Capella
Footballguy
Dungy turning around a franchise without a winning season in 15 years might not be the equivalent of a super bowl ring, but it damn sure adds a lot to his resume.
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!
Favre, Owens HOF Nominees (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter dutch
- Start date
BroncoFreak_2K3
sucker for Orange
Last edited by a moderator:
Different time as far as QB stats but Stabler is overdue and sad it probably took his death to push him in. Wasn't like Raiders won despite him - went to 5 straight AFC Conference Championship games. NFL MVP, SB winner, 70s All Decade team with Staubach & Bradshaw. Threw butt load of INTs but it was his style and still finished with higher QBR than Bradshaw.
moleculo
Footballguy
Kevin Greene wasn't even as good as Karl Mecklenburg.
Chaka
Footballguy
ILB versus OLB/DE doesn't compare easily.
ILB always going to have more tackles and the OLB same with sacks.
massraider
Footballguy
Mecklenberg was much more than an ILB. He played all over the place. Really, really underrated.
If they are just adding up sack totals, then the wrong guys are voting. I cannot believe they are that stupid.
If they are just adding up sack totals, then the wrong guys are voting. I cannot believe they are that stupid.
QBR is an absolutely meaningless statistic.
I actually think all 3 of those QB's are overrated, and all 3 of their teams could have had at least 5-6 other QB's and still been as successful. I mean, in Stabler's case, the team was actually more successful when he left and Plunkett took over. Not saying Plunkett was better, but that team was a Super Bowl team with even mediocre QB play.
Maybe the case I'm making, is that too many QB's are in the HOF.
I remember him more as a rusher, like Greene even, I guess for how he played in Super Bowls or playoff games. He was certainly part of a different time where most of us only saw the games that were on broadcast TV.
Sometimes useful guys don't stack up statistically and you're left with just memories of how they played. As you can tell from these threads year after year, a lot of people hang on stats when comparing.
I don't think his 79 to Greene's 160 sacks matter, like I said i's animal versus mineral with ILB OLB but...quick glance at PFR and Mecklenburg statistically only looks good. I'm not sure, I'm guessing here. I did think Mecklenburg was an excellent player- as important to their D as TD was to their O.
I would vote for Hardy before Mecklenburg if we're talking ILBs. I loved watching that guy and enjoyed some of his battles versus Barry Sanders where it seemed like the other 20 guys weren't on the field, just one on one.
Some guys here used to really love Zach Taylor. I didn't but certainly a great player.
None of the guys above are in the HOF.
Maybe there's a case to be made for everyone having their favorite and then no one gets enough votes. I don't know voting totals. I'd have no prob with one third for Zach, Karl, and Hardy-wouldn't think one voter was 'loopy' for picking that guy or any of that. In totality though, maybe that's not enough.
Some of the TO talk the last 24 hours has been that they weren't going to vote in two WRs. All the positions of football, knowing you can do this year after year, I can imagine picking one WR and thinking I gotta go with a different position. If that was Pace rather than TO. Nothing wrong with that, he was one of the few that lived up to the hype on draft day. What a player.
massraider
Footballguy
I would love a year when no skill guys were voted in. So many guards, corners, and safeties that deserve to be in.
Tau837
Footballguy
spider321
Footballguy
Tau837
Footballguy
Greene made the HOF because of his excellence at sacking the QB. In that regard, neither of the pass rushing contemporaries you mentioned measured up to him.
Greene played in 8 fewer games than Simmons, but had a huge edge in sacks, 160 to 121.5. Greene had double digit sacks in 10 seasons and led the league twice, compared to 4 and 1, respectively, for Simmons. Simmons had a lot more tackles, which closes the gap a bit, but Greene had a lot more fumble recoveries and made a few more Pro Bowls.
Greene had an even bigger edge in sacks on Swilling, 160 to 107.5. Swilling had double digit sacks in 6 seasons and led the league 1 time. Swilling had more forced fumbles and 1 more interception, but Greene had a lot more fumble recoveries, tackles, and also had more safeties.
