Jason Taylor to hold press conference tomorrow... (1 Viewer)

[Ministry of Pain]

I heard on Sporting news Radio on the way in today that he is holding a press conference tomorrow. What would happen if JT decided to announce his retirement? Wouldn't the Dolphins look like fools for trying to milk a 1st rounder for him at that point?

I know this board has little to no sympathy for JT, however I do believe he has been an outstanding DE for Miami, the best ever here, and he is a model citizen as displayed by him winning the Man of the Year award last season after winning Defensive Player of the Year in 2006.

Rather than try and pour dirt on JT, let's assume he won't be as good in 2008 as he was in 2007 and 2006. But let's also assume that not many DE retire after posting double digit sacks, and he has been to 6 Pro Bowls including 4 straight. He is 14th on the all time sack list... 1 more double digit sack total would move him into top 10, and he is #1 all time in fumble returns for TDs at any defensive position. Likely a bordeline HoF candidate.

What would happen if he decided to push the Miami Dolphins hand and retire?

 

[Ripleys]

I hope so. He's the Donovan McNabb of lineman. Quick your crying and just shut up and play or retire.

 

[Bojang0301]

Heaven forbid a guy to prepare for life after football. A lot of guys have a built in celebrity that they can transfer to TV, Movies, Analysing and lineman usually isn't the type that has it easy to transfer to those mediums. Michael Strahan basically took off and entire off-season and still produced at a high level and while I think that is a rarity to be able to do I willing to give a guy like Taylor a break given his history.

 

[BoltBacker]

What would happen if he decided to push the Miami Dolphins hand and retire?

The Dolphins would have missed out on a 4th rounder?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

What would happen if he decided to push the Miami Dolphins hand and retire?

The Dolphins would have missed out on a 4th rounder?

I think this is correct.

 

[Tau837]

He still has work to do to become a borderline HOFer IMO.

Not for that reason, but I doubt he will retire at this point, whether he says he will or not at the press conference.

 

[twitch]

Taylor's not retiring. Parcells will move him somewhere. If he forces this guy to retire by not moving him for whatever his trade value would be, he'll be perceived as a villain on some level by alot of people. He doesnt want that. No matter what Parcells has accomplished in his career, Taylor is probably a more liked football figure. People certainly respect Parcells. I dont think you'll find a ton of people admitting to actually liking him. And the fact of the matter is, he hasnt led a team to a playoff win in 10 years. He's been unwilling to change his stubborn, old-school mentality to adjust to the modern player, and I think its hurt him somewhat. Look at what Coughlin did last year. Did Michael Strahan work out even once with the Giants last offseason?? To my knowledge he didnt. And it didnt exactly hurt his team. No. The head man made a reasonable exception for his star veteran player and good things came from it. Taylor has deserved the same respect, but imo he hasnt received any of that. And for what? For doing what he wants with his own time in March, April and May?? That's ridiculous. The guy had a fairly worthwhile committment, he stuck with it, and got ZERO support from his club. That's unfortunate because it could have been quite a positive. At this point, there's no mending fences with the Dolphins. But he's not retiring. Dont see it happening.

 

[BoltBacker]

I feel sort of bad now. Before this press conference I kind of had the impression he was an ego-centric tool. But now that he's called a press conference to announce...

Taylor will NOT attend this week’s OTAs or next weekend’s mandatory minicamp (sorry for the typo).

“I won’t be at the deal (Monday), obviously, because I have a golf tournament,” Taylor said.

“I’m playing ball in ‘08. If (a trade) doesn’t work out then I’m a Miami Dolphin."

So to recap; he's going to go play golf instead of attending OTA's because he's just hell-bent on winning and he's a Miami Dolphin(?) for now. Keep us updated JT!

 

[Bojang0301]

I feel sort of bad now. Before this press conference I kind of had the impression he was an ego-centric tool. But now that he's called a press conference to announce...Taylor will NOT attend this week’s OTAs or next weekend’s mandatory minicamp (sorry for the typo).“I won’t be at the deal (Monday), obviously, because I have a golf tournament,” Taylor said.“I’m playing ball in ‘08. If (a trade) doesn’t work out then I’m a Miami Dolphin."So to recap; he's going to go play golf instead of attending OTA's because he's just hell-bent on winning and he's a Miami Dolphin(?) for now. Keep us updated JT!

