Pittsburgh Post-Gazette sports writer Ed Bouchette (1 Viewer)

"Punters aren't football players."

He made that ignorant comment on ESPN radio yesterday. Bouchette, and other voters who share his view should have their Hall of Fame voting privileges examined a bit closer. If punters aren't football players, I'm assuming that Mr. Irsay signs Peyton Manning's checks but not Hunter Smith's? When I see EVERY team going for it on 4th down EVERY time, and no punter is on the roster, then his statement will be correct.

Furthermore, Ray Guy wasn't some donut-eating drunken fat slob who waddled onto the field. He was an athlete. He was a three-sport star in high school, and played safety at Southern Mississippi in addition to leading the NCAA in punting. He was also a great placekicker at USM, once kicking a then-record 61-yard field goal in a snowstorm during a game in Utah. Also, he was drafted by the Atlanta Braves, Kansas City Royals and Cincinnati Reds (twice). Guy was the best punter in the history of the NFL. If he's not worthy of being in the Hall of Fame, they should level the place with a wrecking ball.

Other Ray Guy facts:

- He is the first and only punter drafted in the first round.

- His leg strength was legendary. The phrase "hang time" is believed to have been created due to Guy's booming kicks. John Madden swears he witnessed Guy punt the ball 120 yards in practice — from one end zone out the back of the opposite end zone. On those occasions when the Raiders played in domed facilities, Guy's punts sometimes struck the roofs of the stadiums. Arguably, Guy's most famous punt came in a domed stadium during the 1976 NFL Pro Bowl game played at the Superdome in New Orleans, Louisiana, when one of his punts struck the gondola containing a camera and television screens attached to the roof of the stadium.

- In addition to the strength of his kicking leg, Madden also credits Ray Guy with throws of over 80 yards, exceeding those of any of the Raiders' regular quarterbacks. In fact, Guy was the Raiders' third-string quarterback for several seasons.

- Guy was selected to seven AFC Pro Bowl teams, and in 1994, he was named the punter on the National Football League's 75th Anniversary Team.

- Played in 207 consecutive games, and had 619 consecutive punts before having one blocked.

ARTICLE:

Column by Monte Poole

Inside Bay Area

Ray Guy, generally considered the best punter ever, is among the 17

finalists from which three to six will be chosen for enshrinement. The

40 members of the voting committee will meet Saturday morning in Miami,

make their choices and emerge to announce the Class of 2007.

This is the sixth time Guy has made it to the final ballot. This may be

his last best chance, given the list of candidates approaching

eligibility. Yet with several voters firmly opposed to Guy, there is no

reason for him to go to bed tonight convinced this result will turn out

any better than the first five.

Best punter ever has not, so far, been enough.

Guy was named as the punter on the 75th Anniversary team, making him

only one of three members of that team not in the Hall. The others?

Defensive back Rod Woodson, who is not yet eligible. And Billy "White

Shoes" Johnson, who, like Guy, is saddled with the stigma of being a

special teams player.

That any imaginary Hall of Fame roster likely would list a quarterback,

Sammy Baugh, as its punter, says more about the voters than it does

about Guy or, for that matter, Johnson. There is considerable debate

about the value of special teams players.

Considering no punter has been voted to the Hall, Guy, who in 1994

became the first to be nominated, likely is a victim of position

discrimination.

The list of other former Raiders eligible for the Hall and worthy of

consideration is long and distinguished, from Kenny Stabler and Cliff

Branch, to Jim Plunkett and Ray Chester, to Lester Hayes and Todd

Christensen and Steve Wisniewski. Not one is a more obvious candidate

than Guy.

Arguments can be made for and against each of the others. All were

special players, exceptional in their own right, but none was widely

considered superior to his contemporaries.

Guy, however, was. His right foot should be enough to boot argument out

of the building. His punting combined elements of art, science and brute

strength. He was a genuine weapon, respected by teammates and feared by

opponents. He was the player's player and the punter's punter.

His statistics were good enough to place him in seven Pro Bowls. More

than any other punter, Guy's presence was instrumental for creating the

"hangtime" statistic. So he passes the "numbers" test.

As a member of three Super Bowl champions and a team with only one

losing season in his 14-year career, Guy also passes the "winner" test.

Guy's crafty work in Super Bowl XVIII help blow open the game. His punt

late in the second-quarter pinned Washington on its 12. On first down,

quarterback Joe Theismann lofted a swing pass that linebacker Jack

Squirek read, intercepted and returned for a touchdown, giving the

Raiders a 21-3 halftime lead. They won 38-9.

"He's the first punter you could look at and say, 'He wins games,'" Hall

of Fame historian Joe Horrigan once said.

Another test easily passed by Guy is that of charisma. He was that rare

punter who routinely captivated the audience. Opponents, amazed at the

lift on his punts, tested the balls for helium. When Guy trotted onto

the field, it was a must-see event.

For those who downplay the numbers to ask if an athlete won and if he

possessed the magnetism of greatness, Guy is an obvious choice.

Which makes his continued omission is so glaring.

And leaves the Raiders feeling disrespected.

The 2007 finalists are not especially impressive: Defensive linemen Fred

Dean and Richard Dent; offensive linemen Russ Grimm, Gene Hickerson, Bob

Kuechenberg, Bruce Matthews and Gary Zimmerman; wide receivers Michael

Irvin, Art Monk and Andre Reed; tight end Charlie Sanders; linebackers

Derrick Thomas and Andre Tippett; running back Thurman Thomas; defensive

back Roger Wehrli; commissioner Paul Tagliabue; and Guy.

Because debate rages on every nominee, leaving the class without a sure

thing, this may be Guy's best chance yet. There are no locks.

Because the likes of greats such as Jerry Rice, Emmitt Smith, Cris

Carter, Bruce Smith, Darrell Green, Jerome Bettis, Woodson and others

are biding their time until becoming eligible, this may be Guy's best

chance for a while.

