I say Yes.... Two time superbowl champ the teams all-time rushing TD leader and 4th all time in rushing. One of next years ROH inductees should be Brandon Jacobs
"mediocre" but Hampton and his sterling 3.8 career YPC should be in.
Because Jacobs had Eli Manning, Plaxico Burress, Hakeem Nicks, Victor Cruz, Amani Toomer, Jeremy Shockey and a heck of an OL.
Hampton had 1.5 seasons of Phil Simms and basically very little else. He played in an era when everyone knew if you stopped Rodney you stopped the Giants O. Cab Calloway and Howard Cross weren't going to beat you.
I'm not saying Jacobs shouldn't go in...it is a very close call and I think he gets in but has to wait another year or two. But Rodney Hampton was in a different class and fought to keep the Giants respectable...barely.
1993-97 Hampton? Hell no. I watched the guy every bit as much as any of you. He just wasn't very good once injury and being overweight sapped his quickness and speed.
Absolutely STUNNED the Packers. 4th and 1 in the SB was more important, but BJac was a tone setter and a leader in so many important games, even if he had happy feet. He has the TD record, which is nice, but he should be recognized for his larger contributions to the franchise, AS A MAN, which I do not think anyone on either side would dispute.
I think if the ROH was older, some of those overlooked would have been in. We have been lucky to have such players worthy of consideration. It's hard to play catch up when we're talking about recent players with multiple rings as well.
Brandon Jacobs was a generational Giant. Maybe not the most skilled or even best back on the team, but he was a truly unique player and a true embodiment of the franchise and what it means to be a Giant, and it doesn't hurt that no one bled Blue as hard as him.
Put him in.
(Full disclosure - BJac is my favorite Giant of the past 20 years, slightly in front of Elisha)
The "standards" have dropped over the years....look at the baseball hall of fame....there are guys making it, mainly because they have played so long, they have accumulated the stats that put them in a favorable light.....and sometimes, like all star games, it's more a popularity contest, rather than merit....
The Ring of Honor for the Giants, is open to interpretation.....there is not set standard.....it's more for the fans than the player, anyway.....
Jacobs is like Otis Anderson. Love them both but not RoH worthy.
Definitely Ron Johnson, no doubt about it. Also Joe Morrison should be given consideration. He was more influential in his time than Jacobs. Joe Morris also.
If Jacobs is seriously considered, then so too should Bradshaw and Megget.
because of his on-field contributions, he's a convicted rapist and robber, and serving a 30-year jail sentence.
he has no chance to even be considered.
and don't try and equate it to LT, who for one, wasn't borderline at best like Meggett (who I don't think is even borderline) but LT was not convicted of rape.
Jacobs was never asked to be a carry the load guy. Not his fault but again, that's just the fact. Hampton was that guy for several years and it took a toll on him.
someone's going to have to explain to me Ron Johnson over Jacobs
If being the all time leader in rushing touchdowns in the 92 year history of a franchise isn't worth being mentioned along with the best who have played here, your standard needs correction
RE: someone's going to have to explain to me Ron Johnson over Jacobs
Jacobs has him beat in yards, TDs, YPC, carries, you name it.
Ron Johnsons' top three seasons he had 1,300 to 1,600 total yds from scrimmage. He also had 260 to 300 carries. He was the workhorse on a bad team. He got ~60% of the carries per season, he was on the field all the time, and he had the ball for most of the plays. These seasons he averaged 280 carries and 42 catches(322 total plays).
Jacobs never had 1,200 total yds from scrimmage, and the most carries he had was 224. His top three seasons he averaged 215 carries and 15 catches (230 total plays). He had ~43% of the rushing carries per year. He was a good role player on a very good team, not the horse on a bad team.
Johnson carried the offense with crap around him. The three years example I use above the Giants were 17-23 (this includes actually being 9-5 in 1970, so you can imagine the other two years). The passing game never threw for more than 2,700 yds in any of the seasons. He didn't need, nor get, the large holes Jacobs benefited from. He didn't have an offense that could throw it around to the tune of 4,000+ yds to offset his workload and set up the run. The fact he got 1,300- 1,600 yds from scrimmage a year is amazing with the crap that team had.
Put Johnson on the teams Jacobs had and you wouldn't have needed 2 or 3 backs. He would have done it all. He would have been like Tiki was, catching and running. Reading stats don't tell the total story. Jacobs was a banging, one dimensional guy, who had an excellent team around him (which he needed), and fit a role. I am a fan and Jacobs did a good job. He's not a guy who can carry the team.
