Jets' Martin deserves Hall more than Bettis

[NIGHT STALKER]

August 8, 2006

Fast forward to January 2011. Jerome Bettis and Curtis Martin are both eligible for the Pro Football Hall of Fame, and I have only one vote.

I vote for Martin.

Martin was an elite back through all of his first 10 NFL seasons. Bettis posted only six such seasons. Martin also is the much better all-around, every-down back, with 484 receptions and 3,329 receiving yards, both well more than twice Bettis' totals.

And before last season, Martin, perhaps the most under-appreciated NFL back of the past decade, played through everything. Through little nicks and big bruises, he carried the load for the Jets, even if he wasn't near 100 percent.

Somehow, working past all that wear and tear and at the age of 31, he led the league in rushing in 2004 with a career-high 4.6 yards per carry. Then, just a year later, at 32, with his consecutive start streak at 119 games, he was forced to have season-ending arthroscopic surgery on his right knee.

Now, eight months later, it's been a struggle to get back on the field in training camp as the knee continues to hurt. And you know he's really hurting, because through 3,518 carries and 14,101 yards rushing, it's rare that his 5-11, 210-pound frame hasn't played.

His contemporary Bettis, who is officially in the books with 39 fewer carries and 439 fewer rushing yards, got his fairy-tale reward for putting his bowling-ball body through the grind. You know the headline: "The Bus rides off with a ring".

Even if Martin, though having the more productive career, plays this season, he won't have a similar finish. He is 33, and the Jets are in a rebuilding mode. However, it's looking like, sadly, that we've already witnessed Martin's final NFL carry.

The Jets will find some answer to replace Martin for the short term. But getting someone to produce with the same determination, diligence and durability for the long term? Good luck. Martin, with all the heart he has poured into the Jets over the years, has set the highest of standards.

[124]

If Martin plays this season then it will take him an extra year to become eligible.

Martin will be 1st ballott. He's the 4th all time rusher in NFL History. So will Bettis since he's 5th.

[The Troll]

I agree 100%.

Jerome Bettis may be the most over-rated back of the modern era. IMO, the only time he should enter the HOF is as a visitor, but I know they'll elect him and his career 3.9 ypc on the first ballot.

[serphnx]

I agree 100%.

Jerome Bettis may be the most over-rated back of the modern era. IMO, the only time he should enter the HOF is as a visitor, but I know they'll elect him and his career 3.9 ypc on the first ballot.

What about the TD and 1st down totals? I'd imagine Bettis has the edge on that. Martin will make the hall of fame based on his classiness and longevity, but there isn't any season in his career that you'd really feel he's the best player in the league, or is hall of fame caliber. Even when he was rushing champion, I'm pretty sure everyone would have taken about 5 RBs before Martin.

Martin should get in before Bettis probably, but I don't really think either is truly HOF material purely based on their statistical achievements.

[The Troll]

What about the TD and 1st down totals? I'd imagine Bettis has the edge on that. Martin will make the hall of fame based on his classiness and longevity, but there isn't any season in his career that you'd really feel he's the best player in the league, or is hall of fame caliber. Even when he was rushing champion, I'm pretty sure everyone would have taken about 5 RBs before Martin.

Martin should get in before Bettis probably, but I don't really think either is truly HOF material purely based on their statistical achievements.

Bettis played 2 more seasons than Martin and has only ONE more rushing touchdown than Curtis. When receiving numbers are factored in, Bettis is looking up at CMart by 6 touchdowns.

First downs? Please show me a first downs stat for any running back, ever.

I'm not saying that Curtis Martin was ever this great, dominant back. I'm saying that he was better than Jerome Bettis.

[GM]

[faba]

Bettis is a product of grinding it out year by year-nothing really spectatular in a particular season. Longetivity makes the similarity between him and Martin.

[PatsFanTX]

but I know they'll elect him and his career 3.9 ypc on the first ballot.

Yea, CuMar's career 4.0 ypc is so much better than Bettis 3.9.

