Hines Ward - 1st ballot Hall of Famer? (1 Viewer)

[Bri]

If you like stats there's one where Hines is the all time leader (and it's not even close): breaking linebacker jawsI don't think anyone catches him on that one either.

I'm not sure if that's true. When WRs were more blockers lined out wide, the game was different and some of them could flat out lay the wood. Maybe if you put a FB out wide today and just had him tee off on LBs it'd be similar

 

[DoubleG]

If you like stats there's one where Hines is the all time leader (and it's not even close): breaking linebacker jawsI don't think anyone catches him on that one either.

I'm not sure if that's true. When WRs were more blockers lined out wide, the game was different and some of them could flat out lay the wood. Maybe if you put a FB out wide today and just had him tee off on LBs it'd be similar

Steve Smif... or did you mean opponents?

 

[Tau837]

As for getting into Bruce's best year, I agree it was a great season. But he wasn't even 2nd team All Pro, so it can only help his case so much.

I don't think many at all feel that way. Pointing out he wasn't 2nd team all-pro is minimizing 119 catches for 1781 yards and 13 TDs-again, on a team where he was the focal point of the defense. I've seen people around here minimize Jamal Lewis' 2k yard season or Ricky's 1800 yard season and other WR 100+catch seasons too. I'm not surprised about the Bruce comment, but I have never come across similar sentiment elsewhere. I feel like most people have a benchmark in their head 1500, 1800, 2000 and if a player hits that, they feel it's a great season.The counter here I suppose is how many WRs in the HOF had a year better than that one by Bruce? (and again, he has career stat totals to make it) How many have struggled to get 1000 yards when they were on a bad team and the only focus of the D?

At least 4 WRs had a better year than Bruce in that year alone. At least that's what the AP voters thought at the time.

 

[Ghost Rider]

In regards to Isaac Bruce, let's not forget that he has one of the greatest catches in Super Bowl history (a game-winning 73-yard catch in the final two minutes) to his credit, as well as being one of the key components of one of the greatest offensive runs in NFL history. He'll have a tough time getting in, I think, but he should make it long before Hines Ward.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Hines Ward had awful numbers during the team's second SB run: 9 for 168 and 0 TDs in three games. That's 3 catches for 56 yards and 0 TDs per game.In the first SB run? He averaged 3.75 catches for 65 yards and 0.75 TDs. Better numbers, but certainly not amazing numbers. He won the SB MVP, but has otherwise been far from HOF-worthy in his other post-season games. For the most part, rings only help you when you have elite numbers en route to getting those rings (Riggins, Csonka, Swann).

In case you forgot, he played the second SB run on one leg. The fact that he was even on the field at all was amazing.I don't know if he'll make it or not, but those of you saying "no chance" may have some crow to eat before it's all said and done. There's a decent chance he finishes in the top 10-12 all time in receptions, yards, and TDs and with 2 (as of now) rings and a SB MVP along with 4 Pro Bowl berths (as of now, he was close this year), he has a legitimate shot. Bear in mind he's 33 and hasn't slowed down at all. He could easily play 5 more years at a high level if he wants to and doesn't suffer any major injuries since his success is not predicated on speed or agility but rather toughness, intelligence, hands, and route running ability. Those skills don't fade like speed or wiggle.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I don't know if he'll make it or not, but those of you saying "no chance" may have some crow to eat before it's all said and done. There's a decent chance he finishes in the top 10-12 all time in receptions, yards, and TDs and with 2 (as of now) rings and a SB MVP along with 4 Pro Bowl berths (as of now, he was close this year), he has a legitimate shot. Bear in mind he's 33 and hasn't slowed down at all. He could easily play 5 more years at a high level if he wants to and doesn't suffer any major injuries since his success is not predicated on speed or agility but rather toughness, intelligence, hands, and route running ability. Those skills don't fade like speed or wiggle.

You left out "multiple winner of Dirtiest Player in the NFL award" in his list of achievements.

 

[Tau837]

Hines Ward had awful numbers during the team's second SB run: 9 for 168 and 0 TDs in three games. That's 3 catches for 56 yards and 0 TDs per game.In the first SB run? He averaged 3.75 catches for 65 yards and 0.75 TDs. Better numbers, but certainly not amazing numbers. He won the SB MVP, but has otherwise been far from HOF-worthy in his other post-season games. For the most part, rings only help you when you have elite numbers en route to getting those rings (Riggins, Csonka, Swann).

In case you forgot, he played the second SB run on one leg. The fact that he was even on the field at all was amazing.I don't know if he'll make it or not, but those of you saying "no chance" may have some crow to eat before it's all said and done. There's a decent chance he finishes in the top 10-12 all time in receptions, yards, and TDs and with 2 (as of now) rings and a SB MVP along with 4 Pro Bowl berths (as of now, he was close this year), he has a legitimate shot. Bear in mind he's 33 and hasn't slowed down at all. He could easily play 5 more years at a high level if he wants to and doesn't suffer any major injuries since his success is not predicated on speed or agility but rather toughness, intelligence, hands, and route running ability. Those skills don't fade like speed or wiggle.

I think it's unlikely he'll finish in the top 10-12 in those categories, as I posted previously. But that is not as relevant as where he will be ranked on those lists 5 years later when he becomes eligible. Even if he retires top 10-12 in one or more categories, it's very likely he will have fallen down those lists by at least a few spots by that time. So in reality it is likely that his best case when he becomes eligible is to be top 15-20 in those categories... which IMO will be much less impressive to the voters.

 

[Sheriff66]

They vote in the best football players

Ward's not going to get in, then.

XHe is an elite football player.

He is not one of the elite players in NFL history.

He didn't play in the right offense, that is the only reason you say that, can't choose who you are drafted by. I can't wait to bring this threadf back up years do the road and ttyj:

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I don't know if he'll make it or not, but those of you saying "no chance" may have some crow to eat before it's all said and done. There's a decent chance he finishes in the top 10-12 all time in receptions, yards, and TDs and with 2 (as of now) rings and a SB MVP along with 4 Pro Bowl berths (as of now, he was close this year), he has a legitimate shot. Bear in mind he's 33 and hasn't slowed down at all. He could easily play 5 more years at a high level if he wants to and doesn't suffer any major injuries since his success is not predicated on speed or agility but rather toughness, intelligence, hands, and route running ability. Those skills don't fade like speed or wiggle.

You left out "multiple winner of Dirtiest Player in the NFL award" in his list of achievements.

Yes, there's that too.

 

[Wadsworth]

They vote in the best football players

Ward's not going to get in, then.

XHe is an elite football player.

He is not one of the elite players in NFL history.

He didn't play in the right offense, that is the only reason you say that, can't choose who you are drafted by. I can't wait to bring this threadf back up years do the road and ttyj:

He played for a team with the right defense to get to the post season often and obviously the Super Bowl. If he doesn't play for a team that regularly has an elite defense he might not get a shot at being Super Bowl MVP for example. So while Pitt hasn't often had a wide open offense, some of that has to do with their excellent defense, which has benefited Ward in other ways. So yea, if he played for the Colts all these years his stats might be better. But if he played for Lions all these years his stats might be the same or worse and he'd have zero post season experience and not even be in the conversation for HoF.

 

[Ghost Rider]

He played for a team with the right defense to get to the post season often and obviously the Super Bowl. If he doesn't play for a team that regularly has an elite defense he might not get a shot at being Super Bowl MVP for example. So while Pitt hasn't often had a wide open offense, some of that has to do with their excellent defense, which has benefited Ward in other ways. So yea, if he played for the Colts all these years his stats might be better. But if he played for Lions all these years his stats might be the same or worse and he'd have zero post season experience and not even be in the conversation for HoF.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

He could easily play 5 more years at a high level if he wants to and doesn't suffer any major injuries since his success is not predicated on speed or agility but rather toughness, intelligence, hands, and route running ability. Those skills don't fade like speed or wiggle.

