PDA

View Full Version : Who's more HOF worthy TD or Curtis Martin?


Turd_Ferguson
02-04-2012, 07:06 PM
I see Curtis Martin got into the HOF... For starters I don't think this guy was HOF worthy, but I'll take it a step further and say I think Terrell Davis deserves to be in there more than Curtis "average" Martin. Should TD be in before Martin?

Spider
02-04-2012, 07:14 PM
Both do ,but since push came to shove , I went with T.D. based on post season play

SonOfLe-loLang
02-04-2012, 07:16 PM
I hate the fact that longevity is so highly valued. TD was sensational for 4 seasons and, I believe, still holds postseason records. He's a two time super bowl champ, had a 2,000 yard season, and will be remembered more fondly than Martin. Guarantee you that. It's absurd he's not in the hall.

Agamemnon
02-04-2012, 07:17 PM
Greatness > Longevity

Or at least it should. But then again this is more about TD being a Bronco than anything else. If TD had done what he did for the Steelers or Cowboys he'd have been in a long time ago.

Gort
02-04-2012, 07:23 PM
Greatness > Longevity

Or at least it should. But then again this is more about TD being a Bronco than anything else. If TD had done what he did for the Steelers or Cowboys he'd have been in a long time ago.

Earl Campbell was legitimately great, but didn't have a really long, productive career. he was very productive in 5 of his first 6 years, but after that, injuries took their toll.

9407 yards on 2187 carries. but he was a force of nature in those first couple of seasons and people who saw him play will still be talking about him 50 years from now. he's the kind of player that the HOF was created to honor. and they did. he's in.

but nobody will be talking about Emmitt "Dancing Queen" Smith or Curtis Martin the same way. it will literally NEVER happen.

rbackfactory80
02-04-2012, 07:23 PM
TD is hurt by the fact that everyone and their brother ran for a thousand plus in Denver. He was a great back and cracked 2000, and Portis would have also if he stayed in Denver. The running back success under Shanahan hurts his chances of ever getting in.

WolfpackGuy
02-04-2012, 07:31 PM
Martin will always be one of those guys when you look at the record books, and say, "He's up that high?"

He was steady, but not anything spectacular.

houghtam
02-04-2012, 07:35 PM
Greatness > Longevity

Or at least it should. But then again this is more about TD being a Bronco than anything else. If TD had done what he did for the Steelers or Cowboys he'd have been in a long time ago.

Just going to play devil's advocate here. Let's put the show on the other foot for a moment.

1) If Davis had done it for the Steelers or Cowboys (same stats, same longevity), would us Broncos fans be as adamant on his HOF induction?

2) If greatness > longevity, how great for how long? Where do you draw the line? 4 years? 6 years? 8?

Do I think Davis is HOF worthy? Not sure. If he makes it in, I'll be happy, but if not, I understand why.

That said, here are the problems I have with certain members of the HOF. For one, I think the number one consideration should be "was this player considered the best at his position at some point during his career? Curtis Martin? I don't think the case could be made that Martin was EVER considered the best at his position. I honestly question whether Emmitt Smith was.

The problem I have with the HOF process in general is the selection process. Four to seven players must be selected every year. What if there aren't four players good enough? Well then the top four vote getters get in. That's why I like the MLB HOF selection process better (although it still is flawed as well). No minimum, no maximum, you just need to get a certain percentage of the writers' votes.

The HOF should be reserved for the greatest players of all time. Rickey Jackson? Andre Tippett? Art Monk? Thurman Thomas? James Lofton? Jim Kelly?

A case could be made for every one of those guys that they were never considered the best at their position at any time during their career. There are about 275 members in the HOF...I bet that number could be cut in half pretty easily.

Broncos4Life
02-04-2012, 07:37 PM
Wow. Martin should not be in. Maybe in like 20 yrs or so.....But TD deserves to be. Unbiased opinion.

rbackfactory80
02-04-2012, 07:41 PM
Just not enough of a sample for TD. He was a better player than Martin for sure if you match up his best years, and TD was my favorite player during that era, but longevity does matter.

Spider
02-04-2012, 07:52 PM
Just going to play devil's advocate here. Let's put the show on the other foot for a moment.

1) If Davis had done it for the Steelers or Cowboys (same stats, same longevity), would us Broncos fans be as adamant on his HOF induction?

2) If greatness > longevity, how great for how long? Where do you draw the line? 4 years? 6 years? 8?

Do I think Davis is HOF worthy? Not sure. If he makes it in, I'll be happy, but if not, I understand why.

That said, here are the problems I have with certain members of the HOF. For one, I think the number one consideration should be "was this player considered the best at his position at some point during his career? Curtis Martin? I don't think the case could be made that Martin was EVER considered the best at his position. I honestly question whether Emmitt Smith was.

The problem I have with the HOF process in general is the selection process. Four to seven players must be selected every year. What if there aren't four players good enough? Well then the top four vote getters get in. That's why I like the MLB HOF selection process better (although it still is flawed as well). No minimum, no maximum, you just need to get a certain percentage of the writers' votes.

The HOF should be reserved for the greatest players of all time. Rickey Jackson? Andre Tippett? Art Monk? Thurman Thomas? James Lofton? Jim Kelly?

A case could be made for every one of those guys that they were never considered the best at their position at any time during their career. There are about 275 members in the HOF...I bet that number could be cut in half pretty easily.
naw It doesnt matter the team to me,if you look at John Riggins he got in on his post season play and Gayle Sayers got in on even less..

Spider
02-04-2012, 07:56 PM
Just not enough of a sample for TD. He was a better player than Martin for sure if you match up his best years, and TD was my favorite player during that era, but longevity does matter.

I agree see my post where I quoted ole whats his face

SonOfLe-loLang
02-04-2012, 08:03 PM
Just not enough of a sample for TD. He was a better player than Martin for sure if you match up his best years, and TD was my favorite player during that era, but longevity does matter.

Why?

Look at his post season numbers. They are unreal. He left his mark...and then some. Yes, longevity should count for something, but his 4 years were INSANE. They werent merely good, they were all world.

He deserves to be in there.

OBF1
02-04-2012, 08:12 PM
Did Curtis Martin ever lead the league in Rushing yards???


Did Curtis Martin ever lead the league in scoring TD's ???


How many Offensive player of the year awards for Curtis Martin???


How many MVP's for Martin???


How about Superbowl wins and not to mention Superbowl MVP???


It has been a long time since Terrell Davis was playing in the NFL that I think alot of you have forgotten how dominating of a player he was. His Best season, he would have broken Eric Dickensons all time single season yardage record if Denver was not up so far and he was getting pulled from games at halftime already having 150+ yards.

Terrell Davis was greater than Curtis Martin, CM never played with Matt Lepsis, hence he played for alot longer than the great TD.

gyldenlove
02-04-2012, 08:15 PM
Honestly it depends on your definition of fame - do you have to be extraordinary or do you just have to be consistently very good?

TD was extraordinary for a short time, he won a league MVP, Super bowl MVP, 1 league rushing titles, set numerous playoff and super bowl records, won 2 super bowls, 3 all pro teams, 2 time offensive player of the year.

Curtis Martin has 2 more pro-bowls and 2 more all-pros, he was offensive rookie of the year and also won a single league rushing title.

TD has 2 seasons that are better than Curtis Martin's best in terms of yards and TDs. TD won 3 regular season league awards, Curtis Martin won 1, TD won 2 super bowl and was named MVP in one.

(Anywhere that says Martin, you can replace with Bettis and the argument still works except Bettis never won a rushing title, has only 3 all-pros and won a super bowl).

If the hall is there to celebrate life time achievements then Bettis and Martin both deserve to go and Davis shouldn't, but if it is there to celebrate the best of the best, then neither Martin nor Bettis should go but Davis should.

gyldenlove
02-04-2012, 08:15 PM
Did Curtis Martin ever lead the league in Rushing yards???


Yup, in 2004 by 1 yard over Shaun Alexander.

Dr. Broncenstein
02-04-2012, 08:23 PM
When healthy, there was no comparison between the two. TD was by far the better player. If TD was a Patriot and/or Jet, he would have been in.

Dr. Broncenstein
02-04-2012, 08:33 PM
TD ran for 2000 yards in a season where he literally watched from the sidelines during the second half of several games. Martin never once approached that level of dominance.

Tombstone RJ
02-04-2012, 08:57 PM
Curtis who? I already forgot he played...

rbackfactory80
02-04-2012, 09:03 PM
You guys are acting like a bunch of clowns. Curtis was top 10 in everything and a class act on and off the field. He would of looked nice in Orange and Blue.