[gg]

Martin had 1000 yard seasons in 10 years in a row... he is a shoo-in.

who else has done that? sanders? smith? that might be about it... peyton but not in a row...

first ballot.

no question.

[Sperm Edwards]

They are totally different kinds of runners. Their statistics shouldn't be similar. Bettis spent much of his last 3 seasons as a short-yardage/goal-line back. His running style through his career was not so much find-the-hole as make-a-hole. Martin's was find-the-hole & cut quickly into it. Totally different.

What does anyone suppose Martin's career ypc would be if his past 3 seasons were spent in similar fashion? If you say anything over 3.9 you're kidding yourself. He also had the benefit of playing a bit where he was actually PULLED in short-yardage or goal-line where the longest run he could possibly mount could be 1 yard (or less). Even if you score, you got 1 lousy yard.

For the "which is more deserving?" discussion, it depends what you place greater value on. If it's who has the better #'s, I don't see how anyone could argue in Bettis' favor. If it is looking back and saying "I need a first down" or "We need to get in the endzone on this play & everyone knows it's coming up the gut" I can't see how anyone would say "take Bettis out & put Martin in."

Who is more selfless & team-oriented in that respect? You know what I think. I'd hand that to the guy who, after averaging 100 rushing yds/gm, was willing to take a back-seat to Amos Zereoue the following season b/c that's what his coach wanted & thought was in the team’s best interest.

The stats.

Yards-per-carry: Martin 4.008 – Bettis 3.927

Clearly the duty assigned Bettis to, particularly late in his career, had an impact on his career average. Even with that type of duty, is anyone going to argue that, from mid-field, Martin was more likely to get 4.0 yards on a given run than Bettis? Get real. Despite Martin not having a zillion 20-30 yd runs (or more) to jack up (read: skew) the average way high, you can bet he had more than Bettis. The point is, given the type of duty they were assigned to for most of their respective careers, I don't see how this 4.0 vs. 3.9 thing has any merit whatsoever. 4.0 is considered a benchmark because it is a round number, not because it is so much more useful than 3.9. Otherwise, why not 4.1 or 4.2? Why? Because it sounds stupid. You'd think there was some crazy amount of statistical analysis that determined that 3.9 is crap, yet 4.0 is outstanding. 3.927 vs 4.008. A difference of 0.081ypc. That’s less than 3 inches. Officials can't even spot the ball accurately within 3 inches. Besides, put Martin back there for a season of short-yardage duty & then let's see if that 4.008 doesn't change. Would it have been the same on those LA Rams teams? Right. To me? They both have the same ypc. 4.5 is more than 3.9; 5.0 is more than 3.9. Given all the variables in their respective careers, 4.01 and 3.93 are the same friggin thing.

Total yards:

As the better receiver, Martin was simply superior as a total-yardage back throughout his career.

Rushing yards:

When you consider how many years each has been in the league, the difference between the two - like ypc - is statistically insignificant. Similar # of carries, similar # of yards.

Scoring:

In some regards, I'd give this one to Bettis. Martin had hundreds more touches for what was materially the same # of scores given their # of years in the league. He also played his first 3 seasons on a "somewhat worse" offense. Flip-flop their teams in this stretch and it's hard to imagine things turning out identically. Pretend you’re an OC. You’re on the opponent’s 3 yard-line and you need a TD. Who are you feeding the ball to? Bettis.

In other regards, though, Martin simply has more touchdowns in fewer seasons. Read: more touchdowns per game.

Compared to their peers:

Were either of them ever the best RB in the league at any time? No. I can't really fault either too much for that. You can be great without being THE best. But what I can fault both for is the infrequency in which either was a top-5 back (since they're both top-5 in yardage). Bettis went to more pro-bowls. Before you knock that all over, pro-bowl voting is not like baseball all-star game voting. Their peers - players & coaches - have the biggest say in who goes & who doesn’t. He was also in the league for two more years & since one of those pro-bowls was in his 2nd-last year, I suppose that's a wash as well. Each had more than one pro-bowl visit where they were well under that magic 4.0 mark.

