Seven Former Broncos Nominated for Hall of Fame

[Denver Native (Carol)]

View photos of the Broncos listed as nominees for induction into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in the Class of 2014.

http://www.denverbroncos.com/multimedia/photo-gallery/Seven-Former-Broncos-Nominated-for-Hall-of-Fame/496d7d60-c00b-42ba-b078-ef5512654c23

[underrated29]

I heard on NFLN last night that Jerome Bettis was gaining steam for the HOF.....I will be PISSED if he makes it and TD doesnt. Do not get me wrong, I LOVE the Bus. A man his size moving the way he did and playing at a high level for such a long time. He is one of my all time favs. But TD has everything and more that the bus doesnt aside from longevity. TDs playoff numbers still havent been touched. He was the ultimate back and he imo has to make it in over the BUS.

[LTC Pain]

I'm pulling for Rod Smith to make it in. We are from the same school :)

[BroncoWave]

I'd say Lynch has the best shot of making it in any time soon out of all of those. Would be really cool to see him get in. I've met him a couple of times and he's a super nice guy.

[pnbronco]

It's so nice to see Tom N. on that list. I really hope Karl makes it. He did so much for the team for many years and as he said once. I tackled a lot of those players that are in there now.....:D

[atwater27]

#27

[Poet]

Isn't Bettis in the top five of all-time rushing yards?

Atwater should have been in ages ago. That dude WAS defense.

[pnbronco]

Isn't Bettis in the top five of all-time rushing yards?

Atwater should have been in ages ago. That dude WAS defense.

Close, he's sixth.

[BroncoWave]

Isn't Bettis in the top five of all-time rushing yards?

I think sheer accumulation of stats over a career is really overrated. Being lucky enough to stay healthy for a long time while playing at a decent level doesn't mean you are a hall of famer. Bettis was never a guy teams absolutely feared playing against like an Adrian Peterson or Barry Sanders or, yes, even Terrell Davis. If my life depended on winning one game, I'd rather have any of those guys in the backfield than Bettis. The guy averaged 3.9 yards per carry in his career. Not exactly stellar efficiency.

[Poet]

I think sheer accumulation of stats over a career is really overrated. Being lucky enough to stay healthy for a long time while playing at a decent level doesn't mean you are a hall of famer. Bettis was never a guy teams absolutely feared playing against like an Adrian Peterson or Barry Sanders or, yes, even Terrell Davis. If my life depended on winning one game, I'd rather have any of those guys in the backfield than Bettis. The guy averaged 3.9 yards per carry in his career. Not exactly stellar efficiency.

Well to be fair, his ypc died the last years of his career when he was just a short yardage machine. Bettis carried his offense, he was his offense. Like I've been swayed sort of to the TD side, but anyone who thinks Bettis isn't a deserving HoFer is just kidding themselves. I like your argument for the just one game thing. But, if I have to convert a short yardage situation, Bettis is the easy pick over any of those guys. He might not be a first ballot HoF guy, but he's a top five rusher of all-time with a ring.

[BroncoWave]

Well to be fair, his ypc died the last years of his career when he was just a short yardage machine. Bettis carried his offense, he was his offense. Like I've been swayed sort of to the TD side, but anyone who thinks Bettis isn't a deserving HoFer is just kidding themselves. I like your argument for the just one game thing. But, if I have to convert a short yardage situation, Bettis is the easy pick over any of those guys. He might not be a first ballot HoF guy, but he's a top five rusher of all-time with a ring.

I'm not saying he wasn't a really solid player for a long time, but I just don't think he struck fear into the league at all. And it makes since that he carried the offense when their QBs were guys like Neil O'Donnell, Mike Tomczak, and Tommy Maddox for most of his career. I would put Bettis in the hall of very good, but not in the hall of fame.

Just using Terrell Davis as an example, he averaged 20 more yards per game, .8 more per carry, and had 60 career touchdowns to Bettis' 91 despite the fact that Bettis played in 192 games to TD's 78. You'd think a short yardage specialist like Bettis would have more than 1 touchdown every 2.1 games over his career.

Not to mention receiving, a stat in which TD's TOTALS almost match Bettis', despite their different career lengths.

If you want to put Bettis in the HoF, I don't see how you wouldn't put Davis in first.

[MOtorboat]

Bettis never once led the league in anything.

Edit: I take that back. He led the league in carries. Once.

[Poet]

I feel like leading the league is overrated. We forget that an entire manner of play was built off of guys like that. How many tight close wins did the Steelers get, in large part to hime grinding out the clock? Top five all-time rushing, or maybe sixth, I don't recall, but regardless, when you have that, you're a hall of famer.

[MOtorboat]

He averaged 1,050 yards and 7 touchdowns.

That's not greatness.

[BroncoWave]

Bettis never once led the league in anything.

Edit: I take that back. He led the league in carries. Once.

Yeah, if you actually look at his year-by-year carries, nothing really jumps off the page. Especially his touchdowns by season: 7, 3, 3, 11, 7, 3, 7, 8, 4, 9, 7, 13, 9. Not exactly Hall of Fame stuff.

[Poet]

He averaged 1,050 yards and 7 touchdowns.

That's not greatness.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/rush_yds_career.htm

The guy in fifth has 22 more yards than him in his career.

The guy in fourth place has less than 600 on him. Barry Sanders has less than 2k yards more than him.

Wasn't 1k yards still the standard for backs then?
I understand that I'm on the wrong board to make these arguments, but you guys really don't have much. You don't like how he got his yards, sure. But that way was so 'insert whatever negative word you want to use here so I don't strawman you' that he is right up there with the all-time legends.

[MOtorboat]

TD averaged 1,086 yards per season with 9 TDs. He also led the league in yards once (one of only six guys to go for 2,000) and twice in touchdowns.

His playoff performance makes Bettis look like a scrub.

[BroncoWave]

I feel like leading the league is overrated. We forget that an entire manner of play was built off of guys like that. How many tight close wins did the Steelers get, in large part to hime grinding out the clock? Top five all-time rushing, or maybe sixth, I don't recall, but regardless, when you have that, you're a hall of famer.

Brett Favre leads every accumulation stat category by a large margin. But no one thinks he is the greatest QB to ever play. Most don't even have him top 5. Now Favre is obviously a Hall of Famer, but stat accumulation is not the be-all end-all.

