Draft Countdown Forums

Draft Countdown Forums (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/index.php)
-   Pro Football (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=44)
-   -   Steven Jackson HOFer? (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=54916)

ramsrule 12-15-2012 11:36 AM

Steven Jackson HOFer?
 
He needs 164 yards in his last two games to become one of just a few elite backs to rush for 1,000 yards 8 consecutive years. The list includes future and current Hall of Famers Emmitt Smith, LaDamion Tomlinson, Curtis Martin, Thurman Thomas, and Barry Sanders. He only needs about five or six carries to reach 10,000 for his career. Plus, he has been a very good receiver out of the backfield and only missed 11 games due to injury. Thought?

vidae 12-15-2012 11:37 AM

I'm a huge Steven Jackson fan but it's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Very Good.

Ness 12-15-2012 11:43 AM

No. Unfortunately, his resume isn't strong enough. Playing with the Rams all of these terrible years the past decade are more likely to get him overlooked. There also backs more deserving I don't think are ever getting in.

Nalej 12-15-2012 11:45 AM

Negative. Though if was part of very successful teams, it might not be so one sided.

wicket 12-15-2012 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nalej (Post 3212451)
Negative. Though if was part of very successful teams, it might not be so one sided.

this wouldve been my exact answer

MetSox17 12-15-2012 11:51 AM

Absolutely not. The hall is already tainted for rb's after Curtis Martin got in, no need to ruin it any more with Steven Jackson. He has been really good for most of his career and we shoulda had him (damn you parcells), but he has NEVER had a season where you could really say he was worthy of being a HOF'er. He's been a stats compiler on a bad team his whole career. Shouldn't even be a conversation, imo.

Razor 12-15-2012 11:58 AM

Had he played on for a good organization and won a SB or two I could see him getting in. He's an awesome RB, but he's never been special or flashy. I love Steven Jackson, but I don't think he belongs in the HoF.

bearsfan_51 12-15-2012 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetSox17 (Post 3212457)
Absolutely not. The hall is already tainted for rb's after Curtis Martin got in, no need to ruin it any more with Steven Jackson

In 11 years, Martin accumulated 4,200 yards and 45 touchdowns more than what Steven Jackson has in 9.

In other words, Jackson needs to average 2,100 yards and 22 touchdowns over the next two seasons to match Martin's career; that would be 600 yards and 9 touchdowns more than his career best season, which he achieved 7 years ago. It's silly to compare the two.

Rosebud 12-15-2012 12:02 PM

I really want to say yes, but I don't think so, unless he can pull out one more great year with a real contender next season. But I could be convinced by a really good argument.

bearsfan_51 12-15-2012 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rosebud (Post 3212467)
I really want to say yes, but I don't think so, unless he can pull out one more great year with a real contender next season. But I could be convinced by a really good argument.

There is no really good argument. People always want to piss on Curtis Matin getting in (because, frankly, they don't know what they are talking about). But Steven Jackson is a poor man's Curtis Martin.

Trogdor 12-15-2012 12:06 PM

No. And absolutely agree with MetSox no way Martin should of made it either.

Rosebud 12-15-2012 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetSox17 (Post 3212457)
Absolutely not. The hall is already tainted for rb's after Curtis Martin got in, no need to ruin it any more with Steven Jackson. He has been really good for most of his career and we shoulda had him (damn you parcells), but he has NEVER had a season where you could really say he was worthy of being a HOF'er. He's been a stats compiler on a bad team his whole career. Shouldn't even be a conversation, imo.

