Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

In your way of thinking,how long does a RB have to be dominant to make it to the HOF?Gale Sayers only played 7 seasons.

falconfan58 wrote:In your way of thinking,how long does a RB have to be dominant to make it to the HOF?Gale Sayers only played 7 seasons.

The current Hall voters determined three seasons is enough. Ezekiel Elliott is one third of the way to enshrinement!

A prior batch of them determined five seasons was enough (see the Sayers selection).

falconfan58 wrote:In your way of thinking,how long does a RB have to be dominant to make it to the HOF?Gale Sayers only played 7 seasons.

Isn't really a question of how "great" someone's time is compared to the amount of time they were "great?"

Sayers (and a few others) are "in" because their "period of dominance" was so out-of-this-world incredible that the duration wasn't so important.

JuggernautJ wrote:

falconfan58 wrote:In your way of thinking,how long does a RB have to be dominant to make it to the HOF?Gale Sayers only played 7 seasons.

Isn't it really a question of how "great" someone's time is compared to the amount of time they were "great?"

Sayers (and a few others) are "in" because their "period of dominance" was so out-of-this-world incredible that the duration wasn't so important.

JuggernautJ wrote:

JuggernautJ wrote:

falconfan58 wrote:In your way of thinking,how long does a RB have to be dominant to make it to the HOF?Gale Sayers only played 7 seasons.

Isn't it really a question of how "great" someone's time is compared to the amount of time they were "great?"

Sayers (and a few others) are "in" because their "period of dominance" was so out-of-this-world incredible that the duration wasn't so important.

True, but I liken it more to Sayers' uniqueness, the sense one must have had watching him that you knew he was a one of a kind type player and you would tell your grandchildren about having seen him play. I felt that way watching Earl Campbell in his prime from 1978-81, and others must have felt that way watching Namath and Dick Butkus. I also felt that way watching Bo Jackson playing baseball and football simultaneously. These guys were playing the game in such a way that their bodies just could not sustain the punishment they took due to their unique style. Now we are looking at JJ Watt and wondering if he is going to join these guys on the short-but-brilliant career list.

Barber probably falls a little short of Canton. If he had played for another year or two at the same level, he would have a much better argument. But if he had played another year or two, he might be walking with a pronounced limp today.

Barber did have his memorable moments. He really shined in season finales. He had 5 career 200 yard rushing days (3rd most all time) and 3 of them came in season finales. In another finale, he rushed for "only" 95 yards, but scored the winning touchdown with 11 seconds to play. That was a meaningless game as far as the playoffs went, but it was Eli Manning's first win as a starter.

bachslunch wrote:I say no. He was a very good RB with decent receiving skills, but his career is too short. For me, that also goes for other decent peak but too-short-career RBs like Jamal Lewis, Priest Holmes, Shaun Alexander, Ricky Williams, Clinton Portis, Marshawn Lynch, and Chris Johnson. It also goes for compilers who didn't compile long enough like Fred Taylor, Steven Jackson, Corey Dillon, Rickey Watters, Eddie George, Warrick Dunn, Thomas Jones, Ottis Anderson, and Ahman Green. I just can't see anything that elevates anyone above the pack here.

And looking at Barber's career again, he's really more a compiler than I remembered.

This sums up my opinion, too. Barber was a very good player, but, one of the greatest of all-time... I don't think so. To me he's not a HoF player and neither are any of those mentioned by bachslunch. Again, all examples of very good players, but none in the same class as Walter Payton, Emmett Smith, Barry Sanders, Jim Brown, et al. Barber is a lock HOVG electee.

On the other hand, I could see a slight argument for Barber because Terrell Davis was recent elected. IMO Barber is a better player than Davis, and minus the championships, was superior on the field and has greater career stats.