There are 194 users in the forums
Roger Craig Snubbed
Jan 9, 2011 at 11:30 PM
- backontop
- Veteran
- Posts: 14,346
you're letting your homerism blind you from reality. Faulk was always going to be a first ballet induction. Craig will make it eventually, just not over a guy like Faulk.
Jan 9, 2011 at 11:32 PM
- backontop
- Veteran
- Posts: 14,346
Roger Craig is the Chris Carter of RB's when it comes to the HOF.
Jan 9, 2011 at 11:38 PM
- BleedRednGold
- Member
- Posts: 125
I thought it was the hall of fame?? You mean to tell me the person who made the cellphone is better than Alexander gram bell?? I dont think don't. INNOVATORS ARE NOT BETTER THAN INVENTORS.
Jan 9, 2011 at 11:38 PM
- lssanjose
- Veteran
- Posts: 648
Just remember: Chuck Foreman was a guy before Craig's time; so maybe that's why he didn't get as strong a consideration. Charles Haley is someone where you can make a case for, or against being cast into the hall of fame. He may have had five superbowls, but I wouldn't say he had that much of an impact, as say Reggie White.
Jan 9, 2011 at 11:43 PM
- BleedRednGold
- Member
- Posts: 125
Originally posted by lssanjose:
Just remember: Chuck Foreman was a guy before Craig's time; so maybe that's why he didn't get as strong a consideration. Charles Haley is someone where you can make a case for, or against being cast into the hall of fame. He may have had five superbowls, but I wouldn't say he had that much of an impact, as say Reggie White.
But regg white is the ALL TIME sack leader, not Haley.
Jan 9, 2011 at 11:44 PM
- SanFranAddic
- Veteran
- Posts: 3,418
Originally posted by lssanjose:
Just remember: Chuck Foreman was a guy before Craig's time; so maybe that's why he didn't get as strong a consideration. Charles Haley is someone where you can make a case for, or against being cast into the hall of fame. He may have had five superbowls, but I wouldn't say he had that much of an impact, as say Reggie White.
How many Superbowl victories does Reggie have?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/51962/519629ec8d6eb72709e63abe102460096e791b52" alt=""
Jan 9, 2011 at 11:45 PM
- BasharCali49
- Veteran
- Posts: 378
I guess they don't want too many 49ers in the Hall of Fame.
Jan 9, 2011 at 11:46 PM
- BleedRednGold
- Member
- Posts: 125
Originally posted by backontop:
you're letting your homerism blind you from reality. Faulk was always going to be a first ballet induction. Craig will make it eventually, just not over a guy like Faulk.
Faulk wouldn't have done s**t in the 80's or early 90's.
Jan 9, 2011 at 11:46 PM
- okdkid
- Veteran
- Posts: 23,360
We're biased. He was good. But not as good as Frank Gore. He had the luxury of playing with many, many HOF guys. Can't say by himself he was HOF worthy.
Jan 9, 2011 at 11:51 PM
- BleedRednGold
- Member
- Posts: 125
Originally posted by okdkid:
We're biased. He was good. But not as good as Frank Gore. He had the luxury of playing with many, many HOF guys. Can't say by himself he was HOF worthy.
Craig won two, I repeat TWO superbowls before rice and all them showed up.
Jan 9, 2011 at 11:53 PM
- BleedRednGold
- Member
- Posts: 125
Originally posted by BleedRednGold:Originally posted by okdkid:
We're biased. He was good. But not as good as Frank Gore. He had the luxury of playing with many, many HOF guys. Can't say by himself he was HOF worthy.
Craig won two, I repeat TWO superbowls before rice and all them showed up.
I may be wrong on that but he won a SB before we got the "STUDS" on O.
Jan 9, 2011 at 11:56 PM
- backontop
- Veteran
- Posts: 14,346
Originally posted by BleedRednGold:Originally posted by backontop:
you're letting your homerism blind you from reality. Faulk was always going to be a first ballet induction. Craig will make it eventually, just not over a guy like Faulk.
Faulk wouldn't have done s**t in the 80's or early 90's.
there is no way to say that for sure. For all we know you put Faulk on the 49ers during the same years Craig was and he could have played better. Either way Faulk had a better overall career than Craig.
Jan 9, 2011 at 11:58 PM
- mod
- Veteran
- Posts: 41,721
Originally posted by BleedRednGold:Originally posted by okdkid:
We're biased. He was good. But not as good as Frank Gore. He had the luxury of playing with many, many HOF guys. Can't say by himself he was HOF worthy.
Craig won two, I repeat TWO superbowls before rice and all them showed up.
How about our offensive lineman... only once in Franks career has he been able to run behind a Good line. Roger Craig was a great back but I think both Faulk and Frank are better. Faulk definitely is a first ballot HOFer
Jan 10, 2011 at 12:10 AM
- mod
- Veteran
- Posts: 41,721
Roger Craig - 11 years
8,189 yards rushing
4.1 ypc
56 rushing TDs
4,911 receiving yards
566 receptions
17 receiving TD's
Marshall Faulk - 12 years
12,279 yards rushing
4.3 ypc
100 Rushing TDs
6,875 receiving yards
767 receptions
36 Receiving TDs
Faulk and not even close
8,189 yards rushing
4.1 ypc
56 rushing TDs
4,911 receiving yards
566 receptions
17 receiving TD's
Marshall Faulk - 12 years
12,279 yards rushing
4.3 ypc
100 Rushing TDs
6,875 receiving yards
767 receptions
36 Receiving TDs
Faulk and not even close
Jan 10, 2011 at 12:12 AM
- nw49erfan
- Veteran
- Posts: 14
Does anyone else think it's because the fumble?
Sad but it's still the 1st thing that comes to mind when I think of Craig...
Sad but it's still the 1st thing that comes to mind when I think of Craig...