I completely disagree with this. Guys that have great playing speed, can lose a step or two and still be functional by running better routes, getting more time in the flm room, etc. Guys at skill positions that get by with just enough speed but have lots of intangibles are quickly out of the league when they lose a step. I don't know when Ward's skills will erode, but I suspect he will go from very good to out of the league in a very short amount of time. He will not have a gradual decline- he will just lose the ability to get open and be out of the league. I feel certain he will not be playing at a high level in 5 years.

 

[Bri]

As for getting into Bruce's best year, I agree it was a great season. But he wasn't even 2nd team All Pro, so it can only help his case so much.

I don't think many at all feel that way. Pointing out he wasn't 2nd team all-pro is minimizing 119 catches for 1781 yards and 13 TDs-again, on a team where he was the focal point of the defense. I've seen people around here minimize Jamal Lewis' 2k yard season or Ricky's 1800 yard season and other WR 100+catch seasons too. I'm not surprised about the Bruce comment, but I have never come across similar sentiment elsewhere. I feel like most people have a benchmark in their head 1500, 1800, 2000 and if a player hits that, they feel it's a great season.The counter here I suppose is how many WRs in the HOF had a year better than that one by Bruce? (and again, he has career stat totals to make it) How many have struggled to get 1000 yards when they were on a bad team and the only focus of the D?

At least 4 WRs had a better year than Bruce in that year alone. At least that's what the AP voters thought at the time.

From 60 til now # of WR seasons with more than 1700 yardsNAME POS YR AGE EXP G REC RECYD YD/REC RECTD FANT PT1 Jerry Rice wr 1995 33 11 16 122 1848 15.15 15 284.402 Isaac Bruce wr 1995 23 2 16 119 1781 14.97 13 257.803 Charlie Hennigan wr 1961 26 2 14 82 1746 21.29 12 246.604 Marvin Harrison wr 2002 30 7 16 143 1722 12.04 11 239.20seasons with 115 or more catches since 1960 NAME POS YR AGE EXP G REC RECYD YD/REC RECTD FANT PT1 Marvin Harrison wr 2002 30 7 16 143 1722 12.04 11 239.202 Herman Moore wr 1995 26 5 16 123 1686 13.71 14 252.603 Wes Welker wr 2009 28 6 14 123 1348 10.96 4 162.404 Cris Carter wr 1995 30 9 16 122 1371 11.24 17 239.105 Cris Carter wr 1994 29 8 16 122 1256 10.30 7 167.606 Jerry Rice wr 1995 33 11 16 122 1848 15.15 15 284.407 Isaac Bruce wr 1995 23 2 16 119 1781 14.97 13 257.808 Torry Holt wr 2003 27 5 16 117 1696 14.50 12 242.109 Jimmy Smith wr 1999 30 8 16 116 1636 14.10 6 199.6010 Marvin Harrison wr 1999 27 4 16 115 1663 14.46 12 238.7011 Andre Johnson wr 2008 27 6 16 115 1575 13.70 8 205.50

 

[DoubleG]

As for getting into Bruce's best year, I agree it was a great season. But he wasn't even 2nd team All Pro, so it can only help his case so much.

I don't think many at all feel that way. Pointing out he wasn't 2nd team all-pro is minimizing 119 catches for 1781 yards and 13 TDs-again, on a team where he was the focal point of the defense. I've seen people around here minimize Jamal Lewis' 2k yard season or Ricky's 1800 yard season and other WR 100+catch seasons too. I'm not surprised about the Bruce comment, but I have never come across similar sentiment elsewhere. I feel like most people have a benchmark in their head 1500, 1800, 2000 and if a player hits that, they feel it's a great season.The counter here I suppose is how many WRs in the HOF had a year better than that one by Bruce? (and again, he has career stat totals to make it) How many have struggled to get 1000 yards when they were on a bad team and the only focus of the D?

At least 4 WRs had a better year than Bruce in that year alone. At least that's what the AP voters thought at the time.

From 60 til now # of WR seasons with more than 1700 yardsNAME POS YR AGE EXP G REC RECYD YD/REC RECTD FANT PT1 Jerry Rice wr 1995 33 11 16 122 1848 15.15 15 284.402 Isaac Bruce wr 1995 23 2 16 119 1781 14.97 13 257.803 Charlie Hennigan wr 1961 26 2 14 82 1746 21.29 12 246.604 Marvin Harrison wr 2002 30 7 16 143 1722 12.04 11 239.20seasons with 115 or more catches since 1960 NAME POS YR AGE EXP G REC RECYD YD/REC RECTD FANT PT1 Marvin Harrison wr 2002 30 7 16 143 1722 12.04 11 239.202 Herman Moore wr 1995 26 5 16 123 1686 13.71 14 252.603 Wes Welker wr 2009 28 6 14 123 1348 10.96 4 162.404 Cris Carter wr 1995 30 9 16 122 1371 11.24 17 239.105 Cris Carter wr 1994 29 8 16 122 1256 10.30 7 167.606 Jerry Rice wr 1995 33 11 16 122 1848 15.15 15 284.407 Isaac Bruce wr 1995 23 2 16 119 1781 14.97 13 257.808 Torry Holt wr 2003 27 5 16 117 1696 14.50 12 242.109 Jimmy Smith wr 1999 30 8 16 116 1636 14.10 6 199.6010 Marvin Harrison wr 1999 27 4 16 115 1663 14.46 12 238.7011 Andre Johnson wr 2008 27 6 16 115 1575 13.70 8 205.50

Oh stop with the stats and facts already...Ward has INTANGEABLES!!

 

[Bri]

yeah forgot, sorry for hijack of bruce

 

[Evilgrin 72]

He could easily play 5 more years at a high level if he wants to and doesn't suffer any major injuries since his success is not predicated on speed or agility but rather toughness, intelligence, hands, and route running ability. Those skills don't fade like speed or wiggle.

I completely disagree with this. Guys that have great playing speed, can lose a step or two and still be functional by running better routes, getting more time in the flm room, etc. Guys at skill positions that get by with just enough speed but have lots of intangibles are quickly out of the league when they lose a step. I don't know when Ward's skills will erode, but I suspect he will go from very good to out of the league in a very short amount of time. He will not have a gradual decline- he will just lose the ability to get open and be out of the league. I feel certain he will not be playing at a high level in 5 years.

I heard this same argument back in '06 and people were saying he wouldn't be putting up stats like he used to when he hit his mid 30s. He was 33 this year and had his best statistical season since his mid-20s.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

He could easily play 5 more years at a high level if he wants to and doesn't suffer any major injuries since his success is not predicated on speed or agility but rather toughness, intelligence, hands, and route running ability. Those skills don't fade like speed or wiggle.

I completely disagree with this. Guys that have great playing speed, can lose a step or two and still be functional by running better routes, getting more time in the flm room, etc. Guys at skill positions that get by with just enough speed but have lots of intangibles are quickly out of the league when they lose a step. I don't know when Ward's skills will erode, but I suspect he will go from very good to out of the league in a very short amount of time. He will not have a gradual decline- he will just lose the ability to get open and be out of the league. I feel certain he will not be playing at a high level in 5 years.

I heard this same argument back in '06 and people were saying he wouldn't be putting up stats like he used to when he hit his mid 30s. He was 33 this year and had his best statistical season since his mid-20s.

People are dumb about players turning 30. I am not saying that Ward won't be good this year or next year. Lots of good wr's are productive through age 35. Very few are very productive at 38. I would bet you any amount of money up to 2K that Ward has less than 600 receiving yards in 2014.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

He could easily play 5 more years at a high level if he wants to and doesn't suffer any major injuries since his success is not predicated on speed or agility but rather toughness, intelligence, hands, and route running ability. Those skills don't fade like speed or wiggle.

