They changed the rules to let QBs and running backs to run free. When I was young , a tackle had to be secured. That meant if the back could crawl forward someone had to stop him flat. The wide receiver rules have been changed to let them off the line more easily.
You really can not compare the stats of todays players and yesterdays.
Total number of 1,000-yard rushing seasons over Gale Sayers’ peak:
1965 - 1 (Jim Brown)
1966 - 2 (HoFer Leroy Kelly and Sayers)
1967 - 1 (Kelly)
1968 - 1 (Kelly)
1969 - 1 (Sayers)
So that’s 3 players and a total of 6 seasons. In 2010, the #10 rusher (Ray Rice) finished with 1220 yards.
There were 2 in 1970 (the first year after the merger) and 5 in 1971.
John Riggins, 64.9
Larry Csonka, 55.3 (63.6 if you only count his Miami years)
Marcus Allen, 55.1 (58.9 with the Raiders; only 3 seasons over 71.4 and one over 80)
I think you’re on the right track here. There’s an impulse to induct standout players–guys who got their names called–from great teams. The Steelers from their dynasty days have nine players in Canton. The Packers from the Lombardi era have ten (if you count Jim Ringo). Good as these teams may have been, it’s tough to believe that nearly half their starting lineups were HOF worthy.
So, yeah, Swann is as good a pick as any. I was thinking about somebody like Henry Jordan, but he was All-Pro six times; Swann only three.
The 16-game schedule was actually not instituted until 1978.
Another factor, beyond the longer schedule, which has led to inflation in the frequency of the 1000-yard-rushing season has been the de-emphasis of the fullback in actually carrying the ball. In the 1970s, it was not uncommon for a team to have two (or even three) backs who got a lot of carries (e.g., Harris and Bleier in Pittsburgh; Csonka, Morris, and Kiick in Miami). By the mid-to-late 1980s, the fullback had become primarily a blocker (and some teams moved to an H-back, which was essentially a second tight end), meaning that their lead running back got the lion’s share of the carries for the team.
Back to the original question: I’d probably go with Namath. He was fairly good his first few seasons (though he always threw a lot of interceptions), before his knees went completely to hell. I suspect he made it into Canton on the strength of Super Bowl III, and the sentiment that he helped foster perceptions of the AFL as a legitimate rival to the NFL.
We pretty much have to accept that the Pro Football HOF does not have the strictest standards. I think it’s mainly because individual football players are so tough to evaluate. Think of all the stud WRs that are in the league today, who are supreme athletes with lots of swagger. Even with all their talent, there’s no guarantee that they’re going to be a factor in every game; there’s just too many other moving parts. Or think of the elite CB who finishes the season with a single INT. Just eyeballing the stats isn’t going to tell you much about what kind of player he is. And offensive linemen are probably the toughest individual players to evaluate in all of sports, so who’s to say whether or not a particular o-lineman deserves to be in the HOF?
Plus you have to account for the different eras. Only two players exceeded more than 80 receiving yards per game in the 1970s (Gene Washington 1970, Steve Largent 1979). In 2010 alone, five players averaged over 80 yard receiving per game (and two over 90). There’s just a lot more offense now.
By this standard, Floyd Little is even less deserving than I thought- he averaged an anemic 54 yards per game.
I don’t disagree with your post. The fullback observation is right on.
As for Namath, he changed the game before he ever took a snap. Just the fact that he signed with the Jets for an astronomical $427k changed the game of football. He was bigger than life and the media followed his every move. Super Bowl III changed everything.
As noted, football is much more subjective than baseball. Namath belongs in the HOF for what he did for football. That contribution was huge in creating the NFL and the juggernaut it is today.
Auto-correct on my phone. Probably only one character off.
Well if we accept that at face value for a moment, saying he deserves to be in for non-playing activities lends weight to the argument that he is the worst player in the hall.
Considering the relatively recent trend towards two- and three-tailback arrangements (though only having one on the field at any given time, for the most part) it looks like we’re heading back that way.
In 2000, there were 23 1,000 yard rushers, including 13 1,200 yard rushers and 3 1,500 yard rushers.
In 2005, there 16 1,000 yard rushers, including 13 1,200 yard rushers and 5 1,500 yard rushers.
In 2010, there were 17 1,000 yard rushers, including 10 1,200 yard rushers, but just 1 guy- Arian Foster- who rushed for more than 1,500 yards.
Conversely, there were only 33 players who rushed for 500 yards in 2000, of which one was a fullback (and not Mike Alstott) and one was a quarterback.
There were 39 guys who rushed for 500 yards last season, not including Mike Vick.
You bastid! Didn’t you see “Brian’s Song?” He was played by BILLY DEE!
Okay, neither did I. I avoid weepers, even the rare one where it’s okay to be a guy and cry. Which I think is limited to “Brian’s Song” and “Old Yeller.” And maybe “Lassie Come Home,” though my late, lamented Collie couldn’t have found her way home with a tractor beam.
Warren Moon
Don’t think I buy Moon as being a poor choice; despite a late start to his NFL career, he accumulated a lot of counting stats by the end (and if you give him any smidgen of credit for his CFL days that gets even better). His TD/Int ratio wasn’t great, and he certainly wasn’t in the Inner Circle with Joe Montana and Johnny U, but there have been worse QBs.
I’d disagree, even though I suspect that his election to the HoF was based not only on his NFL performance, but his play in the CFL, and his role as the first really successful black quarterback in the modern era.
He went to the Pro Bowl 9 times. His career passer rating (80.9) is comparable to Dan Fouts, Fran Tarkenton, Bart Starr, and John Elway (and note that the first two didn’t win a Super Bowl, either).
May I pile on? Gale Sayers was electrifying when he was healthy. He absolutely belongs in the HOF.
Bad choice as someone who doesn’t belong.
I agree with you, but that’s not a good argument. Michael Vick is electrifying when healthy, but he’s going to need at least 2 more seasons like the last to have a chance of making the Hall.
Yaknow I really don’t give a rat’s hoo hah if my qb tosses a carpload more interceptions than td’s. If he brings home a superbowl I can live with it.
That only means your team can win despite the qb, not that he’s any good.
That’s fair. But for me getting the golden ring is paramount. Never liked Bradshaw because of what he did to my boys. But crud in crunch time he was tough.