Curtis Martin officially retires: Hall of Famer?

[cthomer5000]

So, unsurprisingly, Curtis Martin offically retired today.

My question to the board is, do you think he'll be inducted into the hall of fame?

The case for Curtis:

One of two backs to go over 1,000 for 10 straight years (Barry Sanders is the other)
4th all-time in rushing yardage
7th all-time in yards from scrimmage
12th all time in rushing TDs
Was an iron-man until the final injury that eventually sunk him (missed just 4 games in his first 10 years)The big case against Curtis:

Was arguably never the top back during a given year. Led the league in rushing just once (was the oldest player ever to do so, in fact). Was consistently among the very top backs, but probably never the top back during a given year.

[rkmsuf]

yes

[DaddyTorgo]

i'm just pissed that he left the pats to go hang out with parcells in NJ

[st.cronin]

I had to think for a second to remember who he was. No.

[rkmsuf]

i'm just pissed that he left the pats to go hang out with parcells in NJ

why? didn't work out too badly for NE.

[rkmsuf]

I had to think for a second to remember who he was. No.

turn in your nfl fan card

[Castlerock]

i'm just pissed that he left the pats to go hang out with parcells in NJ
+1

[rkmsuf]

+1

yeah I suppose you people wanted to keep him around to save Pete Carrol, right?

[molson]

Obvious hall of famer. 4th all-time in rushing yards for crying out loud.

[cthomer5000]

I really have to think this one over personally. I hope he makes it, and I also hope the Jets retire his number. He's undoubtedly one of the absolute best to ever put on the uniform for the Jets.

I think the sticking point really could be that he was never THE guy, and the fact that there are some other good backs who've retired recently (Faulk, Bettis).

[molson]

I think the sticking point really could be that he was never THE guy, and the fact that there are some other good backs who've retired recently (Faulk, Bettis).

How many RBs in the last say, 10 years have been "THE guy" by that standard. Certainly not Bettis (Though Bettis has been in more commercials, which will help him).

[rkmsuf]

I really have to think this one over personally. I hope he makes it, and I also hope the Jets retire his number. He's undoubtedly one of the absolute best to ever put on the uniform for the Jets.

I think the sticking point really could be that he was never THE guy, and the fact that there are some other good backs who've retired recently (Faulk, Bettis).

As a Pats fan, the notion that the best ever to put the uniform on for the Jets isn't worthy of the hall of fame makes me LOL.

[cthomer5000]

As a Pats fan, the notion that the best ever to put the uniform on for the Jets isn't worthy of the hall of fame makes me LOL.

Your reading comprehension makes me LOL.

[rkmsuf]

Your reading comprehension makes me LOL.

I got it. You aren't sure if he'll make it. You hope he does but can't make the call.

Understandable since he did play for the Jets which makes it even more of a slam dunk he should go. You do what he did in the NJ swamp and you are the man.


:D :D :D


Actually I think Martin was a better player than Bettis.

As far as the election committee, Martin will score well since he was a great guy. I don't see how he doesn't make it even if Faulk and Bettis are also in consideration.

[stevew]

If Bettis is widely considered to be a lock, and I mean that's tainted by where I live so maybe he's not, then Martin has to be a lock as well. I thought Bettis was terribly overrated and I think Martin performed better than him.

I thought Martin was going to be able to give Emmit's record a run for it's money, although injuries pretty much derailed that.

[Anthony]

i would take Faulk/Martin before i take Faulk/Bettis.

[Kodos]

I voted yes. Consistently very good for a long time.

[molson]

I voted yes. Consistently very good for a long time.

In baseball HOF discussions, that kind of thing can work against someone. But for an NFL RB, longevity is a huge accomplishment.

[Eaglesfan27]

Obvious hall of famer. 4th all-time in rushing yards for crying out loud.

QFT. 1st ballot hall of famer.

[vex]

I would have said no, because like you said, wasn't the top back. However, with the stats you posted, I say yes.

[miked]

Over 1000+ in each of his first 10 seasons, including a 1600yd performance in his last full season. Not to mention, with the Jets, he lost 8 fumbles in 123 games. Silly to think he shouldn't be a first ballot member. It wasn't that he got 4th overall by sticking around a long time, he was very effective in all his seasons (Except the last 2).

