FairWarning
Footballguy
I've seen all of them play and for all the stats, Sanders will not make it. I agree with Monk, T Thomas, Craig, Zimmerman, and Parcells.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
SI's top 10 Non-Hall of Famers (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter DaWidowMaker
- Start date
FairWarning
Footballguy
He should be in too.
Hunterbeer
Footballguy
WHAT?!?!? So being named All-Decade at two different positions (CB and PR), 8 Pro Bowls, being named Defensive Player of the Year once (1994), his 19 defensive and return TDs which are a record, and being the one of the greatest shutdown CBs of all-time is not good enough to make the Hall of Fame?!?!?! That is absolutely absurd. I pray it was sarcasm. I will happily take ANY bet you can come up with that Deion goes into the Hall of Fame.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tau837
Footballguy
I'm pretty sure he was referring to Charlie Sanders, who was named in the original post, not Deion.
Tau837
Footballguy
Irvin averaged more receptions, receiving yards, and receiving TDs per game than Clark. I call that Irvin being better than Clark in the regular season.As for durability, yes, it is obvious that Clark was more durable. Irvin missed 10 games in 1989 and 12 games in 1999. Otherwise, in his other 11 seasons, Irvin missed only 11 games. Clark missed 9 games in 11 seasons. So it appears you are saying Clark was better in the regular season because Irvin played 2 more regular seasons and missed most of them due to injury, even though Irvin outperformed Clark when he played.Is that really your position? That's a strange definition of "better".
Marc Levin
Hangs out with Oscar Zeta Acosta
JWB, for the record, I did acknowledge Irvin finished with better stats on 8 fewer games. I shouldn't have said clearly better in the regular season - I concede that point.
I think, though, that you were overly discounting Clark's in-season accolades, such as number of Pro Bowls and top statistic finishes -
I think, though, that you were overly discounting Clark's in-season accolades, such as number of Pro Bowls and top statistic finishes -
again, pretty close on the all-time charts and Irvin played two more years. Regardless, Irvin dominated the league at WR from '91 to '95. Irvin clearly deserves a HOF spot over Clark, but it was reasonable to compare the two players' regular season careers.
Last edited by a moderator:
MarshallRob
Footballguy
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:Husker said:
Is a 27-yard punt to the opponent's 12-yard-line really a classic NFL moment?
Like I said I was basing my comments about Monk on stats posted in this thread. Turns out I did miss a couple. I looked and thought there were 9 years that Monk failed to lead his team in any of catches, receiving yards or receiving TD's. There were 2 (of 27 possible) I missed.1983: Trailed Brown in all 3 categories
1986: Trailed Clark in all 3 categories
1987: Trailed Clark in all 3 categories
1988: Trailed Sanders in all 3 categories
1989: Did lead team in catches, trailed Clark in yards and TD's.
1990: Trailed Clark in all 3 categories
1991: Did lead team in catches, trailed Clark in yards and TD's.
1992: Trailed Clark in all 3 categories
1993: Trailed Sanders in all 3 categories
So unless I'm missing something (or the stats posted here were wrong) that's 9 years in the meat of Monk's career - nine years with a chance to lead his team in one of the three major receiving categories for 27 chances overall. Only two of the 27 found Monk actually leading his own team - and both were in catches - not the more important measuring of yards or TD's. Those numbers look to me pretty much like a guy playing second fiddle on his own team - a very significant percentage of the time. I don't understand your comments about RB's - these guys are all receivers, right?
Well like I said it looks like second to me (during these 9 years) but if claiming a guy is a HOF'er becase he was 1B on his team, shouldn't any of the 1A guys be getting hall of fame run?
Last edited by a moderator:
Tau837
Footballguy
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.
THanks brother! people sleep on Gary Clark, but he wasn't too bad eh?dgreen said:I'm not a Clark-for-the-HOF guy, but his numbers usually really surprise some people. We can compare them to another WR who is certain to get in the HOF, Michael Irvin.Career stats
Clark: 11 seasons, 167 games, 699 receptions, 10,856 yards, 65 TDs
Irvin: 13 seasons, 159 games, 750 receptions, 11904 yards, 65 TDs
Pro Bowls: Clark 4, Irvin 5
Postseason stats
Clark: 13 games, 58 receptions, 826 yards, 6 TDs
Irvin: 16 games, 87 receptions, 1314 yards, 8 TDs
Clark's teams were 10-3 in his 13 games. Irvin's were 12-4.