ColoradoDarin
02-04-2012, 09:18 PM
TD should be in just for his post season numbers alone.

jutang
02-04-2012, 09:22 PM
You guys are acting like a bunch of clowns. Curtis was top 10 in everything and a class act on and off the field. He would of looked nice in Orange and Blue.

Curtis was a very good player, but would you have considered trading him for TD straight up in retrospect? Surprised to hear he is in the hall already. He is a better version of Sammy Winder. Little, Davis, and Portis are all superior backs compared to Curtis. Since Portis spent 2/3 of his career in DC he'll probably get in the HOF too.

TD4HOF
02-04-2012, 09:26 PM
Holy geez.....see my username.

He was like Secretariat, a couple years in the spotlight, but man, oh man did he lap it up.

Jetmeck
02-04-2012, 09:34 PM
I hate the fact that longevity is so highly valued. TD was sensational for 4 seasons and, I believe, still holds postseason records. He's a two time super bowl champ, had a 2,000 yard season, and will be remembered more fondly than Martin. Guarantee you that. It's absurd he's not in the hall.

Longevity shouldn't be a consideration when it was injury that shortened his career. Now if a guy has a couple of great seasons and then just drops off to average WITH NO INJURY thats different. Martin going in over TD is a JOKE !

houghtam
02-04-2012, 09:37 PM
I'm still wondering if any of you would be fighting for TD with nearly as much ferocity if he had played for any other team. My guess is no.

I don't think either of them belong in the Hall.

Jetmeck
02-04-2012, 09:44 PM
I'm still wondering if any of you would be fighting for TD with nearly as much ferocity if he had played for any other team. My guess is no.

I don't think either of them belong in the Hall.

TD got BETTER EVERY YEAR HE PLAYED !!!! Had he not got injured who knows where this guy ends up. If Martin is the bar TD jumped that bar long ago !

Turd_Ferguson
02-04-2012, 09:51 PM
You guys are acting like a bunch of clowns. Curtis was top 10 in everything and a class act on and off the field. He would of looked nice in Orange and Blue.

I think Martin had a nice career, but he seems like the Drew Bledsoe of running backs. He had lots of numbers, looked great in his earlier career, and never had the true greatness of others that played in the league during his career.

Davis was not only the best running back in the league during his career, he was voted the MVP of the entire league. He was a huge part in his team getting to and winning 2 Superbowls, and was also voted the MVP in one of those Superbowls. I remember them saying in the Americas Game on the Broncos that if you add up the time he spent benched in blow out wins the year he rushed for over 2000 yards it added up to 4 quarters, imagine if he had continued to play in those blow outs.

So what other player in the NFL with a Superbowl MVP, League MVP, 2,000 yard season, 2 Superbowl wins, and lead the AFC in rushing 3 years in a row (Finished 2nd to barry sanders two of those years for the NFL lead) is not in the hall of fame.

Other backs had success in Denver after Davis, but I don't remember any of them, outside of Clinton Portis, being on the same level as TD. Another point that can be made is that Davis is higher on the list of career rushing yardage than Hall of Famer Floyd Little. If they let Irving in off of what Aikman and Smith did, then Elway, Sharpe, and Davis deserve to be in.

Turd_Ferguson
02-04-2012, 10:01 PM
I'm still wondering if any of you would be fighting for TD with nearly as much ferocity if he had played for any other team. My guess is no.

I don't think either of them belong in the Hall.

Well lets say that Adrian Peterson had won an MVP, Superbowl MVP, rushed for 2000 yards, and won 2 Superbowls, and then had this injury and had a few years trying to come back before retiring. Add to that he holds the single game rushing record and is an all around beast, then I would say he deserves to be in the HOF. Especially considering running backs have such short careers anyways. Most of them hold on too long and end up with some junk yardage as back ups at the end of their careers. Im looking at you Emmitt Smith and ladainian tomlinson

BowlenBall
02-04-2012, 10:10 PM
East coast bias, in its worst form.

If Martin played for the Seahawks (for example), he wouldn't have gotten Rookie of the Year OR three of his pro bowls. Even if you gave him all 7 pro bowls, he would have been passed over until he were a seniors candidate, at the very least. Always workmanlike, never great -- I literally have no memories of him playing, and I probably watched 30-40 of his games.

Here's another example:

Will Shields, Kansas City Chiefs, 12 pro bowls: No Hall of Fame
Dermontti Dawson, Pittsburgh Steelers, 7 pro bowls: voted into the Hall of Fame

And don't even get me started on Lynn Swann and John Stallworth. They need to rename it the Hall of Fairly Good East Coast Players (HoFGECP).

strafen
02-04-2012, 10:16 PM
I see Curtis Martin got into the HOF... For starters I don't think this guy was HOF worthy, but I'll take it a step further and say I think Terrell Davis deserves to be in there more than Curtis "average" Martin. Should TD be in before Martin?

Unfortunately, one of the criteria that has perhaps hurt TD chances into the HOF, is the fact that he didin't play long enough.
I'll say this, his 2000-yard season, two SB's, and SBMVP are a heck of a lot acomplishment no matter how long you've played.

TD was legit!

Hamrob
02-04-2012, 10:18 PM
If TD had stayed healthy, he may have broken all the records and been one of the top 2-3 of all time.

TD was the better back of the two (Davis vs. Martin), in my opinion.

Having said that, Curtis Martin was a stud as well. The Pats and the Jets were very mediocre during his time, which prevented Martin from getting national recognition. He was a great back. I remember they had a Monday night game where they had interviews with both T.D. and C. Martin and they both had the ultimate respect for one another.

Here's the kicker: They were and are...both, class acts!

Good for Curtis! Hopefully one day...the HOF wakes up and elects TD too!

houghtam
02-04-2012, 10:52 PM
If TD had stayed healthy, he may have broken all the records and been one of the top 2-3 of all time.

TD was the better back of the two (Davis vs. Martin), in my opinion.

Having said that, Curtis Martin was a stud as well. The Pats and the Jets were very mediocre during his time, which prevented Martin from getting national recognition. He was a great back. I remember they had a Monday night game where they had interviews with both T.D. and C. Martin and they both had the ultimate respect for one another.

Here's the kicker: They were and are...both, class acts!

Good for Curtis! Hopefully one day...the HOF wakes up and elects TD too!

TD is most definitely the better back of the two. Neither of them belong in the HOF, IMO.

Mile High Mojoe
02-05-2012, 12:17 AM
When healthy, there was no comparison between the two. TD was by far the better player. If TD was a Patriot and/or Jet, he would have been in.

Agreed, some old timers may not like this but Floyd as worthy as some might think for the Hall didn't deserve it as much as TD. Make no mistake I love Floyd but TD had far more impact if his short career than Floyd. And as for Martin he just has more years of service. It's the New York and New England bias at work again in the HOF voting again. If Martin goes in TD must go in period.

Archer81
02-05-2012, 01:13 AM
TD is just one of many Broncos who should be in the hall but wont be for quite some time. I wonder if we would even have the ones we have if Denver did not win Superbowls.

We are fans of a team that plays in a city 600 miles from anywhere in nearly every direction. It is what it is.

:Broncos:

Jason in LA
02-05-2012, 01:26 AM
Curtis Martin was very good for a really long time, but he was never great. TD was great.

Longevity means more than real accomplishments, which doesn't make sense to me. If you list Martin's accomplishments up against TD's, it's not even close. League MVP, Super Bowl MVP, offensive player of the year. Stats wise TD is the greatest playoff running back ever. Only thing Martin has over TD is career rushing yards, but that's because he played way longer. Martin never dominated the league like TD did. TD's best two seasons were much greater than any season that Martin had, and TD was a driving force on two Super Bowl teams.

It really is not much of a comparason. TD was way better than Martin.

I have always been against the idea of Martin getting in. He's just like Tim Brown. Very good, but ended up with great career stats because they played at a high level for so long. But neither were really great. They ended up being stats compilers.

Atwater His Ass
02-05-2012, 02:09 AM
TD ran for 2000 yards in a season where he literally watched from the sidelines during the second half of several games. Martin never once approached that level of dominance.

Amen. I remember watching both of these guys coming into the league in their rookie seasons and TD losing out on rookie of the year to this guy. It was gut wrentching to me as it was plain as day that TD was the better player.

It's a joke a guy like Martin gets in but not TD. People want to talk about championships when these two both compteted in the same era as part of the same generation, where TD won 2 Super Bowls, and I'd guarentee that there's not one single team from this era that would have picked a healthy TD over a healthy Martin. Makes me sick.