But neither of them were consistently a top-5 back. For Martin, you could make the argument for 1995, 2001 (though he failed to score in 10 of our last 11 games), and 2004; 3x in 11 years. For Betttis: 1993, 1996 & 1997 (and maybe 2001 but he missed the last 5 games & hardly scored on a 13-3 team with a top-10 scoring offense - let's leave that one out); 3x in 13 years.

So neither of them was the best back in the league ever. Maybe not fair. But each was so infrequently even a top-5 back - 3x in 11 years for Martin & 3x in 13 years for Bettis - that it requires bringing in career yardage totals to justify either's admission.

Who was more TEAM-oriented?

That goes to one's own opinion. Many will say that Martin playing through injuries shows he puts the team above himself; others will point to that and say that it demonstrates the exact opposite (that he wanted to be in there even when all could see it hurt the team). Bettis did the opposite - when the team wanted to rely on their younger backs, he took the "whatever gets me a ring" attitude.

[Much of my acrimony for Martin goes to his cap number – he’s been paid more than any RB in NFL history & as a Jets fan I felt that money would’ve been better spent elsewhere. Since we have no rings to show during his tenure here, the TEAM always a missing piece or two away, you can see where I’m coming from.]

Since neither was Barry Sanders or Jim Brown – guys who clearly should never have taken a backseat to any other RB at any time in their careers, let’s bring the 1000-yds seasons up here. They both had a bunch. Martin had more. Martin had the 10-year streak. Is that great? To some. I think the streak is overrated, as it is an arbitrary number that was more significant 30+ years ago. Since, for this streak, no distinction is made between 1000 yds & 1300-1500 yds, is there a material difference between 1000 and 940 over a 16-game season (under 4 yds/gm)? Because Emmitt Smith had that for 13 straight seasons. How many seasons would Dorsett have had 1000 yds if not for the '82 strike season & Dallas drafting Herschel Walker in '86 followed by the '87 strike season? How many more seasons would Sanders have done it if he didn't retire after another 1500-yard one? What of Walter Payton also had the '82 season interrupt his streak & Chicago also drafting a 1st-round RB (Anderson) in the '87 strike season? Jim Brown played half his career with a 12-game schedule & the other half with a 14-game schedule. Where would his streak have stopped with 16-game seasons, since he had over 1500 yds & 17 rushing TD's even in his final season? Would Marcus Allen's streak have died at 3 seasons if Bo Jackson hadn't fallen into the Raiders' laps & there was free-agency back then instead of having to spar with Al Davis? (Would Curtis' streak have survived the Jets drafting a Bo Jackson talent? Don't make me laugh). What of the RB's who got drafted by a team with a firmly-entrenched starter (S.Alexander, etc)? What if Jim Fassel was his coach to start his career & told Martin to put on & carry an extra 10+ lbs for his first 3 seasons b/c his height-weight ratio didn’t fit Jim’s magic conversion chart? What about all the RB’s who came into the league in a different time – fewer games, poorer medical treatment, legal clothesline tackles, etc. For that matter, how many wins would Cy Young have had if he broke into the majors in 1971 with the Padres?

The streak is impressive to look at on paper, but there were plenty more-talented RB’s who were not fortunate enough to play with circumstances lining up just-so in which to do it.

Superbowls:

We all know this one. Each went to one superbowl. Bettis has a ring & Martin doesn't. Did their respective performances cause one to win & the other to lose? Nope. Next topic.

Off the field:

Anyone who can demonstrate how either was scumbaggish off the field, with a character unbecoming of a HOF'er, let me know.

Were they GREAT on the field?

Not good. Not very good. The HOF isn’t supposed to be the Hall of Good or Hall of Very-Good. GREAT. I don't mean were their accumulated career totals great compared to others in history. That goes without saying since they're both in the top-5 in rushing yards & top-10 in rushing TD's. Did either have that wow-factor? Maybe Bettis a little, the way he'd just run over everybody in his prime. Martin's had some runs where he made people look stupid with his quick cuts. But given the # of carries each has had, I think they're both sorely lacking in this category. That’s a big negative.

