Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

I've seen Frank Gore quite a few times through the years and I've always regarded him as a pretty good running back, but never as a great player. He's never led the NFL in any rushing category; he's been named to five Pro Bowls but he's never been an All-Pro.

Yet, rather quietly (at least to me), he's now passed Jim Brown in career yardage, which puts him ninth all time. Eight of the other players in the top 10 are in the HOF and LaDainian Tomlinson has just become eligible and is likely to be elected.

Is Gore just an accumulator who's piled up good numbers mainly by being good and avoiding serious injury? Or is he truly one of the greats?

Is Gore just an accumulator who's piled up good numbers mainly by being good and avoiding serious injury? Or is he truly one of the greats?

Definitely an accumulator. I don't think he's ever been a top 3 RB in the league. Except maybe his 2nd year when he went over 1600 rushing. As a 49ers fan I'd love to see him in the HOF, but I don't think he belongs there. I'd certainly vote for him for HOVG in a few decades though. I'd call him a poor man's Curtis Martin.

ChrisBabcock wrote:

Is Gore just an accumulator who's piled up good numbers mainly by being good and avoiding serious injury? Or is he truly one of the greats?

Definitely an accumulator. I don't think he's ever been a top 3 RB in the league. Except maybe his 2nd year when he went over 1600 rushing. As a 49ers fan I'd love to see him in the HOF, but I don't think he belongs there. I'd certainly vote for him for HOVG in a few decades though. I'd call him a poor man's Curtis Martin.

Yeah, that's pretty much how I think about him.

Funny is the same things that would potential keep Gore out of the HOF are the same reasons Bettis is in. I'd take Gore over Bettis any day. Early career Gore over Bettis (for both it's really the only time you could put them near the very top though neither was ever the best back in the league), mid-career Gore over mid-career Bettis and now late-career Gore over late-career Bettis. Better football player, easily. Better running back, better receiver out of the backfield, etc.

Gore did have a major injury in college, back when "The U" had an incredible stable of RB's.

I'd rather wait for his - or any player's - career to be over before HOF yes/no, but no, I would say he's a good player worth remembering but not worth immortalizing.

Reaser wrote:Funny is the same things that would potential keep Gore out of the HOF are the same reasons Bettis is in. I'd take Gore over Bettis any day. Early career Gore over Bettis (for both it's really the only time you could put them near the very top though neither was ever the best back in the league), mid-career Gore over mid-career Bettis and now late-career Gore over late-career Bettis. Better football player, easily. Better running back, better receiver out of the backfield, etc.

Gore did have a major injury in college, back when "The U" had an incredible stable of RB's.

I'd rather wait for his - or any player's - career to be over before HOF yes/no, but no, I would say he's a good player worth remembering but not worth immortalizing.

That's a pretty good analysis, I think. I'd also take Gore over Bettis but I don't think either of them should be in the HOF.

I think Frank Gore has a reasonably good HoF case. Reaching 12K lifetime rushing yards seems to be the tipping point between in and out for RBs anymore. Gore is past that, has in fact crept up to 9th all time at this point, and isn't done yet. He doesn't have much of a peak but he's definitely got the compiler argument pretty much sewn up. Given that Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis are in, I don't see him not getting elected -- though I think he'll wait a while. Consider also that nobody except Adrian Peterson will likely reach the 12K milestone anytime in the foreseeable future; that should help, too (it's not like there will be lots of company among recent RBs).

I think he gets in and is a reasonable second tier/large hall option.

rhickok1109 wrote:

Reaser wrote:Funny is the same things that would potential keep Gore out of the HOF are the same reasons Bettis is in. I'd take Gore over Bettis any day. Early career Gore over Bettis (for both it's really the only time you could put them near the very top though neither was ever the best back in the league), mid-career Gore over mid-career Bettis and now late-career Gore over late-career Bettis. Better football player, easily. Better running back, better receiver out of the backfield, etc.

Gore did have a major injury in college, back when "The U" had an incredible stable of RB's.

I'd rather wait for his - or any player's - career to be over before HOF yes/no, but no, I would say he's a good player worth remembering but not worth immortalizing.

That's a pretty good analysis, I think. I'd also take Gore over Bettis but I don't think either of them should be in the HOF.

Bettis and Gore are very different backs, and I doubt Gore will be rushing for six 100 yard games in his next to last season. We should also remember Bettis turned in another 100 yard plus day in the huge 2005 regular season conquest of Chicago, which helped the Steelers get into the playoffs that season. While the much lighter and faster Gore was naturally a better receiver with a higher rushing average, Bettis was more physical, and played a key role in a longer run of success for his franchise. A great barometer of RB excellence is 100 yard games, and only four backs in NFL history have more than Jerome. # 36 was such a unique player at his size, highly unlikely we'll ever see a back with that kind of production ever again in the NFL.

The ability to take over games, impose your will, than close out wins was a big part of NFL football in past seasons. Countless games in which Bettis had to convert third and short situations when everyone in the stadium knew he was getting the ball. I'm a fan of Frank Gore, but he needs more production before he can be a HOF back.

L.C. Greenwood wrote: # 36 was such a unique player at his size, highly unlikely we'll ever see a back with that kind of production ever again in the NFL.

Why is that? Better nutrition? Players more concerned about their health now? Eddie Lacy and LaGarrette Blount have beer guts and they are pretty good. They are not significantly different than Bettis body-wise.

L.C. Greenwood wrote:A great barometer of RB excellence is 100 yard games

Might be true, maybe not. Anything more systematic that backs this assertion up would be welcome. Am unsure, myself.

L.C. Greenwood wrote:and only four backs in NFL history have more than Jerome.

Bettis also had a long career. Am wondering how this works out adjusted to career length.

Jerome Bettis to me has always been a "no duh" HOF'er and I'd take him over Gore quite easily.