I know he doesnt have huge career rushing or recieving numbers. but that being said, his position doesnt really call for that. He was the lead blocker for the NFL's all time rushing leader (Emmit Smith). Without "moose" does emmit have the rushing title? Offensive linemen get in the hall, so with that being said do you believe the "moose" belongs? I know Troy Aikman, Emmit Smith, and Micheal Irvin were the glory players, who did most of the scoring, but to me at least, one of the most important factors to their success was the lead blocker who made Emmit Smith so many running lanes.

Prior to the Moose, the NFL did not have a fullback position in the Pro Bowl. That changed following his 1993 season for the Cowboys.


So does he belong? And why?

I would place him just for being part of those championship teams and for being a huge part of Emmitt Smith getting some of those big runs.

Lorenzo Neal was the better player for a longer period of time...does he belong?

Neal did play longer, but why do you consider him better? Just curious. Moose was a fantastic blocker, decent runner, and had great hands for catching out of the backfield.

Is it the yards Neil gained? Moose played a lil differant role with the cowboys than neil did, that being said i will look closer at his career, maybe he does belong

It's his ability to lead the way for backs, there may not have been a better lead blocker.

Multiple times a pro bowler and all pro...part of the NFL all decade team for the 2000's.

Emmit sure did give it up to Moose in his induction speech.

I say he deserves it. Growing up as a young buck, I always admired the "Moose" and he quickly became one of my favorite players. He basically put the position of fullback on the map. Before him, the fullback position never sent players to the pro bowl, He was the first fullback to go to the pro bowl. I think he was a great lead blocker but he was a very dangerous receiving threat and possibly the greatest "receiving" fullback of all time.

Jim Brown...Bronco Nagurski...Franco Harris...Larry Csonka...John Riggins were all fullbacks well before Moose Johnston suited up in the pros. I mean, I appreciate Johnston's game as much as the next guy, but he didn't put the position on the map and all those guys were pro bowlers (or all pros) before him, the fullback position just changed a bit over time. He was a popular player on a popular team who played an unpopular position, but there were plenty of fullbacks before him...and to me, he wasn't even the best fullback of our era.

JD, Fullbacks in today's game are a lot different then the fullbacks that you listed in that era. There' primary focus was hard noise pound the football, I mean those guys ran for over 1,000 yards a season. I guess my point is that "fullbacks" have evolved over time. Darryl Johnston was hardly a running back. Johnston helped pave the way for this new era of fullbacks by his versatility. Johnston served as Smith's lead blocker, stay in to pass protect, short yardage runner, as well as a passing threat. His versatility is what makes him special. That's not knocking the guys you listed as they were great as well but they were different.

take a look at the Defensive End position. back in the day, you had some 300 pound monster that was physical, abusive, and down right dirty control the edge. Now you take some Defensive ends in today's game and a lot of them weigh 250lbs and aren't so much physical as they are finesse. These positions have just evolved over time and Johnston was one of the guys that started the new trend. But he's definitely not the only one, Lorenzo Neal comes to mind. I would actually rank Neal above Johnston.

That's right!

CHOOO! CHOOO!

Ahhahaahahaaha. Thanks. You saved me the trouble.

I said that the position has changed, I agree with that...and different is fine, it's just that I do not see Moose as the special pioneer you do. He was a good player on a great team who couldn't do what those other fullbacks did because he was not as good all around as they were...they blocked too. Yes, they were used differently, but a lot of that is because they could be too. I just think that if Moose ends up in the Hall, Lorenzo Neal should be there too.

Looking at the DE side, today you have two flavors, one being the lighter speed rush guy, the other being the near 300 pound guy you speak of who eats up blocks and mauls people - but that really has to do with system. You have the 4-3 Dwight Freeney type, and the 3-4 Randy Starks type. It's a cycle, right now 4-3 is the more popular system in the NFL, but not long ago 3-4 was getting more popular; either way, they both still exist.

Alstott was awesome...probably a different era then Moose, or maybe not. He blocked...caught...and ran for 1,000 yards.

I agree with this post... I also believe that the Moose was great at what he did. He deserves to go to the Hall of Fame (as well as Neal). I would consider Moose a Pioneer at we he did because he was unique in his own way. Certainly not as great as the guys you mentioned but like I said, He was different.


Would you NOT consider Freeney a pioneer of "rush end"?

All players are unique...I don't know, I guess I just do not see it the way you do.

And no, I would not consider Freeney a pioneer of the 4-3 "rush end" DE.

Alstott was a BAD ASSSSSSSS!

He was. I seen his big ass barreling into the endzone at least twice year, every year, for the duration of his career. (Against the Atlanta Falcons.) He wasn't much of a blocker, but the fucker could get his big ass into the endzone.