More important than the details of the comparisons, Greene officially ranks #3 all-time in sacks. Unofficially, he probably drops by 2-3 spots (e.g., Deacon Jones would rank higher). But he still ranks very high in a statistic that matters. That is ultimately what got him in. Simmons and Swilling don't have that going for them.
No question that being the first black coach to win the Super Bowl was a factor. But IMO it is a stretch to call that "politics/PC." Race matters, and it was arguably an important milestone for the league. There is no doubt that it was a factor, and that was merited. As another poster pointed out, he deserves a lot of credit for the Tampa turnaround, and that probably gets underrated in these discussions. He obviously benefited by having Manning in Indy, but he took over a 6-10 team there and averaged more than 12 wins per season in his 7 seasons there. He was also influential in the success and popularity of the Tampa 2 defense, so he was influential beyond just his own teams.
I wouldn't have voted for Dungy, at least not this year, but that is partly because IMO coaches should be in a different category; I find it too hard to pass over deserving players for coaches who aren't really compelling (e.g., like Walsh, Belichick caliber). But I knew he was a lock to make it, it was just a matter of when.
All that said, I'm interested to see your list of "several" coaches who are clearly and obviously better candidates, and why you think they are.
Tau837
Footballguy
The feeling on San Diego sports radio (at least on the Loose Cannons show) was that Dungy was ahead of Coryell, and Dungy getting in this year would be the next best thing for Coryell's chances going forward, if Coryell wasn't chosen this year.
Csonka4life
Footballguy
massraider
Footballguy
He could not get the Tampa team over the hump, needed another coach to do that for him and while he did take over a 6-10 Colts team that argument, to me anyway, ignores the fact that the team had two good season prior and basically had a down year. I don't consider him to have built the Colts but I'd give him credit for building the base of that Tampa team.
I would have put these coaches in over him and quick reasons why:
Coryell- more innovative
Vermeil- regular season record pales in comparison but better post-season record, took two teams to Super Bowl, unlike the Colts both teams he took to Super Bowl were terrible teams when he took them over and he built a third team into a competitive team. In short I like his track record of building bad teams more and postseason success more than Dungy.
Jimmy Johnson- arguably(with Jerry Jones being main guy arguing) principle architect of one of best teams ever. Won two SB's and built team that won a third with Switzer as the head coach. Like all of the other candidate he does not have regular season record of Dungy but in 4 less seasons doubled him on SB wins and matched him in postseason wins.
Holmgreen- built two teams from ground up, took two teams to SB, strong regular season record and better post season record.
Cowher-pretty close for regular season record, slightly better post season record. Biggest fault with Cowher is he only built one team, which is all I think Dungy built and I firmly believe the QB's that Cowher had to work with makes his regular season record more impressive than Dungy's even if he never switched teams.
Some of those I mentioned above are close, but I side with all of them over Dungy. What bothers me about it more than anything is most of them are not even close to getting in despite waiting longer. In a nutshell that's what bothers me the most about him getting in and why I said it reeks of politics. Why the rush? Even if you disagree with some or all of these what made him so special he's in and most of these guys don't seem that close with only Coryell even making it as a finalist?
Here are a group of others I put on par with Dungy but they've waited longer and will probably never even be finalist, less yet make it. I would not put any of these coaches in the HOF as of now either for what it's worth.
Flores- Seattle sting hurt overall record and I fault him for not building two good teams but better postseason record and one more SB win are huge. Feel he was on par with Dungy, would not have put either
Siefert- regular season success comparable, doubled him in SB wins and much better post season success. Biggest failure was never truly building team from ground up with success.
Reeves- more wins, worse record, no SB wins is huge but did take two teams to SB and made 4 appearances and built more than one team.
Milkman
Footballguy
Yeah I thought he was better on the field than both of them. Peak Owens is hard to top. Rice obviously was amazing and his longevity is unmatched. Moss was amazing as well but give me TO.
