Battle of the Hall-of-Famers: Mike Rozier vs. Ron Dayne

[AllNRed]

I am not getting why it is so hard to understand what AllNRed is saying.

 

Dayne had a better college career than Rozier.

 

Defining a "college career" is the difference in the argument. There's no single definition, and that's where we vary. You cannot simply define a "college career" based on total yards and/or touchdowns - as we've already discussed, that would mean Taylor Martinez has already had a better "college career" than Tommie Frazier, and that's ludicrous.

 

What's your definition of a "college career".......total yards and/ touchdowns is a big part of a college career because that's the whole point of playing the game. Gaining yards and scoring. We can add in national awards, which I pointed out that Rozier hasn't won an award that Dayne did not. We can talk about the win/loss column in the big games where's I also pointed out that Rozier was 1-1 in two Orange Bowls and Dayne was 2-2 (eclipsing 200 yards in both games gaining MVP in each). Both were consider the best RBs in the draft though Rozier went USFL route first. The only thing that tips the scale is #'s.......total yards & touchdowns. Of course Dayne got a extra season, but that extra season was a great season. He's 1500 yards & 21 TDs ahead of Roziers career totals. It's not like every back in the nation accomplishes just those numbers in a season.

 

This thread turned into a Rozier vs Dayne because husker fans got butt hurt about me saying that someone's career was better than an all-time husker great's.

 

There's 27 RBs ahead of Rozier on the all time rushing leaders for college. Closest to have 7.2 ypc on that list is LaMichael James with 6.6 ypc. But these guys are put in order of their ypc average, they are ranked in order of total production of their career. Discrediting a RB because he averaged 5.9 ypc and not 7.2 is like telling a SF because he averages 26 ppg and not 30+

 

Here's the list

 

http://www.fbsstatis...hingleaders.htm

 

Ron Dayne Wisconsin 6,397 1996 - 1999

Ricky Williams Texas 6,279 1995 - 1998

Tony Dorsett Pittsburgh 6,082 1973 - 1976

DeAngelo Williams Memphis 6,026 2002 - 2005

Charles White USC 5,598 1976 - 1979

Travis Prentice Miami (Oh) 5,596 1996 - 1999

Cedric Benson Texas 5,540 2001 - 2004

Damion Fletcher Southern Miss 5,302 2006 - 2009

LaDainian Tomlinson TCU 5,263 1997 - 2000

Herschel Walker Georgia 5,259 1980 - 1982

Archie Griffin Ohio State 5,177 1972 - 1975

Avon Cobourne West Virginia 5,164 1999 - 2002

Garrett Wolfe Northern Illinois 5,164 2004 - 2006

Montee Ball Wisconsin 5,140 2009 - 2012

LaMichael James Oregon 5,082 2009 - 2011

Mike Hart Michigan 5,040 2004 - 2007

Darren Lewis Texas A&M 5,012 1987 - 1990

Darren Sproles Kansas State 4,979 2001 - 2004

DonTrell Moore New Mexico 4,973 2002 - 2005

Anthony Thompson Indiana 4,965 1986 - 1989

George Rogers South Carolina 4,958 1977 - 1980

Trevor Cobb Rice 4,948 1989 - 1992

Michael Turner Northern Illinois 4,941 2000 - 2003

Ray Rice Rutgers 4,926 2005 - 2007

Paul Palmer Temple 4,895 1983 - 1986

Steve Bartalo Colorado State 4,813 1983 - 1986

Ken Simonton Oregon State 4,802 1998 - 2001

Mike Rozier Nebraska 4,780 1981 - 1983

 

 

Do I think all of these guys ahead of him are better backs.......H*** No. But some could be argued to have an equal or better career than Rozier. So, what that he had to share snaps with other great players on his team. When the #'s go into the books, notice there is no mention of Craig/Gill/Fryar or anyone one else.

[AllNRed]

Running backs like Dayne and Rozier are easier to compare though. Their careers are almost always based on stats.

 

This is an arbitrary definition. Conveniently, it supports a stance you've taken. Further, the stats don't clearly point to Dayne as having the better career. While he had more total yards, Rozier had a higher yard per carry average. Those stats can be twisted just about any way you like.

 

Why is that more important to you. I can't think of any back to average 7.2 ypc other than Rozier.....good for him. Do you not think that the fact that defenses had more to worry about on the field at one time than just him, would open up the opportunity for him to get further down field when he does touch the ball. Even Bo Jackson averaged 6.6 ypc at Auburn.....and IMO, hands down that's the best athlete I've ever witnessed on a football field.

[knapplc]

Does it offend you when someone suggest that someone else had a better career than a husker great?

 

This thread turned into a Rozier vs Dayne because husker fans got butt hurt about me saying that someone's career was better than an all-time husker great's.