Hate to break your heart but the Miami Dolphin are not going anywhere this year. They have cleaned house, completly new system and no matter who starts at QB they will have question marks.I can't blame him going golfing as long as he's on the Dolphins. I would want to go to a better situation too.

 

[Gopher State]

Personally, I think he will retire. His "star appeal" is at an all time high after dancing with the stars. I recall on ESPN, Mike and Mike, that they felt his first movie had thepotential to earn him more money then playing football for the next two years.

He's had a great career, why take a chance and get hurt, go for what he wants to do for the rest of his life now.

 

[T Bell]

If this is anything but a sincere retirement announcement rather than a ploy to help him get traded, then he's a fool. If he retires, the Dolphins still hold the rights to him. Sure, his trade value is gone, but so is his ability to play unless he retracts his retirement statement. He's no better off than he was before and in fact is worse because he's only entrenched the status quo.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Taylor's not retiring. Parcells will move him somewhere. If he forces this guy to retire by not moving him for whatever his trade value would be, he'll be perceived as a villain on some level by alot of people. He doesnt want that. No matter what Parcells has accomplished in his career, Taylor is probably a more liked football figure. People certainly respect Parcells. I dont think you'll find a ton of people admitting to actually liking him. And the fact of the matter is, he hasnt led a team to a playoff win in 10 years. He's been unwilling to change his stubborn, old-school mentality to adjust to the modern player, and I think its hurt him somewhat. Look at what Coughlin did last year. Did Michael Strahan work out even once with the Giants last offseason?? To my knowledge he didnt. And it didnt exactly hurt his team. No. The head man made a reasonable exception for his star veteran player and good things came from it. Taylor has deserved the same respect, but imo he hasnt received any of that. And for what? For doing what he wants with his own time in March, April and May?? That's ridiculous. The guy had a fairly worthwhile committment, he stuck with it, and got ZERO support from his club. That's unfortunate because it could have been quite a positive. At this point, there's no mending fences with the Dolphins. But he's not retiring. Dont see it happening.

Listen. I am all for Jason Taylor getting what he wants. A trade, hollywood career after, whatever. Taylor does come off looking like a joke in this situation, calling a press conference to say that what he and Sparano talk about will remain behind closed doors. And that he wants to win and if he isn't traded he's a dolphin in 08. He already said before that he wasn't going to skip practice and he lied about that. He's obviously posturing to get what he wants without looking like he's selfish. It would be more honorable to me if he simply admitted that he wanted a trade to another team instead of acting like it's in Miami's best interest. There's nothing wrong with him wanting a trade in the first place.I don't think a Patriot fan needs to be told that it doesn't take a nice or well liked coach / staff to be successful in the NFL. It isn't Parcell's job to be liked. He's trying to turn the franchise around. I can imagine it's a headache dealing with people who aren't focused on playing football with your club, but that's part of the deal. It was definitely cold and uneccessary for Parcells to snub Taylor. He can't worry about one player though when he's trying to take a club from a one win season to bridge it to success.

 

[skillz]

I don't think he's going to retire. My guess is that he gives a statement about how he wants to be traded and will not be attending any OTA's, but that if the Dolphins don't trade him he will show up for training camp and play for them in '08. I think the public statement about him not wanting to be a Dolphin may be an attempt for him to further piss off Parcells and get him finally trade Taylor to another team. Parcells doesn't want him there to begin with and if Taylor publically states he doesn't want to be there I am sure Parcells will not want him around the other guys on the team once training camp arrives. He will view Taylor as a cancer and try to move him. Only issue is whether the team continues to demand a first round pick for the guy since they clearly aren't going to get that, especially after Taylor burns the bridge some more during his press conference tomorrow.

