Tomlinson retires

Smith's game against the Giants with the bad shoulder was amazing. Either he is one of the toughest SOBs to ever step on the field or he was on enough drugs to make Anna Nicole Smith envious.

 

The original post was best season and best season only. The definition is pretty vague honestly. It doesn't equate 100 percent to just dominance in my book.

Anyways, explain to me how those seasons weren't? More yards and touchdowns. In many cases it isn't even close (300+ yards and 5+ TD difference).

As for Fred Taylor, I never got into that debate much that I remember. I do believe that he COULD have been but injuries killed it. He's a borderline HOFer to me. If he gets in, fine, if he doesn't, fine.

 

Priest Holmes scored 94 touchdowns in only 113 games.
If Davis ever does make it in, I don't see how they could justify keeping Holmes out.

 

Because all that counts for a RB is rushing? It's the most important but if a RB is big in the passing game it serves just as much value.

I'm not sure if you meant to say I am counting rushing/receiving for everyone except for Campbell I'm using just rushing. If that is what you meant, then you are mistaken. It's just that Campbell had a whopping 47 receiving yards and no receiving TD's that year.


And for the record I should state Campbell is one of my favorite RBs. I just don't let that blind me. There are a bunch of seasons better than Campbell's best.

 

Priest played a full ten years, including 45 more games. Priest was handcuffed by not getting to the NFL until he was 24 and then riding the pine in Baltimore for a long time. Yes, injuries cost him some seasons but it's not the same as Davis. Priest had enough time to compile enough stats to make the HOF.

 

Holmes lost years playing part-time for Mickey Mouse offenses.
What's fair to one is fair to the other.
Holmes and Davis belong in the Hall of Short-Term Brilliance.

 

That is what I meant. You didn't use his total yards.

That said, I still don't see it as a fair comparison. Not that receiving yards shouldn't count for a running back, but not as much as rushing yards. That is often determined by the player's role in the offense rather than how good they are. The game has also changed dramatically. You look at somebody like Roger Craig and the way he was used. Nobody used running backs that way when Campbell was in his prime.

 

Plenty of RB's got 300-500 yards in receiving when Campbell played including Payton, Otis Anderson, Billy Sims, Tony Dorsett ... etc. Campbell just wasn't a good receiver. Don't need to be as a RB but when talking best seasons a RB receiving numbers should be factored in.

 

I did not say running backs didn't gain yards as receivers then. I said they were used differently, which is how guys like Roger Craig ended up with seasons over 2,000 total yards. Heck of a player, but no, not in Campbell's class.

 

It's never surprising when a Cubs fan can't identify what great players, seminal achievement, and greatness itself look like.

 

I figure he thinks Shaun Alexander was the BEST!!!! because of the two dozen times he got to tippy-toe in from the 1 that year.

 

Shaun had a few really great seasons with Seattle.

And I agree Roger Craig had some great years with San Francisco as well. Only 10 can make a legit top 10 list.

People often forget that Craig and Marcus Allen started as fullbacks before switching to halfback.