 

So people who don't see your point of view don't simply have a different opinion, they're 1) offended, or 2) butthurt?

 

Bit of a flawed point of view, that.

 

[irafreak]

I just don't understand the numbers argument. A guy plays 4 and another guy plays 3. The numbers are going to be off. There is no better back than Barry Sanders. He's not the record holder for all things NFL and NCAA though. Numbers only tell part of the story.

[AllNRed]

Running backs like Dayne and Rozier are easier to compare though. Their careers are almost always based on stats.

 

This is an arbitrary definition. Conveniently, it supports a stance you've taken. Further, the stats don't clearly point to Dayne as having the better career. While he had more total yards, Rozier had a higher yard per carry average. Those stats can be twisted just about any way you like.

 

When these two are so close with things like awards, etc., what is there left to compare other than total (career) stats?

 

Gayle Sayers had a better YPC than Walter Payton. Who had the better career?

 

Rex Burkhead had a better YPC than O.J.Simpson.......love Burkhead but on the field I'd take the "Juice".

[AllNRed]

When these two are so close with things like awards, etc., what is there left to compare other than total (career) stats?

 

Gayle Sayers had a better YPC than Walter Payton. Who had the better career?

 

Ron Dayne has the most yards rushing of any D1A college running back, ever. So you're making the claim that he had the best career of any college running back to play D1A, ever? Because of yards?

Do you think that the YPC argument is stronger?

[AllNRed]

Does it offend you when someone suggest that someone else had a better career than a husker great?

 

This thread turned into a Rozier vs Dayne because husker fans got butt hurt about me saying that someone's career was better than an all-time husker great's.

 

So people who don't see your point of view don't simply have a different opinion, they're 1) offended, or 2) butthurt?

 

Bit of a flawed point of view, that.

 

 

You seem to be taking those comments literally......but since we are on the subject......

 

When I hear statements like "Ron Dayne doesn't deserve to highlight a HOF class" or "if he was on the Husker 82 roster, he would be 3rd string and barely get any carries" or "so what he has more yards/TDs, Rozier has a better ypc" or "he didn't have no one else on his team"..........that sounds a bit like someone is "offended" or "butt hurt" that someone who has never played for dear 'ol Nebraska having their career quoted as being better than one of the most beloved huskers to ever step foot in Lincoln.

 

I'm getting elementary arguments to argue Rozier's greatness. IMO, that's a disrespect to him because he has done so much more on the field than to have the strongest argument for him being great is that "well, he had other talents he had to share snaps with" or "he has a better YPC average". The arguments are weak. Bigdsrip gave a great discription to why Dayne is worthy of being respected as one of college footballs elite RBs and the husker fans whom have chosen to take my little quote and run with it only have given arguments for Rozier that he has a better YPC and he had to play with Turner Gill & co.

 

Fact is Dayne has accomplished everything that Rozier has accomplished as a college RB, but Rozier has not accomplished everything that Dayne has. You argue a 7.2 YPC average is better than a 5.9 YPC, true, but its not like 5.9 YPC is not a great average to have. No one looks at that stat and thinks less of a RB at any level. You also dismiss the fact that Dayne accomplished 1500+ total yards and 21 TDs than Rozier. Yes, I understand Rozier only played 3 years here, but if you add 1500 total yards and 21 TDs, wouldn't that make Roziers career that much better.....Yes.....so why is the fact that another player has it and Rozier doesn't make his career less than Rozier's...........oh, I figured it out..........Dayne wasn't a HUSKER, so he couldn't possible be compared to the greatest HUSKER RB of all time..................that my friend is what I mean by being offend or butt hurt.........."how dare I mention Dayne and Rozier in the same sentence"......

[AllNRed]

I just don't understand the numbers argument. A guy plays 4 and another guy plays 3. The numbers are going to be off. There is no better back than Barry Sanders. He's not the record holder for all things NFL and NCAA though. Numbers only tell part of the story.

 

The numbers are for the career (accomplishments on the field). Personally, I never said that Ron Dayne was a better back than Rozier, I simply stated he had a better career. Some don't know, or understand the difference. Others don't want to understand the difference because unless I say Rozier is the greatest back ever and his career surpasses all who has played before and after him, then I am disrespecting.......

[AllNRed]

I'm going to have to go with Rozier on this one. Just my opinion. Dayne was a power back who wasn't going to beat anyone to the endzone on a long run. I never saw Rozier get caught from behind. Sometimes stats don't tell you who was a better back. LP was a better back than both of them, a terrrible person, but better back. Oh, and if we are going on stats than Monte Ball was better than the both of them also. He scored more TD's

 

Monte Ball score 77 TDs Ron Dayne scored 71 TDs............not as much of a disctance than Mike Roziers 49 TDs

 

Mike Rozier also had 4780 total yards

Monte Ball had 5140 total yards

Ron Dayne had 7125 total yards

 

That would make him 3rd best again of those three.