[Lathum]

no brainer

[rkmsuf]

Over 1000+ in each of his first 10 seasons, including a 1600yd performance in his last full season. Not to mention, with the Jets, he lost 8 fumbles in 123 games. Silly to think he shouldn't be a first ballot member. It wasn't that he got 4th overall by sticking around a long time, he was very effective in all his seasons (Except the last 2).


You could argue that at 4.0 a carry he wasn't "special" and that 4th all time was a direct result of longevity and getting the carries.

I say he's in but you could argue otherwise if so inclined.

He and Bettis have the lowest per carry average until you get to #10 on the all time carry list and Riggins.

Eddie George, 3.6 ypc. LOL.

[Synovia]

Touches per Fumble:

C Martin 138.0
C Dillon 102.1
M Faulk 100.1
J Bettis 89.7
E George 84.7
B Sanders 83.4
E Smith 80.7
E James 77.1
R Watters 71.8
T Thomas 67.0
M Allen 55.5
J Riggins 54.6
O Anderson 52.5
T Barber 51.3
W Payton 50.5
J Brown 46.2
O Simpson 42.6
E Dickerson 42.0
T Dorsett 37.0
F Harris 36.3

In my mind, Curtis Martin is a HOF'er. He was basically the best the NFL has ever seen at holding onto the ball.

[Desnudo]

Consistent, but unexciting. I say no.

[molson]

In my mind, Curtis Martin is a HOF'er. He was basically the best the NFL has ever seen at holding onto the ball.

Great stat. It speaks well for Dillon's value and HOF chances as well.

[Synovia]

Great stat. It speaks well for Dillon's value and HOF chances as well.

I dont know if it makes a difference in HOF chances, but it definitely does in the players value. A good part of the reason players like Bettis and Martin hung around so long is because they NEVER dropped the ball. Other players may have had higher YPC, but put the ball down more. <br><br> Fumbles hurt a LOT more than a low YPC.<br><br>Remember, failed running attempts lead to turning the ball over 45 yards downfield. Fumbles lead to turning the ball over right here. <br><br>It would be interesting to see where the numbers came out if you subtracted the league average punt from their total for each fumble, and see who came out with the highest YPC.

[Logan]

Consistent, but unexciting. I say no.

A guy who is a guarantee for 4 yards every carry, nothing more and nothing less, would be very unexciting...but could potentially be the biggest weapon ever when it comes to ball control and keeping the opposing team's offense off the field.

edit: A resounding YES from me. I think he'll be better thought of in 10-20 years than he is now.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Great stat. It speaks well for Dillon's value and HOF chances as well.

Dillon will get in too.

[rkmsuf]

Dillon will get in too.

Now there is a really borderline guy.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Now there is a really borderline guy.

I think it's close, but he will and should go. That 1,600 yard franchise record SB win season with the Pats clinched it. He also was consistently good over many seasons. He'll go.

And Curtis Martin will definitely go. The writers will eat him up. And they should. Class guy (although I hated him for leaving the Pats) and just a solid consistent runner over time. Fourth in career yards? No brainer.

[rkmsuf]

Look at Tomlinson's career numbers. That's like wtf stuff.

[cthomer5000]

Look at Tomlinson's career numbers. That's like wtf stuff.


It really is. He's posting video game numbers.

You guys have sold me on the fact that he'll get inducted. The fact that he was also a definite good guy and a real "heart of a warrior" type will really work in his favor. I imagine he's very well liked by basically everybody who is going to have a say in voting.

[st.cronin]

I put Faulk way, way, way above Martin and Bettis. He's in a different league. Bettis was also a very unique style runner, I think maybe he gets some points for that.

[cthomer5000]

Dillon will get in too.

I think he's extremely borderline.

In my opinion, if Dillon is even a serious candidate than Martin is a 1st-ballot guy.

[Synovia]

Faulk also had a LOT more talent around him that Martin EVER did. A LOT of Martin's years were on teams that had abysmal passing games.

[Desnudo]

A guy who is a guarantee for 4 yards every carry, nothing more and nothing less, would be very unexciting...but could potentially be the biggest weapon ever when it comes to ball control and keeping the opposing team's offense off the field.

edit: A resounding YES from me. I think he'll be better thought of in 10-20 years than he is now.

I agree, because people will be looking at stats. He just wasn't very exciting to watch.

[Young Drachma]

I always waited for him to decline in New York or to bolt after Parcells left. But he really stuck it out and was dependable as hell for so many years. The guy is a no-doubt first ballot HoF.

