Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Hines Ward - 1st ballot Hall of Famer? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter kupcho1
- Start date
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
The same could be said about Rod Smith. Are you putting him in, too?
Last edited by a moderator:
David Yudkin
Footballguy
I would vote too soon to tell, although I would certainly be leaning on the not likely side of the ledger. He could still go on to win another SB or two and have a couple more decent seasons, so IMO it's not entirely out of the question (but still not likely).The main issue I have with Ward is that there are so few WR in the HOF post-merger that there is a glut of deserving WR candidates and also a ton of current players (or at least recent players) that Ward may not rank as high as his backers think.Therre are only so many sports to go around . . . does Ward rank higher on the food chain than:RiceHarrisonOwensMossCarterBrownBruceHoltGiven that there has been a lull in electing WR to the HOF, I'm not sure Ward will get in.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
The answer is "no" to all of those guys. I know some Pitt fans try to say Ward is more deserving than Isaac Bruce, but I say, no way.
Godsbrother
Footballguy
He led with his shoulder. If there was contact with Ward's helmet (you can't tell from that video) it happened after the initial hit and certainly not at Rivers head.
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
I still think he makes it if he doesn't retire in a few more years (as I've heard he might) or get badly injured. The NFL HOF, unlike MLB, elects football players rather than stat-mongers, and personally, of the current generation of WRs, there's not more than 2-3 guys I'd rather have had on my team than Ward. He's a complete football player that plays WR for a traditionally run-oriented team. The fact that he's putting up numbers that put him on the cusp on induction alone means he's got a really good shot.
We're likely looking at ~ 1,000 catches, 11-12,000 yards and 90-100 TDs if he plays another 3 seasons. No, those aren't eye-popping stats in this era, but they're certainly far more than just respectable for a guy who's played on the team that has run the ball more than any other in the NFL over the span of his career.
We're likely looking at ~ 1,000 catches, 11-12,000 yards and 90-100 TDs if he plays another 3 seasons. No, those aren't eye-popping stats in this era, but they're certainly far more than just respectable for a guy who's played on the team that has run the ball more than any other in the NFL over the span of his career.
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
On a related note : what do you guys think the reason is that the HOF committee is so stingy when it comes to wide receivers making it in?
Tau837
Footballguy
Are they really stingy for WRs? The HOF defines its modern era as "a majority of a members' career that occurred after 1946." These are the number of HOF members by position in the modern era:QB - 23RB (HBs and FBs) - 25WR - 19TE - 7OL - 33DL - 26LB - 17DB - 19Specialists - 1Looking at these numbers, I wouldn't necessarily think WRs are underrepresented. I'm sure some will argue that RBs and especially QBs could be overrepresented, but the counter to that (in comparison to WR) is how much more often they handle the ball and how much more instrumental they are to their teams' success (in general).Looks to me like LB, and to a slightly lesser degree DL, are the ones the committee has been "stingy" on thus are underrepresented. Interesting that 19 WRs and 19 DBs are in.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
Look at post-merger receivers and what have you got?Biletnikoff, Irvin, Joiner, Largent, Lofton, Monk, Stallworth, and Swann. And maybe 1 or 2 more that were big in the 60s and spilled over (Taylor and Warfield).So that's basically 8 guys from the last 40 years.
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
I could follow that up by asking why, when OL and DL are the least glamorous positions on the field.. they have 59 representatives and lead all positions? Also, why are there no kickers/punters there?
Answer : the HOF enshrines football players.
Answer : the HOF enshrines football players.
Tau837
Footballguy
This hasn't changed IMO... except for the fact that Ward is two years older and thus that much less likely than he was two years ago to bolster his postseason achievements.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
What exactly does this mean? As opposed to croquette players?I get the point that many years ago in the past they elected guys that were tough eggs that left it on the field, but I would suggest that with each passing year the trend is to look more at numbers and less at intangibles.