... that you have. What they should do is have one nice plaque split between Ron Johnson/Bradshaw/Jacobs/Hampton/Morris.
As mentioned the criteria is a bit nebulous...Pete Gogolak? I would think that Jacobs (or Bradshaw) meant as much to recent Giant champs as George Martin (another guy who, while I loved. was good but by no means "great") meant to the '86 team.
As someone noted, the exclusion of younger Tim Mara is bullshit. Also its starting to look like 08-12 era Giants may eventually have more guys in than 86-91 team. That's debatable.
If Ernie Accorsi just got in, you better be damn sure Jerry Reese will have is name up there too.
RE: RE: someone's going to have to explain to me Ron Johnson over Jacobs
Jacobs has him beat in yards, TDs, YPC, carries, you name it.
Ron Johnsons' top three seasons he had 1,300 to 1,600 total yds from scrimmage. He also had 260 to 300 carries. He was the workhorse on a bad team. He got ~60% of the carries per season, he was on the field all the time, and he had the ball for most of the plays. These seasons he averaged 280 carries and 42 catches(322 total plays).
Jacobs never had 1,200 total yds from scrimmage, and the most carries he had was 224. His top three seasons he averaged 215 carries and 15 catches (230 total plays). He had ~43% of the rushing carries per year. He was a good role player on a very good team, not the horse on a bad team.
Johnson carried the offense with crap around him. The three years example I use above the Giants were 17-23 (this includes actually being 9-5 in 1970, so you can imagine the other two years). The passing game never threw for more than 2,700 yds in any of the seasons. He didn't need, nor get, the large holes Jacobs benefited from. He didn't have an offense that could throw it around to the tune of 4,000+ yds to offset his workload and set up the run. The fact he got 1,300- 1,600 yds from scrimmage a year is amazing with the crap that team had.
Put Johnson on the teams Jacobs had and you wouldn't have needed 2 or 3 backs. He would have done it all. He would have been like Tiki was, catching and running. Reading stats don't tell the total story. Jacobs was a banging, one dimensional guy, who had an excellent team around him (which he needed), and fit a role. I am a fan and Jacobs did a good job. He's not a guy who can carry the team.
Great detailed answer by PP and truly it's not close between Johnson and Jacobs as far as their relative value to their teams was concerned. Different galaxies.
It honestly isn't much of a stretch to say that Johnson's value to the Giants' offense of his day was more comparable to Eli's than Jacobs'.
That's nice and all. Doesn't mean he was actually, yknow, a better back.
This is all predicated on penalizing Jacobs because the Giants had other very good RBs at the same time - Tiki in 2005-06, Bradshaw and Ward after that.
I don't get this obsession with "workhorses". For most of his career as a workhorse, Rodney Hampton was mediocre. I don't know that about Ron Johnson because I never saw him play, but his numbers don't exactly knock you out, and he appears to have spent the majority of his career plagued with injuries.
And, again, Pete Gogolak is in this thing, so it's not exactly only for the brightest of stars in the first place.
is your comment ..
I never seen so many NFL defenders not want to tackle a
player more then they did Jacobs .
He set the tone and for a guy that size to break off
the big runs that he did and there the 60 TD's are
a Giant Team Record !
He got the team fired up every game and backed his talk up
If the Giants in Johnson's career had Tiki or Bradshaw or Ward, I suspect he would have been sharing the workload a bit more.
Says the dude who never saw him play...
Compared to the player Ron Johnson was healthy, fucking Bradshaw, Ward, Jacobs and even Tiki would have their asses glued to the bench in favor of Johnson.
You absolutely cannot look at his Giants stats on those teams and judge him in comparison with the above mentioned guys. Seriously it's not close.
You want to know the type of ability Ron Johnson had? Look up his college stats at Michigan.
What gives you the chutzpah to argue against a guy you admittedly never saw play?
My model for great RB play at that time was Gayle Sayers, who was like watching a G-d run and catch. I missed Jim Brown, so I can't say Sayers was better or worse than Brown. But I saw Barry Sanders, and Sanders was awesome, but not as good as Sayers.
Ron Johnson was in that next broad tier below Sanders and Sayers. On a par with Dickerson, OJ, Campbell, Adrian Peterson, Faulk etc. He just did not have the O-line and other offensive talent to support him those other guys did.