The Raiders have not been especially vocal this time around. Team owner

Al Davis last week noted that Plunkett and Branch have credentials

comparable to current Hall of Famers and expressed his belief that they

deserve enshrinement.

Maybe they do.

With Guy, there should be no "maybe."

Good luck, Ray! The 2007 HoF class will be revealed later today. :X

There are a lot of people with anti-kicker/punter biases. Reminds me of the anti-DH bias in baseball, which I actually understand a little bit, but it's ironic. Any smart football fan, coach, player or writer understands how field position can really have a big influence on the outcome of a game, but punters don't count. That is, until they shank one that loses a game. That "I keek a touchdown" incident did more to generate a lack of respect for the kicking game than most people realise, I think. What PK was that again? Some Hungarian guy? Ah... I know this... drawing a blank. Garo Yapremian(sp)?

One other thing about punters... there are no set of readilly available stats to accurately compare punters for the pro bowl. Net and gross don't take a whole slew of other very important performance issues into account. To understand how good or bad a punter is, I think you simply have to watch him regularly. As a Jets fan, I know how much a bad punter can hurt a team, and how a good one, like our Aussie Ben Graham can help a team. Launching a seventy yarder from your own goal line (point of contact with the ball) with a 5 second-plus hang time is a thing of beauty.

I can't believe Ray Guy isn't already in.

In my lifetime two punters have stood out. Ray Guy and Reggie Roby.

Punting/field position are such a huge part of football. If there's a sportswriter that doesn't recognize that. Check that, most sportswriters are journalists that write about sports, not sportswriters. They're generally clueless about the sports aspects of what they write about. They write well, entertain, and the topic is really irrelevent. It's why I take crappy writers like Mort over many. I don't care about style. I want substance.

RAIDERNATION said:

Other Ray Guy facts:- He is the first and only punter drafted in the first round.- His leg strength was legendary.- In addition to the strength of his kicking leg, Madden also credits Ray Guy with throws of over 80 yards, exceeding those of any of the Raiders' regular quarterbacks. In fact, Guy was the Raiders' third-string quarterback for several seasons.- Guy was selected to seven AFC Pro Bowl teams, and in 1994, he was named the punter on the National Football League's 75th Anniversary Team.- Played in 207 consecutive games, and had 619 consecutive punts before having one blocked.

Click to expand...

Of these, only one lends any credibility to him being HOF-worthy.Personally, it seems to me like there ought to be at least one guy from every position, and I guess Guy is as good of a choice as anybody at punter, but I'm not bowled over by his credentials.

Despyzer said:

RAIDERNATION said:

Other Ray Guy facts:- He is the first and only punter drafted in the first round.- His leg strength was legendary.- In addition to the strength of his kicking leg, Madden also credits Ray Guy with throws of over 80 yards, exceeding those of any of the Raiders' regular quarterbacks. In fact, Guy was the Raiders' third-string quarterback for several seasons.- Guy was selected to seven AFC Pro Bowl teams, and in 1994, he was named the punter on the National Football League's 75th Anniversary Team.- Played in 207 consecutive games, and had 619 consecutive punts before having one blocked.

Click to expand...

Of these, only one lends any credibility to him being HOF-worthy.Personally, it seems to me like there ought to be at least one guy from every position, and I guess Guy is as good of a choice as anybody at punter, but I'm not bowled over by his credentials.

Click to expand...

I think you left out that his team was the most winningest team in football while he was on it. Ray Guy should be in the "HALL" , no if's and or butts. I think anyone that was old enough to watch the Raiders in the 70s would have to agree.

If you are considered the player ever at your position you should be in the hall of fame, just simple logic.

bellmar said:

I think you left out that his team was the most winningest team in football while he was on it. Ray Guy should be in the "HALL" , no if's and or butts. I think anyone that was old enough to watch the Raiders in the 70s would have to agree.

Click to expand...

Ray Guy was the best punter I have seen although with all of the great Steelers-Raiders games of the 70s I can't honestly say that I remember any where he made much of a difference.

E-A-G-L-E-S said:

If you are considered the player ever at your position you should be in the hall of fame, just simple logic.

Click to expand...

Should the best long snapper be enshrined?

Let me ask a question:

Who is the best player in football history? Joe Montana? Walter Payton? Jim Brown? Lawrence Taylor?

If Jim Brown played five plays a game, would he be a Hall of Famer?

If you answered no, which I think any sensible person would, then you must believe that Ray Guy was much, much, much, much more valuable, per play, than Joe Montana, Walter Payton, Lawrence Taylor or Jim Brown. If God appeared before Tony Dungy and said, "For tomorrow's game, I'll give you a choice of having Ray Guy in his prime for five plays or Lawrence Taylor in his prime for five plays," which do you think Dungy would choose? Heck, forget LT, if he gave Dungy the choice between a full game's worth of Ray Guy or a full game's worth of Andre Tippett, who would he choose? Tippett, obviously. So why is Guy a Hall of Famer and Tippett is not?

"Punters are not football players" is a needlessly inflammatory way of stating it. But, with the way the game is played now (by "now" I mean the last 40 or so years), I don't have any problem with the notion that punters are simply incapable of having a Hall-of-fame type impact.

More Ray Guy facts:

1. he led the league in punting average once. He led the league in net punting average twice.

2. his career* ratio of Inside-the-20 punts to touchbacks was 1.64. Compare that with some other punters of the time: John James = 2.39. Dave Jennings = 2.39. Pat McInally = 1.91. Bob Parsons = 2.94!

* - my source does not have touchback and Inside-the-20 stats for the first three years of Guy's career.

Did the Raiders have a consistently horrible coverage team, or what? His yardage totals and net average were good but not dominant, and he did not do a good job of sticking punts inside the 20.

Now, let me pre-emptively answer the "you can't measure the impact he had on the game with stats" argument.