Under your guidlines ("he was a football player"), what does that make Troy Brown? He play on offense, defense, and special teams and made big plays all along the way. He could return a punt, casue a fumble, get that tough first down, get an interception, etc. right when the Pats needed it and was an integral part of winning 3 uper Bowls. He was a football player. does he sniff the HOF (I hope not)?
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
I beg to differ. I still think they value winning and leadership as much or more than they value pure stats. Michael Irvin's inclusion fleshes that out. Ward will pass him in receptions this year, is already past him in TDs, and could very easily pass him in yards as well. Troy Brown had the intangibles, but no where near the stats. I'm not saying the stats are irrelevant, but in a case like Ward's, the numbers are going to be very close to HOF worthy, if not fully worthy, without even counting the intangibles. The intangibles are likely to put him over the top, and not just the blocking and all that, but the fact that he's been able to consistently step up his game in the postseason, and usually plays bigger the bigger the game. The Hall loves a winner.
Tau837
Footballguy
There are 14 WRs who played within the last 40 years who are in, though a few just barely make the 40 year window. There are only 7 WRs in who played within the last 30 years (beginning in the 1979 season). It's true that doesn't seem like a lot... but knock off 10 years (5 waiting for eligibility window and 5 as a shot at an average number of years of waiting while eligible before election) and you are left with 7 WRs who played in a 20 year window. Not that bad. And it just so happens that a few more WRs (Carter, Rice, and Brown) should get in within the next few years, which will make that ratio look better.IMO it is more relevant to look at election patterns than playing career patterns. 19 WRs have been elected to the HOF since 1968. That is 1 WR elected every 2.1 years.I expect Carter, Rice, and Brown to make it within the next 3-4 years, in line with or slightly ahead of the pattern to date.The next 5 year window after that will see guys like Bruce, Jimmy Smith, Rod Smith, and McCardell become eligible... a bit of a dry spell between the Carter-Rice-Brown run and the Harrison-Moss-Owens-Holt run to come. That may help Bruce to make it, but I don't see the others getting in. Andre Reed could make it during that span.Then the next 5 years will see Harrison, Owens, Moss, and likely Holt make it. Presumably this is roughly the window when Ward will first be eligible... but IMO he won't compare favorably with those others, and this will be the tail end of a run of 10-15 years that will have seen 9+ WRs other than Ward elected (Irvin, Monk, Carter, Rice, Brown, Harrison, Owens, Moss, Holt, maybe Bruce, maybe Reed).Plus, we will have a new elite group known to voters who will follow some years later - hard to say who they will be (Boldin, Fitz, et al), but the voters will be watching them wind down their careers.I think the culmination of all of this will be too much for Ward. People will be saying that the committee needs to focus on some other underrepresented positions, and rightfully so.
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
Just FYI, while I'm sure my being a homer makes me biased in terms of Ward's play, it also means I've seen basically every snap the guy has ever played. I'm not advocating his enshrinement because he's a Steeler, I think he deserves it. For the record, since the 70s Steelers, I have only felt maybe 5 Steelers/ex-Steelers deserve HOF consideration, and those are : Bettis, Ward, Woodson, Dermontti Dawson, and Kevin Greene. So, I'm not just banging the drum for Ward because he wears black and gold.
belljr
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Tau837
Footballguy
Well, there are 5 starters on OL and 3-4 starters at DL for every NFL team, compared to 2-3 starters at WR, 1 starter at QB, 1-2 starters at RB... so it is understandable that linemen have more representatives than any other positions. I don't see that having any bearing on Ward's HOF chances.
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
Most teams have 4 DBs and 3-4 DL and 3-4 LBs, so there's no reason there should be 37% more DL than DBs or LBs in the Hall when DBs outnumber DLs and LBs.