Clark won 2 SBs. Irvin won 3.
Average SB performance for Clark: 5.0-85-1.0
Average SB performance for Irvin: 5.3-85-0.67
Seasons in the top 10
Receptions: Clark 4, Irvin 4
Rec. yards: Clark 5, Irvin 6
Rec. TDs: Clark 5, Irvin 5
All-time ranks
Receptions: Clark 25, Irvin 20
Rec. yards: Clark 19, Irvin 14
Rec. TDs: Clark 37, Irvin 37
Fantasy value
Career total value: Clark 425, Irvin 462
Average pos rank: Clark 20, Irvin 30
Irvin had six good fantasy years (above baseline) ranking: 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 11
Clark had eight good fantasy years ranking: 3, 3, 3, 6, 7, 12, 15, 19
Other stuff
Irvin's injuries kept him from blowing Clark away in total career numbers.
Clark's one full year in USFL have his numbers a tad lower than they would have been otherwise.
As we've all been told over and over, Clark was better than Monk who is on the verge of entering the HOF.
Clark isn't nearly as annoying as Irvin.
Despyzer
Lousy Attention Whore
I'll bite... again. Did any of them (or Irvin or McCardell or anyone else we are comparing to Monk) break any major receiving records or finish their careers as the ALL-TIME LEADER in receptions? How is it possible that some of you are overlooking the significance of this?![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
[scooter]
Footballguy
RBs have the luxury of padding their stats with "dump offs" that often go for 0 yards. Example: in 1981 RB Joe Washington "led" the Redskins with 70 catches, but for only 558 yards. No one (except possibly you) would seriously try to claim that Washington was the team's #1 receiving option, even though he had more catches than Monk (56).eta: another example. in 2000 Marshall Faulk caught more passes per game than Torry Holt (who led the league with 1635 receiving yards). You want to argue that Faulk was the team's #1 receiver?
Last edited by a moderator:
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Aren't you forgetting about a guy who was playing for the 49ers during that five-year stretch?Incidentally, from '91 through '95, Jerry Rice caught more touchdowns (67) than Michael Irvin caught (65) in his entire career!Marc Levin said:
Last edited by a moderator:
dgreen
Footballguy
He is the punter on the NFL's 75th Anniversary Team.
Marc Levin
Hangs out with Oscar Zeta Acosta
No - I didn't."Dominating the league" from the WR spot doesn't mean "best WR at the time" - and it does not preclude other WRs from dominating the league.Four years ago, all three of Harrison, Owens and Moss dominated the league from the WR spot.For those four years, Irvin was unstoppable - that Rice was also unstoppable doesn't change Irvin's impact.
Last edited by a moderator:
No I wouldn't try to claim Washington was the best receiver on their team. That's why I compared Monk only to other receivers on his own team. Hence my comment "I don't understand the RB comment". You guys are the ones bringing up RB's. What do running backs have to do with any of the comparisons I'm making on Monk? Charley Brown, Gary Clark, Ricky Sanders - all receivers.However I would agree that leading your team in receptions as a WR doesn't necessarily equate to being the best receiver on your team - that's why I pointed out how often Monk failed to lead his own team in WR receiving yards and WR receiving TD's in addition to WR receptions. It's the pro-Monk crowd that seems obsessed with receptions in and of themselves - why would you be throwing that back at me? I still don't see an example of another hall of fame receiver who as often as Monk failed to lead his own team in these receiving categories (ignoring RB's who caught a lot of dump off passes - irrelevant to the stats in play here).Lastly I think it's cute that you guys seem to be implying that I'm some kind of idiot for questioning whether Monk belongs in the Hall of Fame - yet Monk is not in the Hall of Fame.
Marc Levin
Hangs out with Oscar Zeta Acosta
Lynn Swann?
Last edited by a moderator:
no - the Bills actually ran more than they passed.The K-gun wasn't pass happy!
Marc Levin
Hangs out with Oscar Zeta Acosta
I agree.Just answering the question.
Sidewinder16
Footballguy
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.
Swampy
Footballguy
Without a doubt. How can a player be the greatest ever at one position and not yet be in the HOF.