SacramentoBob
Footballguy
Owens not getting in is stupid. The people who think they are enforcing some kind of morality on inductees are ridiculous. Of course Favre, who was tossing out pics of his dong like TD passes is a fine human being.
I'm one of few who don't have a problem with TO not getting into the HOF this year. He was plenty dominant and deserving to get in soon and I can get over most of his antics but that sabotage job he did on the Eagles is enough to preclude you from first ballot status in my mind.
SacramentoBob
Footballguy
Yeah he totally sabotaged the Eagles by getting them to a Super Bowl and being one of the best players on the field that day.menobrown said:
Wrong year of course but that year you are talking about he certainly got them to the SB, especially in those playoff games they had to win to advance. I mean he was not one of the best players on the field for any of those games like he was in the SB defeat, be hard to do since he did not actually play in those games or anything, but no doubt he's the one that got them there.
There was this garbage that Parcells made BB then that BB made Parcells good and...somewhere amidst that came Seifert taking over Walsh's team and system. This air of him being like Switzer in Dallas, not so much a coach but a caretaker or follower.
How hard is it to win with Montana and Rice? Young and Rice etc.
The guy never got any credit.
This is the first time I've seen his name mentioned in years. He really seems to be forgotten or discarded. He coached 11 years, not just a few followup years.
Dan Reeves should be in. We can debate some of his teams not winning and him as a player not being the greatest and all sorts of things but for me he's been in football forever. **** Lebeau has alot going for him but once I see his years I'm like geesh put him in. Reeves played for Landry, coached for Landry, coached Elway and then Vick and was an advisor with the Cowboys...just go with longevity and put him in.
Wasn't he in more Super bowls than anyone else?
We watched Super Bowl 50-feels like he and Lebeau have been around since day one.
One thing about Reeves that I loved was how he still tried old sets and old plays. Sometimes it was brutally ineffective, but I do think some of that stuff will work on occasion. His mentor Landry created the dime defense didn't he? Weren't defenses also 2-5 then? I think he did a short punt with the Giants and people beat him up for it. When did he have a punter who could throw? I like the Wildcat and some trickery in today's game, no doubt, but I'd be fine too if for one possession a team ran the wishbone. Just try something every now and then. It's fun to watch.
He looked like the game had passed him by when he last coached, but just the same I'd like to see more guys like him. Blow the dust off some of those old playbooks, see what happens.
Cowher felt unfinished. I thought he would have returned by now. He's an odd one. Maybe I just expect them to coach til they're old.
Rove!
Footballguy
Rove!
Footballguy
The Eagles totally mishandled the situation with TO by not giving him a new contract.
Tough to argue TO sabatoged them when the Eagles knew exactly what they were getting into when they got him from SF.
Yenrub
Footballguy
I don’t get the knocks on Dungy
TB was a virtual waste land before he got there but he made them into contenders
spider321
Footballguy
...and I love this modern day myth, by those that didn't see Jerry in his prime, that he was some sort of longevity compiler.
Jerry Rice dominated, ABSOLUTELY DOMINATED, the NFL for years and years. Yes, he played for a long time, but in his prime years, NO ONE that has ever played the position belongs in the same sentence. Not Moss, not TO, NO ONE.
...and Moss was better than TO, too.
Last edited by a moderator:
Milkman
Footballguy
spider321
Footballguy
Jerry Rice - 1987 MVP, 1987 and 1993 Offensive Player of the Year, Super Bowl MVP, 1st Team All '80's, 1st Team All '90's, 10 Time FIRST Team All-Pro, 13 Pro Bowls(when that meant something), 13 seasons of AT LEAST 1100 yards receiving, 3 time Super Bowl Champion, 11 receptions for 215 yards and a TD in Super Bowl XXIII, 7 receptions for 148 yards and 3 TD's in Super Bowl XXIV, never a locker room cancer, and the list goes on and on and on...