I leave Payton out because I have a hard time being fair to him since I always think he comes up short next to Sayers as greatest Bears RB ever.
If the Giants in Johnson's career had Tiki or Bradshaw or Ward, I suspect he would have been sharing the workload a bit more.
Says the dude who never saw him play...
Compared to the player Ron Johnson was healthy, fucking Bradshaw, Ward, Jacobs and even Tiki would have their asses glued to the bench in favor of Johnson.
You absolutely cannot look at his Giants stats on those teams and judge him in comparison with the above mentioned guys. Seriously it's not close.
You want to know the type of ability Ron Johnson had? Look up his college stats at Michigan.
What gives you the chutzpah to argue against a guy you admittedly never saw play?
My model for great RB play at that time was Gayle Sayers, who was like watching a G-d run and catch. I missed Jim Brown, so I can't say Sayers was better or worse than Brown. But I saw Barry Sanders, and Sanders was awesome, but not as good as Sayers.
Ron Johnson was in that next broad tier below Sanders and Sayers. On a par with Dickerson, OJ, Campbell, Adrian Peterson, Faulk etc. He just did not have the O-line and other offensive talent to support him those other guys did.
I leave Payton out because I have a hard time being fair to him since I always think he comes up short next to Sayers as greatest Bears RB ever.
Look up his Michigan stats...
Have you ever heard anyone other than a Giants fan even mention Ron Johnson in that tier with OJ, Campbell, Peterson, Faulk, etc?
I haven't. Not even most Giants fans who saw the man play. Even my father who is probably a little older than you and saw Gifford play - I've never heard him mention Johnson as being in that class of RB.
He says Tiki or Gifford as the best back in Giants history - and Gifford certainly doesn't have the stats to compare - but of course different era and he was a more all purpose back.
Jacobs is mentioned by many as one of the most feared backs in the league during his career.
And not to be argumentative, but why look at college stats? How is that in any way relevant?
Should we put Ron Dayne in the ring of honor?
Stats aren't relative to the argument at all. Re ROH
But I gather you and certainly Greg are making the argument for Jacobs over a guy like Johnson based on stats.
I was basing my argument simply on how good a player Johnson was and his brief importance to that team in late 60s early 70s. He was a much better player than Jacobs, and a much more crucial player to the team. Zero.
Ask your dad that question. The truth is probably that many people, including the Mara family, would rather not remember the embarrassment of that era.
Because the finger of blame for that era points squarely at one of them.
RE: Stats aren't relative to the argument at all. Re ROH
But I gather you and certainly Greg are making the argument for Jacobs over a guy like Johnson based on stats.
I was basing my argument simply on how good a player Johnson was and his brief importance to that team in late 60s early 70s. He was a much better player than Jacobs, and a much more crucial player to the team. Zero.
Ask your dad that question. The truth is probably that many people, including the Mara family, would rather not remember the embarrassment of that era.
Because the finger of blame for that era points squarely at one of them.
I've said all thread stats are not the main reason I think Jacobs should get in, but I will allow I never saw Johnson play so it's not a one over the other, just I don't hear Johnson mentioned too much as a slight.
My Jacobs should get in argument was irrelevant of Johnson.
Ron Johnson was not on a level with Dickerson, OJ, AP, Faulk, and Campbell. I don't need to have seen him play to know that you're out to lunch on that one.
Ron Johnson was not on a level with Dickerson, OJ, AP, Faulk, and Campbell. I don't need to have seen him play to know that you're out to lunch on that one.
There's little point arguing this with you since you insist on judging him without having seen him play. But I will give it one more shot.
You agree the above mentioned group of RBs were in the same class of quality, the same tier?
The one most directly comparable to Ron Johnson is OJ Simpson. They were both drafted in the same year 1969, Simpson was drafted 1st overall by the Bills coming off a 1-13 season, Johnson 20th overall by the Browns.
Just in case you are wondering why Johnson lasted until the 20th pick: 1) Johnson was only a 2 year starter for the Wolverines, and 2) that was an outstanding draft class.
George Kunz OT the 2nd overall pick for Atlanta was an immediate starter, 8 time pro bowler and 1 time All Pro in his 11 year career.
4th Pick was Joe Greene to the Steelers, HOF.
5th QB Greg Cook brilliant QB career cut short by injury. Prolly the best player in that draft.
7th Ted Kwalick TE All Pro his 4th year, 3 straight pro bowls years 3-5
13th Fred Dryer
16th Gene Washington WR (the Stanford one, not the MSU player drafted by the Vikings in 67) - immediate 3* All Pro and 4 time Pro Bowl was the guy I wanted the Giants to draft.
19th Roger Wehrli CB to the Cardinals, multiple All Pro and Pro Bowl player...
20th Ron Johnson RB to the Browns.
Giants acquired him from the Browns in 1970 for a 1st round pick and more, IIRC.
Compare Johnson's first 3 years with the Giants to OJ's with the Bills, and OJ was clearly a great player with shit support, like Johnson, to start. Johnson sustained his first season ending injury his 2nd year as a Giant. He was never the same player after that, even though his 3rd year he again was the lone offensive threat on the team, again a workhorse, and again a Pro Bowl player. OJ was eased into service with the Bills comparatively as they built the NFL'S best OL to support him...
Those two seasons as a 14 game starter, Johnson averaged over 100 per game from scrimmage rushing and receiving, and was voted to the Pro bowl twice and 1st team all pro once.
In OJ's first two seasons as a 24 game starter, 71 and 72, he averaged over 100 yards per game from scrimmage only once and that year was both a pro bowl and all pro selection.
OJ and Johnson absolutely were comparable over that part of their career, and Johnson was arguably the better of the two. Despite one of those years being after recovering from a season ending leg injury.
Arguably the main difference in how the rest of their careers panned out, besides the huge injury factor, was that the Bills who sucked early in OJ's career built their team around him, specifically drafting and building an OL so good it baceme a historically legendary unit known as "the Electric Company."
If you want to judge a player you have never seen play, you should look into his career far more diligently than you have.
What you are arguing is a hypothetical. IF Ron Johnson were healthy and IF the Giants had better talent then he'd have been just as good as those HOF backs, several of whom won MVPs. The great thing with a hypothetical like that is that you can throw it out there and no one can empirically disprove it. Everything you said applies to Rodney Hampton too, but as I've already said, he DID get hurt and you can only go by the career he actually had.
Finishing his career with the 49ers shouldn't be that big a black mark. He was among the very best at his position throughout his nine years as a Giant, never missed a non-strike game, and was at the center (literally and figuratively) of the team's greatest success.
Mark Collins and Leonard Marshall have been mentioned previously. If Jacobs is in the conversation, I think those guys should be considered first.
I'm actually less sure about Jumbo Elliott. He wasn't here in 1986, he missed half of the 1990 season, and he spent a bigger part of his career elsewhere than the others.
I can agree that Collins, Marshall and Oates all have stronger cases
What you are arguing is a hypothetical. IF Ron Johnson were healthy and IF the Giants had better talent then he'd have been just as good as those HOF backs, several of whom won MVPs. The great thing with a hypothetical like that is that you can throw it out there and no one can empirically disprove it. Everything you said applies to Rodney Hampton too, but as I've already said, he DID get hurt and you can only go by the career he actually had.
If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.
Maybe you need to take the wax out of your ears, so I'll shout to help you...
BEFORE THE HYPOTHETICAL PART I SHOWED YOU HE OUTPERFORMED OJ AT THE BEGINNING OF THEIR CAREERS WHEN THEIR SITUATIONS WRRE SIMILAR. HE CARRIED HIS TEAM TO A WINNING SEASON WHEN OJ COULDN'T.
And OJ was excellent right away, if you actually saw both of them play.
But you of course ignored that, and you still didn't see him play.
Because Jacobs had Eli Manning, Plaxico Burress, Hakeem Nicks, Victor Cruz, Amani Toomer, Jeremy Shockey and a heck of an OL.
Hampton had 1.5 seasons of Phil Simms and basically very little else. He played in an era when everyone knew if you stopped Rodney you stopped the Giants O. Cab Calloway and Howard Cross weren't going to beat you.
I'm not saying Jacobs shouldn't go in...it is a very close call and I think he gets in but has to wait another year or two. But Rodney Hampton was in a different class and fought to keep the Giants respectable...barely.
I was trying to do the math in my head and I was almost positive Hampton didn't have over 25,000 rushing yards.
which would make him by far the all-time leading rusher in NFL history. by real far.
I think if the ROH was older, some of those overlooked would have been in. We have been lucky to have such players worthy of consideration. It's hard to play catch up when we're talking about recent players with multiple rings as well.