[gkb]

I'm undecided on Martin. Looking at the stats posted really makes me think that yeah, he should be in. Thinking about the NFL while he was in the league and the "impact" he had makes me think no.

I'm not sure just being consistent is enough to get into the HoF. I know a lot of the guys on this forum don't like Colin Cowherd's show, but one of the things he mentions when talking about HoF entry is, "Can you tell the story of Sport League X without Player Y?"

Can you tell the story of Pro Football without Curtis Martin?
Can you tell the story of Pro Football without Corey Dillon?
Can you tell the story of Pro Football without Jerome Bettis?

I'm not sure I know the answers to those questions and I'm sure some of you who know a lot more about football's history will come up with some great examples against that manner of determining HoF entry.

I'm rambling...for entry into the HoF I'd say Martin no, Dillon no, Bettis yes.

[Young Drachma]

Without him, the Jets never would've rebounded to a place where they were at least decent. That makes him the most important member of the club since Broadway Joe.

[Young Drachma]

I'm undecided on Martin. Looking at the stats posted really makes me think that yeah, he should be in. Thinking about the NFL while he was in the league and the "impact" he had makes me think no.

I'm not sure just being consistent is enough to get into the HoF. I know a lot of the guys on this forum don't like Colin Cowherd's show, but one of the things he mentions when talking about HoF entry is, "Can you tell the story of Sport League X without Player Y?"

Can you tell the story of Pro Football without Curtis Martin?
Can you tell the story of Pro Football without Corey Dillon?
Can you tell the story of Pro Football without Jerome Bettis?

I'm not sure I know the answers to those questions and I'm sure some of you who know a lot more about football's history will come up with some great examples against that manner of determining HoF entry.


I think the context of what teams some of these guys played on is far more important a consideration in football than other sports.

I'm rambling...for entry into the HoF I'd say Martin no, Dillon no, Bettis yes.

Telling the story of the NFL (since it's the only pro football league with any staying power) would be a hell of a lot less interesting if you didn't have Curtis Martin on the Jets, Jerome Bettis on the Steelers...and Dillion is more of a toss up. He was the only thing on the Bengals teams for so many years and then he went to New England and was a model citizen in a title year. he doesn't scream HoF to me, but he'll probably stack up with the best of 'em at the end and should get a shot.

I think the context of what teams some of these guys played on is far more important a consideration in football than other sports.

Lynn Swann is in the Hall of Fame for crying out loud. I think football's credibility in terms of who gets in and who doesn't, is probably the most porous of any sport other than basketball, where pretty much anybody gets in.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Can you tell the story of Pro Football without Curtis Martin?
Can you tell the story of Pro Football without Corey Dillon?
Can you tell the story of Pro Football without Jerome Bettis?



I see what you're saying, but that's simply not the criteria for going into the pro football hall of fame. If it was, some guys in there would not be in there.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

I think he's extremely borderline.

In my opinion, if Dillon is even a serious candidate than Martin is a 1st-ballot guy.

You would be right on both accounts then.

[Desnudo]

I'm undecided on Martin. Looking at the stats posted really makes me think that yeah, he should be in. Thinking about the NFL while he was in the league and the "impact" he had makes me think no.

I'm not sure just being consistent is enough to get into the HoF. I know a lot of the guys on this forum don't like Colin Cowherd's show, but one of the things he mentions when talking about HoF entry is, "Can you tell the story of Sport League X without Player Y?"

Can you tell the story of Pro Football without Curtis Martin?
Can you tell the story of Pro Football without Corey Dillon?
Can you tell the story of Pro Football without Jerome Bettis?

I'm not sure I know the answers to those questions and I'm sure some of you who know a lot more about football's history will come up with some great examples against that manner of determining HoF entry.

I'm rambling...for entry into the HoF I'd say Martin no, Dillon no, Bettis yes.

I think of it more like, "Would I pay just to see Curtis Martin because he's a special player?" And the answer is no. For all three.

[Castlerock]

Dillon will get in too.
I don't know. That very borderline.
If Bettis is widely considered to be a lock, and I mean that's tainted by where I live so maybe he's not, then Martin has to be a lock as well. I thought Bettis was terribly overrated and I think Martin performed better than him.

I thought Martin was going to be able to give Emmit's record a run for it's money, although injuries pretty much derailed that.
I don't think Bettis is a lock at all.