So do they deserve to get in?

Bettis' running style caused him to miss games almost every season & simply wore down faster. You can't help your team if you're on the sideline. If he was healthy maybe Pittsburgh gets a superbowl ring in '01 instead of NE. And for the stat-meisters, 9 of 13 seasons with 3.8 ypc or less. True, he's not a burner so he has to average out 1-yard runs with 9-yarders instead of 25-50-yarders. But it's still just not impressive on paper.

It's no secret that I've never thought of Martin as a dominant runner - not ever. The overwhelming majority of his career was played with a QB who could challenge a defense. When he didn't have that behind him (early '98, early '99, early '03) he was supremely mediocre. While you can't help your team from the sideline, you most definitely CAN hurt it by refusing to go there. Keeping himself on the field in early '02 and most of '05, when he was clearly unfit to play, didn't endear him to me & many others.

But here's what I would never take from either one: if it was so friggin' easy, why weren't there 30 guys who did the same? There’s been a 16-game schedule for 25 years & no fewer than 28 teams in that time. Then I hear about (however talented) a scumbag like Michael Irvin maybe/likely getting a bust of his empty heads made for all to revere this crackhead, and it clinches it for me. One of the reasons I stopped following one of my previously favorite leagues (NBA) is because of the altar unto which so many thugs & dirtbags are revered & worshiped. To say nothing of the MLB scandals. So these two being clean rolls of toilet paper in the dirty ass of professional sports counts a lot to me.

Were they dominant? No. Will you reminisce about their running skills to your grandkids? Maybe Bettis a little bit but not much compared to other backs.

Are they HOF'ers?

I think yes. Both of them.

[spjets]

jesus sperm....did you go to the GreenJets@Ham school of writing....

[Bob]

They both belong. It would be silly to say otherwise.

[PatsFanTX]

Superbowls:

We all know this one. Each went to one superbowl. Bettis has a ring & Martin doesn't. Did their respective performances cause one to win & the other to lose? Nope.

:eek:

CuMar's Super Bowl performance:

11/42, 3.8 ypc

[L.I.MikeBleedsGreen]

They both belong. It would be silly to say otherwise.

Dind Ding Ding we have a winner !!! Ditto

[Boozer76]

They do both belong without a doubt. the one thing that Bettis was able to do that Curtis never did was take over a game and win it on his shoulders. Most of the time when he did it was a very big game.

[L.I.MikeBleedsGreen]

They do both belong without a doubt. the one thing that Bettis was able to do that Curtis never did was take over a game and win it on his shoulders. Most of the time when he did it was a very big game.

Then Again c-mart doesn't weight 275 lbs. You can put Limo lady on his back and he will still win the big game .lol;)

[The Troll]

Jerome Bettis: 13 NFL seasons, FOUR seasons with ypc over 4.0. I'm no mathematician, but to me, that says that for over 2/3rds of his career, Bettis was merely average, dare I say below average.

Meanwhile, in 11 seasons, Martin has dipped below 4 ypc only four times. He also has had four seasons of double-digit touchdowns, compared to Bettis' two.

Sperm, you say that Bettis' average was hurt by his last three seasons. If anything, his last three seasons (in which he scored almost a 3rd of his career TDs) help his status. I would say his average was brought down by seasons like his second one, in which he carried the ball 319 times for a whopping 3.2 yards a pop.

Bettis has six Pro Bowls to Martin's 5, which is inexplicable to me considering one of Bettis' Pro Bowls was the aforementioned 1,025 yard, 3 TD season in 1994. How the hell did he get into the Pro Bowl with Kevan Barlow numbers, anyway?

Curtis Martin was a MUCH better back than Jerome Bettis, and as most of you can attest to, I'm not exactly CMart's biggest supporter on this site. I would put Bettis in the category of guys like Eddie George and Ottis Anderson long before I would put him in the same shrine as guys like Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, and Jim Brown.