I completely disagree with this. Guys that have great playing speed, can lose a step or two and still be functional by running better routes, getting more time in the flm room, etc. Guys at skill positions that get by with just enough speed but have lots of intangibles are quickly out of the league when they lose a step. I don't know when Ward's skills will erode, but I suspect he will go from very good to out of the league in a very short amount of time. He will not have a gradual decline- he will just lose the ability to get open and be out of the league. I feel certain he will not be playing at a high level in 5 years.

I heard this same argument back in '06 and people were saying he wouldn't be putting up stats like he used to when he hit his mid 30s. He was 33 this year and had his best statistical season since his mid-20s.

People are dumb about players turning 30. I am not saying that Ward won't be good this year or next year. Lots of good wr's are productive through age 35. Very few are very productive at 38. I would bet you any amount of money up to 2K that Ward has less than 600 receiving yards in 2014.

I doubt he'll even be playing - I'm pretty sure I read he said he only wanted to play 3 more years. However, I think he could still (like Jerry Rice) still play and be productive at 38 if he chose to do so. Rice is a unique player, no doubt, but he was still putting up #s in his 40s. Ward's game reminds me of Rice's in that he relies more on intelligence, precision, and hard work than he does straight-line speed.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Oh stop with the stats and facts already...Ward has INTANGEABLES!!

He has titles.Michael Irvin - 750-11,904-65 - 5 Pro Bowls - In the HOFAndre Reed - 951-13,198-87 - 7 Pro Bowls - Going on his 5th year of eligibilityWhat do you think separates these two? Winning and intangibles can't matter, so Irvin must be in because his stats were better, right?

 

[Insomniac]

He played for a team with the right defense to get to the post season often and obviously the Super Bowl. If he doesn't play for a team that regularly has an elite defense he might not get a shot at being Super Bowl MVP for example. So while Pitt hasn't often had a wide open offense, some of that has to do with their excellent defense, which has benefited Ward in other ways. So yea, if he played for the Colts all these years his stats might be better. But if he played for Lions all these years his stats might be the same or worse and he'd have zero post season experience and not even be in the conversation for HoF.

You can't underestimate the favoritism of the electorate to the Steelers. Everyone recognizes that there are people who grow up in one market but become fans of a successful team from a different market. In the 70's there were 3 main "Public" teams, the Cowboys, the Steelers and the Raiders. Of those front running kids who grew up in the 70's a disproportionate number of Steelers fans became HOF voters. They've used their power to elect unworthy people like Swann & Stallworth and now they'll elect compilers like Bettis and Ward.

 

[Bri]

Michael Irvin - 750-11,904-65 - 5 Pro Bowls - In the HOFAndre Reed - 951-13,198-87 - 7 Pro Bowls - Going on his 5th year of eligibilityWhat do you think separates these two? Winning and intangibles can't matter, so Irvin must be in because his stats were better, right?

Reed not being in doesn't make much sense to me. It was a different era and he was always considered one of the best til he got old. He was a winner. He was clutch.He was a tough and durable too. Had one year where injury knocked him out for 10 games but the rest of the time, he only missed 8 games in 14 (other) years.He was winding down/clinging on til 2000, but 1996 prob was beginning of the end.Look at others with 11,000 yards and the years they played. (Hit something wrong, Rice would be first of course) Rice started in 80s. Most of the gaudy WR stats come from near the current era. NAME POS YRs G REC RECYD YD/REC RECTD FANT PT1 Isaac Bruce wr 1994--2009 223 1023 15206 14.86 91 2083.802 Terrell Owens wr 1996--2009 205 1006 14951 14.86 144 2402.203 Tim Brown wr 1988--2004 255 1094 14934 13.65 100 2118.404 Marvin Harrison wr 1996--2008 190 1102 14580 13.23 128 2228.805 Randy Moss wr 1998--2009 186 926 14465 15.62 148 2357.356 James Lofton wr 1978--1993 233 764 14004 18.33 75 1883.157 Cris Carter wr 1987--2002 234 1101 13899 12.62 130 2174.008 Henry Ellard wr 1983--1998 228 814 13777 16.93 65 1772.709 Torry Holt wr 1999--2009 173 920 13382 14.55 74 1787.9010 Andre Reed wr 1985--2000 227 951 13198 13.88 87 1897.8011 Steve Largent wr 1976--1989 200 819 13089 15.98 100 1924.6512 Irving Fryar wr 1984--2000 255 851 12785 15.02 84 1812.7013 Art Monk wr 1980--1995 224 940 12721 13.53 68 1713.3014 Jimmy Smith wr 1992--2005 179 862 12287 14.25 67 1630.6015 Charlie Joiner wr 1969--1986 239 750 12146 16.19 65 1606.8016 Michael Irvin wr 1988--1999 159 750 11904 15.87 65 1581.0017 Don Maynard wr 1960--1973 174 628 11750 18.71 88 1705.5018 Muhsin wr 1996--2009 202 860 11438 13.30 62 1522.2019 Rod Smith wr 1995--2006 183 849 11389 13.41 68 1591.3020 Keenan McC. wr 1992--2007 207 883 11373 12.88 63 1516.9021 Derrick Mason wr 1997--2009 202 863 11089 12.85 59 1463.20

 

[Tau837]

Oh stop with the stats and facts already...Ward has INTANGEABLES!!

He has titles.Michael Irvin - 750-11,904-65 - 5 Pro Bowls - In the HOFAndre Reed - 951-13,198-87 - 7 Pro Bowls - Going on his 5th year of eligibilityWhat do you think separates these two? Winning and intangibles can't matter, so Irvin must be in because his stats were better, right?

You can't be serious with this.Irvin is in primarily because he averaged 1419 receiving yards per season over a 5 season stretch, during which the Cowboys won 3 Super Bowls, and in those championship seasons he averaged 1443 receiving yards. In contrast, Reed averaged only 1027 receiving yards in his best 5 season stretch, and he averaged only 956 receiving yards in the Bills' 4 Super Bowl seasons.Irvin also had a 1st team All Pro selection, and Reed never made 1st team.So, yes, 3 titles certainly helped Irvin, no doubt. But there was more to it than that.

 

[Tau837]

From 60 til now # of WR seasons with more than 1700 yardsNAME POS YR AGE EXP G REC RECYD YD/REC RECTD FANT PT1 Jerry Rice wr 1995 33 11 16 122 1848 15.15 15 284.402 Isaac Bruce wr 1995 23 2 16 119 1781 14.97 13 257.803 Charlie Hennigan wr 1961 26 2 14 82 1746 21.29 12 246.604 Marvin Harrison wr 2002 30 7 16 143 1722 12.04 11 239.20

Rice and Harrison will be HOFers. Hennigan isn't. And let's look at those who exceeded 1600 yards in a single season:5. Torry Holt (27) 1,696 2003 STL 6. Herman Moore (26) 1,686 1995 DET 7. Marvin Harrison (27) 1,663 1999 IND 8. Jimmy Smith (30) 1,636 1999 JAX 9. Torry Holt (24) 1,635 2000 STL 10. Randy Moss (26) 1,632 2003 MIN 11. Michael Irvin+ (29) 1,603 1995 DAL 12. Lance Alworth+ (25) 1,602 1965 SDG 12. Rod Smith (30) 1,602 2000 DEN Herman Moore, Jimmy Smith, and Rod Smith will not be making the HOF. I'm not sure about Holt at this point... he looked like a lock until he fell off a cliff last year. So, of the 11 players with the top 13 single season totals, IMO there are only 5 definite HOFers (Rice, Harrison, Irvin, Alworth, Moss).IMO a single season total doesn't prove anything with regard to HOF worthiness. It's definitely a positive, but it doesn't guarantee anything.

seasons with 115 or more catches since 1960 NAME POS YR AGE EXP G REC RECYD YD/REC RECTD FANT PT1 Marvin Harrison wr 2002 30 7 16 143 1722 12.04 11 239.202 Herman Moore wr 1995 26 5 16 123 1686 13.71 14 252.603 Wes Welker wr 2009 28 6 14 123 1348 10.96 4 162.404 Cris Carter wr 1995 30 9 16 122 1371 11.24 17 239.105 Cris Carter wr 1994 29 8 16 122 1256 10.30 7 167.606 Jerry Rice wr 1995 33 11 16 122 1848 15.15 15 284.407 Isaac Bruce wr 1995 23 2 16 119 1781 14.97 13 257.808 Torry Holt wr 2003 27 5 16 117 1696 14.50 12 242.109 Jimmy Smith wr 1999 30 8 16 116 1636 14.10 6 199.6010 Marvin Harrison wr 1999 27 4 16 115 1663 14.46 12 238.7011 Andre Johnson wr 2008 27 6 16 115 1575 13.70 8 205.50

So of these 9 players, only 3 are definite HOFers (Rice, Carter, Harrison). Again, while a strong individual season performance and most definitely a positive for Bruce's case, it proves nothing.And none of this really directly addresses this part of our exchange. You cited a bunch of stuff about how great Bruce's 1995 season was and asked how many WRs have had a better season. Without getting into years besides 1995, I pointed out that there were at least 4 seasons *in the same year* that were judged to be better by AP voters. Not by me. By the AP voters.

 

[DoubleG]

Oh stop with the stats and facts already...Ward has INTANGEABLES!!

He has titles.Michael Irvin - 750-11,904-65 - 5 Pro Bowls - In the HOF

Andre Reed - 951-13,198-87 - 7 Pro Bowls - Going on his 5th year of eligibility

What do you think separates these two? Winning and intangibles can't matter, so Irvin must be in because his stats were better, right?

You can't be serious with this.Irvin is in primarily because he averaged 1419 receiving yards per season over a 5 season stretch, during which the Cowboys won 3 Super Bowls, and in those championship seasons he averaged 1443 receiving yards. In contrast, Reed averaged only 1027 receiving yards in his best 5 season stretch, and he averaged only 956 receiving yards in the Bills' 4 Super Bowl seasons.

Irvin also had a 1st team All Pro selection, and Reed never made 1st team.

So, yes, 3 titles certainly helped Irvin, no doubt. But there was more to it than that.

As a follow up to these excellent points:Irvin lead the league in receiving yards/game twice - and was 2nd in the league in the same category two more times (to Rice) - that's 4 times he was either first or 2nd.

Reed never even cracked the top 4 in any year in receiving yards or TDs. Ironically, he was 2nd in the league in one statistical category - receptions - one time in his 16 year career. I say "irnoically" because that is exactly Ward's high-water mark in terms of receiving stats so far in his career. So thank you for providing the perfect example of a Ward-like career. Andre Reed - a 7 time Pro-Bowler who was near the top (but never quite made it to the top) most seasons and compiled nice career numbers - and yet is not in the HOF.

 

[Tau837]

Oh stop with the stats and facts already...Ward has INTANGEABLES!!

He has titles.Michael Irvin - 750-11,904-65 - 5 Pro Bowls - In the HOF

Andre Reed - 951-13,198-87 - 7 Pro Bowls - Going on his 5th year of eligibility

What do you think separates these two? Winning and intangibles can't matter, so Irvin must be in because his stats were better, right?

You can't be serious with this.Irvin is in primarily because he averaged 1419 receiving yards per season over a 5 season stretch, during which the Cowboys won 3 Super Bowls, and in those championship seasons he averaged 1443 receiving yards. In contrast, Reed averaged only 1027 receiving yards in his best 5 season stretch, and he averaged only 956 receiving yards in the Bills' 4 Super Bowl seasons.

Irvin also had a 1st team All Pro selection, and Reed never made 1st team.

So, yes, 3 titles certainly helped Irvin, no doubt. But there was more to it than that.

As a follow up to these excellent points:Irvin lead the league in receiving yards/game twice - and was 2nd in the league in the same category two more times (to Rice) - that's 4 times he was either first or 2nd.

Reed never even cracked the top 4 in any year in receiving yards or TDs. Ironically, he was 2nd in the league in one statistical category - receptions - one time in his 16 year career. I say "irnoically" because that is exactly Ward's high-water mark in terms of receiving stats so far in his career. So thank you for providing the perfect example of a Ward-like career. Andre Reed - a 7 time Pro-Bowler who was near the top (but never quite made it to the top) most seasons and compiled nice career numbers - and yet is not in the HOF.

Actually, I don't think Ward's career comes close to measuring up to Reed's at this time. Reed went to 7 Pro Bowls compared to Ward's 4. Reed retired at #4 in receptions, #5 in receiving yards, and #7 in receiving TDs... Ward probably won't be particularly close to such ranks when he retires. Ward was on 2 Super Bowl winners but Reed played in 4 Super Bowls... IMO that's a wash. All in all, I think Reed has a better case.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Oh stop with the stats and facts already...Ward has INTANGEABLES!!

He has titles.Michael Irvin - 750-11,904-65 - 5 Pro Bowls - In the HOF

Andre Reed - 951-13,198-87 - 7 Pro Bowls - Going on his 5th year of eligibility

What do you think separates these two? Winning and intangibles can't matter, so Irvin must be in because his stats were better, right?

You can't be serious with this.Irvin is in primarily because he averaged 1419 receiving yards per season over a 5 season stretch, during which the Cowboys won 3 Super Bowls, and in those championship seasons he averaged 1443 receiving yards. In contrast, Reed averaged only 1027 receiving yards in his best 5 season stretch, and he averaged only 956 receiving yards in the Bills' 4 Super Bowl seasons.

Irvin also had a 1st team All Pro selection, and Reed never made 1st team.

So, yes, 3 titles certainly helped Irvin, no doubt. But there was more to it than that.

I'm not saying that's ALL there was to it. It's simply an example of where looking at stats in a vacuum can lead you astray. You said yourself : he averaged 1419 receiving yards per season over a 5 season stretch, during which the Cowboys won 3 Super Bowls

That's the key item there. Had they not won those Super Bowls, he wouldn't be in, plain and simple. Yes, he had that great 5-year stretch but only topped (and barely at that in 1 year) 1000 yards in 2 other seasons his entire career. He had a short prime and not much else. Without the Super Bowls, his stats are basically Keyshawn-esque.

The Hall values longevity and winning. If having a brilliant 5-year stretch is grounds for admission, then I imagine we can expect to see Shawn Alexander, Priest Holmes, and Terrell Davis elected in the next few years, right? Rather than a guy like Bettis.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Oh stop with the stats and facts already...Ward has INTANGEABLES!!

He has titles.Michael Irvin - 750-11,904-65 - 5 Pro Bowls - In the HOF

Andre Reed - 951-13,198-87 - 7 Pro Bowls - Going on his 5th year of eligibility

What do you think separates these two? Winning and intangibles can't matter, so Irvin must be in because his stats were better, right?

You can't be serious with this.Irvin is in primarily because he averaged 1419 receiving yards per season over a 5 season stretch, during which the Cowboys won 3 Super Bowls, and in those championship seasons he averaged 1443 receiving yards. In contrast, Reed averaged only 1027 receiving yards in his best 5 season stretch, and he averaged only 956 receiving yards in the Bills' 4 Super Bowl seasons.

Irvin also had a 1st team All Pro selection, and Reed never made 1st team.

So, yes, 3 titles certainly helped Irvin, no doubt. But there was more to it than that.

As a follow up to these excellent points:Irvin lead the league in receiving yards/game twice - and was 2nd in the league in the same category two more times (to Rice) - that's 4 times he was either first or 2nd.

Reed never even cracked the top 4 in any year in receiving yards or TDs. Ironically, he was 2nd in the league in one statistical category - receptions - one time in his 16 year career. I say "irnoically" because that is exactly Ward's high-water mark in terms of receiving stats so far in his career. So thank you for providing the perfect example of a Ward-like career. Andre Reed - a 7 time Pro-Bowler who was near the top (but never quite made it to the top) most seasons and compiled nice career numbers - and yet is not in the HOF.

Actually, I don't think Ward's career comes close to measuring up to Reed's at this time. Reed went to 7 Pro Bowls compared to Ward's 4. Reed retired at #4 in receptions, #5 in receiving yards, and #7 in receiving TDs... Ward probably won't be particularly close to such ranks when he retires. Ward was on 2 Super Bowl winners but Reed played in 4 Super Bowls... IMO that's a wash. All in all, I think Reed has a better case.

In YOUR opinion. But not the opinion of HOF voters.

 

[CanadianNFLJunkie]

Speaking of which, reminder that today FRIDAY JAN 8th THE Network will show live the 15 (I think) Finalists for this year's class for the HOF.

With all this chatter about WR's and the hall, since Emmitt and Jerry are most likely shoe-in's I wonder if AUTOMATICALLY the voters won't ALSO put in Reed, CC and or Brown, and would rather have the all-time best WR in history go in alone at the WR spot.

 

[Tau837]

Actually, I don't think Ward's career comes close to measuring up to Reed's at this time. Reed went to 7 Pro Bowls compared to Ward's 4. Reed retired at #4 in receptions, #5 in receiving yards, and #7 in receiving TDs... Ward probably won't be particularly close to such ranks when he retires. Ward was on 2 Super Bowl winners but Reed played in 4 Super Bowls... IMO that's a wash. All in all, I think Reed has a better case.

In YOUR opinion. But not the opinion of HOF voters.

Of course what I'm posting is my opinion. And your posts, including this one, are YOUR opinion. Unless you are a HOF voter yourself.

 

[Tau837]

Oh stop with the stats and facts already...Ward has INTANGEABLES!!

He has titles.Michael Irvin - 750-11,904-65 - 5 Pro Bowls - In the HOF

Andre Reed - 951-13,198-87 - 7 Pro Bowls - Going on his 5th year of eligibility

What do you think separates these two? Winning and intangibles can't matter, so Irvin must be in because his stats were better, right?

You can't be serious with this.Irvin is in primarily because he averaged 1419 receiving yards per season over a 5 season stretch, during which the Cowboys won 3 Super Bowls, and in those championship seasons he averaged 1443 receiving yards. In contrast, Reed averaged only 1027 receiving yards in his best 5 season stretch, and he averaged only 956 receiving yards in the Bills' 4 Super Bowl seasons.

Irvin also had a 1st team All Pro selection, and Reed never made 1st team.

So, yes, 3 titles certainly helped Irvin, no doubt. But there was more to it than that.

I'm not saying that's ALL there was to it. It's simply an example of where looking at stats in a vacuum can lead you astray. You said yourself : he averaged 1419 receiving yards per season over a 5 season stretch, during which the Cowboys won 3 Super Bowls

That's the key item there. Had they not won those Super Bowls, he wouldn't be in, plain and simple. Yes, he had that great 5-year stretch but only topped (and barely at that in 1 year) 1000 yards in 2 other seasons his entire career. He had a short prime and not much else. Without the Super Bowls, his stats are basically Keyshawn-esque.

Big difference between being a great WR on a team that won 3 Super Bowls in 4 seasons and being a very good WR on a team that won 2 Super Bowls in 4 years. The Dallas team was widely considered a dynasty. I don't think Ward's Pittsburgh teams are held in quite the same esteem. And IMO Irvin was a fairly weak candidate... I agree he wouldn't have gotten in if not for the titles. Maybe if the Steelers win another Super Bowl before Ward retires, it will make a difference...

The Hall values longevity and winning. If having a brilliant 5-year stretch is grounds for admission, then I imagine we can expect to see Shawn Alexander, Priest Holmes, and Terrell Davis elected in the next few years, right? Rather than a guy like Bettis.

I don't know about Alexander. I am not personally a big fan, but he did have a nice 5 year run culminating in the MVP season.I personally don't think Holmes, Davis, or Bettis are worthy. Davis has a lot of support around here, not sure if that suggests he also has enough support among voters to get in eventually. I used to think Bettis was worthy, but in some of the HOF debates recently I had occasion to compare his numbers more closely with Martin and Davis and it changed my mind. But that doesn't mean the voters won't vote him in. :X

And I'm not sure what any of that has to do with Hines Ward.

 

[Wadsworth]

He played for a team with the right defense to get to the post season often and obviously the Super Bowl. If he doesn't play for a team that regularly has an elite defense he might not get a shot at being Super Bowl MVP for example. So while Pitt hasn't often had a wide open offense, some of that has to do with their excellent defense, which has benefited Ward in other ways. So yea, if he played for the Colts all these years his stats might be better. But if he played for Lions all these years his stats might be the same or worse and he'd have zero post season experience and not even be in the conversation for HoF.

You can't underestimate the favoritism of the electorate to the Steelers. Everyone recognizes that there are people who grow up in one market but become fans of a successful team from a different market. In the 70's there were 3 main "Public" teams, the Cowboys, the Steelers and the Raiders. Of those front running kids who grew up in the 70's a disproportionate number of Steelers fans became HOF voters. They've used their power to elect unworthy people like Swann & Stallworth and now they'll elect compilers like Bettis and Ward.

Oh I get it. It's funny to me as a Jaguars fan to hear Steeler fans whining about how Ward would have a better chance at HoF induction if he played for another team. Really? Try being a Jaguar and even getting a HoF whisper. Jimmy Smith's entire productive career(due to major injury and emergency surgery) was only really 10 seasons. But over those 10 seasons he averaged 80+ catches and 1,200+ yards yet Smiley McCheapshot in Pitt has a much better shot at the HoF in spite of only going over 1,200 yards once in his career. I apologize if I don't shed a tear for poor Hines since playing for Pitt so hindered his HoF chances.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Actually, I don't think Ward's career comes close to measuring up to Reed's at this time. Reed went to 7 Pro Bowls compared to Ward's 4. Reed retired at #4 in receptions, #5 in receiving yards, and #7 in receiving TDs... Ward probably won't be particularly close to such ranks when he retires. Ward was on 2 Super Bowl winners but Reed played in 4 Super Bowls... IMO that's a wash. All in all, I think Reed has a better case.

In YOUR opinion. But not the opinion of HOF voters.

Of course what I'm posting is my opinion. And your posts, including this one, are YOUR opinion. Unless you are a HOF voter yourself.

I wish. Just saying that the HOF voters don't typically regard stats in the same light as we on a FF message board do. And that's where I think people are in danger here... again, I'm not even saying he WILL get in (I said before, I voted maybe) but people saying he has NO chance at all are potentially going to look silly once all is said and done.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

The Hall values longevity and winning. If having a brilliant 5-year stretch is grounds for admission, then I imagine we can expect to see Shawn Alexander, Priest Holmes, and Terrell Davis elected in the next few years, right? Rather than a guy like Bettis.

I don't know about Alexander. I am not personally a big fan, but he did have a nice 5 year run culminating in the MVP season.I personally don't think Holmes, Davis, or Bettis are worthy. Davis has a lot of support around here, not sure if that suggests he also has enough support among voters to get in eventually. I used to think Bettis was worthy, but in some of the HOF debates recently I had occasion to compare his numbers more closely with Martin and Davis and it changed my mind. But that doesn't mean the voters won't vote him in. And I'm not sure what any of that has to do with Hines Ward.

