RB Frank Gore: 4th all-time rusher

[LaserFocus]

1 hour ago, FinSting said:

Riggins averaged 19 TD's per season from '83-'84 after scoring 38 TD's in those two season. That will make you a household name. Regardless of the pollution...crank up that diesel. 

Martin and Riggins were elite talents who proved they belonged with the NFL's greats. It wasn't about volume, but quality, and the ability to withstand the abuse of the RB position and excel at an age when other HOF backs had retired. Good players simply don't have those type of careers. And the ability of any RB to score TDs is part of the whole evaluation process. 

[Forge]

2 hours ago, LaserFocus said:

Martin and Riggins were elite talents who proved they belonged with the NFL's greats. It wasn't about volume, but quality, and the ability to withstand the abuse of the RB position and excel at an age when other HOF backs had retired. Good players simply don't have those type of careers. And the ability of any RB to score TDs is part of the whole evaluation process. 

Wait...you just described Frank Gore. I really don't know how you write this sentence and think it applies to Martin and Riggins but not Gore. 

Elite talents that proved they belonged. Well, Gore was more efficient than either of them, so there's that. 4th all time in rushing yards and 7th all time in YFS. He generated more yardage per touch than either of them and did more with his chances.  So yeah, for Gore it certainly wasn't about volume since he required less of it to do more than either of those guys. 

Withstanding the abuse of the RB position. Well, Gore is 35 years old and still chugging along. Hasn't missed a game in 8 years. So I guess he's checking that box. 

Excel at an age when other Hall of fame backs retired. Well, Gore is 35 and still playing, which is longer than Martin played by three years. Riggins was 36 when he retired, but also played 14 years. Frank Gore was 12th, 9th, and 12th in rushing yards the last 3 years. So he seems to be doing just fine. 

One of your earlier statements indicated that they need to be able to carry the load when everyone knows they are getting the ball, and Gore absolutely fits that bill, given the offensive dysfunction of 2005 - 2010 San Francisco offenses. The 2009 offensive line was so bad they used both of their 2010 first round picks on offensive linemen, yet Gore still rattled off nearly 5 yards per attempt, 13 total touchdowns. That was an offense led by pre-competent Alex Smith and Shaun Hill. Everyone knew Gore was getting the ball. It was even more notable in 2006 when he tore off 1700 yards rushing and 2000 YFS. That year the team has less than 2900 yards passing...for the season. I mean, think about that. And the average yards per attempt? 6.5. Gore average 5.4 per carry on his own. Trust me, everyone knew he was getting the ball that year too. 

[LaserFocus]

2 hours ago, Forge said:

Wait...you just described Frank Gore. I really don't know how you write this sentence and think it applies to Martin and Riggins but not Gore. 

Elite talents that proved they belonged. Well, Gore was more efficient than either of them, so there's that. 4th all time in rushing yards and 7th all time in YFS. He generated more yardage per touch than either of them and did more with his chances.  So yeah, for Gore it certainly wasn't about volume since he required less of it to do more than either of those guys. 

Withstanding the abuse of the RB position. Well, Gore is 35 years old and still chugging along. Hasn't missed a game in 8 years. So I guess he's checking that box. 

Excel at an age when other Hall of fame backs retired. Well, Gore is 35 and still playing, which is longer than Martin played by three years. Riggins was 36 when he retired, but also played 14 years. Frank Gore was 12th, 9th, and 12th in rushing yards the last 3 years. So he seems to be doing just fine. 

One of your earlier statements indicated that they need to be able to carry the load when everyone knows they are getting the ball, and Gore absolutely fits that bill, given the offensive dysfunction of 2005 - 2010 San Francisco offenses. The 2009 offensive line was so bad they used both of their 2010 first round picks on offensive linemen, yet Gore still rattled off nearly 5 yards per attempt, 13 total touchdowns. That was an offense led by pre-competent Alex Smith and Shaun Hill. Everyone knew Gore was getting the ball. It was even more notable in 2006 when he tore off 1700 yards rushing and 2000 YFS. That year the team has less than 2900 yards passing...for the season. I mean, think about that. And the average yards per attempt? 6.5. Gore average 5.4 per carry on his own. Trust me, everyone knew he was getting the ball that year too. 