[BroncoWave]

TD averaged 1,086 yards per season with 9 TDs. He also led the league in yards once (one of only six guys to go for 2,000) and twice in touchdowns.

His playoff performance makes Bettis look like a scrub.

And his per season averages are really skewed because of barely playing due to injuries over his last 3 seasons. The only reason Bettis is 6th in rushing while TD is where he is is because one hit the health lottery and the other one didn't.

[BroncoWave]

King, we all get that he had a bunch of rushing yards in his career. And while that is a check in his favor, I maintain the premise that sheer stat accumulation is overrated. I'm much more concerned with efficiency and averages. It's the only fair way to compare players with such different career lengths.

[Army Bronco]

I think all these Broncos deserve to get in, especially TD, Rod Smith and Atwater but it would be special to see Karl Mecklenburg. He was a great player.

[GEM]

Meck and Atwater....I'd take Gradishar getting voted in by senior committee as a fallback though.

[claymore]

All my arguments have probably already been made but...

Not many RB’s have a better resume than Davis. The ones that do are in the HOF. Im biased, but I never though much of Bettis. If he makes it in before Davis, its because of the city he played for.

TD was one of the best regular season RB's ever. He was THE greatest playoff RB of all time.

League MVP x2
SB MVP x1
NFL Offensive Player of the year x1
AFC Rushing title x 3
NFL Rushing title x1
SB Rings x2
2000 yard season x1


A running back has rushed for at least 1,750 yards 26 times. Davis has done it twice. He and Emmitt Smith are the only players to win a Super Bowl the season they did. Davis is one of five running backs to win a rushing title, MVP, and Super Bowl. The other four (Jim Taylor, Walter Payton, Marcus Allen and Emmitt Smith) are in Canton. Only Davis and Smith achieved all of those feats in the same season. Davis has the only 2,000-yard rushing season that led to a playoff win. Most of the time, teams with a poor passing game have an imbalanced offense, which is a fine recipe for getting exposed in the postseason.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2013/terrell-davis-peak-vs-longevity

Through his first four seasons, Davis rushed for 6,413 yards (4.8 yards per carry) and 56 touchdowns. Among the 24 modern-era Hall of Fame halfbacks and fullbacks, only Earl Campbell (6,457, 4.6 yards per carry) and Eric Dickerson (6,968, 4.8 yards per carry) had more rushing yards during their first four seasons; no member of the Hall of Fame matched Davis’ first-four-season 56 rushing touchdowns.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrell_Davis

[Slick]

I really like Lynch and thought he did a lot for the team in the three years he played in Denver, but I consider him a Buc, not a Bronco. Same for Brian Dawkins. Both guys I like and respected as players but I'd be much happier as a Bronco fan to see Meck, TD, Nalen or Rod Smith get in.

[claymore]

I really like Lynch and thought he did a lot for the team in the three years he played in Denver, but I consider him a Buc, not a Bronco. Same for Brian Dawkins. Both guys I like and respected as players but I'd be much happier as a Bronco fan to see Meck, TD, Nalen or Rod Smith get in.

Agree 100%.

[Poet]

King, we all get that he had a bunch of rushing yards in his career. And while that is a check in his favor, I maintain the premise that sheer stat accumulation is overrated. I'm much more concerned with efficiency and averages. It's the only fair way to compare players with such different career lengths.

How is it overrated? You're brushing his entire career aside because he wasn't popping off massive runs and didn't have a great YPC. He was the entirety of the Pittsburgh offense. A grind it out, run the clock, dominate the time of possession was ran on his back. When Cowher retired, he was something like 70-2 when leading in the fourth quarter - or something like that, the exact numbers aren't in my dome at the moment - and this was largely because of Bettis. That's greatness in itself. That doesn't show up in a statsheet, but that is a form of domination.

As far as fairness is concerned, your manner of evaluation is not exactly fair to the guys with an actual career. You're giving a lot of help to the guys with short careers. You essentially get to count only the prime years and hold up those numbers and averages it compare it to guys who had an entire career. Your short burst of greatness versus a guy who was in the league for over a decade. How is that fair? It's not. It doesn't even make sense. Most guys in the HoF as backs slow down. Their numbers drop off over time as their bodies age and absorb more punishment. This isn't exactly news to anyone who watches football. So it's a little bit disingenuous to say your way is fair. No, I think your way is convenient for your argument.

What sets Terrell Davis apart from a lot of guys in both of these camps is that his short run was just absolutely loaded. No one else did what he did in that time. In essence, he's the exception to the rule. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/rush_yds_career.htm But you can't just discount that list with the 48 other guys ahead of him. There are some mighty fine names there, but how many of them are HoFers? Anyone firing up those Stephen Davis and Garrison Hearts Hall of Fame campaigns?

You have to put those Broncos colored glasses down at some point. Can you make an argument for TD being in the Hall of Fame? Yes. Can you honestly say that he is more deserving of someone with almost twice the yards, and over twice the career span? No.

[slim]

Can you honestly say that he is more deserving of someone with almost twice the yards, and over twice the career span? No.

Yes.

[claymore]

How is it overrated? You're brushing his entire career aside because he wasn't popping off massive runs and didn't have a great YPC. He was the entirety of the Pittsburgh offense. A grind it out, run the clock, dominate the time of possession was ran on his back. When Cowher retired, he was something like 70-2 when leading in the fourth quarter - or something like that, the exact numbers aren't in my dome at the moment - and this was largely because of Bettis. That's greatness in itself. That doesn't show up in a statsheet, but that is a form of domination.

As far as fairness is concerned, your manner of evaluation is not exactly fair to the guys with an actual career. You're giving a lot of help to the guys with short careers. You essentially get to count only the prime years and hold up those numbers and averages it compare it to guys who had an entire career. Your short burst of greatness versus a guy who was in the league for over a decade. How is that fair? It's not. It doesn't even make sense. Most guys in the HoF as backs slow down. Their numbers drop off over time as their bodies age and absorb more punishment. This isn't exactly news to anyone who watches football. So it's a little bit disingenuous to say your way is fair. No, I think your way is convenient for your argument.

