Hines Ward - 1st ballot Hall of Famer? (2 Viewers)

[bbuster]

Based on the WR's that haven't made it in yet, I would say he has a long wait.

 

[The_Man]

Two things - if Denver and Jacksonsville rushed for more yards per game, then why don't we have to include Rod Smith and Jimmy Smith in the discussion for "greatest blocking WR"? Is it because they're not Steelers? Rod Smith also earned 2 Super Bowl titles.

And, really? This guy is saying that the Steelers yard per rush average had anything to do with Ward this year? Maybe it had something to do with him only being on the field in passing situations this year, when every team's ypc average goes up because defenses are happy to allow a draw to gain 8 yards on third-and-12.

The real question, it seems, is whether Rod Smith is a first ballot Hall of Famer?Player........ Yrs...Rec...100Rec...Yds...1000Yd...TD...10TD...Rec/g...Yds/g...TD/g...SB Wins...Probowls

Hines Ward.. 14...1000.....1.......12083.....6........85......3........4.60......55.7.....0.39.......2............4...

Rod Smith.... 12....849.....2.......11389.....8.........68......2.......4.63......62.2......0.37......2............3...

It seems the primary difference between Ward and Smith - aside from Ward being the best blocking WR ever - is that Ward played two more seasons. On a per game basis, the two players are nearly identical, and they reached all of the same career highlights (100 recs, 1000 yards, 10 TDs).

I have brought up Smith as a legit HOF candidate for years, but for some reason he gets summarily dismissed without much fanfare or discussion.

Funny that you admit that with these two players being pretty equal, and in the same breath you dismiss Ward.

More to the point, I think a thread about Rod Smith being a 1st ballot Hall of Famer would be one page long, with the idea summarily dismissed. But with Ward, the debate rages on and on.I've said all along that his career doesn't merit inclusion, but that he will ultimately get in via the Veterans Committee, where his reputation will loom larger than his actual accomplishments.

To that point, I think it's absurd that Chris Hanburger got in the Hall of Fame last year. A very good player, but one of the best LBs in the history or the NFL? Not even close.

 

[sn0mm1s]

To that point, I think it's absurd that Chris Hanburger got in the Hall of Fame last year. A very good player, but one of the best LBs in the history or the NFL? Not even close.

Heh - don't get me started on Floyd Little.

 

[Godsbrother]

True but if I were a rookie WR coming into the NFL and was told at the end of my career I could have the accomplishments and reputation of either Hines Ward or Randy Moss I would choose Ward's career.

LOL

Laugh all you want but every player in the NFL wants a SB ring -- Ward has 2, a SB MVP trophy and the reputation of being a hard nose over achiever. Moss has/had all of the talent in the world and scored a boatload of TDs but he has no championships and has the reputation of an $$$hole and guy who only played when he wanted to. Moss is the better receiver but will be remembered as a jerk.If you read my posts you will see that I am on the fence as to whether or not Ward belongs in the HoF at all but he was a damn good WR and the face of a highly successful franchise. The media loves him so he definitely has a shot at the HoF though it won't be on the first ballot.

 

[Copeman]

Coming from a "peer", who also said Ward was "dirty":

Bengals’ Chris Crocker glad to see “dirty player” Hines Ward retire

Posted by Michael David Smith on March 21, 2012, 6:44 AM EDT

Bengals safety Chris Crocker will not be sending a bouquet to longtime Steelers receiver Hines Ward, who announced his retirement on Tuesday.

Crocker played against Ward many times and told Bengals.com that he doesn’t appreciate the way Ward would blindside vulnerable opponents with hard hits that go beyond the bounds of fair play.

“He tried to end people’s careers and that’s not the way the game is supposed to be played,” Crocker said.

Crocker said Ward punched him in the face during a 2009 game, and many Bengals still have animosity toward Ward for the brutal block he laid on Cincinnati linebacker Keith Rivers in 2008, breaking Rivers’ jaw.

“Stuff like that, it’s just not right,” Crocker said. “And I’m not the only guy that thinks it.”

Having said all that, Crocker says Ward is one of the best receivers he ever played against and should be inducted in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

“He’s probably the first receiver to make blocking such a big part of his game; he was an all-around receiver,” Crocker said. “He was a dirty player, but he made a lot of plays. They used him perfectly to suit his abilities and he was a big-time player for them. Some people might think of him as a borderline Hall of Famer, but I think the fact he helped them win two Super Bowls and all the things he did for that team make him deserving.”

A player can be great and dirty, and in Crocker’s view, Ward was both.

 

[Chase Stuart]

DD has data back to 2002; from 2002-2005, Hines Ward was #8 in the league in targets with 537. Holt happened to be #1 with 634, but Ward was ahead of guys like Joe Horn, TO, Rod Smith, Jimmy Smith, and Isaac Bruce. He had plenty of opportunities.

One problem with normalizing this data is that it ignores the fact that the skills of the players in question may have contributed to the disparity in opportunity being addressed.That is, Holt may have gotten more targets than Ward because Holt's talent led the Rams to pass more often than they would have otherwise, while Ward may have gotten fewer targets than Ward in part because he wasn't as talented a receiver and was a great blocking WR, thus encouraging the Steelers to run more than they might have otherwise.Most would agree that the Rams were clearly committed to passing a lot when Holt was drafted, while the Steelers were clearly more focused on winning with ball control and defense when Ward was drafted. But that could have led directly to the Rams drafting Holt, because he fit so well into their passing oriented attack, and the Steelers drafting Ward, because he fit their offense so well due to his all around skills. Again, this would be evidence that their individual skills ultimately contributed to putting them in the situation that led to more opportunity for Holt than Ward.Suppose the Steelers had drafted Randy Moss, and he played for them instead of the Vikings to start his career. Does anyone think they would not have had more pass attempts over those years? Would the Steelers not have taken full advantage of his obvious amazing talent?Bottom line, one of the reasons Ward didn't get more targets is because he didn't earn/warrant more; one reason Holt got more targets is because he did earn/warrant them. This is yet another reason to focus on what they did, rather than what they might have done if things were different.

