Tiki Barber -- Hall-of-Famer?

I understand some of this, but it's not exactly every career that ends up with 12,000 yards. I think he gets in once people actually look at the number. Over the last six years he has been easily the most underrated running back in the league, putting up big numbers while others (Alexander, Faulk, James etc.) have gotten far more attention.

In addition, on a similar tack, Curtis Martin, yay or nay. I would say on yardage alone he should be in, but I'm sure some would beg to differ.

 

No f'ing way Tiki Barber is a Hall of Famer. In fact, I'm calling for everyone to revisit what it means to be a Hall of Famer. To me, one question should be asked above all: Was said player ever the absolute class of his position? I'm not sure Barber has ever even been in the top three on most people's boards. Being in the Hall of Fame should be special and it should indicate that you dominated your era. Tiki Barber has been a very good NFL player, but he doesn't fit what the criteria should be. Not even close, actually.

 

Actually, overall, over the last 10 years, I'd put him among the top five RBs. Seriously...he's approaching 10,000 yards and has over 550 receptions. There aren't many backs with those stats. And oddly enough, I think playing in NY works against him. Translate the same stats to the Cowboys, and you have a HoFer.

 

I think an interesting take on this was what someone brought up (albeit in terms of what it does to Tiki's fantasy numbers) on another thread.
To me, racking up some serious TDs would be something that could put Tiki over the top. But he's never been the TD machine a la Alexander, Holmes, etc. Giants have seemingly gone the big-guy route. I think fewer TDs makes it that much harder.

 

of course he is a Hall Famer.

 

If 10,000 rushing yards and 5,000 receiving yards puts him in the top 5-7 All Time in yards from scrimmage, then he belongs. The All Purpose Yards catagory is weak, punt returns and kick returns, while valuable aren't nearly as difficult as rushing and receiving yards. And many of Barber's recptions and asscoaited yards were short swing passes, screens and check downs, where he caught the ball within a couple of yards from scrimmage, the hardest yards to get. He wasn't lining up wide against a CB and running 20-30 yards down the sideline, catching it and stepping out of bounds.
His 15,000 from scrimmage is impressive, especially for a back of his size. He's probably averaged 100 yards a game (rushing and receiving) for 7 straight years.

 

I wouldn't say he's a lock, but I think he's got a good case. His combined running and receiving numbers are strong; I'd have no problem if he got in. He's one of the rare prominent New York athletes who isn't overhyped. If anything, he was underrated for a long time. I think people had him pegged as more of a third-down kind of back -- the type who was more dangerous catching little dumps and screens out of the backfield, and not a serious threat to run the ball and get tough yards. It was only last year that he really started getting some notice as one of the best backs in the league, but I'd argue that he's been one for several years now -- at least since 2002. Who's been better over the last five years? Tomlinson. After that, maybe Shaun Alexander, Edgerrin James or Priest Holmes, when he was healthy. I can't think of anyone else.

 

Out.

Tiki is the Raffy Palmeiro of football (minus the 'roids). Great numbers, but a victim of his generation.

Ten thousand yards used to be the benchmark like 500 HRs once was. The bar has been raised in both instances. Ricky Watters has better career numbers than Tiki in nearly every category and is still on the outside looking in at Canton.

I'm sure PFHOF voters have the integrity to decide rightly.

 

Maybe Alexander's been better the last 5 years? Maybe?

 

I don't hink Watters had better career numbers, especially receiving. Tki will have over 100 more receptions and almost 1,000 more receiving yards.
Watters did have 5 years of more than 1200 yards, barber has had 4, going into this year. Barber has had a 1500 and an 1800 yard season, Watters never over 1411(not too shabbY)
Watter did score more TDs than Barber, about 25 more rushing.
Tiki's had 3 years where he was in the top 5 rushers in the league, Watters only 1.
Tiki was a more dominant back than Watters.

Yards from scrimmage leaders by Running Backs
Smith
Payton
Faulk
Sanders
Allen
Martin
Thomas
Dorsett
Dickerson
Bettis
Barber (Should pass Bettis on the list this season)

Of the top 10 leading rushers, only Barry Sanders and Jim Brown averaged more yards per rush than Tiki. His 4.7 yards a carry would rank T-3(OJ) of all running backs to rush for more than 10,000 yards

 

Shaun Alexander:
2002 -- 295 attempts, 1,175 yards, 4.0 avg. 16 TDs; 59 receptions, 460 yards, 2 TDs
2003 -- 326 att., 1,435 yards, 4.4 avg., 14 TDs; 42 rec., 295 yards, 2 TDs
2004 -- 353 att., 1,696 yards, 4.8 avg., 16 TDs; 23 rec., 170 yards, 4 TDs
2005 -- 370 att., 1,880 yards, 5.1 avg., 27 TDs; 15 rec., 78 yards, 1 TD
* He's been hurt this year, so it's not really fair to post his current stats

Barber:
2002 -- 304 att., 1,387 yards, 4.6 avg., 11 TDs; 69 rec., 597 yards, 0 TDs
2003 -- 278 att., 1,216 yards, 4.4 avg. 2 TDs; 69 rec., 461 yards, 1 TD
2004 -- 322 att., 1,518 yards, 4.7 avg., 13 TDs; 52 rec., 578 yards, 2 TDs
2005 -- 357 att., 1,860 yards, 5.2 avg., 9 TDs; 54 rec., 530 yards, 2 TDs

If you want to argue Alexander's better, you certainly can. I don't think it's a given, though. Yes, he scores a lot more touchdowns. But Barber's average is better, and he's a much bigger receiving threat. As good as Alexander was last year, Barber might have been even better. He sure had a big advantage in yards from scrimmage.