|
He was before my time, so I can't make a firsthand judgment.
I've long been an advocate that I'd rather see a truly dominant player get into the Hall of Fame even if his career was short, rather than a player who compiled a lot of stats by having a long and mediocre career. That said, you have to have enough time that we can prove that you were dominant and not just a flash in the pan.
Sayers effectively played for five seasons, with one of those cut short to 9 games (of 14). His last two seasons don't add to the discussion. In those five seasons, he had one dominant season rushing (1966) and two pretty decent ones (high ypc with relatively few carries in 1965 and 1968). He broke 1,000 yards in 1969, but with a non-elite ypc.
He also had three very dominant seasons as a kickoff returner as well (1965, 1966, and 1967).
So one could say that he really got in because of one fantastic season in 1966 and a very good season in 1965, with three other seasons that had decent to good phases.
On the basis of that, I wouldn't say that he proved himself. But I know that people who saw him play would say that he was dominant enough to be a Hall of Famer even with that short resume, and I think the eye test is important. I'll take their word for it.
Overall, though, I think he's a step above average plodders like Jerome Bettis and Curtis Martin, and he's certainly better than Terrell Davis who only had two good seasons in a cheated salary cap situation, but he's far from the top of the list of Hall of Famers.
I'll allow him into the Hall of Fame, but with a shrug.
|