I'm enjoying the discussion, so I'll continue. To me this is more about theory than Ward because I don't view him as a HOFer, but:1) Targets are indicators of quality. On any given team, the player with the most targets is generally the best receiver. If you look at a random team, the WR with the 2nd most targets is probably much better than the WR with the 4th most targets. So looking at yards per target is interesting but it doesn't tell us anything about quality. To me YPT is similar to YPC in that it's a descriptive stat which adds color to a player's ability but does not define his true worth.2) It wasn't Ward's lack of talent that led Pittsburgh to run more frequently; it was the fact that they had the #1 defense in the league. They had a first round bye multiple times with Ward around and won something like 90% of their games for a stretch whenever Ben and Polamalu were both active. I think you could be right in other situations, but in Pittsburgh, the causation arrow was clear to me. They were running to end games, not because they lacked faith in their passing attack. In Ward's case, he earned a significant portion of Pittsburgh's targets, and that's the fairer way to evaluate him. If the Steelers had Moss I don't think we see much of an uptick in pass attempts; maybe they pass even less, as a few deep bombs to Moss could have put several games on ice very early.

 

[David Yudkin]

In Ward's case, he earned a significant portion of Pittsburgh's targets, and that's the fairer way to evaluate him. If the Steelers had Moss I don't think we see much of an uptick in pass attempts; maybe they pass even less, as a few deep bombs to Moss could have put several games on ice very early.

Or Moss could have done more with the same number of targets, while opening up the running game even more by taking guys out of the box, and potentially improving the ypc for the running backs similar to (if not more than) what Ward did. If Moss was on the straight and narrow and did not act like a prima donna, I would have expected the Steelers offense and overall record to have been even better. But that's impossible to prove or disprove, and we certainly will never know what could have happened.

 

[Copeman]

In Ward's case, he earned a significant portion of Pittsburgh's targets, and that's the fairer way to evaluate him. If the Steelers had Moss I don't think we see much of an uptick in pass attempts; maybe they pass even less, as a few deep bombs to Moss could have put several games on ice very early.

Or Moss could have done more with the same number of targets, while opening up the running game even more by taking guys out of the box, and potentially improving the ypc for the running backs similar to (if not more than) what Ward did. If Moss was on the straight and narrow and did not act like a prima donna, I would have expected the Steelers offense and overall record to have been even better. But that's impossible to prove or disprove, and we certainly will never know what could have happened.

The Steelers have had Wallace for a few years, and we all know what he does to defenses (defenses aware, double coverage, etc..). He didn't/hasn't helped to open up much of a running game for the Steelers.ETA: in fact I think it's safe to say the Steelers running game was better without a WR that can stretch the field.

 

[David Yudkin]

In Ward's case, he earned a significant portion of Pittsburgh's targets, and that's the fairer way to evaluate him. If the Steelers had Moss I don't think we see much of an uptick in pass attempts; maybe they pass even less, as a few deep bombs to Moss could have put several games on ice very early.

Or Moss could have done more with the same number of targets, while opening up the running game even more by taking guys out of the box, and potentially improving the ypc for the running backs similar to (if not more than) what Ward did. If Moss was on the straight and narrow and did not act like a prima donna, I would have expected the Steelers offense and overall record to have been even better. But that's impossible to prove or disprove, and we certainly will never know what could have happened.

The Steelers have had Wallace for a few years, and we all know what he does to defenses (defenses aware, double coverage, etc..). He didn't/hasn't helped to open up much of a running game for the Steelers.ETA: in fact I think it's safe to say the Steelers running game was better without a WR that can stretch the field.

Maybe if PIT could field a healthy offensive line they would have had more success running the ball.

 

[Copeman]

In Ward's case, he earned a significant portion of Pittsburgh's targets, and that's the fairer way to evaluate him. If the Steelers had Moss I don't think we see much of an uptick in pass attempts; maybe they pass even less, as a few deep bombs to Moss could have put several games on ice very early.

Or Moss could have done more with the same number of targets, while opening up the running game even more by taking guys out of the box, and potentially improving the ypc for the running backs similar to (if not more than) what Ward did. If Moss was on the straight and narrow and did not act like a prima donna, I would have expected the Steelers offense and overall record to have been even better. But that's impossible to prove or disprove, and we certainly will never know what could have happened.

The Steelers have had Wallace for a few years, and we all know what he does to defenses (defenses aware, double coverage, etc..). He didn't/hasn't helped to open up much of a running game for the Steelers.ETA: in fact I think it's safe to say the Steelers running game was better without a WR that can stretch the field.

Maybe if PIT could field a healthy offensive line they would have had more success running the ball.

I wasn't just talking about the past couple years. In fact, before Wallace got to Pittsburgh, their line was healthy, they had no deep threat that opened up the field (ala Wallace) and had a great running game for years. I don't think I have to tell you this. And the one constant? Good blocking WR's, led by none other than...

 

[David Yudkin]

I wasn't just talking about the past couple years. In fact, before Wallace got to Pittsburgh, their line was healthy, they had no deep threat that opened up the field (ala Wallace) and had a great running game for years. I don't think I have to tell you this. And the one constant? Good blocking WR's, led by none other than...

I guess it depends on how you look at things. Between Buress, Holmes, Wallace, and Brown, the Steelers most years had a decent to good to very good year from a WR other than Ward. Certainly a couple of years they had no one else. But in those years with a decent second receiving or deep threat, PIT had 4 years with 2100+ rushing yards (high of 2700) and 3 others of 1900+ yards. Sounds like the passing game helped the running game and vice versa. That accounts for half of Ward's playing career. Not sure which came first, the chicken or the egg.

 

[cvnpoka]

True but if I were a rookie WR coming into the NFL and was told at the end of my career I could have the accomplishments and reputation of either Hines Ward or Randy Moss I would choose Ward's career.

