Jets All-Time Underrated / Overrated

[Bugg]

Exactly. That's the most bizarre and flat out ridiculous statement I've seen in this thread.  Curtis Martin couldn't carry Eric Dickerson's jock on the football field.  He undoubtedly has better character and is a nicer person, but better RB?  Absolutely not!!!

The fact that Dickerson, despite greater talent and stATS, quit on his team twice doesnt factor in at all? Martin never had a 2000  season like Dickerson. Are we looking at a career or a number of superior seasons? Martin get the former Dickerson hets the later. Further Dickerson was pretty much done before his 30th birthday. Even with all the negative stuff about Martin, you have to grant the guy showed up until he was 32 and led the NFL at 31. And the way Dickerson shot his way out of LA midseason to go to Indy really was crap. Just think about that; what kind of  27-year old man(presumably single and straight) forces a business relocation form Los Angeles to Indianapolis? How stupid is this person?

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/D/DickEr00.htm

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MartCu00.htm

[JoeKlecko]

The fact that Dickerson, despite greater talent and stATS, quit on his team twice doesnt factor in at all? Martin never had a 2000  season like Dickerson. Are we looking at a career or a number of superior seasons? Martin get the former Dickerson hets the later. Further Dickerson was pretty much done before his 30th birthday. Even with all the negative stuff about Martin, you have to grant the guy showed up until he was 32 and led the NFL at 31. And the way Dickerson shot his way out of LA midseason to go to Indy really was crap. Just think about that; what kind of  27-year old man(presumably single and straight) forces a business relocation form Los Angeles to Indianapolis? How stupid is this person?

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/D/DickEr00.htm

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MartCu00.htm

 

I was speaking in terms of being a RB/football player, not in terms of his character or personality.  I'm not excusing Dickerson for the things he did regarding contracts or how he handled relations with his teams, just purely on the playing field.  I would rather have had fewer seasons of Dickerson than having all of Curtis'.

 

I was at SMU when Dickerson was there and the Mustangs won the National Championship and he was a tool then.  That doesn't change the fact that the guy was an awesome football player.

 

Also, FTR, I meant no disrespect.  Usually I agree with your posts, just found this one comment outrageous.

[Bugg]

I was speaking in terms of being a RB/football player, not in terms of his character or personality.  I'm not excusing Dickerson for the things he did regarding contracts or how he handled relations with his teams, just purely on the playing field.  I would rather have had fewer seasons of Dickerson than having all of Curtis'.

 

I was at SMU when Dickerson was there and the Mustangs won the National Championship and he was a tool then.  That doesn't change the fact that the guy was an awesome football player.

 

Also, FTR, I meant no disrespect.  Usually I agree with your posts, just found this one comment outrageous.

Fair. The guy have several dominant seasons; Martin had a longer career. We might value those things differently.

[Sperm Edwards]

I was speaking in terms of being a RB/football player, not in terms of his character or personality.  I'm not excusing Dickerson for the things he did regarding contracts or how he handled relations with his teams, just purely on the playing field.  I would rather have had fewer seasons of Dickerson than having all of Curtis'.

 

I was at SMU when Dickerson was there and the Mustangs won the National Championship and he was a tool then.  That doesn't change the fact that the guy was an awesome football player.

 

Also, FTR, I meant no disrespect.  Usually I agree with your posts, just found this one comment outrageous.

 

This is the crux of it to me, and one need not even use a back like Dickerson to illustrate this point.  Being pretty good for an unusually great number of years doesn't make him a great RB. It means he had a career with great number totals.

 

If you're building a team, you build a team to win in the next few years, not for the next 9.  That's why a team like Denver is willing to give an old Peyton Manning a shiny, new contract instead of looking for someone to develop.  The core of the team they have now is not sustainable in the salary cap era so you worry about now and the relatively near future.  RBs are disposable, and the ones who are truly awesome on the field are very rare.  Guys like Dickerson in the past.  Like AP in today's game.  A group of dangerous runners Martin has no business being in the same conversation with even if he got more carries and yards in his career.  