Sidewinder16
Footballguy
Fred Biletnikoff also answers the question, and he didn't have another HOF receiver on the field with him.Although, IMO, I'm not sure why it matters. Everyone should be judged independently, IMO, not whether they necessarily fit one mold or another (i.e. was consistently the #1 or 1A WR in stats on their team).
If someone doesn't think Monk is Hall-worthy, they are certainly entitled to that opinion. But if all they're looking at is this, then it's an ill-informed opinion, IMO. I would suggest further examination of Monk's impact on receiving and receivers in the NFL, as well as the success of the Redskins, in the '80's and early '90's before finalizing one's opinion.
I'd also suggest people click on and read through the linked names on this page, as well. It doesn't take long to find out that HOF enshrinement isn't all about the numbers/stats.
Marc Levin
Hangs out with Oscar Zeta Acosta
Marc Levin
Hangs out with Oscar Zeta Acosta
BTW, Monk being inshrined recognizes the team's prolific passing game and his short lived holding of the all-time reception record and him being the first of the true modern era WRs (first receiver to ever post 900 receptions, second all-time receiving streak with 183 games)
Yes, I got that stuff from the Wikepedia article.
Yes, I got that stuff from the Wikepedia article.
Sidewinder16
Footballguy
Or 
)
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Oh, I see what you mean. I misinterpreted what you said. My apologies.
MarshallRob
Footballguy
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:
Last edited by a moderator:
Tau837
Footballguy
Lemmiwinks
Footballguy
I think Craig broke the mold of the running back just being a runner. He was a great blocker, great receiver and strong runner. That he was on a great team with so many great players should not be held against him. Craig belongs in the HOF in my opinion.
It's funny, but put that guy on a crappy team like the Patriots at the time and he's in for sure for carrying the team. But surround him with Montana, Rice, Jones, Taylor, etc, and he doesn't merit consideration from those who have responded here.
And I know people hate to talk about this, but Craig does have some big shiny rings and he showed up big in the super bowls that he played in.
It's funny, but put that guy on a crappy team like the Patriots at the time and he's in for sure for carrying the team. But surround him with Montana, Rice, Jones, Taylor, etc, and he doesn't merit consideration from those who have responded here.
And I know people hate to talk about this, but Craig does have some big shiny rings and he showed up big in the super bowls that he played in.
Marc Levin
Hangs out with Oscar Zeta Acosta
No worries - I probably could have explained myself better, too.Oh, I see what you mean. I misinterpreted what you said. My apologies.
[scooter]
Footballguy
True. During Reed's tenure with the Bills, they rushed the ball 7478 times while passing it 7462 times. In the K-Gun era (1990-96) the disparity was even more pronounced -- 3650 rushes to 3478 passes. They were consistently in the top 5 for rushing attempts (and were #1 three times in five years) while averaging 17th for pass attempts:1985: 517 passes (11th), 412 rushes (27th)1986: 499 passes (19th), 419 rushes (26th)1987: 516 passes (7th), 465 rushes (17th)1988: 454 passes (23rd), 528 rushes (6th)1989: 478 passes (21st), 532 rushes (5th)1990: 425 passes (24th), 479 rushes (9th)1991: 516 passes (5th), 505 rushes (5th)1992: 509 passes (8th), 549 rushes (1st)1993: 497 passes (18th), 550 rushes (2nd)1994: 542 passes (12th), 483 rushes (7th)1995: 506 passes (25th), 521 rushes (1st)1996: 483 passes (25th), 563 rushes (1st)1997: 546 passes (11th), 422 rushes (23rd)1998: 461 passes (28th), 531 rushes (1st)1999: 513 passes (24th), 519 rushes (2nd)no - the Bills actually ran more than they passed.The K-gun wasn't pass happy!
Good links guys. Art Monk was certainly an excellent player and quality individual, no doubt.
Biletnikoff is certainly a valid example so I looked into he and Monk some more.
It looks to me like the prime of Biletnikoff's career was 1967 to 1976 (10 seasons).
As calculated before that gives him 30 opportunities to lead his team in rec, yds, or TD's.
By my calcs Biletnikoff lead his team in one of the 3 categories 14 of 30 times (47%).
Of the 16 times he didn't lead his team - on 6 of the occasions he was still top 10 in the league in the category: that gives him 20/30 to either lead his team or be top 10 in league (67%).