I'm on record already about Gore eventually getting into the HOF, but he's doing so largely on the back of what happened years ago. Recently, Gore's just been a mediocre back, and both Martin/Riggins showed us why they were worthy HOF backs much closer to the end of their respective careers. Gore's been the king of the 60 yard rushing day for quite some time. Staying healthy enough to crank out 60 yard rushing days in meaningless games isn't any kind of achievement. I think Gore is actually pushing back his induction, especially when you consider the stacked HOF field.

[TecmoSuperJoe]

13 hours ago, LaserFocus said:

Even the greatest offensive line ever needs a special back to produce when everyone in the stadium knows who is carrying the football. What made Riggins and Bettis so great was the ability to convert those crucial short yardage situations. While backs like Jamaal Charles had pretty yards per carry averages, they were repeatedly stuffed at the point of attack.  

Riggins wasn't special though. Which is why he needed a boatload of carries to gain his yards. Especially later in his carer. And why he was only recognized twice in 14 years for this accomplishments. He was never close to being the best back in the NFL at any one time. 

A great offensive line doesn't need a special back. That's why you can have someone like Timmy Smith run for 200 plus yards in the Super Bowl. NFL history is littered with guys that no one remembers that had big years playing being great offensive lines. Any replacement-level back will look good behind an All Pro line, and scheme that fits their skill set. Like Denver's situation in the late 90's and early 2000's. 

Emmitt Smith, Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, Tony Dorsett, Marshall Faulk, and others that are already in the HOF were good in short yardage situations, while not running for 3 yards and a cloud of dust. So was Frank Gore. 

Does Eddie George belong in the HOF because he had high career totals with a low YPA? Because he got the "tough yards" averaging 342 carries a year playing on teams never as stacked as Gibbs' Redskins? 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

12 hours ago, LaserFocus said:

Because Riggins hadn't played his best football until age 30, while Gore's best was already behind him at that age. Riggins naturally has a lower yards per average because of how he was used. When a larger back is needed for those crucial short yardage plays(which sometimes decide games), they will automatically take a hit in the YPA area. The problem with Gore is the significant number of meaningless games and ineffectual carries he's taking on this late in his career. Hall of Fame, yes, but it will take some time.

The majority of Riggins carries aren't going short yard situations. Especially with the amount of carries he received. So that doesn't make sense. He just didn't average many yards as a runner period regardless of down and distance.

[TecmoSuperJoe]

12 hours ago, LaserFocus said:

If Barry Sanders was used the same way Riggins and Bettis was used, you better believe his yards per carry would be lower, and risk of injury much higher. YPA has value, but limitations as well. One principal reason Bettis is in the Hall and Jamaal Charles and his higher YPA isn't, is the fact Bettis could handle the punishment, and was better later in his career. Most 1,200 backs have more than their share of quality carries, and 100 yard games. 

John Riggins did show potential with the Jets, but the lack of usage was a blessing in disguise. He was a phenomenal athlete in college, and was simply a late developing player. It's extremely rare to see a big back in his 30s outrun secondary players in their 20s, but that was a sign of a future HOF player. Unlike Gore, Riggins didn't stick around for multiple seasons compiling meaningless yards in meaningless games for losing teams. People forget Riggins was the fourth leading rusher in league history when he retired. Overall, a better career than Gore, and voters won't be impressed by a player who hangs on too long.      