 

It is a personal preference, but I'd rather have someone unbelievably great for 3-4 seasons (or most of 3-4 seasons) than someone pretty good, or someone merely decent who doesn't usually hurt the team on the field, for 10.  Curtis is the RB for a team-builder who plays not to lose.  He won't put any team over the top, and he won't be the reason you beat a top team.  He was not great at power-running over people, scat-back eluding people, or burner-back outrunning people.  In short, there was nothing great about his game in terms of running with the football.  But he (generally) won't be the reason for a loss, and that's good enough for some who give the lame "he just gets the job done" mantra.  Ask your woman if she wants a beast in bed or some guy who "just gets the job done" instead.

 

The argument that defenses had to gameplan around Martin is also unconvincing as to this supposed greatness, because Martin had coaches and OC's who used to slavishly feed him the ball over & over & over (as they would to any RBs at their disposal).  So they'd have to stop our ground game not because it was so amazing, but because that's where his coaches directed their offenses.  If it wasn't Martin carrying the ball for them it would have been someone else (or a couple of guys).  But the strategy would have been unchanged on offense, so therefore the gameplanning for defenses preparing for us would have been unchanged as well.  But get out of here with the nonsense of people trying to figure out ways to stop him like he was pre-injury Terrell Davis or a physical freak of nature like a younger Jamal Lewis (who, unlike Martin, really never played in his prime behind a competent QB).  A back with moves, who could overpower defenders with his 240-lb frame & also outrun them with his 4.4 speed? Yeah, I'd really choose Martin over that because he "got the job done" for longer.  How lame.

 

Nevermind one game, which goes without saying.  But even for one season, having my pick of any RB where you might have to rely on the ground game to run over top defenses? Martin certainly wouldn't even be in the top 50 and while I haven't compiled such a list it's possible he might not even be in the top 100.  I might pick him maybe if this superteam had an unstoppable passing game that all I needed out of my RB was just to not screw up, even if it meant passing up on dangerously elusive or powerful runners.  For a slightly-longer 2-3 season window, most of the guys who'd make such a list would still be above Curtis.  

 

For an 8-season or longer window? Sure, Curtis would then be high up on the list.  But who cares? Particularly when veteran RBs cost 10-20x more than younger ones on their rookie deals.  It only sounds great in theory that one guy is the RB for a decade.  But in reality a team is better off re-drafting young RBs to throw in as starter every few years.  It's just easier to build a team that way than handicapping yourself with (today's equivalent of) a $15M RB who gets the league average 4.0 ypc or less most of the time and who almost always comes up small against better defenses while racking up yards on weaklings.  

 

Most overrated RB ever.

[Sperm Edwards]

Ahhhhhhhhhhhh...

[JustInFudge]

You're a rodeo clown and should travel with a barrel. The Jets have had so few great players in their history that some of their thirsty-ass trick-ho fans try to staple the "great" label onto "good" players like Victor Green and Santonio Holmes and Kyle Clifton and Bart Scott, and especially Curtis Martin. It's almost sad.

 

You're the biggest circus act on the board.  You might as well be on the flying trapeze or walking a tight rope over the Grand Canyon.  You're not almost sad, you're pathetically sad. 

 

The difference is, Curtis was a great player, to say he wasnt is just out right stupid.  Seriously.  And the lack of great players in this teams history elevates his status.  He's the best Jet I've ever seen. Revis certainly had a chance to take his place on the podium but he's an after thought who was living on the hype of one great season created by the genius that is Rex Ryan.  

 

Curtis is the best Jet in my life time.  I wasnt around for Namath or Maynard and unfortunately too young to really appreciate Klecko even though I remember him fondly from my childhood (first jersey my father bought me as a kid).  Loved Toon and Kenny O, but they didnt have the careers Curtis did.  So, Curtis IMO is the cream of the crop.  

 

Also, Curtis is the player that I associate the most to the turn around of the NY Jets.  The Jets only had 1 losing season during Martin's tenure with the Jets (taking out his final season when he was injured).  And he never played on a great offense with a great QB.  The guy was the offense.  Many other all time great RB's had the luxury of playing with HOF QB's on all time offenses...Curtis never did.  The dude was an incredible player.  No, he's not a top 10 RB of all time.  But IMO he's in the top 20/15 conversation, without a doubt. 

[Sperm Edwards]

You're the biggest circus act on the board.  You might as well be on the flying trapeze or walking a tight rope over the Grand Canyon.  You're not almost sad, you're pathetically sad. 

 

The difference is, Curtis was a great player, to say he wasnt is just out right stupid.  Seriously.  And the lack of great players in this teams history elevates his status.  He's the best Jet I've ever seen. Revis certainly had a chance to take his place on the podium but he's an after thought who was living on the hype of one great season created by the genius that is Rex Ryan.  

