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

[Count 'Bility]

Oh in only Taylor had competent defenses and coordinators throughout his career.

 

[Excel]

College Awards

Dayne - Heisman, Walter Camp, Maxwell

Rozier - Heisman, Walter Camp, Maxwell

College Stats

Dayne

Season one - 2109 Yards, 6.5 avg, 21 TDs

Season two - 1457 Yards, 5.5 avg, 15 TDs

Season three- 1525 Yards, 5.2 avg, 15 TDs

Season four- 2034 Yards, 6 avg, 20 TDs

Total for college - 7125 Yards, 5.8 avg, 71 TDs

Rozier

Season two - 943 Yards, 6.2 avg, 5 TDs

Season three - 1689 Yards, 7 avg, 15 TDs

Season four - 2148 Yards, 7.8 avg, 29 TDs

Total for college - 4780 Yards, 7.2 avg, 49 TDs

Achievements of teams

Dayne

Season one - 8-5, 7th in Big Ten, won Copper Bowl

Season two - 8-5, 5th in Big Ten, lost Outback Bowl

Season three - 11-1, 1st in Big Ten, won Rose Bowl

Season four - 10-2, 1st in Big Ten, won Rose Bowl

Rozier

Season two - 9-3, 1st in Big 8, lost Orange Bowl

Season three - 12-1, 1st in Big 8, won Orange Bowl

Season four - 12-1, 1st in Big 8, lost Orange Bowl

Players from team selected in NFL Draft

Dayne

Season one - 3

Season two - 2

Season three - 3

Season four - 4

Rozier

Season two - 5

Season three - 7

Season four - 3

NFL Careers

Dayne

2000-2007, 3722 yards, 3.8 avg, 28 TDs

Rozier

1985-1991, 4462 yards, 3.8 avg, 30 TDs, two pro bowls

Both had impressive college careers. Dayne accumulated larger stat totals while Rozier had a better rushing average and had to split time with better backs than Dayne did. Both won heismans and had somewhat dismal NFL carriers though Rozier's was better than Dayne's. I'm partial to Dayne's college resume because he didn't play at a powerhouse and he led his team to better bowl victories than Rozier.

 

[BOJ]

I wil make it easy on everyone. The articles should actually read "Orlando Pace Highlights 2013 HOF Class." chuckleshuffle

 

[Coqui]

Did Ron Dayne have to equally 3-way split the team's offensive production with another 2 of the greatest players to ever play college football?

This is a serious question.

Ok now you're going a little too far.

 

[Coqui]

I'm going to rank the best college RBs since 1970 based on who I think was best in COLLEGE, not just on stats. I prefer the eyeball test vs. just pure stats. Here she goes for my top 20

1. Barry Sanders (don't blame him for being stuck behind Thurman Thomas and for striking while the iron was hot and skipping his senior year)
   
2. Herschel Walker
   
3. Bo Jackson
   
4. Ricky Williams
   
5. Adrian Peterson
   
6. Lawrence Phillips(don't blame him for being crazy. Dude was a stud and if he hadn't gotten into trouble he would have won the Heisman and went on to a solid pro career. No doubt in my mind)
   
7. Mike Rozier
   
8. Ron Dayne
   
9. Reggie Bush
   
10. Billy Sims
    
11. Earl Campbell
    
12. Tony Dorsett
    
13. Marshall Faulk
    
14. LaDainian Tomlinson
    
15. Darren McFadden
    
16. Cedric Benson
    
17. DeAngelo Williams
    
18. Marcus Allen
    
19. Eric Dickerson
    
20. Archie Griffin (yes I know he won the Heisman twice, but I'm not hugely impressed by his numbers or by seeing highlight vids of the guy. Sorry Buckeye fans).
    

What do you guys think? Am I way off or what?

Eddie George was better than Archie IMO. So I'm more upset he's not on this list.