The point was while Irvin got in on the strength of a 5-year "prime", Davis, Holmes, and Alexander are unlikely to, despite the fact that their brief primes were all more spectacular statistically than Irvin's. The difference was that Irvin has those 3 rings and also managed to play at a mediocre (statistical) level for a few more seasons. His edge over those 3 (Davis less so, obviously) is his rings and his relatively robust career #s. These are factors I believe will help Ward. I think Ward has a more than decent chance of getting a 3rd ring if he plays 3 more years, the foundation is there for this Steelers team to be very good for the next few seasons.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

He played for a team with the right defense to get to the post season often and obviously the Super Bowl. If he doesn't play for a team that regularly has an elite defense he might not get a shot at being Super Bowl MVP for example. So while Pitt hasn't often had a wide open offense, some of that has to do with their excellent defense, which has benefited Ward in other ways. So yea, if he played for the Colts all these years his stats might be better. But if he played for Lions all these years his stats might be the same or worse and he'd have zero post season experience and not even be in the conversation for HoF.

You can't underestimate the favoritism of the electorate to the Steelers. Everyone recognizes that there are people who grow up in one market but become fans of a successful team from a different market. In the 70's there were 3 main "Public" teams, the Cowboys, the Steelers and the Raiders. Of those front running kids who grew up in the 70's a disproportionate number of Steelers fans became HOF voters. They've used their power to elect unworthy people like Swann & Stallworth and now they'll elect compilers like Bettis and Ward.

Oh I get it. It's funny to me as a Jaguars fan to hear Steeler fans whining about how Ward would have a better chance at HoF induction if he played for another team. Really? Try being a Jaguar and even getting a HoF whisper. Jimmy Smith's entire productive career(due to major injury and emergency surgery) was only really 10 seasons. But over those 10 seasons he averaged 80+ catches and 1,200+ yards yet Smiley McCheapshot in Pitt has a much better shot at the HoF in spite of only going over 1,200 yards once in his career. I apologize if I don't shed a tear for poor Hines since playing for Pitt so hindered his HoF chances.

You have legitimate points here, but they're rendered almost moot when you get into eyeroll smileys and dopey monikers like Smiley McCheapshot. You Duuuuuuu-val fans (and fans of any other team in the league) love to hate Ward, but every one of you would be in here chest-puffing if he played for your team and was laying defenders out all over the field. And you know it.

 

[Tau837]

The Hall values longevity and winning. If having a brilliant 5-year stretch is grounds for admission, then I imagine we can expect to see Shawn Alexander, Priest Holmes, and Terrell Davis elected in the next few years, right? Rather than a guy like Bettis.

I don't know about Alexander. I am not personally a big fan, but he did have a nice 5 year run culminating in the MVP season.I personally don't think Holmes, Davis, or Bettis are worthy. Davis has a lot of support around here, not sure if that suggests he also has enough support among voters to get in eventually. I used to think Bettis was worthy, but in some of the HOF debates recently I had occasion to compare his numbers more closely with Martin and Davis and it changed my mind. But that doesn't mean the voters won't vote him in. And I'm not sure what any of that has to do with Hines Ward.

The point was while Irvin got in on the strength of a 5-year "prime", Davis, Holmes, and Alexander are unlikely to, despite the fact that their brief primes were all more spectacular statistically than Irvin's. The difference was that Irvin has those 3 rings and also managed to play at a mediocre (statistical) level for a few more seasons. His edge over those 3 (Davis less so, obviously) is his rings and his relatively robust career #s. These are factors I believe will help Ward. I think Ward has a more than decent chance of getting a 3rd ring if he plays 3 more years, the foundation is there for this Steelers team to be very good for the next few seasons.

You are somewhat glossing over the fact that Davis had only 3 years of spectacular play and Holmes just 3 1/2. 5 years for Irvin is obviously a more sustained run.(And if you want to argue for including Davis's rookie year, that lowers the bar enough to make Irvin's run an 8 year run.)

 

[Evilgrin 72]

The Hall values longevity and winning. If having a brilliant 5-year stretch is grounds for admission, then I imagine we can expect to see Shawn Alexander, Priest Holmes, and Terrell Davis elected in the next few years, right? Rather than a guy like Bettis.

I don't know about Alexander. I am not personally a big fan, but he did have a nice 5 year run culminating in the MVP season.I personally don't think Holmes, Davis, or Bettis are worthy. Davis has a lot of support around here, not sure if that suggests he also has enough support among voters to get in eventually. I used to think Bettis was worthy, but in some of the HOF debates recently I had occasion to compare his numbers more closely with Martin and Davis and it changed my mind. But that doesn't mean the voters won't vote him in. And I'm not sure what any of that has to do with Hines Ward.

The point was while Irvin got in on the strength of a 5-year "prime", Davis, Holmes, and Alexander are unlikely to, despite the fact that their brief primes were all more spectacular statistically than Irvin's. The difference was that Irvin has those 3 rings and also managed to play at a mediocre (statistical) level for a few more seasons. His edge over those 3 (Davis less so, obviously) is his rings and his relatively robust career #s. These are factors I believe will help Ward. I think Ward has a more than decent chance of getting a 3rd ring if he plays 3 more years, the foundation is there for this Steelers team to be very good for the next few seasons.

You are somewhat glossing over the fact that Davis had only 3 years of spectacular play and Holmes just 3 1/2. 5 years for Irvin is obviously a more sustained run.(And if you want to argue for including Davis's rookie year, that lowers the bar enough to make Irvin's run an 8 year run.)

I didn't really look it up, to be honest. I guessed that those guys all had about a 5 year prime.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Ward comes out somewhere north of Donald Driver.

 

[Wadsworth]

He played for a team with the right defense to get to the post season often and obviously the Super Bowl. If he doesn't play for a team that regularly has an elite defense he might not get a shot at being Super Bowl MVP for example. So while Pitt hasn't often had a wide open offense, some of that has to do with their excellent defense, which has benefited Ward in other ways. So yea, if he played for the Colts all these years his stats might be better. But if he played for Lions all these years his stats might be the same or worse and he'd have zero post season experience and not even be in the conversation for HoF.

You can't underestimate the favoritism of the electorate to the Steelers. Everyone recognizes that there are people who grow up in one market but become fans of a successful team from a different market. In the 70's there were 3 main "Public" teams, the Cowboys, the Steelers and the Raiders. Of those front running kids who grew up in the 70's a disproportionate number of Steelers fans became HOF voters. They've used their power to elect unworthy people like Swann & Stallworth and now they'll elect compilers like Bettis and Ward.

Oh I get it. It's funny to me as a Jaguars fan to hear Steeler fans whining about how Ward would have a better chance at HoF induction if he played for another team. Really? Try being a Jaguar and even getting a HoF whisper. Jimmy Smith's entire productive career(due to major injury and emergency surgery) was only really 10 seasons. But over those 10 seasons he averaged 80+ catches and 1,200+ yards yet Smiley McCheapshot in Pitt has a much better shot at the HoF in spite of only going over 1,200 yards once in his career. I apologize if I don't shed a tear for poor Hines since playing for Pitt so hindered his HoF chances.

You have legitimate points here, but they're rendered almost moot when you get into eyeroll smileys and dopey monikers like Smiley McCheapshot. You Duuuuuuu-val fans (and fans of any other team in the league) love to hate Ward, but every one of you would be in here chest-puffing if he played for your team and was laying defenders out all over the field. And you know it.

Obviously I can't speak for all Duuuuuuuu-val fans( and thanks for the shout out), but I would not be happy with Ward when he cheap shots people. Ward is in fact an excellent run blocker and hard hitter and I respect that part of his game and would love that element if he were a Jaguar. But I don't like cheap shots and even if he were a Jaguars I would still call him out for that type of play.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

He played for a team with the right defense to get to the post season often and obviously the Super Bowl. If he doesn't play for a team that regularly has an elite defense he might not get a shot at being Super Bowl MVP for example. So while Pitt hasn't often had a wide open offense, some of that has to do with their excellent defense, which has benefited Ward in other ways. So yea, if he played for the Colts all these years his stats might be better. But if he played for Lions all these years his stats might be the same or worse and he'd have zero post season experience and not even be in the conversation for HoF.