 

Curtis is the best Jet in my life time.  I wasnt around for Namath or Maynard and unfortunately too young to really appreciate Klecko even though I remember him fondly from my childhood (first jersey my father bought me as a kid).  Loved Toon and Kenny O, but they didnt have the careers Curtis did.  So, Curtis IMO is the cream of the crop.  

 

Also, Curtis is the player that I associate the most to the turn around of the NY Jets.  The Jets only had 1 losing season during Martin's tenure with the Jets (taking out his final season when he was injured).  And he never played on a great offense with a great QB.  The guy was the offense.  Many other all time great RB's had the luxury of playing with HOF QB's on all time offenses...Curtis never did.  The dude was an incredible player.  No, he's not a top 10 RB of all time.  But IMO he's in the top 20/15 conversation, without a doubt. 

 

lol

[JustInFudge]

Yeah, I'm still chuckling at the thought of a Penningtologist making such an argument against any other player to ever step out onto a football field; all in the very same thread no less.

 

That dude's something else.   He's like Smash but 10x worse and throws more tantrums and insults. 

 

Blowing out the candles of those guys top make Martin's shine brighter in comparison is a pretty weak argument. I'll grant you he was better than Dickerson and Bettis.

 

Martin was a very servicable and durable back. He was fortunate statistically to play for one coach who aigned and overpaid him, and another who was a dope who slavishly gave him carries. He was ridiculoulsy overpaid and that cap room cost the Jets.

 

You're missing the point.  All time greats have bad games.  Using 1 bad game from Curtis as proof positive he stunk was the weak argument.  Thats what that post was about.  

 

Martin was more than serviceable.  We're talking about a lock for 1,000 yards and 40+ catches a year.  He was the Jets offense.

 

And you're like the 3rd person to use his contract as an argument against him?  Who cares what he was paid.  His contract doesnt make him less or more of a player.  

[#27TheDominator]

I DON'T LIKE DICKERSON!  HE WAS A PUNK ASS.  HE WASN'T TOUGH.

 

At the time the knock on him was that he'd break one long run, but have dozens of super short ones.  I didn't like him or his style.  I'd have taken Billy Simms, Chuck Muncie or the Pruitts over him. If we are talking about seasons over careers, Earl was another world better than Dickerson.  I don't care about stats.  Stats make all you mooks overrate Bo, who couldn't even do it for a half a season at a time. 

[Sperm Edwards]

I DON'T LIKE DICKERSON!  HE WAS A PUNK ASS.  HE WASN'T TOUGH.

 

At the time the knock on him was that he'd break one long run, but have dozens of super short ones.  I didn't like him or his style.  I'd have taken Billy Simms, Chuck Muncie or the Pruitts over him. If we are talking about seasons over careers, Earl was another world better than Dickerson.  I don't care about stats.  Stats make all you mooks overrate Bo, who couldn't even do it for a half a season at a time. 

So basically just like Martin.  Except Martin didn't have those long runs mixed in.  Kind of significant difference, since a long run is often (if not usually) a TD.  Balancing out 2-yard carries with a 50-yard or 80-yard carry is better than balancing them out with an 8-10-yard carry (which so often seemed to come on 3rd & 15 or 2nd & 20, so we ended up punting anyway).

 

Without getting into another debate about Dickerson, this was kind of the point I was making.  Career totals do not make someone better or more dangerous.  Simms is another one who I'd rather have for a SB run than Martin.  Martinettes love to complain about the lack of support behind him (even though the passing games were usually middle of the road at worst and the OLs were generally very good to great).  Try looking at the sorry-ass QBs & OLs Simms ran behind.  I'd be lying if I said I even remember Eric Hipple or the useless OLs Detroit had. Damn shame ultra-talented guys like him were buried on garbage teams with no free agency, and mount on top of that that injuries that would have had him back on the field the next season nowadays instead ended his career and others.

[#27TheDominator]

So basically just like Martin.  Except Martin didn't have those long runs mixed in.  Kind of significant difference, since a long run is often (if not usually) a TD.  Balancing out 2-yard carries with a 50-yard or 80-yard carry is better than balancing them out with an 8-10-yard carry (which so often seemed to come on 3rd & 15 or 2nd & 20, so we ended up punting anyway).