LOL

Laugh all you want but every player in the NFL wants a SB ring -- Ward has 2, a SB MVP trophy and the reputation of being a hard nose over achiever. Moss has/had all of the talent in the world and scored a boatload of TDs but he has no championships and has the reputation of an $$$hole and guy who only played when he wanted to. Moss is the better receiver but will be remembered as a jerk.If you read my posts you will see that I am on the fence as to whether or not Ward belongs in the HoF at all but he was a damn good WR and the face of a highly successful franchise. The media loves him so he definitely has a shot at the HoF though it won't be on the first ballot.

such a specious argument. you are downplaying moss's accomplishments while overrating ward's. then you are transposing those values on others.ill take a simpler viewpoint. players want to dominate and be the best rather than be a cog. no, that doesnt mean players dont care about winning or prefer pursuing personal goal at the expense of winning. im just saying that players would prefer to go down in history as a transcendent talent and individual achiever than an overachiever type.do players prefer dan marino's career or aikman? marcus allen or tomlinson? joe dumars or charles barkley? tony parker or karl malone?

 

[cobalt_27]

True but if I were a rookie WR coming into the NFL and was told at the end of my career I could have the accomplishments and reputation of either Hines Ward or Randy Moss I would choose Ward's career.

LOL

Laugh all you want but every player in the NFL wants a SB ring -- Ward has 2, a SB MVP trophy and the reputation of being a hard nose over achiever. Moss has/had all of the talent in the world and scored a boatload of TDs but he has no championships and has the reputation of an $$$hole and guy who only played when he wanted to. Moss is the better receiver but will be remembered as a jerk.If you read my posts you will see that I am on the fence as to whether or not Ward belongs in the HoF at all but he was a damn good WR and the face of a highly successful franchise. The media loves him so he definitely has a shot at the HoF though it won't be on the first ballot.

such a specious argument. you are downplaying moss's accomplishments while overrating ward's. then you are transposing those values on others.ill take a simpler viewpoint. players want to dominate and be the best rather than be a cog. no, that doesnt mean players dont care about winning or prefer pursuing personal goal at the expense of winning. im just saying that players would prefer to go down in history as a transcendent talent and individual achiever than an overachiever type.do players prefer dan marino's career or aikman? marcus allen or tomlinson? joe dumars or charles barkley? tony parker or karl malone?

Aikman not the best example. I'd want aikman's career over marino's. Trent Dilfer might be the better comparison. And this gets to the silliness of Steeler fans' support of Ward. Nice career. Contributing piece to the success of team. Unequivocally not a HOFer.

 

[cvnpoka]

i was trying to find hofers that were super bowl mvps and comparing them to near goats. i am surprised if ppl prefer aikman to marino. i would prefer to be arguably the best ever than aikman.

 

[CalBear]

1) Targets are indicators of quality. On any given team, the player with the most targets is generally the best receiver. If you look at a random team, the WR with the 2nd most targets is probably much better than the WR with the 4th most targets. So looking at yards per target is interesting but it doesn't tell us anything about quality. To me YPT is similar to YPC in that it's a descriptive stat which adds color to a player's ability but does not define his true worth.2) It wasn't Ward's lack of talent that led Pittsburgh to run more frequently; it was the fact that they had the #1 defense in the league. They had a first round bye multiple times with Ward around and won something like 90% of their games for a stretch whenever Ben and Polamalu were both active. I think you could be right in other situations, but in Pittsburgh, the causation arrow was clear to me. They were running to end games, not because they lacked faith in their passing attack. In Ward's case, he earned a significant portion of Pittsburgh's targets, and that's the fairer way to evaluate him. If the Steelers had Moss I don't think we see much of an uptick in pass attempts; maybe they pass even less, as a few deep bombs to Moss could have put several games on ice very early.

Your statements here are contradictory. If targets are indicators of quality, Randy Moss would get a lot more targets than Hines Ward playing on the Steelers, because Randy Moss is a much better receiver. A WR's percentage of team targets relative to other WRs is probably an indicator of relative talent within the team, but Ward on the Steelers getting 120 targets vs. Moss on the Patriots getting 120 targets doesn't indicate that Ward is comparable to Moss.

 

[cvnpoka]

http://www.vice.com/read/hines-ward-is-a-ticking-time-bomb

 

[kupcho1]

The NFL network talking heads (e.g., Sapp) were already banging the HOF drum this morning. Like it or not, Hines will be appearing in Canton. It might not be in 5 years, but it will be happening.

 

[Godsbrother]

True but if I were a rookie WR coming into the NFL and was told at the end of my career I could have the accomplishments and reputation of either Hines Ward or Randy Moss I would choose Ward's career.

LOL

Laugh all you want but every player in the NFL wants a SB ring -- Ward has 2, a SB MVP trophy and the reputation of being a hard nose over achiever. Moss has/had all of the talent in the world and scored a boatload of TDs but he has no championships and has the reputation of an $$$hole and guy who only played when he wanted to. Moss is the better receiver but will be remembered as a jerk.If you read my posts you will see that I am on the fence as to whether or not Ward belongs in the HoF at all but he was a damn good WR and the face of a highly successful franchise. The media loves him so he definitely has a shot at the HoF though it won't be on the first ballot.

such a specious argument. you are downplaying moss's accomplishments while overrating ward's. then you are transposing those values on others.ill take a simpler viewpoint. players want to dominate and be the best rather than be a cog. no, that doesnt mean players dont care about winning or prefer pursuing personal goal at the expense of winning. im just saying that players would prefer to go down in history as a transcendent talent and individual achiever than an overachiever type.do players prefer dan marino's career or aikman? marcus allen or tomlinson? joe dumars or charles barkley? tony parker or karl malone?