In addition Biletnikoff was:
Pro Bowl: 6 times in 10 years
Top 10 Rec: 5 times in 10 years
Top 10 Rec yds: 5 times in 10 years
Top 10 Rec TDs: 8 times in 10 years
Monk came out swinging as a rookie - the prime of his career looks like 1980-1991 (12 seasons). I'll drop off 92/93 - years I counted against him in the earlier post. That's 36 opportunities for Monk.
By my calcs Monk led his team in one of the 3 categories 13 of 36 times (36%).
Of the 23 times he didn't lead his team - on 3 of the occasions he was still top 10 in the league in the category: that gives him 16/36 to either lead his team or be top 10 in the league (44%).
In addition Monk was:
Pro Bowl: 3 times in 12 years
Top 10 Rec: 4 times in 12 years
Top 10 YDs: 3 times in 12 years
Top 10 TDs: 1 time in 12 years
I'm a proponent of one of the items mentioned in Bill James' list relating to being the best player or one of the very best players in the league at your position for some period of time.
I agree that it's not all about just stats and just comparing yards, catches, TD's etc. between candidates.
The stats/numbers on Monk seem relevant here as they don't necessarily indicate he was the best receiver on his own team over an extended period - makes it very hard to argue he was one of the very best in the league over the same period.
His percentage of times a pro bowler or Top 10 also don't support it, and pale in comparison to Biletnikoff.
I really started watching football only right at the end of Biletnikoff's career so I don't really have first hand experience watching him play the way I do with the Redskins' players involved here. Fred's whole career was before the passing explosion so his overall stats don't measure up. Certainly by reputation though I believe Biletnikoff is recognized as a receiver who truly changed the game.
Monk has many things in his favor and it's clearly a close call. If or more likely when he finally gets in I wouldn't have any major heartburn over it - but I think he falls short in (to me) this very important area (i.e.: being clearly one of the best players at your position for some reasonably extended period). His primary accomplishment (retiring with the all time receptions record) is based to quite an extent on longevity and coming along right at the time the passing rules were changed.
Biletnikoff is certainly a valid example so I looked into he and Monk some more.
It looks to me like the prime of Biletnikoff's career was 1967 to 1976 (10 seasons).
As calculated before that gives him 30 opportunities to lead his team in rec, yds, or TD's.
By my calcs Biletnikoff lead his team in one of the 3 categories 14 of 30 times (47%).
Of the 16 times he didn't lead his team - on 6 of the occasions he was still top 10 in the league in the category: that gives him 20/30 to either lead his team or be top 10 in league (67%).
In addition Biletnikoff was:
Pro Bowl: 6 times in 10 years
Top 10 Rec: 5 times in 10 years
Top 10 Rec yds: 5 times in 10 years
Top 10 Rec TDs: 8 times in 10 years
Monk came out swinging as a rookie - the prime of his career looks like 1980-1991 (12 seasons). I'll drop off 92/93 - years I counted against him in the earlier post. That's 36 opportunities for Monk.
By my calcs Monk led his team in one of the 3 categories 13 of 36 times (36%).
Of the 23 times he didn't lead his team - on 3 of the occasions he was still top 10 in the league in the category: that gives him 16/36 to either lead his team or be top 10 in the league (44%).
In addition Monk was:
Pro Bowl: 3 times in 12 years
Top 10 Rec: 4 times in 12 years
Top 10 YDs: 3 times in 12 years
Top 10 TDs: 1 time in 12 years
I'm a proponent of one of the items mentioned in Bill James' list relating to being the best player or one of the very best players in the league at your position for some period of time.
I agree that it's not all about just stats and just comparing yards, catches, TD's etc. between candidates.
The stats/numbers on Monk seem relevant here as they don't necessarily indicate he was the best receiver on his own team over an extended period - makes it very hard to argue he was one of the very best in the league over the same period.
His percentage of times a pro bowler or Top 10 also don't support it, and pale in comparison to Biletnikoff.
I really started watching football only right at the end of Biletnikoff's career so I don't really have first hand experience watching him play the way I do with the Redskins' players involved here. Fred's whole career was before the passing explosion so his overall stats don't measure up. Certainly by reputation though I believe Biletnikoff is recognized as a receiver who truly changed the game.