 

Without getting into another debate about Dickerson, this was kind of the point I was making.  Career totals do not make someone better or more dangerous.  Simms is another one who I'd rather have for a SB run than Martin.  Martinettes love to complain about the lack of support behind him (even though the passing games were usually middle of the road at worst and the OLs were generally very good to great).  Try looking at the sorry-ass QBs & OLs Simms ran behind.  I'd be lying if I said I even remember Eric Hipple or the useless OLs Detroit had. Damn shame ultra-talented guys like him were buried on garbage teams with no free agency, and mount on top of that that injuries that would have had him back on the field the next season nowadays instead ended his career and others.

 

 

Isn't this kind of the Mattingly arguement?  People want to say the guy doesn't belong because he "doesn't have the numbers" but he was the best player in baseball for several years. 

[Scott Dierking]

Isn't this kind of the Mattingly arguement?  People want to say the guy doesn't belong because he "doesn't have the numbers" but he was the best player in baseball for several years. 

Yankees suck!

[#27TheDominator]

Yankees suck!

 

Today?  Pretty much. 

[Sperm Edwards]

Isn't this kind of the Mattingly arguement?  People want to say the guy doesn't belong because he "doesn't have the numbers" but he was the best player in baseball for several years. 

 

Ditto Dale Murphy.  And then Don Sutton, the Curtis Martin of baseball pitchers, gets in.

[Scott Dierking]

Ditto Dale Murphy.  And then Don Sutton, the Curtis Martin of baseball pitchers, gets in.

Sorta like, Curtis Martin, the Sperm Edwards of posting.

 

No big time gains, just steady, small gains with the occasional burst?

[Sperm Edwards]

Sorta like, Curtis Martin, the Sperm Edwards of posting.

 

No big time gains, just steady, small gains with the occasional burst?

 

Finally, someone who gets it.

 

Or more to the point, I'm compiling by making such long posts.  The posts are not really any better, but my career totals look really impressive compared to others because of the sheer number of attempts.

[joebabyny]

5. Brett Favre-- As much as you hate him, he's the second best QB to ever wear the uniform.

 

Flash Gordon was the second best Jets QB ever

 

[Lizard King]

Underrated: Al Toon. Kenny O ended his playing time way too soon.

[NJ]

A few notes:

Most Overrated Jets Ever:

1. Santonio Holmes-- because of the Super Bowl MVP, and because he was a Steeler, many Jets fans get hardcore revisionist when talking about him. In seven seasons, he's had one 1,000 yard season, and has never had 80 catches, yet he's talked about like he was elite at any point. Mike Wallace was instantly better than him.

2. Kerry Rhodes-- A few nice picks and 4,000,000 missed and deferred tackles. The amount of delusion amongst his backers was borderline creepy.

 

A fk'n men

[kay_gee]

If you're talking about great Jets then Martin is one of the greatest ever. Sorry, there's just not enough great players from this franchise to leave Martin off the "Greatest Jets" list. I wouldn't say he's underrated as a Jet though.

 

As for overrated compared to everyone else? I dunno. I don't think so, but only because I never looked at Martin as the same type of RB an Adrian Peterson is, and it's hard for me to judge him in his own time and outside of today's game (which I am more familiar with than football of the 1990s when I was much younger and Martin was in his prime).

 

I mean, today it's a passing league. The ball is handed off occasionally to the RB whose goal is mostly to gain a few yards and hang on. Most RBs aren't Adrian Peterson-like players and are more just a cog in a well-oiled offense. Martin was a very good cog.

[Sperm Edwards]

That dude's something else.   He's like Smash but 10x worse and throws more tantrums and insults. 

 

 

You're missing the point.  All time greats have bad games.  Using 1 bad game from Curtis as proof positive he stunk was the weak argument.  Thats what that post was about.  

 

Martin was more than serviceable.  We're talking about a lock for 1,000 yards and 40+ catches a year.  He was the Jets offense.

 

And you're like the 3rd person to use his contract as an argument against him?  Who cares what he was paid.  His contract doesnt make him less or more of a player.  

Except during the Jets' best season in Martin's tenure here, he was the weak spot of the Jets offense.  Crazy solid passing game, two WRs who finished the season #1 and #2 in 1st down receptions (to keep feeding Martin extra carries), and the best non-chop-blocking OL in the game? And Mr. Awesome got his thousand 3.5 yards at a time.  Yawn.