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
I preferred Lloyd as a Steeler, but Greene had the better career. Most people don't realize that Greene has more sacks than anyone in NFL history not named Bruce Smith or Reggie White. He has more than Gastineau and Howie Long put together. More than Charles Haley and Dan Hampton combined. More than Randy White and Pat Swilling combined. And no active player is going to pass him any time in the next decade (and possibly not ever.)
belljr
Footballguy
True. He was solid with the Rams I'm just not sold on him as an HOF completely but there are plenty of guys that I think may not belong. I like to think the HOF is for legneds but in reality it's also for the tier below that too. That's just my hang up.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
None of us has any idea what Ward's final numbers will look like, but I will guess in the range of 950-1100-80 if he plays 2-3 more seasons.
By the time he was HOF eligible, that most likely would not rank him in the Top 10 in receptions, Top 20 in yardage, or Top 20 in TD. As already mentioned, there are many other worthy EWR from his era that were statistically great producers.
IMO, if Ward played in the 70s or 80s, he'd be in. But since he is more of a throwback player in an era of huge WR numbers, I think he will be a borderline candidate.
While he's been solid most of his career, he's really only had 3 noteworthy seasons. While some folks are saying his numbers are low because the Steelers ran so much, IMO his TD total benefitted by teams having to overplay the run.
In many ways, his career has been similar to Derrick Mason. Anyone thing Mason is a HOFer?
By the time he was HOF eligible, that most likely would not rank him in the Top 10 in receptions, Top 20 in yardage, or Top 20 in TD. As already mentioned, there are many other worthy EWR from his era that were statistically great producers.
IMO, if Ward played in the 70s or 80s, he'd be in. But since he is more of a throwback player in an era of huge WR numbers, I think he will be a borderline candidate.
While he's been solid most of his career, he's really only had 3 noteworthy seasons. While some folks are saying his numbers are low because the Steelers ran so much, IMO his TD total benefitted by teams having to overplay the run.
In many ways, his career has been similar to Derrick Mason. Anyone thing Mason is a HOFer?
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
I agree 100% and agree with your assessment. Personally, I just think (hope?) that the committee will put more stock in his all-around game, effort, leadership, and record as a winner than they would in, say, Reggie Wayne's stats, if Wayne retires with 5-10% more catches, yards, and TDs than Ward.
Tau837
Footballguy
Michael Irvin was not one of the stronger WR candidates to have been elected.. personally, I felt he was a bubble candidate. And comparing him to Ward, he was a 1 time first team All Pro (0 for Ward), made 5 Pro Bowls (4 for Ward), was a key member and leader of 3 Super Bowl champions (1 for Ward), and made an All Decade team (not sure if Ward will make this decade's team... I doubt it). The only non-intangible accomplishment Ward has over Irvin is the Super Bowl MVP, but that doesn't make up the gap. Ward may have just passed him in TDs, but he has also played 1 more game already, so by the time he passes him in receptions and yards (if ever), it will be an apples and oranges comparison.Here is a better comparison IMO: Rod Smith. I don't think he'll make it, but consider that Smith:
is a good character guy
was a leader
was tough
was a great blocking WR
was a key player on 2 Super Bowl championship teams
has a healthy edge on Ward as of right now in receptions and receiving yards
has the whole undrafted free agent thing going for him (I don't think that matters, but some think it does)
Do you think Smith will make it? Why do you think Ward is more deserving than Smith?
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
This is true, but it benefitted a lot more by his being sure-handed and able to use his body and route-running to get open in the end zone despite his lack of size. It also hurt his reception and yardage numbers more than it helped his TDs. The one year of his career that the Steelers really aired it out, look at what his #s were like. He could have probably posted a lot more 90-1,200-10 type seasons if he played for 20-25 other NFL teams for his career. He belongs in Pittsburgh, though.Also, he also already has, IIRC, 71 TDs, so if he plays 2-3 more years beyond this one, he'll probably be closer to 90-100 than 80. he has 5 already this season in 6 games, and since Tomlin came aboard, the Steelers throw a lot more in the red zone. I wouldn't be shocked to see, even if his numbers dropped to more like 60-800 yards the next few years, for him still to grab 7-8 TDs a season at a minimum.
