McNeil was the more talented back but he was always hurt, this one isn't close w/ regards to on field production. Curtis in a landslide.
He led the league in sacks in 85 and 89, which is funny because 85 was Freeman's best year as a Jet with 1,331 rushing yards. O'Brien was sacked 62 times that year, that's nearly 4 sacks a game. Crazy
That 82 playoff game Freeman went off against the Bengals rushing for 202 yards and a TD with a 9.62 yards per carry. Curtis never came close to a playoff performance like that, doesn't mean much just saying.
He NEVER/EVER learned to threw the ball away. He was determined to make a play except when he was going to get hit then he chickened out & dove to the ground. One play comes to mind when he was scrambling & saw he was going to get hit around the other teams 1 yd line & dove to ground instead of diving for the goal line. That play forever labeled him a pansy player in the NFL :jets:
steven jackson just eclipsed Faulks franchise rushing mark. yet I dont think anyone here would take Jackson in his prime over Faulk in his prime. I prefer dependability. you cant make big plays when your injured. we all know Freeman was more explosive. thats just my opinion though. also im a lil bias since CMart is one of my fav all time players.
I guess when I viewed the question I was answering talent wise. Freeman was hands down the better athlete but Curtis was just more durable. The advances in medical technology and equipment surely helped. I would say Freeman had more talent but Curtis was the better overall back for us just because of the reliable production.
I loved Bo, he was and always will be my favorite Non-Jet player. That injury sucked so bad, he could've done so much damage.
He was great against Cincy and had another very good game the next week but in postseason Freeman averaged 4.2 YPC and Curtis 4.4. Also, Freeman had 5 playoff games under 3 YPC out of 8 postseason games total. Curtis had 1 postseason game(out of 10) w/ under 3 YPC. Freeman was definitely the more talented back but he Curtis' career was much better.
If Bo would have just played football he would have gone down as one of the all time greats but he barely played thanks to playing baseball. He had great YPCs but RBs usually wear down later in seasons but he was just getting started b/c of his late starts to his seasons. he wasn't averaging 5-6 YPC over the course of 16 games on an annual basis.
I didn't vote because honestly who is better depends on how you interpet better. Martin put up more yards over his career than Freeman, But Freeman when healthy put up much better numbers, the problem with Freeman was he couldn't stay healthy and only played more than 13 games 3 times in his career. But Freeman was the more explosive player of the two. Yards per attempt Martin was at 4.0 for his career with peak seasons of 4.5 and 4.6 with all other seasons being 4.2 or lower with 3 seasons below 4 yards per carry as a Jet. Yards per attempt for Freeman was 4.5 for his career with peaks of 5.2 and 5.9 with most of his other years around 4.5. Freeman never averaged fewer than 4.0 and had six seasons at or above Martin's peak years in that stat. Same with receiving. Martin averaged 6.9 yards per reception. He had peak years 8.3 ypc, 7.4 ypc and 7.3 ypc with 5 seasons at or under 6.2 ypc. Freeman on the other hand averaged 10 yards per per catch over his career with peak years at 14.4 ypc, 11.8 and 11.7 ypc.. he had six seasons at or over 10 yards per catch and never averaged under 8.0 yards per catch. So who was the better running back? I'd go with McNeil to be honest on a talent level. But when you factor in ability to stay healthy Martin becomes the better back because he was on the field more to contribute more. Martin was able to stay healthy longer, so he's hall of fame material, Freeman wasn't able to stay healthy so he's not. But if you look at the stats on a per carry or per reception basis as opposed to total career stats Freeman was clearly the more talented back.
It's funny, Martin only racked up 2000 more yards rushing than McNeil over each players time with the Jets. and only 1500 more total yards than McNeil when you include both rushing and receptions. and martin only scored 13 more touchdowns...there was two areas that Martin was clearly superior to Freeman though, protecting the ball, 17 fumbles for Martin compared to 45 for Freeman and ability to be on the field due to health. Just for the record, martin had about 700 more carries than Freeman over their jets careers.
Not even close. McNeill was a very good back, and more of a home run hitter than Martin, but Martin is one of the most consistently good players in NFL history. Also, context. There were some years when Martin was the entire Jets offense, and that has a bearing on his average per carry. -X-
The more carries you get the harder it is to have a higher YPC, as great as Freeman was when he was healthy he wasn't maintaining those averages if he had the workload that Curtis had. The most carries Freeman had in a season was 294, that's less than all but 3 seasons(including his injury shortened final season) for Curtis.
I think it's pretty interesting to compare them. For one game you may start a healthy McNeil over Martin--he was the thrid guy taken overall in the draft, definitely had all the tools for a RB. Aside from the injuries we've all mentioned, McNeil played in more of a passing offense under Joe Walton and with another back of Hector's quality, so his numbers can't match Martin's. Curtis played for Parcells and Herm, both of whom ran ran ran, almost too much.
Yes and no, in freemans 294 carry season 4.5 per carry and 11.2 per reception. In any of Martin's seasons where he carried that much or more he only met or exceeded the per carry of 4.5 twice and never sniffed even close to 11.2 yards per catch. You can argue that if Freeman had stayed healthy his per average woulda been lower, but then you'd have to argue that his career stats would have probably been equal or better than Martins...you slip into the realm of the hypothetical. And if you want to start talking on that level you need to factor in the O-LIne for both teams, Martin did run behind a much better line than McNeil.