First, as I detailed in my last post, a punter would have to be as valuable as Jim Brown and **** Butkus at the same time to deserve Hall of Fame enshrinement. But I don't see the evidence that Guy was even head-and-shoulders above the other punters of his time.

Second, I understand that stats aren't perfect, but I don't think they're any less perfect for punters than they are for quarterbacks or running backs, and no one has a problem using QB and RB stats, with an effort to put them into context. If you try to tell me that he had so many touchbacks because he was constantly booming them from his own 30, I'll ask why his gross average wasn't higher. If you tell me that he was a master at punting away from the other team's best return threat, I'll ask why his net average wasn't better. If you try to tell me that you once saw him boom an 80 yarder that totally changed the game, I'll point out that Oronde Gadsden made some of the most incredible catches I've ever seen and that Quentin Coryatt laid the biggest hit I've ever seen, but that doesn't mean they're a Hall of Famers. Specifically what is it that he did so much better than every other punter, and why do the numbers fail to capture it?

Godsbrother said:

bellmar said:

I think you left out that his team was the most winningest team in football while he was on it. Ray Guy should be in the "HALL" , no if's and or butts. I think anyone that was old enough to watch the Raiders in the 70s would have to agree.

Click to expand...

Ray Guy was the best punter I have seen although with all of the great Steelers-Raiders games of the 70s I can't honestly say that I remember any where he made much of a difference.

Click to expand...

Games played against teams not from Pittsburgh can still be considered important.

Sea Bass said:

Godsbrother said:

bellmar said:

I think you left out that his team was the most winningest team in football while he was on it. Ray Guy should be in the "HALL" , no if's and or butts. I think anyone that was old enough to watch the Raiders in the 70s would have to agree.

Click to expand...

Ray Guy was the best punter I have seen although with all of the great Steelers-Raiders games of the 70s I can't honestly say that I remember any where he made much of a difference.

Click to expand...

Games played against teams not from Pittsburgh can still be considered important.

Click to expand...

Doug Drinen said:

Specifically what is it that he did so much better than every other punter, and why do the numbers fail to capture it?

Click to expand...

One number I've seen (or at least heard thrown about) is opposing team's punt return yardage. I remember seeing a stat that in his final season, opposing teams combined for ~80 punt return yards, basically taking the punt returner completely out of the game.I don't have full stats on that, so I don't know how that compares to others, but that is the stat I've seen mentioned most with Guy.

Doug Drinen said:

Let me ask a question:

Who is the best player in football history? Joe Montana? Walter Payton? Jim Brown? Lawrence Taylor?

If Jim Brown played five plays a game, would he be a Hall of Famer?

If you answered no, which I think any sensible person would, then you must believe that Ray Guy was much, much, much, much more valuable, per play, than Joe Montana, Walter Payton, Lawrence Taylor or Jim Brown. If God appeared before Tony Dungy and said, "For tomorrow's game, I'll give you a choice of having Ray Guy in his prime for five plays or Lawrence Taylor in his prime for five plays," which do you think Dungy would choose? Heck, forget LT, if he gave Dungy the choice between a full game's worth of Ray Guy or a full game's worth of Andre Tippett, who would he choose? Tippett, obviously. So why is Guy a Hall of Famer and Tippett is not?

"Punters are not football players" is a needlessly inflammatory way of stating it. But, with the way the game is played now (by "now" I mean the last 40 or so years), I don't have any problem with the notion that punters are simply incapable of having a Hall-of-fame type impact.

Click to expand...

I wasn't aware that the HOF should be considered an MVP club. I thought that it was to recognize the best players in the game and recognize individuals that have done the most to revolutionize or promote the game.Further, I think that your argument just plain stinks. Going by that logic, offensive lineman should be in the HOF at a MUCH greater rate than WRs and a greater rate than RBs as well. Because they have an impact on every single play of the game and great offensive lineman have more of an impact on the game than a WR that may get the ball in his hands 6 or 7 times a game. In fact, there should be more Centers in the HOF by that logic than any other position other than QB since they have the ball in their hands on every single play.

The bottom line is that punters, kickers and special teams players can have huge impacts on the game and the best of them should be recognized as such. Now if you want to argue Guy's credentials that's fine, but to argue than an entire position doesn't even matter is assinine. Just ask the Buffalo Bills how much of an impact Mooreman has had for them over the past 4 years.

Godsbrother said:

Should the best long snapper be enshrined?

Click to expand...

Maybe, but you would have to wait until he is eligible.

How many media members are enshrined in the pro football HoF?

The top few players at EVERY position should be there, including longsnappers, punters, and place kickers.

GroveDiesel said:

Doug Drinen said:

Let me ask a question:

Who is the best player in football history? Joe Montana? Walter Payton? Jim Brown? Lawrence Taylor?

If Jim Brown played five plays a game, would he be a Hall of Famer?

If you answered no, which I think any sensible person would, then you must believe that Ray Guy was much, much, much, much more valuable, per play, than Joe Montana, Walter Payton, Lawrence Taylor or Jim Brown. If God appeared before Tony Dungy and said, "For tomorrow's game, I'll give you a choice of having Ray Guy in his prime for five plays or Lawrence Taylor in his prime for five plays," which do you think Dungy would choose? Heck, forget LT, if he gave Dungy the choice between a full game's worth of Ray Guy or a full game's worth of Andre Tippett, who would he choose? Tippett, obviously. So why is Guy a Hall of Famer and Tippett is not?

"Punters are not football players" is a needlessly inflammatory way of stating it. But, with the way the game is played now (by "now" I mean the last 40 or so years), I don't have any problem with the notion that punters are simply incapable of having a Hall-of-fame type impact.

Click to expand...

I wasn't aware that the HOF should be considered an MVP club. I thought that it was to recognize the best players in the game and recognize individuals that have done the most to revolutionize or promote the game.Further, I think that your argument just plain stinks. Going by that logic, offensive lineman should be in the HOF at a MUCH greater rate than WRs and a greater rate than RBs as well. Because they have an impact on every single play of the game and great offensive lineman have more of an impact on the game than a WR that may get the ball in his hands 6 or 7 times a game. In fact, there should be more Centers in the HOF by that logic than any other position other than QB since they have the ball in their hands on every single play.

The bottom line is that punters, kickers and special teams players can have huge impacts on the game and the best of them should be recognized as such. Now if you want to argue Guy's credentials that's fine, but to argue than an entire position doesn't even matter is assinine. Just ask the Buffalo Bills how much of an impact Mooreman has had for them over the past 4 years.

Click to expand...

I would never vote for a punter for the hof. Nor would I vote for a long snapper, Steve Tasker or a holder. The Andersons perhaps. Brian Mitchell? Convince me and I may consider it. Otherwise, special teams players, while valuable to a teams success, are of less imprtance to my mind than someone who plays on offense or defense. That includes lineman, who should get more recognition, imne other thing, how is it determined that Ray Guy is the best ever as a punter? Are there any stats to back up the claim or merely 'they say'?

Old posts on Ray Guy:

Just Win Baby said:

MarshallRob said:

Husker said:

Ray Guy. Ray Guy. Ray Guy.

Click to expand...

If you really think a punter should be in the Hall of Fame, what's the case for Ray Guy? He doesn't hold any important punting records nor is he even close. His career punting average is over three yards behind the all-time leader Shane Lechler. So is his net average. I don't think Guy is even in the Top 40 all-time. Are there some specific punts you can point to that helped his team win a title? The only thing I could find was from his Wikipedia entry:

Arguably, his best performance was in Super Bowl XVIII against the Washington Redskins. When the Raiders offense faltered just outside the range of placekicker Chris Bahr, Guy, known for his power, showed a great deal of finesse by booting a 27-yard punt that pinned the Washington Redskins on their own 12-yard line late in the first half. On the very next play, the Raiders' Jack Squirek intercepted Washington quarterback Joe Theismann and returned it for a touchdown that gave them a 21-3 halftime lead.

Click to expand...

Is a 27-yard punt to the opponent's 12-yard-line really a classic NFL moment?

Click to expand...

I have questioned before why everyone cites Guy in HOF discussions, and no one can really explain. I think a lot of people have just latched onto that as a smart but "clever" opinion on who deserves to be in the HOF but isn't.

And, aside from whether or not Guy is the best punter, is the more fundamental question of whether any punter should be in the HOF. I have gone into this in other posts, but I think the fundamental question that arises is how many significant/impact plays per season any HOF player made... for a typical HOF offensive or defensive player, it is a high number. For a kicker, not so high... which I suspect is why only one true kicker is in the HOF. Same thing for punters, but probably even less impact than kickers. I mean, even kickers can make game winning plays... when was the last time anyone thought a punter made a game winning play?

Otherwise, why stop there? Why not the best punt returner... the best kickoff returner (well, he's probably in--Sayers)... the best at covering kickoffs... the best long snapper... the best at blocking kicks... the best nickelback... etc. IMO the answer is that these players have more limited roles, and do not impact game outcomes to the same extent as typical HOFers, who played most offensive or defensive snaps.

Click to expand...

MarshallRob said:

Sidewinder16 said:

Isn't comparing stats between Guy and Lechler sort of like comparing stats for Favre and Unitas?

There's a lot of info. on Guy's Wikipedia page (as well as other places across the net) that seems to be mysteriously ignored. Guy's leg was plenty strong (he had a career long punt of 74 yards, Madden swears he saw Guy punt a ball from the back of one endzone to the back of the other endzone in practice, he kicked a 61 yard FG in college), but any football fan should know that punting the longest punt possible doesn't make you the best punter. Punts inside the 20, low punt return avg., and number of fair catches are all important to winning the field position battle, of which the punter should be an integral part and an asset. It's possible to be a league leader in punt avg. and net and be a liability in your team's punting game (out kicking your coverage).

Guy is most famous for his hang time (and apparently was a key catalyst for the birth of the term) being able to hang a punt for 6 seconds (a freakin' eternity for a punt), to the point that one of his balls was tested for helium. His bouncing a punt off the Superdome hanging scoreboard is the stuff of legends. He was more than willing to sacrifice distance for hang time/field position when it benefited the team.

He played 14 seasons for a team that was a perennial Super Bowl contender (including playing in and winning 3) and had one losing season (7-9) during his time. His contributions to his team's field position battles, and thus their wins, are pretty well documented. Plenty of people "in the know" (coaches, players, historians) have said that Guy was integral to the success of the Raiders in the '70's and early '80's. I've seen no compelling evidence to disbelieve that.

I understand the general prejudice against punters as football players (and even display it myself at times, although Guy breaks that mold as well, having been a great all around athlete; he was Oaklands 3rd QB for a time, could reportedly throw a football 80 yards, and was drafted multiple times as a pitcher by MLB teams) but I'm firmly in the "Ray Guy belongs in the Hall" camp. IMO, the Hall is for players that had a significant impact on the game in their time (my personal definition of "great"). Guy undoubtedly fills that role.

I'm fine if someone wants to disagree that what Guy did was not Hall-worthy, but I would encourage anyone to read up on what exactly he (or any other player, for that matter) did do before making a final judgement.

Click to expand...

Comparing Guy to Lechler is NOT like comparing Unitas to Favre. It's easier to post bigger passing numbers now than it was in Unitas' day. That's a fact. Is it easier to punt better today? I don't see any evidence to conclude that. Lechler, a current player, is the all-time leader in punting average. But the second and third-best guys played in the 1940's and 1960's (Sammy Baugh and Tommy Davis respectively). Why shouldn't Davis get in the Hall instead of Guy? His average is much better, he punted in much tougher conditions (San Francisco), and he also doubled as a very good placekicker. Additionally, though all of Unitas' records have been bettered he's STILL in the top 10 in passing yards and passing TD's over 30 years after he retired. Guy is nowhere near the leaderboard in punting average. Shouldn't the "greatest punter of all time" at least be in the top 20? Ok, average isn't the only stat to consider. Agreed. Let's go through some other stats:

Guy kicked 210 punts inside the 20. They didn't count the stat for his first 3 years so let's be really really generous and bump him up to 300. Jeff Feagles has 456. Sean Landeta has 381. Chris Gardocki has 320.