You can't underestimate the favoritism of the electorate to the Steelers. Everyone recognizes that there are people who grow up in one market but become fans of a successful team from a different market. In the 70's there were 3 main "Public" teams, the Cowboys, the Steelers and the Raiders. Of those front running kids who grew up in the 70's a disproportionate number of Steelers fans became HOF voters. They've used their power to elect unworthy people like Swann & Stallworth and now they'll elect compilers like Bettis and Ward.

Oh I get it. It's funny to me as a Jaguars fan to hear Steeler fans whining about how Ward would have a better chance at HoF induction if he played for another team. Really? Try being a Jaguar and even getting a HoF whisper. Jimmy Smith's entire productive career(due to major injury and emergency surgery) was only really 10 seasons. But over those 10 seasons he averaged 80+ catches and 1,200+ yards yet Smiley McCheapshot in Pitt has a much better shot at the HoF in spite of only going over 1,200 yards once in his career. I apologize if I don't shed a tear for poor Hines since playing for Pitt so hindered his HoF chances.

You have legitimate points here, but they're rendered almost moot when you get into eyeroll smileys and dopey monikers like Smiley McCheapshot. You Duuuuuuu-val fans (and fans of any other team in the league) love to hate Ward, but every one of you would be in here chest-puffing if he played for your team and was laying defenders out all over the field. And you know it.

Obviously I can't speak for all Duuuuuuuu-val fans( and thanks for the shout out), but I would not be happy with Ward when he cheap shots people. Ward is in fact an excellent run blocker and hard hitter and I respect that part of his game and would love that element if he were a Jaguar. But I don't like cheap shots and even if he were a Jaguars I would still call him out for that type of play.

I don't really think he cheap-shots people. I've heard DEs and linebackers say over and over again how their favorite plays are when they get a blind-side shot at a QB that doesn't see them coming and how the QB goes limp in their arms, etc.. etc.. Snot bubbles, all that jazz. I see DBs lay huge licks on WRs coming across the middle and it's the WRs fault (you gotta keep your head on a swivel when you go across the middle or they'll make you pay!) I don't get why the fact that Ward is an offensive player laying out defenders makes it different. I think defenders who call out Ward are pissed because despite the fact that offensive players get most of the glory, their upside is that they can dole out huge hits with relative impunity and a guy like Ward deprives them of that. Just one (admittedly biased) guy's opinion.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I don't really think he cheap-shots people. I've heard DEs and linebackers say over and over again how their favorite plays are when they get a blind-side shot at a QB that doesn't see them coming and how the QB goes limp in their arms, etc.. etc.. Snot bubbles, all that jazz. I see DBs lay huge licks on WRs coming across the middle and it's the WRs fault (you gotta keep your head on a swivel when you go across the middle or they'll make you pay!) I don't get why the fact that Ward is an offensive player laying out defenders makes it different. I think defenders who call out Ward are pissed because despite the fact that offensive players get most of the glory, their upside is that they can dole out huge hits with relative impunity and a guy like Ward deprives them of that. Just one (admittedly biased) guy's opinion.

I have always loved the irony of linebackers and defensive ends who get blind side shots on relatively defenseless Q.B.'s in very vulnerable positions referencing those Q.B.'s being put in dresses. Few of them have the temperment to take even one or two of the type of shots they deal out on a regular basis.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I have always loved the irony of linebackers and defensive ends who get blind side shots on relatively defenseless Q.B.'s in very vulnerable positions referencing those Q.B.'s being put in dresses. Few of them have the temperment to take even one or two of the type of shots they deal out on a regular basis.

 

[kupcho1]

yet Smiley McCheapshot in Pitt has a much better shot at the HoF

 

[zed2283]

Stupid question.

I need to start my own thread where people come and ask me if Player X will make the Hall of Fame, and I will set each of you straight. 9 times out of 10 the answer will be no.

And the term "1st ballot" will not be allowed.

 

[Adebisi]

Stupid question.I need to start my own thread where people come and ask me if Player X will make the Hall of Fame, and I will set each of you straight. 9 times out of 10 the answer will be no.And the term "1st ballot" will not be allowed.

This is the Shark Pool. Everyone who's ever had a 1,000 yard season is a Hall of Famer. Three of them, and you're first ballot.

 

[zed2283]

Stupid question.I need to start my own thread where people come and ask me if Player X will make the Hall of Fame, and I will set each of you straight. 9 times out of 10 the answer will be no.And the term "1st ballot" will not be allowed.

This is the Shark Pool. Everyone who's ever had a 1,000 yard season is a Hall of Famer. Three of them, and you're first ballot.

Drives me nuts.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Ward also plays on a team that has 2 HoF WRs already in Canton. A lot of the reasons used for Stallworth were terms like winner, work ethic, dedication...Hines Ward has all that plus he owns a ton of records on the Pittsburgh Steelers, in essence he has broken a lot of those records on his own.

1st ballot, I doubt it. but I would vote Ward in because he embodies what you look for in a leader. He's a welcome site in an era of "me me me" and I think the voters will find it easy to vote for him especially with the 2 rings he owns. If he can have another strong year this season with BenR out for 4-6 games and Leftmanwich starting a good 1/3 of the season...hats off for sure.

Ward is approaching 1,000 receptions which will also aid in him being elected to the Pro Football HoF.

 

[Tau837]

Ward also plays on a team that has 2 HoF WRs already in Canton. A lot of the reasons used for Stallworth were terms like winner, work ethic, dedication...Hines Ward has all that plus he owns a ton of records on the Pittsburgh Steelers, in essence he has broken a lot of those records on his own. 1st ballot, I doubt it. but I would vote Ward in because he embodies what you look for in a leader. He's a welcome site in an era of "me me me" and I think the voters will find it easy to vote for him especially with the 2 rings he owns. If he can have another strong year this season with BenR out for 4-6 games and Leftmanwich starting a good 1/3 of the season...hats off for sure. Ward is approaching 1,000 receptions which will also aid in him being elected to the Pro Football HoF.

Just curious... did you read through the thread? Most of these arguments have been discussed thoroughly.Not sure how Swann & Stallworth being in the HOF matters to this discussion. And they are arguably among the few least deserving WRs (or HOFers at all positions) in the HOF. If anything, the high number of Steelers in the HOF may hurt future borderline candidates, since there will be those who feel that the Steelers already have enough/too much representation.As for the winner, work ethic, dedication, blocking, leadership, not "me-focused", and "winner" arguments, why do some people seem so convinced that all of these things will influence voters for the HOF when they apparently did not (sufficiently) influence All Pro and Pro Bowl selections?As for 1000 receptions, that is great. But the problem is that too many of his peers and other recent era WRs will have much better statistics. And that is really Ward's biggest problem.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Ward also plays on a team that has 2 HoF WRs already in Canton. A lot of the reasons used for Stallworth were terms like winner, work ethic, dedication...Hines Ward has all that plus he owns a ton of records on the Pittsburgh Steelers, in essence he has broken a lot of those records on his own. 1st ballot, I doubt it. but I would vote Ward in because he embodies what you look for in a leader. He's a welcome site in an era of "me me me" and I think the voters will find it easy to vote for him especially with the 2 rings he owns. If he can have another strong year this season with BenR out for 4-6 games and Leftmanwich starting a good 1/3 of the season...hats off for sure. Ward is approaching 1,000 receptions which will also aid in him being elected to the Pro Football HoF.

Just curious... did you read through the thread? Most of these arguments have been discussed thoroughly.Not sure how Swann & Stallworth being in the HOF matters to this discussion. And they are arguably among the few least deserving WRs (or HOFers at all positions) in the HOF. If anything, the high number of Steelers in the HOF may hurt future borderline candidates, since there will be those who feel that the Steelers already have enough/too much representation.As for the winner, work ethic, dedication, blocking, leadership, not "me-focused", and "winner" arguments, why do some people seem so convinced that all of these things will influence voters for the HOF when they apparently did not (sufficiently) influence All Pro and Pro Bowl selections?As for 1000 receptions, that is great. But the problem is that too many of his peers and other recent era WRs will have much better statistics. And that is really Ward's biggest problem.

