PDA

View Full Version : Hall of Fame 2012 class


Pages : [1] 2

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 06:32 PM
When I was in college I spent a summer interning at the Pro Football Hall of Fame working mostly through their library, but also doing a little work on the history of the selection process.

In spite of this, I don't have the sterling record at predicting enshrinement classes to the degree that I'd like. Nonetheless, here's my shot at predicting the top 5 players to get in next year (the last two spots are almost always the senior voters' representatives, which has basically become a lock for enshrinement).

This should be an interesting class because there don't look to be any first ballot guys (Will Shields and Bill Parcells having the only real chance), freeing up room to clear up the current logjam.

1) Willie Roaf- Tackle- 1993-2001 New Orleans Saints, 2002-2005 Kansas City Chiefs

Roaf didn't make it in his first year of eligibility, but it's only a matter of time. He was on the all 90's and 00's team (an almost lock for selection), and was arguably the best tackle of his era.

2) Dermontti Dawson- Center- 1988-2000 Pittsburgh Steelers

The HOF hasn't selected a center since 1998, and only two centers in the modern era have been selected (Mike Webster, Dwight Stevenson), but if I were to make a list of all-time great centers, Dawson would be 2nd or 3rd of all-time. He was a semi-finalist the last two years, he'll make it soon.

3) Chris Doleman- Defensive End/Linebacker- 1985-1993, 1999 Minnesota Vikings, 1994-95 Atlanta Falcons, 1996-1998 San Francisco 49'ers

Am I just trolling the Cris Carter supporters? I'm really not. The more people you listen to, the less surprised they are that Carter hasn't been inducted yet, and the less confident they are he will be next year either. Taking his spot as a token Viking, Chris Doleman is a really underrated player with 8 Pro Bowls, and more importantly 5 times All-Pro selection and induction on the all 90's team. Doleman is fourth all-time in sacks, ahead of Richard Dent. Cris Carter will get in eventually, but it looks like there is a wait on receivers.

4) Curtis Martin- Runningback- 1995-97 New England Patriots, 1998-2005 New York Jets

It's either him or Bettis, but I don't think both, not yet anyway. Martin is 4th overall, while Bettis is 5th. And although Bettis won the Superbowl, it's uncommon they vote in two players from the same team in one class. Dawson deserves to go first, and has been waiting longer.

5) Cortez Kennedy- Defensive Tackle- 1990-2000 Seattle Seahawks

Kennedy was always unnoticed being on some bad Seahawks team in a corner of the country most people are unaware exists. But he was a dominant presence on the d-line, compiled great numbers, and won a defensive MVP (and was another all 90's player).

Still have to wait another year: Cris Carter, Will Shields, Jerome Bettis, Andre Reed, Tim Brown, Charles Haley, Bill Parcells, Bill Cowher


The best case I can make for Carter or Bettis this year is that the HOF would be concerned that my class above would be too "boring."

Raiderz4Life
08-06-2011, 06:38 PM
I think Carter and Reed really should go in. I hate that Timmy has to wait some more but that's probably what's going to happen. I would like Bettis to get in before Martin..just my opinion though.

Splat
08-06-2011, 07:03 PM
Roaf and Shields going in at the same time would just be epic.

yo123
08-06-2011, 07:08 PM
If Curtis Martin gets in before Cris Carter I will lose all faith in this entire process.

And yes I have said this before.

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 07:27 PM
Besides being a Vikings fan, why do you think that is? I think they have very comparable careers, but it's historically easier for runningbacks to get into the HOF than receivers.

yo123
08-06-2011, 07:32 PM
Besides being a Vikings fan, why do you think that is? I think they have very comparable careers, but it's historically easier for runningbacks to get into the HOF than receivers.


I just think that Carter had the same kind of consistency while being less of a stat compiler than Martin. Martin wasn't really a gamechanger, he was always just solid but unspectacular. I know that Carter was always more of a possession guy but he still had years where he was among the best receivers in the league, and also was a part of one of the greatest offenses of all time in '98. I wouldn't mind if Martin got in eventually but I think it's too soon for him. He was always the kind of a guy who was going to get his numbers but you didn't really worry about him going off.

hockey619
08-06-2011, 08:16 PM
Roaf and Shields going in at the same time would just be epic.

agreed, I loved both those guys, just great lineman. OL never get their due because they dont have any real stats, you have to watch to see their impact on the game. and lord knows thats a lot to ask of HOF voters.

I just think that Carter had the same kind of consistency while being less of a stat compiler than Martin. Martin wasn't really a gamechanger, he was always just solid but unspectacular. I know that Carter was always more of a possession guy but he still had years where he was among the best receivers in the league, and also was a part of one of the greatest offenses of all time in '98. I wouldn't mind if Martin got in eventually but I think it's too soon for him. He was always the kind of a guy who was going to get his numbers but you didn't really worry about him going off.

i dont really like carter, and ive heard from people who know things that hes quite an arrogant *** in person.

But he definitely should be in over Martin. Like you said, martin was always just solid, never a guy that made your jaw drop or did anything too crazy. idk, its that wow quality that i think of when i think hall of fame, a guy who dominated at his position, not just solid for a long time.

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 08:27 PM
I tend to think of Carter as solid but unspectacular as well (by HOF standards).

Also, to refer to Martin as just "solid" is unfair. From '95 to '05 next to Marshall Faulk (who was clearly the best RB of that era), I'd put he and Bettis as 2A and 2B.* He's always been underrated simply for being effective and not flashy.

*Though you could split that up with Terrell Davis dominating '95-'00 and LT dominating '01-'05

Splat
08-06-2011, 08:31 PM
Off topic and I don't know why this popped in my head but are there any HOF busts with dreadlocks yet? Because that would be sweet...

Hurricanes25
08-06-2011, 08:35 PM
I tend to think of Carter as solid but unspectacular as well (by HOF standards).

Also, to refer to Martin as just "solid" is unfair. From '95 to '05 next to Marshall Faulk (who was clearly the best RB of that era), I'd put he and Bettis as 2A and 2B.* He's always been underrated simply for being effective and not flashy.

*Though you could split that up with Terrell Davis dominating '95-'00 and LT dominating '01-'05

110% agree.

A lot of the arguements used against Martin can be used against Carter as well. They both deserve to be in the HOF. Does it really matter who gets in first?

YAYareaRB
08-06-2011, 08:37 PM
curtis my favorite martin!

Saints-Tigers
08-06-2011, 08:42 PM
Roaf should be a lock. Kinda sad that he didn't go in last year, but dems da breaks for linemen.

V.I.P
08-06-2011, 08:44 PM
Marshall Faulk, amazing playing.

Marshall Faulks' speech, no so amazing...

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 08:49 PM
Richard Dent was worse. Mentioning your college is fine, but nobody wants to hear about Tennessee State for 10 minutes. You'd think it was the college HOF.

yo123
08-06-2011, 08:52 PM
agreed, I loved both those guys, just great lineman. OL never get their due because they dont have any real stats, you have to watch to see their impact on the game. and lord knows thats a lot to ask of HOF voters.



i dont really like carter, and ive heard from people who know things that hes quite an arrogant *** in person.

But he definitely should be in over Martin. Like you said, martin was always just solid, never a guy that made your jaw drop or did anything too crazy. idk, its that wow quality that i think of when i think hall of fame, a guy who dominated at his position, not just solid for a long time.


Carter definitely made some jaw dropping catches. I'd put his hands in the top 3 of all time for sure.

Granted if your looking for an completely objective opinion on Cris Carter you shouldn't ask me, but he was not just solid for a long time. He was consistently a top 2-5 receiver year in and year out. We're not talking about Hines Ward here.

Raiderz4Life
08-06-2011, 08:54 PM
I hope they replay the induction cuz I wanna see the speeches specially Shannon's.

I also agree Carter had some of the best hands ever. Top 5 for sure.

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 08:56 PM
And Martin was consistently a top 2-5 runningback. It's not like Martin ever played with an elite QB (Bledsoe, Testaverde, Chad Pennington) or elite offensive lines, but he always put up great numbers, and was on some winning ball clubs (making a Superbowl, which is more than Carter's teams had done).

I don't necessarily think Martin is a better player than Carter, I think they are quite similar, I just think Martin is more likely to get in sooner.

If there's a player Carter is likely to replace on that list, it's Chris Doleman.

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 08:57 PM
Or did you mean 2-5 of all time? Because a) I disagree and b) you really can't compare receivers in the last 20 years to the other 60 years the game existed.

yo123
08-06-2011, 09:01 PM
I tend to think of Carter as solid but unspectacular as well (by HOF standards).

Also, to refer to Martin as just "solid" is unfair. From '95 to '05 next to Marshall Faulk (who was clearly the best RB of that era), I'd put he and Bettis as 2A and 2B.* He's always been underrated simply for being effective and not flashy.

*Though you could split that up with Terrell Davis dominating '95-'00 and LT dominating '01-'05


Well once again we're getting into the longevity thing. From 95 to 05 he was definitely second to Faulk overall. But on a year by year basis I don't think he was consistently a top 5 back. Was he ever actually a top 3 back in the league? I mean, his career YPC was 4.0 and he never got above 4.5 for a season.

Hurricanes25
08-06-2011, 09:04 PM
Well once again we're getting into the longevity thing. From 95 to 05 he was definitely second to Faulk overall. But on a year by year basis I don't think he was consistently a top 5 back. Was he ever actually a top 3 back in the league? I mean, his career YPC was 4.0 and he never got above 4.5 for a season.

In 2004, his ypc was 4.6. He was 31 years old and led the league in rushing. (Oldest player in history to lead the league in rushing)

yo123
08-06-2011, 09:06 PM
Or did you mean 2-5 of all time? Because a) I disagree and b) you really can't compare receivers in the last 20 years to the other 60 years the game existed.

The only guys I'd rank clearly ahead of Carter are Rice, Moss, and Hutson (totally going off stories and stats on him obviously, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.)

Then there's kind of a cluster **** with guys like Largent, Brown, T.O, etc but I don't see how you can definitively take Carter out of the top 5. Which is part of my point here, can anyone make a serious argument for Martin as a top 5 RB ever? Totally off the top of my head Brown, Dickerson, Sanders, Simpson, and Payton take him out of the conversation entirely.

yo123
08-06-2011, 09:07 PM
In 2004, his ypc was 4.6. He was 31 years old and led the league in rushing. (Oldest player in history to lead the league in rushing)

4.6 then I guess I missed that. My point stays the same though.

Hurricanes25
08-06-2011, 09:09 PM
4.6 then I guess I missed that. My point stays the same though.

Haha, I'm not going to let you screw Curtis Martin out of .1 ypc. :)

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 09:10 PM
I'm not sure season-by-season is all that relevant when it comes to the HOF, judging by history, voters don't seem to think so nearly as much as comparing overall careers.

However, he was in the top 3 in the following years:

1995 (1,487 yards behind Emmitt Smith and Barry Sanders)
1999 (1,464 yards behind Edgerrin James)
2001 (1,513 yards behind Priest Holmes)
2004 (1,697 yards 1st overall)

That might not seem like much, but keep in mind that Cris Carter was never in the top 3 in yards, often because for much of his career he wasn't even the best receiver on his own team. Guys like David Boston and Amani Toomer were, however, showing that year-by-year isn't really a great barometer.

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 09:14 PM
The only guys I'd rank clearly ahead of Carter are Rice, Moss, and Hutson (totally going off stories and stats on him obviously, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.)

Then there's kind of a cluster **** with guys like Largent, Brown, T.O, etc but I don't see how you can definitively take Carter out of the top 5. Which is part of my point here, can anyone make a serious argument for Martin as a top 5 RB ever?
Largent is definitely above Carter. No way he's not by anyone who knows the game before 1980 (which is why fan discussions usually aren't worth much).

But you're also comparing apples and oranges, because the wide receiver position wasn't very important until the 1980's, so you're comparing 30 years of history vs. 90 years of history (and I'm still not sure I would rank Carter as a top 5 WR in the last 30 years).

Ness
08-06-2011, 09:19 PM
If Curtis Martin gets in before Cris Carter I will lose all faith in this entire process.

And yes I have said this before.

Oh I've already lost faith. Curtis Martin in before Chris Carter? That's just ridiculous.

No disrespect to Martin, he was actually one of my favorite all time players at his position, but Carter should have been in first and deserves to go in ahead of Martin.

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 09:20 PM
1) Jerry Rice
2) Randy Moss
3) Steve Largent
4) Terrell Owens
5) Marvin Harrison

You could make a case for Cris Carter, sure, but that's just in the last thirty years, and guys like Andre Johnson and Larry Fitzgerald are coming.

yo123
08-06-2011, 09:20 PM
I'm not sure season-by-season is all that relevant when it comes to the HOF, judging by history, voters don't seem to think so nearly as much as comparing overall careers.

However, he was in the top 3 in the following years:

1995 (1,487 yards behind Emmitt Smith and Barry Sanders)
1999 (1,464 yards behind Edgerrin James)
2001 (1,513 yards behind Priest Holmes)
2004 (1,697 yards 1st overall)

That might not seem like much, but keep in mind that Cris Carter was never in the top 3 in yards, often because for much of his career he wasn't even the best receiver on his own team. Guys like David Boston and Amani Toomer were, however, showing that year-by-year isn't really a great barometer.

Well first of all I hardly think we can blame Carter for not being the best receiver on his own team when he played with the second best WR of all time.

I'd argue that Carter was at a disadvantage in the yardage rankings because of his style as a possession receiver, which I suppose can be a small knock against him for not going down the field all that much. But I think there is definitely a lot of value in having a guy who moved the chains as much as he did, and pretty much caught everything thrown his way. Also an outstanding red zone guy.

Martin was a very good player don't get me wrong, I just think we need to be careful about overrating a player who averaged 4.0 YPC or less 7 out of his 11 years in the league.

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 09:21 PM
Oh I've already lost faith. Curtis Martin in before Chris Carter? That's just ridiculous.
So ridiculous it's probably going to happen.

Ness
08-06-2011, 09:22 PM
So ridiculous it's probably going to happen.

Well yes, which is why I've lost faith.

Ness
08-06-2011, 09:23 PM
Carter definitely made some jaw dropping catches. I'd put his hands in the top 3 of all time for sure.

Granted if your looking for an completely objective opinion on Cris Carter you shouldn't ask me, but he was not just solid for a long time. He was consistently a top 2-5 receiver year in and year out. We're not talking about Hines Ward here.

I'd even go as far to say that Carter probably had better hands than Rice, and Rice had some of the best hands ever.

Ness
08-06-2011, 09:25 PM
Let's not forget how many touchdowns Carter has. 130, 4th best behind Rice, Moss, and Owens.

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 09:27 PM
And Martin is 4th overall in rushing yards. So.....

I just think the more you argue the fact, the more you realize how similar the two guys are. Carter was more of an underneath and endzone guy, which is quite similar to being something of an everydown, grinder, back as a runningback.

Ness
08-06-2011, 09:28 PM
And Martin is 4th overall in rushing yards. So.....