I put Faulk way, way, way above Martin and Bettis. He's in a different league. Bettis was also a very unique style runner, I think maybe he gets some points for that.
I think it's:
Faulk
Martin
Dillon
Bettis
with the HOF line below Martin.

[MikeVic]

Bettis has to get in! And it's not the Steeler fan in me that's saying so!

[molson]

I see what you're saying, but that's simply not the criteria for going into the pro football hall of fame. If it was, some guys in there would not be in there.

Cowherd is such an oddball. One could "tell the history of football" and limit specifc mentioning of players to 5 or 6. Or on the other hand, telling a more complete "history of football" should probably include Doug Williams and Jim Mcmahon. Should they be in?

[RedKingGold]

Smith's not eligible for the HOF yet either, right?

I think the problem for all of these backs in the 90's is that there were many very good ones. In fact, I think this is pretty much what kills Terrell Davis's HOF chances.

[stevew]

You can definitely tell the story of pro-football without Corey Dillon. I mean, that's just plain laughable.

[cthomer5000]

I don't quite get the Dillon ahead of Bettis logic.

It's honestly never crossed my mind that Dillon was a hall of fame RB.

[stevew]

Over the next few years, how many backs will actually emerge as solid HOf canidates.
Off the top of my head(no order)

Bettis
Dillon
Martin
Faulk
Tiki Barber
Edgerrin James
Tomlinson
Alexander
And maybe even Dunn/Fred Taylor.

Obviously all those guys won't get in, but they will all likely be over 10k yards.

[Castlerock]

I don't quite get the Dillon ahead of Bettis logic.

It's honestly never crossed my mind that Dillon was a hall of fame RB.

I think Dillon has a better shot than Bettis but I don't think either of them make it.

[Logan]

Cowherd is such an oddball. One could "tell the history of football" and limit specifc mentioning of players to 5 or 6. Or on the other hand, telling a more complete "history of football" should probably include Doug Williams and Jim Mcmahon. Should they be in?

Agree on this...went to the HoF website, and only looked at the list of modern era QBs. The names I think would be the first one to discuss when bringing up "this is pro football..."

Blanda, Bradshaw, Elway, Marino, Montana, Namath, Starr, Staubach, Tittle, Unitas.

Now, I'm no historical football expert, so maybe I'm not giving enough credit to the older guys...but it would at least knock out guys like:

Aikman, Fouts, Kelly, Moon, Young (and I'm a huge Niner fan)

Are these guys not really HoF worthy?

[Castlerock]

Over the next few years, how many backs will actually emerge as solid HOf canidates.
Off the top of my head(no order)

Bettis
Dillon
Martin
Faulk
Tiki Barber
Edgerrin James
Tomlinson
Alexander
And maybe even Dunn/Fred Taylor.

Obviously all those guys won't get in, but they will all likely be over 10k yards.
Tomlinson, Faulk and Martin from that list.

[Synovia]

I don't quite get the Dillon ahead of Bettis logic.

It's honestly never crossed my mind that Dillon was a hall of fame RB.

Because he was better in pretty much every statistical category? YPC, check. Carries per fumble, Check. Yards per reception, check......

Pretty much the only thing Bettis did better than Dillon was play three years longer.<br><br>Tiki Barber shouldnt even be involved in this conversation. Hes not even close.

[MikeVic]

I think Dillon has a better shot than Bettis but I don't think either of them make it.

Why does Dillon have a better chance?

edit: some explanation was given right above this.

I think Bettis being the RB of the Steelers will help him out a lot.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

I am not saying Dillon will get in, but he has a good shot. For this one simple fact: He is 14th all time in career rushing yards with 11,238. Every single player ahead of him on that list (and one below him, O.J.) who is eligible is in the HOF. Those above him but not yet eligible are Smith, Martin, Bettis, and Faulk. I am not saying that gets him in for sure. But in that circumstance, how can you say he does not at least have a good shot at it. However, I am not sure I agree that he has a better chance than Bettis, who is 5th all time and only 500 yards behind Martin.

[Castlerock]

I am not saying Dillon will get in, but he has a good shot. For this one simple fact: He is 14th all time in career rushing yards with 11,238. Every single player ahead of him on that list (and one below him, O.J.) who is eligible is in the HOF. Those above him but not yet eligible are Smith, Martin, Bettis, and Faulk. I am not saying that gets him in for sure. But in that circumstance, how can you say he does not at least have a good shot at it. However, I am not sure I agree that he has a better chance than Bettis, who is 5th all time and only 500 yards behind Martin.
Hmmm. I didn't realize Bettis was that high on the list.

