Clubfoothead Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 TD isn't even close to being a candidate. He was dominant for only three years and only has 7,600 rushing yds and 60 TDs over the course of his career. That's not HOF material. Winning two SBs helps, but the fact that he played on two really good teams isn't going to overshadow his good-but-not-great career numbers. Priest was a more dominant back than TD. He's a different style runner, so he never had those 1,700- and 2,000-yd rushing seasons, but he still has more career rushing yds, a lot more receiving yards, and A LOT more TDs. His 27-TD season also broke the single-season NFL record. I don't think either are HoF material. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 I don't think either are HoF material. I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 TD isn't even close to being a candidate. He was dominant for only three years and only has 7,600 rushing yds and 60 TDs over the course of his career. That's not HOF material. Winning two SBs helps, but the fact that he played on two really good teams isn't going to overshadow his good-but-not-great career numbers. Priest was a more dominant back than TD. He's a different style runner, so he never had those 1,700- and 2,000-yd rushing seasons, but he still has more career rushing yds, a lot more receiving yards, and A LOT more TDs. His 27-TD season also broke the single-season NFL record. TD had 500 MORE rushing yards if you count post-season, and if anything, post-season stats should count even more than reg-season toward HOF induction. and i don't know how you say priest was a more "dominant" back than davis. TD's career was basically 4 years. the heart of priest's career was 7 years. i don't think either TD or priest gets in the HOF. but with TD, you can at least make a compelling case based mostly on the two-year stretch of unprecedented dominance where the broncos won back-to-back super bowls on the back of TD setting all-time records for regular+post-season yards and carries. the only thing really special that priest ever did was to set the mark for TDs, which of course was broken the very next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 TD had 500 MORE rushing yards if you count post-season, and if anything, post-season stats should count even more than reg-season toward HOF induction. So, the fact that TD was lucky enough to play with John Elway, Shannon Sharpe, and a defense that was good enough to win two SBs makes him a more worthy candidate than Priest? LOL, that's ridiculous. Yes, TD did dominate from '96-'98 and was a stud in one SB and pretty good in the other. But playing on better teams doesn't make one individual player better than the other. Dan Fouts never even made it to a SB and he was a better QB than the vast majority of those that did. and i don't know how you say priest was a more "dominant" back than davis. TD's career was basically 4 years. the heart of priest's career was 7 years. i don't think either TD or priest gets in the HOF. but with TD, you can at least make a compelling case based mostly on the two-year stretch of unprecedented dominance where the broncos won back-to-back super bowls on the back of TD setting all-time records for regular+post-season yards and carries. the only thing really special that priest ever did was to set the mark for TDs, which of course was broken the very next year. Comparing TD to Priest is like comparing Corey Dillon to Marshall Faulk. Simply looking at the rushing numbers doesn't tell the full story... Terrell Davis: 1655 carries, 7607 yds (4.6 avg), 60 rushing TDs, 169 rec, 1280 rec yds, 5 rec TDs Priest Holmes: 1734 carries, 8035 yds (4.6 avg), 86 TDs, 334 rec, 2945 yds, 8 rec TDs Looking at the regular-season numbers, Priest had a slightly better career. And since playoff numbers are a function of who was lucky enough to play on the better team, it's apples-and-oranges. And neither of these guys are even close to the HOF, so it's a moot point. BTW, TD's stretch from '97-'98 was far from "unprecedented." See: Smith, Emmitt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egret Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 TD isn't even close to being a candidate. He was dominant for only three years and only has 7,600 rushing yds and 60 TDs over the course of his career. That's not HOF material. Winning two SBs helps, but the fact that he played on two really good teams isn't going to overshadow his good-but-not-great career numbers. Priest was a more dominant back than TD. He's a different style runner, so he never had those 1,700- and 2,000-yd