Gale Sayers - Extremely over rated?

[dlphg9]

So as I was in the middle of doing some research for a post I went down a rabbit hole and eventually found myself looking at Gale Sayers stats. I may be completely off base here, because admittedly I have never watched any Gale Sayers highlights and am basing this on stats, but how in the hell is he in the HOF? Hell USA Today had him ranked as number 21 all time, 247sports has him ranked as 48 all time.

He played for 7 seasons, but only played a total of 4 games in years 6 and 7 combined. He only had 2 1000 yard seasons and those were the only times he led the league in rushing. He only had 2 seasons in which he had double digit receiving + rushing TDs. He was amazing at punt and kick off returns, but that was only for his first 3 years.

His career accomplishments aren't really that great, besides being AP 4 times. He never even got to play in a playoff game, so he obviously doesn't have any SB championships. He isn't even in the top 100 for career rushing yards, hell he's barely even in the top 150 coming in at 145th. He had a massive amount of rushing TDs though... 39...

He was good at 1 thing when it came to carrying the ball and that was fumbling. He almost has as many fumbles (34) as he does rushing TDs (39). Hell in a couple of seasons he had significantly more fumbles than rushing TDs.

Yr/Rush TDs/Fumbles

1/14/9
2/8/2
3/7/8
4/2/7
5/8/7
6/0/1
7/0/0

Out of 7 years he fumbled more than he rushed for a TD in 3 of those years.

He does have a few things on his resume that are pretty decent. He averaged 5.0 ypc over his entire career, was a fantastic returner during his first 3 years, and his rookie season he had 14 rush TDs, 6 receiving TDs, 1 kickoff return TD, and 1 punt return TD. I think his rookie season may be the reason he is so highly regarded. He is just incredibly over rated and seems to get a boost from being injury prone.

Someone prove me wrong.

[Prison Bitch]

Do any of his peer coaches or players agree?

[Megatron96]

Can't quantify Gale Sayers through his stats. Go watch him play. Then you'll understand.

Note: Gale was Barry Sanders or Sweetness before Barry or Walter.

[kgrund]

Originally Posted by dlphg9

So as I was in the middle of doing some research for a post I went down a rabbit hole and eventually found myself looking at Gale Sayers stats. I may be completely off base here, because admittedly I have never watched any Gale Sayers highlights and am basing this on stats, but how in the hell is he in the HOF? Hell USA Today had him ranked as number 21 all time, 247sports has him ranked as 48 all time.

He played for 7 seasons, but only played a total of 4 games in years 6 and 7 combined. He only had 2 1000 yard seasons and those were the only times he led the league in rushing. He only had 2 seasons in which he had double digit receiving + rushing TDs. He was amazing at punt and kick off returns, but that was only for his first 3 years.

His career accomplishments aren't really that great, besides being AP 4 times. He never even got to play in a playoff game, so he obviously doesn't have any SB championships. He isn't even in the top 100 for career rushing yards, hell he's barely even in the top 150 coming in at 145th. He had a massive amount of rushing TDs though... 39...

He was good at 1 thing when it came to carrying the ball and that was fumbling. He almost has as many fumbles (34) as he does rushing TDs (39). Hell in a couple of seasons he had significantly more fumbles than rushing TDs.

Yr/Rush TDs/Fumbles

1/14/9
2/8/2
3/7/8
4/2/7
5/8/7
6/0/1
7/0/0

Out of 7 years he fumbled more than he rushed for a TD in 3 of those years.

He does have a few things on his resume that are pretty decent. He averaged 5.0 ypc over his entire career, was a fantastic returner during his first 3 years, and his rookie season he had 14 rush TDs, 6 receiving TDs, 1 kickoff return TD, and 1 punt return TD. I think his rookie season may be the reason he is so highly regarded. He is just incredibly over rated and seems to get a boost from being injury prone.

Someone prove me wrong.