[molson]

I am not saying Dillon will get in, but he has a good shot. For this one simple fact: He is 14th all time in career rushing yards with 11,238. Every single player ahead of him on that list (and one below him, O.J.) who is eligible is in the HOF. Those above him but not yet eligible are Smith, Martin, Bettis, and Faulk. I am not saying that gets him in for sure. But in that circumstance, how can you say he does not at least have a good shot at it. However, I am not sure I agree that he has a better chance than Bettis, who is 5th all time and only 500 yards behind Martin.

True, but Dillon only has 600 yards more than the #16 guy Ricky Waters, and only 800 yards more than #17 and #18 (Tiki Barber and Eddie George). I don't think anyone considers any of those 3 HOF-worthy.

I still think he's in though, thanks to the late-career run and Super Bowls.

[Synovia]

Molson, Bettis does have 2K more yards rushing than Dillon, but its at almost 1/2 yard per carry less.
<br><br>
If theres anyone whos a compiler, its Bettis, and not Martin.

[RedKingGold]

Over the next few years, how many backs will actually emerge as solid HOf canidates.
Off the top of my head(no order)

Bettis
Dillon
Martin
Faulk
Tiki Barber
Edgerrin James
Tomlinson
Alexander
And maybe even Dunn/Fred Taylor.

Obviously all those guys won't get in, but they will all likely be over 10k yards.

Once again, has Emmitt Smith even been inducted yet? If not, he obviously has to be at the top of that list.

[molson]

Molson, Bettis does have 2K more yards rushing than Dillon, but its at almost 1/2 yard per carry less.
<br><br>
If theres anyone whos a compiler, its Bettis, and not Martin.

Personally, I think all 3 belong. Bettis' strongest argument is obviously being #5 all time in rushing yards.

His YPC is going to be lower because he was a different kind of runner - he doesn't have as many 30 yards+ carries as guys like Martin and Dillon. And I imagine he got more short-yardage (goalline and 3rd/4th and 1) carries than those guys did.

Of course, Martin and Dillon had the explosiveness, long carries, consistency AND they never fumbled the ball.

[Synovia]

Personally, I think all 3 belong. Bettis' strongest argument is obviously being #5 all time in rushing yards.

His YPC is going to be lower because he was a different kind of runner - he doesn't have as many 30 yards+ carries as guys like Martin and Dillon. And I imagine he got more short-yardage (goalline and 3rd/4th and 1) carries than those guys did.

Of course, Martin and Dillon had the explosiveness, long carries, consistency AND they never fumbled the ball.
Actually, IIRC, from 1999 on (the only data Football Outsiders has) both Martin (while healthy) and Dillon were more effective short yardage backs than Bettis. <br><br>The thing that makes me dislike bettis the most as a HOF'er is that for most of his career, he wasnt good enough to be "the guy" and had to play along with someone else. Both Dillon and Martin WERE good enough to handle both duties.

[Anthony]

and he fumbled the ball in the biggest game of his career ('06 Super Bowl) and nearly cost the Steelers the game and me $110.

[Synovia]

and he fumbled the ball in the biggest game of his career ('06 Super Bowl) and nearly cost the Steelers the game and me $110.

He also, IIRC, fumbled the week before and almost lost the game against the Colts.

[Passacaglia]

He also, IIRC, fumbled the week before and almost lost the game against the Colts.

Yeah, it was the Colts game that he almost blew.

[Travis]

Agree on this...went to the HoF website, and only looked at the list of modern era QBs. The names I think would be the first one to discuss when bringing up "this is pro football..."

Blanda, Bradshaw, Elway, Marino, Montana, Namath, Starr, Staubach, Tittle, Unitas.

Now, I'm no historical football expert, so maybe I'm not giving enough credit to the older guys...but it would at least knock out guys like:

Aikman, Fouts, Kelly, Moon, Young (and I'm a huge Niner fan)

Are these guys not really HoF worthy?

Just to nitpick a bit, but how could you not include Moon in any historical conversation? It can be looked at from both sides, but had he been able to start his career in the NFL rather than the CFL (as a QB), he'd likely be holding all sorts of NFL career records rather than just being top 5-10 on a lot of the lists. Also one of the pioneers at his position for breaking the race barrier while (I believe) the only player inducted into both the Canadian and Professional Hall of Fame.