[Sperm Edwards]

Jerome Bettis: 13 NFL seasons, FOUR seasons with ypc over 4.0. I'm no mathematician, but to me, that says that for over 2/3rds of his career, Bettis was merely average, dare I say below average.

Meanwhile, in 11 seasons, Martin has dipped below 4 ypc only four times. He also has had four seasons of double-digit touchdowns, compared to Bettis' two.

Sperm, you say that Bettis' average was hurt by his last three seasons. If anything, his last three seasons (in which he scored almost a 3rd of his career TDs) help his status. I would say his average was brought down by seasons like his second one, in which he carried the ball 319 times for a whopping 3.2 yards a pop.

Bettis has six Pro Bowls to Martin's 5, which is inexplicable to me considering one of Bettis' Pro Bowls was the aforementioned 1,025 yard, 3 TD season in 1994. How the hell did he get into the Pro Bowl with Kevan Barlow numbers, anyway?

Curtis Martin was a MUCH better back than Jerome Bettis, and as most of you can attest to, I'm not exactly CMart's biggest supporter on this site. I would put Bettis in the category of guys like Eddie George and Ottis Anderson long before I would put him in the same shrine as guys like Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, and Jim Brown.

Tell me who had more help with his YPC: Martin in '96 for the superbowl Patriots or the almost-superbowl Jets (3.5-3.6 ypc) or Bettis for the '94 Los Angeles Rams. He was blamed so much for it his peers voted him to the pro-bowl - well look at the other RBs' numbers that year. Some years are just tough on RB's like some years ('95) are kind to WR's. One more pro-bowl than Martin had. (Or does anyone think that if Martin played 2 more years he'd get voted to another one?)

I think Martin was a more complete back. In their respective primes, I think Bettis was a more dominant back.

Both had HOF careers.

[The Troll]

Tell me who had more help with his YPC: Martin in '96 for the superbowl Patriots or the almost-superbowl Jets (3.5-3.6 ypc) or Bettis for the '94 Los Angeles Rams. He was blamed so much for it his peers voted him to the pro-bowl - well look at the other RBs' numbers that year. Some years are just tough on RB's like some years ('95) are kind to WR's. One more pro-bowl than Martin had. (Or does anyone think that if Martin played 2 more years he'd get voted to another one?)

I think Martin was a more complete back. In their respective primes, I think Bettis was a more dominant back.

Both had HOF careers.

Boo hoo hoo. Bettis only had HOFer Jackie Slater to block for him. How do you explain how he averaged over a yard and a half more per carry while playing on the same team in his rookie season? That was back when free agency was in its infancy. It's not like LA lost 4/5ths of its offensive line. Honestly, I don't know what happened that season and neither do you, but it's ridiculous to put that entire weight on the people around Bettis and none on him.

[PeterNorth09]

Curtis Martin is one of the greatest football players of all time. RB is the most physically cutthroat position in sports and he consistently brought it for more than 10 years. The Cal Ripken of his position.

[Sperm Edwards]

Boo hoo hoo. Bettis only had HOFer Jackie Slater to block for him. How do you explain how he averaged over a yard and a half more per carry while playing on the same team in his rookie season? That was back when free agency was in its infancy. It's not like LA lost 4/5ths of its offensive line. Honestly, I don't know what happened that season and neither do you, but it's ridiculous to put that entire weight on the people around Bettis and none on him.

Whatever. Martin had HOF'er Kevin Mawae to block for him in '98 with a pro-bowl QB, a pro-bowl WR, and another borderline pro-bowl WR. Not to mention the NFL's then-premeire blocking-TE. He put up 3.5 ypc.

I'm not arguing Bettis had better career #'s than Martin, nor that he was the better all-around back. He wasn't. While two different runners, both of their games was grind-it-out and wear the defense down. I thought Bettis was better at it in his prime.