Hi JWB,Do you ever "listen" to what some of the HoF voters speak about? Mike Wilbon is a HoF voter believe it or not and I bet I can speak for both of us in saying "We think we know more about football than Mike Wilbon"...do you understand what I'm getting at? Your post is what you would say if you were in front of the HoF voters, but these guys are mostly older guys meaning North of the age of 40 let's say, and they do think in some of the terms I posted. I don't believe that Pittsburgh having so many in the HoF hurts Ward at all. Why do you think the Steelers' organization came down on BenR so harshly? The league and media respect that team immensely or have thru the Chuck Noll and Bill Cowher eras. We can have different views, that's fine. This thread is about 4-5 years old and running, but you seem to think I am way off in left field just because others discussed and dismantled some of what I posted. Just because someone writes something doesn't mean it's correct. And I would say the same about my posts. They are opinions. Example...Tony Dungy was hotly debated and I am one of the 1st that feels he will be voted 1st ballot HoF, no doubt in my mind. I'll be shocked if it takes longer than that. We had some posters that don't think he should even be in the HoF. Which is right? it's all opinions I guess. Cheers

 

[Tau837]

Ward also plays on a team that has 2 HoF WRs already in Canton. A lot of the reasons used for Stallworth were terms like winner, work ethic, dedication...Hines Ward has all that plus he owns a ton of records on the Pittsburgh Steelers, in essence he has broken a lot of those records on his own. 1st ballot, I doubt it. but I would vote Ward in because he embodies what you look for in a leader. He's a welcome site in an era of "me me me" and I think the voters will find it easy to vote for him especially with the 2 rings he owns. If he can have another strong year this season with BenR out for 4-6 games and Leftmanwich starting a good 1/3 of the season...hats off for sure. Ward is approaching 1,000 receptions which will also aid in him being elected to the Pro Football HoF.

Just curious... did you read through the thread? Most of these arguments have been discussed thoroughly.Not sure how Swann & Stallworth being in the HOF matters to this discussion. And they are arguably among the few least deserving WRs (or HOFers at all positions) in the HOF. If anything, the high number of Steelers in the HOF may hurt future borderline candidates, since there will be those who feel that the Steelers already have enough/too much representation.As for the winner, work ethic, dedication, blocking, leadership, not "me-focused", and "winner" arguments, why do some people seem so convinced that all of these things will influence voters for the HOF when they apparently did not (sufficiently) influence All Pro and Pro Bowl selections?As for 1000 receptions, that is great. But the problem is that too many of his peers and other recent era WRs will have much better statistics. And that is really Ward's biggest problem.

Hi JWB,Do you ever "listen" to what some of the HoF voters speak about? Mike Wilbon is a HoF voter believe it or not and I bet I can speak for both of us in saying "We think we know more about football than Mike Wilbon"...do you understand what I'm getting at? Your post is what you would say if you were in front of the HoF voters, but these guys are mostly older guys meaning North of the age of 40 let's say, and they do think in some of the terms I posted. I don't believe that Pittsburgh having so many in the HoF hurts Ward at all. Why do you think the Steelers' organization came down on BenR so harshly? The league and media respect that team immensely or have thru the Chuck Noll and Bill Cowher eras. We can have different views, that's fine. This thread is about 4-5 years old and running, but you seem to think I am way off in left field just because others discussed and dismantled some of what I posted. Just because someone writes something doesn't mean it's correct. And I would say the same about my posts. They are opinions. Example...Tony Dungy was hotly debated and I am one of the 1st that feels he will be voted 1st ballot HoF, no doubt in my mind. I'll be shocked if it takes longer than that. We had some posters that don't think he should even be in the HoF. Which is right? it's all opinions I guess. Cheers

Of course it's all opinions. No offense intended, just asking, since the thread was recently bumped but has been running for years. Two questions on this stuff:1. Do you think there is a substantial difference between the football knowledge, acumen, and perspective of those voting for the HOF and those voting for annual honors/awards like All Pro selections? I don't see why Ward will get certain kinds of credit in a HOF discussion that he hasn't (apparently) gotten for annual honors/awards, but that has been asserted often by his supporters.2. 4 WRs have been inducted in the past 4 classes, and Brown and Carter seem likely to get in soon, and Reed has a chance. And by the time Ward is eligible, Bruce, Moss, Owens, Harrison, and Holt will all either be eligible or within a year or two of becoming eligible. That is a lot of high quality WRs meriting at least strong consideration over a period of 15 years or so, especially considering that in the 44 HOF classes from 1963 to 2006, only 17 WRs were inducted. Do you think they all get in? If not, which ones do you think Ward beats out for HOF induction?

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Of course it's all opinions. No offense intended, just asking, since the thread was recently bumped but has been running for years. Two questions on this stuff:1. Do you think there is a substantial difference between the football knowledge, acumen, and perspective of those voting for the HOF and those voting for annual honors/awards like All Pro selections? I don't see why Ward will get certain kinds of credit in a HOF discussion that he hasn't (apparently) gotten for annual honors/awards, but that has been asserted often by his supporters.2. 4 WRs have been inducted in the past 4 classes, and Brown and Carter seem likely to get in soon, and Reed has a chance. And by the time Ward is eligible, Bruce, Moss, Owens, Harrison, and Holt will all either be eligible or within a year or two of becoming eligible. That is a lot of high quality WRs meriting at least strong consideration over a period of 15 years or so, especially considering that in the 44 HOF classes from 1963 to 2006, only 17 WRs were inducted. Do you think they all get in? If not, which ones do you think Ward beats out for HOF induction?

1st of all, great post, and I'm being very honest in saying I am biased out the ying yang when it comes to Hines Ward so my opinion should be taken with a grain of salt. I'm not even a Steelers fan but I just enjoy the way he goes about the game. To your 1st question, yes I do think that voters get caught up in seasons along the way but then look back at the overall body of work and Hines Ward over the next 2-3 seasons is going to be mentioned a lot as a future HoF player...I can hear Dan Dierdorf already praising him now To go to the 2nd part, let's project out. Ward turned 34 this past March, likely has 2-3 more years. Currently he is 12th on the all time list for receptions but he is going to end up with about 1,100+ which will slide him ahead of Marvin Harrison into number 2 all time. Looking around him, I only see Randy Moss as a guy that will move ahead of him or stay ahead of him so Ward has a solid chance to end up #3 all time in receptions, top5 almost a lock. He probably won't hit 95 again but I'm not totally sold on the other WRs that Pitt has right now. Ward should be able to gather up 200-225 balls over the next 3 seasons...I could be off but even give him 70 balls avg for the next 3 years and he makes it past Harrison. He's probably gonna make top10 or thereabout for receiving yds and Tds as well. Football is not Baseball but even a hard nosed stat guy would be hard pressed to not vote for Ward's accomplishments. Then you add in 2 rings and the fact he is a blue collar lunch pail type of guy and you are going to see many voters, especially the older ones over the age of 50 that want to put this guy into the HoF. Even though TO is probably the best WR I have ever seen when he was in his prime, the atitude makes it hard for voters to want to put him in the HoF. It's easier for them to vote for a good guy like Ward who is decorated, was voted to 4 straight Pro Bowls from 2001-2004, and has 2 SB rings to boot. Plus Pittsburgh is not known as a pass 1st team which will probably work in his favor as well. If I were a HoF voter, I would vote for Ward. Perhaps not 1st ballot depending on who was eligible but he certainly is going to garner a lot of attention and votes IMHO. Holt is going to have to wait i think to get voted in. TO might unfortunately have to wait as well just because of his atitude.