To me the HOF should mean best of your generation, not that you played at an average or above average level for a long period of time. TD was the absolute best of any RB who played in his era. That to me is HOF worthy, not a guy who was lucky enough never to pick up a serious injury that eventually cost him his entire career.

Agamemnon
02-05-2012, 06:22 AM
I'm still wondering if any of you would be fighting for TD with nearly as much ferocity if he had played for any other team. My guess is no.

I don't think either of them belong in the Hall.

The greatest postseason running back of all time belongs in the HoF. Period.

rbackfactory80
02-05-2012, 06:52 AM
I think Martin had a nice career, but he seems like the Drew Bledsoe of running backs. He had lots of numbers, looked great in his earlier career, and never had the true greatness of others that played in the league during his career.

Davis was not only the best running back in the league during his career, he was voted the MVP of the entire league. He was a huge part in his team getting to and winning 2 Superbowls, and was also voted the MVP in one of those Superbowls. I remember them saying in the Americas Game on the Broncos that if you add up the time he spent benched in blow out wins the year he rushed for over 2000 yards it added up to 4 quarters, imagine if he had continued to play in those blow outs.

So what other player in the NFL with a Superbowl MVP, League MVP, 2,000 yard season, 2 Superbowl wins, and lead the AFC in rushing 3 years in a row (Finished 2nd to barry sanders two of those years for the NFL lead) is not in the hall of fame.

Other backs had success in Denver after Davis, but I don't remember any of them, outside of Clinton Portis, being on the same level as TD. Another point that can be made is that Davis is higher on the list of career rushing yardage than Hall of Famer Floyd Little. If they let Irving in off of what Aikman and Smith did, then Elway, Sharpe, and Davis deserve to be in.

There is no argument over who was better when both were healthy and on the field and you are right, I said it before, the great Denver running system has lessened his chance of ever getting in.

Blueflame
02-05-2012, 06:55 AM
There's only one RB who was better than TD back in '96- '99 and that was Barry Sanders.

Garcia Bronco
02-05-2012, 07:40 AM
i ve always maintained that if Gayle Sayers is in the hall, so should TD

OrangeSe7en
02-05-2012, 07:43 AM
Greatness > Longevity

Or at least it should. But then again this is more about TD being a Bronco than anything else. If TD had done what he did for the Steelers or Cowboys he'd have been in a long time ago.

This is it, right here. Where's the greatness with Curtis Martin? He's the Art Monk of RBs, which is to day, he was very good for a long time.

When did his stats ever translate into a SB win?

When did he ever win a SB MVP?

When did he ever win a regular season MVP?

When did he ever rush for over 1700 yards?

Sorry, I'm not seeing the greatness with Martin...not compared to Terrell Davis.

OrangeSe7en
02-05-2012, 07:47 AM
You guys are acting like a bunch of clowns. Curtis was top 10 in everything and a class act on and off the field. He would of looked nice in Orange and Blue.

No thanks. I'm glad we had Terrell Davis. I'd rather have Davis.

And he can be a class act but that doesn't mean he belongs in the HOF in front of Davis.

CEH
02-05-2012, 07:58 AM
1,500+ yard seasons:
Martin: 2
Davis: 3

Rushing titles:
Martin: 1
Davis:1

MVP:
Davis : 1
Martin :0


2K season:
Davis :1
Martn 0

Super Bowl MVP:
Davis : 1
Matrin 0


Seasons ranking top-3 in rushing yards:
Martin:3
Davis:3

Post season records:
Davis: most consective 100 yard games

Gort
02-05-2012, 08:58 AM
I'm still wondering if any of you would be fighting for TD with nearly as much ferocity if he had played for any other team. My guess is no.

I don't think either of them belong in the Hall.

if by "fighting for" you mean expressing an opinion on a forum dedicated to the Broncos, then the answer is "no".

:)

Spider
02-05-2012, 09:13 AM
East coast bias, in its worst form.

If Martin played for the Seahawks (for example), he wouldn't have gotten Rookie of the Year OR three of his pro bowls. Even if you gave him all 7 pro bowls, he would have been passed over until he were a seniors candidate, at the very least. Always workmanlike, never great -- I literally have no memories of him playing, and I probably watched 30-40 of his games.

Here's another example:

Will Shields, Kansas City Chiefs, 12 pro bowls: No Hall of Fame
Dermontti Dawson, Pittsburgh Steelers, 7 pro bowls: voted into the Hall of Fame

And don't even get me started on Lynn Swann and John Stallworth. They need to rename it the Hall of Fairly Good East Coast Players (HoFGECP).

+1 this right here

brother love
02-05-2012, 09:17 AM
Martin disappeared in big games.

Spider
02-05-2012, 09:19 AM
Agreed, some old timers may not like this but Floyd as worthy as some might think for the Hall didn't deserve it as much as TD. Make no mistake I love Floyd but TD had far more impact if his short career than Floyd. And as for Martin he just has more years of service. It's the New York and New England bias at work again in the HOF voting again. If Martin goes in TD must go in period.

just glad i got to see both Little and Davis play

Mile High Mojoe
02-05-2012, 10:34 AM
just glad i got to see both Little and Davis play

Little was a warrior on some horrible teams to be sure but TD had something extra.

Jason in LA
02-05-2012, 02:10 PM
1,500+ yard seasons:
Martin: 2
Davis: 3

Rushing titles:
Martin: 1
Davis:1

MVP:
Davis : 1
Martin :0


2K season:
Davis :1
Martn 0

Super Bowl MVP:
Davis : 1
Matrin 0


Seasons ranking top-3 in rushing yards:
Martin:3
Davis:3

Post season records:
Davis: most consective 100 yard games

TD also holds the post season records for most rushing yards per game and highest rushing yards per carry. He blows away the field. If I'm remembering right, he avearged 152 yards per game. John Riggins was second with 111. TD avearged 5.6 yards per carry. Eric Dickerson was second with 5.2.

To put it in a different perspective, in 8 playoff games TD rushed for 1,142 yards and 12 TDs. That's agaisnt the best teams in the league, not a mix of good and bad teams. Average that out over a 16 game schedule, one playing only playoff teams, and TD would break the single season rushing record, and at the time of the end of his career, that would have been one shy of the record for most rushing TDs in a season. How is that not Hall of Fame worthy?

It is interesting that quarterbacks are defined by post season play. If the Giants win the Super Bowl, Eli Manning is nearly a shoe in for the Hall of Fame. But that doesn't extend to other players. TD is the greatest post season back in the history of the game. When it matters the most, when a Super Bowl is on the line, he was the best. How does that not get him in the Hall of Fame?

KipCorrington25
02-05-2012, 02:14 PM
Unfortunately, one of the criteria that has perhaps hurt TD chances into the HOF, is the fact that he didin't play long enough.


You think? Please tell us more Captain Obvious. Hilarious!

Jason in LA
02-05-2012, 02:18 PM
Here is one comparason that I've never seen. It just struck me that Martin played against the Packers in Super Bowl XXXI, and TD did in Super Bowl XXXII. So I looked up the stats. The Packers had the best run defense in '97, and I'm pretty sure they were near the top in '96 as well. As we all know, against a heavily favored Packers team, TD ran for 152 yards, and that was with missing an entire quarter. He kicked the crap out of their defense. Martin also faced a heavily favored Packers team, and he only rushed for 42 yards.

Every catagory except one, TD dominates Martin. The numbers are not even close. The only catagory that Martin wins is career yards, and that's because TD had a career ending injury.

Jason in LA
02-05-2012, 02:22 PM
It finally hit me, I'm going to write an article on this. I'm going to get an interview with TD, which will be pretty easy. I'll get in contact with a few other athletes who played during that time.

I'm starting the crusade! TD is going to the Hall of Fame!

bombay
02-05-2012, 02:22 PM
TD. There's a difference between greatness and being good for a very long time.

bombay
02-05-2012, 02:24 PM
The argument for TD is very similar to Kurt Warner before Kurt made it back for another super bowl run with Arizona. I would have voted for Kurt just on the basis of his accomplishments with the Rams.

Jason in LA
02-05-2012, 02:30 PM
The argument for TD is very similar to Kurt Warner before Kurt made it back for another super bowl run with Arizona. I would have voted for Kurt just on the basis of his accomplishments with the Rams.

Warner was an interesting case, and a little different from TD. Warner had the thumb injury, but it was never clear that was the cause of him becoming a horrible QB, which was why I wasn't so sure that he was a Hall of Famer. If it was clear that it was an injury at that time, then I would have said yes. But that probably won't be an issue for him now. Getting the Cardinals to the Super Bowl should be enough to get him.