Monk has many things in his favor and it's clearly a close call. If or more likely when he finally gets in I wouldn't have any major heartburn over it - but I think he falls short in (to me) this very important area (i.e.: being clearly one of the best players at your position for some reasonably extended period). His primary accomplishment (retiring with the all time receptions record) is based to quite an extent on longevity and coming along right at the time the passing rules were changed.
Waldorf
Footballguy
An interesting fact on the Ray Guy web site is that in 1985, 71% of his punts were not returned. They compare this to the 2003 Pro Bowl punters, whose respective numbers were 52% and 40%. Opponents totaled only 159 punt return yards the entire year.I'd be interesting in seeing how Guy's 1985 numbers compare to other years. If those stats are comparable to other years, he is deserving of a place in the Hall, as those are pretty incredible numbers.
Cold Steel
Footballguy
Please - for mercy's sake - let's move past the Art Monk et al. discussion. I didn't think that it was possible to say the same thing so many times in so many different ways.
Andre Tippet & Tommy Nobis: Absolutely.
Let me chum the waters with another name: Herschel Walker.
Bottom Line: Nobody in the history of professional football has gained as many yards with the football as he has - or as many yards rushing in a single season. Walking through the most excellent criteria that TS Garp listed for Baseball's HOF, arguments could be made for Herschel on each point.
Read this if you think I've gone off the deep end (or if you're a still-embittered Vikings fan). Yes, it does reference his college career, and yes, it was written in 2000, but it still gets the point across.
Andre Tippet & Tommy Nobis: Absolutely.
Let me chum the waters with another name: Herschel Walker.
Bottom Line: Nobody in the history of professional football has gained as many yards with the football as he has - or as many yards rushing in a single season. Walking through the most excellent criteria that TS Garp listed for Baseball's HOF, arguments could be made for Herschel on each point.
Read this if you think I've gone off the deep end (or if you're a still-embittered Vikings fan). Yes, it does reference his college career, and yes, it was written in 2000, but it still gets the point across.
[scooter]
Footballguy
Herschel is a classic "woulda coulda shoulda" player. His USFL stats are tainted by the mediocre competition, and he really only had 3-4 great seasons in the NFL. His legacy will end up similar to that of Priest Holmes and Terrell Davis -- guys who were great for a few years, but (for whatever reasons) just couldn't keep up the pace.Now, if this was the "football hall of fame", Walker would be a first-ballot unanimous entry. But, unfortunately, your college achievements don't count.
Waldorf
Footballguy
Just looked up. He had 12 touchbacks that year. Todd Sauerbrun was NFC Pro Bowl kicker they were using for reference, he had 12 touchbacks. Chris Hanson was the AFC punter they were using for reference, he had 10 touchbacks. So, that doesn't explain the difference.What I also find incredible is that Guy had only three punts blocked over the course of his entire career. For reference, Feagles has had 11.
Last edited by a moderator:
Marc Levin
Hangs out with Oscar Zeta Acosta
You may be correct, but my money is on TD getting into the HOF this year.
Tau837
Footballguy
IMO Matthews and Tagliabue are locks for induction this year. I think Thurman Thomas should be next.
That leaves no more than 3 more spots in the class according to the rules, although as recently as 2001 there was a class of 7. And 1-2 of those remaining spots could be claimed by the senior committee nominations. That leaves plenty of competition for the 1-4 remaining non senior committee nominations.
Given my belief that Thomas will and should be in this year (should have been next year), I think that could hurt Davis's chances. I don't know the answer to this... but how often have two RBs made it in the same class? Does anyone think this could be a factor?
Now, what if Davis doesn't get in this year? Well, Darrell Green and Cris Carter are first ballot locks in 2008, so Davis will have to compete with everyone else for one of those few remaining spots.
In 2009, Bruce Smith and Shannon Sharpe are first ballot locks. Again, Davis will have to compete for one of only a few remaining spots.
The 2010 class is almost full already IMO, with Emmitt, Rice, and Rod Woodson all first ballot locks and Tim Brown, Aeneas Williams, and Darren Woodson each also becoming eligible for the first time.
Then in 2011, Bettis, Deion, Faulk, and Martin all become eligible for the first time, assuming Faulk and Martin are done.