 

[beanman]

College Awards

Dayne - Heisman, Walter Camp, Maxwell

Rozier - Heisman, Walter Camp, Maxwell

College Stats

Dayne

Season one - 2109 Yards, 6.5 avg, 21 TDs

Season two - 1457 Yards, 5.5 avg, 15 TDs

Season three- 1525 Yards, 5.2 avg, 15 TDs

Season four- 2034 Yards, 6 avg, 20 TDs

Total for college - 7125 Yards, 5.8 avg, 71 TDs

Rozier

Season two - 943 Yards, 6.2 avg, 5 TDs

Season three - 1689 Yards, 7 avg, 15 TDs

Season four - 2148 Yards, 7.8 avg, 29 TDs

Total for college - 4780 Yards, 7.2 avg, 49 TDs

Achievements of teams

Dayne

Season one - 8-5, 7th in Big Ten, won Copper Bowl

Season two - 8-5, 5th in Big Ten, lost Outback Bowl

Season three - 11-1, 1st in Big Ten, won Rose Bowl

Season four - 10-2, 1st in Big Ten, won Rose Bowl

Rozier

Season two - 9-3, 1st in Big 8, lost Orange Bowl

Season three - 12-1, 1st in Big 8, won Orange Bowl

Season four - 12-1, 1st in Big 8, lost Orange Bowl

Players from team selected in NFL Draft

Dayne

Season one - 3

Season two - 2

Season three - 3

Season four - 4

Rozier

Season two - 5

Season three - 7

Season four - 3

NFL Careers

Dayne

2000-2007, 3722 yards, 3.8 avg, 28 TDs

Rozier

1985-1991, 4462 yards, 3.8 avg, 30 TDs, two pro bowls

Both had impressive college careers. Dayne accumulated larger stat totals while Rozier had a better rushing average and had to split time with better backs than Dayne did. Both won heismans and had somewhat dismal NFL carriers though Rozier's was better than Dayne's. I'm partial to Dayne's college resume because he didn't play at a powerhouse and he led his team to better bowl victories than Rozier.

I'm sorry, I just can't agree with you here. Look at who Nebraska had to play in the Orange Bowl vs. who Wisky had to play. Otherwise, thanks for compiling all that; very nice comparison.

 

[beanman]

I had Eddie George on but then bumped him in favor of Eric Dickerson. I think Eddie could easily take one of the spots from 15-20 on my list. Pretty much wild guesses just based off of recollection and not looking at any stats, etc.

 

[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....... :lol:

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.

What the hell? Are you serious? Did I say his career wasn't good? And Ahman Green became the permier starter after the 4 backs in front of him on the depth chart were either supsended or injured. As a true freshman, Green was 5th on the depth chart during the first kickoff. Both what does that have to do with what I said........

You don't understand why Dayne's career is better because you don't want to understand it. Let me dumb it down once again.

Rozier & Dayne won the same awards by the time they left their programs, with Dayne winning a few more, 2 awards didn't exist when Rozier was playing.

Rozier & Dayne both were consensus All Americans

Rozier & Dayne were both the #1 RB in the NFL draft their final seasons, though Rozier went USFL first.

Only thing separating their career is 1500 yards and 21 TDs.

If Rozier scored 21 more TDs than he did, would you say his career is even better. If he ran for 1500 more yards would you say his career was even better. Yes you would. So why is it so much energy is being spent trying to make it seem like another RB who accomplished the same things that Rozier accomplished but ran for more yards and TDs is not a better career. I know this argument would have went this long if Ron Dayne's name was replaced with Rex Burkhead or Marlon Lucky, or Dan Alexander or some other RB who played for NU. No one wants to admit that another back at another school could have had a better career than a Husker who had the best year of all Husker RBs.......I'm not saying he's not a great back. I'm not saying Dayne is a better back.......I simply stated that his career was better and that he deserved to highlight the HOF class as much as anyone else who has.

If you'll read my post again you'll see I never said you felt his career wasn't good. And I guess we'll just have to disagree on "better" career since I feel a year less to play might actually...you know...affect the total numbers so it's not an accurate comparison...but keep "dumbing" things down for me...

 

[Excel]

I'm partial to Dayne's college resume because he didn't play at a powerhouse and he led his team to better bowl victories than Rozier.

I'm sorry, I just can't agree with you here. Look at who Nebraska had to play in the Orange Bowl vs. who Wisky had to play. Otherwise, thanks for compiling all that; very nice comparison.

