this fine print before using this data or sending questions or corrections. Year Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD---------------------+-----------------+----------------- 1996 ind W,42-14 | 25 102 2 | 1 4 0 1996 nwe L,3-28 | 13 43 0 | 2 -1 0 1997 nwe W,7-6 | 25 67 0 | 1 7 0 1997 den L,21-24 | 23 105 1 | 1 3 0 2001 nwe L,17-24 | 9 8 1 | 0 0 0 2002 cle W,36-33 | 1 -2 0 | 0 0 0 2002 ten L,31-34 | 3 6 0 | 0 0 0 2004 nyj W,20-17 | 27 101 1 | 1 21 0 2004 nwe L,27-41 | 17 64 1 | 0 0 0---------------------+-----------------+-----------------TOTAL | 143 494 6 | 6 34 0I believe you must dominate 3-5 years minimum with some playoff success. I never really considered Swann a HOFer. He was a great clutch receiver, but I thought Stallworth was better.I think Bettis is a lock for the HOF.
Frenchy Fuqua
Footballguy
Interesting that Bettis is knocked for his 3.9 YPC but Curtis Martin (4.0) Marshall Faulk (4.2) and Emmitt Smith (4.2) are all in the same ballpark. One more great stat on Bettis:
Career 100 yard rushing games
1-Emmitt Smith 78
2-Walter Payton 77
3-Barry Sanders 76
4-Eric Dickerson 64
5-Jerome Bettis 61
6-Jim Brown 58
7-Curtis Martin 57
8-Franco Harris 47
Career 100 yard rushing games
1-Emmitt Smith 78
2-Walter Payton 77
3-Barry Sanders 76
4-Eric Dickerson 64
5-Jerome Bettis 61
6-Jim Brown 58
7-Curtis Martin 57
8-Franco Harris 47
Pat Patriot
Footballguy
The conclusion I come to is that Franco Harris is no more a HOFer than Jerome Bettis is.
I discounts stats severely, and look at tape. At their peak, how good a ball player were they? Not, did they average 900 yards a year for 18 years. Career stats are great things, and guys get accolades for playing for years, by getting honored by their own teams, such as the Ring of Fame in Denver. That doesn't make them hall of famers. People like to use stats as a way to prove somebody is no good, like Swanny here. They had a great running game, another HOF receiver, and a very good tight end, in an era where they didn't throw the ball much, and his career was shortened by injury. Given that situation, he's not going to put up huge numbers. But rest assured, he was the best WR in the game at the time. He could go up and get a ball like nobody at the time. Fastest guy? Not at all. But, the best hands I've seen. And, you can use numbers all you want with Bettis. I still say he's an above average back, but not a hall of famer. Who else was going to make the pro bow (really not much of an achievement, because 6 in 30-when he was making it- is a 20% chance. That's not greatness, but above average. There were great backs playing when Bettis played, but not many. Curtis Martin falls into the pack. I love both of these backs, but I don't feel either is hall worthy, though in discussion, I do believe they'll be borderline candidates. there are many players I feel have Hall of Fame talent in the league now, but have to keep it up for a few years, not 10, to get there. Shaun Alexander, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Marvin Harrison, Randy Moss, Brett Favre, LT2, Chad Johnson, Richard Seymour, Rodney Harrison, (I'd put Bruschi here, but he's been so underrated outside of NE all his career, I don't see it changing at the hall induction, though I think he's one of the great Inside Linebackers ever. Not overly physical, but nobody reads and reacts, or has better football instincts) Larry Johnson, Marshall Faulk, Ike Bruce, Tiki Barber and that's about it. It's a pretty small group that I'd put in there.
It's a far different Era. Back then teams only ran about 45 plays a game. It's much higher, and I believe the average to be about 65-70 per game. More passing plays, and rule tweaking is a large part of it. MOre clock stoppages equals more plays. And, IMHO, though he's in, I think he was a borderline candidate, just as bettis is, IMHO. But, when you win 4 SB's in 6 years, with the same primary back, he's going into the hall.
Godsbrother
Footballguy
As I said earlier, you can't just look at stats 30 years later and conclude whether or not a player deserves to be in the HOF. Sometimes you actually have to watch the guy play football. Tell me how a guy that made the Pro Bowl his first nine seasons in the league doesn't belong in the Super Bowl? Apparently people watching him at the time thought he was pretty good.
Tau837
Footballguy
He was All NFL twice. That is typically 2-3 RBs from the entire NFL. I'm not sure if that is "greatness", but it is better than merely above average.There are 22 RBs since 1951 who have been All NFL 2+ times and are eligible for the HOF, and only 5 are not in the HOF. And none of those 5 accomplished anything close to what Bettis has accomplished. Also, all of them played with fewer teams, making it easier to earn All NFL and Pro Bowl honors than when Bettis earned his.These are the number of All NFL selections for RBs since 1951, sorted in descending order, from All NFL Teams):8 jim brown - HOFer7 walter payton - HOFer7 barry sanders - HOFer5 lenny moore - HOFer5 gale sayers - HOFer5 o.j. simpson - HOFer5 eric dickerson - HOFer4 ollie matson - HOFer4 frank gifford - HOFer4 leroy kelly - HOFer4 emmitt smith - not yet eligible, will be HOFer3 doak walker - HOFer3 deacon dan towler3 earl campbell - HOFer3 terrell davis - not yet eligible, will not make it IMO3 mike alstott - not yet eligible, not sure if he could make it due to being FB...?3 marshall faulk - not yet eligible, will be HOFer3 priest holmes - not yet eligible, will not make it IMO2 eddie price2 hugh mcelhenney - HOFer2 joe perry - HOFer2 paul hornung - HOFer2 jim taylor - HOFer2 larry brown2 john brockington2 chuck foreman2 marcus allen - HOFer2 thurman thomas - not yet eligible, will be HOFer IMO2 jerome bettis - not yet eligible, will be HOFer IMO2 curtis martin - not yet eligible, will be HOFer IMO1 dub jones1 ron walter1 alan ameche1 rick casares1 jon arnett1 j.d. smith1 **** bass1 don perkins1 tommy mason1 ron johnson1 larry csonka - HOFer1 calvin hill1 otis armstrong1 lawrence mccutcheon1 franco harris - HOFer1 delvin williams1 ottis anderson1 tony dorsett - HOFer1 billy sims1 george rogers1 freeman mcneil1 john riggins - HOFer1 william andrews1 joe morris1 charles white1 roger craig1 christian okoye1 barry foster1 larry centers1 jamal anderson1 edgerrin james1 eddie george1 ricky williams1 jamal lewis1 ladainian tomlinson1 william henderson