What sets Terrell Davis apart from a lot of guys in both of these camps is that his short run was just absolutely loaded. No one else did what he did in that time. In essence, he's the exception to the rule. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/rush_yds_career.htm But you can't just discount that list with the 48 other guys ahead of him. There are some mighty fine names there, but how many of them are HoFers? Anyone firing up those Stephen Davis and Garrison Hearts Hall of Fame campaigns?

You have to put those Broncos colored glasses down at some point. Can you make an argument for TD being in the Hall of Fame? Yes. Can you honestly say that he is more deserving of someone with almost twice the yards, and over twice the career span? No.
Id say that absolutley dominating the league for a short time trumps being mediocre for a long time.

[Poet]

I sometimes forget what fan base I'm talking to.

[Poet]

Id say that absolutley dominating the league for a short time trumps being mediocre for a long time.

Well, Bettis was in the top ten for rushing ever year for a long time, that's not exactly mediocre, Clay.

[claymore]

Well, Bettis was in the top ten for rushing ever year for a long time, that's not exactly mediocre, Clay.

It damn sure aint dominating. I thought the HOF was about greatness. Not middle of the pack performances.

[slim]

King, you can't tell me that Jerome Bettis deserves to be in the HOF and then tell me Rod Smith doesn't. Please try to have a little consistency in your HOF arguments. tia.

Personally I think Bettis is a borderline guy and probably deserve to be there (I feel the same about Rod Smith).

TD is a slam dunk, IMO.

[Poet]

It damn sure aint dominating. I thought the HOF was about greatness. Not middle of the pack performances.

I suggest you look up the word middle, you twathead. :lol:

The Hall of Fame is about being one of the best ever at your position. Bettis definitely meets that criteria. Being a top ten rusher for a long time is greatness when that length puts you up at sixth all-time.

If doing what Bettis did was so easy to do, he wouldn't have his spot. I forgot to address this with BTB, but the health lottery is crap. Bettis took more punishment than most backs do in their entire career. I remember watching the "behind the glory," or whatever that show is on Bettis, and he was playing games with horrendous injuries. Big backs like him don't get out of bounds, it's harder for them to do things to mitigate the damage done to them. They're a battering ram, as much punishment as he was giving out, he was taking and then some. To just say that he won the health lottery is inaccurate. The dude was a warrior.

[Poet]

King, you can't tell me that Jerome Bettis deserves to be in the HOF and then tell me Rod Smith doesn't. Please try to have a little consistency in your HOF arguments. tia.

Personally I think Bettis is a borderline guy and probably deserve to be there (I feel the same about Rod Smith).

TD is a slam dunk, IMO.

Personally I think being top ten in rushing makes a player a lock for the Hall of Fame. I don't see how having that achievement, plus a Super Bowl ring, makes him anything less. You guys really, really are heavily relying on how he got his yards. Again, when you're basically in the top ten for rushing all-time, and you're in the top ten for rushing for most of your long career, that's greatness.

There is no inconsistency to my arguments at all. I'm not sure what analogy you're trying to draw, or what argument you're trying to make?

[claymore]

I suggest you look up the word middle, you twathead. :lol:

The Hall of Fame is about being one of the best ever at your position. Bettis definitely meets that criteria. Being a top ten rusher for a long time is greatness when that length puts you up at sixth all-time.

If doing what Bettis did was so easy to do, he wouldn't have his spot. I forgot to address this with BTB, but the health lottery is crap. Bettis took more punishment than most backs do in their entire career. I remember watching the "behind the glory," or whatever that show is on Bettis, and he was playing games with horrendous injuries. Big backs like him don't get out of bounds, it's harder for them to do things to mitigate the damage done to them. They're a battering ram, as much punishment as he was giving out, he was taking and then some. To just say that he won the health lottery is inaccurate. The dude was a warrior.

He wasnt great. Thats what the HOF if for. Greatness. TD was great. Albeit for a short period, but he was.

[claymore]

Personally I think being top ten in rushing makes a player a lock for the Hall of Fame. I don't see how having that achievement, plus a Super Bowl ring, makes him anything less. You guys really, really are heavily relying on how he got his yards. Again, when you're basically in the top ten for rushing all-time, and you're in the top ten for rushing for most of your long career, that's greatness.

There is no inconsistency to my arguments at all. I'm not sure what analogy you're trying to draw, or what argument you're trying to make?

Using that argument, all time scoring leaders (kickers) should get in before anyone else.

[slim]

I never once thought of Bettis as "great" when he was a player. I understand the argument for him to get in, but it feels like the criteria changes based on the person being argued for.

Ultimately I agree with Clay. It should be an honor only for the best of the best. TD was great by every measure. GREAT!

[BroncoWave]

How is it overrated? You're brushing his entire career aside because he wasn't popping off massive runs and didn't have a great YPC. He was the entirety of the Pittsburgh offense. A grind it out, run the clock, dominate the time of possession was ran on his back. When Cowher retired, he was something like 70-2 when leading in the fourth quarter - or something like that, the exact numbers aren't in my dome at the moment - and this was largely because of Bettis. That's greatness in itself. That doesn't show up in a statsheet, but that is a form of domination.

As far as fairness is concerned, your manner of evaluation is not exactly fair to the guys with an actual career. You're giving a lot of help to the guys with short careers. You essentially get to count only the prime years and hold up those numbers and averages it compare it to guys who had an entire career. Your short burst of greatness versus a guy who was in the league for over a decade. How is that fair? It's not. It doesn't even make sense. Most guys in the HoF as backs slow down. Their numbers drop off over time as their bodies age and absorb more punishment. This isn't exactly news to anyone who watches football. So it's a little bit disingenuous to say your way is fair. No, I think your way is convenient for your argument.

What sets Terrell Davis apart from a lot of guys in both of these camps is that his short run was just absolutely loaded. No one else did what he did in that time. In essence, he's the exception to the rule. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/rush_yds_career.htm But you can't just discount that list with the 48 other guys ahead of him. There are some mighty fine names there, but how many of them are HoFers? Anyone firing up those Stephen Davis and Garrison Hearts Hall of Fame campaigns?

You have to put those Broncos colored glasses down at some point. Can you make an argument for TD being in the Hall of Fame? Yes. Can you honestly say that he is more deserving of someone with almost twice the yards, and over twice the career span? No.