Barry Sanders didn't need to be used in a specific way, because his skills weren't limited. Riggins wasn't a short yardage specialist. Like I just said you don't get that many carries if most of them are for short yardage. An offense wouldn't be in that situation most of the time for you to get 300 plus carries to execute them in. Riggins was a threeyards and a cloud of dust back in his later years. If the Redskins were in a ton of short yardage situations anyway, maybe they wouldn't be if Riggins was a better runner. 

Jamaal Charles comparison doesn't really hold water. He has just over 7000 rushing yards. He's not going to make the HOF because his totals are too low. He couldn't even become a compiler like Riggins retiring with a high yardage total after playing mostly average seasons. He also didn't play on a championship roster. 

You don't have all those carries, go to the Redskins later on post 30, and become a better player physically. Especially at runningback. Body doesn't work like that. Getting a high volume of carries doesn't make the quality of your being better. 

Gore just went over his 12th season of 1200 YFS. How is that meaningless yards? And wait, because he played for the Colts and Dolphins on the backend of his carries the games are meaningless? If you're putting up production, then it shouldn't matter what team you play for. There are tons of HOF players that played for losing teams most of their career. Should they be kicked out of the HOF because their teams weren't competitive? 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

11 hours ago, LaserFocus said:

It's not about averages, it's about impact. Riggins has more 100 yards games, and delivered a postseason for the ages over 30. When the end was obvious in 1985, after his strong 1984, HOF voters had recent evidence of great play. Gore, not so much, and these 60 yard rushing days aren't impressive.  

Gore is having an impact. The yardage totals AND averages are evidence of this lol. It's not Gore's fault the Colts and Dolphins have been poo. You're basically saying that because Riggins was fortunate enough to play on a stacked teams for a few years towards the end of his career, that validates the rest of his lackluster years, and marginalizes Gore's. 

It would be like saying Teddy Bruschi belongs in the HOF because he played for New England, and Zach Thomas doesn't since he was with Miami. 

[LaserFocus]

8 hours ago, PapaShogun said:

Gore is having an impact. The yardage totals AND averages are evidence of this lol. It's not Gore's fault the Colts and Dolphins have been poo. You're basically saying that because Riggins was fortunate enough to play on a stacked teams for a few years towards the end of his career, that validates the rest of his lackluster years, and marginalizes Gore's. 

It would be like saying Teddy Bruschi belongs in the HOF because he played for New England, and Zach Thomas doesn't since he was with Miami. 

Gore's been having a minimal impact for years, and the numbers do bear this out. And John Riggins was a key part of those stacked Redskins teams, his prime seasons just came later.   

[LaserFocus]

8 hours ago, PapaShogun said:

Barry Sanders didn't need to be used in a specific way, because his skills weren't limited. Riggins wasn't a short yardage specialist. Like I just said you don't get that many carries if most of them are for short yardage. An offense wouldn't be in that situation most of the time for you to get 300 plus carries to execute them in. Riggins was a threeyards and a cloud of dust back in his later years. If the Redskins were in a ton of short yardage situations anyway, maybe they wouldn't be if Riggins was a better runner. 

Jamaal Charles comparison doesn't really hold water. He has just over 7000 rushing yards. He's not going to make the HOF because his totals are too low. He couldn't even become a compiler like Riggins retiring with a high yardage total after playing mostly average seasons. He also didn't play on a championship roster. 

You don't have all those carries, go to the Redskins later on post 30, and become a better player physically. Especially at runningback. Body doesn't work like that. Getting a high volume of carries doesn't make the quality of your being better. 

Gore just went over his 12th season of 1200 YFS. How is that meaningless yards? And wait, because he played for the Colts and Dolphins on the backend of his carries the games are meaningless? If you're putting up production, then it shouldn't matter what team you play for. There are tons of HOF players that played for losing teams most of their career. Should they be kicked out of the HOF because their teams weren't competitive? 