Curtis Martin is one of the greatest football players of all time. RB is the most physically cutthroat position in sports and he consistently brought it for more than 10 years. The Cal Ripken of his position.

Don't even go there to make an argument. Cal Ripken was the single most selfish, me-first player in the history of professional team sports.

[The Troll]

Whatever. Martin had HOF'er Kevin Mawae to block for him in '98 with a pro-bowl QB, a pro-bowl WR, and another borderline pro-bowl WR. Not to mention the NFL's then-premeire blocking-TE. He put up 3.5 ypc.

I'm not arguing Bettis had better career #'s than Martin, nor that he was the better all-around back. He wasn't. While two different runners, both of their games was grind-it-out and wear the defense down. I thought Bettis was better at it in his prime.

Don't even go there to make an argument. Cal Ripken was the single most selfish, me-first player in the history of professional team sports.

Kevin Mawae is a Hall of Famer? Not in my opinion. If Dermontti Dawson isn't in yet, then it looks like it will be a long wait for Mawae, who was never even close to as DOMINANT as Dawson.

What about those Steeler teams Bettis played on? He had guys like Alan Faneca and the aforementioned Dawson blocking for him. Later in his career, poor Jerome was forced to run behind that terrible Steelers o-line, which only featured two multiple-time All-Pro's blocking for him. Not to mention Hines Ward, the best blocking receiver in football. Over the course of their careers, who had more talent surrounding them? Bettis or Martin? Bettis, whose Steeler teams went to 4 AFC championship games, or Martin, who played for the ****ing Jets?

[Bugg]

Eric Dickerson is in the HoF on really one historic season and a bunch of very good ones. He was a bad guy and and bad teammate. Both Martin and Bettis by that logic deserve to be in; both were for the msot part good guys. Similarly, Dickerson ws a very good back who stuck around for a relatively long time. But his teams never won anything. In fact, his teams were 2-5 in playoff games, in which he scored 4 TDs total. Eric Dickerson is the football equivalent of a Donn Sutton/complier,a nd once you let these guys in, you cannot keep out the other really good. And make way for Ricky Watters while you're at it. He complied the numbers. Link doesn't work.

Guy who was great and should be in anyway-Thurman Thomas.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/ThomTh00.htm

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

[PFSIKH]

They both belong. It would be silly to say otherwise.

Color me silly then.

Both are good backs for the reasons covered in the first 23 posts of this thread.

Neither of them were great backs. Which I believe should be a requirement for the Hall. At no time during their NFL careers, could you look at one and say "damm...that is the best back in the NFL."

I saw on ESPN the other day the list of eligibles for next year. Terrell Danis was on that list. Now, Terell Davis was a great back. His injury shortened career might prevent him from joining the Hall. IMHO he belongs, but at no time during their respective careers did CuMar or The Bus come close to Davis' greatness.

Just because they piled up numbers for being good for an extremely long period of time does not make them great. It is tough to make an argument for either being a Top 10 back of alltime, which should be the first argument on whther they should be in.

[#27TheDominator]

Color me silly then.

Both are good backs for the reasons covered in the first 23 posts of this thread.

Neither of them were great backs. Which I believe should be a requirement for the Hall. At no time during their NFL careers, could you look at one and say "damm...that is the best back in the NFL."

I think they both will get in and I don't really have a problem with it, but I agree. They weren't THE BEST. This goes with the Mattingly argument in baseball. Guy was the best player in the game for several years, but didn't put up the BS longevity numbers so he won't get in. Martin was a 5 time pro-bowler. In the words of Derrick Coleman "whoopty damn doo." So was Greg Pruitt. If you watched them both in their primes you'd probably prefer to have Pruitt. Or Billy Simms.

[JetsMan57]

I dont mean to reroute the thread, but why the heck isnt Winston Hill in the HOF?

