Jamaal Charles belongs in the Hall of Fame: dealing with every wrong argument that claims otherwise

I take on the objections to why the obviously great running back deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, and note the 2 realities that show he should.

“He wasn’t great long enough.”

“He didn’t have a strong playoff track record.”

“He wasn’t enough of a winner.”

“He’s ranked X in total (insert yards/touchdowns)”

Let’s get something out of the way immediately; I am not objective on this topic. I wrote this for The Athletic when Jamaal Charles, one of the greatest runners to ever walk on to an NFL field, retired back in 2019:

Jamaal Charles once gave a speech at a Special Olympics ceremony. He mentions that he was diagnosed with a learning disability at a young age, and shared with the crowd what the Special Olympics and the discovery of his gifts meant to him.

“I was afraid. I was lost. When I was a boy, I had trouble reading. I found out I had a learning disability,” said Charles. “People made fun of me. They said I would never go anywhere. But I learned I can fly.”

My oldest son loved watching Charles. When he was younger, he would take the football and run with it after telling me he would “fly like Jamaal.” And that’s what the Hall of Fame should celebrate if it does the right thing and put him in there one day. Great athletes allow us to marvel at their abilities. But the very greatest, the ones like Jamaal Charles, make us believe we can fly, too.

I’m honest enough to admit that Charles is not a player I am objective on. He is one of my favorite players in the history of the sport, perhaps in part because he began his greatness before I began writing about the Chiefs as an actual job. There’s a purity in fanhood that you lose when you start doing this professionally. It’s an incredible job, but it costs you something in the wonder and fun, and that’s just the truth. Players are still deeply appreciated but always thinking about the “content” that will be produced after each event takes away some of the joy. And that’s just the truth.

But with Charles, I never lost that joy. I’ll never forget the first time I realized what a special player he was. It wasn’t during his incredible breakout 2009 season, when he ran for 1,120 yards and had another 297 receiving yards to go along with eight touchdowns DESPITE THE FACT THAT HE BARELY PLAYED THE FIRST HALF OF THE SEASON. On a side note, look at his game log that year sometime. The first 8 games of the year, he averaged under 6 touches a game. He was essentially a backup. Then, down the stretch in the final a 8 games, Charles ran for 968 yards (again, in 8 games) and all 7 of his touchdowns that year. But I digress.

For me, I realized Charles was special in 2008, against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. It was the only game in 2008 where Charles saw significant touches, and it was immediately apparent ( at least to me) that he had something special.

But we’re getting ahead of ourselves here. First, I want to make a statement: Jamaal Charles belongs in the Hall of Fame, and I’ll prove it to you. First, I’ll deal with the most common objections to why he shouldn’t be inducted (and show why they’re wrong to be treated as deal-breakers). After that, I’ll note how his unique accomplishments and actual, easy-to-see greatness make him an easy inclusion.

First, let’s address the arguments against him, and why they aren’t controlling enough to leave him out of the Hall.

Argument 1: Charles wasn’t great for long enough to make the Hall of Fame

Charles played in the NFL for 11 years. Of those seasons, 4 were cut very short due to injuries, and 2 (his first 2 years in the league) were abbreviated because Charles was not the primary ball carrier. It’s worth noting, as we discussed above, that one of those abbreviated seasons Charles rushed for over 1,100 yards in just 8 games starting. Yet, because of Todd Haley’s refusal to put Charles on the field full time earlier, he didn’t get enough volume to make the Pro Bowl (something Hall of Fame voters absolutely care about) over more established names.

In short, Charles only had 5 exceptional seasons as a pro, 4 of which were rewarded with All Pro mention (2) and Pro Bowl mention (4). Because of that, the argument goes, he just didn’t have enough time of greatness to be worthy of Canton.

This argument basically punishes Charles for two things: First, the fact that his coaches (insanely) hardly played him his first year and a half in the league. Second, the fact that Charles had 2 injuries derail his prime in 2011 and 2015. Two things that are completely out of his control.

That said, I understand that doing something more often or for longer is more impressive (and therefore makes one more worthy of an accolade like the Hall of Fame). But here’s what is interesting… this argument ignores the reality of players who are already in the Hall of Fame. Please note the list I’m about to give you isn’t for purposes of comparison, but to point out that “only” having 5 exceptional seasons is not some automatic barrier of entry into the Hall of Fame.

Earl Campbell, one of the greatest running backs in history, only had 5 seasons in which he rushed for over a thousand yards.