So in the next 5 HOF classes, I think 5 RBs other than Davis will be inducted, and that is also ignoring Ricky Watters, who some would feel is more deserving than Davis. And then, after 2012, we'll be able to tell which of the next generation (Tomlinson, Alexander, James, etc.) will be likely inductees.
I just don't see room for Davis, and I certainly think if he's going to get in, it will have to be before 2010.
That leaves no more than 3 more spots in the class according to the rules, although as recently as 2001 there was a class of 7. And 1-2 of those remaining spots could be claimed by the senior committee nominations. That leaves plenty of competition for the 1-4 remaining non senior committee nominations.
Given my belief that Thomas will and should be in this year (should have been next year), I think that could hurt Davis's chances. I don't know the answer to this... but how often have two RBs made it in the same class? Does anyone think this could be a factor?
Now, what if Davis doesn't get in this year? Well, Darrell Green and Cris Carter are first ballot locks in 2008, so Davis will have to compete with everyone else for one of those few remaining spots.
In 2009, Bruce Smith and Shannon Sharpe are first ballot locks. Again, Davis will have to compete for one of only a few remaining spots.
The 2010 class is almost full already IMO, with Emmitt, Rice, and Rod Woodson all first ballot locks and Tim Brown, Aeneas Williams, and Darren Woodson each also becoming eligible for the first time.
Then in 2011, Bettis, Deion, Faulk, and Martin all become eligible for the first time, assuming Faulk and Martin are done.
So in the next 5 HOF classes, I think 5 RBs other than Davis will be inducted, and that is also ignoring Ricky Watters, who some would feel is more deserving than Davis. And then, after 2012, we'll be able to tell which of the next generation (Tomlinson, Alexander, James, etc.) will be likely inductees.
I just don't see room for Davis, and I certainly think if he's going to get in, it will have to be before 2010.
Last edited by a moderator:
David Yudkin
Footballguy
I had a thread on Herschel last year if anyone wanted to look for it . . .
Marc Levin
Hangs out with Oscar Zeta Acosta
JWB, for the record, I believe Thermal and TD both should and can get in this year.
But, I think it'll be Davis getting the edge if only one gets in.
Those two SB rings, a 2G season, and complete dominance of the RB position for a couple of years will sway more voters than Thermal's reg. season and post-season stats. The detriment is Thomas' TD numbers - only one double digit rush TD year.
That said, Thermal's all-time numbers, his post season numbers, two of his Super Bowl performances, his number of years leading the league in yards from scrimmage and his four double digit total TDs are all strong endorsements for his selection.
Not saying they won't both garner enough votes to get in, but Davis will have more and will get in if only one or the other makes it.
But, I think it'll be Davis getting the edge if only one gets in.
Those two SB rings, a 2G season, and complete dominance of the RB position for a couple of years will sway more voters than Thermal's reg. season and post-season stats. The detriment is Thomas' TD numbers - only one double digit rush TD year.
That said, Thermal's all-time numbers, his post season numbers, two of his Super Bowl performances, his number of years leading the league in yards from scrimmage and his four double digit total TDs are all strong endorsements for his selection.
Not saying they won't both garner enough votes to get in, but Davis will have more and will get in if only one or the other makes it.
Last edited by a moderator:
GRIDIRON ASSASSIN
Footballguy
Widowmaker, is Darren Woodson even eligible? He hasn't been retired long enough.
It's tough for safeties to make it to the Hall of Fame...
I wish Stabler and Monk were in the HOF.
It's tough for safeties to make it to the Hall of Fame...
I wish Stabler and Monk were in the HOF.
Tau837
Footballguy
See my post above. Darren Woodson becomes eligible in 2010. Personally, I think Leroy Butler, who first becomes eligible for the upcoming 2007 class, has a better case than Woodson... but I don't think either will make it.
GRIDIRON ASSASSIN
Footballguy
You REALLY have to be an elite safety to make it though. I don't think either will.Only two in my lifetime have made it in the past 25 years: Lott and Houston...and I'm sure Rod Woodson will as well.Butler and Darren Woodson won't make it. Ken Houston (S) 1967-1980 Ronnie Lott (CB-S) 1981-1994
Pat Patriot
Footballguy
Anybody who thinks Swann is not a Hall of Famer, never saw him play. He was a GREAT player. Call me crazy but I think GREAT players should be in the Hall. Good players that build up stats dont meet my definition of Hall of Famer. Monk is out.