This is extremely harsh, Stephen Jackson has been the best running back in the league before and right up there for many more seasons. Not because of the numbers he compiled, but because of what it took him to accomplish what he did having to carry those awful teams. He certainly had the talent to make the HOF, but because of the organization he's been with he hasn't had the career to put him in the hall of fame.

jrdrylie 12-15-2012 12:10 PM

His career numbers are slightly worse than Eddie George. Definitely not HoF worthy.

bearsfan_51 12-15-2012 12:10 PM

Other runningbacks in the same class not in the Hall:

-Ricky Watters
-Corey Dillon
-Ricky Williams
-Thomas Jones
-Warrick Dunn
-Jamal Lewis
-Tiki Barber
-Clinton Portis
-Shaun Alexander
-Edgerrin James
-Fred Taylor

Most likely, none of those guys are getting in, and neither is Jackson.

Rosebud 12-15-2012 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bearsfan_51 (Post 3212469)
There is no really good argument. People always want to piss on Curtis Matin getting in (because, frankly, they don't know what they are talking about). But Steven Jackson is a poor man's Curtis Martin.

I don't ***** about Martin getting in. Talent and level of dominance are crucial towards making it in, but ultimately results have to matter to, and Martin was absolutely excellent at getting the job done. Same reason Emmitt Smith probably would've ended up in the hall of fame even if he didn't end up on those Cowboys.

That said I think Steven Jackson's play at his very best was more dominant than Martin's even though on those god awful Rams that didn't let that lead to all that impressive results.

bearsfan_51 12-15-2012 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rosebud (Post 3212474)
I don't ***** about Martin getting in. Talent and level of dominance are crucial towards making it in, but ultimately results have to matter to, and Martin was absolutely excellent at getting the job done. Same reason Emmitt Smith probably would've ended up in the hall of fame even if he didn't end up on those Cowboys.

That said I think Steven Jackson's play at his very best was more dominant than Martin's even though on those god awful Rams that didn't let that lead to all that impressive results.

I think that's just far too hard to quantify. There are certain backs (Earl Campbell) that the numbers don't blow you away, but it's obvious on film what an absolute freak he was. I don't get that vibe from Steven Jackson.

Mufasa 12-15-2012 12:13 PM

Absolutely not. I don't even have to look at the stats. He's been one of the better runningbacks in the league throughout his career, but I've never once watched him play and thought "there's a hall of fame runningback". I do have that thought every time I watch Adrian Peterson play. The Hall of Fame is reserved for the all time greats, and Jackson certainly does not fit that. He belongs nowhere near Barry Sanders, Jim Brown, Walter Payton, etc.

Nalej 12-15-2012 12:23 PM

I never watched Curtis Martin and thought "there's a HOF RB".
I did think that many times while watching Ricky Williams though. He's not getting in.
While I don't think Jax gets in, the only way to really get any love for the HOF while being stuck on a terrible team is to have people think you're the GOAT (i.e. B. Sanders)

MetSox17 12-15-2012 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bearsfan_51 (Post 3212466)
In 11 years, Martin accumulated 4,200 yards and 45 touchdowns more than what Steven Jackson has in 9.

In other words, Jackson needs to average 2,100 yards and 22 touchdowns over the next two seasons to match Martin's career; that would be 600 yards and 9 touchdowns more than his career best season, which he achieved 7 years ago. It's silly to compare the two.

First, i wasn't necessarily comparing the two, just sharing the fact that i disagree with Curtis Martin being in the Hall, despite him having a better career than Jackson (which you mentioned). While watching some NFL film stuff, one thing that always stuck out to me is someone mentioning whether or not someone was ever on an elite class in the NFL at his position, as a method of determining whether or not they were HoF worthy.

To me, Martin never stood out as an elite guy (the same way SJax hasn't), and certainly never put up eye popping numbers, though he did have his best season by far at 31, and that was the only season of his career where he led the league in rushing. I'm sure you have very viable reasons why you disagree.

bearsfan_51 12-15-2012 12:43 PM

The thing with Martin, is that while he was arguably never the top back in the league at any one year, he was a top 3 back for 5-6 years, and a top 10 back for 10 years, which matters just as much to the selectors. If it was only about being temporarily elite, Terrell Davis would be in for sure.