 

His contract makes him way overrated.  He was paid like he was the best RB in the history of the sport.  TWICE.  Those contracts, along with Martin's "play me even though I'm so injured I'm an obvious liability on the field" attitude may have cost us a SB.  Certainly didn't help any.  And our coaches were dumb enough to do it.  I even remember Herm saying something to the effect of Curtis gets as many carries as he asks for.  Good grief.

[JustInFudge]

Except during the Jets' best season in Martin's tenure here, he was the weak spot of the Jets offense.  Crazy solid passing game, two WRs who finished the season #1 and #2 in 1st down receptions (to keep feeding Martin extra carries), and the best non-chop-blocking OL in the game? And Mr. Awesome got his thousand 3.5 yards at a time.  Yawn.

 

His contract makes him way overrated.  He was paid like he was the best RB in the history of the sport.  TWICE.  Those contracts, along with Martin's "play me even though I'm so injured I'm an obvious liability on the field" attitude may have cost us a SB.  Certainly didn't help any.  And our coaches were dumb enough to do it.  I even remember Herm saying something to the effect of Curtis gets as many carries as he asks for.  Good grief.

 

One season they had a good passing attack.  One.  I dont care about contracts.  You do.  Silly thing to harp on if you ask me.  And YPC is stoopid overrated. 

 

FWIW - and I dont remember the stat perfectly, but there was something out there that if Curtis carried the ball 20+ times for the Jets, they were like 20-2 or maybe even undefeated..it was something like that...I'd suspect thats why he got the ball a lot...to you know, win and stuff. 

 

Also, I distinctly remember both Vinny and Chad saying their jobs were infinitely easier because they had him to hand off to and dump off to.  Guy was a great receiver.  11th all time in all purpose yards on a list with guys who played forever, with WR's and returners. 

[Scott Dierking]

   And our coaches were dumb enough to do it.  I even remember Herm saying something to the effect of Curtis gets as many carries as he asks for.  Good grief.

So a coach and a staff that stubbornly keep an offense one dimensional, and can't look at it any other way can be classified as inept?

 

Really?

[Matt39]

Except during the Jets' best season in Martin's tenure here, he was the weak spot of the Jets offense.  Crazy solid passing game, two WRs who finished the season #1 and #2 in 1st down receptions (to keep feeding Martin extra carries), and the best non-chop-blocking OL in the game? And Mr. Awesome got his thousand 3.5 yards at a time.  Yawn.

 

His contract makes him way overrated.  He was paid like he was the best RB in the history of the sport.  TWICE.  Those contracts, along with Martin's "play me even though I'm so injured I'm an obvious liability on the field" attitude may have cost us a SB.  Certainly didn't help any.  And our coaches were dumb enough to do it.  I even remember Herm saying something to the effect of Curtis gets as many carries as he asks for.  Good grief.

 

Not that I disagree with most of this...but the guards on the 98 team stunk(Todd Berger iirc?). They drafted guards with their 2nd and 3rd picks in 1999.

[#27TheDominator]

We can't fault Martin for his contract?  The underlying article basically blames Freeman McNeil for his draft position.  The guy was like smoke.  Yes he got hurt a lot, but I don't see anybody here rating him so high and for one game at their healthy peaks I'd take him over Martin.

[Sperm Edwards]

One season they had a good passing attack.  One.  I dont care about contracts.  You do.  Silly thing to harp on if you ask me.  And YPC is stoopid overrated. 

 

FWIW - and I dont remember the stat perfectly, but there was something out there that if Curtis carried the ball 20+ times for the Jets, they were like 20-2 or maybe even undefeated..it was something like that...I'd suspect thats why he got the ball a lot...to you know, win and stuff. 

 

Also, I distinctly remember both Vinny and Chad saying their jobs were infinitely easier because they had him to hand off to and dump off to.  Guy was a great receiver.  11th all time in all purpose yards on a list with guys who played forever, with WR's and returners. 

 

You can suspect it, but you would be wrong. 

 

Teams run the ball after they have the lead and are trying to run down the clock.  If you're losing, particularly if you're getting beat up or if the clock is not your friend in general, you're running less.

 

Further, I'm sure your stat is wrong.  It might be for 30+ carries, but that only illustrates my point even more.