Fair enough. The whole "'better' bowl victories" thing is all a matter of perspective and depends on how you want to judge it. I can see your point - Nebraska definitely played better teams in those Orange Bowls than Wisconsin did in its Rose Bowls but those Nebraska teams, as a whole, were also much better than those Wisconsin teams.

Here's what I mean:

Dayne

First Season: NR Wisconsin beats NR Utah in Copper Bowl

Second Season: NR Wisconsin loses to #11 UGA in Outback Bowl

Third Season: #9 Wisconsin beats #6 UCLA in Rose Bowl

Fourth Season: #4 Wisconsin beats #22 Stanford in Rose Bowl

Rozier

Second Season: #4 Nebraska loses to #1 Clemson in Orange Bowl

Third Season: #3 Nebraska beats #13 LSU in Orange Bowl

Fourth Season: #1 Nebraska loses to #5 Miami in Orange Bowl

Rozier's teams outranked his opponents' teams all but once while Dayne's teams were underdogs all but once.

A lot of this, like debating most things in sports history (or all history for that matter), is just a matter of perspective and mining data for the bits that support a person's predetermined belief. No great consensus is going to be reached other than just saying that both were great players who had somewhat similar careers at very different schools. Anything past that is just a matter of where you were standing before this discussion even began.

 

[Count 'Bility]

Did Ron Dayne have to equally 3-way split the team's offensive production with another 2 of the greatest players to ever play college football?

This is a serious question.

Ok now you're going a little too far.

How so? That's what Turner Gill and Irving Fryar are.

 

[Coqui]

Did Ron Dayne have to equally 3-way split the team's offensive production with another 2 of the greatest players to ever play college football?

This is a serious question.

Ok now you're going a little too far.

How so? That's what Turner Gill and Irving Fryar are.

The best ever in college football? Better than Herschel Walker, Doak Walker, Barry Sanders, Tony Dorsett, Roger Staubach........

 

[AllNRed]

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.

From an overall career stand point, yes. Specifically, the two national titles, Heisman Trophy finalist and career win/loss percentage.

Statistically, however, Martinez will end up being the better quarterback than Frazier. Martinez will end his career with more total offensive yards (by far), more individual passing/rushing yards, more rushing and passing touchdowns, more career starts, and possibly more career wins. By the end of 2013, Martinez very well could be in the 'elite' category of Nebraska football players with how many records he has broken and could potentially break.

While you're right that Martinez doesn't have Frazier's resume, he is by no means a slouch. A comparison between the two (purely from an athletic and statistical stand point) is more than fair, imho.

Of course, when it's all said and done, I will still say Frazier had the better career because of those titles and his overall importance to the Husker program. Very similar to how I believe Rozier had the better career in comparison to Dayne.

No argument from me here. My comment wasn't to make Martinez seem like a slouch. Any man who will leave this program with as many finger prints in the record books as Martinez will deserves much praise. The comment was simply on accomplishments with the stats. Frazier wasn't breaking every record but he was winning his games and bring championships back to Lincoln. Stats show the athlete ability of the player but doesn't necessarily suggest they are having a great career without national rewards and/or championships and bowl wins to accompany them. That's why I said that Frazier/Martinez is no comparison. Totally different from Dayne/Rozier. Both put up great stats, both hold/held records at their schools, both helped to bring home championships/bowl wins to the program.

 

[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....... :lol:

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.

What the hell? Are you serious? Did I say his career wasn't good? And Ahman Green became the permier starter after the 4 backs in front of him on the depth chart were either supsended or injured. As a true freshman, Green was 5th on the depth chart during the first kickoff. Both what does that have to do with what I said........

You don't understand why Dayne's career is better because you don't want to understand it. Let me dumb it down once again.

Rozier & Dayne won the same awards by the time they left their programs, with Dayne winning a few more, 2 awards didn't exist when Rozier was playing.

Rozier & Dayne both were consensus All Americans

Rozier & Dayne were both the #1 RB in the NFL draft their final seasons, though Rozier went USFL first.

Only thing separating their career is 1500 yards and 21 TDs.