Tau837
Footballguy
I agree, LBs are the most underrepresented group IMO. I wouldn't mind some more DBs... Deion and Woodson will be in soon, and IMO Aeneas Williams also deserves to make it. That said, I think many knowledgeable football people will tell you that DL is a more important/valuable position than LB and DB, so I suspect that is a reason why DL is better represented than the other defensive positions.Still, I don't see any connection to Ward's HOF chances.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
I know stats are not everything, but they do mean something, and even though the Steelers have been more of a running than passing team, Ward still only has four seasons of 1,000 yards or more (two of which were 1,003 and 1,004), and in his two best yardage seasons, he benefited greatly from the presence of Plaxico Burress, who drew deep double coverage, enabling Ward to work underneath well. Ward has never been a guy who could single-handedly carry the passing game as a number 1 WR. He could still improve his overall numbers, but right now, he is 82nd all-time in receptions, 96th all-time in receiving yards, and 77th all-time in TD receptions, and I do not think a few more seasons of 65-800-7 will help his case that much, unless you are a fan of compilers.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tau837
Footballguy
Greene has more official sacks than all but Smith and White, but there are others who have more but played at least part of their careers before the NFL started tracking sacks. Greene was great at sacks for sure, but I don't think he was nearly as complete a player as Long, Hampton, or Swilling to name a few defensive players you cited.
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
Too bad his knee got hurt when it did, because he was poised for a big postseason. He was the man in the 1st Q of the Baltimore game before hurting the knee.. and being able to come back from a grade 2+ MCL tear in 2 weeks is pretty amazing. That's a 4-week injury at minimum and probably more like 6 weeks. To not only come back in 2 weeks, but also be able to make an impact on the game was big.
Sadly, statistically, it's going to look in retrospect like he had a crappy postseason, when he actually only played 1 quarter at full speed and 4 quarters at maybe 60% in 2 games.
Sadly, statistically, it's going to look in retrospect like he had a crappy postseason, when he actually only played 1 quarter at full speed and 4 quarters at maybe 60% in 2 games.
Last edited by a moderator:
Where does that show up on the stat sheets? In five years nobody is going to remember his role in these playoffs, just the stats.Ward is a great player but he isn't HOF material imo. His numbers are FAR closer to Muhsin Muhammad than Randy Moss, that is answer enough in itself. If and when this conversation is happening in 5-10 years, there are not only going to be a slew of new HOF inductees like Harrison, Moss, TO, and Holt, but there will be a bunch of active guys like Fitzgerald, Smith, Boldin, Wayne, Andre Johnson etc that will be dwarfing Ward's stats. Its hard to bring a guy like Ward in when a bunch of active players are piling up better numbers.
PurplePride
Footballguy
I agree. I like Ward but I'm not sure he'll have enough come time to vote HOF. Maybe he will with another apperance in a SuperBowl. Do you think Holmes would have had such a big game if Ward was healthy?
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
This is not a surprising thought process on a fantasy football site, but it's pretty obvious that the HOF values all-around players and postseason success more so than just stats. Otherwise, explain why Cris Carter has been passed over twice already while Michael Irvin is in.Where does that show up on the stat sheets? In five years nobody is going to remember his role in these playoffs, just the stats.Ward is a great player but he isn't HOF material imo. His numbers are FAR closer to Muhsin Muhammad than Randy Moss, that is answer enough in itself. If and when this conversation is happening in 5-10 years, there are not only going to be a slew of new HOF inductees like Harrison, Moss, TO, and Holt, but there will be a bunch of active guys like Fitzgerald, Smith, Boldin, Wayne, Andre Johnson etc that will be dwarfing Ward's stats. Its hard to bring a guy like Ward in when a bunch of active players are piling up better numbers.
Bill Young
Footballguy
Numbers, numbers, numbers!!!
Just because Randy Moss, Torry Holt, Marvin Harrison, and anybody else you'd care to name have "better numbers", doesn't mean that the HOF voters are so ignorant as to leave someone like Hines Ward out.
