Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

7DnBrnc53 wrote:Just found this online. This person makes a lot of sense:

http://www.jeffpearlman.com/a-herschel- ... -theorist/

It makes no sense whatsoever.

CSKreager wrote:We all know the gist- Vikings traded way too much for Herschel, didn't work out, Cowboys became a dynasty.

But more specifically- WHY did it go wrong? The Vikings had more success in 1987-1988 with relatively less-than-awesome running games.

Was it NFC depth/strength? Quarterbacking woes? Misused? Too much inside game?

If anything, it's worth noting that the Eagles in 1992 did a much MUCH better job of utilizing Herschel for whatever reason than the Vikes did. The Herschel you saw that year seemed to be exactly what the Vikings were trying to do.

Also, Herschel Walker didn't want to be a Viking, and needed more money to close the deal. As was noted, the running scheme was different, but Walker was still just 27 years old, and the rest of his career was underwhelming. For one of the greatest backs in NCAA history, you just expected more at the pro level. Played a long time, and complied yardage as a receiver and returner, but was more of a complimentary piece. Won't be a Hall of Famer.

I wasn't personally impressed with the conspiracy theory although it was too long to read all of it even for me. I did find a 30 for 30 giving another perspective: http://www.espn.com/30for30/film?page=t ... aderobbery

My favorite book "Pro Football Chronicle" summed it up nicely in 1989. "Walker is a great athlete, not a great football player. A quarterback could hand him a piano instead of the ball and he would still gain 4.2 yards. Walker has everything you would look for in a great back..except the slightest hint of instinctive running ability."

conace21 wrote:My favorite book "Pro Football Chronicle" summed it up nicely in 1989. "Walker is a great athlete, not a great football player. A quarterback could hand him a piano instead of the ball and he would still gain 4.2 yards. Walker has everything you would look for in a great back..except the slightest hint of instinctive running ability."

That's very accurate. He had power and speed but absolutely no moves. He could run over and through people but he had no way of evading them. Often, if he had made even a small cut, he would have been able to use his strength to run through an arm tackle or a slightly off-balance defender, but that wasn't instinctive with him and he never learned how to do it.

rhickok1109 wrote:

conace21 wrote:My favorite book "Pro Football Chronicle" summed it up nicely in 1989. "Walker is a great athlete, not a great football player. A quarterback could hand him a piano instead of the ball and he would still gain 4.2 yards. Walker has everything you would look for in a great back..except the slightest hint of instinctive running ability."

That's very accurate. He had power and speed but absolutely no moves. He could run over and through people but he had no way of evading them. Often, if he had made even a small cut, he would have been able to use his strength to run through an arm tackle or a slightly off-balance defender, but that wasn't instinctive with him and he never learned how to do it.

Joe Greene once expressed amazement at Rocky Bleier's 1976 season, saying that Rocky gained 1000 yards without ever making a cut. I think the same can be said about Herschel Walker's 1988 season...he gained 1500 yards without ever making a tackler miss. In some sense, Walker's lack of elusiveness is what made him so spectacular in the NCAA and USFL; he would simply run over people and then outrun the guys in the secondary that were chasing him.

To respond to the thread question, I think perhaps nothing 'went wrong'. Walker was strong and durable, but not really an elite RB.

rhickok1109 wrote:

conace21 wrote:My favorite book "Pro Football Chronicle" summed it up nicely in 1989. "Walker is a great athlete, not a great football player. A quarterback could hand him a piano instead of the ball and he would still gain 4.2 yards. Walker has everything you would look for in a great back..except the slightest hint of instinctive running ability."

That's very accurate. He had power and speed but absolutely no moves. He could run over and through people but he had no way of evading them. Often, if he had made even a small cut, he would have been able to use his strength to run through an arm tackle or a slightly off-balance defender, but that wasn't instinctive with him and he never learned how to do it.

I always had the feeling Walker lost confidence, or started running more tentatively after leaving the Cowboys. A north/south runner can still be successful in the NFL, and Walker had a rare strength and speed ratio. Whatever the problem was, Walker's production as a RB was disappointing after leaving Dallas.

L.C. Greenwood wrote:

rhickok1109 wrote:

conace21 wrote:My favorite book "Pro Football Chronicle" summed it up nicely in 1989. "Walker is a great athlete, not a great football player. A quarterback could hand him a piano instead of the ball and he would still gain 4.2 yards. Walker has everything you would look for in a great back..except the slightest hint of instinctive running ability."

That's very accurate. He had power and speed but absolutely no moves. He could run over and through people but he had no way of evading them. Often, if he had made even a small cut, he would have been able to use his strength to run through an arm tackle or a slightly off-balance defender, but that wasn't instinctive with him and he never learned how to do it.

I always had the feeling Walker lost confidence, or started running more tentatively after leaving the Cowboys. A north/south runner can still be successful in the NFL, and Walker had a rare strength and speed ratio. Whatever the problem was, Walker's production as a RB was disappointing after leaving Dallas.

Well, he had one great year with Dallas, with 1518 yards in 1988, but that was mainly because he got a lot of carries. He had a 4.2 YPC. When the Cowboys traded him the following season, his YPC was only 3.0, but it went up to 4.0 with the Vikings. His averages for the next 6 seasons, with Minnesota, Philadelphia, and the Giants, were 4.2, 4.2, 4.0, 4.3, 4.7, and 4.2. So he was quite consistent in that respect and his production depended on how many carries he got. Maybe the Vikings just needed to give him the ball more often.

I always had the feeling Walker lost confidence, or started running more tentatively after leaving the Cowboys. A north/south runner can still be successful in the NFL, and Walker had a rare strength and speed ratio. Whatever the problem was, Walker's production as a RB was disappointing after leaving Dallas.[/quote]
Well, he had one great year with Dallas, with 1518 yards in 1988, but that was mainly because he got a lot of carries. He had a 4.2 YPC. When the Cowboys traded him the following season, his YPC was only 3.0, but it went up to 4.0 with the Vikings. His averages for the next 6 seasons, with Minnesota, Philadelphia, and the Giants, were 4.2, 4.2, 4.0, 4.3, 4.7, and 4.2. So he was quite consistent in that respect and his production depended on how many carries he got. Maybe the Vikings just needed to give him the ball more often.[/quote]


With a back who enjoys using his power, a team can afford to feed him the ball despite some ineffective carries. Later in games, those three yard gains turn into larger ones, as defenses become worn down. Walker retained his speed, and was able to break off some longer gains occasionally, but it wasn't sustainable. I think Walker's other teams would have enjoyed seeing him have more value as a ballcarrier, but with the exception of 1992, it didn't happen. Overall, a good career, but thought it had HOF potential. In 143 NFL games after leaving Dallas in 1988, Walker managed only three more 100 yard games than Jerome Bettis had in 2004. He did have some value as a receiver/returner, but was a complimentary piece mostly after 1988.

How do you explain Herschel's 1992 season? The Eagles must have done something right that MIN couldn't.