I just find it hard to question his HoF merits given the late start that was pretty much forced on him by the social landscape during that time frame.

[Izulde]

Unquestionably a Hall of Famer.

[Senator]

Hall of Fame.

LT - first back ever to get 20K yards rushing?

[JeeberD]

Martin is in, IMO...

In regards to LT, all it takes is one injury to throw him off his pace. There were lots of folks out there (myself included) who thought that Martin had a chance to pass Emmitt, but injuries finally caught up to him...

[Richard Weed]

My Favorite Martin, yeah. I'd put him in before Bettis and Dillion, but I'd put Dillion ahead of Bettis. Both Bettis and Dillion won Superbowls but Dillion carried his team (Bengals) than Bettis (Steelers).

[MikeVic]

My Favorite Martin, yeah. I'd put him in before Bettis and Dillion, but I'd put Dillion ahead of Bettis. Both Bettis and Dillion won Superbowls but Dillion carried his team (Bengals) than Bettis (Steelers).

What? Dillon didn't win with the Bengals. And Bettis was a very important piece for the Steelers earlier in his career.

[Glengoyne]

Dillon will get in too.

Now there is a really borderline guy.

i would take Faulk/Martin before i take Faulk/Bettis.

I agree with all of this.

I've got serious questions about Dillon. Faulk is a cut above Martin, and I think Martin is a cut above both Bettis and Dillon. Dillon is the least hall worthy of the bunch IMO.

Curtis is in, and he will likely be a first ballot guy. I wouldn't mind at all if he had to wait a year.

[Izulde]

I'd agree with those that stack Faulk above Martin and Martin above Dillon and Dillon above Bettis.

Dillon carried a horrible franchise on his back for a lot of years and made them better than they actually were, as been noted elsewhere. Furthermore, Dillon was a major part of the Super Bowl victories he was part of.

By the time Bettis got on the Super Bowl train, he was more part-time than anything else.

[Village Idiot]

edit: A resounding YES from me. I think he'll be better thought of in 10-20 years than he is now.


I agree. I can't stand the Pats, never could...but I always enjoyed watching Martin pound the ball down after down. I was glad when he went to the Jets since I can tolerate them. He was just one of those blue collar guys that I've always had a ton of respect for and would have loved to see in an Eagles uniform.

He didn't have flash, but he oozed substance. In another 20 years when we have 1st down RB specialists, 2nd down RB specialist, 3rd and short specialist, and 3rd and long specialists...Martin will be a guy I can tell my grandson or granddaughter about who could carry the ball 30 times a game if he had to, and had 300+ carries in 8 of his 10 seasons.

VI

[stevew]

I'd agree with those that stack Faulk above Martin and Martin above Dillon and Dillon above Bettis.

Dillon carried a horrible franchise on his back for a lot of years and made them better than they actually were, as been noted elsewhere. Furthermore, Dillon was a major part of the Super Bowl victory he was part of.

By the time Bettis got on the Super Bowl train, he was more part-time than anything else.

Make them better? They won 34 games in the 7 years he was in Cincy. 34 games. I'm going to guess you would be hard pressed to find one HOF'er that accumulated the majority of his career stats on a team that won 30% of its games during his tenure.

If you take Sanders as the prime example of a good player on a bad team, his teams still won almost half of the games in the 10 years he was there(78 games)

Dillon was awesome the one year that he won the bowl with the Pats. But before that, he was merely a compiler on a crappy go-nowhere team.

[stevew]

dola, I'll bet 2 beers that Tiki Barber makes the NFL Hall of Fame before Corey "I hate the media" Dillon does.

[Logan]

dola, I'll bet 2 beers that Tiki Barber makes the NFL Hall of Fame before Corey "I hate the media" Dillon does.

Well, since Barber has retired before Dillon, I don't think that's really going out on the limb, no matter how you feel about their individual chances.

[stevew]

Well, since Barber has retired before Dillon, I don't think that's really going out on the limb, no matter how you feel about their individual chances.

I thought Dillon was retired? Maybe not.

[Logan]

Pretty sure he's just in limbo...

[tanglewood]

Make them better? They won 34 games in the 7 years he was in Cincy. 34 games. I'm going to guess you would be hard pressed to find one HOF'er that accumulated the majority of his career stats on a team that won 30% of its games during his tenure.