You have to look at the entire career of the player, and ALL OF THE CONTRIBUTIONS the player makes to his team.
Now, that being said, I do not believe Hines Ward is a first ballot HOF'er. But I do believe he will get in. Not only because of his numbers, but because of his abilities to block, draw coverage leaving other receivers open, and generally just his ability to raise the playing level of his teams.
A true HOF'er.
Just because Randy Moss, Torry Holt, Marvin Harrison, and anybody else you'd care to name have "better numbers", doesn't mean that the HOF voters are so ignorant as to leave someone like Hines Ward out.
You have to look at the entire career of the player, and ALL OF THE CONTRIBUTIONS the player makes to his team.
Now, that being said, I do not believe Hines Ward is a first ballot HOF'er. But I do believe he will get in. Not only because of his numbers, but because of his abilities to block, draw coverage leaving other receivers open, and generally just his ability to raise the playing level of his teams.
A true HOF'er.
Inspiration
Footballguy
Fixed?Oh, I forgot, quarterbacks win games; everyone else is just on the team.Where does that show up on the stat sheets? In five years nobody is going to remember his role in these playoffs, just the stats.
Roethlisberger is a great player but he isn't HOF material imo. His numbers are FAR closer to Jake Delhomme than Peyton Manning, that is answer enough in itself. If and when this conversation is happening in 5-10 years, there are not only going to be a slew of new HOF inductees like Manning and Brady, but there will be a bunch of active guys like Rivers, Cutler, and Brees etc that will be dwarfing Roethlisberger's stats. Its hard to bring a guy like Roethlisberger in when a bunch of active players are piling up better numbers.
Roethlisberger is a lock for a Hall of Fame because he "won" two Super Bowls, but Hines Ward is only judged on his individual stats? Tom Brady "wins" three Super Bowls, but Richard Seymour is just another great player who happened to be on the team? If I had my way, no player would ever be credited with wins and losses. Sure, the ultimate goal is to win games, but no player to should ever take the credit or the blame for a game that requires the efforts of 45(?) active players and an entire coaching staff.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Hard to say, but while Ward does occasionally get loose for a big play, Holmes is a big play waiting to happen. Ward not being healthy forced Roethlisberger to hold the ball longer, which gave Holmes more of a chance to get open, and resulted in him busting a few big plays in the last two games (the TD against Baltimore, and the 40-yard gain before the winning TD last night). In a sense, Ward's injury might have helped them win. That might sound odd, but Holmes' big plays were integral to them winning the last two games, and that might not have happened had Ward been healthy enough to catch his usual short passes. Those drives might have stalled instead of them resulting in TDs thanks to Holmes' big play ability. In fact, the Steelers going on to win this Super Bowl despite Ward not being healthy for most of the AFC title game and all of the Super Bowl probably hurts him more than it helps him. It takes away the "he might have made a difference had he been healthy" argument, had they barely lost either game.
Fair or not, QBs are usually upgraded or downgraded upon postseason success and Super Bowls more than players at other positions. I cannot remember anyone ever saying that Rod Smith should make the Hall because he won a Super Bowl twice, so I can't imagine why the same would apply to Hines Ward.
Last edited by a moderator:
Inspiration
Footballguy
Trust me, I completely agree that Hines Ward should not be judged based on number Super Bowls his teams have won (as I mentioned in the final sentence of my previous post). I was just pointing out the disparity in the evaluation process; the number of Super Bowls won by the team a QB is on make or break his career; for any other position, Super Bowls are essentially irrelevant. I understand that this is (and likely will always be) the case, but it simply makes no sense to me.
Last edited by a moderator:
thesurfshop19
Footballguy
One comparison I am particularly interested in is Rod Smith vs. Hines Ward. Both have two rings. Smith has slightly more yards, while Ward has more TDs. Both have been to multiple Pro Bowls, but Ward gets the advantage here as well as the Super Bowl MVP (although Rod Smith's performance in SB33 was perhaps better than Ward's in SB40).