Turd_Ferguson
02-05-2012, 03:31 PM
Agreed, some old timers may not like this but Floyd as worthy as some might think for the Hall didn't deserve it as much as TD. Make no mistake I love Floyd but TD had far more impact if his short career than Floyd. And as for Martin he just has more years of service. It's the New York and New England bias at work again in the HOF voting again. If Martin goes in TD must go in period.

Hmm Good point about the New England bias... Except that the Pats only have one more HOFer than the Broncos.. Wait are you talking about fantasy football HOF, or real life HOF?

Bronx33
02-05-2012, 04:04 PM
any excuse to keep a bronco out will be taken ( end of story)

Agamemnon
02-05-2012, 06:11 PM
There's only one RB who was better than TD back in '96- '99 and that was Barry Sanders.

Barry Sanders was not a better running back than Terrell Davis. He was a more electrifying runner, but he couldn't hold TD's jock as an all-around player.

Agamemnon
02-05-2012, 06:13 PM
Hmm Good point about the New England bias... Except that the Pats only have one more HOFer than the Broncos.. Wait are you talking about fantasy football HOF, or real life HOF?

The fact that a franchise that was hot garbage until the mid-90's has one more HoFer than the Broncos would actually seem to prove the point.

Spider
02-05-2012, 06:16 PM
There's only one RB who was better than TD back in '96- '99 and that was Barry Sanders.

open field ? yep ,goaline and short yardage ? not a chance in hell ........T.D. was a every down back and kicked ass doing it , Those backs are rare
Little was a warrior on some horrible teams to be sure but TD had something extra.Well i wont go there , I will just say i was a pleasure seeing both in a bronco uni .......

strafen
02-05-2012, 08:49 PM
It finally hit me, I'm going to write an article on this. I'm going to get an interview with TD, which will be pretty easy. I'll get in contact with a few other athletes who played during that time.

I'm starting the crusade! TD is going to the Hall of Fame!He deserves to be in. He was an important element in us not only making it to the SB, but winning it.
His credentials are too good to bypass.

BroncoMan4ever
02-05-2012, 11:18 PM
i love TD. he is my favorite player ever. No other player is ever going to take that spot from him for me. but Martin had the better career.

you can't even dream of denying a guy who is one of the top 5 rushers in history, was a class act, 11 straight 1000 seasons.

had injury not struck TD, this wouldn't even be a debate, because he likely would have wound up owning every single rushing record in the NFL, but because of the brevity of his career Martin is the more HOF worthy.

maher_tyler
02-05-2012, 11:45 PM
TD was a ****in beast..wish he could have stayed healthy.

houghtam
02-06-2012, 12:55 AM
Barry Sanders was not a better running back than Terrell Davis. He was a more electrifying runner, but he couldn't hold TD's jock as an all-around player.

I've argued this about 50 times with fellow Broncos fans and anyone that says this has no clue what he is talking about. I watched all but like three or for of Sanders' games and most of TD's. Sanders had no line and Scott Mitchell, Andre Ware or the QB of the week, and Wayne Fontes as a coach. TD had our line, John Elway and Mike Shanahan. You do the math. Sanders was better than TD hands down. You're out of your mind or drinking the orange kool aid (or both) if you think otherwise.

houghtam
02-06-2012, 01:03 AM
And just to add to my point, Sanders just about matches or exceeds every regular season stat of TD's, both rushing and receiving, and does so over twice as long of a career with a much worse supporting cast.

ol#7
02-06-2012, 01:28 AM
And just to add to my point, Sanders just about matches or exceeds every regular season stat of TD's, both rushing and receiving, and does so over twice as long of a career with a much worse supporting cast.

Did TD run over your cat or something?

Sanders style didnt translate to consistent success. Too many runs for losses because he was a dancer. Detroit couldn't pound the ball with him to win a game or rely on him at the goal line. TD could do it all. He was an every down back. Sanders was electrifying and amazing, but his gifts were limited to the ability to make the big play.

The difference is, I believe both belong in the HOF, where you have some weird TD bias.

TD dominated the league for 4 years and gave Elway the going alway present(s) he couldnt win on his own.

houghtam
02-06-2012, 01:52 AM
Did TD run over your cat or something?

Sanders style didnt translate to consistent success. Too many runs for losses because he was a dancer. Detroit couldn't pound the ball with him to win a game or rely on him at the goal line. TD could do it all. He was an every down back. Sanders was electrifying and amazing, but his gifts were limited to the ability to make the big play.

The difference is, I believe both belong in the HOF, where you have some weird TD bias.

TD dominated the league for 4 years and gave Elway the going alway present(s) he couldnt win on his own.

I absolutely love TD. I just think the criteria for HOF consideration is too lax. I voted neither because I don't think either Martin or TD were Greatest of All-Time quality, as well as many others like I said. The argument for Sanders not being an all-around back is an incorrect one, and is usually spouted off by people who didn't watch him play. The common joke by people in Michigan at the time was their offense (run by such gurus as Mouse Davis and Dave Levy, btw) was it was "Sanders up the middle, Sanders to the left, Sanders to the right, punt. Barry was very much a versatile and every down back.

How many Hall of Famers were on TD's side of the ball? Zimmerman, Elway, Sharpe. People can and do make arguments for Nails and Rod Smith. How many HOFers were on Barry's side of the ball?

Barry Sanders is better than TD for the same reasons Elway was better than Marino. Swap their teams and Elway would put up similar stats, Marino would not.

Blueflame
02-06-2012, 01:55 AM
open field ? yep ,goaline and short yardage ? not a chance in hell ........T.D. was a every down back and kicked ass doing it , Those backs are rare


Yep... in a first and goal to go, the opposing defense knew they were gonna see TD... four times if need be. And most of the time he'd get in the end zone too. It's so very unfortunate that injury shortened his career because he sure was fun to watch... a true game changer.

My point was not to disparage TD... just to say that the only other RB in the game during that time frame who got an opposing defense's attention and respect like TD did... was Barry Sanders.

Oh... and Barry Sanders is in the Hall of Fame.

ol#7
02-06-2012, 02:04 AM
I absolutely love TD. I just think the criteria for HOF consideration is too lax. I voted neither because I don't think either Martin or TD were Greatest of All-Time quality, as well as many others like I said. The argument for Sanders not being an all-around back is an incorrect one, and is usually spouted off by people who didn't watch him play. The common joke by people in Michigan at the time was their offense (run by such gurus as Mouse Davis and Dave Levy, btw) was it was "Sanders up the middle, Sanders to the left, Sanders to the right, punt. Barry was very much a versatile and every down back.

How many Hall of Famers were on TD's side of the ball? Zimmerman, Elway, Sharpe. People can and do make arguments for Nails and Rod Smith. How many HOFers were on Barry's side of the ball?

Barry Sanders is better than TD for the same reasons Elway was better than Marino. Swap their teams and Elway would put up similar stats, Marino would not.

Lets see, TD was one of the best at his position when he played and a couple of years THE best. One of those years barely losing the rushing title to Barry Sanders. All time greatest post season RB hands down. Are you just arguing to argue.

Barry Sanders sucked at pass blocking, couldnt catch a cold and lead the league in negative runs. He put his team in 3rd and longs alot. Doesnt mean he wasnt a great back, he was, just not the complete back TD was.

houghtam
02-06-2012, 02:10 AM
Barry Sanders sucked at pass blocking, couldnt catch a cold

Absolutely not true. Sanders' per-game receiving stats were nearly identical to TD's (actually slightly better). Additionally, Sanders run as the single back without a fullback until the final two years of his career. He was in during all 3rd down situations, and pass blocked proficiently. He did have a lot of negative runs, but he didn't have Alex Gibbs, and Zimmerman and Tommy Nalen weren't blocking for him. He also didn't have 4 running backs come in after him and automatically rush for 1200 yards. I'm sure "he'd break off 2k in our system" isn't an inside joke on Detroit Lions forums, if they do indeed have such a thing. :)

BroncoMan4ever
02-06-2012, 02:54 AM
open field ? yep ,goaline and short yardage ? not a chance in hell ........T.D. was a every down back and kicked ass doing it , Those backs are rare
Well i wont go there , I will just say i was a pleasure seeing both in a bronco uni .......

backs like TD that could play every down are extinct in today's NFL. even the cream of the crop aren't every down backs anymore and are in multiple back systems.

Adrian Peterson has a 3rd down replacement in Gerhart.
Matt Forte has Barber
McFadden and Bush form an awesome tandem
Ray Rice pairs with Ricky Williams
Arian Foster pairs with Ben Tate

Spider
02-06-2012, 03:16 AM
backs like TD that could play every down are extinct in today's NFL. even the cream of the crop aren't every down backs anymore and are in multiple back systems.