Marcus Allen, an all-time great that no one questions as a Hall of Fame player, had only 4 seasons in which he rushed for over 850 yards, and only 3 seasons in which he went over a thousand yards.

Gale Sayers, a great player whose career (much like Charles) was cut short by injuries, only played a total of 7 seasons and was only in the top of the league in rushing, etc. for 5 seasons. Essentially identical to Charles.

Terrell Davis, an icon in Denver, had 4 seasons in which he rushed for over a thousand yards. His career, like Sayers and Campbell (and Charles) was cut short as well due to the nature of the position and the tough injuries that come with it.

Larry Csonka, whose name is iconic, had 3 seasons in which he rushed for over 900 yards and only 2 more in which he rushed for over 800 yards.

I bring up these names for a simple purpose: to note that saying “he was only great for 5 years” is NOT a dispositive statement regarding Hall of Fame status. Multiple exceptions have been made for players whose careers were cut short due to circumstances outside their control, and so Charles deserves the same consideration as any of them. Now, you can say that those players are different from Charles, and we’ll address the reason Charles deserves inclusion.

However, the evidence is clear that having only half a decade of excellence does not preclude Hall of Fame entry. So we can move past that argument safely and say something akin to “IF one has half a decade of excellent performance, there must be a compelling reason to overlook the lack of longevity… does Charles have that compelling reason?”

He does, but let’s deal with the other common arguments against Charles first.

Argument 2: Charles didn’t have enough postseason success to make the Hall of Fame

This is what people generally throw back when talking about players like Davis, who didn’t have more years of elite play than Charles in the league (one fewer, in fact). The idea is that succeeding during the playoffs is of utmost importance, which is a fair statement.

That said, postseason success is a team statistic, not an individual one. This is especially true at the running back position, where it’s impossible for a player (no matter how great) to carry a team to the playoffs and beyond. The easiest example of this is Barry Sanders, who (despite being arguably the greatest running back in history) played in only 6 playoff games and 1 memorably performance of those games.

And Sanders isn’t alone. O.J. Simpson only played in one playoff game. Jim Brown played in 4. In short, postseason performance is a matter of opportunity, which is a team issue, and it’s no real measure of greatness. While it might be a factor to consider in terms of something to put a player who is on the edge over the top, it’s hardly a reason players have been kept out.

Argument 3: Charles didn’t rush for enough total yards

This is very similar to Argument 1, but different in the sense that people say things like “Charles is 56th all-time in rushing, how can he be considered one of the greatest?”

This argument has the same flaw as Argument 1 in that there are multiple players who did NOT have as much total productivity as Charles, so I won’t repeat that. We’ve already demonstrated that there are players who didn’t have Charles’ longevity are in the Hall of Fame, so it’s not a dispositive argument.

However, this argument has a different flaw in that it seems to fundamentally misunderstand what the Hall of Fame celebrates. To paraphrase many others who have said something similar, it’s not the “hall of longevity.” If a player strings together a bunch of “OK” seasons, is that better than being exceptional for 5?

Let’s ask this another way… is the career of Patrick Mahomes less impressive than the careers of Carson Palmer, Vinne Testaverde, and Drew Bledoe? Is staying healthy for a long time the same thing as greatness? I’d argue that it is not, and by using cumulative stats we reward longevity to a disproportionate amount.

Now that we’ve dealt with the 3 arguments as to why Charles shouldn’t be in the Hall of Fame, let’s talk about why he should. First, the numbers, the REAL numbers, don’t lie.

Reality Number 1- Charles should be in the Hall of Fame because he produced at a level almost no other running back has

You don’t have to believe me. You can believe the numbers. The Athletic’s Ethan Douglas once wrote in detail for Arrowhead Pride about what the advanced stats say about Jamaal Charles. The short version (which I’m using with his blessing) can be found here:

EPA is “expected points added,” basically measuring how much more likely a team is to score with every touch. Yards per carry is… well, you know. What this chart shows is players who had a significant number of carries, and how they performed with those carries.

Note that Charles stands virtually alone apart from the crowd. And this is despite the fact that the Chiefs spent multiple years of his prime with less than optimal offensive line play (with a few notable exceptions in 2013 and 2014, in which the line play improved). This is what separates him from the other greatest outlier on this graph, Chiefs legend Priest Holmes (an incredible player in his own right who happened to run behind arguably the greatest run blocking group in history). When Charles made stuff happen, it was often out of thin air. And of course, those numbers don’t contain the impact he made as a pass catcher, where he was borderline magical with the ball in his hands (we’ll talk about that soon).