Similar cases? Similar players? One a clear winner over the other?
Similar cases? Similar players? One a clear winner over the other?
Tau837
Footballguy
We should really merge this thread with the other recent Ward HOF thread. As I pointed out in that thread:Numbers, numbers, numbers!!!
Just Win Baby said:No one who is advocating Ward for the HOF has responded to this. There are two issues here IMO.1. One could argue that this shows Ward was never one of the very best WRs in the league. And, while he played at the same time as some other all time great WRs, the fact that 12 guys made it at least once shows that there was still opportunity.A related question: How many WRs are in the HOF that never made 1st team All Pro even once? I assume that number is very small, and presumably there was something compelling about those individuals. Does Ward have an equally compelling case? Heck, we could extend the question to all positions, not just WR.2. Most of those arguing for Ward are saying that it isn't a stat driven argument for him, that he makes up for having lower stats with intangibles, blocking, etc. These posters are essentially saying that HOF voters will take those things into account when they consider his HOF resume and view them positively enough that they overcome his relatively low numbers. This begs the question, then why haven't All Pro voters done the same thing?Just Win Baby said:These are the players who have been selected as AP 1st Team All Pros during Ward's careeravid BostonCris CarterLarry FitzgeraldAntonio FreemanMarvin HarrisonTorry HoltAndre JohnsonChad JohnsonRandy MossMuhsin MuhammadTerrell OwensSteve SmithFor all those who feel Ward's play has been good enough for him to merit HOF induction, why hasn't it been good enough to earn at least one 1st Team All Pro selection?
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
I would say they are even. I wouldn't put either in. Both would be in the Hall of Very Good. Both were very good receiving WRs, awesome blockers, and excellent team leaders, and both could be called massive overachievers based on what was expected out of them coming out of college. Neither had the most talent, but both got to where they are through hard work.
Last edited by a moderator:
David Yudkin
Footballguy
No one seems to have addressed my post from earlier in the thread, that basically only an infintile amount of players that played at the same time at the same position will ever get in the HOF.For those really pimping Ward as a HOFer, who of the crop of guys that were his peers at WR would you LEAVE OUT, as again only a few will ever make it in?Rice? Harrison? Brown? Carter? Owens? Moss? And that's just for starters. There's also Bruce, Holt, JSmith, RSmith, Chad Johnson, Calvin Johnson, SSmith, Wayne, Fitzgerald, and who knows who else by the time Ward both retires AND is eligble for induction.The greatest amount of WR to play in the same season was 9, which was in the 65-67 time frame. That was a very isolated occurance, as at any given time there are usually 4-7 HOFers playing in the same season.That may get all out of whack in the future, but if we go 9 deep for those that played at the same time as Ward, where would he fall given that my list of guys did not include Michael Irvin (already inducted), Andre Reed, or Henry Ellard. IMO, I think 9 is probably too high, but where does Ward stack up against his contemporaries?Numbers, numbers, numbers!!!Just because Randy Moss, Torry Holt, Marvin Harrison, and anybody else you'd care to name have "better numbers", doesn't mean that the HOF voters are so ignorant as to leave someone like Hines Ward out.You have to look at the entire career of the player, and ALL OF THE CONTRIBUTIONS the player makes to his team.Now, that being said, I do not believe Hines Ward is a first ballot HOF'er. But I do believe he will get in. Not only because of his numbers, but because of his abilities to block, draw coverage leaving other receivers open, and generally just his ability to raise the playing level of his teams.A true HOF'er.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tau837
Footballguy