I just think the more you argue the fact, the more you realize how similar the two guys are. Carter was more of an underneath and endzone guy, which is quite similar to being something of an everydown, grinder, back as a runningback.

Except Carter has been snubbed the last few years. I don't think Martin gets in on his first try though. Perhaps his second. I loved Martin when he was playing, still wish he was sometimes, but I just think Carter should have been in already and the more time goes on, I think it's going to screw his chances over. Just like Art Monk.

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 09:29 PM
Poor Deion, Shannon Sharpe already gave the "growing up poor and black in the South speech." He thought he was going to bring down the house, too.

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 09:30 PM
Except Carter has been snubbed the last few years. I don't think Martin gets in on his first try though. Perhaps his second.
2012 is his second try.

CashmoneyDrew
08-06-2011, 09:36 PM
Did I just turn to the Hall of Fame speech for Deion Sanders or a local station broadcasting the Saturday night sermon?

Raiderz4Life
08-06-2011, 09:46 PM
I think Andre Reed should get in before Carter or Martin tbh

Complex
08-06-2011, 09:55 PM
That might not seem like much, but keep in mind that Cris Carter was never in the top 3 in yards, often because for much of his career he wasn't even the best receiver on his own team. Guys like David Boston and Amani Toomer were, however, showing that year-by-year isn't really a great barometer.

Amani Toomer was never better than Cris Carter.

TheBoyWonder22
08-06-2011, 09:55 PM
Amani Toomer was never better than Cris Carter.
He means the best on their team.

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 10:00 PM
No, I meant guys who were top 3 in yards receiving. Obviously he's not better, I used him as an example to show that looking at year-to-year doesn't make as much sense as comparing total careers.

Everyone can have a fluke year or two.

Complex
08-06-2011, 10:02 PM
1) Jerry Rice
2) Randy Moss
3) Steve Largent
4) Terrell Owens
5) Marvin Harrison

You could make a case for Cris Carter, sure, but that's just in the last thirty years, and guys like Andre Johnson and Larry Fitzgerald are coming.

How are Steve Largent and Marvin Harrison better than Cris Carter? I know Steve Largent had crappy QBs through out most of his career but, imo he is not better than Cris Carter. Marvin Harrison should be in the top 5 mainly because he disappeared in the playoffs with the best QB throwing him the ball well 2nd best behind Tom Brady.

Edit: I just saw Randy Moss, I don't know how I missed him.

Raiderz4Life
08-06-2011, 10:05 PM
I rly lost faith in the HoF system when Michael Irvin got in before Carter. Carter>>>Irvin

boknows34
08-06-2011, 10:07 PM
1) Willie Roaf- Tackle- 1993-2001 New Orleans Saints, 2002-2005 Kansas City Chiefs

2) Dermontti Dawson- Center- 1988-2000 Pittsburgh Steelers

3) Chris Doleman- Defensive End/Linebacker- 1985-1993, 1999 Minnesota Vikings, 1994-95 Atlanta Falcons, 1996-1998 San Francisco 49'ers

4) Curtis Martin- Runningback- 1995-97 New England Patriots, 1998-2005 New York Jets

5) Cortez Kennedy- Defensive Tackle- 1990-2000 Seattle Seahawks

Still have to wait another year: Cris Carter, Will Shields, Jerome Bettis, Andre Reed, Tim Brown, Charles Haley, Bill Parcells, Bill Cowher


Swap Doleman for one of the WRs and I think that's going to be the Class of 2012. Roaf, Dawson, Martin and Kennedy all made the cut down to the Final 10 in 2011 which bodes well for their chances next year. With no obvious 1st ballot guys (2010 had Rice and Emmitt; 2011 had Deion and Faulk) next year is a golden opportunity to start clearing up the WR backlog.

boknows34
08-06-2011, 10:10 PM
How are Steve Largent and Marvin Harrison better than Cris Carter? I know Steve Largent had crappy QBs through out most of his career but, imo he is not better than Cris Carter. Marvin Harrison should be in the top 5 mainly because he disappeared in the playoffs with the best QB throwing him the ball.

Edit: I just saw Randy Moss, I don't know I missed him.

Largent retired as the all-time leader in receptions, rec yardage and TD catches. He broke Hutson's TD record which had stood for nearly half a century. That's got to carry some weight.

Ness
08-06-2011, 10:24 PM
2012 is his second try.

Are you sure? He last played in 2007.

Ness
08-06-2011, 10:25 PM
I rly lost faith in the HoF system when Michael Irvin got in before Carter. Carter>>>Irvin

Irvin before Carter LMAO.

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 10:26 PM
Yes. He was eligible this year.

bearsfan_51
08-06-2011, 10:27 PM
Marvin Harrison should be in the top 5 mainly because he disappeared in the playoffs with the best QB throwing him the ball well 2nd best behind Tom Brady.
And who could forget Cris Carter's memorable playoff performances like..uh....

You can switch Carter and Harrison and I would accept that. They are pretty damn similar in a lot of respects. Harrison had about 1,000 more yards and a slightly higher ypc avg, Carter had 12 more touchdowns.

Woody56
08-06-2011, 10:28 PM
Are you sure? He last played in 2007.

Martin never played in 07, he didn't even play in 06.

Ness
08-06-2011, 10:28 PM
Yes. He was eligible this year.

Oh I thought it had to be five years.

Ness
08-06-2011, 10:29 PM
Oh whoops he didn't actually start the 2007 season. Gotcha.

boknows34
08-06-2011, 11:12 PM
Oh whoops he didn't actually start the 2007 season. Gotcha.

Martin made the cut down to the Last 10 for the Class of 2011 with Reed, Kennedy, Roaf and Dawson. Best way to work out which HOF Class a player is first time eligible for is to add 6 years to his final season. Martin, Bettis, Faulk and Deion all played their last game in the 2005 season, waited five full seasons (2006-10) and then became eligible for the Class of 2011.

Ness
08-07-2011, 06:30 AM
Just watched the speech from Shannon Sharpe. Very touching.

BigBanger
08-07-2011, 11:32 AM
I am shocked that people still have Andre Reed even in this discussion as a Hall of Fame player. He had longevity and solid production. Was part of a winning franchise and made 4 trips to the Super Bowl, which were all loses. Okay, that's a good career, but he was the third most important part of an offense that had 2 legitimate Hall of Fame players. He was never once in his career, for any significant time, considered the a top 3 player at his own position. I think he had 10 TD catches once in a single season. Once. In 16 seasons, he had over 1,000 yards... 4 times. 4 measly times in 16 years. A guy like Sterling Sharpe (who was actually dominant and every bit as good as Jerry Rice, Michael Irvin and Andre Rison) had (5) 1,000 yard seasons in a 7 year career. Put in Sterling Sharpe, then we can talk about players who played for a really long time, compiled some nice stats and played fairly well.

My Top WRs

1. Jerry Rice
2. Randy Moss
3. Terrell Owens
4. Michael Irvin
5. Sterling Sharpe


I put knocks on Marvin Harrison and Torry Holt for coming up lame in the post season.


Cris Carter is in a similar category as Henry Ellard. I'm not sure Carter was even better than Ellard. Ellard played with dog **** at QB, ran routes all over the field, actually stretched the field and made big plays. I'm a little surprised he's been put on the waiting list, but I don't think Carter was ever that type of WR that really dominated the game. I'd put him in the Hall of Really Good. Curtis Martin, Jerome Bettis... Hall of Really Good. Marshall Faulk? Curtis Martin? There's a difference between the two.

Raiderz4Life
08-07-2011, 11:50 AM
How you gonna knock Andre Reed for being the 3rd wheel and then put Michael Irvin in your top 5....c'mon now

bearsfan_51
08-07-2011, 12:52 PM
Marshall Faulk? Curtis Martin? There's a difference between the two.

1) Duh.
2) There's also a difference between Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, and Marshall Faulk. Just because you aren't better than everyone else in the HOF doesn't mean you don't deserve to be in.

Martin and Bettis are 4th and 5th all-time in rushing, they are getting in and there's no question about it.

wordofi
08-07-2011, 01:18 PM
If Willie Roaf gets in, would that make him the first 300 lber (listed over 300 lbs. other players in the HoF may be 300 lbs., but they're not listed at 300 lbs.) to make the Hall of Fame?

BigBanger
08-07-2011, 02:00 PM
2) There's also a difference between Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, and Marshall Faulk.
Not really.


Just because you aren't better than everyone else in the HOF doesn't mean you don't deserve to be in.
No, but you should be as good as everyone else in the HOF. Otherwise, what's the point? I used Faulk as a reference since he was the last RB inducted. And there is a big difference between Marshall Faulk and Curtis Martin or Jerome Bettis.

I'd rather take Terrell Davis and Priest Holmes because they were better players than Curtis Martin. Martin played longer and has better all-time stats, but he hardly had the caliber of season that a Davis or Holmes had. Those guys dominated the league. Martin was consistently good. Jerome Bettis? Consistently good.

I'm of the opinion that there are too many players that make it on a yearly basis and too many players are considered snubs because they had long lasting careers where they were really good, but never were the best at their position. Andre Reed was never the best WR. Jermoe Bettis was never the best RB in the NFL for any extended period of time. The HOF should be reserved for the elite of the elite.

Raiderz4Life
08-07-2011, 02:05 PM
Mentioning Priest Holmes should void your whole argument. Terrell Davis...eehh...only cuz he had tha 2k season but he didn't play long enough. Holmes...no...just no...he shouldn't even be allowed in this conversation.

BigBanger
08-07-2011, 02:36 PM
Mentioning Priest Holmes should void your whole argument. Terrell Davis...eehh...only cuz he had tha 2k season but he didn't play long enough. Holmes...no...just no...he shouldn't even be allowed in this conversation.
Holmes is eligible in 2013, but I think it's funny that he's not in the debate and Davis is. Is the 2000 yard season the deciding factor? Basically, both players had 4 years of dominance. And both are extremely comparable. I would also think the two Super Bowl runs would be more important than the 2,000 yard season, especially when TD was the main reason why they won those Super Bowls.


Priest Holmes would be a first ballot HOFer in my book. He had back-to-back seasons of 24 TDs and 27 TDs. And in 8 games the following season he had 15 Total TDs before going down with an injury, that basically ended his career. From 2001 to 2004, he was one of the most dominant offensive players in the NFL. And the only reason why his dominance wasn't any longer was because of injury.


Priest Holmes from 2001 to 2004

2001 - 16 Games - 327 carries, 1,555 rushing yards, 4.8 Avg., 8 TDs, 62 receptions, 614 yards, 2 TDs. Total's: 2,169 yards, 10 TDs.

2002 - 14 games - 313 carries, 1,615 rushing yards, 5.2 Avg., 21 TDs, 70 receptions, 672 yards, 3 TDs. Total's: 2,287 yards, 24 TDs.

2003 - 16 games - 320 carries, 1,420 rushing yards, 4.4 Avg., 27 TDs, 74 receptions, 690 yards. Total's: 2,110 yards, 27 TDs.

2004 - 8 games - 196 carries, 892 rushing yards, 4.6 Avg., 14 TDs, 19 receptions, 187 yards, 1 TDs. Total's: 1,079 yards, 15 TDs.


Terrell Davis from 1995 to 1998


1995 - 14 games - 237 carries, 1,117 rushing yards, 4.7 Avg., 7 TDs, 49 receptions, 367 yards, 1 TDs. Total's: 1,484 yards, 8 TDs.

1996 - 16 games - 345 carries, 1,538 rushing yards, 4.5 Avg., 13 TDs, 36 receptions, 310 yards, 2 TDs. Total's: 1,848 yards, 15 TDs.

1997 - 15 games - 369 carries, 1,750 rushing yards, 4.7 Avg., 15 TDs, 42 receptions, 287 yards. Total's: 2,037 yards, 15 TDs.

1998 - 16 games - 392 carries, 2,008 rushing yards, 5.1 Avg., 21 TDs, 25 receptions, 217 yards, 2 TDs. Total's: 2,225 yards, 23 TDs.


I would put both of those guy in before I would put in Curtis Martin or Jerome Bettis.

Raiderz4Life
08-07-2011, 02:53 PM
Not saying TD is in it either...if it were up to me he wouldn't get in. 3-4 years of being good shouldn't get you into the HoF. Priest holmes shouldn't sniff the HoF.

Ness
08-07-2011, 03:22 PM
I am shocked that people still have Andre Reed even in this discussion as a Hall of Fame player. He had longevity and solid production. Was part of a winning franchise and made 4 trips to the Super Bowl, which were all loses. Okay, that's a good career, but he was the third most important part of an offense that had 2 legitimate Hall of Fame players. He was never once in his career, for any significant time, considered the a top 3 player at his own position. I think he had 10 TD catches once in a single season. Once. In 16 seasons, he had over 1,000 yards... 4 times. 4 measly times in 16 years. A guy like Sterling Sharpe (who was actually dominant and every bit as good as Jerry Rice, Michael Irvin and Andre Rison) had (5) 1,000 yard seasons in a 7 year career. Put in Sterling Sharpe, then we can talk about players who played for a really long time, compiled some nice stats and played fairly well.

My Top WRs

1. Jerry Rice
2. Randy Moss
3. Terrell Owens
4. Michael Irvin
5. Sterling Sharpe


I put knocks on Marvin Harrison and Torry Holt for coming up lame in the post season.


Cris Carter is in a similar category as Henry Ellard. I'm not sure Carter was even better than Ellard. Ellard played with dog **** at QB, ran routes all over the field, actually stretched the field and made big plays. I'm a little surprised he's been put on the waiting list, but I don't think Carter was ever that type of WR that really dominated the game. I'd put him in the Hall of Really Good. Curtis Martin, Jerome Bettis... Hall of Really Good. Marshall Faulk? Curtis Martin? There's a difference between the two.

Was Curtis Martin ever considered a top three running back at his position? I think you can make a case for Reed being a top three player at his position at some point during his career. It's all subjective.

Ness
08-07-2011, 03:32 PM
Not saying TD is in it either...if it were up to me he wouldn't get in. 3-4 years of being good shouldn't get you into the HoF. Priest holmes shouldn't sniff the HoF.

Right, and it pains me to say it but this is why Sterling Sharpe isn't getting in. Terrell Davis has the best case you can make for someone that played a short career due to the two Super Bowls which is basically got for Denver, elite stats during that tenure, and an MVP. He basically had a Hall of Fame career in a short period of time. The only thing that is missing is the longevity, which is a big deciding factor. I love Holmes, but he should not be anywhere near Canton.

BigBanger
08-07-2011, 03:40 PM
Not saying TD is in it either...if it were up to me he wouldn't get in. 3-4 years of being good shouldn't get you into the HoF. Priest holmes shouldn't sniff the HoF.
TD is never going to get in, let alone Priest Holmes or Sterling Sharpe, but those guys were actually dominating players that do get snubbed because of injury shortened careers. While a guy like Andre Reed makes the final list of ten because his career stats, which are nice, make him out to be some dominating player when he wasn't. He isn't snubbed. He just doesn't belong. Cris Carter and Tim Brown were much better players than Reed.