 

And lastly, the Jets' passing game was a threat for a lot more than 1 season.  A good enough passing game, for a RB, is one that is efficient enough or challenges deep enough or both.  And he almost always had that.  The times he didn't, he still had a killer OL and an OC that loved to feed him the ball when the D was in nickel/dime situations (and of course we ended up punting after Martin's useless 15-yard run on 3rd & 25.

[JustInFudge]

You can suspect it, but you would be wrong. 

 

Teams run the ball after they have the lead and are trying to run down the clock.  If you're losing, particularly if you're getting beat up or if the clock is not your friend in general, you're running less.

 

Further, I'm sure your stat is wrong.  It might be for 30+ carries, but that only illustrates my point even more.

 

And lastly, the Jets' passing game was a threat for a lot more than 1 season.  A good enough passing game, for a RB, is one that is efficient enough or challenges deep enough or both.  And he almost always had that.  The times he didn't, he still had a killer OL and an OC that loved to feed him the ball when the D was in nickel/dime situations (and of course we ended up punting after Martin's useless 15-yard run on 3rd & 25.

 

I love you but not as much as Curtis Martin.

[Sperm Edwards]

Not that I disagree with most of this...but the guards on the 98 team stunk(Todd Berger iirc?). They drafted guards with their 2nd and 3rd picks in 1999.

 

O'Dwyer absolutely did not stink.  He was no superstar but he was at least average blocker.  He just committed a lot of holding penalties & it's because his pass-blocking was meh.  But he was a solid enough run-blocker.  Hell, Tuna offered him a $2M/year extension after the '98 season (decent starter money back then; today's equivalent of $5-6M/year) but he turned it down.  And it is unlikely that run-happy Tuna would have made that offer if he thought O'Dwyer couldn't run block.

 

And Berger was Tuna's preference to replace Lonnie Paleili (remember him?).   So that doesn't explain why he had a lower ypc than Adrian Murrell did, despite Testaverde bringing life to our passing game and Kevin Mawae replacing Roger Duffy (had to look him up) and Fabini replacing David never-healthy Williams and 16 healthy games out of Jumbo.

 

That 1998 line was damn solid.

 

It's always excuses for Martin and it always was.  If there was a 10 yard lane for him to run through, he got 10 yards.  More dangerous RBs juke someone or break a tackle and get another 5-20 yards out of it (or take it to the house outright).  And it happened over & over & over.  He was a selfish, me-first pig who cared more about his stats & carry-totals than the team.  When asked what his goal was entering the upcoming season, he'd say 2000 yards.  Team players say getting a superbowl ring. 

[Sperm Edwards]

So a coach and a staff that stubbornly keep an offense one dimensional, and can't look at it any other way can be classified as inept?

 

Really?

 

It wasn't even the one-dimensional factor (though I'm not a fan, then or now).  It was that he basically let the player dictate his own playing time and number of carries.  But with the offenses of late, there is no dimension that makes Mark Sanchez - or an offense "led" by him - into a good one.  Might as well keep feeding RBs the ball up the gut.  At least they won't turn it over 25+ times a season.

[Matt39]

O'Dwyer absolutely did not stink.  He was no superstar but he was at least average blocker.  He just committed a lot of holding penalties & it's because his pass-blocking was meh.  But he was a solid enough run-blocker.  Hell, Tuna offered him a $2M/year extension after the '98 season (decent starter money back then; today's equivalent of $5-6M/year) but he turned it down.  And it is unlikely that run-happy Tuna would have made that offer if he thought O'Dwyer couldn't run block.

 

And Berger was Tuna's preference to replace Lonnie Paleili (remember him?).   So that doesn't explain why he had a lower ypc than Adrian Murrell did, despite Testaverde bringing life to our passing game and Kevin Mawae replacing Roger Duffy (had to look him up) and Fabini replacing David never-healthy Williams and 16 healthy games out of Jumbo.

 

That 1998 line was damn solid.

 

It's always excuses for Martin and it always was.  If there was a 10 yard lane for him to run through, he got 10 yards.  More dangerous RBs juke someone or break a tackle and get another 5-20 yards out of it (or take it to the house outright).  And it happened over & over & over.  He was a selfish, me-first pig who cared more about his stats & carry-totals than the team.  When asked what his goal was entering the upcoming season, he'd say 2000 yards.  Team players say getting a superbowl ring. 