 

Dayne never rushed for under 1400 yards a season. Rozier's first year didn't eclipse 1000.

 

This is just the CAREERS they both put together. I'm not saying that Daynes a better back, just saying he had a better career.

[Enhance]

To me, stats don't necessarily mean the better career. For example, and as someone mentioned earlier, Taylor Martinez is going to go down in history with the most offensive yards of any Husker quarterback. I can't look up the stats right now, but my guess is he'll also finish with more touchdown passes, a higher completion percentage and more career wins.

 

But, Frazier won two national titles and was a Heisman finalist. He without question had the better career.

 

If you take all factors into account, I believe Rozier had the better career, even if he didn't have more touchdowns or yards.

[NUance]

To me, stats don't necessarily mean the better career. For example, and as someone mentioned earlier, Taylor Martinez is going to go down in history with the most offensive yards of any Husker quarterback. I can't look up the stats right now, but my guess is he'll also finish with more touchdown passes, a higher completion percentage and more career wins.

 

But, Frazier won two national titles and was a Heisman finalist. He without question had the better career.

 

If you take all factors into account, I believe Rozier had the better career, even if he didn't have more touchdowns or yards.

I wonder how each would've done if the teams were reversed---if T-Mart played on the 90s teams and Tommie was playing today? We might be speaking of Martinez in a different light.

[Count 'Bility]

To me, stats don't necessarily mean the better career. For example, and as someone mentioned earlier, Taylor Martinez is going to go down in history with the most offensive yards of any Husker quarterback. I can't look up the stats right now, but my guess is he'll also finish with more touchdown passes, a higher completion percentage and more career wins.

 

But, Frazier won two national titles and was a Heisman finalist. He without question had the better career.

 

If you take all factors into account, I believe Rozier had the better career, even if he didn't have more touchdowns or yards.

I wonder how each would've done if the teams were reversed---if T-Mart played on the 90s teams and Tommie was playing today? We might be speaking of Martinez in a different light.

Pretty good assessment. I say the same thing when comparing Jamal Lord to Eric Crouch. There's 21 other guys who get on the field that play a huge role in one's success or failure.

 

I dont know how this pertains to this particular discussion, but it's a good point nonetheless.

[irafreak]

I just don't understand the numbers argument. A guy plays 4 and another guy plays 3. The numbers are going to be off. There is no better back than Barry Sanders. He's not the record holder for all things NFL and NCAA though. Numbers only tell part of the story.

 

The numbers are for the career (accomplishments on the field). Personally, I never said that Ron Dayne was a better back than Rozier, I simply stated he had a better career. Some don't know, or understand the difference. Others don't want to understand the difference because unless I say Rozier is the greatest back ever and his career surpasses all who has played before and after him, then I am disrespecting.......

So because Rozier's career was shorter, it wasn't as good? Ahman Green only became the premier starter after LP got suspended. So the ball happened to bounce his way otherwise he backs up LP for a whole season. Still don't understand why some stats give Dayne a better career. You have to look at the whole picture.

[Count 'Bility]

I just don't understand the numbers argument. A guy plays 4 and another guy plays 3. The numbers are going to be off. There is no better back than Barry Sanders. He's not the record holder for all things NFL and NCAA though. Numbers only tell part of the story.

 

The numbers are for the career (accomplishments on the field). Personally, I never said that Ron Dayne was a better back than Rozier, I simply stated he had a better career. Some don't know, or understand the difference. Others don't want to understand the difference because unless I say Rozier is the greatest back ever and his career surpasses all who has played before and after him, then I am disrespecting.......

So because Rozier's career was shorter, it wasn't as good? Ahman Green only became the premier starter after LP got suspended. So the ball happened to bounce his way otherwise he backs up LP for a whole season. Still don't understand why some stats give Dayne a better career. You have to look at the whole picture.

hell, Ahman Green technically only got one good full season under his belt. He was battling nagging little injuries most of the '96 season.

[AllNRed]

To me, stats don't necessarily mean the better career. For example, and as someone mentioned earlier, Taylor Martinez is going to go down in history with the most offensive yards of any Husker quarterback. I can't look up the stats right now, but my guess is he'll also finish with more touchdown passes, a higher completion percentage and more career wins.

 

But, Frazier won two national titles and was a Heisman finalist. He without question had the better career.

 

If you take all factors into account, I believe Rozier had the better career, even if he didn't have more touchdowns or yards.

 

What did Rozier accomplish that Dayne did not. They both recieved the same national awards. They both are the best backs in their school history. Only thing different from their careers is the amount of yards and TDs.

 

Martinez & Frazier is a bit of a reach. Frazier accomplished so many things that Martinez has not. All Martinez has is stats. No championship, no All American status, no national awards. No comparison.