I think your perspective on what the HOF is for is off. The HOF, IMO, is not just about what players are considered the best to ever play the game, but also what they have contributed over a period of adequate time. Now, what that 'time' length should be is debatable. For me, four seasons is not long enough. No matter who the player is. In TD's case specifically though, you should also analyze the team he played for. We never got a chance to see what numbers TD was capable of putting up without John Elway, or outside of Denver's offense. Some may have forgotten that this same offense turned no-names like Olandis Gary and Mike Anderson into 1,000yd rushers. Clinton Portis' style of running is also a direct result of Mike Shanahan's "make one cut and get upfield" style of rushing offense, IMO I did love TD, but he just didn't have the type of longevity I'd look for when selecting a HOFer.
I'm not a Sayers fan because he refers to himself in the third person and can be a braggart. He comes across as a douche to me. That said, I like watching his NFL highlights. He was a brilliant performer. A strong case can be made that he was the most scintillating runner of all-time. (O.J. Simpson, Billy Sims, and Barry Sanders would be others who would be worth consideration for that title.) You cannot compare his statistics to Davis's statistics. It's just not fair for a number of reasons. Sayers played in the 14-game era and for mediocre or bad teams. The Bears won the league title in 1963 and then got old. That includes the head coach. George Halas coached his last game in 1967 at the age of 72. Jim Dooley took over as the head coach in 1968. He found out that it's extremely tough to follow a legendary head coach. Bears records during the Sayers era 1965: 9-5 1966: 5-7-2 1967: 7-6-1 1968: 7-7 1969: 1-13 1970: 6-8 1971: 6-8 Point is that Sayers played in a down period in the Chicago Bears history. Davis played in Denver's best era. ____ Sayers 1st team All-Pro, 1965 1st team All-Pro, 1966 1st team All-Pro, 1967 1st team All-Pro, 1968 1st team All-Pro, 1969 He was on every 1st team across the board for all five of those years- Associated Press, Sporting News, PFWA, Pro Football Weekly, New York Daily News, UPI, you name it. Davis 2nd team All-AFC, 1995- United Press International 1st team All-Pro, 1996 1st team All-Pro, 1997 1st team All-Pro, 1998 Every selecting organization had Davis on its 1st team in 1996, 1997, and 1998. In 1995, he was one of two AFC RBs on the AFC 2nd team. Obviously, two were on the 1st team. Then there were four RBs from the NFC with similar honors. That year, it is fair to say he was one of the best eight runners, but he likely wasn't a top three or four RB. In summation, as a running back, Sayers had five Hall of Fame level seasons and Davis had three. ____ As I mentioned upthread, Sayers was a masterful kick returner. Sayers absolutely annihilates Davis in this aspect because Davis was not a kick returner. Sayers- punt returns- 27 for 391 yards, 14.5 average, 2 touchdowns kickoff returns- 91 for 2781 yards, 30.6 average, 6 touchdowns Sayers over Davis BIG time ____ In 1969, Sayers was the only runner in pro football to eclipse the 1000 yard mark. You knocked Sayers for only having two seasons of 1000 yards. Well, it was a huge deal to gain 1000 yards in a season back in Sayers' era. Sayers led the NFL in rushing in 1966 and 1969. Davis led the NFL in rushing in 1998. Sayers 2, Davis 1
You can compare their stats at a per game basis. Sayers 1965 - 61.9 1966 - 87.9 1967 - 67.7 1968 - 95.1 1969 - 73.7 Davis 1995 - 79.8 1996 - 95.9 1997 - 116.6 1998 - 125.5 Davis was a huge reason that Denver's best era was during his years. ____ I agree that All Pro teams are important and signficant but Sayers played in a league of about 15-16 teams. Davis competed against running backs from 30 teams. ____ This is the one thing Sayers has that Davis doesn't when considering the HOF ____ Just to put it in a little bit of perspective; Sayers competed against running backs from 15 teams - Davis ran up against 30. In 1966 Jim Nance led all professional running backs with 1458 yards. I know they didn't play against the same teams or in the same league, but it's something to consider. Also, Davis missed out in 1996 by 15 yards and in 1997 didn't have the most yards rushing because Barry Sanders had over 2,000 (Davis had 1750). I think leading the league in rushing is a nice thing but a little bit irrelevant.
It's still subject to debate. There are guys I consider blatantly obvious that aren't in the HOF today.
Neither Sayers nor Davis should be penalized in this discussion because on number of teams in the league. All we should do is examine how well each performed in his era. Davis had more competition, sure. Was it better competition? I don't know. I think the league is watered down right now. I had posted the rushing titles to show the other poster that Sayers was great. That guy actually used the word "suck" in reference to Sayers earlier in the thread. That's just being ignorant to the NFL of the 1960s.