 

Not saying it wasnt solid- but I vaguely remember Tuna blaming Martins low YPC on the guard situation which led to the drafting of Thomas(who should have never been a Redskin) and David Loverne.

 

Martin wasn't a dangerous back I agree with you. Plenty of guys I'd take over him....and I find it hard to argue with folks that wouldnt take a back with 5 awesome seasons over 10 solid ones. But with Martin- you knew he wasnt going to fumble. Everyone within the organization loved him, including his teammates- he was just one of those guys that you couldnt replace, but knew you probably could find an upgrade. I used to be a lot more passionate about this subject....but as time goes one, meh Martin wasn't the reason we didnt win a SB. MArtin wasnt the reason Herm was awful, nor the reason Pennington couldmt make NFL throws.

 

But, yeah, he was never an elite back. Guys like Frank Gore were better backs than Martin.

[Sperm Edwards]

Not saying it wasnt solid- but I vaguely remember Tuna blaming Martins low YPC on the guard situation which led to the drafting of Thomas(who should have never been a Redskin) and David Loverne.

 

Martin wasn't a dangerous back I agree with you. Plenty of guys I'd take over him....and I find it hard to argue with folks that wouldnt take a back with 5 awesome seasons over 10 solid ones. But with Martin- you knew he wasnt going to fumble. Everyone within the organization loved him, including his teammates- he was just one of those guys that you couldnt replace, but knew you probably could find an upgrade. I used to be a lot more passionate about this subject....but as time goes one, meh Martin wasn't the reason we didnt win a SB. MArtin wasnt the reason Herm was awful, nor the reason Pennington couldmt make NFL throws.

 

But, yeah, he was never an elite back. Guys like Frank Gore were better backs than Martin.

 

I would take a back with 5 awesome seasons over 10 solid ones any draft day in any year.  10 solid seasons sounds more useful than it is.  It's not like finding a RB or two to combine for 1200 yards is so hard to find (especially in the favorable situations Martin usually found himself).  Frankly, it's easy.

 

Gore is a great example.  5 years of a beast like Gore is going to get a team further, and serve it better, than 10 years of Martin.  

[JustInFudge]

Frank Gore >>>> Curtis Martin????

 

lmfao

[Matt39]

Frank Gore >>>> Curtis Martin????

 

lmfao

 

YPC is probably the easiest way to judge on the surface- Gore's at 4.6 career over 8 years. Guys been a hell of a back. Durable too, considering the nasty injury at Miami. His best season is better than Martins, on like 50 less carries too.

[JustInFudge]

YPC is probably the easiest way to judge on the surface- Gore's at 4.6 career over 8 years. Guys been a hell of a back. Durable too, considering the nasty injury at Miami. His best season is better than Martins, on like 50 less carries too.

 

YPC is an overrated stat.

 

I wouldnt call Gore durable, he's missed his fair share of games. 

 

Their best seasons are very comparable in yardage, yes Gore did in less carries, Martin had more TD's, Gore had more receptions, yes, but it was also his second season and basically Martins last.  4.8 vs. 4.6.  Pretty equal if you ask me.

 

Gore has eclipsed the 1200 yard mark, 3 times.  Martin 7.  Gore has had 1 season with double digit TD's, Martin 5 times.  Frank's best season for receptions is 61, Martin is 70.  31 fumbles compared to 29 on a lot less carries.  Obviously Gore has some time left but I'd be surprised if he finishes near Curtis' totals.  

 

I'll take Curtis in a heartbeat over Gore. 

[Matt39]

YPC is an overrated stat.

 

I wouldnt call Gore durable, he's missed his fair share of games. 

 

Their best seasons are very comparable in yardage, yes Gore did in less carries, Martin had more TD's, Gore had more receptions, yes, but it was also his second season and basically Martins last.  4.8 vs. 4.6.  Pretty equal if you ask me.

 

Gore has eclipsed the 1200 yard mark, 3 times.  Martin 7.  Gore has had 1 season with double digit TD's, Martin 5 times.  Frank's best season for receptions is 61, Martin is 70.  31 fumbles compared to 29 on a lot less carries.  Obviously Gore has some time left but I'd be surprised if he finishes near Curtis' totals.  

 

I'll take Curtis in a heartbeat over Gore. 

 

Martin also had the benefit of getting 300 carries every season. Gore's only taken 300 once....and he went for 1700 yards