Originally Posted by Cassel>Manning
Even if that is true, TD would probably have an even better shot at the HOF if he played 5 more years where he averaged 800-1000 yards a season. The HOF doesn't have to be about longterm accumulation of stats. TD was one of the best to ever do it from the moment he stepped onto the field.
If I asked you after Super Bowl 32 if you thought TD would be a HOF'er you would say yes, and you would probably say he would make it in on the first ballot. The dudes body gave up on him.
Four years of absolute dominance with even better playoff and Super Bowl performances should make TD a lock.
logic never has been your strong suit, has it? you've given us the textbook definition of moving the goalposts. you were making the case that he'd be among the all-time greats. sure, if you give him some (what amounts to) garbage-time stats in some injury plagued years (he'd have been lucky to average 800 yards per year the way the broncos rode him--like a rented mule). at that point, domination would have been long-since gone. while the guys you try to compare him to just got stronger, TD is going downhill in this scenario.
so, while his fire flashed bright, he was simply (EVEN IN THIS PLAY-WORLD OF YOURS) never good enough for long enough to be an all-time great.
to have been an all-time great, he'd have had to have been paced a bit by the broncos coaching staff... 30 less carries per year MAY have put him on that track--but we'll never know. and you, sir, can continue to masturbate to dreams of TD if you'd like... the rest of us here in reality-land don't give a **** about your wet diaper.