What you should be focusing on is how great he had to be to not only be the HOF, but the NFL's All Time team. Do yourself a favor and go watch some Sayers' highlight reels and get back with us. He was truly special.

[dlphg9]

Originally Posted by Megatron96

Can't quantify Gale Sayers through his stats. Go watch him play. Then you'll understand.

Note: Gale was Barry Sanders or Sweetness before Barry or Walter.

He has the least amount of rushing yards of any RB in the HOF. I don't care how smooth someone was if they were only productive for 5 years. Mother****ing Jamaal Charles may be the best damn running back I've ever watched, but he gets negative marks for his injuries.

[kgrund]

Total rushing yards is a big nothing burger. Nobody thinks Curtis Martin, Frank Gore, or Jerome Bettis are greater than Sayers. You can be really good for a long while and rack up yards. Sayers, by his peers and historians of the game, know he was not good but great.

[MatriculatingHank]

Emmitt Smith still sucks!

[Rain Man]

He was before my time, so I can't make a firsthand judgment.

I've long been an advocate that I'd rather see a truly dominant player get into the Hall of Fame even if his career was short, rather than a player who compiled a lot of stats by having a long and mediocre career. That said, you have to have enough time that we can prove that you were dominant and not just a flash in the pan.

Sayers effectively played for five seasons, with one of those cut short to 9 games (of 14). His last two seasons don't add to the discussion. In those five seasons, he had one dominant season rushing (1966) and two pretty decent ones (high ypc with relatively few carries in 1965 and 1968). He broke 1,000 yards in 1969, but with a non-elite ypc.

He also had three very dominant seasons as a kickoff returner as well (1965, 1966, and 1967).

So one could say that he really got in because of one fantastic season in 1966 and a very good season in 1965, with three other seasons that had decent to good phases.

On the basis of that, I wouldn't say that he proved himself. But I know that people who saw him play would say that he was dominant enough to be a Hall of Famer even with that short resume, and I think the eye test is important. I'll take their word for it.

Overall, though, I think he's a step above average plodders like Jerome Bettis and Curtis Martin, and he's certainly better than Terrell Davis who only had two good seasons in a cheated salary cap situation, but he's far from the top of the list of Hall of Famers.

I'll allow him into the Hall of Fame, but with a shrug.

[dlphg9]

Originally Posted by kgrund

Total rushing yards is a big nothing burger. Nobody thinks Curtis Martin, Frank Gore, or Jerome Bettis are greater than Sayers. You can be really good for a long while and rack up yards. Sayers, by his peers and historians of the game, know he was not good but great.

Just got done watching some highlights and I would take Jamaal Charles over Sayers. God I hate watching old highlight vids. Everyone looks so god damn slow. Sayers was a great athlete back then, but if he played now he wouldn't be shit.

[Megatron96]

D-9, I went through this about 25-30 years ago. For me, it was the fact that all these 'experts' kept saying that Gale Sayers was better than Barry Sanders. It irked me. Finally I began watching tape on Gale. This was a lot harder back then. The Al Gore's interwebs wasn't what it is today. I had to record shows, on VHS. I had to find and watch full games of Gale so I could understand the context of his play.

What I came away with was that he wasn't better than Barry, IMO. But he made a pretty good argument that he was as good as Barry.

But none of that can be seen in his stats. It was a different time. The game was different. Just watch him play. Forget the stats. Gale changed the NFL's perspective on how the RB position was played or could be played. He was kind of the MJ of his time in the NFL. And that sea change that Gale Sayers produced through his play is why he's in the HOF. Not his stats.

[Ubeja Vontell]

Gale Sayers was the greatest....did I just see that....running back ever. The guy was on a whole other level when it came to....wow!!!!!

Don't take my word for it....




His first four seasons he averaged over five yards a carry, which it did for his career. Now add 6 kick returns and 2 punt returns to score. How many starting running backs can say that?

"The Kansas Comet" was very special, a one of a kind.





What gets lost in his story is his older brother Roger was faster than he was, he was a legit world class sprinter who once beat Bob Hayes.