I think they are similar players, but I think it's pretty clear Ward has surpassed Smith.Super Bowl MVPs: Ward 1, Smith 02nd team All Pro selections (neither made 1st team All Pro): Ward 3, Smith 1Pro Bowls: Ward 4, Smith 3Ward has played 170 regular season games so far. Smith played 183. So with one more season, they will be roughly even in games played, and Ward will have more catches (currently Smith leads 849 to 800) and TDs (currently Ward leads 72 to 68). Ward will need another season to pass Smith in yards, but I assume he will get there (Smith leads 11389 to 9780).Ward has played in 14 postseason games and put up 76/1064/8, compared to Smith's 49/860/6 in 12 games.Anyway, I agree neither should make the HOF, and I don't think either will.I would say they are even. I wouldn't put either in. Both would be in the Hall of Very Good. Both were very good receiving WRs, awesome blockers, and excellent team leaders, and both could be called massive overachievers based on what was expected out of them coming out of college. Neither had the most talent, but both got to where they are through hard work.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Let's not forget the fact that Rod Smith had eight 1,000 yard seasons in nine years (including a run of six in a row), while Ward only has five 1,000 yard seasons. And since starting, Smith only had Elway for two years and then had Griese and Plummer for most of the rest of his career, while Ward has had Roethlisberger for five.I think they are similar players, but I think it's pretty clear Ward has surpassed Smith.Super Bowl MVPs: Ward 1, Smith 02nd team All Pro selections (neither made 1st team All Pro): Ward 3, Smith 1Pro Bowls: Ward 4, Smith 3Ward has played 170 regular season games so far. Smith played 183. So with one more season, they will be roughly even in games played, and Ward will have more catches (currently Smith leads 849 to 800) and TDs (currently Ward leads 72 to 68). Ward will need another season to pass Smith in yards, but I assume he will get there (Smith leads 11389 to 9780).Ward has played in 14 postseason games and put up 76/1064/8, compared to Smith's 49/860/6 in 12 games.Anyway, I agree neither should make the HOF, and I don't think either will.I would say they are even. I wouldn't put either in. Both would be in the Hall of Very Good. Both were very good receiving WRs, awesome blockers, and excellent team leaders, and both could be called massive overachievers based on what was expected out of them coming out of college. Neither had the most talent, but both got to where they are through hard work.
Also, I put zero stock in pro bowls made, so throw that stat out. 
That's a great question, but it doesn't help Ward's case. It hurts it. Carter was better at everything Ward is praised for (blocking, etc). And he's been passed over twice. What kind of HoF is going to have Hines Ward but not Chris Carter?Lets get to brass tacks as David suggests:Of the current HOF, each decade pretty much has 5 WRs that played the bulk of their careers in that decade (well the 80s has 4 and 90s 1). If that holds true, give me the 5 WRs from the 00s that go to the HOF and how Hines Ward fits into that picture.Here's your list, pick 5 WRs that played the bulk of their careers in the 00s:Harrison, Owens, Moss, Bruce, Holt, Rod Smith, and dont forget Wayne, Fitzgerald, Boldin, SS, C Johnson, and Andre Johnson who will be "00" guys. Which of these guys gets cut for Ward's spot?
Sheriff66
Footballguy
How many rings did his teams win ? How many SB MVPs did Carter win? 2 Rings matter big time when they vote, and he has a chance for more.
CalBear
Footballguy
People won't even remember the stats; they still argue that Art Monk was a big part of three Super Bowl runs. Ward is clearly more deserving than Monk, and will have as many cheerleaders.Where does that show up on the stat sheets? In five years nobody is going to remember his role in these playoffs, just the stats.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
Sounds a lot like Deion Branch.Look, no one is saying Ward isn't an excellent player. But can you really say he's better than Rice, Harrison, Carter, Brown, Moss, Owens, etc.?
Because if you don't think he is, Ward is going to have a hard time getting in. The numbers of WR inductees is telling us this, not you pimping Ward to get in.
Carter isn't in yet because there are so many deserving players and so limited an amount of players that get inducted each year that he hasn't made it in yet. Doesn't mean he's not going in, only that not yet.
IMO, the only way Ward will get in (if at all) will be through the veteran's committee process (ie having to wait 25 years).