Brandon Jacobs was a generational Giant. Maybe not the most skilled or even best back on the team, but he was a truly unique player and a true embodiment of the franchise and what it means to be a Giant, and it doesn't hurt that no one bled Blue as hard as him.
Put him in.
(Full disclosure - BJac is my favorite Giant of the past 20 years, slightly in front of Elisha)
The Ring of Honor for the Giants, is open to interpretation.....there is not set standard.....it's more for the fans than the player, anyway.....
Quote:
Tiki? Joe Morris? Anyone else?
Tiki, Hampton, Gifford
I don't know enough about Joe Morris.
Jacobs is like Otis Anderson. Love them both but not RoH worthy.
Definitely Ron Johnson, no doubt about it. Also Joe Morrison should be given consideration. He was more influential in his time than Jacobs. Joe Morris also.
If Jacobs is seriously considered, then so too should Bradshaw and Megget.
he has no chance to even be considered.
and don't try and equate it to LT, who for one, wasn't borderline at best like Meggett (who I don't think is even borderline) but LT was not convicted of rape.
And for the guy that said Eli can "potentially" go from this team... Whattttt??? lol
Typo, sorry!
If being the all time leader in rushing touchdowns in the 92 year history of a franchise isn't worth being mentioned along with the best who have played here, your standard needs correction
Ron Johnsons' top three seasons he had 1,300 to 1,600 total yds from scrimmage. He also had 260 to 300 carries. He was the workhorse on a bad team. He got ~60% of the carries per season, he was on the field all the time, and he had the ball for most of the plays. These seasons he averaged 280 carries and 42 catches(322 total plays).
Jacobs never had 1,200 total yds from scrimmage, and the most carries he had was 224. His top three seasons he averaged 215 carries and 15 catches (230 total plays). He had ~43% of the rushing carries per year. He was a good role player on a very good team, not the horse on a bad team.
Johnson carried the offense with crap around him. The three years example I use above the Giants were 17-23 (this includes actually being 9-5 in 1970, so you can imagine the other two years). The passing game never threw for more than 2,700 yds in any of the seasons. He didn't need, nor get, the large holes Jacobs benefited from. He didn't have an offense that could throw it around to the tune of 4,000+ yds to offset his workload and set up the run. The fact he got 1,300- 1,600 yds from scrimmage a year is amazing with the crap that team had.
Put Johnson on the teams Jacobs had and you wouldn't have needed 2 or 3 backs. He would have done it all. He would have been like Tiki was, catching and running. Reading stats don't tell the total story. Jacobs was a banging, one dimensional guy, who had an excellent team around him (which he needed), and fit a role. I am a fan and Jacobs did a good job. He's not a guy who can carry the team.
No Tyree Catch, no "Manning lobs it, Burress along ..." without his 4th and 1 conversion.
No "Manning lobs it, Burress alone..." without his blitz pickup on that play either.... Go back and look at it.
As mentioned the criteria is a bit nebulous...Pete Gogolak? I would think that Jacobs (or Bradshaw) meant as much to recent Giant champs as George Martin (another guy who, while I loved. was good but by no means "great") meant to the '86 team.
As someone noted, the exclusion of younger Tim Mara is bullshit. Also its starting to look like 08-12 era Giants may eventually have more guys in than 86-91 team. That's debatable.
If Ernie Accorsi just got in, you better be damn sure Jerry Reese will have is name up there too.
Quote:
Jacobs has him beat in yards, TDs, YPC, carries, you name it.
Ron Johnsons' top three seasons he had 1,300 to 1,600 total yds from scrimmage. He also had 260 to 300 carries. He was the workhorse on a bad team. He got ~60% of the carries per season, he was on the field all the time, and he had the ball for most of the plays. These seasons he averaged 280 carries and 42 catches(322 total plays).
Jacobs never had 1,200 total yds from scrimmage, and the most carries he had was 224. His top three seasons he averaged 215 carries and 15 catches (230 total plays). He had ~43% of the rushing carries per year. He was a good role player on a very good team, not the horse on a bad team.
Johnson carried the offense with crap around him. The three years example I use above the Giants were 17-23 (this includes actually being 9-5 in 1970, so you can imagine the other two years). The passing game never threw for more than 2,700 yds in any of the seasons. He didn't need, nor get, the large holes Jacobs benefited from. He didn't have an offense that could throw it around to the tune of 4,000+ yds to offset his workload and set up the run. The fact he got 1,300- 1,600 yds from scrimmage a year is amazing with the crap that team had.