The HOF standards, by past precedent, say that 3 to 4 years of dominance, when your career is short lived, is enough to make it in.

Ness
08-07-2011, 03:52 PM
The HOF standards, by past precedent, say that 3 to 4 years of dominance, when your career is short lived, is enough to make it in.

Another reason why I've lost faith in some of the voting. If we're talking modern players by that method getting in.

BigBanger
08-07-2011, 04:22 PM
Was Curtis Martin ever considered a top three running back at his position? I think you can make a case for Reed being a top three player at his position at some point during his career. It's all subjective.
In a single season? Reed might have been close. I think of him the same way I think of Derrick Mason. Expect Reed got a lot more exposure playing for an open, hurry up offense that went to 4 straight Super Bowls.

Right, and it pains me to say it but this is why Sterling Sharpe isn't getting in. Terrell Davis has the best case you can make for someone that played a short career due to the two Super Bowls which is basically got for Denver, elite stats during that tenure, and an MVP. He basically had a Hall of Fame career in a short period of time. The only thing that is missing is the longevity, which is a big deciding factor. I love Holmes, but he should not be anywhere near Canton.

Guys like Holmes and TD are the reason why I can't put in Martin or Bettis, and I loved the Bus. I know the two guys not getting in were the dominating players on a year by year basis. Martin/Bus never even came close to matching the kind of numbers Holmes and TD put up in a span of 4 years. Very few RBs not in the Hall of Fame have put up those kind of numbers during a 4 year stretch. I think there should be exceptions. Streling Sharpe, Priest Holmes and Terrell Davis are exceptions. Those guys were at the pinnacle of the sport and they were better than a lot of players at their position who could never put up the kind of numbers they did.


Look at Earl Campbell's numbers, and then tell me Priest Holmes doesn't belong. Earl Campbell is one of my favorite players of all-time. It shouldn't be solely about production, but about dominance. Campbell really only had 5 years of dominance (or even decent production). But it was a great five years. When he was healthy, Campbell was in a class of his own. When Priest Holmes was healthy, he put up numbers that few RBs have rivaled. IMO, Holmes' 3 1/2 year stretch is as impressive as any other RB that ever played.

bearsfan_51
08-07-2011, 04:24 PM
IMO, Holmes' 3 1/2 year stretch is as impressive as any other RB that ever played.
I can't think of anyone that would agree with you, but everyone is entitled to their opinion.

dannyz
08-07-2011, 04:24 PM
Will Roger Craig ever get in? I was watching NFLN and they just kept saying Marshall Faulk was the First ever Receiving RB and I was like Craig was doing before him. I know you can't put everyone from those 80's 49ERS but he has a couple of Super Bowl Rings and his stats are not Bad.

bearsfan_51
08-07-2011, 04:28 PM
It's also worth noting that Priest Holmes played behind the greatest offensive line since at least the 90's Cowboys.

Ness
08-07-2011, 04:32 PM
Will Roger Craig ever get in? I was watching NFLN and they just kept saying Marshall Faulk was the First ever Receiving RB and I was like Craig was doing before him. I know you can't put everyone from those 80's 49ERS but he has a couple of Super Bowl Rings and his stats are not Bad.

Craig is never getting in. Unless he's like 80 years old.

Ness
08-07-2011, 04:39 PM
In a single season? Reed might have been close. I think of him the same way I think of Derrick Mason. Expect Reed got a lot more exposure playing for an open, hurry up offense that went to 4 straight Super Bowls.



Guys like Holmes and TD are the reason why I can't put in Martin or Bettis, and I loved the Bus. I know the two guys not getting in were the dominating players on a year by year basis. Martin/Bus never even came close to matching the kind of numbers Holmes and TD put up in a span of 4 years. Very few RBs not in the Hall of Fame have put up those kind of numbers during a 4 year stretch. I think there should be exceptions. Streling Sharpe, Priest Holmes and Terrell Davis are exceptions. Those guys were at the pinnacle of the sport and they were better than a lot of players at their position who could never put up the kind of numbers they did.


Look at Earl Campbell's numbers, and then tell me Priest Holmes doesn't belong. Earl Campbell is one of my favorite players of all-time. It shouldn't be solely about production, but about dominance. Campbell really only had 5 years of dominance (or even decent production). But it was a great five years. When he was healthy, Campbell was in a class of his own. When Priest Holmes was healthy, he put up numbers that few RBs have rivaled. IMO, Holmes' 3 1/2 year stretch is as impressive as any other RB that ever played.
I think it's going to be harder though as time moves on for certain players to get in. Campbell played a long time ago when stats and whatever aren't as important as they seem to be now. Wide receivers for example are going to get harder to classify and going to have to rely more on people that actually watched them played. You'll have guys like Chad Johnson and Steve Smith with a handful of 1,000 yard seasons, which may complicate things further. The game is so much in favor of offense now. Not to mention people seem to rely more on statistics a lot.

BigBanger
08-07-2011, 05:03 PM
I can't think of anyone that would agree with you, but everyone is entitled to their opinion.

He averaged 22 TDs a season for 3 straight years. Who else has done that? LT? Is there anyone else? Maybe Emmitt? Dickerson? Alexander?

bearsfan_51
08-07-2011, 05:59 PM
He averaged 22 TDs a season for 3 straight years. Who else has done that? LT? Is there anyone else? Maybe Emmitt? Dickerson? Alexander?
That's a really impressive statistic. I still don't think you'd find many people that would say Priest Holmes is an elite runningback (see a page or two back where I discussed the pitfalls of year-to-year comparisons).

yo123
08-07-2011, 06:02 PM
He averaged 22 TDs a season for 3 straight years. Who else has done that? LT? Is there anyone else? Maybe Emmitt? Dickerson? Alexander?

3 HOF offensive linemen will do that for you.

Hurricanes25
08-07-2011, 08:44 PM
Priest Holmes was great for those 3 or so years but other than that, he did nothing. He is not a HOF player.

Same goes for Terrell Davis. 4 great years and nothing else.

Splat
08-07-2011, 08:48 PM
Coming from a huge Chiefs and Priest Holmes fan he is not in any way a HOF.

Jimmy
08-07-2011, 10:20 PM
I can't remember where I heard this, but this is the way I now judge if a player if Hall of Fame worthy or not.

Can you tell the unabridged story of the NFL without mentioning that player's name? If so, he does not belong in the hall of fame.

Philliez01
08-07-2011, 11:23 PM
I can't remember where I heard this, but this is the way I now judge if a player if Hall of Fame worthy or not.

Can you tell the unabridged story of the NFL without mentioning that player's name? If so, he does not belong in the hall of fame.

I like that idea but it still has its flaws. Some people are canonized in history for a simple moment, a game, a season or a career. Roger Maris was the single-season HR leader for how many years? I know it's a different sport but does it make him a Hall of Famer?

But I see that point. Could you tell your children about this player and how great he was? Or is a certain player just a very important member of a team's history? The latter are guys like Bettis, Reed, etc. who aren't first-balloters and might be debated for a while. Some guys I feel just belong in a Ring of Honor (not necessarily those two) as opposed to a Hall of Fame.

Hall of Fame voting is one of my favorite things though. I love rehashing old arguments, debating past players, etc. It's the geek in me I guess.

BigBanger
08-08-2011, 01:22 AM
I still don't think you'd find many people that would say Priest Holmes is an elite runningback.
But Curtis Martin is?

Holmes had 94 career TDs to Martin's 100. Holmes accomplished those numbers in 8 seasons (only 3 seasons with 14+ starts) compared to Martin's 11 seasons in the league (where he started at least 12 every year). Martin never had 2,000 yards from scrimmage. Holmes was well on pace to do it 4 straight years before an injury. Martin scored 15+ TDs twice in his career. Holmes did it in 3 straight years. You could literally, and I mean literally, pick and chose Curtis Martins best four years of his career and compare them to Holmes' first four years in KC, and Holmes numbers are pretty staggering compared to a future Hall of Fame RB, especially when Holmes played in 10 less games.


Curtis Martin's Best 4 Years of Career

2004: 16 Games - 371 Carriers, 1,697 rushing yards, 4.6 Avg., 12 TDs, 41 receptions, 245 yards, 2 TDs. Total yards: 1942 yards, 14 TDs.

1995 - 16 games - 368 Carriers, 1,487 rushing yards, 4.0 Avg., 14 TDs, 30 Receptions, 261 yards, 1 TD. Total yards: 1,748. Total TDs: 15 TDs.

2001 - 16 games - 333 Carriers, 1,513 rushing yards, 4.5 Avg., 10 TDs, 53 Receptions, 320 yards. Total yards: 1,833. Total TDs: 10 TDs.

1996 - 16 games - 316 Carriers, 1,152 rushing yards, 3.6 Avg., 14 TDs, 46 Receptions, 333 yards, 3 TDs. Total yards: 1,485. Total TDs: 17 TDs.


4 Year Totals: 64 games - 1,388 Carriers, 5,849 rushing yards, 4.2 Avg., 50 TDs, 170 Receptions, 1,159 yards, 6 TDs. Total yards: 7,008. Total TDs: 56 TDs. Total Yards Per Game: 109.5.



Priest Holmes from 2001 to 2004


2001 - 16 Games - 327 carries, 1,555 rushing yards, 4.8 Avg., 8 TDs, 62 receptions, 614 yards, 2 TDs. Total's: 2,169 yards, 10 TDs.

2002 - 14 games - 313 carries, 1,615 rushing yards, 5.2 Avg., 21 TDs, 70 receptions, 672 yards, 3 TDs. Total's: 2,287 yards, 24 TDs.

2003 - 16 games - 320 carries, 1,420 rushing yards, 4.4 Avg., 27 TDs, 74 receptions, 690 yards. Total's: 2,110 yards, 27 TDs.

2004 - 8 games - 196 carries, 892 rushing yards, 4.6 Avg., 14 TDs, 19 receptions, 187 yards, 1 TDs. Total's: 1,079 yards, 15 TDs.


4 Year Totals: 54 games - 1,156 Carriers, 5,482 rushing yards, 4.7 Avg., 70 TDs, 225 Receptions, 2,163 yards, 6 TDs. Total yards: 7,645. Total TDs: 76 TDs. Total Yards Per Game: 141.5.



Does longevity make you elite, even though you rarely played at an elite level?

Because that's my major gripe. If you play long enough, and if you're good enough to start, you can compile some historically impressive statistics. Does that alone make you a Hall of Fame player?

In my book, Priest Holmes, although short lived, was one of the best RBs I have seen since the last 90s/early 00s. He'd make my Top 5 and I'd put him ahead of Curtis Martin. I go by the eye ball test. And what I saw from Holmes, I saw only from the greatest RBs that ever played. I'd even consider him the second best RB of the 2000s.

bearsfan_51
08-08-2011, 08:47 AM
But Curtis Martin is?
No, but whereas nobody said that Martin was elite, you did say that Holmes was.

hockey619
08-08-2011, 09:09 AM
No, but whereas nobody said that Martin was elite, you did say that Holmes was.

I think its pretty much a given that if a guy is getting hall of fame talk, its because those doing the talking think hes elite (or they are insinuating as much).

And if Martin isnt elite, then why would he go to the hall?

bearsfan_51
08-08-2011, 09:15 AM
I think its pretty much a given that if a guy is getting hall of fame talk, its because those doing the talking think hes elite (or they are insinuating as much).
I guess that depends on how you define elite, but there are already 276 players in the HOF.

He's getting in because he ran for more yards than all but 3 people that ever played in the NFL. He's getting in and there's absolutely no doubt about it. It's ridiculous that this is even being argued about.

You can argue whether he should get in, fine. But if you honestly don't understand why he's getting in, I'd recommend following a more simple sport like paint chip eating or banging your face into a wall.

Splat
08-08-2011, 09:20 AM
No, but whereas nobody said that Martin was elite, you did say that Holmes was.

I think Holmes was elite but only for a short time and that doesn't put you in the HOF.

jth1331
08-08-2011, 12:17 PM
I think people overvalue total yards.
Football is too young of a sport to really put an emphasis on total yards on all time ranks.
Like Art Monk for instance, who is not a HOFer in my eyes. In the span of what, 16 years since he retired, 10 guys surpasses his receptions mark already. Then you have guys who very well may surpass it still active in Mason, Wayne, Johnson, etc.
Why is Monk a HOFer, but not Andre Reed?
Martin was a solid back, elite I wouldn't say so. He didn't score as much as an elite back should.

Now, Terrell Davis absolutely trumps Martin. Terrell Davis wasn't just good for 4 years, he was flat out dominant. In 4 years he had over 6,500 total yards, 61 touchdowns, won 2 Super Bowls, Super Bowl MVP, NFL MVP, 3 Pro Bowls, 3 1st team All- Pro's, and not just regular season domination, but post season.
8 career postseason games, 1,140 yards on a 5.59 ypc and 12 touchdowns.
At some point, you really need to take out longevity stats for certain individuals.

Raiderz4Life
08-08-2011, 12:41 PM
**** it lets put Bo Jackson in

FUNBUNCHER
08-08-2011, 12:45 PM
I think people overvalue total yards.
Football is too young of a sport to really put an emphasis on total yards on all time ranks.
Like Art Monk for instance, who is not a HOFer in my eyes. In the span of what, 16 years since he retired, 10 guys surpasses his receptions mark already. Then you have guys who very well may surpass it still active in Mason, Wayne, Johnson, etc.
Why is Monk a HOFer, but not Andre Reed?
Martin was a solid back, elite I wouldn't say so. He didn't score as much as an elite back should.

Now, Terrell Davis absolutely trumps Martin. Terrell Davis wasn't just good for 4 years, he was flat out dominant. In 4 years he had over 6,500 total yards, 61 touchdowns, won 2 Super Bowls, Super Bowl MVP, NFL MVP, 3 Pro Bowls, 3 1st team All- Pro's, and not just regular season domination, but post season.
8 career postseason games, 1,140 yards on a 5.59 ypc and 12 touchdowns.
At some point, you really need to take out longevity stats for certain individuals.

Too young a sport?? The NFL started in 1920. The NBA started in 1949.

Durability and consistency are two of the most underrated traits considered by fans when evaluating which players are HOFs and which ones aren't.

Secondly, people have a hard time grasping that a player can have a 'quiet' HOF career.

IMO there's some truth to the argument that if Lawrence Taylor played for the Patriots and Andre Tippett played for the Giants, it would be Tippett and not Taylor who was regarded as the better OLB.

And sorry, but stats do matter for RBs. Some numbers are automatic, and rushing for 13,000 yards is one of those markers.


For those who think total yards are overrated, consider the odds are that NONE of the RBs currently playing will top 13000 for their career, other than Tomlinson.

And you can't say on one hand TDs are important but yardage for a RB isn't.

Was Terrell Davis a special RB?? Or was he the beneficiary of playing in a 'runningback friendly' scheme(ZBS) under Shahanan??

How successful would Martin have been playing in Denver?? What kind of numbers would he have put up in Mile High??

I wouldn't be surprised to see TD one day make the HOF, voted in by the veteran's committee, but otherwise injuries robbed him of what could have been statistically a HOF career.

