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!
Why doesn't Tiki Barber merit more HOF consideration? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter TheDirtyWord
- Start date
STEADYMOBBIN 22
Footballguy
That’s a pretty weird statement. Almost as weird as listing jersey retirements and college stats.
Last edited by a moderator:
STEADYMOBBIN 22
Footballguy
Dude, I know all about Gail Sayers. I know al about Forrest Gregg and Night Train Lane and Len Dawson. I know my history.
I’ve watched every one of his highlights. He was a good player, but he is way overrated.
Im in the minority and you don’t have to agree.
I don't think you really know history, if you did then you'd know the impact Sayers made on the game.
STEADYMOBBIN 22
Footballguy
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Also, Tiki Barber was probably better than Sayers.
If you are into the history of the NFL you are well aware of the fact Gale Sayers is on a totally other level than a Terrell Davis a Tiki Barber. Really don't belong in the same coversation.
moleculo
Footballguy
JohnnyU
Footballguy
I can probably excuse this because of your age and lack of NFL history knowledge, but that’s embarrassing.
Last edited by a moderator:
moleculo
Footballguy
I can't be friends with anyone who says Floyd Little and TD don't belong in the HoF....especially someone who uses Gerald Riggs as an argument.
STEADYMOBBIN 22
Footballguy
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Shawnky
Footballguy
Shawnky
Footballguy
He was a much different type of player than TD, and nowhere near as much of a beast that TD was. Not taking anything away from his talent.
As you know there was always talk of how TD lacked breakaway speak (faster than given credit for). Sayers was just the opposite he was all about..zoooooooooom.
Sure TD was a more physical runner just not as...WOW~~
Shawnky
Footballguy
Which is why I said they were different types of players. The wow factor is all dependent on what wows you.
I'm pretty sure 75 yard runs zigging here and there is a solid..WOW...for 99% of football fans everywhere.
CalBear
Footballguy
From 1965-1969 (Sayer's main career), the Bears went 29-38-3 and did not make the playoffs.
Sayers had runs of...
103
96
93
80
80 again
80 again
70
63
61
Was ALL NFL Five times
Scored 57 TD's
And had every football fan there was totally freaking out, it was as if God decided to show us what a real thrill looks like. The guy made a HUGE impact.
Take what Barkley did this season playing on a bad team and multiple it by 10.
Check out the impact Walter Payton made his first five seasons, how were the Bears doing?
By the way, prior to 1965 and Gale Sayers the most points the Bears had ever scored in a season....396 in 1940, in 65....franchise record 409.
Last edited by a moderator:
moleculo
Footballguy
than why do we bother voting for HoF? Why not just go straight down the list of rushing yards?
moleculo
Footballguy
moleculo
Footballguy
wait a minute...how is it possible to have a rush of 103 yards? I'm calling shenanigans.
ETA: Sayers PFR page. His career longest was 70 yards. TD's PFR page. Wanna guess the length of his longest run? 71. On a per-game basis - Sayers' best season was 95.1 rushing yards per game. TD: 125.5.
Last edited by a moderator:
Anarchy99
Footballguy
There are 235 players with more rushing yards than Paul Hornung. Should they all make the HOF?
You have a tendency to only look at career totals and ignore everything else about a player.
Riggs averaged 20 yards a game rushing with a 2.7 ypc in his 6 career playoff appearances. Davis averaged 142.5 yards per game rushing with a 5.6 ypc to go along with 12 TD in 8 post season games.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Sayers thing was his combo of rushing/receiving/punt and kick returns, I assumed it was obvious that combo was what I was talking about.
Sayers 's thing was his combined yards, all the ways he could hurt you. Riggs was pretty much a thumper.
Google anyone, and you won't go too far before you start seeing numbers.
It will never be.....
Zeno...so how many yards did he gain in his career.
anyone.....doesn't matter.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tau837
Footballguy
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Sorry for the grammar correction, but it's Sayers' not Sayer's
Now back to your regularly scheduled program.
Last edited by a moderator:
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Carson Palmer, Kerry Collins, Drew Bledsoe, and Vinny Testaverde all have more career passing yards than Joe Montana.
Steven Jackson, Eddie George, Matt Forte, Corey Dillon, Thomas Jones, Ottis Anderson, Chris Johnson, and several others had more rushing yards than Earl Campbell.
Henry Ellard, Irving Fryar, Brandon Marshall, Jimmy Smith, and Derrick Mason had more receiving yards than Michael Irvin.
Apparently anyone in the first grouping is better than the other HOF player because they had a higher career yardage total.
moleculo
Footballguy
No, you said he had runs of ...
Returns <> runs. I think you know that.
Look - I like Sayers. He was a transcendent talent and belongs in the HoF. I'm merely pointing out that you rely on stats to make a case in one situation and then ignore those same stats in another. At the same time, you ignore playoff production and end of season awards - all of that counts. You can't just look at career rushing numbers.
See where I mention that word.....IMPACT...above with Sayers? That is the key word....IMPACT, then you start dealing in numbers.
moleculo
Footballguy
If all I looked at career rushing numbers then Sayers isn't in the HOF, right?
Where did you get the idea all that matters in JUST rushing yards? It's a combination of things.
That was to make the point that guys way down there in rushing all still ahead of TD/Barber, guys not in the elite.
moleculo
Footballguy
moleculo
Footballguy
are you claiming that the center piece to a back to back SB champion, NFL MVP and SB MVP was not elite, and had a negligible impact on the game?
I was talking about Riggs. Who is also ahead of Sayers who was totally elite.
I have a real bad habit and know it about assuming things are obvious, when they aren't.
Forget Riggs a bad example.
Maybe I need to look deeper into TD.
While I agree that the bolded is silly, at the risk of going a little off topic, I think Henry Ellard and Brandon Marshall were better WR's than Michael Irvin. They just never really played on good teams, other than the 89' Rams who ran into the 49ers dynasty, at its peak. Ellard is near the top of my list of underrated WR's of all time, and Marshall was great with a variety of different teams, offenses, and QB's.
Ellard...814...rec Irvin...750
Ellard....13, 779 yards Irvin....11, 904
What are the odds...both with 65 TD
One of the really dramatic comparisions is Cliff Branch vs HOFer Lynn Swann. Branch and not even close.
Last edited by a moderator:
Anarchy99
Footballguy
It's pretty clear over the years that voters migrate toward players that played key roles on SB winning teams. I agree that Ellard is very underrated for the era he played in. However, Irvin won 3 rings. Ellard's teams went 4-6 in the post season including games scoring 0, 3, 7, and 7 points.
Marshall put up some gaudy regular season numbers but never played in a playoff game. He may have been very talented and caught a lot of passes, but never making the post season will likely kill him when it comes to HOF consideration.
My overall point was that just looking at career totals is only a small piece of a players resume. Some of the discussion on older players lately vs. new players has been really odd. Comparing the passer rating of a HOF QB from the 70s vs. someone still playing doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
Players who played on bad teams never got their shot to star in the playoffs, so it does get a little funky.
I go with the eyeball test (until pushed and have to deal in numbers) and what we actually see. Only Jim Brown and Barry Sanders were on a par with Gale Sayers. That is me watching all of them play many times.
I never got the same....whoa~~~....watching Tiki Barber.
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't disagree with any of that. I tend to compare players more among their peers, than by career stats, when it comes to players off different eras. I think its a little strange that rings matter as much as they do, I could see that mattering a lot in say, basketball, where a single player can routinely take over games, but not so much in football.
If Irvin hadn't played for the Cowboys, but had the same career minus the 3 rings, nobody would be even making a case for him in the HOF. I agree voters tend to rate rings and playoff performance at the peak of importance, I value things differently is all. So to me, Ellard>>Marshall>Irvin. I' wouldn't have any of them in the HOF.
Cliff Branch not being in the HOF is one of those that will never make sense to me. In my opinion, Branch was the best WR of the 1970's, and has 3 rings. Its a joke he wasn't in 25 years ago.
Not sure about the best but in that discussion back then.
Yep, how can you have a HOF without Cliff Branch, hell, his numbers superior to Bob Hayes, so...?????
Tau837
Footballguy
But Irvin was a key reason the Cowboys got those 3 championships, so of course that is part of his HOF case. He is in primarily because he averaged 1419 receiving yards per season over a 5 season stretch, during which the Cowboys won 3 Super Bowls, and in those championship seasons he averaged 1443 receiving yards.
Branch had a great 3 year stretch, but the rest of his career was average. The problem for Branch is that several WRs who played during Branch's peak stretch were seen as better than him and are already in the HOF (Largent, Lofton, Joiner, Swann, and Stallworth with most direct overlaps, but also others with smaller overlaps in both directions, like Belitnikoff, Warfield, and Monk). I could see Branch making it as a senior nominee at some point.