Aikman not the best example. I'd want aikman's career over marino's. Trent Dilfer might be the better comparison. And this gets to the silliness of Steeler fans' support of Ward. Nice career. Contributing piece to the success of team. Unequivocally not a HOFer.

Ward is a SB MVP that finishes his career at number 8 all-time at his position despite the fact that he played for a mostly-running team and had the likes of Kordell Stewart, Mike Tomczak, Kent Graham and Tommy Maddox throwing to him for much of his career.You obviously don't think much of Ward's accomplishments but comparing him to Trent Dilfer is ridiculous.

 

[cobalt_27]

I didn't compare him to dilfer. I think the point of that discussion was how there is a tendency to over value SB trophies or lack thereof when evaluating an individual player's contributions to the game and worthiness or unworthiness to the hall of fame.

 

[Copeman]

True but if I were a rookie WR coming into the NFL and was told at the end of my career I could have the accomplishments and reputation of either Hines Ward or Randy Moss I would choose Ward's career.

LOL

Laugh all you want but every player in the NFL wants a SB ring -- Ward has 2, a SB MVP trophy and the reputation of being a hard nose over achiever. Moss has/had all of the talent in the world and scored a boatload of TDs but he has no championships and has the reputation of an $$$hole and guy who only played when he wanted to. Moss is the better receiver but will be remembered as a jerk.

If you read my posts you will see that I am on the fence as to whether or not Ward belongs in the HoF at all but he was a damn good WR and the face of a highly successful franchise. The media loves him so he definitely has a shot at the HoF though it won't be on the first ballot.

such a specious argument. you are downplaying moss's accomplishments while overrating ward's. then you are transposing those values on others.ill take a simpler viewpoint. players want to dominate and be the best rather than be a cog. no, that doesnt mean players dont care about winning or prefer pursuing personal goal at the expense of winning. im just saying that players would prefer to go down in history as a transcendent talent and individual achiever than an overachiever type.

do players prefer dan marino's career or aikman? marcus allen or tomlinson? joe dumars or charles barkley? tony parker or karl malone?

Aikman not the best example. I'd want aikman's career over marino's. Trent Dilfer might be the better comparison. And this gets to the silliness of Steeler fans' support of Ward. Nice career. Contributing piece to the success of team. Unequivocally not a HOFer.

Says who? You? You must not be keeping up with what the sporswriters and sports media type people have been saying, along with the direct quotes from many of them in this thread supporting at least the notion that Ward belongs in the HoF, or at the very least in the discussion. Unequivocally? Riiiight.

 

[Godsbrother]

I didn't compare him to dilfer. I think the point of that discussion was how there is a tendency to over value SB trophies or lack thereof when evaluating an individual player's contributions to the game and worthiness or unworthiness to the hall of fame.

You may be right but it is definitely a factor. Aikman's passing numbers (27th all time) isn't what landed him in the HoF.Ward's numbers are very good (8th all time) and he was a big part of a team that went to 6 AFC Championships, 3 Super Bowls, Won 2 championships and he was a SB MVP. He also has the reputation of being one of the most physical WRs to play the game and is well liked by the media.Whether or not he is HoF worthy is certainly debatable but I think his accomplishments are more comparable to Aikman than Dilfer.

 

[CalBear]

I didn't compare him to dilfer. I think the point of that discussion was how there is a tendency to over value SB trophies or lack thereof when evaluating an individual player's contributions to the game and worthiness or unworthiness to the hall of fame.

You may be right but it is definitely a factor. Aikman's passing numbers (27th all time) isn't what landed him in the HoF.Ward's numbers are very good (8th all time) and he was a big part of a team that went to 6 AFC Championships, 3 Super Bowls, Won 2 championships and he was a SB MVP. He also has the reputation of being one of the most physical WRs to play the game and is well liked by the media.Whether or not he is HoF worthy is certainly debatable but I think his accomplishments are more comparable to Aikman than Dilfer.

Please, Ward is not "8th all-time" in any meaningful statistic. Receptions are a compiler stat. Drew Bledsoe is #6 all-time in attempts and completions, but that doesn't mean he's HOF-worthy.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Ward is a SB MVP that finishes his career at number 8 all-time at his position despite the fact that he played for a mostly-running team and had the likes of Kordell Stewart, Mike Tomczak, Kent Graham and Tommy Maddox throwing to him for much of his career.

Ward had Roethlisberger, a probable Hall of Fame QB, throwing to him for 8 of his 14 NFL seasons. Generational peers like Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Torry Holt and Isaac Bruce did not have the ball thrown to them for the MAJORITY of their careers by a probable HOF QB. Moss, Holt and Bruce all had that luxury for 3-4 seasons; Owens had Steve Young very early in his career, but that's it.And what's funny is, you can knock Tommy Maddox, but Ward's two best seasons came with Maddox, not Roethlisberger.

 

[Godsbrother]

Ward is a SB MVP that finishes his career at number 8 all-time at his position despite the fact that he played for a mostly-running team and had the likes of Kordell Stewart, Mike Tomczak, Kent Graham and Tommy Maddox throwing to him for much of his career.

Ward had Roethlisberger, a probable Hall of Fame QB, throwing to him for 8 of his 14 NFL seasons. Generational peers like Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Torry Holt and Isaac Bruce did not have the ball thrown to them for the MAJORITY of their careers by a probable HOF QB. Moss, Holt and Bruce all had that luxury for 3-4 seasons; Owens had Steve Young very early in his career, but that's it.And what's funny is, you can knock Tommy Maddox, but Ward's two best seasons came with Maddox, not Roethlisberger.

Not knocking Maddox at all but a Pro-bowl QB he was not. And many here in the Shark Pool consider Roethlisberger nothing more than a game manager whose success has been due to the great Steelers defense.

 

[Godsbrother]

I didn't compare him to dilfer. I think the point of that discussion was how there is a tendency to over value SB trophies or lack thereof when evaluating an individual player's contributions to the game and worthiness or unworthiness to the hall of fame.