King, if you had one game to win to save your life, would you take Bettis over anyone on this list?

Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, Terrell Davis, Marshall Faulk, Ladainian Tomlinson, Curtis Martin.

That's seven players from Bettis' era who I would say were probably more talented running backs. If there are seven players from your era at your position who were better than you , how can you say that he is a for sure hall of famer?

Basically your only argument for Bettis is that he was a pretty good back who was durable enough to play for a really long time.

[Poet]

King, if you had one game to win to save your life, would you take Bettis over anyone on this list?

Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, Terrell Davis, Marshall Faulk, Ladainian Tomlinson, Curtis Martin.

That's seven players from Bettis' era who I would say were probably more talented running backs. If there are seven players from your era at your position who were better than you , how can you say that he is a for sure hall of famer?

Basically your only argument for Bettis is that he was a pretty good back who was durable enough to play for a really long time.

No, my argument is that at the end of his career, he had more rushing yards than all but five guys, and since then one person has surpassed him. He retired with a SB ring, was a pivotal part of a dominant team's offense and had great longevity.

In contrast, your argument is that your guy had three great years, and in those years he was ridiculously good in the playoffs and had two rings. That's fine, but when you start acting like TD is entitled to the Hall of Fame when he's clearly a borderline candidate, and the Bus is not, that's when I have to correct you.

You cited talent and being better. They're not quite the same thing. Terrell Davis was an undrafted player, so no, I'm not sure he was more talented. Bettis was taken in the first round of the draft, was he not? Sanders, Smith, Faulk, LT and Martin were all first round picks, were they not? So would it not be fair to say that TD was the least talented out of that group? It's also worth pointing out that out of the top five rushers of all time, Sanders, Smith, and Martin are in it. So Bettis actually being comparable to them in yards actually says a lot about him.

As far as winning the one game goes, I'm not sure? Sanders was not very good in the playoffs, but he played on suspect teams. LT had playoff struggles as well. Faulk did well in the playoffs, Smith was great in the playoffs, Bettis was productive, and I'm not sure how good Martin was. I suspect that I would take Smith or Davis. But if I had to have one guy for their careers, Davis is at the end of the list. I'll have him for four years of productivity.

[Poet]

Using that argument, all time scoring leaders (kickers) should get in before anyone else.

Only if you're stupid, or being obtuse to try to make a really forced, or contrived argument.

[BroncoWave]

No, my argument is that at the end of his career, he had more rushing yards than all but five guys, and since then one person has surpassed him. He retired with a SB ring, was a pivotal part of a dominant team's offense and had great longevity.

In contrast, your argument is that your guy had three great years, and in those years he was ridiculously good in the playoffs and had two rings. That's fine, but when you start acting like TD is entitled to the Hall of Fame when he's clearly a borderline candidate, and the Bus is not, that's when I have to correct you.

You cited talent and being better. They're not quite the same thing. Terrell Davis was an undrafted player, so no, I'm not sure he was more talented. Bettis was taken in the first round of the draft, was he not? Sanders, Smith, Faulk, LT and Martin were all first round picks, were they not? So would it not be fair to say that TD was the least talented out of that group? It's also worth pointing out that out of the top five rushers of all time, Sanders, Smith, and Martin are in it. So Bettis actually being comparable to them in yards actually says a lot about him.

As far as winning the one game goes, I'm not sure? Sanders was not very good in the playoffs, but he played on suspect teams. LT had playoff struggles as well. Faulk did well in the playoffs, Smith was great in the playoffs, Bettis was productive, and I'm not sure how good Martin was. I suspect that I would take Smith or Davis. But if I had to have one guy for their careers, Davis is at the end of the list. I'll have him for four years of productivity.

See, I've never said Davis should be a sure-fire hall of famer. I think you are implying that I think that, but I haven't said it. I realize his longevity is a decent reason he might be kept out. My main point is that I think he should get in before Bettis does. That's more of a knock on Bettis from me than just trying to pump up a Bronco. I just don't see how managing to be slightly above average for a long time makes you a Hall of Famer.

You seem to be married to his career rushing yards, but you have consistently ignored the touchdown stat I've brought up. How can a guy as big as Bettis that got pretty much all of Pitt's carries for 10 years and probably got all of their goal line rushes his entire career only rush for 91 touchdowns in his career? Football is about scoring points is it not? All of those yards are nice, but he really didn't convert them into a lot of touchdowns. He had four seasons in his career in which he started at least 11 games but only scored 4 or fewer touchdowns the WHOLE SEASON. How does a "hall of fame caliber" running back who is as big as Bettis have four seasons with such pitiful touchdown production? Here is how he compares to the other guys on my list in terms of games per touchdown and rushing attempts per touchdown.

Games per touchdown:

Ladainian Tomlinson: 1.2
Terrell Davis: 1.3
Emmitt Smith: 1.4
Barry Sanders: 1.5
Marshall Faulk: 1.8
Curtis Martin: 1.9
Jerome Bettis: 2.1

Rushes per touchdown:
Ladainian Tomlinson: 21.9
Emmitt Smith: 26.9
Terrell Davis: 27.6
Marshall Faulk: 28.4
Barry Sanders: 31
Jerome Bettis: 38.2
Curtis Martin: 39.1


Now let's look at some other career efficiency stats.

Yards per carry:
Barry Sanders: 5
Terrell Davis: 4.6
Marshall Faulk: 4.3
Ladainian Tomlinson: 4.3
Emmitt Smith: 4.2
Curtis Martin: 4.0
Jerome Bettis: 3.9

Yards per game:
Barry Sanders: 99.8
Terrell Davis: 97.5
Curtis Martin: 83.9
Emmitt Smith: 81.2
Ladainian Tomlinson: 80.5
Jerome Bettis: 71.2
Marshall Faulk: 69.8

And with these stats, you can't say it's unfair to look at career averages since we are counting Bettis' down years at the end of his career and not Davis. I say this because the guys he is being compared to also had pretty bad down years at the end of their careers for the most part.

On all of these lists showing efficiency, Bettis comes either last or next to last when compared to the great running backs of his era. I know you are a smart guy King, but I don't see how you can give more weight and credit to totals instead of averages and efficiency. It's the only fair way to compare guys with different career lengths and different numbers of carries. Bettis just doesn't stack up to the guys of his era in any rushing efficiency stats.