It seemed illogical at the time, but the Lions were smart to limit Barry Sanders close to the goal line. As great as he was, Sanders did have a tendency to lose yardage, the condensed field didn't play to his strengths, and he would have been injured in those situations. Riggins was a master in converting short yardage situations, just like Jerome Bettis. Blaming a great back for the offense being in a short yardage situation is like blaming a great QB after a failed pass, it doesn't make any sense.

Jamaal Charles simply wasn't elite the way Riggins was, he couldn't take the pounding, and faded. Nice career, but the playoff game versus Baltimore sums up all you need to know about the differences between the two backs. Charles was outstanding in the first half, but got hurt, and was a non-factor the rest of the way as the Ravens rallied for the win. Riggins by contrast, was usually strong as the game went by, and his 1982 postseason was a legendary performance.

History has shown early usage matters at the RB position, and Riggins was helped by not having a ton of carries before he became a Redskin. Combined with his natural talent, Riggins just matured later, and built a HOF career. And no compiler has a big season so close to retirement like Riggins' 1984 campaign. Frank Gore hasn't enjoyed a memorable season in years, if averaging 62 yards per game rushing, and a pittance in receiving yards each game is quality, we've hit a new low in terms of standards. Yes, some HOF players did lay for losing teams, but at least we saw why they were HOF-caliber near the end. Not so for Gore, not even close.     

[LaserFocus]

9 hours ago, PapaShogun said:

The majority of Riggins carries aren't going short yard situations. Especially with the amount of carries he received. So that doesn't make sense. He just didn't average many yards as a runner period regardless of down and distance.

All offense encounter short yardage situations, and backs like Riggins and Bettis played a huge role in keeping drives going, which helped win games. It's no coincidence those Redskin and Steelers teams were successful during those eras. 

[LaserFocus]

9 hours ago, PapaShogun said:

Riggins wasn't special though. Which is why he needed a boatload of carries to gain his yards. Especially later in his carer. And why he was only recognized twice in 14 years for this accomplishments. He was never close to being the best back in the NFL at any one time. 

A great offensive line doesn't need a special back. That's why you can have someone like Timmy Smith run for 200 plus yards in the Super Bowl. NFL history is littered with guys that no one remembers that had big years playing being great offensive lines. Any replacement-level back will look good behind an All Pro line, and scheme that fits their skill set. Like Denver's situation in the late 90's and early 2000's. 

Emmitt Smith, Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, Tony Dorsett, Marshall Faulk, and others that are already in the HOF were good in short yardage situations, while not running for 3 yards and a cloud of dust. So was Frank Gore. 

Does Eddie George belong in the HOF because he had high career totals with a low YPA? Because he got the "tough yards" averaging 342 carries a year playing on teams never as stacked as Gibbs' Redskins? 

No back can achieve what Riggins did simply based on volume, it was the quality was carried the day. Getting caught up in yards per carry for a big back isn't the correct way to evaluate the position. His value is more on wearing down defenses, and getting those tough yards between the tackles many other backs cannot obtain. Other large backs, like Natrone Means, Christian Okoye, etc. had a few years of success, but couldn't take the pounding. 

Timmy Smith was great for a single game, and a back can succeed for a season behind a strong line, but the great backs do it for years, including the postseason. Denver's post-Terrell Davis had short bursts of success, and were usually invisible in the playoffs. Barry Sanders, Tony Dorsett, and Marshall Faulk were lighter backs, and not at the level of John Riggins/Jerome Bettis when it came to those short yardage situations. Frank Gore will eventually join them in Canton, and had inside running talent, but not at the Riggins/Bettis level.

Eddie George had a tremendous career, but he was overused, and burned out around age 30. Career totals just shy of what you want in a HOF back. We just can't penalize great players for helping make their teams great, Riggins was a key component of Washington's success, and everyone knows it. 

   

[x0x]

5 years ago I posted the typical HoF question and I believe it was somewhere in the 80s that he had no chance. Looking a lot better now.

[ET80]

@x0x

Please stop bumping old threads.