Adrian Peterson has a 3rd down replacement in Gerhart.
Matt Forte has Barber
McFadden and Bush form an awesome tandem
Ray Rice pairs with Ricky Williams
Arian Foster pairs with Ben Tate

^5

BroncoMan4ever
02-06-2012, 03:16 AM
I absolutely love TD. I just think the criteria for HOF consideration is too lax. I voted neither because I don't think either Martin or TD were Greatest of All-Time quality, as well as many others like I said. The argument for Sanders not being an all-around back is an incorrect one, and is usually spouted off by people who didn't watch him play. The common joke by people in Michigan at the time was their offense (run by such gurus as Mouse Davis and Dave Levy, btw) was it was "Sanders up the middle, Sanders to the left, Sanders to the right, punt. Barry was very much a versatile and every down back.

How many Hall of Famers were on TD's side of the ball? Zimmerman, Elway, Sharpe. People can and do make arguments for Nails and Rod Smith. How many HOFers were on Barry's side of the ball?

Barry Sanders is better than TD for the same reasons Elway was better than Marino. Swap their teams and Elway would put up similar stats, Marino would not.

Sanders was an amazing player to watch. a living breathing highlight reel. basically the original Devin Hester type of player.

but while Sanders was used as an every down back, he wasn't a guy who particularly excelled in short yardage or goal line situations. Barry liked to dance behind the line and that led to a lot of amazing long runs, but that doesn't get the job done in a short yardage or a goal line situation.

TD could do it all. his field vision was perhaps the best of any RB ever. while he didn't have the rubber legs of Sanders he had plenty of ability to break tackles. he could move piles. he could break the long run. you knew that on a 3rd and 3 late in a game that TD was going to get the ball and 9 times out of 10, he was going to get 4 yards. put him in at the goal line and let him pound it 4 straight attempts and you knew he was going to get into the end zone.

also an amazing stat to consider. in his 2000 yard season, TD was only tackled for loss on i believe 2 rushing attempts all season. Barry's running style led to multiple tackles for loss a game.

his first 4 years in the NFL compile as one of the 3 greatest 4 year stretches to begin a career of any RB in NFL history. The only 2 better were by Earl Campbell and Eric Dickerson, but neither of them had as many rushing TDs as he did.

also, no RB in NFL history has come close to his rushing performance in the playoffs and super bowls.

i'd take a fully healthy TD over a fully healthy Sanders any day

Spider
02-06-2012, 03:19 AM
Sanders was an amazing player to watch. a living breathing highlight reel. basically the original Devin Hester type of player.

but while Sanders was used as an every down back, he wasn't a guy who particularly excelled in short yardage or goal line situations. Barry liked to dance behind the line and that led to a lot of amazing long runs, but that doesn't get the job done in a short yardage or a goal line situation.

TD could do it all. his field vision was perhaps the best of any RB ever. while he didn't have the rubber legs of Sanders he had plenty of ability to break tackles. he could move piles. he could break the long run. you knew that on a 3rd and 3 late in a game that TD was going to get the ball and 9 times out of 10, he was going to get 4 yards. put him in at the goal line and let him pound it 4 straight attempts and you knew he was going to get into the end zone.

also an amazing stat to consider. in his 2000 yard season, TD was only tackled for loss on i believe 2 rushing attempts all season. Barry's running style led to multiple tackles for loss a game.

his first 4 years in the NFL compile as one of the 3 greatest 4 year stretches to begin a career of any RB in NFL history. The only 2 better were by Earl Campbell and Eric Dickerson, but neither of them had as many rushing TDs as he did.

also, no RB in NFL history has come close to his rushing performance in the playoffs and super bowls.

i'd take a fully healthy TD over a fully healthy Sanders any day
great points , I would also like to add ,T.D. also finished his runs ,I still get upset when I think about how he got hurt ......

houghtam
02-06-2012, 03:36 AM
Sanders was an amazing player to watch. a living breathing highlight reel. basically the original Devin Hester type of player.

but while Sanders was used as an every down back, he wasn't a guy who particularly excelled in short yardage or goal line situations. Barry liked to dance behind the line and that led to a lot of amazing long runs, but that doesn't get the job done in a short yardage or a goal line situation.

TD could do it all. his field vision was perhaps the best of any RB ever. while he didn't have the rubber legs of Sanders he had plenty of ability to break tackles. he could move piles. he could break the long run. you knew that on a 3rd and 3 late in a game that TD was going to get the ball and 9 times out of 10, he was going to get 4 yards. put him in at the goal line and let him pound it 4 straight attempts and you knew he was going to get into the end zone.

also an amazing stat to consider. in his 2000 yard season, TD was only tackled for loss on i believe 2 rushing attempts all season. Barry's running style led to multiple tackles for loss a game.

his first 4 years in the NFL compile as one of the 3 greatest 4 year stretches to begin a career of any RB in NFL history. The only 2 better were by Earl Campbell and Eric Dickerson, but neither of them had as many rushing TDs as he did.

also, no RB in NFL history has come close to his rushing performance in the playoffs and super bowls.

i'd take a fully healthy TD over a fully healthy Sanders any day

How did a fully healthy TD do without A future first ballot HOFer as his quarterback? 200 yards in 3+ games sound familiar? Was he just getting warmed up? How many yards did Stephen Davis rush for when he took over for Barry? How many did Droughns, Gary, Anderson and Portis rush for after Davis went down?

You can't win a TD is better than Sanders argument for two reasons: 1) It's not true, and 2) The burden of proof is on you (a Broncos fan) to prove that Davis (a Broncos player who is not in the HOF) is better than Sanders (a non-Broncos player who is in the HOF) without being a total homer. And your argument is that Sanders was put in (first ballot, mind you) because of the east coast bias (Detroit IS located in the eastern time zone, I guess. LOL)? Because he was an electrifying runner?

Blueflame
02-06-2012, 03:41 AM
backs like TD that could play every down are extinct in today's NFL. even the cream of the crop aren't every down backs anymore and are in multiple back systems.

Adrian Peterson has a 3rd down replacement in Gerhart.
Matt Forte has Barber
McFadden and Bush form an awesome tandem
Ray Rice pairs with Ricky Williams
Arian Foster pairs with Ben Tate

While they didn't see the field very much, we did also have other RBs (Derrick Loville and Vaughn Hebron) who got "some" playing time back then. For example... the 4th quarter of the Redskins game and the entire second half of the Eagles game the year TD got his 2000 yards. When TD got close to 200 yards (184) in the playoff game vs. the Jags (December 27, 1997), Loville was put in to do mop-up and eventually added 103 more yards (which would be considered a decent showing for most starting RBs). The numbers show a complete and total domination (511 total yards; 310 on the ground)... don't get me wrong; TD chewed up the Jags defense and left them totally demoralized. But his backup wasn't exactly a scrub either. I'd also point out that Howard Griffith did his share in the success of the ground game.

Gort
02-06-2012, 03:52 AM
How did a fully healthy TD do without A future first ballot HOFer as his quarterback? 200 yards in 3+ games sound familiar? Was he just getting warmed up? How many yards did Stephen Davis rush for when he took over for Barry? How many did Droughns, Gary, Anderson and Portis rush for after Davis went down?

You can't win a TD is better than Sanders argument for two reasons: 1) It's not true, and 2) The burden of proof is on you (a Broncos fan) to prove that Davis (a Broncos player who is not in the HOF) is better than Sanders (a non-Broncos player who is in the HOF) without being a total homer. And your argument is that Sanders was put in (first ballot, mind you) because of the east coast bias (Detroit IS located in the eastern time zone, I guess. LOL)? Because he was an electrifying runner?

aren't you being a homer? Lansing, MI is your location. Barry Sanders played for Detroit. coincidence?

i mostly remember him juking and jiving in the backfield for a loss and the low class way he walked away from his team when he retired. i also remember people in the media telling me how great Barry was, moreso than seeing Barry be great on the field with my own eyes.

here's an ESPN article about how Barry Sanders was overrated.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=paolantonio_sal&id=3055421

TD has way more class than Sanders. TD never would have walked away from the Broncos while he still had plenty of gas in the tank. TD was a warrior on the field. Barry wasn't.

houghtam
02-06-2012, 06:51 AM
aren't you being a homer? Lansing, MI is your location. Barry Sanders played for Detroit. coincidence?

i mostly remember him juking and jiving in the backfield for a loss and the low class way he walked away from his team when he retired. i also remember people in the media telling me how great Barry was, moreso than seeing Barry be great on the field with my own eyes.

here's an ESPN article about how Barry Sanders was overrated.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=paolantonio_sal&id=3055421

TD has way more class than Sanders. TD never would have walked away from the Broncos while he still had plenty of gas in the tank. TD was a warrior on the field. Barry wasn't.