And don't even get me started on the receiving stats for these guys. Bettis would come up laughably short in those. TD's career TOTALS are about on par with Bettis'.

[Poet]

See, I've never said Davis should be a sure-fire hall of famer. I think you are implying that I think that, but I haven't said it. I realize his longevity is a decent reason he might be kept out. My main point is that I think he should get in before Bettis does. That's more of a knock on Bettis from me than just trying to pump up a Bronco. I just don't see how managing to be slightly above average for a long time makes you a Hall of Famer.

You seem to be married to his career rushing yards, but you have consistently ignored the touchdown stat I've brought up. How can a guy as big as Bettis that got pretty much all of Pitt's carries for 10 years and probably got all of their goal line rushes his entire career only rush for 91 touchdowns in his career? Football is about scoring points is it not? All of those yards are nice, but he really didn't convert them into a lot of touchdowns. He had four seasons in his career in which he started at least 11 games but only scored 4 or fewer touchdowns the WHOLE SEASON. How does a "hall of fame caliber" running back who is as big as Bettis have four seasons with such pitiful touchdown production? Here is how he compares to the other guys on my list in terms of games per touchdown and rushing attempts per touchdown.

Games per touchdown:

Ladainian Tomlinson: 1.2
Terrell Davis: 1.3
Emmitt Smith: 1.4
Barry Sanders: 1.5
Marshall Faulk: 1.8
Curtis Martin: 1.9
Jerome Bettis: 2.1

Rushes per touchdown:
Ladainian Tomlinson: 21.9
Emmitt Smith: 26.9
Terrell Davis: 27.6
Marshall Faulk: 28.4
Barry Sanders: 31
Jerome Bettis: 38.2
Curtis Martin: 39.1


Now let's look at some other career efficiency stats.

Yards per carry:
Barry Sanders: 5
Terrell Davis: 4.6
Marshall Faulk: 4.3
Ladainian Tomlinson: 4.3
Emmitt Smith: 4.2
Curtis Martin: 4.0
Jerome Bettis: 3.9

Yards per game:
Barry Sanders: 99.8
Terrell Davis: 97.5
Curtis Martin: 83.9
Emmitt Smith: 81.2
Ladainian Tomlinson: 80.5
Jerome Bettis: 71.2
Marshall Faulk: 69.8

And with these stats, you can't say it's unfair to look at career averages since we are counting Bettis' down years at the end of his career and not Davis. I say this because the guys he is being compared to also had pretty bad down years at the end of their careers for the most part.

On all of these lists showing efficiency, Bettis comes either last or next to last when compared to the great running backs of his era. I know you are a smart guy King, but I don't see how you can give more weight and credit to totals instead of averages and efficiency. It's the only fair way to compare guys with different career lengths and different numbers of carries. Bettis just doesn't stack up to the guys of his era in any rushing efficiency stats.

And don't even get me started on the receiving stats for these guys. Bettis would come up laughably short in those. TD's career TOTALS are about on par with Bettis'.

Being slightly above average? His damn entire career he was top ten in rushing year in and year out. That's by definition NOT being slightly above average. I'm completely at odds with that statement. I'm completely at odds with "only rush for 91 TD's in his career." 91 TDs is a lot of touchdowns.

I rarely say this, but this entire argument is laughable. Yeah, guys in his era were better at rushing for touchdowns. But most guys in his era weren't as good at rushing for yards, or grinding out the clock and dominating time of possession. What you're arguing with me is that Bettis is not a HoFer, even though he retired fifth all-time in rushing yards, because in his era he was not a great scoring RB?

[BroncoWave]

Being slightly above average? His damn entire career he was top ten in rushing year in and year out. That's by definition NOT being slightly above average. I'm completely at odds with that statement. I'm completely at odds with "only rush for 91 TD's in his career." 91 TDs is a lot of touchdowns.

I rarely say this, but this entire argument is laughable. Yeah, guys in his era were better at rushing for touchdowns. But most guys in his era weren't as good at rushing for yards, or grinding out the clock and dominating time of possession. What you're arguing with me is that Bettis is not a HoFer, even though he retired fifth all-time in rushing yards, because in his era he was not a great scoring RB?

Look at my last two lists. Those aren't about scoring. Those are about those yards that you claim he was so much better at getting than most of his era. He was last among those guys in yards per carry and second to last in yards per game. And the guy behind him in yards per game (Faulk) MORE than made up for that with his receiving productivity.

If he's only giving you 71 yards per game, he can't be doing TOO much in terms of grinding out the clock and giving you TOP. 71 yards per game is not very many at all.

If you think totals are a more legitimate measure of productivity than averages and efficiency, I'm not sure what else I can say to you on this.

[Poet]

Look at my last two lists. Those aren't about scoring. Those are about those yards that you claim he was so much better at getting than most of his era. He was last among those guys in yards per carry and second to last in yards per game. And the guy behind him in yards per game (Faulk) MORE than made up for that with his receiving productivity.

If he's only giving you 71 yards per game, he can't be doing TOO much in terms of grinding out the clock and giving you TOP. 71 yards per game is not very many at all.

If you think totals are a more legitimate measure of productivity than averages and efficiency, I'm not sure what else I can say to you on this.

I feel like when we're talking about an overall career, which is much more than four years, yeah....I'm not sure what I can do for you, or what you can do for me. I feel like drafting a guy and having him produce for me to the point that he's in the top five all-time in rushing for his career, all with me is incredible.

Also, my claim is, all time. That's sort of the point. All time, in the history of the game, everyone, who ever played, all dem, the squad, the roster, the warm bodies, the whole effing crew...top five...

The reason why he's giving you 71 yards per game is because of the end of his career when he was the short yardage guy. It did a number on YPC and yards per game.

[BroncoWave]

The reason why he's giving you 71 yards per game is because of the end of his career when he was the short yardage guy. It did a number on YPC and yards per game.

This really isn't true. Up until his last season he was still starting several games and getting 250 carries a season. It wasn't until his very last season that he was completely done starting and saw an enormous dropoff in his carries.

