When Larry Allen Goes into the HOF, Remember This...

[JonJon]

Larry Allen was one bad mamma jamma

 

[InmanRoshi]

That 'great' OL consisted of a lot of NFL rejects and players on their last chance in the league. People don't realize how long Tuinei and Newton had been around and sucked before Emmitt came along. You think Gurode was a late bloomer? Newton was 29 in Emmitt's rookie 1990 year. Tuinei was already 30. People couldn't believe the Cowboys had even stuck with them that long, and only assumed they did so because they were in such disarray that they hadn't had the opportunity to upgrade their positions yet because they were busy fixing other leaks. Seriously, they were like Rob Pettiti and Jacob Rogers caliber jokes around Dallas before Emmitt. Newton in particular was like a human punchline on Randy Galloway's call in show (who was kind of a pioneer of talk radio in Dallas). That great OL nearly got Aikman killed as a rookie, and probably took at least 3-5 years of his career that year alone.

The thing that saved that line was Emmitt's vision and instincts, because they were allowed to 'dumb down' the running game to "just block the guy in front of you, and Emmitt will find the hole". They didn't even have running plays designed to go to designated holes, it was just 'hand off to Emmitt and let him run to daylight'. Aside from Stepnoski, they were too fat and immoble to do i zones, traps and counters with any kind of intricate blocking to open up designated holes. They were a trainwreck when it came to doing screens and blocking in space. And when Emmitt missed those first two games with his holdout in 1993, they looked helpless again.

 

[AbeBeta]

Generally speaking, yes.

But the question was whether Emmitt owes his certain HOF status to Allen in any way.

Let's say Emmitt blows a knee in training camp of Allen's rookie year, and never plays again. Never having played with Allen, he retires with 3 consecutive rushing titles and two rings--what are his HOF chances?

Is there a point here? 4 seasons doesn't get you in the HoF. The guys who wen back to back did much more than just go back to back, they have much longer careers wrapped around that

 

[percyhoward]

Is there a point here? 4 seasons doesn't get you in the HoF. The guys who wen back to back did much more than just go back to back, they have much longer careers wrapped around that.

Those other guys had longer careers than just 4 seasons, yes. But what did they do with the rest of their careers that Emmitt didn't do in his first 4 years? Not much.

The point is, Emmitt could have played more than four seasons, with or without Allen, and still been a Hall of Famer, probably (by all rights) first ballot. Even if the Cowboys had never drafted Allen, and Emmitt had say, 4 or 5 below average seasons from 1994 on, those seasons do nothing to affect Emmitt's status.

Ever heard of a back who won 3 rushing titles and led his team to two championships, who was kept out of the HOF because of what he did in four other seasons?

 

[percyhoward]

Good question... to answer your question I would probably point to a similar situation in how T. Davis' career went. He had ridiculous numbers from 95 - 98 won the league MVP, only one rushing title, but still was far and away one of the top three rbs in the league. He then went on to have three or so injury plagued years and was never the same. In his first year of eligibility, he was a semi-finalist for the HOF. So probably E. Smith without Allen would have a harder time to get into the HOF because of how the OL would have performed and possibly had a shorter career because of it. He probably wouldn't be a first ballot HOF like he is now.

True that Emmitt's career would likely have been shorter, and he wouldn't have had the opportunity to be the all-time rushing leader. But when it came to HOF consideration, it would then come down to Davis' one rushing title vs. Emmitt's three.

Looking back at the past 50+ years though, it would be extremely hard for Emmitt not to have been first-ballot.

 

[AbeBeta]

Those other guys had longer careers than just 4 seasons, yes. But what did they do with the rest of their careers that Emmitt didn't do in his first 4 years? Not much.

The point is, Emmitt could have played more than four seasons, with or without Allen, and still been a Hall of Famer, probably (by all rights) first ballot. Even if the Cowboys had never drafted Allen, and Emmitt had say, 4 or 5 below average seasons from 1994 on, those seasons do nothing to affect Emmitt's status.

Ever heard of a back who won 3 rushing titles and led his team to two championships, who was kept out of the HOF because of what he did in four other seasons?

If Emmitt leveled off after those first four years, I honestly think he would have had a hard time getting into the hall. But it depends on how much he leveled off.

Also, your "2 straight rushing titles" criteria is not particularly compelling. Walter Payton may be the best RB in the modern era (certainly top 5). He was 55 yards and 87 yards shy of making 3 straight titles. He has 5 of the top 100 rushing seasons in NFL history, yet only one of those years did he win the rushing title. Why? Because he played during OJ and Campbells' primes and despite a HUGE 1984 with nearly 1700 rushing yards, he didn't lead the league b/c Eric Dickerson got 2100 that year. Payton doesn't have an OL guy in with him.

 

[DallasEast]

Is there a point here? 4 seasons doesn't get you in the HoF. The guys who wen back to back did much more than just go back to back, they have much longer careers wrapped around that

If your name is Ernie Nevers, five seasons gets you in the Hall. ~Maxwell Smart voice: Missed it by THAT much!~

 

[AbeBeta]

If your name is Ernie Nevers, five seasons gets you in the Hall. ~Maxwell Smart voice: Missed it by THAT much!~

Nevers played in a completely different era - these guys usually played both ways and pretty much if you had what is today a minor knee injury you were done for your career.