You may be right but it is definitely a factor. Aikman's passing numbers (27th all time) isn't what landed him in the HoF.Ward's numbers are very good (8th all time) and he was a big part of a team that went to 6 AFC Championships, 3 Super Bowls, Won 2 championships and he was a SB MVP. He also has the reputation of being one of the most physical WRs to play the game and is well liked by the media.Whether or not he is HoF worthy is certainly debatable but I think his accomplishments are more comparable to Aikman than Dilfer.

Please, Ward is not "8th all-time" in any meaningful statistic. Receptions are a compiler stat. Drew Bledsoe is #6 all-time in attempts and completions, but that doesn't mean he's HOF-worthy.

If 10,000 receptions is meaningless and such an easy feat then have so few accomplished it? You guys crack me up.

 

[CalBear]

I didn't compare him to dilfer. I think the point of that discussion was how there is a tendency to over value SB trophies or lack thereof when evaluating an individual player's contributions to the game and worthiness or unworthiness to the hall of fame.

You may be right but it is definitely a factor. Aikman's passing numbers (27th all time) isn't what landed him in the HoF.Ward's numbers are very good (8th all time) and he was a big part of a team that went to 6 AFC Championships, 3 Super Bowls, Won 2 championships and he was a SB MVP. He also has the reputation of being one of the most physical WRs to play the game and is well liked by the media.Whether or not he is HoF worthy is certainly debatable but I think his accomplishments are more comparable to Aikman than Dilfer.

Please, Ward is not "8th all-time" in any meaningful statistic. Receptions are a compiler stat. Drew Bledsoe is #6 all-time in attempts and completions, but that doesn't mean he's HOF-worthy.

If 10,000 receptions is meaningless and such an easy feat then have so few accomplished it? You guys crack me up.

Longevity is not a criterion for entry into the Hall of Fame. By the time Ward is eligible for HOF induction he will have been passed by some number of:Wayne (862)Ochocinco (766)Boldin (707)A.Johnson (706)S.Smith (699)Witten (696)Fitzgerald (693)Let's say three of those guys make it; should they all get in the HOF, too? Because all their other stats will be way better than Ward's.3700 completions is more rare than 1000 receptions, but both Bledsoe and Vinny Testaverde managed that. Hall of Famers?

 

[Ghost Rider]

Ward is a SB MVP that finishes his career at number 8 all-time at his position despite the fact that he played for a mostly-running team and had the likes of Kordell Stewart, Mike Tomczak, Kent Graham and Tommy Maddox throwing to him for much of his career.

Ward had Roethlisberger, a probable Hall of Fame QB, throwing to him for 8 of his 14 NFL seasons. Generational peers like Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Torry Holt and Isaac Bruce did not have the ball thrown to them for the MAJORITY of their careers by a probable HOF QB. Moss, Holt and Bruce all had that luxury for 3-4 seasons; Owens had Steve Young very early in his career, but that's it.And what's funny is, you can knock Tommy Maddox, but Ward's two best seasons came with Maddox, not Roethlisberger.

Not knocking Maddox at all but a Pro-bowl QB he was not. And many here in the Shark Pool consider Roethlisberger nothing more than a game manager whose success has been due to the great Steelers defense.

So now you are dismissing your own QB because of some misconception that a few dopes in the SP have? Really?

 

[Wadsworth]

I didn't compare him to dilfer. I think the point of that discussion was how there is a tendency to over value SB trophies or lack thereof when evaluating an individual player's contributions to the game and worthiness or unworthiness to the hall of fame.

You may be right but it is definitely a factor. Aikman's passing numbers (27th all time) isn't what landed him in the HoF.Ward's numbers are very good (8th all time) and he was a big part of a team that went to 6 AFC Championships, 3 Super Bowls, Won 2 championships and he was a SB MVP. He also has the reputation of being one of the most physical WRs to play the game and is well liked by the media.Whether or not he is HoF worthy is certainly debatable but I think his accomplishments are more comparable to Aikman than Dilfer.

Please, Ward is not "8th all-time" in any meaningful statistic. Receptions are a compiler stat. Drew Bledsoe is #6 all-time in attempts and completions, but that doesn't mean he's HOF-worthy.

If 10,000 receptions is meaningless and such an easy feat then have so few accomplished it? You guys crack me up.

It is far from meaningless, it is a huge accomplishment, and makes him worth considering for the Hall of Fame.

 

[Godsbrother]

Ward is a SB MVP that finishes his career at number 8 all-time at his position despite the fact that he played for a mostly-running team and had the likes of Kordell Stewart, Mike Tomczak, Kent Graham and Tommy Maddox throwing to him for much of his career.

Ward had Roethlisberger, a probable Hall of Fame QB, throwing to him for 8 of his 14 NFL seasons. Generational peers like Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Torry Holt and Isaac Bruce did not have the ball thrown to them for the MAJORITY of their careers by a probable HOF QB. Moss, Holt and Bruce all had that luxury for 3-4 seasons; Owens had Steve Young very early in his career, but that's it.And what's funny is, you can knock Tommy Maddox, but Ward's two best seasons came with Maddox, not Roethlisberger.

Not knocking Maddox at all but a Pro-bowl QB he was not. And many here in the Shark Pool consider Roethlisberger nothing more than a game manager whose success has been due to the great Steelers defense.

So now you are dismissing your own QB because of some misconception that a few dopes in the SP have? Really?

Nahhh, just having some fun with ya, Ghost!

 

[Godsbrother]

I didn't compare him to dilfer. I think the point of that discussion was how there is a tendency to over value SB trophies or lack thereof when evaluating an individual player's contributions to the game and worthiness or unworthiness to the hall of fame.

You may be right but it is definitely a factor. Aikman's passing numbers (27th all time) isn't what landed him in the HoF.Ward's numbers are very good (8th all time) and he was a big part of a team that went to 6 AFC Championships, 3 Super Bowls, Won 2 championships and he was a SB MVP. He also has the reputation of being one of the most physical WRs to play the game and is well liked by the media.Whether or not he is HoF worthy is certainly debatable but I think his accomplishments are more comparable to Aikman than Dilfer.

Please, Ward is not "8th all-time" in any meaningful statistic. Receptions are a compiler stat. Drew Bledsoe is #6 all-time in attempts and completions, but that doesn't mean he's HOF-worthy.

If 10,000 receptions is meaningless and such an easy feat then have so few accomplished it? You guys crack me up.

Longevity is not a criterion for entry into the Hall of Fame. By the time Ward is eligible for HOF induction he will have been passed by some number of:Wayne (862)Ochocinco (766)Boldin (707)A.Johnson (706)S.Smith (699)Witten (696)Fitzgerald (693)Let's say three of those guys make it; should they all get in the HOF, too? Because all their other stats will be way better than Ward's.3700 completions is more rare than 1000 receptions, but both Bledsoe and Vinny Testaverde managed that. Hall of Famers?

Bledoe & Testaverde were good ballplayers that deserve credit for compiling those numbers but the HoF is supposed to about more than just stats (otherwise even have a voting committee?). Ward has the stats, won championships, was a SB MVP and was considered one of the toughest WRs to ever play the game. He is also well liked and highly regarded by the sportswriters that will be voting.All of these factors leads me to believe he may get in someday (though not 1st ballot). It won't shock me if he doesn't but he has a good chance and certainly worth consideration.

 

[The_Man]

Art Monk had to wait for 8 years - despite the fact that at various points in his career, he held the all-time NFL records for career receptions, receptions in a season, and consecutive games with a reception. And he won 3 Super Bowls. If Ward ever gets in, he'll have to wait as least as long.

 

[Wadsworth]

I didn't compare him to dilfer. I think the point of that discussion was how there is a tendency to over value SB trophies or lack thereof when evaluating an individual player's contributions to the game and worthiness or unworthiness to the hall of fame.

You may be right but it is definitely a factor. Aikman's passing numbers (27th all time) isn't what landed him in the HoF.Ward's numbers are very good (8th all time) and he was a big part of a team that went to 6 AFC Championships, 3 Super Bowls, Won 2 championships and he was a SB MVP. He also has the reputation of being one of the most physical WRs to play the game and is well liked by the media.Whether or not he is HoF worthy is certainly debatable but I think his accomplishments are more comparable to Aikman than Dilfer.

Please, Ward is not "8th all-time" in any meaningful statistic. Receptions are a compiler stat. Drew Bledsoe is #6 all-time in attempts and completions, but that doesn't mean he's HOF-worthy.

If 10,000 receptions is meaningless and such an easy feat then have so few accomplished it? You guys crack me up.

Longevity is not a criterion for entry into the Hall of Fame. By the time Ward is eligible for HOF induction he will have been passed by some number of:Wayne (862)Ochocinco (766)Boldin (707)A.Johnson (706)S.Smith (699)Witten (696)Fitzgerald (693)Let's say three of those guys make it; should they all get in the HOF, too? Because all their other stats will be way better than Ward's.3700 completions is more rare than 1000 receptions, but both Bledsoe and Vinny Testaverde managed that. Hall of Famers?

Bledoe & Testaverde were good ballplayers that deserve credit for compiling those numbers but the HoF is supposed to about more than just stats (otherwise even have a voting committee?). Ward has the stats, won championships, was a SB MVP and was considered one of the toughest WRs to ever play the game. He is also well liked and highly regarded by the sportswriters that will be voting.All of these factors leads me to believe he may get in someday (though not 1st ballot). It won't shock me if he doesn't but he has a good chance and certainly worth consideration.

If Bledsoe or Testaverde had played their entire careers with the Steelers and put up the exact same stats there would be masses of Black and Gold fans screaming that they should be in the Hall. And they would likely get in, just like Ward probably will. But that does not mean any of them deserve it.

 

[Godsbrother]

I didn't compare him to dilfer. I think the point of that discussion was how there is a tendency to over value SB trophies or lack thereof when evaluating an individual player's contributions to the game and worthiness or unworthiness to the hall of fame.

You may be right but it is definitely a factor. Aikman's passing numbers (27th all time) isn't what landed him in the HoF.Ward's numbers are very good (8th all time) and he was a big part of a team that went to 6 AFC Championships, 3 Super Bowls, Won 2 championships and he was a SB MVP. He also has the reputation of being one of the most physical WRs to play the game and is well liked by the media.Whether or not he is HoF worthy is certainly debatable but I think his accomplishments are more comparable to Aikman than Dilfer.

Please, Ward is not "8th all-time" in any meaningful statistic. Receptions are a compiler stat. Drew Bledsoe is #6 all-time in attempts and completions, but that doesn't mean he's HOF-worthy.

If 10,000 receptions is meaningless and such an easy feat then have so few accomplished it? You guys crack me up.

Longevity is not a criterion for entry into the Hall of Fame. By the time Ward is eligible for HOF induction he will have been passed by some number of:Wayne (862)Ochocinco (766)Boldin (707)A.Johnson (706)S.Smith (699)Witten (696)Fitzgerald (693)Let's say three of those guys make it; should they all get in the HOF, too? Because all their other stats will be way better than Ward's.3700 completions is more rare than 1000 receptions, but both Bledsoe and Vinny Testaverde managed that. Hall of Famers?

Bledoe & Testaverde were good ballplayers that deserve credit for compiling those numbers but the HoF is supposed to about more than just stats (otherwise even have a voting committee?). Ward has the stats, won championships, was a SB MVP and was considered one of the toughest WRs to ever play the game. He is also well liked and highly regarded by the sportswriters that will be voting.All of these factors leads me to believe he may get in someday (though not 1st ballot). It won't shock me if he doesn't but he has a good chance and certainly worth consideration.

If Bledsoe or Testaverde had played their entire careers with the Steelers and put up the exact same stats there would be masses of Black and Gold fans screaming that they should be in the Hall. And they would likely get in, just like Ward probably will. But that does not mean any of them deserve it.

Well I see we're going round and round so I'll just end by saying you don't luck yourself into the HoF. There are a number of players in the hall that you might not agree with but in the end it doesn't matter. If a player gets in the HoF then a lot of people thought they were deserving.

 

[cvnpoka]

Well I see we're going round and round so I'll just end by saying you don't luck yourself into the HoF. There are a number of players in the hall that you might not agree with but in the end it doesn't matter. If a player gets in the HoF then a lot of people thought they were deserving.

id say making the hof involves a ton of luck for all but the transcendent talent. and even those guys are lucky not to go billy sims.

 

[cobalt_27]

Art Monk had to wait for 8 years - despite the fact that at various points in his career, he held the all-time NFL records for career receptions, receptions in a season, and consecutive games with a reception. And he won 3 Super Bowls. If Ward ever gets in, he'll have to wait as least as long.

The Monk-Ward comparison is the best there is. Monk > Ward. But, both compiled. Testaverde-esque. Happened to play on superior teams than Vinny did. But, Monk didn't deserve to go to the Hall because he outlasted his peers. Same with Ward. Like Monk, Ward was rarely the best receiver on his team.Good for him that he played a long time. Put him in the Steelers Hall of Fame. Steelers fans can rejoice whatever they need to in his honor. But, let's not further continue the dilution of the Hall by the silliness of putting very good--but not great--players in. It's a terrible practice, and the Steeler fans, just by virtue of wanting to validate their own here, want Ward to get in for that reason. Not because he was an all-time great.

 

[The_Man]

The Monk-Ward comparison is the best there is. Monk > Ward. But, both compiled. Testaverde-esque. Happened to play on superior teams than Vinny did. But, Monk didn't deserve to go to the Hall because he outlasted his peers. Same with Ward. Like Monk, Ward was rarely the best receiver on his team.

Monk was on the all-80s second team with James Lofton, behind Rice and Largent. He held the NFL's all-time receptions record. He held the NFL's all-time receptions in a season record - is that compiling, since it happened in one year?His credentials dwarf Ward's. And he's a guy many people consider borderline Hall of Fame.

 

[cobalt_27]

The Monk-Ward comparison is the best there is. Monk > Ward. But, both compiled. Testaverde-esque. Happened to play on superior teams than Vinny did. But, Monk didn't deserve to go to the Hall because he outlasted his peers. Same with Ward. Like Monk, Ward was rarely the best receiver on his team.

Monk was on the all-80s second team with James Lofton, behind Rice and Largent. He held the NFL's all-time receptions record. He held the NFL's all-time receptions in a season record - is that compiling, since it happened in one year?His credentials dwarf Ward's. And he's a guy many people consider borderline Hall of Fame.

I most certainly agree with this.And, he is a borderline HOFer. Which is why Hines Ward is never, ever getting into the HOF.

 

[infantsam]

I've posted about this before. I know non-fans think he's dirty and kinda dislike him. I know most Steelers fans worship him.

He'll get in and deserves it.

The why to that is easy and it has very litle to do w/ numbers. His numbers are great but they simply SUPPORT why he should go in.

He goes in because when he was on the field he changed the game. He significantly changed the way Pitt ran their offense AND how the other team ran their defense. And if they didn't - and many a corner/safety/D-coordinator didn't and REFUSED to acknowledge that he was MUCH tougher and stronger - well he put them on their back or the bench and made them pay. And then he got up - smiled - and went out the next play right across the middle and leaped up for some crappy pass and got both arms on it before being blown up by a LB or S.

Defensive corners and safeties have had bounties on Ward for years - and their JOB is take people out and they call Ward dirty. That's pathetic and laughable. I don't think many self respecting Raven's ever said anything like that.

EVERYONE wants to be like Hines Ward.

And just like Dennis Rodman eventually did - he'll get in, he'll cry and he'll make a great speech.

 

[pecorino]

i am a steelers homer who loves the way hines ward played and i don't think he deserves to go in on the first ballot but i think he will eventually get in. his numbers are quite good even though he was never the premiere player at his position. but i feel like many HOFers get in because they did one thing better than anyone else, and it might not be quantifiable. i am thinking here of lynn swann (yes, i know, another hotly contested HOF decision). but he eventually got in because of his niche: he combined grace, fluidity and acrobatics like no one else at his position (imo). that's why hines will get in, he has a niche: he was the best blocking WR in history (imo). again, not quantifiable, but it distinguishes him from the rest of the ho-hum 1000-catch guys. and maybe not even enough to make him worthy to get in since it is such an odd thing to say about WRs.

 

[Steelers4Life]

Ward is a SB MVP that finishes his career at number 8 all-time at his position despite the fact that he played for a mostly-running team and had the likes of Kordell Stewart, Mike Tomczak, Kent Graham and Tommy Maddox throwing to him for much of his career.

Ward had Roethlisberger, a probable Hall of Fame QB, throwing to him for 8 of his 14 NFL seasons. Generational peers like Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Torry Holt and Isaac Bruce did not have the ball thrown to them for the MAJORITY of their careers by a probable HOF QB. Moss, Holt and Bruce all had that luxury for 3-4 seasons; Owens had Steve Young very early in his career, but that's it.And what's funny is, you can knock Tommy Maddox, but Ward's two best seasons came with Maddox, not Roethlisberger.

But they all played on teams that passed the ball a lot and allowed them to put up big numbers, regardless of who the QB was.He'd been in the league for 6 years already before Big Ben took over. In the following 4 years (2004 through 2007) Ward averaged 95 catches, 1,125 yards, and 7.5 TDs, still on run-heavy teams. By the time the Steelers started to really open things up because the line and running game struggled, Ward was already 10 years into his career and past his prime, and I'm sure his playing style took a toll on him that other WRs didn't.I can only imagine how different his numbers would look if he'd played on a team with a good QB and that passed the ball a normal amount. He was never a speed guy, but he was always awesome at getting open and finding the spot he needed to be so the QB could find him. He had the talent to put up huge numbers, but also the work ethic and desire to become revered for his blocking.

 

[Tau837]

i am a steelers homer who loves the way hines ward played and i don't think he deserves to go in on the first ballot but i think he will eventually get in. his numbers are quite good even though he was never the premiere player at his position. but i feel like many HOFers get in because they did one thing better than anyone else, and it might not be quantifiable. i am thinking here of lynn swann (yes, i know, another hotly contested HOF decision). but he eventually got in because of his niche: he combined grace, fluidity and acrobatics like no one else at his position (imo). that's why hines will get in, he has a niche: he was the best blocking WR in history (imo). again, not quantifiable, but it distinguishes him from the rest of the ho-hum 1000-catch guys. and maybe not even enough to make him worthy to get in since it is such an odd thing to say about WRs.

IMO Swann ultimately got in because of multiple memorable big plays in Super Bowls won by his team. To this day, those replays are still shown.Furthermore, Swann had some non-trivial advantages over Ward:1. 4 Super Bowl rings for Swann, 2 for Ward. That said, Swann didn't make an impact in the first one, but 3 is still greater than 2. And Swann played better in those Super Bowls than Ward did.2. 1 1st team All Pro selection for Swann, 0 for Ward.Also, while both won Super Bowl MVP once, Swann was also NFL MOY once, whereas Ward has no other NFL awards. I doubt this really matters, but it is theoretically possible it could have nudged Swann over the top.

 

[David Yudkin]

i am a steelers homer who loves the way hines ward played and i don't think he deserves to go in on the first ballot but i think he will eventually get in. his numbers are quite good even though he was never the premiere player at his position. but i feel like many HOFers get in because they did one thing better than anyone else, and it might not be quantifiable. i am thinking here of lynn swann (yes, i know, another hotly contested HOF decision). but he eventually got in because of his niche: he combined grace, fluidity and acrobatics like no one else at his position (imo). that's why hines will get in, he has a niche: he was the best blocking WR in history (imo). again, not quantifiable, but it distinguishes him from the rest of the ho-hum 1000-catch guys. and maybe not even enough to make him worthy to get in since it is such an odd thing to say about WRs.

IMO Swann ultimately got in because of multiple memorable big plays in Super Bowls won by his team. To this day, those replays are still shown.Furthermore, Swann had some non-trivial advantages over Ward:1. 4 Super Bowl rings for Swann, 2 for Ward. That said, Swann didn't make an impact in the first one, but 3 is still greater than 2. And Swann played better in those Super Bowls than Ward did.2. 1 1st team All Pro selection for Swann, 0 for Ward.Also, while both won Super Bowl MVP once, Swann was also NFL MOY once, whereas Ward has no other NFL awards. I doubt this really matters, but it is theoretically possible it could have nudged Swann over the top.

From what little I remember, I seem to recall there was a full bore campaign to try to get Swann inducted . . . almost a rallying call and call to arms and he made it in in his final year of eligibility.There is no doubt that Swann's circus catches in the Super Bowl got him in, as his raw numbers pale in comparison to other receivers from his era and guys in the HOF. I guess he got credit for being a big play threat and potential game changer on any play . . . but it would have been nice if we got to see him utilized more and post big numbers a lot more consistently.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

The Monk-Ward comparison is the best there is. Monk > Ward. But, both compiled. Testaverde-esque. Happened to play on superior teams than Vinny did. But, Monk didn't deserve to go to the Hall because he outlasted his peers. Same with Ward. Like Monk, Ward was rarely the best receiver on his team.

Monk was on the all-80s second team with James Lofton, behind Rice and Largent. He held the NFL's all-time receptions record. He held the NFL's all-time receptions in a season record - is that compiling, since it happened in one year?His credentials dwarf Ward's. And he's a guy many people consider borderline Hall of Fame.

His credentials dwarf Ward's? Both played 14 seasons.Receptions? WardTD? WardPro Bowls? WardPostseason Stats? Ward

 

[Ice Cream Man]

The Monk-Ward comparison is the best there is. Monk > Ward. But, both compiled. Testaverde-esque. Happened to play on superior teams than Vinny did. But, Monk didn't deserve to go to the Hall because he outlasted his peers. Same with Ward. Like Monk, Ward was rarely the best receiver on his team.

Monk was on the all-80s second team with James Lofton, behind Rice and Largent. He held the NFL's all-time receptions record. He held the NFL's all-time receptions in a season record - is that compiling, since it happened in one year?His credentials dwarf Ward's. And he's a guy many people consider borderline Hall of Fame.

His credentials dwarf Ward's? Both played 14 seasons.Receptions? WardTD? WardPro Bowls? WardPostseason Stats? Ward

 

[Ballstein]

I think ward has intangibles that I've never seen in any wr in my lifetime.

 

[JohnnyRobinsonForCanton]

I think Hines Ward eventually gets in based on his accomplishments and championships. By the numbers I think he could be stronger. I regarded Moss, Owens and Harrison as the top receivers when I was growing up. Hines Ward was really good but I think his case may fall short of deserving it but I wouldn't be surprised if he got in.

 

[kupcho1]

Rachael vs. Guy: Celebrity Cook-OffPositive or negative impact on HOF chances?

 

[cobalt_27]

Rachael vs. Guy: Celebrity Cook-Off

Positive or negative impact on HOF chances?

Null.Guy gets in before Ward.

In fact, Ray Guy and Guy Fieri both get inducted in the NFL HOF before Ward does.

 

[KellysHeroes]

good player, but not HoF

 

[dgreen]

Any player that requires 14 pages of debate about whether he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame or not, clearly doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame.

There was once a really long thread about Jerry Rice being a HOFer. Greatest fishing trip ever.