Former Jets, Pats RB Martin headlines Hall's Class of 2012

[woodbuck27]

http://bleacherreport.com/tb/bdPZc?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=nfl

INDIANAPOLIS -- Curtis Martin has gone from the mean streets of Pittsburgh to the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

The star running back with the Patriots and Jets for 11 seasons was one of six players elected Saturday to comprise the Class of 2012. Martin once disliked playing the game but used it to escape a neighborhood where his grandmother was murdered.

"When I get awarded something like the Hall of Fame, it's almost foreign to me," said Martin, the NFL's fourth-leading career rusher.

"This wasn't something I planned on doing. Football is something I did so I didn't end up jailed or dead.
Kirwan: Hall of Fame snubs
Bill Parcells won two Super Bowls and rebuilt three franchises, but that wasn't enough for Hall voters. Pat Kirwan examines the snubs. More ...

» No HOF love for the receivers
» Levy surprised by Parcells snub



"If you make up your mind to just do the right thing no matter what ... and you stick to it, which I did, this is how things can turn around. I feel as if my life turned around from what it used to be, and I think anyone has a chance."

Martin and four linemen were elected to the hall, along with one senior committee choice. Martin is joined by Chris Doleman, Cortez Kennedy, Willie Roaf, Dermontti Dawson, and senior selection Jack Butler.

Jerome Bettis, Cris Carter and Bill Parcells were among the finalists who didn't make it.

CLICK LINK for the complete story.

[pbmax]

Like all the picks with the exception of Jack Butler, whom I do not know at all.

They have to elect the WRs soon, or the logjam is going to be ridiculous. The inclusion of Monk, who had numbers more than dominant talent, makes this situation worse. Each of the three remaining receivers (Reed, Brown, Carter) was better and has better numbers.

[pbmax]

Also, the Senior committee ought to get Gillingham in there as well. They get two shots at the apple per year.

[Bretsky]

Charles Haley....huge Snub

When I think of Hall of Famers, I don't think of Curtis Martin. He was very solid, but IMO never great. He excelled over time.....I just never thoguht he was great

[Upnorth]

He was a compiler. He was consistently one of the best in the league but was always just eclipsed by Priest Holmes, Faulk, Alexander, Tomlinson, Green and others. Always the bridesmaid, never the bride. I do think he deserves it more than Monk, but I am not convinced he deserves to be there. I do love seeing 4 linemen get in this year though.

[Patler]

Curtis Martin had 10 consecutive years with over 1000 yards rushing. Only Emmitt Smith has had more, with 11. In 11 years Martin had over 14,000 yards rushing. Only Smith, Walter Payton and Barry Sanders have had more career rushing yards. Martin had nearly five hundred receptions for another 3,300 yards. Only Smith, Payton, Sanders, Tomlinson, Faulk and Marcus Allen have more combined yards from scrimmage than Martin, Marcus Allen played 5 more years than Martin, and leads him by 200 total yards.

Smith, Payton, Sanders, Faulk and Allen are all HOF'ers. Tomlinson probably will be too. Martin deserves it as well.

[pbmax]

Yes on Haley.

[Patler]

Haley? A disruptive force both on and off the field. Not a Hall of Famer in my opinion.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Haley was a dominant player. Curtis Martin was a very good player over a long career. It's the hall of fame, not the hall of very good.

Stats should be mostly ignored in these decisions.

[Patler]

Haley was a dominant ass, but just a very good player. Not a Hall of Famer.

Martin had 1697 yards rushing one season, 1513 another and two other seasons over 1450 yards. Martin has more yards rushing than Tomlinson and both have now played 11 seasons. Martin was a heck of a lot more than just very good.

How did Marcus Allen get in? It basically took him 16 years to do what Martin did in 11.

Haley was a spectacle of sorts, so he gained name recogniotion. Curtis Martin just quietly went about his business and exceeded the performance of all but a few truly elite players; Smith, Payton and Sanders. Haley was basically a 8-10 sacks/year guy at his best (one year with 16). In his 13 year career he had 100 sacks, 96 in his first 10 years. Hardly a dominating player, just a good one.

[Patler]

Haley was a dominant player. Curtis Martin was a very good player over a long career. It's the hall of fame, not the hall of very good.

Stats should be mostly ignored in these decisions.

Ya, ignore actual performance, just go on whether or not you remember the guy's name, and make no effort to recall why you remember his name. Sounds like good criteria to pick HOF members.

Kevin Greene and Charles Haley played at the same time. They played basically the same game. Green outplayed Haley by a lot (165 sacks to 100 sacks). Greene can't seem to get in, and you think Haley should?

[Harlan Huckleby]

Ya, ignore actual performance, just go on whether or not you remember the guy's name,

yes, exactly. that's the way to do it.

stats are a good way to identify candidates. But what really matters is the subjective judgement of how dominant the guy was. Like the definition of pornography, I know what it is when I see it, and Curtis Martin was no porn star.

[pbmax]

Haley was a dominant ass, but just a very good player. Not a Hall of Famer.

Martin had over 1697 yards rushing one season, 1513 another and two other seasons over 1450 yards. Martin has more yards rushing than Tomlinson and both have now played 11 seasons. Martin was a heck of a lot more than just very good.

How did Marcus Allen get in? It basically took him 16 years to do what Martin did in 11.

Haley was a spectacle of sorts, so he gained name recogniotion. Curtis Martin just quietly went about his business and exceeded the performance of all but a few truly elite players; Smith, Payton and Sanders. Haley was basically a 8-10 sacks/year guy at his best (one year with 16). In his 13 year career he had 100 sacks, 96 in his first 10 years. Hardly a dominating player, just a good one.

I am surprised by the low sack total, but what I remember of him was that he could not be blocked on a pass rush and teams tried to run at him but eventually gave up making it their focus. He essentially played full time for 10 years and averaged 10 sacks in those years (actually 9.6). That includes the first two years at San Fran when he was a situational sub for pass rush.

If anything, I am less concerned about his impact as I am about 8 full years as a full-time starter. While that is a longer than most and a good career, it might not be enough.

[SkinBasket]

Ya, ignore actual performance, just go on whether or not you remember the guy's name, and make no effort to recall why you remember his name. Sounds like good criteria to pick HOF members.

Don't worry, it's how he picks his political candidates too.

[Patler]

Haley was fortunate to play on two very good franchises at just the right times, when they were the darlings of the league and media. As a result very good players on those teams, like Haley, were portrayed as truly dominating players, which they weren't. Haley played from 1986 to 1999, Kevin Greene from 1985 to 1999. Kevin Greene was a dominating player for most of that time. Haley had a few flashy years, some very good years and a couple when people were wondering where he went. Until Kevin Greene gets in, voters shouldn't give Haley a second thought..