Guy had 128 touchbacks. Feagles has only 115 in a longer career. Gardocki has 102.

Guy kicked 619 consecutive punts without a block. Gardocki's streak is 1112 punts.

Guy once kicked a 74-yarder. Great, but the record is 98 yards.

Guy led the league in punting 3 times. Impressive but the immortal Yale Lary, Jim Fraser, and Rohn Stark all did the same thing. Jerrel Wilson did it 4 times. Why isn't he in the Hall?

Guy has the reputation of being the best ever. He made a lot of All-Pro teams and the NFL's 75th Anniversary team. Madden tells everyone Guy was the best. But could we see some numbers to prove all those people were right? You say his contributions are "well-documented". Where are these documents?

Finally, I found the following from a 2005 Dr. Z column about hang time:

But once again, for the umpteenth time, Ray Guy appears on the Hall of Fame ballot. His lifetime gross average was an unimpressive 42.4. I got a letter on his behalf from some lobbying agency that tried to cover this number by explaining that he made up for it by pinning the enemy deep with coffin-corner kicks. This is a flat out lie written by someone who probably spells football with a pf. Guy's big weakness was that he didn't go for the edges. He was a middle of the end zone punter, although he had the livest leg in the game and when he caught one it really hung.

At one of our Hall of Fame selectors meetings, Peter King, who had meticulously gone through years of play-by-play sheets, presented the research he had done on what Guy's net would have been, had it been kept in those days. It was in the low 30, mediocre indeed. But every time you get John Madden talking about Guy, whom he had coached in Oakland, he'd mention his hang time, "regularly in the high-5.0 range, sometimes as high as six seconds."

This is, of course, nonsense. Never in history has there been a six-second hanger.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Good stuff, JWB.

Here is the bottom line. We are just a bunch of message board goons. Ask any coach who was in the league when Guy was playing, and all of them will tell you that he was the best. Period. Ask those same coaches today, and they'll still say he was the best. Ever.

The NFL tells us that "punter" is, in fact, a position. That's good enough for me.

Any HoF voter who has an always/never standard regarding a certain position should have his voting privileges revoked. That's ridiculous.

RAIDERNATION said:

Good stuff, JWB.Here is the bottom line. We are just a bunch of message board goons. Ask any coach who was in the league when Guy was playing, and all of them will tell you that he was the best. Period. Ask those same coaches today, and they'll still say he was the best. Ever.The NFL tells us that "punter" is, in fact, a position. That's good enough for me.

Click to expand...

Well, most of the good stuff was MarshallRob's.

redman said:

Any HoF voter who has an always/never standard regarding a certain position should have his voting privileges revoked. That's ridiculous.

Click to expand...

Doug Drinen said:

More Ray Guy facts:

1. he led the league in punting average once. He led the league in net punting average twice.

2. his career* ratio of Inside-the-20 punts to touchbacks was 1.64. Compare that with some other punters of the time: John James = 2.39. Dave Jennings = 2.39. Pat McInally = 1.91. Bob Parsons = 2.94!

* - my source does not have touchback and Inside-the-20 stats for the first three years of Guy's career.

Did the Raiders have a consistently horrible coverage team, or what? His yardage totals and net average were good but not dominant, and he did not do a good job of sticking punts inside the 20.

Now, let me pre-emptively answer the "you can't measure the impact he had on the game with stats" argument.

First, as I detailed in my last post, a punter would have to be as valuable as Jim Brown and **** Butkus at the same time to deserve Hall of Fame enshrinement. But I don't see the evidence that Guy was even head-and-shoulders above the other punters of his time.

Second, I understand that stats aren't perfect, but I don't think they're any less perfect for punters than they are for quarterbacks or running backs, and no one has a problem using QB and RB stats, with an effort to put them into context. If you try to tell me that he had so many touchbacks because he was constantly booming them from his own 30, I'll ask why his gross average wasn't higher. If you tell me that he was a master at punting away from the other team's best return threat, I'll ask why his net average wasn't better. If you try to tell me that you once saw him boom an 80 yarder that totally changed the game, I'll point out that Oronde Gadsden made some of the most incredible catches I've ever seen and that Quentin Coryatt laid the biggest hit I've ever seen, but that doesn't mean they're a Hall of Famers. Specifically what is it that he did so much better than every other punter, and why do the numbers fail to capture it?

Click to expand...

Doug Drinen said:

Let me ask a question:

Who is the best player in football history? Joe Montana? Walter Payton? Jim Brown? Lawrence Taylor?

If Jim Brown played five plays a game, would he be a Hall of Famer?

If you answered no, which I think any sensible person would, then you must believe that Ray Guy was much, much, much, much more valuable, per play, than Joe Montana, Walter Payton, Lawrence Taylor or Jim Brown. If God appeared before Tony Dungy and said, "For tomorrow's game, I'll give you a choice of having Ray Guy in his prime for five plays or Lawrence Taylor in his prime for five plays," which do you think Dungy would choose? Heck, forget LT, if he gave Dungy the choice between a full game's worth of Ray Guy or a full game's worth of Andre Tippett, who would he choose? Tippett, obviously. So why is Guy a Hall of Famer and Tippett is not?

"Punters are not football players" is a needlessly inflammatory way of stating it. But, with the way the game is played now (by "now" I mean the last 40 or so years), I don't have any problem with the notion that punters are simply incapable of having a Hall-of-fame type impact.