If you take Sanders as the prime example of a good player on a bad team, his teams still won almost half of the games in the 10 years he was there(78 games)

Dillon was awesome the one year that he won the bowl with the Pats. But before that, he was merely a compiler on a crappy go-nowhere team.

Sanders played on some crappy teams but also played on a few decent ones. Dillon played for a Bengals franchise that went through a monumentally awful stretch for 10 years or so. They were unprecedentedly bad an I would say unquestionably underwent the worst run of any franchise in modern NFL history. And to say that Dillon was merely a compiler is a bit demeaning, he did post some excellent stats in Cincy, which considering for his entire career ther barring his last injury plagued season he was the only player remotely close to being called a threat on the offense is pretty impressive.

+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| Rushing | Receiving |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| 1997 cin | 16 | 233 1129 4.8 10 | 27 259 9.6 0 |
| 1998 cin | 15 | 262 1130 4.3 4 | 28 178 6.4 1 |
| 1999 cin | 15 | 263 1200 4.6 5 | 31 290 9.4 1 |
| 2000 cin | 16 | 315 1435 4.6 7 | 18 158 8.8 0 |
| 2001 cin | 16 | 340 1315 3.9 10 | 34 228 6.7 3 |
| 2002 cin | 16 | 314 1311 4.2 7 | 43 298 6.9 0 |
| 2003 cin | 13 | 138 541 3.9 2 | 11 71 6.5 0 |
| 2004 nwe | 15 | 345 1635 4.7 12 | 15 103 6.9 1 |
| 2005 nwe | 12 | 209 733 3.5 12 | 22 181 8.2 1 |
| 2006 nwe | 16 | 199 812 4.1 13 | 15 147 9.8 0 |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| TOTAL | 150 | 2618 11241 4.3 82 | 244 1913 7.8 7 |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+


If you look at his prime seasons and think he didn't get as many yards as you may have thought, look at the low number of carries. It wasn't an endurance problem as he only missed two games before the achilles (I think) injury he picked up in 2003 and he showed he could carry the load for his Super Bowl season with the Pats, it was simply that the Bengals were on defense so often he just couldn't get the ball. If you add just another 40 carries, less than three more per game, to each of his first six seasons you can stick on another thousand yards or so to his career totals.

HOF wise he needs another 2 seasons at least of decent work, similar to the last two years to be a lock. Playing for another contender too wouldn't hurt. If he retires today or has one poor season and quits I don't think he's in, but he certainly is higher up on the list than Bettis. Or at least should be.

[Kodos]

In
Faulk
Martin

Out
Dillon
Bettis

[cthomer5000]

Multile Buccaneers runs would be worse than that Bengals stretch in my opinion. I dont think you can say that Bengals strech was "unquestionably the worst run of any franchise in modern NFL history."

[tanglewood]

Multile Buccaneers runs would be worse than that Bengals stretch in my opinion. I dont think you can say that Bengals strech was "unquestionably the worst run of any franchise in modern NFL history."

Firstly, an expansion team has a gimmie for their first two seasons at least. Secondly, Tampa Bay actually made the playoffs in their fourth season winning the NFC Central with a 10-6 record. The Bengals underwent 14 consecutive non-winning seasons 1991-2004. As stevew said the Bengals won 34 games in 7 years that Dillon was with them. It was a given every year that they would blow a top 5 draft pick on a guy that would be out of the league in 3 seasons.

It's interesting that stevew argued Dillon playing on the Bengals doesn't help him because they were so terrible and now you are saying they weren't really that terrible.

[cthomer5000]

It's interesting that stevew argued Dillon playing on the Bengals doesn't help him because they were so terrible and now you are saying they weren't really that terrible.

They were terrible, im just questioning your claim that it was unquestionably the worst stretch of any team in modern NFL history.

Bucs 83-95 is pretty fucking awful. Practically any stretch in Cardinals history is pretty fucking awful.

[larrymcg421]

This is not a comprehensive list, but here are a few 7 years runs that are worse than the Dillon Bengals in terms of games won. Of course, a few of them played shorter seasons, so the Bucs are probably the class of this list.

Steelers (64-70): 24
Saints (67-73): 25
Bucs (83-89): 26
Colts (78-84): 30
Falcons (66-72): 30
Cardinals (86-92): 32
Jets (71-77): 33
Lions (2000-06): 33 (they will be losing a 9-7 record next year, so are primed to move up the list)

[jbergey22]

He is a lock.