I'm arguing against one of my top 5 all time favorite Broncos players and I'm the homer? I loved Al Wilson but I'm not about to say he was a better all around linebacker than Ray Lewis. And I hate me some Ray Ray. I call it like I see it, and I probably saw more combined games of Sanders and Davis than anyone on this board, save for maybe South Stand Junkie. Sanders was a first ballot HOFer with crap supporting cast. TD is not a HOFer with minimum 3 HOFers on his side of the field. Who is making the more ridiculous statement?

CEH
02-06-2012, 06:54 AM
Barry Sanders QBs while in Det.

Batch, Mitchell, Kreig,Peete, Kramer and Gailano

Barry's problem was not the greatness of Barry it was that he played for a crap franchise with crappy QB save one season for his whole career

Gort
02-06-2012, 07:06 AM
I'm arguing against one of my top 5 all time favorite Broncos players and I'm the homer? I loved Al Wilson but I'm not about to say he was a better all around linebacker than Ray Lewis. And I hate me some Ray Ray. I call it like I see it, and I probably saw more combined games of Sanders and Davis than anyone on this board, save for maybe South Stand Junkie. Sanders was a first ballot HOFer with crap supporting cast. TD is not a HOFer with minimum 3 HOFers on his side of the field. Who is making the more ridiculous statement?

i wouldn't say Al Wilson was better than Stabby McStabsalot either.

i am saying TD is worthy of the HOF and that TD played the position in a way that Barry couldn't. i prefer TD's downhill smashmouth style much more.

houghtam
02-06-2012, 07:14 AM
i wouldn't say Al Wilson was better than Stabby McStabsalot either.

i am saying TD is worthy of the HOF and that TD played the position in a way that Barry couldn't. i prefer TD's downhill smashmouth style much more.

Is TD more deserving than Martin? Yes. Do I think TD belongs in the HOF? No. Do I prefer TDs style better than Sanders? Yes. Do I feel TD was in the same class as (edit) Sanders? No. The HOF voters agree with me. But I'm the homer. LOL

Gort
02-06-2012, 07:21 AM
Is TD more deserving than Martin? Yes. Do I think TD belongs in the HOF? No. Do I prefer TDs style better than Sanders? Yes. Do I feel TD was in the same class as (edit) Sanders? No. The HOF voters agree with me. But I'm the homer. LOL

they put Franco Harris in the HOF too, and his whole career was a series of rushes for 3 yards and then running out of bounds.

i do think you're being a homer though. a little bit at least. ask anyone who the 5 greatest RBs of all time were and nobody outside of Michigan even remembers to mention Barry. in Michigan, he's the first name they think of.

my top 5.

Jim Brown
Earl Campbell
Walter Payton

and then 2 of these 4 for the final 2 spots:

Tony Dorsett
TD
OJ
Eric Dickerson

i honestly can't put Sanders ahead of any of those guys because i don't think he's deserving. maybe i'm being a bit of a homer on TD, but i don't think so.

houghtam
02-06-2012, 07:40 AM
they put Franco Harris in the HOF too, and his whole career was a series of rushes for 3 yards and then running out of bounds.

i do think you're being a homer though. a little bit at least. ask anyone who the 5 greatest RBs of all time were and nobody outside of Michigan even remembers to mention Barry. in Michigan, he's the first name they think of.

my top 5.

Jim Brown
Earl Campbell
Walter Payton

and then 2 of these 4 for the final 2 spots:

Tony Dorsett
TD
OJ
Eric Dickerson

i honestly can't put Sanders ahead of any of those guys because i don't think he's deserving. maybe i'm being a bit of a homer on TD, but i don't think so.

That's where it gets dicey for me because I never watched most of those guys play. It's why I refuse to get into arguments about who was better, John Elway or Terry Bradshaw (just an example). I always use the "best I've ever seen play" argument which basically narrows it down to the past 25 years or so. Those players to me are, in order, Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, people I feel are sure HOFers. After that it gets a bit murky. TD is definitely a top 10 back that I've ever seen, possibly even Top 5. But I don't think TD is a HOFer.

Gort
02-06-2012, 07:51 AM
That's where it gets dicey for me because I never watched most of those guys play. It's why I refuse to get into arguments about who was better, John Elway or Terry Bradshaw (just an example). I always use the "best I've ever seen play" argument which basically narrows it down to the past 25 years or so. Those players to me are, in order, Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, people I feel are sure HOFers. After that it gets a bit murky. TD is definitely a top 10 back that I've ever seen, possibly even Top 5. But I don't think TD is a HOFer.

so using your words, if TD is possibly one of the top 5 backs you've ever seen in the past 25 years, isn't that the definition of HOF worthy?

unless you mean "top" as a statistical measure due to longevity. but if you mean "top" as in "best", then isn't that exactly what the HOF is supposed to recognize?

OJ was just a bit before my time and Jim Brown was well before my time, but i saw all the others i mentioned play. Dickerson could run like a gazelle. Earl Campbell was like an unstoppable dump truck in his prime. Tony Dorsett was a shifty and deceptively quick runner. Payton was the whole offense in Chicago for years and years. and TD was like poetry in motion.

anyway, i'm not upset that Barry's in the HOF. just that i never saw in him what the media saw in him. but i do think TD belongs and i do think Curtis Martin doesn't. but there are others in the HOF who don't belong either so Curtis is just the latest to get in with a favorable bump from the NYC-centric sports media. that's all.

ColoradoDarin
02-06-2012, 07:53 AM
That's where it gets dicey for me because I never watched most of those guys play. It's why I refuse to get into arguments about who was better, John Elway or Terry Bradshaw (just an example). I always use the "best I've ever seen play" argument which basically narrows it down to the past 25 years or so. Those players to me are, in order, Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, people I feel are sure HOFers. After that it gets a bit murky. TD is definitely a top 10 back that I've ever seen, possibly even Top 5. But I don't think TD is a HOFer.

So TD is one of the Top 5-7 (or so, by your remarks here) backs to play in the last 25+ years and that's not HoF worthy?

Agamemnon
02-06-2012, 07:57 AM
I've argued this about 50 times with fellow Broncos fans and anyone that says this has no clue what he is talking about. I watched all but like three or for of Sanders' games and most of TD's. Sanders had no line and Scott Mitchell, Andre Ware or the QB of the week, and Wayne Fontes as a coach. TD had our line, John Elway and Mike Shanahan. You do the math. Sanders was better than TD hands down. You're out of your mind or drinking the orange kool aid (or both) if you think otherwise.

Keep arguing. Watched them both plenty. Barry Sanders was a walking highlight reel, but TD was the better all-around back. You can talk about lines all you want, but Detroit's line had plenty of pro bowlers and quality players. This "Barry Sanders had no line" bull**** gets so tiresome. And really if you know anything about Barry Sanders you should know that a running back like him is a blocking scheme's worst nightmare because he never followed the play.

Agamemnon
02-06-2012, 08:02 AM
they put Franco Harris in the HOF too, and his whole career was a series of rushes for 3 yards and then running out of bounds.

i do think you're being a homer though. a little bit at least. ask anyone who the 5 greatest RBs of all time were and nobody outside of Michigan even remembers to mention Barry. in Michigan, he's the first name they think of.

my top 5.

Jim Brown
Earl Campbell
Walter Payton

and then 2 of these 4 for the final 2 spots:

Tony Dorsett
TD
OJ
Eric Dickerson

i honestly can't put Sanders ahead of any of those guys because i don't think he's deserving. maybe i'm being a bit of a homer on TD, but i don't think so.

I see you value consistent production over flashy highlights. Smart. The only people who think Barry Sanders is better than any of those guys are people who don't understand what a running back is suppose to do.

Hint: It's definitely not being as inconsistent play to play as the passing game.

Again, being the most electrifying back of all-time does not mean you were the best. And in Sanders' case it might not even mean he's in the top 10 all-time.

Gort
02-06-2012, 08:03 AM
Keep arguing. Watched them both plenty. Barry Sanders was a walking highlight reel, but TD was the better all-around back. You can talk about lines all you want, but Detroit's line had plenty of pro bowlers and quality players. This "Barry Sanders had no line" bull**** gets so tiresome. And really if you know anything about Barry Sanders you should know that a running back like him is a blocking scheme's worst nightmare because he never followed the play.