If Rozier scored 21 more TDs than he did, would you say his career is even better. If he ran for 1500 more yards would you say his career was even better. Yes you would. So why is it so much energy is being spent trying to make it seem like another RB who accomplished the same things that Rozier accomplished but ran for more yards and TDs is not a better career. I know this argument would have went this long if Ron Dayne's name was replaced with Rex Burkhead or Marlon Lucky, or Dan Alexander or some other RB who played for NU. No one wants to admit that another back at another school could have had a better career than a Husker who had the best year of all Husker RBs.......I'm not saying he's not a great back. I'm not saying Dayne is a better back.......I simply stated that his career was better and that he deserved to highlight the HOF class as much as anyone else who has.

If you'll read my post again you'll see I never said you felt his career wasn't good. And I guess we'll just have to disagree on "better" career since I feel a year less to play might actually...you know...affect the total numbers so it's not an accurate comparison...but keep "dumbing" things down for me...

I apologize. Looks like I schemed over the small two letter word in the response.

And yes, we'll have to agree to disagree. I really don't understand why it's a big fuss. Everyone is saying that Rozier's career would be BETTER if he had an extra year, yet disagree with Dayne having a better career because he had an extra year.......that makes no sense. Arguing facts.....you know things that actually happened and are documented in the record books with opinions and what if theories do nothing more than just keep the conversation going on forever, but doesn't change what the outcome of history was.

What if Rozier got an extra year at Nebraska........

-it would be his 5th year of eligibility as he played one year in JUCO/ can we give Dayne an extra year.......

-could he have had a great year, of course, but how do we know he wouldn't have had an injury. (he did sit out for the last quarter of his final game as a husker)

Fact is....Rozier/Dayne are great backs. Two of the best in college football history. They accomplished pretty much the exact same things while in uniform at their specific programs. Dayne just so happened to accomplish 1500 total yards and 21 TDs more.....if that doesn't make the career that much better, what's with the argument of "give Rozier another year and he would have that also". When grading a career that look at what the player did while playing, not what he could have done with more time. In that case Barry Sanders would be in the NFL record books instead of Emmit Smith. Not all college backs have a 1000 yard season and even less eclipse 1400-1500 with 21 TDs in a season, so that is still a large gap between the two's career output. I repeat, being that they both left with the same accomplishments as far as awards/champions/etc....the stats is the only thing that sets the career apart...........if I dumb it down any more than that, then it's hard for me to know you understand logic, thus I will just leave the conversation alone and let you continue to believe what you want.

 

[AllNRed]

I'm partial to Dayne's college resume because he didn't play at a powerhouse and he led his team to better bowl victories than Rozier.

I'm sorry, I just can't agree with you here. Look at who Nebraska had to play in the Orange Bowl vs. who Wisky had to play. Otherwise, thanks for compiling all that; very nice comparison.

Fair enough. The whole "'better' bowl victories" thing is all a matter of perspective and depends on how you want to judge it. I can see your point - Nebraska definitely played better teams in those Orange Bowls than Wisconsin did in its Rose Bowls but those Nebraska teams, as a whole, were also much better than those Wisconsin teams.

Here's what I mean:

Dayne

First Season: NR Wisconsin beats NR Utah in Copper Bowl

Second Season: NR Wisconsin loses to #11 UGA in Outback Bowl

Third Season: #9 Wisconsin beats #6 UCLA in Rose Bowl

Fourth Season: #4 Wisconsin beats #22 Stanford in Rose Bowl

Rozier

Second Season: #4 Nebraska loses to #1 Clemson in Orange Bowl

Third Season: #3 Nebraska beats #13 LSU in Orange Bowl

Fourth Season: #1 Nebraska loses to #5 Miami in Orange Bowl

Rozier's teams outranked his opponents' teams all but once while Dayne's teams were underdogs all but once.

A lot of this, like debating most things in sports history (or all history for that matter), is just a matter of perspective and mining data for the bits that support a person's predetermined belief. No great consensus is going to be reached other than just saying that both were great players who had somewhat similar careers at very different schools. Anything past that is just a matter of where you were standing before this discussion even began.

Great post.

 

[knapplc]

It's insulting that sporting pages title their articles things like "Ron Dayne highlights 2013 HOF ballot." Really Ron Dayne.....

It's funny how we got off on a Rozier/Dayne tangent in this thread, when the original premise was a question of whether Dayne should take precedence over Tommie Frazier.