rushing seasons, but he still has more career rushing yds, a lot more receiving yards, and A LOT more TDs. His 27-TD season also broke the single-season NFL record. Don't try to confuse me with facts and statistics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 So, the fact that TD was lucky enough to play with John Elway, Shannon Sharpe, and a defense that was good enough to win two SBs makes him a more worthy candidate than Priest? LOL, that's ridiculous. Yes, TD did dominate from '96-'98 and was a stud in one SB and pretty good in the other. But playing on better teams doesn't make one individual player better than the other. Dan Fouts never even made it to a SB and he was a better QB than the vast majority of those that did. Looking at the regular-season numbers, Priest had a slightly better career. And since playoff numbers are a function of who was lucky enough to play on the better team, it's apples-and-oranges. And neither of these guys are even close to the HOF, so it's a moot point. so kicking ass and setting records in the playoffs doesn't count for anything, huh? it's all, as you say, "luck"? gotcha. BTW, TD's stretch from '97-'98 was far from "unprecedented." See: Smith, Emmitt. emmitt 1992: 1713 rushing yards reg. season, 336 playoffs, 2049 total emmitt 1993: 1486 rushing yards reg. season, 280 playoffs, 1766 total TD 1997: 1750 rushing yards reg. season, 581 playoffs, 2331 total TD 1998: 2008 rushing yards reg. season, 468 playoffs, 2476 total Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 (edited) so kicking ass and setting records in the playoffs doesn't count for anything, huh? Sure, it counts for something. But when you only play at a high level for three years and other players are blowing your regular-season stats away, it means a lot less. Roger Craig kicked ass in a lot more playoffs games than TD did (and not to mention had a much longer career), yet he's still not in the HOF and probably never will be. it's all, as you say, "luck"? gotcha. Yes, the quality of the team that one ends up on certainly is "luck." emmitt 1992: 1713 rushing yards reg. season, 336 playoffs, 2099 total emmitt 1993: 1486 rushing yards reg. season, 280 playoffs, 1766 total TD 1997: 1750 rushing yards reg. season, 581 playoffs, 2331 total TD 1998: 2008 rushing yards reg. season, 468 playoffs, 2476 total Emmitt 1991: 1563 rushing yds reg. season, 185 playoffs, 1748 total Emmitt 1992: 1713 rushing yds reg. season, 336 playoffs, 2099 total Emmitt 1993: 1486 rushing yds reg. season, 280 playoffs, 1766 total Emmitt 1994: 1484 rushing yds. reg season, 118 playoffs, 1602 total Emmitt 1995: 1773 rushing yds. reg season, 298 playoffs, 2071 total Emmitt 1996: 1204 rushing yds. reg season, 196 playoffs, 1400 total Emmitt 1990-2004: 18335 rushing yds. reg season, 1586 playoffs, 19921 total, 196 total TDs TD 1995-2001: 7606 rushing yds. reg season, 1140 playoffs, 8746 total, 77 total TDs There's something to be said for longevity. Edited August 8, 2006 by Bill Swerski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 so, swerski....i say TD had an unprecedented 2 year run, you counter with emmitt, i prove you wrong, and you come back with "emmitt had a better 14 year run". wow, that is brilliant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 so, swerski....i say TD had an unprecedented 2 year run, you counter with emmitt, i prove you wrong, and you come back with "emmitt had a better 14 year run". wow, that is brilliant. That's nice, but Emmitt had an unprecedented five straight seasons of 1,600+ rushing yds from '91-'95. But if you want to sculpt TD's HOF bust for those two seasons, go right ahead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 That's nice, but Emmitt had an unprecedented five straight seasons of 1,600+ rushing yds from '91-'95. But if you want to sculpt TD's HOF bust for those two seasons, go right ahead. so then you ARE agreeing that TD's two-season, 4,800 yard, back-to-back super bowl run was unprecedented and that you were a total clueless idiot for trying to correct me on that point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 so then you ARE agreeing that TD's two-season, 4,800 yard, back-to-back super bowl run was unprecedented and that you were a total clueless idiot for trying to correct me on that point? No, I'm saying that Emmitt had an "unprecedented" five year run that nobody - not Jim Brown, not Walter Payton, not Barry Sanders, not Earl Campbell, and especially not Terrell Davis - was able to achieve. And also that you're an obnoxious, piece-of-sh!t waste of a human life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.