Click to expand...

This is a good post, but after thinking about it for awhile, I don't think there's any debate that Ray Guy was more valuable per play than Joe Montana or Jim Brown. Over five rushing plays, we'd expect Jim Brown to get us 26 yards. A regular old RB would get us about 20 yards. We'd have Brown at the goal-line, and he'd probably end up with a few more touchdowns over the course of his career than your regular RB.But there's no way that a regular punter can come within 1.2 yards per punt of the best punter of all time. The Cowboys led the NFL with a 48.2 net average, and the Giants were last with a 40.2 net average. I think Mat McBriar was probably worth about 20 yards per game more than the average punter. That would make him the most valuable player per play in the NFL, excluding placekickers.

If you had the choice of LaDainian Tomlinson for five runs or Mat McBriar for five punts, I think it's safe to say that McBriar would win in a landslide.

That being said, I don't know if Guy is by far the greatest punter of all time, and I also don't know if being X% more valuable per play than Montana or Jim Brown is enough.

Godsbrother said:

E-A-G-L-E-S said:

If you are considered the player ever at your position you should be in the hall of fame, just simple logic.

Click to expand...

Should the best long snapper be enshrined?

Click to expand...

That would require some pretty remarkable accomplishment. I do agree that there are limits to what you should enshrine. Holders on place kicks are another one. Some peoples' tasks on the field are so limited that you need to consider whether they can justly accompany guys like Jim Brown and Johnny Unitas in the HoF. What the Hall probably needs is a Special Teams section that is separate from the main Hall. That's the kind of place you can put a long snapper who snapped 3500 times without an error or something.

Chase Stuart said:

Doug Drinen said:

Let me ask a question:

Who is the best player in football history? Joe Montana? Walter Payton? Jim Brown? Lawrence Taylor?

If Jim Brown played five plays a game, would he be a Hall of Famer?

If you answered no, which I think any sensible person would, then you must believe that Ray Guy was much, much, much, much more valuable, per play, than Joe Montana, Walter Payton, Lawrence Taylor or Jim Brown. If God appeared before Tony Dungy and said, "For tomorrow's game, I'll give you a choice of having Ray Guy in his prime for five plays or Lawrence Taylor in his prime for five plays," which do you think Dungy would choose? Heck, forget LT, if he gave Dungy the choice between a full game's worth of Ray Guy or a full game's worth of Andre Tippett, who would he choose? Tippett, obviously. So why is Guy a Hall of Famer and Tippett is not?

"Punters are not football players" is a needlessly inflammatory way of stating it. But, with the way the game is played now (by "now" I mean the last 40 or so years), I don't have any problem with the notion that punters are simply incapable of having a Hall-of-fame type impact.

Click to expand...

This is a good post, but after thinking about it for awhile, I don't think there's any debate that Ray Guy was more valuable per play than Joe Montana or Jim Brown. Over five rushing plays, we'd expect Jim Brown to get us 26 yards. A regular old RB would get us about 20 yards. We'd have Brown at the goal-line, and he'd probably end up with a few more touchdowns over the course of his career than your regular RB.But there's no way that a regular punter can come within 1.2 yards per punt of the best punter of all time. The Cowboys led the NFL with a 48.2 net average, and the Giants were last with a 40.2 net average. I think Mat McBriar was probably worth about 20 yards per game more than the average punter. That would make him the most valuable player per play in the NFL, excluding placekickers.

If you had the choice of LaDainian Tomlinson for five runs or Mat McBriar for five punts, I think it's safe to say that McBriar would win in a landslide.

That being said, I don't know if Guy is by far the greatest punter of all time, and I also don't know if being X% more valuable per play than Montana or Jim Brown is enough.

Click to expand...

Even if Ray Guy was more valuable than Jim Brown on a per play basis, I don't think that was really Doug's point. His point was that a full game of Ray Guy is obviously worth much less than a full game of any HOF player or even non HOF player (the Tippett example).Obviously, the reason the 5 plays of Jim Brown thing came up is because Guy was limited to 5 or so plays per game, and Doug's point was that no player, not even nobrainer HOFers like Jim Brown, should be a HOFer based on 5 plays per game.

Furthermore, it is not clear that Ray Guy is the best punter in NFL history. IMO there are two questions that are mixed up in this discussion:

1. Does the best punter in NFL history deserve to be in the HOF?

2. Is Ray Guy the best punter in NFL history?

redman said:

Any HoF voter who has an always/never standard regarding a certain position should have his voting privileges revoked. That's ridiculous.

Click to expand...

I disagree. I see no reason a punter should ever be selected to the hall. Their value to a team is minimized by the infrequency of their play, the nature of thier job- they dont score-, and the fact that it is much easier to replace a punter with someone with similar stats than it is to replace Tomlinson, Rice, Munoz or Manning.If I need cap room and my punter is making top 5/10 $$$ for his position then I wouldn't hesitate to release him and find another. While not a dime a odzen, good punters are not all that difficult to get and the difference between good punters and Ray Guy is not that great, as is born out by the stats from Marshall Rob and JWB. So if Guy is considered the best ever and I see know reason to vote him then I obviously wouldn't vote for anyother punter.

redman said:

Godsbrother said:

E-A-G-L-E-S said:

If you are considered the player ever at your position you should be in the hall of fame, just simple logic.

Click to expand...

Should the best long snapper be enshrined?

Click to expand...

That would require some pretty remarkable accomplishment. I do agree that there are limits to what you should enshrine. Holders on place kicks are another one. Some peoples' tasks on the field are so limited that you need to consider whether they can justly accompany guys like Jim Brown and Johnny Unitas in the HoF. What the Hall probably needs is a Special Teams section that is separate from the main Hall. That's the kind of place you can put a long snapper who snapped 3500 times without an error or something.

Click to expand...

I like this idea. Then I could see myself voting for a punter.