Even if you want to take out his last 3 seasons he still averaged 4.0 ypc and 77.5 ypg. Slightly better, but still pales in comparison to the other guys I compared him to.

His TD stats are even WORSE if you take out his last 3 seasons. He average 2.4 games per touchdown and a touchdown every 46 carries.

Real Hall of Fame stuff right there.

[Poet]

This really isn't true. Up until his last season he was still starting several games and getting 250 carries a season. It wasn't until his very last season that he was completely done starting and saw an enormous dropoff in his carries.

Even if you want to take out his last 3 seasons he still averaged 4.0 ypc and 77.5 ypg. Slightly better, but still pales in comparison to the other guys I compared him to.

His TD stats are even WORSE if you take out his last 3 seasons. He average 2.4 games per touchdown and a touchdown every 46 carries.

Real Hall of Fame stuff right there.

They were spelling him with other runners, right? Did they not just usually have him as a short yardage guy, and have the speedsters in one other occasions? I recall Parker in 05.

You do realize that you're glossing over the good stuff that he did, going harshly on 91 career TD's - which is great for a career - and then telling me that TD deserves it more, when he played for three relevant seasons. Yeah, like, he wasn't the most prolific TD scorer ever. :noidea: I feel like we're also not pointing out some stuff as well. I was a bit younger when Bettis was in his prime, but he had a reputation for being a really good blocking back, which does count for something.

http://www.nfl.com/history/randf/records/indiv/rushing

Most Seasons, 1,000 or More Yards Rushing
Jerome Bettis, L.A. Rams, 1993-94; Pittsburgh, 1996-2001

Not too many dudes ahead of him on that list.

[Dzone]

The Bus shouldnt even be talked about for at least 15 years

[BroncoWave]

They were spelling him with other runners, right? Did they not just usually have him as a short yardage guy, and have the speedsters in one other occasions? I recall Parker in 05.

You do realize that you're glossing over the good stuff that he did, going harshly on 91 career TD's - which is great for a career - and then telling me that TD deserves it more, when he played for three relevant seasons. Yeah, like, he wasn't the most prolific TD scorer ever. :noidea: I feel like we're also not pointing out some stuff as well. I was a bit younger when Bettis was in his prime, but he had a reputation for being a really good blocking back, which does count for something.

http://www.nfl.com/history/randf/records/indiv/rushing

Most Seasons, 1,000 or More Yards Rushing
Jerome Bettis, L.A. Rams, 1993-94; Pittsburgh, 1996-2001

Not too many dudes ahead of him on that list.

Funny how you just glossed over the fact that I destroyed your argument of "his last few years skewed his career stats". I've given you stat after stat after stat proving my case. You are clinging to total rushing yards. I guess if you are just going to ignore his shortcomings in every single efficiency stat and just cling to the yards he compiled there's nothing else I can really say.

:noidea:

[Dzone]

The Bus is no Terrel Davis

[Poet]

Funny how you just glossed over the fact that I destroyed your argument of "his last few years skewed his career stats". I've given you stat after stat after stat proving my case. You are clinging to total rushing yards. I guess if you are just going to ignore his shortcomings in every single efficiency stat and just cling to the yards he compiled there's nothing else I can really say.

:noidea:

I don't feel like you've done anything to support your argument at all. It started with you talking about TD being more deserving than Bettis and then you started talking about other HoF players. I'm not ignoring shortcomings. At one point you made a very interesting argument about talent, which I feel like I did a good job of refuting, especially since you phrased like the more talented player is always better. You also came with a very weak and self-serving argument about the health lottery, which I absolutely did refute, and anyone who watched the NFL during that time would know as well. Then you came with a very awkward "which one would you rather have for one game," argument, which was totally lost on me.

I don't see how 91 career touchdowns is a short coming. I just read that it's good for tenth all-time. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=8598

I don't see how being sixth all time doesn't make him great, just because you don't like how he did it. I don't see how being a running back that is up there all-time with the most 1k rushing seasons isn't great. I don't see how being the pivotal part of his offense for most of his long career isn't great. Again, the dude was also a really good blocking back, which counts for something, to me at least.

The only thing that I haven't cited is the blocking back.

So as I look at what I have, and when I look at what you have, I feel fine about my argument. I'm sure you feel the same way, too.

[BroncoWave]

One more thing I will throw in. I think the fact that he is a player for the steelers, a team that HoF voters have an absolute hard-on for, and still can't get him the Hof shows that he has some obvious shortcomings on his resume. HoF voters love to vote in any Steeler or Cowboy with a half-decent resume.

[Poet]

One more thing I will throw in. I think the fact that he is a player for the steelers, a team that HoF voters have an absolute hard-on for, and still can't get him the Hof shows that he has some obvious shortcomings on his resume. HoF voters love to vote in any Steeler or Cowboy with a half-decent resume.

Kevin Greene is like third on the all-time list for sacks and is not in. A lot of people think that Ward will struggle to get into the Hall of Fame as well. I know that the Steelers had basically half their 70's teams get dumped into the Hall of Fame, but being a Steeler isn't exactly a lock to get you in - assuming that you merit discussion, that is - but I see your thinking.

[BroncoWave]

King, does it make you feel dirty that you are so vehemently defending a Steeler?

[Poet]

King, does it make you feel dirty that you are so vehemently defending a Steeler?

Yes.

[BroncoWave]

Yes.

Maybe you have such an elevated view of him because of beatings he gave the Bengals. :D

[Poet]

Maybe you have such an elevated view of him because of beatings he gave the Bengals. :D

I think you have an elevated view of TD because he was a Bronco. :D

[BroncoWave]

Do you think Jerome Bettis was better than Corey Dillon?

[Poet]

Do you think Jerome Bettis was better than Corey Dillon?

Yeah, I do. Dillon's a borderline guy that could have had an actual HoF career if he wasn't on such a shitty ******* team.

[BroncoWave]

Huh, interesting. I would say Dillon's stats actually compare favorably to Bettis too if you are looking at their averages. (Although we have already established our differences on that unit of measure. :lol: )

[BroncoWave]

I think it's even more impressive to have the stats Dillon had playing for such a shitty team. You know that team had to pass alot late in games most likely, and Dillon still put up huge stats for the better part of 10 years.