That's a good question...Sayers had Jim Brown (for 1 season), Jim Taylor and Leroy Kelly (not counting AFL) and Terrell Davis had Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis I saw that too...lol... I just wanted to point out that Davis may have had only 1 rushing title, but he missed one by 15 yards and another season he rushed for 1750 yards but finished second because Barry Sanders ran for over 2,000
Everything you wrote in post #27 is good. I think Sayers and Davis are close as running backs, but Sayers has the added bonus of being arguably the greatest kickoff returner of all-time. Earlier you had mentioned fumbles. Sayers had more than Davis, but really any starting RB back then had more fumbles than starting RBs in Davis's era. There were more fumbles back in the 1960s for any number of reasons. The fields were in worse shape, more mud, fewer artificial surfaces, maybe the ball was slicker back then, etc. Davis has extraordinary playoff stats. If we treated those as regular season stats, Davis would have had one more 1st team All-Pro year. Maybe Sayers could have also put up brilliant postseason numbers had he played for teams good enough to qualify for postseason play. Also, it is the Pro Football Hall of Fame and not the Pro Football Hall of Greatness. There has to be more people who recognize the name Gale Sayers as opposed to the name Terrell Davis. I don't know that we can tell the story of pro football without mentioning Sayers. However, I think we can do it without mentioning Davis. I think Davis should get serious consideration for the PFHOF, though. Thing is it doesn't seem he's even getting that yet.
I would say yes, but not for a while. He had as dominating a 3 year span than any RB in the history of the game. He's was good during the regular season, good during the playoffs, good during the superbowl. But longevity does have its benefits.
No. He was great for a short time but I personally feel like you need a longer career to be considered for the Hall of Fame. At the same time I can see why one would want TD in the HOF because even though his time was so short in the NFL for those 3-4 years of complete dominance he was the best at his position, perhaps the flat out best player in the entire league. But for me the time was too short lived.
Yes, only because his career was cut short due to an injury sustained while being a true football player (tackle on an interception-against the NYJ no less).
We're not discussing the Hall of What Could Have Been. If an injury cuts a great player's career short and leaves him with numbers that would normally leave one on the outside, too bad. Also, I realize he had one of the most dominant 3 yr periods of time of any RB in history, but we'e seen many guys shred defenses for a couple years and flame out (aka Larry Johnson, Jamal Lewis); the longevity and consistency is what separates the HOFers from the rest. I think TD would have been a HOFer had he been able to play longer, but he didn't and therefore he wouldn't get my vote.
My post has nothing to do with "could have been" and everything to do with what actually happened. You yourself admit that his play was HOF-worthy. My post specifically addresses your and others' concern that duration of domination should play an integral part in consideration of HOF induction. It's not like he excelled for only one or two seasons. He kicked ass for 4, including his rookie year. I would argue that often times, longevity plays too crucial a role in HOF voting, ie. Art Monk. Considering that the average starting RB only plays 2.6 years in the league, his HOF seasons alone almost doubled what is a typical career for his position. Coupled with the fact that his career suffered not due to durability or even his ever-present migraines, but a freak injury that epitomizes his dedication to being a great FB player, not just a RB, but a complete FB player. It was his ST play that got him in Shanny's good graces, and his willingness to help the team in any way that he could (specifically, making a tackle on an Elway interception) that caused his downfall. Either way, it is not as cut and dry and you want to make it. It really comes down to how much of a role you feel longevity should play into HOF voting. It is debatable and really just a matter of opinion, but since everyone here agrees his best years were HOF worthy, then by extension, so must he be.
We obviously place different values on consistency and longevity so we'll have to agree to disagree. I do agree TD was on his way to immortality, but injuries are a part of the game and he's not the first potential HOFer to have his path derailed by injury. Barry Sanders did what TD did for over double the amount of time and that's what separates them (yes, I am aware Sanders has no rings-that's an entirely different discussion).
Until Kenny Easley gets voted in no way TD is a hall of famer. Longevity has been part of the formula to determine who gets in the hall of fame. Many players who have retired or wore down after a fast start have been on the outside looking in. There is a long list of players that should go in ahead of TD that have been held out. Easley, Bo Jackson, and Sterling Sharpe are examples.
But 3 great seasons and a quick exit out of the league just are not enough for a Hall of Famer. You need a longer career than what Davis had. It would be one thing if he was a great player for his 8 years in the league every single season and just retired on top, deciding like Jim Brown that who cares about how well he's playing, it's just time to go. But that isn't the case with TD. He shined for a short period of time and died off quickly. If he had never ran for those 9 extra yards to give him 2,008 in 1998 we would never even be discussing if he should be in the Hall of Fame, but because he did run for 2,000 yards he of course is in the discussion, as he should be, but his time was too short.