One of my prized possesions





5 time pro bowler, 4 time all pro, in six seasons.

He was the nations top HS long jumper with 24-10 1/2

[dlphg9]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

He was before my time, so I can't make a firsthand judgment.

I've long been an advocate that I'd rather see a truly dominant player get into the Hall of Fame even if his career was short, rather than a player who compiled a lot of stats by having a long and mediocre career. That said, you have to have enough time that we can prove that you were dominant and not just a flash in the pan.

Sayers effectively played for five seasons, with one of those cut short to 9 games (of 14). His last two seasons don't add to the discussion. In those five seasons, he had one dominant season rushing (1966) and two pretty decent ones (high ypc with relatively few carries in 1965 and 1968). He broke 1,000 yards in 1969, but with a non-elite ypc.

He also had three very dominant seasons as a kickoff returner as well (1965, 1966, and 1967).

So one could say that he really got in because of one fantastic season in 1966 and a very good season in 1965, with three other seasons that had decent to good phases.

On the basis of that, I wouldn't say that he proved himself. But I know that people who saw him play would say that he was dominant enough to be a Hall of Famer even with that short resume, and I think the eye test is important. I'll take their word for it.

Overall, though, I think he's a step above average plodders like Jerome Bettis and Curtis Martin, and he's certainly better than Terrell Davis who only had two good seasons in a cheated salary cap situation, but he's far from the top of the list of Hall of Famers.

I'll allow him into the Hall of Fame, but with a shrug.

It just bugs me that people can look at a player with a short career that had some fairly good seasons and say yeah they belong among the best, but look at Jamaal and say that he wasn't a HOFer. Jamaal had 5 whole seasons as well and absolutely was a force on some terrible teams. They both had 5 years in which they played most all of the season.

Jamaals totals over those 5 years

77 games played/61 games started/1170 rushes/6416 rushing yards/38 rushing TDs/5.5 ypc/8401 yards from scrimmage/55 rushing + receiving yds

JC per season avg during those 5 years

234 rushes/1283 yds/8 rushing tds/1680 yds from scrimmage/11 rush + receiving tds

Sayers totals over his 5 season stretch

64 games played/60 games started/955 rushes/4866 rushing yards/39 rushing TDs/5.1 ypc/6178 yards from scrimmage/52 rushing + receiving yds

GS per season avg during those 5 years

191 rushes/973 yds/8 rushing tds/1235 yds from scrimmage/10 rush + receiving tds

So if Gale Sayers is a HOFer, then why isn't Jamaal Charles? People want to say it's because Jamaal didn't have enough years of playing at a high level, but thats not used against Sayers. Jamaal is probably the best/most explosive RB I've ever watched, but never gets national praise because he played for the Chiefs and some dog shit Chiefs teams. Jamaal is one of the most under appreciated players ever, but he was as dominate of a player as you can have. He almost never got stopped for a loss. I wish things could have went better for Jamaal.

[dlphg9]

Originally Posted by Megatron96

D-9, I went through this about 25-30 years ago. For me, it was the fact that all these 'experts' kept saying that Gale Sayers was better than Barry Sanders. It irked me. Finally I began watching tape on Gale. This was a lot harder back then. The Al Gore's interwebs wasn't what it is today. I had to record shows, on VHS. I had to find and watch full games of Gale so I could understand the context of his play.

What I came away with was that he wasn't better than Barry, IMO. But he made a pretty good argument that he was as good as Barry.

But none of that can be seen in his stats. It was a different time. The game was different. Just watch him play. Forget the stats. Gale changed the NFL's perspective on how the RB position was played or could be played. He was kind of the MJ of his time in the NFL. And that sea change that Gale Sayers produced through his play is why he's in the HOF. Not his stats.

I watched him. Players back then just weren't as athletic as they are now on average. Throw Jamaal on a team in the past and people would talk about him like they do Barry Sanders. Gale and Sanders had the benefit of playing lesser competition. Jamaal was playing in a time where some LBs were as fast as the RBs and he made guys look stupid.