[Sperm Edwards]

I think they both will get in and I don't really have a problem with it, but I agree. They weren't THE BEST. This goes with the Mattingly argument in baseball. Guy was the best player in the game for several years, but didn't put up the BS longevity numbers so he won't get in. Martin was a 5 time pro-bowler. In the words of Derrick Coleman "whoopty damn doo." So was Greg Pruitt. If you watched them both in their primes you'd probably prefer to have Pruitt. Or Billy Simms.

I think they both will get in for playing for so long at a position that rarely lasts so long.

I thought they should get in because I see a whole wave of people coming up that will get in for being "very good" instead of great, or dominant. Football's HOF is going to become what baseball's is now, where all-time greats such as Paul Molitor & Kirby Puckett have been inducted. As long as that's going to happen I don't see how you can keep these two out.

And Troll, Jackie Slater was like 40 years old in 1994-1995 (his last 2 seasons) & hadn't been a pro-bowler for years. No I didn't watch every Rams game then but I doubt it's a stretch to suggest that he was way past his prime by then.

I'm not arguing that Bettis was an all-time great over his entire career. He wasn't. Neither was Martin. The best I could come up with for justifying both of them is that if it was so mediocre then far more much-greater RB's would have done it by now.

If you'd argue that both were maybe top-20 backs but not top-10 that is not really something I'd place too much weight on. Because that means that if they played before 10 others on that list then they WOULD have been top-10. I wouldn't penalize them for simply playing later than others.

But I don't think either one is a shoe-in. Not any more than Drew Bledsoe should be. And if he lasts 3 more years (very possible) he'll crack 50,000 passing yards. Was he an all-time great? Testaverde is #6 on the all-time passing yards list & just think about all those terrible Tampa teams he was on. What about Henry Ellard & Art Monk then?

[PFSIKH]

Great points Sperm.

Rule changes.

Expanding the season from 14 to 16 games.

The previously accepted numbers should carry little weight today.

10K yards? Edgerrin James barring injury should break that mark this season. It is only his 8th season and one of those season he missed 10 games due to injury. He is a talent. No doubt. Tiki Barber, with 1214 yards will break the 10K mark this year. This is his 10th year. It seems just like yesterday he was too small to be an every down back and fumbled too much. Yet he will, barring injury, break the 10k mark and start getting talk for a HofF nod. Why? When 62.5 yards is needed per game for a 16 game season to break 1000, 10K mark means little. IMHO the new mark should be closer to 15K for a 10 year career. That would get the player in the neighborhood of needing a 100 yards a game.

I think the HofF should be set-up like the Packers' Hall of Fame. They have certain levels. A Hall of Fame. Number retired. Ring of Honor. Even if they make the NFL Hall does not mean they make the Packer Hall of Fame.

The Hall should be for greatness. Even players like CuMar and Bus will find their names their, but for actual enshrinement, leave it to the great players.

[Bugg]

Great points Sperm.

Rule changes.

Expanding the season from 14 to 16 games.

The previously accepted numbers should carry little weight today.

10K yards? Edgerrin James barring injury should break that mark this season. It is only his 8th season and one of those season he missed 10 games due to injury. He is a talent. No doubt. Tiki Barber, with 1214 yards will break the 10K mark this year. This is his 10th year. It seems just like yesterday he was too small to be an every down back and fumbled too much. Yet he will, barring injury, break the 10k mark and start getting talk for a HofF nod. Why? When 62.5 yards is needed per game for a 16 game season to break 1000, 10K mark means little. IMHO the new mark should be closer to 15K for a 10 year career. That would get the player in the neighborhood of needing a 100 yards a game.

I think the HofF should be set-up like the Packers' Hall of Fame. They have certain levels. A Hall of Fame. Number retired. Ring of Honor. Even if they make the NFL Hall does not mean they make the Packer Hall of Fame.

The Hall should be for greatness. Even players like CuMar and Bus will find their names their, but for actual enshrinement, leave it to the great players.

I like the idea. That would be ideal. But it's too late. Once they set up the HoF they aren't going to go back and reclassify everyone. Someday soon Ricky Watters, Edge and Tiki are going to be enshrined, and probably TEstaverde and Bledsoe too.