Over a 10 year span(from '86 to '95) Rice AVERAGED 89 receptions, 1,420 yards receiving, and 15 TD's. ...and that includes the 12 game strike shortened 1987 season.
Compiler my ###.
I'm sure you're too young to realize this, but to say that TO was better than Rice is just ignorant.
You can make a valid argument for 5 guys at every single position as to who is the best ever, except wide receiver.
At wide receiver there is only Jerry Rice.
Over a 10 year span(from '86 to '95) Rice AVERAGED 89 receptions, 1,420 yards receiving, and 15 TD's. ...and that includes the 12 game strike shortened 1987 season.
Compiler my ###.
I'm sure you're too young to realize this, but to say that TO was better than Rice is just ignorant.
You can make a valid argument for 5 guys at every single position as to who is the best ever, except wide receiver.
At wide receiver there is only Jerry Rice.
Last edited by a moderator:
Milkman
Footballguy
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Which part, the part where he came back on half a leg and went for over 100 yards in the super bowl?
I think TO not getting in makes the HOF look stupid, personally.
Frankly, I don't care about the HOF, never pay attention to who gets in and who doesn't, and almost never hear the speeches or anything related to the HOF. However, hearing that TO did not get in was silly enough for me respond. Insane. Makes no sense.
spider321
Footballguy
msommer
Footballguy
Milkman
Footballguy
Yeah he was. I'm thinking of all the WR that have ever played they game the top 3 are hard to argue against. TO/Rice/Moss That's why it's insane that he isn't a first ballot HOF.http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/1522700-picking-terrell-owens-over-jerry-rice-randy-moss-as-the-greatest-of-all-time
I guess I'm not the only one ^^^^^ that thinks he's the best.
Last edited by a moderator:
spider321
Footballguy
I'll bet you're the guy that wrote that drivel.
There's no way 2 people are that oblivious.
Milkman
Footballguy
He makes some great points. You can't see past Rices bulk stats though. It's ok bro most casual fans can't.
spider321
Footballguy
He makes zero great points. The writer carefully nitpicked a coupe of obscure criteria and then compares TO's stats on a per start basis to Rice's. Of course the guy with the shorter career is going to look similar when the other guy was an old man towards the end and played at least 3 years too long
The writer goes on to brag about how TO made first team all-pro five times. That's really good and it's also exactly half as many times as Jerry was first team all-pro.
...and once again, Jerry averaged 1,420 receiving yards and 15 TD's over a 10 year span. TO had only 2 seasons in his entire career where he was even close to those numbers.
That's not just bulk stats. That's year in and year out dominating the position like no one else ever has or ever will stats.
It's ok, kid. You can't see beyond TO's tantrums, crying, and look at me attitude. Most uneducated fans can't.
The writer goes on to brag about how TO made first team all-pro five times. That's really good and it's also exactly half as many times as Jerry was first team all-pro.
...and once again, Jerry averaged 1,420 receiving yards and 15 TD's over a 10 year span. TO had only 2 seasons in his entire career where he was even close to those numbers.
That's not just bulk stats. That's year in and year out dominating the position like no one else ever has or ever will stats.
It's ok, kid. You can't see beyond TO's tantrums, crying, and look at me attitude. Most uneducated fans can't.
Last edited by a moderator:
moleculo
Footballguy
Jerry Rice never #####ed his way out of town. Jerry Rice was never a distraction to his team. Jerry Rice was never traded. Jerry Rice did most of his work in the pre-pass happy era. Jerry Rice is perhaps the greatest football player of all time, all positions. Please do not compare the careers of TO with Rice....not even in the same stratosphere.
Yenrub
Footballguy
spider321
Footballguy
Take out the "O" in OLB, and we could have a discussion.
...but yes, I would agree with you that LT was the best LB ever.
I even agree with Milkman that TO is a top 5 WR, but to say that he was better than Jerry is just silly.
Last edited by a moderator:
