Should Roger Craig be in the Hall of Fame?

[FirstTimer]

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CraiRo00.htm

11 seasons
4 Pro Bowls(Made Pro Bowl as both a HB and a FB)
1 First Team All Pro-1988 (Made second team All Pro 3 other times)
1988 NFL AP Offensive POY
NFL All Decade Team(1980's)
3 time Super Bowl champion
Made the playoffs every season in the NFL

8,189 yards rushing(39th all time)
4,911 yards receiving
56 rushing TD's(48th all time)
17 receiving TD's
566 receptions(80th all time)
13,100 yards from scrimmage(37th all time)
Top 10 in rushing yardage 3 times
Top 10 in receptions 4 times
8 straight seasons of over 1,000 yards from scrimmage
2 seasons of 2,000 yards from scrimmage
First player in NFL history to have 1,000 yards both rushing and receiving in the same season

 

[EmpireWF]

Only a top 10 rusher in the league in 3 seasons...

 

[Aso]

8 straight seasons of over 1,000 yards from scrimmage
2 seasons of 2,000 yards from scrimmage
First player in NFL history to have 1,000 yards both rushing and receiving in the same season

Tough for me to say yes though

 

[ralaw]

An issue is that most of us never really watched him play, so all we can go off of his stats, which have value, but don't always tell the whole story. I would like to hear from the older guys that remember watching him play. His prime years were from 85'-88' and I was a little kid that didn't even care about football and most of this site probably wasn't even alive.

 

[Glenbino]

Whenever I bring up Ricky Watters as a HoFer people always bring up Craig as a better candidate so I guess that makes me a yes vote for Craig by proxy even though, like ralaw, I never really saw him play. My only recollection of him as a player was from Tecmo Bowl... and I always found Tom Rathman to be the superior option in that incarnation.

 

[Senser81]

Craig's prime wasn't long enough, IMO. 1985 and 1988 were clearly his best years...his other seasons were a mixture of above-average and below-average. He was a very distinct runner...high-knee style, VERY physical on an alleged 'finesse' team. I'd put Chuck Foreman in before Roger Craig, but I wouldn't say either is a very strong HOF candidate.

 

[NAHSTE]

:stanley:

 

[Shayn•Da•Pain]

Craig's prime wasn't long enough, IMO. 1985 and 1988 were clearly his best years...his other seasons were a mixture of above-average and below-average. He was a very distinct runner...high-knee style, VERY physical on an alleged 'finesse' team. I'd put Chuck Foreman in before Roger Craig, but I wouldn't say either is a very strong HOF candidate.

I believe you know me pretty well, and you know I'm very knowledgeable about old timey players. Chuck Foreman IMO takes a back seat to Roger Craig every day of the week.

The thing about it though is I agree with you about everything else. I'll add though that Craig won 3 super bowls, and I loved his running style. The thing is if one is going to accept Roger's short prime period, I think Davis should get in first. It also hurts Craig that Garrison Hearst broke his team rushing record, Waters came after Craig and seemed to be a little better than Craig, and now Gore breaking the team rushing TD record. It seems to look harder and harder to make a case for him as the years tick by.

 

[Senser81]

I believe you know me pretty well, and you know I'm very knowledgeable about old timey players. Chuck Foreman IMO takes a back seat to Roger Craig every day of the week.

Foreman's prime was 5 years, and he was a pro bowler every year, ROTY in 1973, and a 1st team All-Pro in 1975 when he led the NFL in receiving (!) and scored 22 TDs in a 14 game schedule. From 1974-1976, his TD totals were 15, 22, & 14, leading the NFL twice. He was clearly one of the best players in the NFL, regardless of position, from 1973-1977 and was a trendsetter for being so effective at catching passes out of the backfield.

Craig's prime was 5 years, and he was a pro bowler 4 of those years, and was a 1st team All-Pro in 1988. Craig led the NFL in receiving in 1985. His TD totals are much less impressive than Foreman's, and in his career Craig had 3 less TDs than Foreman (73 v. 76) despite playing 56 more games.

Craig kind of made his name in the postseason, especially his 3 TD game in SB XIX. Still, Foreman has more postseason rushing yards (860 v. 841) in 5 fewer postseason games.

I just think Foreman was much more effective in his prime than Craig.

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

IMO Craig simply didn't score enough and wasn't a dominant enough of a runner.
When I see some of the scoring seasons Foreman and Faulk had it just hits me when you're getting that many touches on both facets of the game you need to be scoring not just moving chains.
It doesn't help when you have two top5ers playing in the league at the same time.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

I don't really have an opinion on this (I guess I lean no), but can we please leave "Craig won three Super Bowls" out of this? That should mean very little in the context of this discussion. He isn't a QB (don't even love that angle with QB's, but I get why it comes up at least), he isn't someone who was good enough to change the direction of a franchise (Faulk), and he was never even close to the best payer on his team. His three SB's don't make him any more of a hall of famer than they would the LG or the RILB or the TE.

Craig didn't win three Super Bowls. He was on three Super Bowl winning teams.

 

[jms493]

"And the Giants have the ball!!!!"

RC choked the NFC Championship away....We love you roger!

 

[ram29jackson]

I don't really have an opinion on this (I guess I lean no), but can we please leave "Craig won three Super Bowls" out of this? That should mean very little in the context of this discussion. He isn't a QB (don't even love that angle with QB's, but I get why it comes up at least), he isn't someone who was good enough to change the direction of a franchise (Faulk), and he was never even close to the best payer on his team. His three SB's don't make him any more of a hall of famer than they would the LG or the RILB or the TE.