Sanders also got to play at least half his games in a dome and he played alot of bad teams from his division year in and year out. i would like to see his career stats broken down by opponents record. it wouldn't surprise me to hear than Sanders got 2/3rds of his yardage against sub .500 teams. he did play alot of bad Tampa Bay and Green Bay teams twice a year. Chicago and Minnesota were also up and down during his time in the league.

ol#7
02-06-2012, 08:04 AM
Keep arguing. Watched them both plenty. Barry Sanders was a walking highlight reel, but TD was the better all-around back. You can talk about lines all you want, but Detroit's line had plenty of pro bowlers and quality players. This "Barry Sanders had no line" bull**** gets so tiresome. And really if you know anything about Barry Sanders you should know that a running back like him is a blocking scheme's worst nightmare because he never followed the play.

This.

Houghtam's refrain and logic should be taken over to the Lions board where maybe someone will agree with him.

Herman Moore was no slouch either. Mouse Davis run and shoot also spread the field pretty well, even with no FB, Sanders wasnt always facing a stacked box.

Agamemnon
02-06-2012, 08:10 AM
I'm arguing against one of my top 5 all time favorite Broncos players and I'm the homer? I loved Al Wilson but I'm not about to say he was a better all around linebacker than Ray Lewis. And I hate me some Ray Ray. I call it like I see it, and I probably saw more combined games of Sanders and Davis than anyone on this board, save for maybe South Stand Junkie. Sanders was a first ballot HOFer with crap supporting cast. TD is not a HOFer with minimum 3 HOFers on his side of the field. Who is making the more ridiculous statement?

It's becoming clear to me that you just don't know how to judge the running back position. A running back's job is to consistently grind out yards, move the chains, and control the clock, not get 80% of his yards on three or four big plays per game. He produced in a manner not unlike a passing game, and while that makes him very unique and kind of amazing, the fact that he was completely unreliable in short yardage situations and on third down means that he just doesn't measure up to guys like TD. Sorry, but it's the truth.

Agamemnon
02-06-2012, 08:18 AM
This.

Houghtam's refrain and logic should be taken over to the Lions board where maybe someone will agree with him.

Herman Moore was no slouch either. Mouse Davis run and shoot also spread the field pretty well, even with no FB, Sanders wasnt always facing a stacked box.

Stacking the box was never the way to defend Sanders anyway (just led to more big plays when he broke into the open field). A standard front could generally shut him down on inside runs, and with runs to the outside, the key was to play disciplined football and not get caught out of position. Sanders was a master of making over-aggressive defenders hate themselves.

Spider
02-06-2012, 08:42 AM
Stacking the box was never the way to defend Sanders anyway (just led to more big plays when he broke into the open field). A standard front could generally shut him down on inside runs, and with runs to the outside, the key was to play disciplined football and not get caught out of position. Sanders was a master of making over-aggressive defenders hate themselves.

If you missed a tackle on Sanders , dont panic , just wait for him , he will be back ;D

bendog
02-06-2012, 08:54 AM
Tough crowd. LOL Guy ran for over 1000 for ten straight years. If that's not enough, nothing is. Though, while it pains me, I have to agree with Agamemnon that if TD did in Dullass or NY what he did in Den, he'd already be in.

Agamemnon
02-06-2012, 09:06 AM
Tough crowd. LOL Guy ran for over 1000 for ten straight years. If that's not enough, nothing is. Though, while it pains me, I have to agree with Agamemnon that if TD did in Dullass or NY what he did in Den, he'd already be in.

I don't think the issue is so much Martin as it is one more Bronco great getting snubbed for an inferior player.

bendog
02-06-2012, 09:10 AM
I don't think the issue is so much Martin as it is one more Bronco great getting snubbed for an inferior player.

Well, you have a pt with TD being a lot better than an aging but still 1000 yd runner. That was a good AFC championship game.

houghtam
02-06-2012, 10:13 AM
Tough crowd indeed. So far the answers I've gotten as to why TD was a "more complete back" are, in no particular order: "I liked his running style better", "you're from Michigan so although you're a Brocos fan you have a hidden agenda", "Herman Moore and the Detroit Lions offensive line were pretty good too", and "go take that to a Detroit Lions board". That's your argument, you're welcome to have it. It is also why this will be my last post on the subject.

Agamemnon
02-06-2012, 10:36 AM
How did a fully healthy TD do without A future first ballot HOFer as his quarterback? 200 yards in 3+ games sound familiar? Was he just getting warmed up? How many yards did Stephen Davis rush for when he took over for Barry? How many did Droughns, Gary, Anderson and Portis rush for after Davis went down?

You can't win a TD is better than Sanders argument for two reasons: 1) It's not true, and 2) The burden of proof is on you (a Broncos fan) to prove that Davis (a Broncos player who is not in the HOF) is better than Sanders (a non-Broncos player who is in the HOF) without being a total homer. And your argument is that Sanders was put in (first ballot, mind you) because of the east coast bias (Detroit IS located in the eastern time zone, I guess. LOL)? Because he was an electrifying runner?

TD gets off to a semi-slow start in his first three games of the season before his career-altering injury, and you think that means something? Seriously dude, you are making a fool of yourself.

And yes Barry Sanders is in the HoF because he was an electrifying runner with flashy stats. In terms of what an all-around back is supposed to do he isn't even in the realm of Curtis Martin much less Terrell Davis. There's nothing wrong with being arguably the most dynamic playmaker ever. That's actually quite amazing. Just stop acting like Barry Sanders was a complete back. It's ridiculous.

BroncoBeavis
02-06-2012, 10:39 AM
Tough crowd indeed. So far the answers I've gotten as to why TD was a "more complete back" are, in no particular order: "I liked his running style better", "you're from Michigan so although you're a Brocos fan you have a hidden agenda", "Herman Moore and the Detroit Lions offensive line were pretty good too", and "go take that to a Detroit Lions board". That's your argument, you're welcome to have it. It is also why this will be my last post on the subject.

If that's all you got out of this thread, I'm not sure you're reading it all.

Here's another number. 4.0 yards per carry. For more reference on where that puts him:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/rush_yds_per_att_career.htm

Definitely not a be-all end-all stat. But a good indicator that Curtis got most of his yards as a grind-it-out workhorse with a long career. TD was a far brighter star, just burned out too early.

houghtam
02-06-2012, 10:42 AM
If that's all you got out of this thread, I'm not sure you're reading it all.

Here's another number. 4.0 yards per carry. For more reference on where that puts him:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/rush_yds_per_att_career.htm

Definitely not a be-all end-all stat. But a good indicator that Curtis got most of his yards as a grind-it-out workhorse with a long career. TD was a far brighter star, just burned out too early.

I simply have to respond to this, as it appears you haven't read the argument. Davis > Martin.

Agamemnon
02-06-2012, 10:45 AM
Tough crowd indeed. So far the answers I've gotten as to why TD was a "more complete back" are, in no particular order: "I liked his running style better", "you're from Michigan so although you're a Brocos fan you have a hidden agenda", "Herman Moore and the Detroit Lions offensive line were pretty good too", and "go take that to a Detroit Lions board". That's your argument, you're welcome to have it. It is also why this will be my last post on the subject.

This isn't about liking his style better. This is about knowing what a franchise back is supposed to do, namely gain yards consistently and convert 3rd downs and on the goal line. Breaking off big runs is definitely a nice plus, but it isn't supposed to be your primary means of gaining yards and scoring TDs. Seriously dude, this isn't about personal preference, this is about understanding how the game of football works. You clearly don't get it, and that's fine. Just don't act like we are being unfair with you, when nothing you've said shows a shred of knowledge regarding running backs or the role of the running game in general.

To you being a highlight reel player makes Sanders a great all-around back. So go ahead and move along, because no one with any sense is going to agree with that nonsense.

Tombstone RJ
02-06-2012, 10:50 AM
ask yourself this: in 20 years are people going to be talking about CM or TD? That is, who will the general NFL football fan remember? Honestly, neither may be remembered but IMHO that tells me that CM does not deserve to be in the HoF either.

I think people will know the name Terrell Davis. I don't think people will know who Curtis Martin is, JMHO.

BroncoBeavis
02-06-2012, 10:50 AM
I simply have to respond to this, as it appears you haven't read the argument. Davis > Martin.

Gotcha. You're talking about Sanders, not Martin.

Agamemnon
02-06-2012, 11:15 AM
ask yourself this: in 20 years are people going to be talking about CM or TD? That is, who will the general NFL football fan remember? Honestly, neither may be remembered but IMHO that tells me that CM does not deserve to be in the HoF either.

I think people will know the name Terrell Davis. I don't think people will know who Curtis Martin is, JMHO.