[Poet]

Huh, interesting. I would say Dillon's stats actually compare favorably to Bettis too if you are looking at their averages. (Although we have already established our differences on that unit of measure. :lol: )

Dillon is a borderline HoF guy. No one is ever going to vote for him, though.

[BroncoWave]

PS, the only thing more fun than getting you to pump up a Steeler is getting you to pump up a Steeler over a Bengal. :)

[Poet]

I think it's even more impressive to have the stats Dillon had playing for such a shitty team. You know that team had to pass alot late in games most likely, and Dillon still put up huge stats for the better part of 10 years.

The one thing Dillon had going for him was that Willie Anderson was his RT. Willie Anderson is probably the best right tackle I've ever seen. He used to rape the Pittsburgh and Baltimore defenses. Absolutely murdered them. Like straight up knee deep in their ass. To quote Jim Rome on Rome is burning "If Willie Anderson was in New York, he'd wind up in the Hall."

That's it.

[Poet]

PS, the only thing more fun than getting you to pump up a Steeler is getting you to pump up a Steeler over a Bengal. :)

Eh, it's a mark of my integrity. At least I'm not a football fan like that piece of shit Slim. That guy will use any argument and flip flop on stances to justify anything for a Bronco. He's basically a dumber version of Joel.

[BroncoWave]

I probably lost my Bronco homer card when I said Ray Guy should be in the HoF over Karl Mecklenburg.

[Poet]

I probably lost my Bronco homer card when I said Ray Guy should be in the HoF over Karl Mecklenburg.

I was proud of you. I disagree, but I was proud of you.

[claymore]

Only if you're stupid, or being obtuse to try to make a really forced, or contrived argument.

Your argument for Bettis hinges on the fact that he is in the top 10 for yardage all time for rushers. Why would you not place the same emphasis on the scoring leaders? Kickers are around for along time too. 20 years worth of points looks impressive, even though they were not impressive in any one of those individual years.

[Poet]

Your argument for Bettis hinges on the fact that he is in the top 10 for yardage all time for rushers. Why would you not place the same emphasis on the scoring leaders? Kickers are around for along time too. 20 years worth of points looks impressive, even though they were not impressive in any one of those individual years.

Because being top ten as a RB is far more important than being top ten for a kicker. You're assuming that I am weighing the worth of all positions equally, which no one does.

[Northman]

I probably lost my Bronco homer card when I said Ray Guy should be in the HoF over Karl Mecklenburg.

I dont know why, Gay Guy was a beast. Far more impactful than Meck and i do love Meck. Maybe its just the Raider thing that people cant get over.

[atwater27]

Brett Favre leads every accumulation stat category by a large margin. But no one thinks he is the greatest QB to ever play. Most don't even have him top 5. .

This post is dreadfully wrong.

[claymore]

Because being top ten as a RB is far more important than being top ten for a kicker. You're assuming that I am weighing the worth of all positions equally, which no one does.You are placing your importance on longevity, and not greatness. I think a kicker would deserve equal weight from you.

[Poet]

You are placing your importance on longevity, and not greatness. I think a kicker would deserve equal weight from you.

Once again, you are incorrect. I am placing my importance on a career. Again, you have your definition of greatness, which is fine. I'm still waiting for an ACTUAL rebuttal as to being tied for the fourth most 1k yard seasons isn't great. I still want to know how being sixth all time, and retiring fifth all time, isn't great. Retiring with the ninth most rushing TD's, that's nothing to be sneezed at either. For his career, Bettis year in and year out was one of the best backs in the league. That's pretty hard to refute.

As far as your thoughts on the kicker, you're dangerously close to making a strawman argument. You're desperately trying to attach a sinking ship, or lame idea to my argument in hopes of damaging it. Doesn't work like that, Clay. It would be like me stating that putting TD into the hall would advocate for guys like Priest Holmes and other guys with shorter, but flashy careers. Nope. Doesn't work like that. Ask BroncoWave how I feel about special teams players in the Hall.

[BroncoWave]

This post is dreadfully wrong.

Really, because pretty much every "top QB" list I see starts with Montana, Elway, Manning, Brady, then MAYBE Favre sneaks in the top 5. Brett Favre was the king of stat accumulation. Not saying he wasn't a HoF QB (because he was) but very few people think he is the greatest ever.

[atwater27]

Stat accumulation? What, he threw for all those yards and TD's in garbage time? His stats are great because he played great. Favre is easily in the greatest QB ever conversation.

[BroncoWave]

Stat accumulation? What, he threw for all those yards and TD's in garbage time? His stats are great because he played great. Favre is easily in the greatest QB ever conversation.

I didn't say he's not in the conversation, but very few people actually rate him at #1. My point is that if total stats are the biggest thing that matters (like King seems to be implying) then Favre should unquestionably be regarded as the greatest QB ever to play. Since most people don't regard him as that, clearly other things than total stats matter.

[atwater27]

I didn't say he's not in the conversation, but very few people actually rate him at #1. My point is that if total stats are the biggest thing that matters (like King seems to be implying) then Favre should unquestionably be regarded as the greatest QB ever to play. Since most people don't regard him as that, clearly other things than total stats matter.

Where is this most people stat you talk about? You honestly think that the most career wins at the QB position and the second most 4th quarter comebacks along with the insane records doesn't matter? He did it all playing Madden?

[BroncoWave]

Where is this most people stat you talk about? You honestly think that the most career wins at the QB position and the second most 4th quarter comebacks along with the insane records doesn't matter? He did it all playing Madden?

Jesus effing christ. Are you reading what I am saying? I AGREE with you that Favre is an all-time great and sure fire hall of famer. What I'm saying is most people probably wouldn't rate him THE #1 all time greatest. If you want to know who these "most people" are, I just googled "greatest qb of all time". These are the first lists that popped up.

This guy has him seventh: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/lists/top-10-qbs-all-time#photo-title=Brett+Favre&photo=10893560
These guys have him ninth: http://www.mensfitness.com/training/pro-tips/top-10-quarterbacks-of-all-time
8th here: http://www.ranker.com/crowdranked-list/the-best-quarterbacks-of-all-time
Fourth: http://www.thetoptens.com/quarterbacks/
Tenth: http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/the-definitive-list-top-10-nfl-quarterbacks/6376/
Fourth: http://armchairgm.wikia.com/Article:Top_50_Quarterbacks_of_All-Time
11th: http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/clark-judge/19065863/top-10-all-time-qbs-all-hail-johnny-unitas

These are just some of the lists I pulled off the first few pages of my google search. Still haven't found one that has him in the top 3 even.