Craig didn't win three Super Bowls. He was on three Super Bowl winning teams.

which is why any offensive lineman who played long term with Montana should be in the Hall of Fame.

people just wax over the fact that football just simply doesnt happen in any way shape or form without well executed lineplay. They everything to football in every way. In the same way baseball looks at every stat possible, they really need to calibrate the inexact but very crucial science that is the offensive and defensive lineman/linemen. Montana and Rice dont exist on your radar without time for a play to work and no one remembers the names of those 5 guys.......

 

[Villain]

I'll vote yes because that would set a precedent for Frank Gore being a Hall of Famer too.

:homer:

:leavingthethreadnow:

 

[Shayn•Da•Pain]

which is why any offensive lineman who played long term with Montana should be in the Hall of Fame.

people just wax over the fact that football just simply doesnt happen in any way shape or form without well executed lineplay. They everything to football in every way. In the same way baseball looks at every stat possible, they really need to calibrate the inexact but very crucial science that is the offensive and defensive lineman/linemen. Montana and Rice dont exist on your radar without time for a play to work and no one remembers the names of those 5 guys.......

No search engines required. Jesse Sappulu, Guy McIntyre, Barton, Bubba Paris, and that guy Wallace who had the ugly helmet made to prevent concussions.

To be fair this was about the time I got into Tecmo Super Bowl (1990-91) and later Tecmo SB 3, so I know these guys very well. I always snagged Guy McIntyre as a cheap guard. Sappulu was an ok guard to get as well. But I digress.

The 49ers offense didn't hinge on having a superior o-line. The o-line was very good I'll give you that, but the game plan was based on quick-short passes and getting the ball out very quick. Much of the longer developing plays used roll outs or bootlegs, mixing in sliding pockets and fast reads to check downs in the face of pressure and blitzes. In the WCO that Bill Walsh ran, Montana typically had a 3 step drop, 5 at the most. The routes were rarely longer than 15 yards deep, and Montana had great ability to get out of trouble with his feet. The o-line didn't have to be all-world. They were very good, but I doubt you'll every see a HOF evern get mentioned out of that group of o-linemen Craig played with.

 

[shag773]

Craig didn't win three Super Bowls. He was on three Super Bowl winning teams.

He had three TDs and over a hundred and twenty yards from scrimmage in the 84 SB. In 88 SB he had over 175 yards from scrimmage (100 receiving), and in 89 SB he had over 100 yards from scrimmage and a TD.

The blowout against Denver was the Montana/Rice show, but you could argue he very easily could of been a SB MVP in 84 and he was involved in some huge plays in one of the closest and exciting SBs in history, and he had a huge game.

I'm not saying he's a hall of famer, but you can't say he was just "on" three SB winning teams. He was a big part of at least two of them. And he should be recognized for it.

 

[shag773]

No search engines required. Jesse Sappulu, Guy McIntyre, Barton, Bubba Paris, and that guy Wallace who had the ugly helmet made to prevent concussions.

To be fair this was about the time I got into Tecmo Super Bowl (1990-91) and later Tecmo SB 3, so I know these guys very well. I always snagged Guy McIntyre as a cheap guard. Sappulu was an ok guard to get as well. But I digress.

The 49ers offense didn't hinge on having a superior o-line. The o-line was very good I'll give you that, but the game plan was based on quick-short passes and getting the ball out very quick. Much of the longer developing plays used roll outs or bootlegs, mixing in sliding pockets and fast reads to check downs in the face of pressure and blitzes. In the WCO that Bill Walsh ran, Montana typically had a 3 step drop, 5 at the most. The routes were rarely longer than 15 yards deep, and Montana had great ability to get out of trouble with his feet. The o-line didn't have to be all-world. They were very good, but I doubt you'll every see a HOF evern get mentioned out of that group of o-linemen Craig played with.

Just watch the 1st half of the Niners/Eagles game in 89 to see how this offensive line could be dominated, then watch the 2nd half to see how the offensive adjustment at half time to short, quick passes to Rice could make that line look credible again.

 

[dave]

I'm old enough to have seen him play live throughout his career - Hall of Maybe.

Great player, no doubt. Deserves his number retired as a Niner, but is on the edge where the Hall of Fame is concerned IMO. Absolutely no weaknesses as a player, but that doesn't make you a Hall of Famer. A brilliant fit for Bill Walsh's system, but again, that doesn't make you a Hall of Famer.

This one is tough because Roger Craig absolutely deserves 100% respect, but like Terrell Davis, the final numbers don't add up.

 

[dave]

OK Price and Primetime ... don't just neg rep me, give your opposing viewpoint.

You too, Rudi.

You guys who just hang on to the others kill me.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

He had three TDs and over a hundred and twenty yards from scrimmage in the 84 SB. In 88 SB he had over 175 yards from scrimmage (100 receiving), and in 89 SB he had over 100 yards from scrimmage and a TD.

The blowout against Denver was the Montana/Rice show, but you could argue he very easily could of been a SB MVP in 84 and he was involved in some huge plays in one of the closest and exciting SBs in history, and he had a huge game.

I'm not saying he's a hall of famer, but you can't say he was just "on" three SB winning teams. He was a big part of at least two of them. And he should be recognized for it.

What i'm saying, is playing on three Super Bowl winners shouldn't be a big resume enhancer unless you were the star player on those teams, which he wasn't.

However, we are talking Pro Football Hall of Fame/NFL, so fighting the Super Bowl aura is like trying to swim upstream. There are plenty of players in the hall of fame who would never have gotten in had they played for losing teams. The reverse as well. And it's bullshit. We overrate the Super Bowl game.