Stop acting like you're repping TD, when in fact you're denigrating Curtis Martin's accomplishments. What NFL RB had nearly the success Terrell Davis had over a 4 year span???

Doesn't mean TD was better, just that he was on the verge of career greatness.

bearsfan_51
08-08-2011, 01:13 PM
Bo Jackson certainly gets in my "players I wanted to be growing up" Hall of Fame. Also included are Randall Cunningham and Steve Young (until I found out what Mormonism was...sorry Mormons).

BigBanger
08-09-2011, 12:50 AM
Durability and consistency are two of the most underrated traits considered by fans when evaluating which players are HOFs and which ones aren't.
Durability has a lot to do with luck just as much as anything else. Guys like Terrell Davis, Priest Holmes, Kenny Easley and Sterling Sharpe were flat out unlucky. The consistency was there... oh, my God was it there... but these guys simply suffered career ending injuries.

Longevity is also overcompensated for good, decent players. As jth1331 said, Art Monk did nothing spectacular in his career. Nothing. He had a couple seasons, a couple, throughout a 16 year career where he was viewed as the best player at his position. 3 out of 16. That should not get ANYONE into the HOF.

Here's why Monk is not a HOF player:

He ranked in the top 10 in receptions in just 4 of his 16 years. 3 times in the top 5. That's not all that impressive. He gets a lot of credit for catching 100 passes when people didn't do that. Well, he did it once in his career. And while he was playing, people actually were doing that. People were even breaking his record. Sterling Sharpe broke his record. And then broke it again. This is a guy who caught more than 80 passes just 3 times in his career. 80 passes. So this perception that he was catching 100 balls every year... he wasn't doing it. He did it once. He sniffed 100 catches only one other time in his career.


Monk ranked in the top 10 in TDs ONCE in his entire career. He had 9 TDs in 1991 and ranked in a tie for 9th place. Never caught 10 TD passes in his career. He actually averaged 4.5 TD catches per season throughout his career. Yeah, I don't know how that gets you into the HOF. But thankfully for him, a bunch of people just looked at his career stats and cried foul, so HOF voters said, "Let's put him in. People are bitching about it." And that's what they're doing with Andre Reed. And eventually, Andre Reed (who was actually a better player than Monk) will make it in too, but for the only reason that he played for a long time and put up, mostly, decent stats on a year by year basis. Neither were anything close to playing like a dominating player, but they played a long time, and playing for a long time gets you into the Hall of Fame.

Art Monk was a good player for a long time. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less. That's all he was. Andre Reed? Little more than that. Monk had some nice career stats, but they're pretty much meaningless when you were considered the best player at your position for about two or three years during a 16 year career. Gary Clark, his own teammate, was producing as much and sometimes even more than Monk during his prime.




Secondly, people have a hard time grasping that a player can have a 'quiet' HOF career.
Curtis Martin definitely had that.



And you can't say on one hand TDs are important but yardage for a RB isn't.
TDs are the only thing that gives Cris Carter a leg to stand on as far as the Hall of Fame is concerned. If Carter had 68 career TD catches, he would be Rod Smith (who I respect more than just about any other WR to ever play, but he's no HOFer).


Was Terrell Davis a special RB?? Or was he the beneficiary of playing in a 'runningback friendly' scheme(ZBS) under Shahanan??
This question has been answered. See history. No other Bronco RB accomplished anything remotely close to what Terrell Davis did.

How successful would Martin have been playing in Denver?? What kind of numbers would he have put up in Mile High??
What if I stepped on Curtis Martin's head when he was a child? Would he get a concussion and die while playing High School Football, thus making this debate nonexistent?

I wouldn't be surprised to see TD one day make the HOF, voted in by the veteran's committee, but otherwise injuries robbed him of what could have been statistically a HOF career.
Hid did have a HOF career. If you watched what he did, and I believe you did, then there should be no question.

What NFL RB had nearly the success Terrell Davis had over a 4 year span???
Quite a few. And they're all called Hall of Fame RBs.

Doesn't mean TD was better, just that he was on the verge of career greatness.
Yeah, it does mean that he was better. TD was a better player than Curtis Martin. You can slice it and dice it anyway you want, but he was simply a better player. He's got 2 rings to prove it. He's got a 2,000 yard season. He dominated the postseason. What did Curtis Martin do in the postseason? It was kinda like his career. Some good, some mediocre, but not much to write home about.

Here is what Curtis Martin has going for him: 2 things... (1) consecutive seasons over 1,000 yards rushing and (2) career rushing yards.

That's all he has to hang his hat on. Its good enough to get him into the HOF. It's also so unspectacular that people are going to think, "Curtis Martin? He did that? Wow." And then move on.

V.I.P
08-09-2011, 01:04 AM
Will John Lynch make the HOF?

BigBanger
08-09-2011, 01:07 AM
Will John Lynch make the HOF?
Without question.

Ravens1991
08-09-2011, 01:09 AM
How bout Hines Ward???? I have been in a debate w/ my coach for weeks about it. I say no because he isnt a top 5 WR in his era. But my coach brings up good points about having the same amount of catches as Moss and his rings. I still dont think he deserves it though but it maybe my bias.

bearsfan_51
08-09-2011, 01:09 AM
I wouldn't have put Monk in either, but I think Martin was a better player than Monk.

I also certainly wouldn't put Andre Reed in, I don't get that at all.

Not sure about John Lynch. Personally? I'd put him in. I think he's the best strong safety from 1997-2007, and that's certainly enough to put him in. Will he get in? I'm much less certain. Next to interior lineman, safety is the position that's hardest to get into the HOF (not counting kickers, who aren't really football players).

Sapp is a lock. Brooks is a lock. Does that defense get 3 HOF players? I'm not sure, but I think he deserves it.

bearsfan_51
08-09-2011, 01:10 AM
How bout Hines Ward???? I have been in a debate w/ my coach for weeks about it. I say no because he isnt a top 5 WR in his era. But my coach brings up good points about having the same amount of catches as Moss and his rings. I still dont think he deserves it though but it maybe my bias.
No. For the reasons you mentioned. This is an era of dominant receivers, and Ward isn't one of them.

He's helped by the Superbowl MVP, but still no.

bearsfan_51
08-09-2011, 01:12 AM
Yeah it does mean that he was better. TD was a better player than Curtis Martin. You can slice it, dice it anyway you want, but he was simply a better player. He's got 2 rings to prove it.
Also why Jeff Hostetler is a better QB than Dan Marino. Even moreso the case because runningbacks are usually judged by the number of Superbowls they win.

BigBanger
08-09-2011, 01:24 AM
Next to interior lineman, safety is the position that's hardest to get into the HOF (not counting kickers, who aren't really football players)
Forgot about that. He should be a lock. I thought Steve Atwater would be a lock and who is mentioning Steve Atwater as possible HOF player? No one. To me, Atwater was a first ballot kind of guy. So many great players need to get in at certain positions. Safety is one of them.

Rodney Harrison, Brian Dawkins, John Lynch... they should all get in. Darren Sharper?

Philliez01
08-09-2011, 01:25 AM
How bout Hines Ward???? I have been in a debate w/ my coach for weeks about it. I say no because he isnt a top 5 WR in his era. But my coach brings up good points about having the same amount of catches as Moss and his rings. I still dont think he deserves it though but it maybe my bias.

Hines Ward is one of those immense fan favorites, intangible-laden guys who play hard but not special. He never dominated nor was he ever really "special". He might make the outskirts of the debate on who should go in or not but I can't see anything else.

I think a good question would be which coaches from the 90s onward make it?

bearsfan_51
08-09-2011, 01:28 AM
Speaking of great defenses, it's interesting to note that the 2000 Ravens will have 4 likely HOF players, but only two of those were from the defense (R. Lewis and Rod Woodson, who obviously isn't getting in primarily from his years as a Raven).

The rest of the defense was mostly really good, but not elite players like Peter Boulware, Chris McAllister, and Sam Adams. Nobody other than Lewis really has a chance.

boknows34
08-09-2011, 01:33 AM
Speaking of great defenses, it's interesting to note that the 2000 Ravens will have 4 likely HOF players, but only two of those were from the defense (R. Lewis and Charles Woodson, who obviously isn't getting in primarily from his years as a Raven).

The rest of the defense was mostly really good, but not elite players like Peter Boulware, Chris McAllister, and Sam Adams. Nobody other than Lewis really has a chance.

I think you mean Rod Woodson who is already enshrined in Canton. Shannon Sharpe (2011) and Jon Ogden (eligible 2013) being the other two to make it 4 Ravens.

bearsfan_51
08-09-2011, 01:41 AM
Yeah, Rod Woodson. Thanks.

boknows34
08-09-2011, 02:02 AM
Kenny Easley
5 Pro Bowls
4 1st team All-Pros
1 2nd team All Pro
1984 Defensive Player of the Year
1980s All Decade team (First Team)
Career cut short through illness after 7 seasons. (Sterling Sharpe of safeties)
Only Defensive player on 1st team 1980s All Decade team not in the HOF
Hasn't got a sniff of Canton

Darren Woodson
5 Pro Bowls
3 1st team All-Pros
Starter on 3 Super Bowl winning teams
Hasn't got a sniff of Canton

Steve Atwater
8 Pro Bowls
2 1st team All-Pros
1 2nd team All Pro
Starter on 2 Super Bowl winning teams
1990s All Decade team (First Team)
Hasn't got a sniff of Canton

LeRoy Butler
4 Pro Bowls
4 1st team All-Pros
Starter on 1 Super Bowl winning team
1990s All Decade team (First Team)
Hasn't got a sniff of Canton


* Retired but not yet eligible
John Lynch
9 Pro Bowls
2 1st team All-Pros
2 2nd team All Pros
Starter on 1 Super Bowl winning team
Eligible in 2013

Rodney Harrison
2 Pro Bowls
2 1st team All-Pros
1 2nd team All Pro
Starter on 2 Super Bowl winning teams
30 sacks/30 interceptions
Eligible in 2014


* Still Active
Brian Dawkins
8 Pro Bowls
4 1st team All-Pros
1 2nd team All Pro
2000s All Decade team (First Team)

Darren Sharper
5 Pro Bowls
2 1st team All-Pros
4 2nd team All Pros
2000s All Decade team (Second Team)
63 Interceptions (6th all-time)
1,412 interception ret yds (3rd all-time)
11 interception ret TDS (2nd all-time)

Ness
08-09-2011, 02:06 AM
How bout Hines Ward???? I have been in a debate w/ my coach for weeks about it. I say no because he isnt a top 5 WR in his era. But my coach brings up good points about having the same amount of catches as Moss and his rings. I still dont think he deserves it though but it maybe my bias.

If he played a few more seasons, maybe. We'll have to see. Unfortunately I can't think of one year where Ward was arguably the best receiver in the NFL. 2002 would be the closest, and even at that point there were others guys like Owens, Harrison, Holt, and Moss that personally I would have put ahead of Ward. The thing that Ward has going for him seems to be that he's played for a long time and has been very durable throughout this career.

Ness
08-09-2011, 02:12 AM
Kenny Easley
5 Pro Bowls
4 1st team All-Pros
1 2nd team All Pro
1984 Defensive Player of the Year
1980s All Decade team (First Team)
Career cut short through illness after 7 seasons. (Sterling Sharpe of safeties)
Only Defensive player on 1st team 1980s All Decade team not in the HOF
Hasn't got a sniff of Canton

Darren Woodson
5 Pro Bowls
3 1st team All-Pros
Starter on 3 Super Bowl winning teams
Hasn't got a sniff of Canton

Steve Atwater
8 Pro Bowls
2 1st team All-Pros
1 2nd team All Pro
Starter on 2 Super Bowl winning teams
1990s All Decade team (First Team)
Hasn't got a sniff of Canton

LeRoy Butler
4 Pro Bowls
4 1st team All-Pros
Starter on 1 Super Bowl winning team
1990s All Decade team (First Team)
Hasn't got a sniff of Canton


* Retired but not yet eligible
John Lynch
9 Pro Bowls
2 1st team All-Pros
2 2nd team All Pros
Starter on 1 Super Bowl winning team
Eligible in 2013

Rodney Harrison
2 Pro Bowls
2 1st team All-Pros
1 2nd team All Pro
Starter on 2 Super Bowl winning teams
30 sacks/30 interceptions
Eligible in 2014


* Still Active
Brian Dawkins
8 Pro Bowls
4 1st team All-Pros
1 2nd team All Pro
2000s All Decade team (First Team)

Darren Sharper
5 Pro Bowls
2 1st team All-Pros
4 2nd team All Pros
2000s All Decade team (Second Team)
63 Interceptions (6th all-time)
1,412 interception ret yds (3rd all-time)
11 interception ret TDS (2nd all-time)

LeRoy Butler was so annoying in the 90's when the 49ers played the Packers.

Too bad Kenny Easley didn't play a few more seasons. Probably would have been in Canton by now if he didn't get sick.

boknows34
08-09-2011, 02:21 AM
If he played a few more seasons, maybe. We'll have to see. Unfortunately I can't think of one year where Ward was arguably the best receiver in the NFL. 2002 would be the closest, and even at that point there were others guys like Owens, Harrison, Holt, and Moss that personally I would have put ahead of Ward. The thing that Ward has going for him seems to be that he's played for a long time and has been very durable throughout this career.

His postseason resume might be enough to get him over the line in the eyes of some voters.

17 games
88 catches
1,181 yds
10 TDs
Super Bowl MVP
2 Super Bowl rings

I can see Ward making it but only after a long wait and an Art Monk style campaign.

FUNBUNCHER
08-09-2011, 05:05 AM
Safeties don't get into Canton.

Ness
08-09-2011, 05:46 AM
Safeties don't get into Canton.

This is true, and unfortunate. There are a couple that deserve to be in. Atwater for sure.

JHL6719
08-09-2011, 05:54 AM
Steve Atwater was an absolute terror. For a long time.

I'll never forget the lick he came up and delivered on Christian Okoye. I wonder if the "Nigerian Nightmare" still checks under his bed at night for Atwater....

jth1331
08-10-2011, 09:56 AM
I personally hate the HOF for football. Its too easy to get in, and its bias like crazy.
Very few at certain positions when the resume qualifies them for induction. Look at that list of safeties. Atwater was arguably the best safety of the '90's and not even a sniff at consideration.
You have past studs get passed over for other players of more popular teams. Randy Gradishar I heard was regarded as one of the best LB's of his era, but he constantly got passed over.

Ravens1991
08-10-2011, 10:04 AM
eaking of safeties its gonna be interesting to see who gets left out out of this era. Troy P, Ed Ree, Dawkins, Darren Sharper, Rodney Harrison. Someones gonna get left out

Raiderz4Life
08-10-2011, 10:43 AM
eaking of safeties its gonna be interesting to see who gets left out out of this era. Troy P, Ed Ree, Dawkins, Darren Sharper, Rodney Harrison. Someones gonna get left out

Let it be Harrison

Ness
08-10-2011, 12:28 PM
eaking of safeties its gonna be interesting to see who gets left out out of this era. Troy P, Ed Ree, Dawkins, Darren Sharper, Rodney Harrison. Someones gonna get left out

More like all of them. If Atwater isn't even getting consideration, how are these other players going to get in? Guys like Joey Browner aren't even getting a nod.

FUNBUNCHER
08-10-2011, 12:57 PM
Polamalu and Ed Reed are near locks, which is unheard of for a safety.

I think what's going to happen is the Hall is going to hit a dry patch in the next decade for finding Canton worthy candidates; there aren't many WRs, RBs, QBs, LBs and DEs left who are really HOF worthy IMO.

That's when we could see a renaissance by the HOF committee and a 'rediscovery' of the importance of the safety position in the NFL.

Safeties used to be stereotyped as too slow to play corner, too small to play LB. We all understand now that an elite safety can be a game changer and oftentimes the most important player on D.

Some of these candidates may be in their 50s and 60s before it happens, but too many modern fans respect the safety position to have them ignored forever.

Almost all the safeties listed by Ness if you really think about it are HOF worthy in their own right.

Raiderz4Life
08-10-2011, 01:05 PM
Jack Tatum isn't the Hall of Fame. That's some ******** imo.

boknows34
08-10-2011, 01:45 PM
Jack Tatum isn't the Hall of Fame. That's some ******** imo.

Tatum went to 3 Pro Bowls and was only once a 2nd team All-Pro. That's nowhere near enough for Canton and he's clearly well down the pecking order for a position that doesn't get much consideration anyway.

Ed Reed was voted in the NFLN's Top 100 of All-Time at #88. I'd say his chances are excellent.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/baltimore-ravens/09000d5d81a58346/NFL-s-Top-100-Players-No-88-Ed-Reed

Troy P is also a virtual lock. After that its going to be a tossup between Lynch, Dawkins, Sharper. Atwater's best chance is as a Senior nominee.

Raiderz4Life
08-10-2011, 01:52 PM
Maybe its just me being a homer and because JT is probably my favorite Raider of all time but the man deserves to be in.

FUNBUNCHER
08-10-2011, 05:11 PM
Maybe its just me being a homer and because JT is probably my favorite Raider of all time but the man deserves to be in.

If people didn't see Jack Tatum play, they don't understand his greatness.
It's not a stretch to say that Tatum was the most feared hitter in the league during the '70s, a true collision artist.

The man is dead right now because of the reckless abandon with which he played the game and the endless successive concussions he suffered.

Jack Tatum paralyzed a player in a preseason NFL game, Darryl Stingley.

He's the player Ronnie Lott patterned much of his own game, and IMO the only reason he's not in the HOF is strictly political.

Raiderz4Life
08-10-2011, 05:22 PM
If people didn't see Jack Tatum play, they don't understand his greatness.
It's not a stretch to say that Tatum was the most feared hitter in the league during the '70s, a true collision artist.

The man is dead right now because of the reckless abandon with which he played the game and the endless successive concussions he suffered.

Jack Tatum paralyzed a player in a preseason NFL game, Darryl Stingley.

He's the player Ronnie Lott patterned much of his own game, and IMO the only reason he's not in the HOF is strictly political.

"I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault."
Jack Tatum

One of my fave quotes lol Gotta love Tatum. Embodied the Oaklan Raiders.

BigBanger
08-10-2011, 05:37 PM
I personally hate the HOF for football. Its too easy to get in, and its bias like crazy.
Very few at certain positions when the resume qualifies them for induction. Look at that list of safeties. Atwater was arguably the best safety of the '90's and not even a sniff at consideration.
Didn't they just pass a rule that there needs to be at least 4 players inducted every year, or something like that? Which basically means they're going to force even more unwarranted players into the Hall of Fame.


As far as safeties go... I think Atwater has the biggest gripe. He was the premier safety of the 90s. One of my favorite defensive players of the 90s. Someone mentioned the hit on Okoye, but how about the hit in the Super Bowl against the Packers where he knocked out the Packer's WR (either Freeman or Brooks) and his own teammate... and himself. The guy was a tank.

Kenny Easley was the second best safety of the 80s to Ronnie Lott (he was right there with Lott, and if he played somewhere other than Seattle and for a few more years, people might be calling him better than Lott). Easley is the only safety to win the DPOY award for the entire decade of the 80s and 90s. Ed Reed was the next safety to win the award (2004), a full 20 years later.

After that I would put in Jack Tatum. Because he nearly killed a player, wrote books about his violence and never apologized for it... he's not getting in. But there have been very few players that had the type of effect on WRs going into the middle of the field as Jack Tatum. Guys like Ronnie Lott and Steve Atwater patterned their game after his attitude and toughness. He's a historically prevalent player. Everyone knows the name Jack Tatum. Since his death didn't garner any buzz for Canton, then nothing probably will. He was a great player and dominating force in the middle of the field.



But you also have Deron Cherry, wasn't mentioned above, who is a guy I would say is, arguably, the third or fourth most deserving safety to not be in the Hall of Fame. In the prime of his career, Cherry was either the best safety in the game or in the top 3. Every single year. He was named AFC DPOY in 1986.


Deron Cherry

6x Pro Bowl (1983-1988)
3x 1st Team All-Pro
2x 2nd Team All-Pro
7x All-AFC team
1986 AFC Defensive Player of the Year
50 Career INTs
NFL 1980s All-Decade Team (2nd Team)


I'm not a fan of Darren Woodson. Its kind of what happens when you're a good player for America's team when America's team won 3 Super Bowls. To me Carnell Lake and Merton Hanks were better players and neither of them are Hall of Fame caliber players.

Ness
08-10-2011, 07:20 PM
I'm almost curious how the Hall of Fame voting goes when it gets down to the final twenty or so. It just seems to me that there is a clear bias for offensive players.

"Oh Irvin had a monster career as a wide receiver, sorry Steve Atwater too bad you didn't play receiver. Alright what other offensive players are there on this ballot...hmm hmm hmm do do dee do..."

molenguinurtle
08-10-2011, 09:39 PM
If Dawkins doesn't make it in, something is seriously wrong with the HOF. Also, I too believe there will be a drought at some point at other positions, and the committee will realize the backlog they have at safety. That list is ridiculous (with the exception of Woodson).

Ness
08-16-2011, 12:20 AM
Corey Dillon is eligible right? I think he should get in with in the next few years. He gave everything he had for Cincinnati (and basically got nothing in return) and earned a Super Bowl ring with New England following his most productive season. He only went to four Pro Bowls and I don't think he was ever listed as an All-Pro (playing for the Bengals I think had something to do with his lack of attention), but regardless he had a lot of big seasons and I believe deserves a spot there.

cmarq83
08-16-2011, 09:29 AM
corey dillon deserves to go to the hall for putting up with the bengals and getting a ring, in spite of the fact that he wasn't one of the best running backs in the nfl for more than a season or so of his entire career?

meh, **** it. it's not like making it in actually has anything to do with having been one of the best players ever anymore (see: irvin, michael). might as well just induct everyone who played for the patriots from 2000-2004.

I don't think it's an absurd suggestion to think that Corey Dillon could make the hall of fame. Personally I don't think he deserves it, but he is relatively high on the all time rushing list, retired at 32 still relatively effective, and frankly played on a team that had nothing for most of his career. In his one season with a good supporting cast around him he was one of the best backs in the NFL. His career stats should be around good enough to make it, and for all we know if he was on an effective team he could have been one of the 10 best backs ever.

Nobody was suggesting that Troy Brown or Ted Johnson should make the hall of fame, but rather a 10,000+ yd. back with a ring that he was a huge part of getting should have a good shot at eventually making the hall. Just a forewarning though you may see a couple of ex-patriots making the hall in the next few years :p.

DraftSavant
08-16-2011, 11:17 AM
His postseason resume might be enough to get him over the line in the eyes of some voters.

17 games
88 catches
1,181 yds
10 TDs
Super Bowl MVP
2 Super Bowl rings

I can see Ward making it but only after a long wait and an Art Monk style campaign.

Ward's a guy I've been thinking long and hard about for the last year or so. If you'd have asked me three or for years ago, I would have said "no" resoundingly.

Right now, though, he's solidly in the top 5 of all major postseason receiving categories. He's had many, many big games for the Steelers in crunchtime. Superbowl MVP. After awhile, everything adds up and becomes too much to ignore. I'd much rather see a guy like Ward voted in as opposed to a regular season compiler who never did crap in the playoffs like Bettis.

cmarq83
08-16-2011, 11:35 AM
there is nothing that sets corey dillon apart from running backs like fred taylor, warrick dunn, tiki barber, eddie george, thomas jones or shaun alexander. none of whom should ever even sniff the hall of fame.

I think that is a pretty big generalization. Next to Tiki Barber, who if he finished his career and wasn't such a massive tool probably would have made it, Dillon had the best career out of the bunch. George was forced the rock, Dunn had 3 good seasons and like 10 average ones, and Shawn Alexander wasn't dominant long enough. Fred Taylor had zero big moments over his career which hurts his candidacy. Dillon does have a SB ring (which does play a minor factor), and for a while held the single game record for rushing yards. I think people forget just how physical a runner Dillon was. He ran hard like Peterson without quite as much breakaway speed. Had he played on some better teams a lot of his 1200yd 7td seasons would be 1400yd 10td type seasons. He was relatively consistent for an 8 year stretch before declining.

Cincinnati is just a terrible organization to play for. For most of his career they had atrocious QB, and teams could stack the box. Once they fell behind they had to abandon the running game. I don't think he'll make it, but if he was put in a somewhat functional organization I think he'd definitely get a bust in Canton.

Ness
08-16-2011, 01:31 PM
corey dillon deserves to go to the hall for putting up with the bengals and getting a ring, in spite of the fact that he wasn't one of the best running backs in the nfl for more than a season or so of his entire career?

meh, **** it. it's not like making it in actually has anything to do with having been one of the best players ever anymore (see: irvin, michael). might as well just induct everyone who played for the patriots from 2000-2004.

You could say the same thing about Curtis Martin...who actually didn't get a ring. How many years was he considered the absolute best at his position? Maybe two years out of his entire career? Dillon also has 89 touchdowns in ten years...that's pretty good with most of them coming with Cincinnati.

Ness
08-16-2011, 01:48 PM
there is nothing that sets corey dillon apart from running backs like fred taylor, warrick dunn, tiki barber, eddie george, thomas jones or shaun alexander. none of whom should ever even sniff the hall of fame.

You're kidding me. Dillon was a lot more consistent than a lot of those players. He has a boatload more touchdowns than Tiki Barber. He didn't have the injury problems that Fred Taylor had (plus he has a lot more touchdowns as well), had way more consistent and dominant seasons than Dunn in terms of yards and touchdowns (Dunn shouldn't even be in the conversation with everyone else you mentioned), trumps Thomas Jones in touchdowns and yardage while playing for only ten years, and beats George again in touchdowns. The only other guy that really has Dillon outgunned is Alexander. But he loses in yardage while he beats Dillon for touchdowns. Actually I'd probably give Dillon the edge because of not only yards, but he also has a ring...and he was still a threat up until he left the game.

I'll meet you halfway and say Dillon should at least be in the conversation.

Philliez01
08-16-2011, 02:20 PM
You're kidding me. Dillon was a lot more consistent than a lot of those players. He has a boatload more touchdowns than Tiki Barber. He didn't have the injury problems that Fred Taylor had (plus he has a lot more touchdowns as well), had way more consistent and dominant seasons than Dunn in terms of yards and touchdowns (Dunn shouldn't even be in the conversation with everyone else you mentioned), trumps Thomas Jones in touchdowns and yardage while playing for only ten years, and beats George again in touchdowns. The only other guy that really has Dillon outgunned is Alexander. But he loses in yardage while he beats Dillon for touchdowns. Actually I'd probably give Dillon the edge because of not only yards, but he also has a ring...and he was still a threat up until he left the game.

I'll meet you halfway and say Dillon should at least be in the conversation.

Corey Dillon was a good/very good player. He was never dominant, always very good.

I don't think rings are as helpful for someone's cause unless it's a QB or coach honestly.

Ness
08-16-2011, 02:23 PM
Corey Dillon was a good/very good player. He was never dominant, always very good.

I don't think rings are as helpful for someone's cause unless it's a QB or coach honestly.

Oh I disagree. Especially in 2004.

Saints-Tigers
08-16-2011, 02:54 PM
It's so dumb that people like Dillon will get consideration over Steve Atwater, or the upcoming safeties.

You really think Dillon was comparable to top RBs like Atwater, Reed, Dawkins, Easley etc are for safeties?

Nalej
08-16-2011, 02:58 PM
C.Dillon > C.Martin

He did break Walter Peyton's single game rushing record.
Well, he was the first to do it.

bearsfan_51
08-16-2011, 02:59 PM
I hope you all realize that while you can debate the merits of Dillon in the HOF, there is zero chance it happens.

Nalej
08-16-2011, 03:02 PM
Oh, I'm completely aware of this.
Also the point that S.Atwater should be in before he and C.Martin

Complex
08-16-2011, 03:18 PM
What do you guys think of Jamal Lewis chances of getting into the HOF?

bearsfan_51
08-16-2011, 03:22 PM
Small, but possible. He's really helped by the fact that he made the all-2000's team. (these things are really important to voters).

I'd put Lewis a little higher than Dillon. I shouldn't have said Dillon has no chance, but I think it's probably less than 5%, and I would put Lewis at about 10%. As njx said, if Dillon gets in then you're talking about guys like Fred Taylor, Tiki Barber, Warrick Dunn, and Eddie George as possibilities too.

Of all of those guys, I think Lewis has the best chance due to his 2000+ yard season (the others on the list are O.J. Simpson, Eric Dickerson, Barry Sanders, Terrell Davis, and Chris Johnson). Injuries ruined Davis' shot, the other three are already in the HOF, and Johnson is the best runningback currently in the league.

I'm torn on his actual chances, but I'd personally vote no.

niel89
08-16-2011, 03:25 PM
What do you guys think of Jamal Lewis chances of getting into the HOF?

Pretty low. He was an amazing runner though. His 2000 yard year was crazy.

Nalej
08-16-2011, 03:27 PM
^^^ yea, but wasn't about 400+ yds off the Browns though lol
Poor bastards

Ravens1991
08-16-2011, 03:29 PM
I never saw Kevin Greene play, but I always wondered why isnt he in the HOF? Isnt he 3rd all time with sacks

Complex
08-16-2011, 03:30 PM
I would like to add that Lewis did help the Ravens win the superbowl.

Nalej
08-16-2011, 03:31 PM
I never saw Kevin Greene play, but I always wondered why isn't he in the HOF? Isn't he 3rd all time with sacks

Same here. I think I saw him towards the end of his career with Carolina
but I honestly can't recall anything about him....
A quick google search says he beasted from a sack POV but I didn't see much of him though

DraftSavant
08-16-2011, 03:41 PM
I hope you all realize that while you can debate the merits of Dillon in the HOF, there is zero chance it happens.

It took this long?

BigBanger
08-16-2011, 04:09 PM
I never saw Kevin Greene play, but I always wondered why isnt he in the HOF? Isnt he 3rd all time with sacks
I like Kevin Greene a lot, but when he played with Pittsburgh, there was no question that Greg Lloyd was the best OLB on that team if you ask me. And if you look at sack numbers, that would be hard to believe since Lloyd didn't have 10 sack seasons like Greene put up year in and year out.

If Lloyd wasn't such an asshole to the media, didn't stick handguns into his son and wife's mouth, then he might get Hall of Fame talk. He was a phenomenal athlete.

Greene bounced around a lot and played for a bunch of different teams. I'm not sure what team he would go in for when he gets inducted, which will happen eventually. He was most recognized for his tenure in Pittsburgh (where he was apart of one of the great LB groups in NFL history), but was only there for three years.

Greene was also playing in the NFL with guys like Lawrence Taylor, Reggie White, Bruce Smith, Michael Strahan, Derrick Thomas who rushed the passer and were, simply put, better players. So he tends to get overlooked.

Ness
08-16-2011, 05:06 PM
I hope you all realize that while you can debate the merits of Dillon in the HOF, there is zero chance it happens.

I'd say his chances should be just about as good as Martin's. I'd probably put Martin a little higher, but not that high. I can't recall many years where he was arguably the best at this position. This hurts Dillon too, but I think the fact that Dillon was still a consistent back like Martin, durable, has a lot of yards and touchdowns plus a Super Bowl rings, helps his case.

I'm definitely putting Dillon ahead of the likes of George, Taylor, Barber, and Warrick Dunn (can't believe someone tried to compared Dillon to Dunn).

Ness
08-16-2011, 05:08 PM
Small, but possible. He's really helped by the fact that he made the all-2000's team. (these things are really important to voters).

I'd put Lewis a little higher than Dillon. I shouldn't have said Dillon has no chance, but I think it's probably less than 5%, and I would put Lewis at about 10%. As njx said, if Dillon gets in then you're talking about guys like Fred Taylor, Tiki Barber, Warrick Dunn, and Eddie George as possibilities too.

Of all of those guys, I think Lewis has the best chance due to his 2000+ yard season (the others on the list are O.J. Simpson, Eric Dickerson, Barry Sanders, Terrell Davis, and Chris Johnson). Injuries ruined Davis' shot, the other three are already in the HOF, and Johnson is the best runningback currently in the league.

I'm torn on his actual chances, but I'd personally vote no.

Oh come on. Lewis has 10,000 yards sure, but really had one dominant season. He's only made one Pro Bowl Bowl and All-Pro, and doesn't have close the amount of touchdowns Dillion got in ten years.

Pat Sims 90
08-16-2011, 05:14 PM
Dillon also played on some really ****** teams compared to what Martin and Lewis had.

Ness
08-16-2011, 05:19 PM
Dillon also played on some really ****** teams compared to what Martin and Lewis had.

Dillon played on some of the worst teams imaginable.

bearsfan_51
08-16-2011, 05:24 PM
Oh come on. Lewis has 10,000 yards sure, but really had one dominant season. He's only made one Pro Bowl Bowl and All-Pro, and doesn't have close the amount of touchdowns Dillion got in ten years.
His one dominant season is still more than Dillon's zero dominant seasons.

Pat Sims 90
08-16-2011, 05:31 PM
His one dominant season is still more than Dillon's zero dominant seasons.

If u played on those Bengal teams in the late 90's and early 00's and had the numbers that Dillon had those count as dominant seasons.

Nalej
08-16-2011, 05:31 PM
I disagree. I think a 1600+ yd, 13TD season is pretty dominant. That's just me though, I guess.

bearsfan_51
08-16-2011, 05:40 PM
It's not on par with 2,000+ and 14 touchdowns.

Nalej
08-16-2011, 05:45 PM
I wasn't comparing one dominant season to another.
Just stating that it still is a dominant season.

Ness
08-16-2011, 06:06 PM
His one dominant season is still more than Dillon's zero dominant seasons.

LOL 2004 wasn't dominant? Yeah okay.

While we're at it let's throw Priest Holmes in because he had three dominant years and didn't do anything else. Or Shaun Alexander because of his dominance in 2005.

Ness
08-16-2011, 06:09 PM
It's not on par with 2,000+ and 14 touchdowns.

And 62 touchdowns in 9 years isn't on par with 89 touchdowns in 10 years.

Ness
08-16-2011, 06:17 PM
yes, that was me. a couple of posts ago. because you were going on and on about yardage and dunn is very comparable in that regard (though i'm sure 300 yards makes all the difference in the world). funny enough, neither were ever among the best players at their position for the period of time they played. neither is getting into the hall. further, dunn was actually a receiving threat. dillon was a 4time pro-bowler, dunn was a 3-time. neither had an all-pro. boy, they DO sound fairly comparable in this discussion, come to think of it. keep on thinking that being the #4 all-time rusher with an all-pro is about the same as being the #17 all time leading rusher without, though. no doubt, dillon is just on the cusp.

and just for the **** of it, guess how many running backs are in the hall of fame without a single all-pro?

Warren Moon has zero All Pros. That's it, destroy his bust.

Please, the Pro Bowl has always had a good amount of bias to it. And playing on the Bengals doesn't help his case for getting a spot on the Pro Bowl. Not to mention there were far more consistently dominant runners in the AFC during the prime of his career compared to Dunn in the NFC. The competition was a lot more fierce for Dillon. Dillon trumps Dunn in yards and touchdowns considerably and played a lot less years. Dillon was not considered one of the best runningbacks in the league during his career are you kidding me? You don't break Walter Payton's single game rushing record just by coincidence. And you don't score almost 90 touchdowns in ten years while gaining over 11,000 rushing yards through luck. If you actually watched them both play you would know who the better back was. It was Dillon by far. Don't just go by All Pros or Pro Bowls.

Dunn - 12 years (Tampa Bay/Atlanta): 64 touchdowns, 10,967 rushing yards.

Dillon - 10 years:(Cincinnati, New England) 89 touchdowns, 11,241 rushing yads, Super Bowl Champion.

Raiderz4Life
08-16-2011, 06:21 PM
Warren Moon has 3 All-Pros actually, '88, '89, '90.

Ness
08-16-2011, 06:23 PM
Warren Moon has 3 All-Pros actually, '88, '89, '90.
First team how many? By the way I'm talking about the All Pro listed awarded by the AP, which doesn't list him on any 1st team. I don't think any second team. Maybe 1990.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_All-Pro_Team

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_All-Pro_Team

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1990_All-Pro_Team

Raiderz4Life
08-16-2011, 06:25 PM
First team how many?

You never said anything about 1st team. You just said All-Pros in general and I responded with a general answer.

Ness
08-16-2011, 06:30 PM
You never said anything about 1st team. You just said All-Pros in general and I responded with a general answer.

Well your information is wrong. Moon only has one All Pro listing which is a 2nd team in 1990 awarded by the AP. Unless those links I posted have the wrong information.

Raiderz4Life
08-16-2011, 06:37 PM
Well wiki has 3 All Pros credited to him under awards. Also its not NFL Hall of Fame but Pro Football so I'm going to assume that they are also including his years in the CFL. Maybe I'm not sure.

boknows34
08-16-2011, 07:04 PM
Well wiki has 3 All Pros credited to him under awards. Also its not NFL Hall of Fame but Pro Football so I'm going to assume that they are also including his years in the CFL. Maybe I'm not sure.

The CFL is not considered and neither is the USFL which rules out any chance for Herschel Walker.

You have to remember the Pro Football Hall of Fame was created in 1963 and recognised not just the NFL but also any league which eventually had teams merge with the NFL, namely the AAFC (46-49) and AFL (60-69). In fact if you look at the HOF player profiles of those who played in the AAFC it acknowledges their achievements and stats from that league.

Marion Motley
http://www.profootballhof.com/hof/member.aspx?PlayerId=156&tab=Bio

Otto Graham
http://www.profootballhof.com/hof/member.aspx?PlayerId=77&tab=Stats

By comparison Warren Moon (CFL) and Steve Young (USFL) get no mention of their careers in other pro leagues.

Moon
http://www.profootballhof.com/hof/member.aspx?PlayerId=256&tab=Stats

Young
http://www.profootballhof.com/hof/member.aspx?PlayerId=252

boknows34
08-16-2011, 07:13 PM
Moon was a 2nd team AP All-Pro in 1990 when he also won the 1990 Offensive Player of the Year award. Moon led the NFL with 4,689 yds and 33 TDs that season. Joe Montana was the 1st team AP All-Pro QB and the league MVP in 1990. Sporting News had Moon as a 1st team All-Pro but AP is the one that carries most prestige.

Raiderz4Life
08-16-2011, 07:26 PM
I was just throwing it out there cuz I read his winning 5 grey cups in the hall of fame website. But I wasn't sure.

bearsfan_51
08-16-2011, 08:55 PM
There is no position where it's easier to make the HOF than at QB. Quick, name a QB that isn't in the HOF that deserves to be. If you say Ken Stabler, you're wrong.

Pat Sims 90
08-16-2011, 08:59 PM
There is no position where it's easier to make the HOF than at QB. Quick, name a QB that isn't in the HOF that deserves to be. If you say Ken Stabler, you're wrong.

Kenny Anderson... if Dan Fouts is in there Anderson should be.

bearsfan_51
08-16-2011, 09:02 PM
Dan Fouts threw for 10,000 more yards and 60 more touchdowns.

Pat Sims 90
08-16-2011, 09:03 PM
Dan Fouts threw for 10,000 more yards and 60 more touchdowns.

Dan Fouts was one of the most overrated QBs ever though.

bearsfan_51
08-16-2011, 09:05 PM
Good counterargument.

Pat Sims 90
08-16-2011, 09:07 PM
Good counterargument.

It is because San Diego Def was so awful that Fouts had to throw the Ball 600 times a season. A lot of QBs in that situation could have had Fouts numbers.

bearsfan_51
08-16-2011, 09:11 PM
Dan Fouts had a career record of 86-84

Anderson had a career record of 91-81

Not exactly a huge difference there. Fouts gets in because he had a more statistically impressive career.

You could make the case that he doesn't belong and I would probably buy it, but Fouts is still higher on the ladder than Anderson.

Raiderz4Life
08-16-2011, 09:39 PM
There is no position where it's easier to make the HOF than at QB. Quick, name a QB that isn't in the HOF that deserves to be. If you say Ken Stabler, you're wrong.

I was gonna say Ken...i think he needs to be let in

J-Mike88
08-16-2011, 09:47 PM
It's so dumb that people like Dillon will get consideration over Steve Atwater, or the upcoming safeties.

You really think Dillon was comparable to top RBs like Atwater, Reed, Dawkins, Easley etc are for safeties?
Exactly.
I just popped into this thread for the first time, and I laughed out my beer when I saw Dillon's name mentioned... in a thread titled "Hall of fame".

Is someone kidding me here?

I had that guy in Fantasy Football when he had the huge game with the Bungles, and was a fan of his.
But there's no way in heII he is even close to a Hall of Fame player.

Nalej
08-16-2011, 10:13 PM
I don't think anyone in here has said that Dillon should be a HOF.
He was brought in comparison to C.Martin. If one gets in then why not the other? Longevity?
Still, I think the person with the highest hopes of him making the HOF gave him a 5% chance, so no, no one is saying he deserves to be in

Pat Sims 90
08-16-2011, 10:29 PM
Another Player i will throw out there for people going off pure stats is Ken Riley who is 5th on Int list. Only thing keeping him out is never was voted to a pro bowl.

CC.SD
08-17-2011, 12:27 AM
It is because San Diego Def was so awful that Fouts had to throw the Ball 600 times a season. A lot of QBs in that situation could have had Fouts numbers.

no way. Fouts had his numbers because the whole offense was one of the most explosive ever ever ever, the guy bombed it down the field like few ever could.

Anyone even contesting his candidacy is basically ignoring Air Coryell and has a big chunk of their nfl history missing, which is weird for people talking about the hall of fame.

Ness
08-17-2011, 12:29 AM
when did moon play running back? why would we destroy his bust?

What does running back have to do with it? He's a Hall of Fame Player with zero All-Pro's. Same thing with Troy Aikman. The end.

case closed.

Maybe for you.

right. everyone he was playing with was better. for his entire career.

Didn't say that. You did. I just said the competition was fierce, not that Dillon didn't meet the challenge.

yup, all of 300 yards. funny enough, warrick dunn obliterates dillon when you factor in his receiving ability. but you wouldn't want to talk about that.

Since when is the thing that instantly gets runningbacks credibility for the Hall of Fame their receiving statistics? What about Dillon's total touchdowns? That alone puts Dillon out of Dunn's league. Also rushing yards. Playing two more seasons will close the gap on someone, but Dunn still couldn't catch up. The only case you have for Dunn is receiving statistics and really when think about it it's kind of strawman when Dillon has accomplished everything else over Dunn, including being a champion. The reason I didn't talk about it (Dunn's receiving yardage) was because it didn't matter. If that is the only thing Dunn has over Dillon then it isn't much of a case. It's like Roger Craig and Ricky Watters. Great runners that had a great receiving career too, yet they aren't in...and Craig has been a finalist twice. Unless you are some phenom like Thurman Thomas or Marshall Faulk (who also had a boatload of rushing yards) it's not really going to matter. Rushing yards are always going to be seen as the bigger statistic for runningbacks, I'd say followed by touchdowns and YPA.


yes, why would we go by the consensus voting of him and his peers at the time he was playing? i mean, we can just say 'he scored lots!!!!' like it's the only thing that mattered.
Well I'll say that the Pro Bowl is extremely bias which is why I don't really put that much stock into it...at least not anymore. I think it was better in the past. In any case, Dillon played in Cincinnati, a team that was a loser every single season of his career there. Not only was it was a losing franchise, but it was losing franchise in a place that isn't exactly a huge media market. Dillon was also notorious for not being a charmer with the media. That probably hurt his stock in the spotlight as well.

because super bowls matter about as much for a rb as they do for qb. especially when the rb was completely average in that super bowl and simply mediocre in the AFCC.

Even without that ring Dillon's career is superior to Dunn's. And Dillon was a vital part to the Patriots that season in 2004. And it's not like he was a slouch like you're making him out to me. The dude blasted the Colts in the divisional round and had 75 yards and a touchdown in the Super Bowl. Dillon had 292 rushing yards in three straight game in the playoffs. And you're seriously trying to downplay that? That's like grilling Walter Payton and call him overrated because he only rushed for 100 yards once out of all of his postseason games.

Ness
08-17-2011, 12:34 AM
Kenny Anderson... if Dan Fouts is in there Anderson should be.

Yes Anderson should be in.

Ness
08-17-2011, 12:41 AM
Dan Fouts had a career record of 86-84

Anderson had a career record of 91-81

Not exactly a huge difference there. Fouts gets in because he had a more statistically impressive career.

You could make the case that he doesn't belong and I would probably buy it, but Fouts is still higher on the ladder than Anderson.
Why is Fouts higher on that ladder though? Because he threw the ball more? It's funny because Anderson and that Bengals team actually got to a Super Bowl through San Diego with Fouts at the helm.

Ness
08-17-2011, 12:43 AM
no way. Fouts had his numbers because the whole offense was one of the most explosive ever ever ever, the guy bombed it down the field like few ever could.

Anyone even contesting his candidacy is basically ignoring Air Coryell and has a big chunk of their nfl history missing, which is weird for people talking about the hall of fame.
I don't think Fouts doesn't deserve it, because he brought Air Coryell to life, but at the same time I do think Anderson should be in.

Ness
08-17-2011, 12:55 AM
I'll just say that while I don't think Dillon is getting in, I do believe that he should at least be talked about. I definitely put him higher than the likes of George, Taylor, and Warrick Dunn.

Raiderz4Life
08-17-2011, 01:03 AM
I don't think he deserves to be talked about. He was good not great. Don't think anyone really feared him.

Ness
08-17-2011, 01:04 AM
I don't think he deserves to be talked about. He was good not great. Don't think anyone really feared him.

I think that's because people didn't fear Cincinnati. Oh well whatever.

bearsfan_51
08-17-2011, 02:15 AM
Why is Fouts higher on that ladder though? Because he threw the ball more?
Yes, because he threw the ball more. The job of the quarterback is to throw the ball and move the ball forward and score points. Fouts did that more times than Anderson did. Also, he had a higher YPA, so he was more efficient than Anderson in moving the ball forward relative to the amount of times he had to throw the ball to do it.
It's funny because Anderson and that Bengals team actually got to a Super Bowl through San Diego with Fouts at the helm.
Funny haha, or funny ironic?

Ness
08-17-2011, 02:53 AM
Yes, because he threw the ball more. The job of the quarterback is to throw the ball and move the ball forward and score points. Fouts did that more times than Anderson did. Also, he had a higher YPA, so he was more efficient than Anderson in moving the ball forward relative to the amount of times he had to throw the ball to do it.

Funny haha, or funny ironic?
Yeah because San Diego's defense was terrible. Fouts didn't really have a choice.

Oh and Dan Fout's YPA was 7.7 compared to Anderson's 7.3. Not a huge difference. Anderson performed just as well...and that was without Wes Chandler, Charlie Joiner, Kellen Winslow, and John Jefferson. Also, Anderson was running a WCO the majority of his career.

Really it's like arguing who's QB rating is higher between the two and making a huge deal out of it.

Anderson = 81.9
Fouts = 80.2

As for being funny, I'd say ironic. Doesn't really matter though. Anderson has been in the discussion and at least and considered for getting in seeing as how he was a finalist in 1996 and 1998.

bearsfan_51
08-17-2011, 11:19 AM
Half a yard per play over 15 years is a big difference.

DraftSavant
08-17-2011, 12:45 PM
Anderson vs. Fouts is actually an excellent debate. Fouts meant more in terms of impact left on the game, but he was a dreadful, abysmal postseason QB.

Personally, I think it's a god damned travesty that Fouts is in the Hall, but Coryell isn't.

bearsfan_51
08-17-2011, 12:47 PM
Agree with the above.

jth1331
08-17-2011, 01:47 PM
Corey Dillon?
WE ARE DISCUSSING DILLON FOR THE HOF?
http://partneryahoo.photobucket.com/albums/e219/spotless_rougedirector/random%20stuffs/seinfeld-nah.gif

Ness
08-17-2011, 03:27 PM
Half a yard per play over 15 years is a big difference.

That doesn't necessarily mean he was the better quarterback, or rather more deserving than Anderson for the Hall of Fame.

Anderson vs. Fouts is actually an excellent debate. Fouts meant more in terms of impact left on the game, but he was a dreadful, abysmal postseason QB.

Personally, I think it's a god damned travesty that Fouts is in the Hall, but Coryell isn't.
Yes, and Anderson was a great quarterback in the postseason.

Ness
08-17-2011, 03:52 PM
quarterbacks have nothing to do with the question, except insofar as you don't have any idea what i'm talking about.

Okay. Zero. That doesn't mean the Hall of Fame doesn't strictly except players without an All-Pro selection. Like I said, it doesn't matter.

and everyone else who will be voting on whether or not corey dillon is a hall of fame running back. but please, keep pretending like i'm the only person who thinks he doesn't belong.

Right, because the Hall of Fame voters are always correct. And where did I say I thought you were the only person who thought he doesn't belong? Please, point this out to me.

he clearly *didn't* meet the challenge. he was never better than 3rd in rushing. never better than 4th in your favorite statistic. he was never, ever, at any point in his career, one of the top running backs in the league. the only year it's remotely arguable was 2004, and one season does NOT a hall of fame candidate make. period. full stop. it's unbelievable that you *still* think this is a valid discussion.

Okay, Curtis Martin only held the rushing title once. And that is the only thing he ever led in anything if I'm not mistaken. And that was his best season. Just one. Dillon at a time had the NFL record for rushing yardage in a single game as well.

since when is it solely based on the number of touchdowns they scored over an average length career? when the hell did i even come close to suggesting that was 'the thing'? please, quotes.

I didn't say it was based solely on the number of touchdowns they scored in a career. I'm saying that receiving statistics for a runningback take a backseat to their rushing total and total touchdowns. This is why we have guys like Roger Craig and Ricky Watters not in the Hall of Fame.

*yawn* he had one stat. over his entire career. and he was never better than 4th (for running backs) at it in his entire career. but yeah, one stat puts him out of dunn's league. dunn's one stat is meaningless. that's one helluva way to argue.

Actually he had two. Rushing yards and total touchdowns. But I guess you still need more convincing.


and yet, he was only 300 behind. and annihilated him in receiving yardage. you know, because running backs are occasionally used as receivers. i know that may come as a shock, given that you've been slobbering all over corey dillon's stats.

Rushing yards. Touchdowns. Super Bowl champion. Less years played. But I guess Dunn's career magically triumphed all of those because he caught the ball more.

yup, that massive 300 yard difference in rushing. just screams hall of fame.

So do touchdowns. And a ring. And accomplishing more in less years played. Continue to ignore these facts though when comparing to Dunn.

yeah, it's kind of like if the only thing dillon had in this entire argument was touchdowns...

You mean having more rushing yards isn't important? Or being a Super Bowl champion?


and those 300 rushing yards will make all the difference. it's clear that dillon is in, based on that alone.

meanwhile, i think you completely missed the bloody boat where i NEVER suggested that warrick dunn belonged in. only that he belonged in as much as dillon. which is to say, not at all. neither should sniff the hall, neither should ever be a finalist. period.

And you completely misunderstood what I said for something else. I wasn't talking about Dunn's candidacy for the Hall of Fame because I know he'll never make it already. But in comparison to Dillon, his career was not as good.

do you actually not understand the difference between 'all-pro' and 'pro bowl'?

Why yes. Do you need help?

he averaged 3ypc in the AFCC. barely better in the super bowl. and if he hadn't played one of the worst rushing defenses in the league in the divisional game, he likely would've been stoned there, too. further, where the hell did i call him overrated? i suggested that his postseason stats wouldn't elevate him. they won't.

So what? He had almost 300 rushing yards in three straight games on route to winning the Super Bowl. He played two good defenses after the Colts and had decent outings against two tough teams in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. You just came out of the blue and started talking about his postseason statistics for the year. You didn't say anything about them elevating his status. And I wasn't saying anything either, but since you brought it up and tried to make it out worse than it actually was I merely corrected you. Really, it's like arguing that the 49ers weren't that good all these years because they played in the NFC West, even though they had to actually beat the good teams once they got to the postseason. Basically, you're nitpicking when it comes to Dillon's 2004 postseason.

i'd just like to leave you with this:



he won't. he shouldn't. if you want the last word, it's all yours.
Fine. Believe what you'd like. And I will have the last word. Guess you aren't coming back.

Raiderz4Life
08-17-2011, 03:56 PM
You're giving Dillon WWAAYY too much credit for that SB. He really wasn't an integral part of winning it. IIRC he was barely average through the post-season.

Nalej
08-17-2011, 04:03 PM
Stats dont tell the whole story. His presence opened up a lot for Brady

No, I dont think he's a HOFer

Ness
08-17-2011, 04:08 PM
You're giving Dillon WWAAYY too much credit for that SB. He really wasn't an integral part of winning it. IIRC he was barely average through the post-season.

Ehhh, to each their own. Having nearly 300 yards in three games rushing with a 4.49 average I'd say is decent. By no means was that postseason performance one of the best of all time, but I do think what he did in that stretch was decent. I don't see it as "barely-average".

boknows34
08-17-2011, 06:03 PM
As far as RBs from that late 90s/00s era are concerned, I think voters will draw the HOF line under Edgerrin James and everyone underneath will miss out. Tomlinson is a lock. Martin and Bettis whether some like it or not will get elected eventually.

BigBanger
08-18-2011, 05:09 PM
Fouts meant more in terms of impact left on the game, but he was a dreadful, abysmal postseason QB.
Wow. I wouldn't go that far. He had some dreadful and abysmal outings, which directly lead to losses, but he was more hit-or-miss in the playoffs if you ask me. He has some games in the postseason that were great performances. The Epic in Miami? He set playoff records for completions, attempts and yards in a game.

He had a dominating performance against the Steelers in 1982. He threw for 300+ yards in most of the playoff games he played in (mostly because they never ran the ball, but all the pressure was on him to score points through the air).

He was the Peyton Manning of the late 70s / early 80s. They tried to win without any defense or rushing attack. And in the postseason, you can't throw the ball 40 or 50 times a game and expect to win. It hasn't happened until just recently where pass heavy offenses win late in the postseason. Dan Fouts was one of the greatest leaders to ever play QB. And the offense he ran, well, you already said it ... enormous impact on what the game is today.

CC.SD
08-18-2011, 10:34 PM
Jerome Bettis and Curtis Martin waaaaay before Corey Dillon. aren't these the #4 and 5 rushers of all time?

jth1331
08-19-2011, 02:19 PM
Hey, lets vote Cory Dillon into the HOF because he helped the Pats win a Super Bowl!
Not like Terrell Davis had over 1,000 yards, 10+ TD's in 8 playoff games.

bearsfan_51
08-19-2011, 03:50 PM
Let's not let Davis or Dillon in and call it a day.

Ness
08-20-2011, 03:34 AM
Let's not let Davis or Dillon in and call it a day.

Yes. And the same goes for Holmes.

FUNBUNCHER
08-20-2011, 07:21 AM
What, no Ricky Watters and Clinton Portis??lol

Bengalsrocket
08-20-2011, 06:39 PM
Am I the only one who doesn't see the HoF as some sacred privilege only passed onto the most elite players?

There is always going to be tiers of greatness. Jerry Rice was better than Art Monk and Jim Brown was better than Emmitt Smith, but all 4 players should still be in the Hall of Fame.

I think special players that put there time in the league and achieved some form of greatness should be recognized in the hall of fame. Canton can never get to crowded to me, because one inductee can never take anything from another inductee, even if one is superior in every way.

All that being said, Corey Dillon never achieved the kind of greatness I'm talking about, regardless of his ring or his touchdowns. Corey Dillon was a pretty great Bengal and he helped achieve one of the greatest moments in patriots history, but he is not one of the greatest in the league.

Ravens1991
08-20-2011, 07:10 PM
The hall of fame should only be for players who changed the league and are some of the greatest of all time. If you are the greatest from your team then you belong in their ring of honor.

Splat
08-20-2011, 07:13 PM
Let's not let Davis or Dillon in and call it a day.

Yes. And the same goes for Holmes.

Done. Moving on.

bearsfan_51
08-20-2011, 07:21 PM
The hall of fame should only be for players who changed the league and are some of the greatest of all time. If you are the greatest from your team then you belong in their ring of honor.
Yeah, that's never going to happen. If that was the case, the HOF would induct one player every decade, and nobody would ever go.

FUNBUNCHER
08-20-2011, 08:38 PM
If Corey Dillon had the same career for one the NFL's gold standard franchises, like the Giants or Dolphins, I think he'd be serious HOF candidate.

It's like people sort of forgot how great a RB he was until he went to the Pats.

Ness
08-21-2011, 12:10 AM
If Corey Dillon had the same career for one the NFL's gold standard franchises, like the Giants or Dolphins, I think he'd be serious HOF candidate.

It's like people sort of forgot how great a RB he was until he went to the Pats.

I don't think a lot of people actually knew who he was until he went to New England.

jth1331
08-22-2011, 10:40 AM
I don't think a lot of people actually knew who he was until he went to New England.

I'd guarantee that 90% of people didn't know who he was until his 278 yard game against the Broncos.

nepg
08-22-2011, 11:04 AM
I'll just say that while I don't think Dillon is getting in, I do believe that he should at least be talked about. I definitely put him higher than the likes of George, Taylor, and Warrick Dunn.
Pretty much this. He may have only had a few big moments, but he's a Top 20 RB of All-Time both by performance as well as by pure numbers. When a guy has numbers like that, he's got to be considered.

nepg
08-22-2011, 11:14 AM
And Martin was consistently a top 2-5 runningback. It's not like Martin ever played with an elite QB (Bledsoe, Testaverde, Chad Pennington) or elite offensive lines, but he always put up great numbers, and was on some winning ball clubs (making a Superbowl, which is more than Carter's teams had done).

I don't necessarily think Martin is a better player than Carter, I think they are quite similar, I just think Martin is more likely to get in sooner.

If there's a player Carter is likely to replace on that list, it's Chris Doleman.
Wait.

You just put Bledsoe, Testeverde, and Pennington in their respective primes in the "not elite" category? WTF?

bearsfan_51
08-22-2011, 11:27 AM
Wait.

You just put Bledsoe, Testeverde, and Pennington in their respective primes in the "not elite" category? WTF?
Not sure if serious.

49ers1984
08-31-2011, 01:47 AM
Was Curtis Martin ever considered a top three running back at his position? I think you can make a case for Reed being a top three player at his position at some point during his career. It's all subjective.


1989,1991 and 1994 were the only years he may have been one of the best receivers. Other then those years he was a pretty ordinary wr. Do you really want to elect someone who never lead the NFL in any category and only passed 1000 yards 4 times?

yo123
08-31-2011, 01:52 AM
Nevermind you fixed it.

Ness
08-31-2011, 02:14 AM
1989,1991 and 1994 were the only years he may have been one of the best receivers. Other then those years he was a pretty ordinary wr. Do you really want to elect someone who never lead the NFL in any category and only passed 1000 yards 4 times?

Well statistics are a hard thing to just go by. If you watched him back then you may have a different opinion about him. Reed came through when he was needed, was great in the YAC department, and was a decent deep threat. Art Monk only went over the 1,000 yard mark 5 times is was only elected to the Pro Bowl three times out of a 16 year career. He led the NFL in receptions once. But the way he played the game and for those who actually saw him probably has something to do with why he is in today.

bigbluedefense
08-31-2011, 09:01 AM
The Terrell Davis debate is one that I haven't picked a side on yet. The guy was absolutely dominant but his career was cut so short. But should we penalize him for that? Afterall, he was a running back. And in his prime, the guy was one of the best RBs of all time.

This is a tough one for me.

bearsfan_51
08-31-2011, 09:13 AM
The Terrell Davis debate is one that I haven't picked a side on yet. The guy was absolutely dominant but his career was cut so short. But should we penalize him for that? Afterall, he was a running back. And in his prime, the guy was one of the best RBs of all time.

This is a tough one for me.
I think you have to. What settles it for me is the fact that a lot of his yards came from his linemen chop-blocking people.

bigbluedefense
08-31-2011, 09:17 AM
I think you have to. What settles it for me is the fact that a lot of his yards came from his linemen chop-blocking people.

But he wasn't the first and wasn't the last RB who ran in that system. He was easily the best though.

In his prime, he was just as feared as Adrian Peterson. I don't think that's an exaggeration either.

If you put a gun to my head, I say exclude him. But the man was absolutely dominant during his short prime. The sweep to TD was almost unstoppable at one point.

bearsfan_51
08-31-2011, 09:22 AM
Yeah I think that's an exaggeration. Davis was never punishing like Peterson, and Davis had a ton more talent around him than Peterson.

Also, if Peterson quit the NFL today, would he make the HOF? No. Not even a chance.

bigbluedefense
08-31-2011, 09:32 AM
TD was running for 1800 yards in a season while sitting out the entire 4th quarter almost every game one year.

How was he not as dominant? He was sick. But yeah, the career was just too short.

bearsfan_51
08-31-2011, 09:35 AM
He was statistically dominant, but I was responding to your statement that he was "feared" like Peterson, who guys would literally shy away from tackling for his first few years in the league because he was such a brutal runner. Davis never got that kind of treatment, and he never saw 8 in the box consistently like Peterson does.

I'm not saying Peterson is better, but he's certainly more physically dominant.

bigbluedefense
08-31-2011, 09:37 AM
Ok, I can agree with that. TD could truck people too though. Let's not sell him short. I remember him putting the hit stick on people.

FUNBUNCHER
08-31-2011, 10:19 AM
Don't say Terrell Davis has NO shot at the HOF.

You see the guys who the Veteran's Committee are selecting for Canton??
Would anyone be upset or surprised to see a 70+ year old Davis hobbling up to the podium in 30 years to accept his yellow jacket and HOF bust???

Because Davis' career at one point was incandescent white hot and the reason why many believe Elway finally got his SB ring(s), don't forget playing with a migraine so severe in the SB that he couldn't see(!), there's going to be a case to be made for Terrell Davis.

If I had to bet MY money, I'd say Terrell Davis is more likely than not to make the HOF, one day.

Different eras I know, but if there's room in the Hall for Gale Sayers, IMO there should be room for Terrell Davis.

bearsfan_51
08-31-2011, 10:29 AM
I don't think Sayers belongs in the HOF either, and I'm a Bears fan. That said, Sayers > Davis.

Sayers was 1st team all pro every year he was in the league. He scored 22 touchdowns as a rookie at a time when a season was 10 games. He was the greatest return-man of all time before Devin Hester.

FUNBUNCHER
08-31-2011, 11:14 AM
Not saying Sayers is better or worse than Terrell Davis, only making the case there are precedents for players who achieved brilliance in tragically short careers to be inducted into the HOF.

I think most football fans believe if the Broncos didn't have TD, they don't win back to back SBs.

Sayers played in the era of 14 game seasons, not 10.

TD was a 3x 1st team All Pro, 2x NFL MVP, 2x SB champ and a SB MVP.
Also had a 2000+ yard/21 Tds rushing season.
Terrell Davis accomplished all of this during the first 5 years of his NFL career.

If Davis had played 5 more years and simply had been an average RB, his HOF candidacy would have been a lock.

EDIT: The HOF isn't just about stats.
Gale Sayers was regarded by most from his era as the greatest RB they'd ever seen, second only to Jim Brown. His statistical production was almost irrelevant.
When fans routinely see a player juke 5+ defenders in the open field, reputation is enough.

bigbluedefense
08-31-2011, 11:33 AM
Can you imagine if Sayers stayed healthy his whole career though? He could have been the best offensive player in NFL history. He was that good in his prime.

bearsfan_51
08-31-2011, 11:35 AM
Ok ok..you've twisted my arm. Gayle Sayers is awesome.

He autographed his book for me, by the way. Seemed like a nice guy.

vidae
08-31-2011, 11:46 AM
Can you imagine if Sayers stayed healthy his whole career though? He could have been the best offensive player in NFL history. He was that good in his prime.

I was going to post the same thing. If only, what could have been etc. He'd probably be the measuring stick by which all other offensive players are measured.

boknows34
08-31-2011, 01:20 PM
Or if Sayers, like Barry Sanders 25 years later, had been on a better team. Sayers was 1st team All-Pro on a 1-13 Bears team in 1969 which also featured Dick Butkus.

Raiderz4Life
08-31-2011, 01:24 PM
Can you imagine if Sayers stayed healthy his whole career though? He could have been the best offensive player in NFL history. He was that good in his prime.

I think Mr. Bo Jackson might have given him a run for his money.

bearsfan_51
08-31-2011, 04:00 PM
Or if Sayers, like Barry Sanders 25 years later, had been on a better team. Sayers was 1st team All-Pro on a 1-13 Bears team in 1969 which also featured Dick Butkus.
The other twenty starters for that team had to have been the worst football players in NFL history.

It's like putting Tom Brady and Ray Lewis on the same team and only winning one game.

niel89
08-31-2011, 04:08 PM
Sayer was just a different animal in his time. It was just a different era, and guys like Sayers just weren't around. He was so unique and special that his little time in the NFL was enough for him to get to the HoF in that era. If he played now and had the same effect in a short career, he probably wouldn't make the Hall. His abilities were just so new and unique in his time.

boknows34
09-28-2011, 01:12 PM
The prelim list for the 2012 modern era candidates has just been released this afternoon.

http://www.profootballhof.com/enshrinement/2011/9/28/modern-era-nominees-for-the-class-of-2012/

Running back Tiki Barber, quarterback Drew Bledsoe, wide receiver Keyshawn Johnson, guard Will Shields, and coaches Bill Cowher, Bill Parcells, and Marty Schottenheimer are among the 11 first-year eligible modern-era candidates for the Pro Football Hall of Fame Class of 2012. The preliminary list includes 71 players, 14 coaches and 18 contributors.

From that list of nominees, the Pro Football Hall of Fame Selection Committee will choose 25 candidates who will advance as semifinalist nominees. The list of 25 semifinalists will be announced in mid-November.

The list of 25 semifinalists will be further reduced by a mail ballot to 15 modern-era finalists and announced in early January.

The final list of nominees that will be considered for election will consist of the 15 modern-era finalists and the two senior nominees, former Pittsburgh Steelers defensive back Jack Butler and former Detroit Lions guard Dick Stanfel, who were selected this last month by the Hall of Fame’s Senior Selection Committee.

Splat
09-28-2011, 01:16 PM
Tiki Barber

http://lolwut.com/layout/lolwut.jpg

bearsfan_51
09-28-2011, 02:48 PM
Welcome to the HOF Jack Butler and Dick Stanfel.

Saints-Tigers
09-28-2011, 02:55 PM
Sayers, even per game when healthy really doesn't approach "best offensive player of all time" type numbers.

His 22 TDs weren't in 10 games either, it was 14.

DraftSavant
09-28-2011, 02:58 PM
Welcome to the HOF Jack Butler and Dick Stanfel.

As one of the founders of B.L.E.S.T.O. and one of the pioneers of modern scouting, Butler absolutely should be in the HoF.

bearsfan_51
02-04-2012, 05:12 PM
When I was in college I spent a summer interning at the Pro Football Hall of Fame working mostly through their library, but also doing a little work on the history of the selection process.

In spite of this, I don't have the sterling record at predicting enshrinement classes to the degree that I'd like. Nonetheless, here's my shot at predicting the top 5 players to get in next year (the last two spots are almost always the senior voters' representatives, which has basically become a lock for enshrinement).

This should be an interesting class because there don't look to be any first ballot guys (Will Shields and Bill Parcells having the only real chance), freeing up room to clear up the current logjam.

1) Willie Roaf- Tackle- 1993-2001 New Orleans Saints, 2002-2005 Kansas City Chiefs

Roaf didn't make it in his first year of eligibility, but it's only a matter of time. He was on the all 90's and 00's team (an almost lock for selection), and was arguably the best tackle of his era.

2) Dermontti Dawson- Center- 1988-2000 Pittsburgh Steelers

The HOF hasn't selected a center since 1998, and only two centers in the modern era have been selected (Mike Webster, Dwight Stevenson), but if I were to make a list of all-time great centers, Dawson would be 2nd or 3rd of all-time. He was a semi-finalist the last two years, he'll make it soon.

3) Chris Doleman- Defensive End/Linebacker- 1985-1993, 1999 Minnesota Vikings, 1994-95 Atlanta Falcons, 1996-1998 San Francisco 49'ers

Am I just trolling the Cris Carter supporters? I'm really not. The more people you listen to, the less surprised they are that Carter hasn't been inducted yet, and the less confident they are he will be next year either. Taking his spot as a token Viking, Chris Doleman is a really underrated player with 8 Pro Bowls, and more importantly 5 times All-Pro selection and induction on the all 90's team. Doleman is fourth all-time in sacks, ahead of Richard Dent. Cris Carter will get in eventually, but it looks like there is a wait on receivers.

4) Curtis Martin- Runningback- 1995-97 New England Patriots, 1998-2005 New York Jets

It's either him or Bettis, but I don't think both, not yet anyway. Martin is 4th overall, while Bettis is 5th. And although Bettis won the Superbowl, it's uncommon they vote in two players from the same team in one class. Dawson deserves to go first, and has been waiting longer.

5) Cortez Kennedy- Defensive Tackle- 1990-2000 Seattle Seahawks

Kennedy was always unnoticed being on some bad Seahawks team in a corner of the country most people are unaware exists. But he was a dominant presence on the d-line, compiled great numbers, and won a defensive MVP (and was another all 90's player).

Still have to wait another year: Cris Carter, Will Shields, Jerome Bettis, Andre Reed, Tim Brown, Charles Haley, Bill Parcells, Bill Cowher


The best case I can make for Carter or Bettis this year is that the HOF would be concerned that my class above would be too "boring."
I'd like to take this opportunity to thank myself.

CashmoneyDrew
02-04-2012, 05:14 PM
Well you did leave off one, so I will create an entirely new thread to call you out on that!

nobodyinparticular
02-04-2012, 05:43 PM
From other thread

Branch isn't considered modern-era? He retired in 85.

Senior committee is for those who retired 25 years ago or more. Cliff's last eligibility for regular nomination would have been 2009 if my math is right.

Rabscuttle
02-04-2012, 05:46 PM
Charles Haley needs to smack some writers in the face with his dick.

Brodeur
02-04-2012, 05:46 PM
**** the Curtis Martin selection. The consensus when he retired was "maybe this guy will get in on the Senior Committee one day" or "very good player but not a hall of famer" and he gets in on his second year? What the ****?

DraftSavant
02-04-2012, 05:48 PM
From other thread



Senior committee is for those who retired 25 years ago or more. Cliff's last eligibility for regular nomination would have been 2009 if my math is right.

Ahhh, gotcha.

Still a huge snub!

yodabear
02-04-2012, 05:50 PM
Why no love for wide receivers man? All 3 of those guys (Reed, Carter, and Brown) deserve it over Martin. Sure, Reed had Jim Kelly throwing it to him, sure Tim Brown had some good QBs if I recall correctly, and Carter had well um Randall Cunningham for a couple years or so, but at least in Carter's and Brown's case they still produced when their QBs changed. I don't get it man. I don't get it.

DraftSavant
02-04-2012, 05:50 PM
Also, Tony Boselli dies a little inside every time one of these LTs makes it to the HoF.

Complex
02-04-2012, 05:52 PM
Randy Gene Moss better make it his 1st time.

DraftSavant
02-04-2012, 05:52 PM
Why no love for wide receivers man? All 3 of those guys (Reed, Carter, and Brown) deserve it over Martin. Sure, Reed had Jim Kelly throwing it to him, sure Tim Brown had some good QBs if I recall correctly, and Carter had well um Randall Cunningham for a couple years or so, but at least in Carter's and Brown's case they still produced when their QBs changed. I don't get it man. I don't get it.

Meh...if you didn't win Superbowls, everybody just views those 90s WRs as the same. Everyone was putting up videogame numbers at WR.

I mean...look at this ridiculous ****. 9 guys w/over 100 receptions. #10 had 99.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&conference=null&statisticCategory=RECEIVING&season=1995&seasonType=REG&experience=null&tabSeq=0&qualified=true&Submit=Go

I'm totally pissed about Martin getting in, too, but not because some WRs didn't get in. Positions like OL and DB are still sooo underrepresented in the HoF.

**** wide receivers.

yodabear
02-04-2012, 06:02 PM
Meh...if you didn't win Superbowls, everybody just views those 90s WRs as the same. Everyone was putting up videogame numbers at WR.

I mean...look at this ridiculous ****. 9 guys w/over 100 receptions. #10 had 99.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&conference=null&statisticCategory=RECEIVING&season=1995&seasonType=REG&experience=null&tabSeq=0&qualified=true&Submit=Go

I'm totally pissed about Martin getting in, too, but not because some WRs didn't get in. Positions like OL and DB are still sooo underrepresented in the HoF.

**** wide receivers.

Cris Carter is #2 in receptions and TDs. He is only #2 because of this one Rice guy. For Reed and the other 2 Bills who are firmly in the Hall of Fame, name me one other team to make it to back to back to back to back Super Bowls in history. And Tim Brown when he retired was #3 to Rice and Carter. So if ur talking all time guys, I think these guys all have a chance.

And yeah, on ur other point I agree man. There are some other non position players that deserve to be in over Martin, so yeah they are underrepresented and I agree with ya.

DraftSavant
02-04-2012, 06:26 PM
You're essentially arguing that Cris Carter and Tim Brown are the Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis of WRs. :shrug:

When I think of any of those players, I don't think "HOF." I dunno.

From that era, I think it's very solidly Rice (who is a tier above everyone), then Irvin, Bruce, and Sterling Sharpe on another tier (and you could probably convince me on Tim Brown for this tier, too, but he played on mostly terrible teams for his career), and then everyone else (Carter, Reed, Herman Moore, etc).

Just me, though. Then again, I wasn't one of those people up in arms when Art Monk got passed on year after year, either.

I think I mostly just don't care about WRs.

vidae
02-04-2012, 06:27 PM
You're essentially arguing that Cris Carter is the Curtis Martin of WRs.

I love this quote and I love you.

Halsey
02-04-2012, 06:30 PM
arter is #4 in re eptions and TDs.

yodabear
02-04-2012, 06:30 PM
I love this quote and I love you.

Ur a *****.

DraftSavant
02-04-2012, 06:40 PM
I need to stop ninja editing.

Ness
02-04-2012, 06:49 PM
Wow Carters gets shafted again. Unreal.