Put Johnson on the teams Jacobs had and you wouldn't have needed 2 or 3 backs. He would have done it all. He would have been like Tiki was, catching and running. Reading stats don't tell the total story. Jacobs was a banging, one dimensional guy, who had an excellent team around him (which he needed), and fit a role. I am a fan and Jacobs did a good job. He's not a guy who can carry the team.
Great detailed answer by PP and truly it's not close between Johnson and Jacobs as far as their relative value to their teams was concerned. Different galaxies.
It honestly isn't much of a stretch to say that Johnson's value to the Giants' offense of his day was more comparable to Eli's than Jacobs'.
This is all predicated on penalizing Jacobs because the Giants had other very good RBs at the same time - Tiki in 2005-06, Bradshaw and Ward after that.
I don't get this obsession with "workhorses". For most of his career as a workhorse, Rodney Hampton was mediocre. I don't know that about Ron Johnson because I never saw him play, but his numbers don't exactly knock you out, and he appears to have spent the majority of his career plagued with injuries.
And, again, Pete Gogolak is in this thing, so it's not exactly only for the brightest of stars in the first place.
Jacobs was a cog in two championships, maybe if Johnson was part of two champions, he'd belong.
but I never saw Ron Johnson play anyway, before my time. Doesn't sound like he has the same case though.
I never seen so many NFL defenders not want to tackle a
player more then they did Jacobs .
He set the tone and for a guy that size to break off
the big runs that he did and there the 60 TD's are
a Giant Team Record !
He got the team fired up every game and backed his talk up
Says the dude who never saw him play...
Compared to the player Ron Johnson was healthy, fucking Bradshaw, Ward, Jacobs and even Tiki would have their asses glued to the bench in favor of Johnson.
You absolutely cannot look at his Giants stats on those teams and judge him in comparison with the above mentioned guys. Seriously it's not close.
You want to know the type of ability Ron Johnson had? Look up his college stats at Michigan.
What gives you the chutzpah to argue against a guy you admittedly never saw play?
My model for great RB play at that time was Gayle Sayers, who was like watching a G-d run and catch. I missed Jim Brown, so I can't say Sayers was better or worse than Brown. But I saw Barry Sanders, and Sanders was awesome, but not as good as Sayers.
Ron Johnson was in that next broad tier below Sanders and Sayers. On a par with Dickerson, OJ, Campbell, Adrian Peterson, Faulk etc. He just did not have the O-line and other offensive talent to support him those other guys did.
I leave Payton out because I have a hard time being fair to him since I always think he comes up short next to Sayers as greatest Bears RB ever.
Look up his Michigan stats...
Quote:
If the Giants in Johnson's career had Tiki or Bradshaw or Ward, I suspect he would have been sharing the workload a bit more.
Says the dude who never saw him play...
Compared to the player Ron Johnson was healthy, fucking Bradshaw, Ward, Jacobs and even Tiki would have their asses glued to the bench in favor of Johnson.
You absolutely cannot look at his Giants stats on those teams and judge him in comparison with the above mentioned guys. Seriously it's not close.
You want to know the type of ability Ron Johnson had? Look up his college stats at Michigan.
What gives you the chutzpah to argue against a guy you admittedly never saw play?
My model for great RB play at that time was Gayle Sayers, who was like watching a G-d run and catch. I missed Jim Brown, so I can't say Sayers was better or worse than Brown. But I saw Barry Sanders, and Sanders was awesome, but not as good as Sayers.
Ron Johnson was in that next broad tier below Sanders and Sayers. On a par with Dickerson, OJ, Campbell, Adrian Peterson, Faulk etc. He just did not have the O-line and other offensive talent to support him those other guys did.
I leave Payton out because I have a hard time being fair to him since I always think he comes up short next to Sayers as greatest Bears RB ever.
Look up his Michigan stats...
Have you ever heard anyone other than a Giants fan even mention Ron Johnson in that tier with OJ, Campbell, Peterson, Faulk, etc?
I haven't. Not even most Giants fans who saw the man play. Even my father who is probably a little older than you and saw Gifford play - I've never heard him mention Johnson as being in that class of RB.
He says Tiki or Gifford as the best back in Giants history - and Gifford certainly doesn't have the stats to compare - but of course different era and he was a more all purpose back.
Jacobs is mentioned by many as one of the most feared backs in the league during his career.