I don't know how many players are in the NFL HOF...300-400? But I wouldn't put Ray Guy in the top 1,000 football players of all time.

dutch said:

GroveDiesel said:

Doug Drinen said:

Let me ask a question:

Who is the best player in football history? Joe Montana? Walter Payton? Jim Brown? Lawrence Taylor?

If Jim Brown played five plays a game, would he be a Hall of Famer?

If you answered no, which I think any sensible person would, then you must believe that Ray Guy was much, much, much, much more valuable, per play, than Joe Montana, Walter Payton, Lawrence Taylor or Jim Brown. If God appeared before Tony Dungy and said, "For tomorrow's game, I'll give you a choice of having Ray Guy in his prime for five plays or Lawrence Taylor in his prime for five plays," which do you think Dungy would choose? Heck, forget LT, if he gave Dungy the choice between a full game's worth of Ray Guy or a full game's worth of Andre Tippett, who would he choose? Tippett, obviously. So why is Guy a Hall of Famer and Tippett is not?

"Punters are not football players" is a needlessly inflammatory way of stating it. But, with the way the game is played now (by "now" I mean the last 40 or so years), I don't have any problem with the notion that punters are simply incapable of having a Hall-of-fame type impact.

Click to expand...

I wasn't aware that the HOF should be considered an MVP club. I thought that it was to recognize the best players in the game and recognize individuals that have done the most to revolutionize or promote the game.Further, I think that your argument just plain stinks. Going by that logic, offensive lineman should be in the HOF at a MUCH greater rate than WRs and a greater rate than RBs as well. Because they have an impact on every single play of the game and great offensive lineman have more of an impact on the game than a WR that may get the ball in his hands 6 or 7 times a game. In fact, there should be more Centers in the HOF by that logic than any other position other than QB since they have the ball in their hands on every single play.

The bottom line is that punters, kickers and special teams players can have huge impacts on the game and the best of them should be recognized as such. Now if you want to argue Guy's credentials that's fine, but to argue than an entire position doesn't even matter is assinine. Just ask the Buffalo Bills how much of an impact Mooreman has had for them over the past 4 years.

Click to expand...

I would never vote for a punter for the hof. Nor would I vote for a long snapper, Steve Tasker or a holder. The Andersons perhaps. Brian Mitchell? Convince me and I may consider it. Otherwise, special teams players, while valuable to a teams success, are of less imprtance to my mind than someone who plays on offense or defense. That includes lineman, who should get more recognition, imne other thing, how is it determined that Ray Guy is the best ever as a punter? Are there any stats to back up the claim or merely 'they say'?

Click to expand...

Ask the Bears about Devin Hester. This whole argument that some positions are important is ridiculous. If that was the case you wouldn't have every head coach talking about how important special teams are. To me it's a neglected part of the game that deserves to get more attention because special teams do win games.

cstu said:

dutch said:

GroveDiesel said:

Doug Drinen said:

Let me ask a question:

Who is the best player in football history? Joe Montana? Walter Payton? Jim Brown? Lawrence Taylor?

If Jim Brown played five plays a game, would he be a Hall of Famer?

If you answered no, which I think any sensible person would, then you must believe that Ray Guy was much, much, much, much more valuable, per play, than Joe Montana, Walter Payton, Lawrence Taylor or Jim Brown. If God appeared before Tony Dungy and said, "For tomorrow's game, I'll give you a choice of having Ray Guy in his prime for five plays or Lawrence Taylor in his prime for five plays," which do you think Dungy would choose? Heck, forget LT, if he gave Dungy the choice between a full game's worth of Ray Guy or a full game's worth of Andre Tippett, who would he choose? Tippett, obviously. So why is Guy a Hall of Famer and Tippett is not?

"Punters are not football players" is a needlessly inflammatory way of stating it. But, with the way the game is played now (by "now" I mean the last 40 or so years), I don't have any problem with the notion that punters are simply incapable of having a Hall-of-fame type impact.

Click to expand...

I wasn't aware that the HOF should be considered an MVP club. I thought that it was to recognize the best players in the game and recognize individuals that have done the most to revolutionize or promote the game.Further, I think that your argument just plain stinks. Going by that logic, offensive lineman should be in the HOF at a MUCH greater rate than WRs and a greater rate than RBs as well. Because they have an impact on every single play of the game and great offensive lineman have more of an impact on the game than a WR that may get the ball in his hands 6 or 7 times a game. In fact, there should be more Centers in the HOF by that logic than any other position other than QB since they have the ball in their hands on every single play.

The bottom line is that punters, kickers and special teams players can have huge impacts on the game and the best of them should be recognized as such. Now if you want to argue Guy's credentials that's fine, but to argue than an entire position doesn't even matter is assinine. Just ask the Buffalo Bills how much of an impact Mooreman has had for them over the past 4 years.

Click to expand...

I would never vote for a punter for the hof. Nor would I vote for a long snapper, Steve Tasker or a holder. The Andersons perhaps. Brian Mitchell? Convince me and I may consider it. Otherwise, special teams players, while valuable to a teams success, are of less imprtance to my mind than someone who plays on offense or defense. That includes lineman, who should get more recognition, imne other thing, how is it determined that Ray Guy is the best ever as a punter? Are there any stats to back up the claim or merely 'they say'?

Click to expand...

Ask the Bears about Devin Hester. This whole argument that some positions are important is ridiculous. If that was the case you wouldn't have every head coach talking about how important special teams are. To me it's a neglected part of the game that deserves to get more attention because special teams do win games.

Click to expand...

If you listed the players on the Bears this year, in terms of value to the team, where would Hester rank?

GroveDiesel said:

Further, I think that your argument just plain stinks. Going by that logic, offensive lineman should be in the HOF at a MUCH greater rate than WRs and a greater rate than RBs as well. Because they have an impact on every single play of the game and great offensive lineman have more of an impact on the game than a WR that may get the ball in his hands 6 or 7 times a game. In fact, there should be more Centers in the HOF by that logic than any other position other than QB since they have the ball in their hands on every single play.