[Ubeja Vontell]

Originally Posted by dlphg9

I watched him. Players back then just weren't as athletic as they are now on average. Throw Jamaal on a team in the past and people would talk about him like they do Barry Sanders. Gale and Sanders had the benefit of playing lesser competition. Jamaal was playing in a time where some LBs were as fast as the RBs and he made guys look stupid.

Sayers scored 22 td's his rookie season, he scored 8 times on returns in his career,

Forget who played in what era, that never means anything, it's aiways vs your era.

Saw both play many times, Gale Sayers simply a more exciting runner. Barry Sanders his only equal.

Sayers more pro bowls/all pro's in six seasons than Charles had in what 11/12?

There had never been anything like Gale Sayers before, he was totally unique.



Stold this...

Gale Sayers (1965-1971)

Sayers was the all-time halfback during the NFL's 50th season in 1969, and his legacy is good enough to make him a finalist for the 100th season. Sayers finished his career with 9,435 scrimmage yards, including 4,956 rushing yards. He led all NFL rushers in both 1966 and 1969, and he was a five-time all-NFL member. Of his four Pro Bowl selections, he was player of the game three times.





STEVE SABOL, president of NFL Films:

1. Jim Brown: He remains the very definition of greatness. His career is a yardstick by which all other running backs are measured.

2. Walter Payton: He had all the moves: a lowered shoulder for a defensive lineman, a slack leg for a linebacker, and a lead-pipe stiff arm for a defensive back. He would pivot, change speeds and run laterally when necessary. But he never lost sight of a great runner’s first principle: When everything else fails, gut out a couple of yards.

3. Barry Sanders: He challenged the notion that football is a contact sport. Many times I saw him run 50 yards or more for touchdowns without being touched by a defender.

4. Gale Sayers: He was what coaches in the 1960s called an “anywhere, anytime runner,” meaning he was a threat to score from any place on the field at any moment of the game.

[Nickhead]

Originally Posted by dlphg9

So as I was in the middle of doing some research for a post I went down a rabbit hole and eventually found myself looking at Gale Sayers stats. I may be completely off base here, because admittedly I have never watched any Gale Sayers highlights and am basing this on stats, but how in the hell is he in the HOF? Hell USA Today had him ranked as number 21 all time, 247sports has him ranked as 48 all time.

He played for 7 seasons, but only played a total of 4 games in years 6 and 7 combined. He only had 2 1000 yard seasons and those were the only times he led the league in rushing. He only had 2 seasons in which he had double digit receiving + rushing TDs. He was amazing at punt and kick off returns, but that was only for his first 3 years.

His career accomplishments aren't really that great, besides being AP 4 times. He never even got to play in a playoff game, so he obviously doesn't have any SB championships. He isn't even in the top 100 for career rushing yards, hell he's barely even in the top 150 coming in at 145th. He had a massive amount of rushing TDs though... 39...

He was good at 1 thing when it came to carrying the ball and that was fumbling. He almost has as many fumbles (34) as he does rushing TDs (39). Hell in a couple of seasons he had significantly more fumbles than rushing TDs.

Yr/Rush TDs/Fumbles

1/14/9
2/8/2
3/7/8
4/2/7
5/8/7
6/0/1
7/0/0

Out of 7 years he fumbled more than he rushed for a TD in 3 of those years.

He does have a few things on his resume that are pretty decent. He averaged 5.0 ypc over his entire career, was a fantastic returner during his first 3 years, and his rookie season he had 14 rush TDs, 6 receiving TDs, 1 kickoff return TD, and 1 punt return TD. I think his rookie season may be the reason he is so highly regarded. He is just incredibly over rated and seems to get a boost from being injury prone.

Someone prove me wrong.

just when you ridicule me of stupid posts, you post this? did you get kicked in the head by a horse recently? asking for a friend.