If you look at the even more detailed numbers, the case for Charles being one of the greatest to ever do it gets even stronger. A number have available now that we never used to is “yards over expected,” where a player can be judged based on a number of factors on a given rush compared to what the “expected” yards should be depending on where everyone else is on the field during the play (the entire methodology is laid out here, and it’s pretty cool. It’s been shown to be quite predictive).

By utilizing this stat, we can really look and see whether Charles outperformed what other running backs would have done in his shoes. And that’s when his greatness that jumps off the screen on tape jumps out of the chart.

See Charles? He’s the dude alllllllllll the way on the top right.

In other words, when compared to other runners of high volume in this century, Charles stands absolutely, completely alone. There’s no one else like him, or even particularly close.

That sort of demonstrative superiority over literally everyone else should carry an incredible weight. The fact that a player was objectively BETTER (forgive the all-caps, I cannot think of another way to emphasis it the way it deserves) at doing his job (creating yards) than literally anyone else should be one of the biggest factors in deciding whether his name goes down among the greats. Certainly much more so than factors outside his control, like injury luck and coaches refusing to give him the ball.

If the Hall of Fame is meant to celebrate players that did it better than anyone, a player we can prove did it better than anyone should be at the front of the line.

Reality Number 2- Jamaal Charles was genuinely great

Greatness is a hard thing to describe or measure. But there is no one who actually watched Charles play that (if they’re being honest) who could deny that he was great.

This is what I wrote about Charles when trying to use words to sum up something that can’t be adequately described by words.

It’s rather challenging to explain to people who didn’t see running back Jamaal Charles play just how great he was in his prime.

“So he was fast?” Well, yes, but that’s only part of his game.

“Oh, he had really good balance?” Sure, but we’re still not there.

“He saw the field well?” Better than anyone, but still not enough.

It seems even highlight clips don’t do the trick. After all, we could probably come up with at least 5-10 clips for every star running back in which he looks amazing. There are a few select players whose brilliance isn’t completely captured on video, and in those cases, seeing them in person is the only thing that makes an onlooker realize just how special they were.

What I’m trying to say here is I really don’t know how I’ll explain the greatness of Jamaal Charles’ play to my younger kids or any other future Chiefs fan who wasn’t there to see it.

This is all still true, so I won’t waste many words here. I’ll just say this… almost no one had that magical top gear Charles did.

There were faster players than Charles, but not many. He was terrifying at that second level, and one missed tackle from a touchdown in a way few players have ever been. But it was more than that.

Almost no one has ever shown the ability to vanish in a puff of smoke away from defenders like Charles did on a routine basis.

There were a few players who could make moves like this in the open field, but not many. His ability to see the field and go precisely where he needed at precisely the right time, cutting while rarely slowing down, was something special to watch.

That combination of lethal speed, vision, and the ability to cut back wherever he needed from any angle is something that only a handful of players in league history have shared, and it shows in the numbers.

But even more than all that, Charles’ greatness was something that is glaringly, blatantly obvious whenever someone had the privilege of watching him glide down the field (twisting from contact and never losing speed) like he was on skates while the mortals around him were stuck running.

If you cannot simply watch Jamaal Charles and not see that he belongs listed among the greatest players to ever play, I don’t know what to tell you.

The arguments against him don’t hold up under scrutiny and haven’t kept other great players out. The numbers that measure impact show that he was one of the most impactful players at his position to ever walk the earth. And the eye test for greatness could not be easier.

I have been lucky enough to see some amazing players perform in person. And besides Mahomes, there’s no one that stood out the way Charles did every time he stepped onto the field (Tyreek Hill is quite close with his blinding speed). He was just a different human than those around him. His combination of traits made him appear as though he were a glitch in time. And he did so with grace and ease that belied belief.

Football is a beautiful sport. Not enough people realize it as they look at the violence and the hits, but it is a genuinely beautiful sport. And almost no one in history has exemplified that more than Jamaal Charles, the man who could fly. He belongs in the Hall of Fame more than most, and I hope one day that gets realized.

This article was made free for everyone because it’s that important. I hope you enjoyed. If you haven’t, you can still subscribe for 60% (12 dollars a year) off forever and get hundreds of film reviews and articles a year, as well as be eligible for mailbags and giveaways. Click below!