And not to be argumentative, but why look at college stats? How is that in any way relevant?
Should we put Ron Dayne in the ring of honor?
I was basing my argument simply on how good a player Johnson was and his brief importance to that team in late 60s early 70s. He was a much better player than Jacobs, and a much more crucial player to the team. Zero.
Ask your dad that question. The truth is probably that many people, including the Mara family, would rather not remember the embarrassment of that era.
Because the finger of blame for that era points squarely at one of them.
I was basing my argument simply on how good a player Johnson was and his brief importance to that team in late 60s early 70s. He was a much better player than Jacobs, and a much more crucial player to the team. Zero.
Ask your dad that question. The truth is probably that many people, including the Mara family, would rather not remember the embarrassment of that era.
Because the finger of blame for that era points squarely at one of them.
I've said all thread stats are not the main reason I think Jacobs should get in, but I will allow I never saw Johnson play so it's not a one over the other, just I don't hear Johnson mentioned too much as a slight.
My Jacobs should get in argument was irrelevant of Johnson.
There's little point arguing this with you since you insist on judging him without having seen him play. But I will give it one more shot.
You agree the above mentioned group of RBs were in the same class of quality, the same tier?
The one most directly comparable to Ron Johnson is OJ Simpson. They were both drafted in the same year 1969, Simpson was drafted 1st overall by the Bills coming off a 1-13 season, Johnson 20th overall by the Browns.
Just in case you are wondering why Johnson lasted until the 20th pick: 1) Johnson was only a 2 year starter for the Wolverines, and 2) that was an outstanding draft class.
George Kunz OT the 2nd overall pick for Atlanta was an immediate starter, 8 time pro bowler and 1 time All Pro in his 11 year career.
4th Pick was Joe Greene to the Steelers, HOF.
5th QB Greg Cook brilliant QB career cut short by injury. Prolly the best player in that draft.
7th Ted Kwalick TE All Pro his 4th year, 3 straight pro bowls years 3-5
13th Fred Dryer
16th Gene Washington WR (the Stanford one, not the MSU player drafted by the Vikings in 67) - immediate 3* All Pro and 4 time Pro Bowl was the guy I wanted the Giants to draft.
19th Roger Wehrli CB to the Cardinals, multiple All Pro and Pro Bowl player...
20th Ron Johnson RB to the Browns.
Giants acquired him from the Browns in 1970 for a 1st round pick and more, IIRC.
Compare Johnson's first 3 years with the Giants to OJ's with the Bills, and OJ was clearly a great player with shit support, like Johnson, to start. Johnson sustained his first season ending injury his 2nd year as a Giant. He was never the same player after that, even though his 3rd year he again was the lone offensive threat on the team, again a workhorse, and again a Pro Bowl player. OJ was eased into service with the Bills comparatively as they built the NFL'S best OL to support him...
Those two seasons as a 14 game starter, Johnson averaged over 100 per game from scrimmage rushing and receiving, and was voted to the Pro bowl twice and 1st team all pro once.
In OJ's first two seasons as a 24 game starter, 71 and 72, he averaged over 100 yards per game from scrimmage only once and that year was both a pro bowl and all pro selection.
OJ and Johnson absolutely were comparable over that part of their career, and Johnson was arguably the better of the two. Despite one of those years being after recovering from a season ending leg injury.
Arguably the main difference in how the rest of their careers panned out, besides the huge injury factor, was that the Bills who sucked early in OJ's career built their team around him, specifically drafting and building an OL so good it baceme a historically legendary unit known as "the Electric Company."
If you want to judge a player you have never seen play, you should look into his career far more diligently than you have.
If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.
Mark Collins and Leonard Marshall have been mentioned previously. If Jacobs is in the conversation, I think those guys should be considered first.
I'm actually less sure about Jumbo Elliott. He wasn't here in 1986, he missed half of the 1990 season, and he spent a bigger part of his career elsewhere than the others.
If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.
Maybe you need to take the wax out of your ears, so I'll shout to help you...
BEFORE THE HYPOTHETICAL PART I SHOWED YOU HE OUTPERFORMED OJ AT THE BEGINNING OF THEIR CAREERS WHEN THEIR SITUATIONS WRRE SIMILAR. HE CARRIED HIS TEAM TO A WINNING SEASON WHEN OJ COULDN'T.
And OJ was excellent right away, if you actually saw both of them play.
But you of course ignored that, and you still didn't see him play.