Having an argument on another teams forum

[British_Panther]

eh guys, no-one gets into the HOF for having 3 good years, unless all three of them end in rings.

[nosuchthingasapanther]

eh guys, no-one gets into the HOF for having 3 good years, unless all three of them end in rings.

i agree.

besides that, both sets of stats are too close to say one is better than the other.

[Cutler]

eh guys, no-one gets into the HOF for having 3 good years, unless all three of them end in rings.

two of them for one of the players ended in rings, a superbowl mvp, off player of the year (2), and one mvp.

the other back got mvp and off player of the year once I believe.

One them is also one of eleven to ever rush for 1,500 yards three times, and one of six to run for 2,000 yards.

[zebrainz]

eh guys, no-one gets into the HOF for having 3 good years, unless all three of them end in rings.

Terrell Davis is RB#1. I figured that from the OP's screen name. Checked the stats and they match. The only argument he has is Gayle Sears, and even that isn't a strong one. I don't think TD deserves induction either. He only has 2 rings during that 3 year period . If he gets inducted it will be because of where he works, not by evaluation against his peers. I would hate if that happened.

What we got here fellas is a Denver fanboy.

[Boltergeist]

Terrell Davis is RB#1. I figured that from the OP's screen name. Checked the stats and they match. The only argument he has is Gayle Sears, and even that isn't a strong one. I don't think TD deserves induction either. He only has 2 rings during that 3 year period . If he gets inducted it will be because of where he works, not by evaluation against his peers. I would hate if that happened.

What we got here fellas is a Denver fanboy.

I just looked at the #'s to figure it out ... that many yards and we're questioning. I think TD might get in, but he'll have to wait until he's veteran's committee eligible.

[CatfanMO]

Terrell Davis is RB#1. I figured that from the OP's screen name. Checked the stats and they match. The only argument he has is Gayle Sears, and even that isn't a strong one. I don't think TD deserves induction either. He only has 2 rings during that 3 year period . If he gets inducted it will be because of where he works, not by evaluation against his peers. I would hate if that happened.

What we got here fellas is a Denver fanboy.

Finkle is Eihorn?

[OneBadassCat]

Is this Deangleo vs Peterson?

[Seal (SmittyIsOurSavior)]

Is this Deangleo vs Peterson?

Definitely not. D-Lo hasn't even had 3 legit seasons. And neither have been to the SB.

[CatMan72]

In my opinion, YPC is the best way to measure a RB - so RB # 1 would have it in this comparison, but the HOF is about much more than just stats (which is as it should be in some cases) otherwise Art Monk would have been inducted on the 1st ballot.

[KatsAzz]

We are arguing which of two rbs deserve to be in the HOF more, here are numbers based on their best three years. The rbs will not be named due to bias reasons

RB #1

1,106 carries, 5,296 yards, 4.8 ypc, 49 tds

Playoffs:

1,140 yds, 12 tds, 5.6 ypc in 8 games

RB #2

1,059 carries, 4,960 yards, 4.7 ypc, 60 tds

Playoffs: 355 yds, 4 tds, 3.9 ypc in 5 games

What do you guys think...?

If one goes on stats alone,then #1 looks better on paper.The deciding factors would be the type teams they played on and how important they were to the overall success of those teams.

Without the players or teams names,the best player would be hard to determine.

[Cutler]

Terrell Davis is RB#1. I figured that from the OP's screen name. Checked the stats and they match. The only argument he has is Gayle Sears, and even that isn't a strong one. I don't think TD deserves induction either. He only has 2 rings during that 3 year period . If he gets inducted it will be because of where he works, not by evaluation against his peers. I would hate if that happened.

What we got here fellas is a Denver fanboy.

I am not a Denver fan boy lol. I wanted Cutler back when they were offering him, thats about the only connection I have to Denver, I am on Denvers forum sometimes, but I am also on a lot of other teams forums as well.

I just think he should be in

=/

[panthers55]

Bottom line is that HOF usually revolves around longevity and consistency over time, superbowl wins/rings/MVPs etc. So three years won't get you in but 10 years over 1000 yards might especially if you mixed in a few Super Bowl wins, a couple probowls, All-pro designation etc. Given the average life for a running back is 5 years or less, a HOF has to beat the odds and stand out for a consistent time.

Terrel Davis only rushed for 7607 yards and lasted 7 years. And really after 1998 he was done which means he had 4 really good years. He had some spectacular years but didn't last long. He will likely get into the hall of fame based on those years but injuries really hurt his career which is why he was only a semifinalist in 2007 which was his first shot at induction. He is a finalist in 2010 and might make it but it is always up to who else is in the running. If Sharpe gets in that might mean Davis has to wait a bit longer if at all.

[Seal (SmittyIsOurSavior)]

In my opinion, YPC is the best way to measure a RB - so RB # 1 would have it in this comparison, but the HOF is about much more than just stats (which is as it should be in some cases) otherwise Art Monk would have been inducted on the 1st ballot.

I agree 100%. Most people try to make arguments saying guys like Thomas Jones and Michael Turner are better than guys like D-Lo and CJ. But if you look at YPC, it's quite obvious that it doesn't actually matter how many total yards you have if you can't produce a big YPC number.

If you get 100 more carries than another guy, you're obviously gonna end up with more yards. But it doesn't mean you're more productive.

[Raskle]

18 playoff touchdowns trumps 4, imo. Based on just the stats you provided, I'd say #1 is better than #2. Not saying either is HoF worthy, but in a straight up comparison, the playoff stats leading to winning playoff games is the only thing you should worry over.