[Northman]

I agree with Wave, while Favre is easily a HOF and was a great QB i would never rank him in the top 5 QB's of alltime list.

[BroncoWave]

I agree with Wave, while Favre is easily a HOF and was a great QB i would never rank him in the top 5 QB's of alltime list.

Yep, and that's all I'm saying. Seems like atwater is trying to imply that I think he's a bum. Just making a point that having the top accumulation of stats doesn't necessarily make you the best player.

[atwater27]

Jesus effing christ. Are you reading what I am saying? I AGREE with you that Favre is an all-time great and sure fire hall of famer. What I'm saying is most people probably wouldn't rate him THE #1 all time greatest. If you want to know who these "most people" are, I just googled "greatest qb of all time". These are the first lists that popped up.

This guy has him seventh: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/lists/top-10-qbs-all-time#photo-title=Brett+Favre&photo=10893560
These guys have him ninth: http://www.mensfitness.com/training/pro-tips/top-10-quarterbacks-of-all-time
8th here: http://www.ranker.com/crowdranked-list/the-best-quarterbacks-of-all-time
Fourth: http://www.thetoptens.com/quarterbacks/
Tenth: http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/the-definitive-list-top-10-nfl-quarterbacks/6376/
Fourth: http://armchairgm.wikia.com/Article:Top_50_Quarterbacks_of_All-Time
11th: http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/clark-judge/19065863/top-10-all-time-qbs-all-hail-johnny-unitas

These are just some of the lists I pulled off the first few pages of my google search. Still haven't found one that has him in the top 3 even. 1st of all, Settle the **** down.

http://www.footballnation.com/content/brett-favre-is-the-greatest-quarterback-all-time/21686/

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/330132-why-brett-favre-is-the-greatest-nfl-quarterback-of-all-time

http://sundial.csun.edu/2009/10/why-brett-favre-is-the-greatest-quarterback-ever/

http://www.chinstrapninjas.com/legacy-revisited-is-brett-favre-the-best-qb-of-all-time/

Second of all, stop changing your argument. You initially said no one thinks he is the greatest QB to ever play. That is simply untrue. And you hinting that his 'stats' are somehow inflated or are for some reason cheapened as compared to others so you can make a weak comparison to try to win an argument with King doesn't pass the smell test.

[BroncoWave]

Congrats on finding some writers on no-name websites to prove me wrong. :lol:

And congrats on taking my hyperbole of "no one thinks he is the GOAT" seriously. Obviously there are some people who do, like his mom or Packers fans or people like that.

[BroncoWave]

And you hinting that his 'stats' are somehow inflated or are for some reason cheapened as compared to others so you can make a weak comparison to try to win an argument with King doesn't pass the smell test.

I'm hinting nothing of the sort. Stop trying to make more of my argument than what exists. Literally the ONLY point I was making with my Favre argument is being the all time leader in total stat categories doesn't necessarily make you the all time best player at that position. And it's just a fact that most credible football analysts don't have Favre as #1 on their list. Not a single one of your links were posted by anyone who any of us have ever heard of.

[Slick]

Bettis absolutely belongs in the Hall. I think TD does too but I wouldn't be pissed if he got in before TD. Nobody wanted to tackle that bowling ball. Also, I think if you asked the guys who played against either TD or Bettis, they'd say they were both Hall of Fame caliber running backs.

[slim]

Eh, it's a mark of my integrity. At least I'm not a football fan like that piece of shit Slim. That guy will use any argument and flip flop on stances to justify anything for a Bronco. He's basically a dumber version of Joel.

Let's try and stay above the belt.

[atwater27]

And it's just a fact that most credible football analysts don't have Favre as #1 on their list. Not a single one of your links were posted by anyone who any of us have ever heard of.

Oh. So only the people you put a stamp of approval on get to have legitimate and accepted rankings of football players. Nobody else counts. Good to know.

[slim]

Slick, stop being reasonable and troll King with me.

[Poet]

I agree with Wave, while Favre is easily a HOF and was a great QB i would never rank him in the top 5 QB's of alltime list.

I think I have him somewhere in my top five. The INt's are brutal, but his INT rate is actually pretty decent. It's hard for me to rank him high, because I dislike him.

Slim, I sent those low blows as I felt you crossed a line. In retrospect, I regret writing that post. But, it's pointless as in about a day or two we will be dissing one another. Then we will be at peace. Then we will diss one another, then make peace, as is our custom.

[TXBRONC]

I think I have him somewhere in my top five. The INt's are brutal, but his INT rate is actually pretty decent. It's hard for me to rank him high, because I dislike him.

Slim, I sent those low blows as I felt you crossed a line. In retrospect, I regret writing that post. But, it's pointless as in about a day or two we will be dissing one another. Then we will be at peace. Then we will diss one another, then make peace, as is our custom.

I won't put him in the top five not with nine season where he had 17 or more interceptions and six of those he had 21 or more. Plus three times he led the League interceptions. Favre will make it into the Hall of Fame and deservedly so but top five all time?

[Broncolingus]

I think all seven Bronc's should get in, but I'm bias...

Regarding Brett Fav-ree, absolutely HOF, certainly top 20, perhaps top 10...not in my top 5, however.

3486

Thank God he was a better QB than actor...

JMO...

[BroncoJoe]

No comments on Dan Reeves?

[Chef Zambini]

I think I have him somewhere in my top five. The INt's are brutal, but his INT rate is actually pretty decent. It's hard for me to rank him high, because I dislike him.

Slim, I sent those low blows as I felt you crossed a line. In retrospect, I regret writing that post. But, it's pointless as in about a day or two we will be dissing one another. Then we will be at peace. Then we will diss one another, then make peace, as is our custom.gotta start a thread top 10 QBs of all time.

[Poet]

gotta start a thread top 10 QBs of all time.

Those get real painful on here. If a certain someone isn't put number one, you're called bad names and everyone hates you. :D