Click to expand...

I never once mentioned putting their hands on the ball. There are other ways to have an impact on the play than to touch it. That's one reason I included LT in the example. Punters are only on the field for five plays. The best wide receivers are on the field, impacting the game in various ways, for about 50 or 60. If you're talking special teams guys like Steve Tasker or Larry Izzo, you might have a bit of a case. They probably play 20 plays a game. Punters play five.

Just Win Baby said:

If you listed the players on the Bears this year, in terms of value to the team, where would Hester rank?

Click to expand...

And a followup question: if the NFL were drafting from scratch, when would the first punter be taken? If Ray Guy in his prime were available, when would he be taken?Serious question.

Doug Drinen said:

GroveDiesel said:

Further, I think that your argument just plain stinks. Going by that logic, offensive lineman should be in the HOF at a MUCH greater rate than WRs and a greater rate than RBs as well. Because they have an impact on every single play of the game and great offensive lineman have more of an impact on the game than a WR that may get the ball in his hands 6 or 7 times a game. In fact, there should be more Centers in the HOF by that logic than any other position other than QB since they have the ball in their hands on every single play.

Click to expand...

I never once mentioned putting their hands on the ball. There are other ways to have an impact on the play than to touch it. That's one reason I included LT in the example. Punters are only on the field for five plays. The best wide receivers are on the field, impacting the game in various ways, for about 50 or 60. If you're talking special teams guys like Steve Tasker or Larry Izzo, you might have a bit of a case. They probably play 20 plays a game. Punters play five.

Click to expand...

Tasker also played WR a couple of seasons and was MVP of a Pro Bowl. He should be in before Guy is even considered.

Just Win Baby said:

Furthermore, it is not clear that Ray Guy is the best punter in NFL history. IMO there are two questions that are mixed up in this discussion:1. Does the best punter in NFL history deserve to be in the HOF?2. Is Ray Guy the best punter in NFL history?

Click to expand...

After thinking about it for awhile, I think there is another important one:3. Who is supposed to be in the Hall of Fame?I view the Hall of Fame as sort of an extension of the MVP award. The most valuable players of all time are supposed to be in the Hall of Fame. In my view, if no punter has ever had as much value to their team as, say, Neal Anderson (which is clearly the case), then I don't want any punter in the Hall unless Neal Anderson is in first.It's now clear to me that others view it as more of an extension of the All-Pro team. That the Hall membership should necessarily include a cross-section of all kinds of players. I really never even realized that this distinction was there until I read through this thread. But it's clear that arguments between the two camps are never going to get anywhere. In my (newly-revised) opinion, Ed Bouchette's viewpoint and raidernation's viewpoint:

The NFL tells us that "punter" is, in fact, a position. That's good enough for me.

Click to expand...

are equally valid as far as I'm concerned. This thread has, however, caused me to wonder if Ray Guy really is as good as everyone says he is.

Just Win Baby said:

RAIDERNATION said:

Good stuff, JWB.Here is the bottom line. We are just a bunch of message board goons. Ask any coach who was in the league when Guy was playing, and all of them will tell you that he was the best. Period. Ask those same coaches today, and they'll still say he was the best. Ever.The NFL tells us that "punter" is, in fact, a position. That's good enough for me.

Click to expand...

Well, most of the good stuff was MarshallRob's.

Click to expand...

Hey, thanks for remembering JWB.As for the article quoted in the first post, I found this part the most amusing:

Guy's crafty work in Super Bowl XVIII help blow open the game. His puntlate in the second-quarter pinned Washington on its 12. On first down,quarterback Joe Theismann lofted a swing pass that linebacker JackSquirek read, intercepted and returned for a touchdown, giving theRaiders a 21-3 halftime lead. They won 38-9."He's the first punter you could look at and say, 'He wins games,'" Hallof Fame historian Joe Horrigan once said.Another test easily passed by Guy is that of charisma. He was that rarepunter who routinely captivated the audience. Opponents, amazed at thelift on his punts, tested the balls for helium. When Guy trotted ontothe field, it was a must-see event.For those who downplay the numbers to ask if an athlete won and if hepossessed the magnetism of greatness, Guy is an obvious choice.

Click to expand...

Apparently Guy's a Hall of Famer because he was crafty, charismatic, magnetic (who knew?) and pinned a team back on its 12-yard line.

Fact of the matter is, some positions are more valuable than others and this should be considered in HoF voting.

We've had this argument in baseball before, when Bill James and other serious analysts demonstrated that a closer should never win the MVP award for similar reasons. Now, a few closers DO deserve enshrinement in the Hall, but this generally requires dominance AND a long career.

Number of plays is a pretty darned important aspect of value, and punters just don't have enough.

Also, players and coaches can be wrong about strategy and player value, and have been many times in the past. Just look at the Pro Bowl voting every year.

-Josh

If going by any sort of MVP sort of standards, then no offensive linemen should he in the hall. That is Heisman award thinking. Each postision has value, and you will never see a lineman on defense or offense voted the super bowl MVP. It isn't an MVP vote, at least I don't think so.

It's about recognizing the best there ever was at any given position. I do however, draw the line at long snappers and holders. Call that a double standard if you want...

I wouldn't mind seeing a seperate category for special teamers though, their performance along with punters and kickers can change the game's outcome with special performances. That is why long snappers and holders don't get consideration in my mind. They can't win games, only lose them. don't tell me punters can't or don't have an impact on whether or not a team can win a game.

How many times has a team with a 3 point lead and 1:30 left on the clock lost when the punter puts a 50 yard punt out of bounds inside the ten? Yes, they can greatly influence the outcome of a game. The punters who demonstrate that sort of game changing ability deserve HoF recognition. I happen the think Dave Jennings was as good as Guy,, but that is another topic.