 

[DallasEast]

Nevers played in a completely different era - these guys usually played both ways and pretty much if you had what is today a minor knee injury you were done for your career.

Since I stated that Nevers played one extra season than your statement, my comment doesn't contradict your own. I was only pointing out how close the length of Nevers' career came to your own conclusion. You didn't preface your statement with what particular era players actually played or how many positions players played or how sports medicine has revolutionized pro football player's careers.

 

[AbeBeta]

Since I stated that Nevers played one extra season than your statement, my comment doesn't contradict your own. I was only pointing out how close the length of Nevers' career came to your own conclusion. You didn't preface your statement with what particular era players actually played or how many positions players played or how sports medicine has revolutionized pro football player's careers.

And you didn't preface yours by noting that you planned to be a pedantic loser.

 

[DallasEast]

And you didn't preface yours by noting that you planned to be a pedantic loser.

My goodness, what crawled up your ***?

You said, "4 seasons doesn't get you in the HoF."

I said, "If your name is Ernie Nevers, five seasons gets you in the Hall." I followed with my accurate observation to your comment by indicating that it does not contradict yours by including: ~Maxwell Smart voice: Missed it by THAT much!~

what the hell?

 

[AbeBeta]

My goodness, what crawled up your ***?

You said, "4 seasons doesn't get you in the HoF."

I said, "If your name is Ernie Nevers, five seasons gets you in the Hall." I followed with my accurate observation to your comment by indicating that it does not contradict yours by including: ~Maxwell Smart voice: Missed it by THAT much!~

what the hell?

Simply say, yes you are correct. Totally different era and move on.

 

[DallasEast]

Simply say, yes you are correct. Totally different era and move on.

No, I shall not because it's unnecessary. If you'll stop taking every reply to your comments so seriously, you wouldn't have to demand others to 'move on'. Mine was certainly innocent enough.

 

[AbeBeta]

No, I shall not because it's unnecessary. If you'll stop taking every reply to your comments so seriously, you wouldn't have to demand others to 'move on'. Mine was certainly innocent enough.

I must of misread your intended comment -- b/c it sounded like you were just being a jerk.

There has been a ton of semantic BS infiltrating this board, so you can see why a post like that would get a reaction.

 

[DallasEast]

I must of misread your intended comment -- b/c it sounded like you were just being a jerk.

There has been a ton of semantic BS infiltrating this board, so you can see why a post like that would get a reaction.

Okay. Agreed. I understand now and I apologize if my comment read differently.

 

[percyhoward]

If Emmitt leveled off after those first four years, I honestly think he would have had a hard time getting into the hall.

Wow. After three rushing titles and two rings.

Are you basing this idea on anything?

 

[AbeBeta]

Wow. After three rushing titles and two rings.

Are you basing this idea on anything?

Again, I said it would depend on his performance after that -- although there are a bunch of older guys in the hall who only had a few huge seasons, the bar is higher now as guys tend to play longer. Look at the last few guys, Thurman Thomas, Sanders, Dickerson, Payton, Dorsett. All had far more than 3 good years. Earl Campbell even had 5 really good years.

Emmitt would have had 3 great years but that likely wouldn't be a long enough career to get him in the hall. You just don't see many modern day guys get in on those credentials

 

[THUMPER]

If your name is Ernie Nevers, five seasons gets you in the Hall. ~Maxwell Smart voice: Missed it by THAT much!~

Or Gale Sayers. He only played in 5 real seasons (1965-69). He played two more years but only played in 2 games in each of those seasons.

Sayers only played in 68 games in his career, had only 2 years over 1000 yards, and ran for less than 5000 yards in his career.

As amazing as Sayers was to watch he does not belong in the HoF IMO. That should be reserved for the players who demonstrated greatness over a significant period of time. The same is true for Terrell Davis as I know his name has been brought up a number of times as a potential candidate.

 

[AbeBeta]

Okay. Agreed. I understand now and I apologize if my comment read differently.

Blame it on the semantic crowd (read Roy PR team) that takes everything literally.

 

[DallasEast]

Or Gale Sayers. He only played in 5 real seasons (1965-69). He played two more years but only played in 2 games in each of those seasons.

Sayers only played in 68 games in his career, had only 2 years over 1000 yards, and ran for less than 5000 yards in his career.

As amazing as Sayers was to watch he does not belong in the HoF IMO. That should be reserved for the players who demonstrated greatness over a significant period of time. The same is true for Terrell Davis as I know his name has been brought up a number of times as a potential candidate.

I have to disagree about Sayers. What he was able to accomplish during the regular season, even in a shorten career, is Hall of Fame worthy. Still, I would add that the Board of Selectors didn't have to automatically make him a first-ballot inductee either because of his career numbers.

Blame it on the semantic crowd (read Roy PR team) that takes everything literally.

Can't abersonc. I'm guilty by association. To date, I still haven't seen anyone debunk one of the Roy Williams myths yet. :