NFL Off Season

[Nick M]

Where do you stand on RBs that aren't in?

I can easily name the one that doesn't belong. The clue is that in his prime, he could not get 4 ypc.

 

[Town Heretic]

I'll have to think about that one...Riggins would be my first guess.

Running backs you can make an argument for...Roger Craig and Mr. James already on the boards.

Robert Smith, Corey Dillon, Ahman Green, Chris Warren, Rickey Watters

Hon Men: Billy Simms. A great one if he doesn't get injured too early.

 

[tetelestai]

I can easily name the one that doesn't belong. The clue is that in his prime, he could not get 4 ypc.

Marcus Allen?

Marcus Allen only had three 1,000 yard seasons, he averaged 55 yards a game over his career.

 

[tetelestai]

Players who don't belong in the HOF:

Troy Aikman
Joe Namath
Bob Griese
Lynn Swann
Paul Hornung
Bob Hayes

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Here are the seven loser franchises (including the Cowboys), with only 2 postseason wins or less since 1996

The Boys are back! They have won the NFC East Division two out of the last three years. They are just getting started!

If I remember correctly the Steelers did not even win one single playoff game over a span of thirty nine years! Imagine that--thirty nine years!!!

Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones!

And don't forget that the Cowboys have the highest winning percentage among all NFL teams while the lowly Steelers are somewhere in the middle of the pack!

Thirty nine years!

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Players who don't belong in the HOF:

Terry Bradshaw!

 

[Nick M]

Marcus Allen?

Marcus Allen only had three 1,000 yard seasons, he averaged 55 yards a game over his career.

I was thinking of the Bus. Maybe because he is a Domer, but mostly because he just played a long time and accumulated large numbers which most backs don't do.

 

[Nick M]

Players who don't belong in the HOF:

Troy Aikman
Joe Namath
Bob Griese
Lynn Swann
Paul Hornung
Bob Hayes

Namath and Griese are definite, they don't belong. Some say Troy was perfect in the biggest game. True. Elway fell apart, except for his last game. Kelly fell apart. And they both belong. Namath was down right mediocre, below average.

Here is a good summary on Griese.

Overview: Griese stands as proof that football prizes team accomplishments over individual statistics. He was ushered into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 1990, but he rarely did anything more notable than hand the ball off while leading arguably the most lethal ground attack in modern NFL history. Even his Hall of Fame bio describes him as "the poised leader of a classic ball-control offense that generated an awesomely efficient running attack." This legacy was never more evident than it was in Griese's three Super Bowl appearances. In his two victories, Griese attempted just 18 total passes. His Super Bowl passer rating of 72.7 is only slightly below his pedestrian career passer rating of 77.1.

In my non humble opinion, Joe Namath is the most over rated player in history. Meaning how he is regarded vs where he was a player. Jay Cutler is better than Joe Namath. By a large margin. If you put together fantasy teams through the Superbowl era, nobody aside from a Jets fan would take him. Nobody would take him period with money on the line.

He threw for 27,663 yards in 12 seasons. This statistic is moderately impressive due to the era he was playing in. However, when you factor in the fact that he spent the first half of his career throwing the ball around in the AFL, it puts things into better perspective. No disrespect to the AFL, it was a fun league, but no one can ignore the fact that it was much easier to pass and put up big numbers in the AFL of the 1960's then it was in the NFL of that same era.

The passing yards, however, are not the main focus of this discussion. It is the touchdown vs. interception ratio that caught my eye. Namath threw a pedestrian 173 touchdown passes in the years he played. More alarmingly, he threw 220 interceptions.

His career Quarterback rating amounts to a pathetic 65.5. True it was a different era, but other famous Quarterbacks who played during the same period did far better. Just look at Roger Staubach (83.4), Len Dawson (82.6) and Sonny Jurgensen (82.6). Namath is nowhere close to any of the above mentioned in that department.

Your boy Otto Grahm has a rating of about 80 or so. I would have to check. He did that in the 40s and 50s. And nobody thinks Colin Kapernick is an elite QB today, why should Joe be.

 

[Nick M]

Jerome Bettis.

Career 192 153 3479 13662 91 71 3.9 71.2 18.1 281 200 1449 7.2 3 34 1.0 7.5 15111 94 41 102

A running back has to be judged on ypc because of the different factors. A couple of good seasons isn't Hall of Fame to me. A great career, one of dominance in your era.

 

[tetelestai]

Namath and Griese are definite, they don't belong. Some say Troy was perfect in the biggest game. True.

I wouldn't say Troy was perfect in the biggest games, I would say he didn't make mistakes in big games.

His numbers are not great, and he never made a first team All-Pro team.

How can you be in the HOF, and never make a first team All-Pro team?

He barely had more TD's (165) than INT's (141).

He's ranked 178th on Pro Football Reference

Brad Johnson, John Kitna, Chris Chandler, and Jim Everett threw more TD's than Aikman.

 

[Nick M]

I wouldn't say Troy was perfect in the biggest games, I would say he didn't make mistakes in big games.

If you don't make mistakes, that is the definition of flawless. John Elway led the league in passing once. He could have had number like Favre, Manning, and Marino, but he didn't. And he is in the Hall. Like Bettis, he has large numbers over time because he played a long time. His career rating is only 79.9.

Brad Johnson, John Kitna, Chris Chandler, and Jim Everett threw more TD's than Aikman.

Much like the mediocre Steelers players in the Hall because they were on the best team, anchored by the best defensive line. And football is still won and lost on the line of scrimmage.

 

[Town Heretic]

Jerome Bettis.

Career 192 153 3479 13662 91 71 3.9 71.2 18.1 281 200 1449 7.2 3 34 1.0 7.5 15111 94 41 102

A running back has to be judged on ypc because of the different factors. A couple of good seasons isn't Hall of Fame to me. A great career, one of dominance in your era.

You're wrong about Bettis. His average came down because he was usually the whole offense on a team. He played with poor qbs or game managers for his entire career. After his rookie break out year they loaded the box for him everywhere he went. And even so he had two big opening years with the Steelers averaging 4.5 and 4.4 while rushing for over three thousand yards. That's pretty darn impressive.

And when Kordel Stewart had his first decent year breaking into the low 80s by rating, Bettis responded with a 4.8 average per carry and another 1000+ yd year. And that's 9 years in. Again, impressive. He played four more years heavier and past his prime, more motivation and battering ram, capable of bursts but having hit the wall.

Even so, he darn nearly managed a thousand yards in 2004, rushing for 941 yds and 3.8 a carry. Considering his age and wear, that's not hay.

Bettis belongs.

Oh, and that rookie year? 1,429 yds, 4.9 avg.

If he'd been on Smith's Cowboys God knows how many yards you could have tacked on that one.

 

[tetelestai]

You're wrong about Bettis. His average came down because he was usually the whole offense on a team. He played with poor qbs or game managers for his entire career. After his rookie break out year they loaded the box for him everywhere he went. And even so he had two big opening years with the Steelers averaging 4.5 and 4.4 while rushing for over three thousand yards. That's pretty darn impressive.

And when Kordel Stewart had his first decent year breaking into the low 80s by rating, Bettis responded with a 4.8 average per carry and another 1000+ yd year. And that's 9 years in. Again, impressive. He played four more years heavier and past his prime, more motivation and battering ram, capable of bursts but having hit the wall.

Even so, he darn nearly managed a thousand yards in 2004, rushing for 941 yds and 3.8 a carry. Considering his age and wear, that's not hay.

Bettis belongs.

Oh, and that rookie year? 1,429 yds, 4.9 avg.

If he'd been on Smith's Cowboys God knows how many yards you could have tacked on that one.

He is wrong about Bettis.

Bettis was great.

Bill Cowher was 108-1-1 when leading by 10 points or more in a game.

The reason for that amazing stat was Jerome Bettis.

Under Cowher, when the Steelers were up, they ran, ran, ran, ran, ran, the ball. The other teams knew they were going to run the ball, but Bettis still picked up the yards, and the first downs.

IOW, Bettis earned those yards. They didn't come at garbage time on a delayed handoff with his team down 20 points. They came with his team leading in the fourth quarter, and trying to wind down the clock.

Bettis played for the Steelers 10 seasons. The Steelers won 10 or more games 7 of those seasons.

 

[Nick M]

He never dominated. Emmitt smith, whom people like to down play because of how good Dallas was dominated. You watched those games. He took 10 straight hand offs on an 11 play drive just to have Moose jam it in from the 2. That happened for a decade, even after the dynasty was over.

 

[Town Heretic]

He never dominated. Emmitt smith, whom people like to down play because of how good Dallas was dominated.

See, Emmitt is a Pensacola guy, so I hate to say it, but he's overrated. His first contact was well beyond the line of scrimmage because he had one of the best lines in NFL history. Great vision and a good burst, but Bettis would have been a beast with that line. Heck, he was a beast with far less and with little help. I noted what he could do and did when he got it.

You watched those games. He took 10 straight hand offs on an 11 play drive just to have Moose jam it in from the 2. That happened for a decade, even after the dynasty was over.

Tough back. Fine instincts. Not particularly fast or quick, but a good burst and great vision. I'm not going to take his bust away, but if you give me that line and a choice I'm taking Bettis without hesitation.

 

[Nick M]

Id take Emmitt. But not over Sanders. Emmitt is tier 2, after Sanders, Bo Jackson, Jim Brown and OJ.

 

[Town Heretic]

Id take Emmitt. But not over Sanders. Emmitt is tier 2, after Sanders, Bo Jackson, Jim Brown and OJ.

I go Brown, Sanders and then it's impossible. Dickerson, LT, Peterson, Smith, Peyton, Sayers. So many truly great backs so very close together.

 

[Nick M]

Well, Walter Payton might be the best NFL player of all time, while not being the best running back. Even John Madden says so. No, he did it all, as you know. Something Zeke Elliot could have in his career, if he doesn't continue to flirt with disaster. Elliot's blocking is as good as any, including Payton.

 

[tetelestai]

I go Brown, Sanders and then it's impossible. Dickerson, LT, Peterson, Smith, Peyton, Sayers. So many truly great backs so very close together.

I would classify the RB's into two categories. Those who just ran the ball, and those who ran and caught the ball.

Roger Craig, and Marshall Faulk are the only backs to have 1,000 yards rushing, and 1,000 yards receiving in the same year. (Charlie Taylor, and Lionel James had more than 1,000 receiving yards, but they didn't get 1,000 rushing yards).

LaDainian Tomlinson had 1,645 yards rushing, and 725 yards receiving in the same year. Priest Holmes had 1,615 rushing, and 615 receiving.

Current players LeVeon Bell had 1,361 yards rushing, and 854 receiving in 2014, and David Johnson had 1,239 yards rushing, and 879 receiving last year.

I predict more backs will join Craig and Faulk, as teams are utilizing the RB in the passing game more.

 

[Town Heretic]

I would classify the RB's into two categories. Those who just ran the ball, and those who ran and caught the ball.

Roger Craig, and Marshall Faulk are the only backs to have 1,000 yards rushing, and 1,000 yards receiving in the same year. (Charlie Taylor, and Lionel James had more than 1,000 receiving yards, but they didn't get 1,000 rushing yards).

Thurman Thomas was as adept as a receiving option, but he didn't get the same opportunities on his team. I think he was a four to six hundred, 10 + yds a catch guy during his 1000+ yds run, for about a decade.

Looked. He went over six hundred yds receiving 3 times and 500+ once in his prime, while rushing for working on six thousand yds rushing in those same four years.

LaDainian Tomlinson had 1,645 yards rushing, and 725 yards receiving in the same year. Priest Holmes had 1,615 rushing, and 615 receiving.

Same sort of situation.

Current players LeVeon Bell had 1,361 yards rushing, and 854 receiving in 2014, and David Johnson had 1,239 yards rushing, and 879 receiving last year.

Supra. When you have a back who can get over half way to a thousand yards receiving and keeps a decent average it's really just a matter of plays.

I predict more backs will join Craig and Faulk, as teams are utilizing the RB in the passing game more.

Probably so. The receiving is nice, but often that can have more to do with the offensive style than anything else. I have no doubt Brown, a world crass lacrosse player, would have been excellent as threat there (and he caught a few balls) but the emphasis wasn't really there at the position.

Others worth mentioning.

Ricky Watters had nearly ten yds receiving average and was good for a few hundred yds in a year. At the end of his career he put up 1,242 rushing, 613 passing (his 10th and next to the last year in the league :shocked Another reason why he's a guy who could find himself in Canton and likely should at some point.