Davis versus Bettis for HOF

[JohnTurney]

there has been a lot of Bettis pro and con, but in the context of if you had to choose one of the two RBs on final 15, which one?

[Reaser]

I did this with these two on the old forum, a couple of times.

Short version:

Ever been the best at their position? Davis (yes), Bettis (no)
Ever been the best offensive player, period? Davis (yes), Bettis (no)
Ever been the best player in the league, period? Davis (yes), Bettis (no)

Davis is on the lower end of "should be HOF", for me. Bettis isn't.

For those that care about stats. Davis has arguably the best (and also 2nd best) rushing seasons - including postseason - in league history. Bettis has ... fairly meaningless compiled stats.

HOF trait? Davis: great vision, a trait shared with other great backs. Bettis: he was big.

Contributions towards a Championship? Davis, arguably the main contributor for two championship teams. Bettis, closer to being Bill Buckner than Willis Reed for the '05 Steelers.

[Bryan]

there has been a lot of Bettis pro and con, but in the context of if you had to choose one of the two RBs on final 15, which one?

I'm not really high on either guy for the HOF. If I had to choose one, it would be Davis, because he was simply better than Bettis. Its like choosing a poor man's Sandy Koufax over a poor man's Nolan Ryan. I think a "pro" for Bettis is his longevity as a power back is somewhat unique. Is that longevity enough to get Bettis in the HOF? IMO, no...but maybe it is.

[JohnTurney]

One argument that will be posited on Bettis is mitigation for his low yards per attempt. It will be presented that his ypa between the twenties was 4.5, whereas his overall is 3.9. The suggestion is that his YPA is low because he ran a lot in the red zone.

However, I hope it's not just accepted without context, like the Floyd Little rarely lost yards thing in which there was no comparison made. I mean, didn't all running backs' YPA go down in the red zone? Or even coming out of the opponent's red zone?

If Jim Brown was 5.2 overall, what was his YPA between the 20s?

I expect this will be something that will put Bettis over the top . . . no guarantee, but he was in Final 10 last year ,. . . And depending on how many first ballot guys there are is reasonable to expect those in the final 10 will move up.

[rhickok1109]

Forced to choose, I would reluctantly vote for Davis, but I don't think either of them belongs in the HOF.

[bachslunch]

Agreed with Bryan -- they're both second-tier versions of the peak vs. longevity argument. If they're both above the acceptable line, I'd go with Bettis because he has been a finalist longer. Neither are elite guys, though, and I could live if neither were elected.

[26554]

The idea that Terrell Davis is more deserving of the HoF than Bettis gives me a headache.

For one, how come so few bring up the fact that Bettis spent his prime with the likes of (past his prime) Jim Everett, TJ Rubley, Mike Tomczak, Jim Miller and Kordell Stewart? None of them were close to even late career John Elway.

[Gary Najman]

I would vote for Davis, but I think that Bettis would enter the Hall first based in "fame" and longer career.

[Reaser]

The idea that Terrell Davis is more deserving of the HoF than Bettis gives me a headache.

For one, how come so few bring up the fact that Bettis spent his prime with the likes of (past his prime) Jim Everett, TJ Rubley, Mike Tomczak, Jim Miller and Kordell Stewart? None of them were close to even late career John Elway.

Someone's HOF case being "he played a long time and played with worse QB's than another finalist did" seems a little light?

Outside of games played (which if that's a HOF stat then Trey Junkin needs to go in before any of these guys) what did Bettis accomplish that Davis didn't? Or what was Bettis better at than Davis? In other words, what makes Bettis more "deserving"?

Keeping in mind that Bettis had 6 more seasons and over twice as many games to accomplish something, which is all "longevity" really is, more chances to accomplish something. With all those extra seasons and games he should at least be equal on accomplishments, yes? Same or more times; MVP, OPOY, best back in the sport, 1st-team All-Pro's, top of the list for greatest rushing seasons, 2,000 yards, multiple seasons over 2,000 yards from scrimmage, multiple seasons over 1,800 yards from scrimmage, when watching them play who was the better player, seasons averaging over 5.0 yards a carry, seasons averaging over 4.0 yards a carry, 200 yard games, 170 yard games, etc ...

Where in there is Bettis better than Davis or what did he do that makes him more deserving? I honestly don't get it? Essentially played twice as long and didn't accomplish half of what Davis did.

As for QB's, that is part of every players career, who they played with, what system, etc ... Regardless, I've always felt the year Bettis' was the best player he could be was actually his rookie season, and having Everett and Rubley at QB didn't derail that. Similar to how during Davis' best season Bubby Brister was the QB for a quarter of it, so not sure how valid that argument is?

[conace21]

Davis probably did have the best year ever in 1998. That said, in his three best seasons he finished 2nd, 2nd, and 1st in rushing. In Bettis' three best seasons, he finished 3rd, 3rd, and 2nd in rushing.