Add that into the fact that he's the 4th all-time in rushing, and it's honestly not much of a question. I get why Martin sits uncomfortably for a lot of people, but it's hard to look at his resume and keep him out.

What I find ironic (and I mentioned in the HOF thread), is that the same people who want Curtis Martin out, want Cris Carter in. Cris Carter is the receiver equivalent of Curtis Martin, and I wonder how many people actually watched Carter play who think otherwise.

Raiderz4Life 12-15-2012 01:08 PM

I ******* love Steven Jackson and feel so bad for him for having to rot in that **** hole that was the Rams for most of his career, but I will also echo the no.

Ness 12-15-2012 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bearsfan_51 (Post 3212492)
What I find ironic (and I mentioned in the HOF thread), is that the same people who want Curtis Martin out, want Cris Carter in. Cris Carter is the receiver equivalent of Curtis Martin, and I wonder how many people actually watched Carter play who think otherwise.

In my opinion Carter was a better receiver than Martin was a runningback. Definitely the best hands and best boundary receiver I've seen. Plus he was a touchdown machine and still ranks inside the top five for all time touchdowns at his position.

Martin never really had any signature moments in his career unfortunately. He wasn't very flashy. He just got the job done and quietly racked up the numbers. Reminded me of a much more durable Garrison Hearst.

bearsfan_51 12-15-2012 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ness (Post 3212525)
In my opinion Carter was a better receiver than Martin was a runningback. Definitely the best hands and best boundary receiver I've seen. Plus he was a touchdown machine and still ranks inside the top five for all time touchdowns at his position.

Martin never really had any signature moments in his career unfortunately. He wasn't very flashy. He just got the job done and quietly racked up the numbers. Reminded me of a much more durable Garrison Hearst.

What signature moments does Carter have? Also, Martin is 4th all time in rushing yards, which is a more impressive stat than receiving touchdowns.

The Hearst comparison is equally ridiculous, considering he had 2 seasons with more than 1,100 yards.

And Steve Largent had better hands than Carter, or anyone for that matter.

bigbluedefense 12-15-2012 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bearsfan_51 (Post 3212473)
Other runningbacks in the same class not in the Hall:

-Ricky Watters
-Corey Dillon
-Ricky Williams
-Thomas Jones
-Warrick Dunn
-Jamal Lewis
-Tiki Barber
-Clinton Portis
-Shaun Alexander
-Edgerrin James
-Fred Taylor

Most likely, none of those guys are getting in, and neither is Jackson.

Ricky Watters should, but he won't.

Ness 12-15-2012 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bearsfan_51 (Post 3212531)
What signature moments does Carter have? Also, Martin is 4th all time in rushing yards, which is a more impressive stat than receiving touchdowns.

The Hearst comparison is equally ridiculous, considering he had 2 seasons with more than 1,100 yards.

And Steve Largent had better hands than Carter, or anyone for that matter.

Well there was that one overtime catch against the Bears in 1994 with Warren Moon's first year. That is still talked about sometimes. Also, his plethora of spectacular catches.

I don't see why rushing yards is more important than receiving touchdowns to you. In any case, it's apples and oranges. The receiving yardage statistic can have a lot to do with stability at quarterback sometimes as well. Carter never had that like Rice or Irvin during the majority of his career. Definitely had some hits and misses in there.

To you Steve Largent had better hands. Well that's wonderful. To me, Carter had the best. And his boundary work as a receiver was arguably the best as well.

Here is an interesting video regarding the subject. NFL Network also had Carter ranked number one on their list of greatest hands.



For Carter, during his prime, there were a few instances when he arguably the best receiver in the NFL even with Jerry Rice in the league. I don't think you could really say that about Martin during his career compared with his peers.

As for Martin/Hearst, I'm not comparing Hearst's yardage totals to Martins. I'm talking about their abilities as a player. Those are two different things.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:57 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.