I seriously doubt that the greatest playoff back of all-time will be forgotten, but then again he was a Bronco and forgetting Bronco players does seem like the in thing to do.

Mile High Mojoe
02-06-2012, 12:28 PM
I've argued this about 50 times with fellow Broncos fans and anyone that says this has no clue what he is talking about. I watched all but like three or for of Sanders' games and most of TD's. Sanders had no line and Scott Mitchell, Andre Ware or the QB of the week, and Wayne Fontes as a coach. TD had our line, John Elway and Mike Shanahan. You do the math. Sanders was better than TD hands down. You're out of your mind or drinking the orange kool aid (or both) if you think otherwise.

I agree, Sanders is the 2nd greatest RB in NFL history just as Peyton was #1 for the same reason. Both played on horrible teams for years and still put up the best stats in the game. This being done the whole time every team knew they'd run the ball and they still couldn't stop them.

Sanders was a better RB for that reason alone. TD played on some great teams with the best OL's. Could TD have become that kind of back, maybe, but his greatness is measured in his all around game and in the post season.

Gort
02-06-2012, 12:37 PM
I agree, Sanders in the 2nd greatest RB in NFL history just as Peyton was #1 for the same reason. Both played on horrible teams for years and still put up the best stats in the game. This being done the whole time every team knew they'd run the ball and they still couldn't stop them.

Sanders was a better RB for that reason alone. TD played on some great teams with the best OL's. Could TD have become that kind of back, maybe, but his greatness is measured in his all around game and in the post season.

huh?

the Lions made the playoffs in 5 of Sanders' 10 seasons. i think people who have high regard for Sanders are romanticizing about him a bit. he had the luxury of playing against a couple of awful division foes twice a year for much of his career. the same thing happened with the so-called SF dynasty. people forget that they were making the playoffs every year because they had the good fortune to find themselves in the same division as the woeful Saints, Rams, and Falcons for many years.

Mile High Mojoe
02-06-2012, 12:44 PM
huh?

the Lions made the playoffs in 5 of Sanders' 10 seasons. i think people who have high regard for Sanders are romanticizing about him a bit. he had the luxury of playing against a couple of awful division foes twice a year for much of his career. the same thing happened with the so-called SF dynasty. people forget that they were making the playoffs every year because they had the good fortune to find themselves in the same division as the woeful Saints, Rams, and Falcons for many years.

Just because they made the playoffs didn't make them a "good" team. They were good enough to get the playoffs and those playoff runs were because of Sanders not becuase of some amazing team backing him up. He was a one man show just as Walter was. I watched many of his games and had he got some help around him he may not of retired and would have set every rushing record there was, he was that good. Walter is the King but Sanders is #2 based on the team he labored on alone period.

Tombstone RJ
02-06-2012, 12:45 PM
I agree, Sanders in the 2nd greatest RB in NFL history just as Peyton was #1 for the same reason. Both played on horrible teams for years and still put up the best stats in the game. This being done the whole time every team knew they'd run the ball and they still couldn't stop them.

Sanders was a better RB for that reason alone. TD played on some great teams with the best OL's. Could TD have become that kind of back, maybe, but his greatness is measured in his all around game and in the post season.

Sanders was great, no doubt, and he may have not had the best offense surrounding him but to say he played on crappy teams all the time is not necessarily the truth. Detroit played in a pretty weak division and Sanders also benefitted from playing half his games at home on astro turf. Yah, he made ankle breaking cuts but he also benefitted from playing inside on astro turf.

Spider
02-06-2012, 12:59 PM
Sanders was great, no doubt, and he may have not had the best offense surrounding him but to say he played on crappy teams all the time is not necessarily the truth. Detroit played in a pretty weak division and Sanders also benefitted from playing half his games at home on astro turf. Yah, he made ankle breaking cuts but he also benefitted from playing inside on astro turf.

^5 I saw Sanders play also , and people saying a 1 st and 2 nd down scat back is better then a 3 down , down hill running back is absurd ........Last Running 2 backs in the modern era I seen as good as TD was LT2 and Martin ..

bendog
02-06-2012, 01:06 PM
Sanders had some pretty average qb talent, and that isn't dissing TD because imo Sanders never could have just crushed defenses. That's what Den did with the zone blocking. They just beat on the front 7 all day long. TD just wore out. He ran like Ahmad Bradshaw only he followed his blocks and had a better one cut.

TD wouldn't have had the same success on turf with the talent, or lack of talent, that Sanders had. But TD never went out of bounds unless he was in contact with a defender. Not once, that I recall. R. Smith even had it out with new recievers about Broncos never going out of bounds without putting a hat on somebody first.

bendog
02-06-2012, 01:08 PM
^5 I saw Sanders play also , and people saying a 1 st and 2 nd down scat back is better then a 3 down , down hill running back is absurd ........Last Running 2 backs in the modern era I seen as good as TD was LT2 and Martin ..

Sweetness is no. 1 for me. It's hard to deny Emmitt as well. and Dorsett. For one season, TD hands down. Barry was great, but despite the yards, I don't see him in the same company.

Mile High Mojoe
02-06-2012, 01:12 PM
Sanders was great, no doubt, and he may have not had the best offense surrounding him but to say he played on crappy teams all the time is not necessarily the truth. Detroit played in a pretty weak division and Sanders also benefitted from playing half his games at home on astro turf. Yah, he made ankle breaking cuts but he also benefitted from playing inside on astro turf.

I think you people really underestimate how great Sanders was just as far too many overestimate how great Jim Brown was.

Jim Brown belongs in the discussion as one of the best ever but I donít consider him the best ever. Hereís why. Brown played on the best team in his era, played with a HOF QB, with a HOF Coach, one of the Best OL of the era and one of the best Dís in the NFL at the time.

Payton played on crappy Bears teams from 1975 his Rookie year until 1983 when the Bears put together a great Defensive team. From 83 to 87 when the Bears won a Super Bowl and made playoff appearances the Bears O was still one of the most conservative in the NFL and relied heavily on Payton in the running and passing game. Payton had it all speed, power, moves, could catch passes and was one of best blocking RBís of all time.

I saw the game were Payton took the field against one of the tough Vikings defensive teams in 1977 rushing for the NFL single game rushing record. In that record-setting game against the Vikings, Payton was suffering with a 101-degree fever and intense flu. He played through his illness, rushing for 275 yards on 40 attempts, with 1 touchdown.

I watched Payton play from his Rookie season until he retired and to me not only is he the greatest RB to every play the game, heís the greatest football player ever to play the game.

Hereís another subject altogether but the best Defensive player of all time to me was Lawrence Taylor. I saw him play from his rookie season on and he dominated the game like no other player has before or sense.

Turd_Ferguson
02-06-2012, 01:19 PM
ask yourself this: in 20 years are people going to be talking about CM or TD? That is, who will the general NFL football fan remember? Honestly, neither may be remembered but IMHO that tells me that CM does not deserve to be in the HoF either.

I think people will know the name Terrell Davis. I don't think people will know who Curtis Martin is, JMHO.

The history of the Denver Broncos could not be written without Davis. Any Broncos fan that follows the NFL should know who he is. If you list the Broncos Legends that even the most common Broncos fan would know you would absolutely have to have:
Elway
Sharpe
Davis
Shanahan

The history of the Jets and Pats would not change that much without Martin IMO. . . The Pats are a relatively new fan base. They were terrible for years, younger fans, and fans that have jumped on the wagon as of late probably dont have a real good idea of who Curtis Martin is or even how good he was...

Spider
02-06-2012, 01:20 PM
Sweetness is no. 1 for me. It's hard to deny Emmitt as well. and Dorsett. For one season, TD hands down. Barry was great, but despite the yards, I don't see him in the same company.

^5

bendog
02-06-2012, 01:34 PM
btw, I didn't mention OJ or Marcus Allen. OJ seems to me from almost another era, but his talent was as good or better than anyone. Young Floyd Little is the only other runner who I saw run student body right, get to the tackle, see nothing there, stop on a time and take off going the other way and simply outrun an entire defense. Later in Little's career, he ran like a little TD. Marcus Allen is maybe the best overall player I ever saw. He could run, but he was also an outstanding blocker and could catch. He probably could have played strong safety.

Dickerson is the guy who just sort of mystifies me. He played on Rams teams that had stud defenses. They went to one bowl. He goes onto two big years in Indy, and does well to get to .500. He's like dating a cheerleader worried of her rep.

Boogerboots
02-06-2012, 07:59 PM
I voted for option 4... It's all Griese's fault.

Its truly sad to believe that when you break it down, that 3 years of mediocrity separates TD from the HoF.