 

[twitch]

Taylor's not retiring. Parcells will move him somewhere. If he forces this guy to retire by not moving him for whatever his trade value would be, he'll be perceived as a villain on some level by alot of people. He doesnt want that. No matter what Parcells has accomplished in his career, Taylor is probably a more liked football figure. People certainly respect Parcells. I dont think you'll find a ton of people admitting to actually liking him. And the fact of the matter is, he hasnt led a team to a playoff win in 10 years. He's been unwilling to change his stubborn, old-school mentality to adjust to the modern player, and I think its hurt him somewhat. Look at what Coughlin did last year. Did Michael Strahan work out even once with the Giants last offseason?? To my knowledge he didnt. And it didnt exactly hurt his team. No. The head man made a reasonable exception for his star veteran player and good things came from it. Taylor has deserved the same respect, but imo he hasnt received any of that. And for what? For doing what he wants with his own time in March, April and May?? That's ridiculous. The guy had a fairly worthwhile committment, he stuck with it, and got ZERO support from his club. That's unfortunate because it could have been quite a positive. At this point, there's no mending fences with the Dolphins. But he's not retiring. Dont see it happening.

Listen. I am all for Jason Taylor getting what he wants. A trade, hollywood career after, whatever. Taylor does come off looking like a joke in this situation, calling a press conference to say that what he and Sparano talk about will remain behind closed doors. And that he wants to win and if he isn't traded he's a dolphin in 08. He already said before that he wasn't going to skip practice and he lied about that. He's obviously posturing to get what he wants without looking like he's selfish. It would be more honorable to me if he simply admitted that he wanted a trade to another team instead of acting like it's in Miami's best interest. There's nothing wrong with him wanting a trade in the first place.I don't think a Patriot fan needs to be told that it doesn't take a nice or well liked coach / staff to be successful in the NFL. It isn't Parcell's job to be liked. He's trying to turn the franchise around. I can imagine it's a headache dealing with people who aren't focused on playing football with your club, but that's part of the deal. It was definitely cold and uneccessary for Parcells to snub Taylor. He can't worry about one player though when he's trying to take a club from a one win season to bridge it to success.

Let me keep this real simple. Ive got a HUGE problem with people like you lableing a person like Jason Taylor a flat out LIAR. You have squat for information, and this guy is a class human being who cares about people to the point that his NFL peers voted him man of the year. Whatever criticism you have of the guy I could certainly accept. But again, claiming the man has LIED about the situation when you have not a lick of actual knowledge on the situation just has YOU sounding like a buffoon.

 

[FF_Guru]

Doesn't sound like he plans on retiring...says one more year.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

 

[SSOG]

He still has work to do to become a borderline HOFer IMO.Not for that reason, but I doubt he will retire at this point, whether he says he will or not at the press conference.

A DPoY award, 100+ sacks, and a strong penchant for turnovers (7 ints are pretty impressive for a DE) make anyone a BORDERLINE HoF candidate. It's not enough to get him to the final 15, but it's more than enough to get him on the preliminary list, and possibly even enough to get him to the 25-man list.I think he has more work to do before he has even an outside shot at enshrinement, but he's definitely worked his way on the bubble. I'd like to see more All Pros out of him, and even his pro-bowl totals are disappointingly low, but then again, both are very competitive for DEs. I think Michael Strahan should be a first-ballot HoFer, and he only has one more of each. I like the fact that Jason Taylor didn't sell out against the run to achieve his success like his passrushing peers (Simeon Rice, Dwight Freeney, etc). The fact that the media likes him and his Man of the Year award will also help, whether they should or not.

 

[fatness]

“I won’t be at the deal (Monday), obviously, because I have a golf tournament,” Taylor said. “I’ve missed the OTAs before. As far as minicamp’s concerned … There was some stuff that came up (in Sparano’s May 21 announcement) about minicamp and training camp. This minicamp coming up I have my brother’s graduation, and I have a legal matter I have to finish taking care of. So Tony and I will talk about that and figure out the future.”

He will not retire: “I’m playing ball in ‘08. If (a trade) doesn’t work out then I’m a Miami Dolphin. I love this place.”

“This is not about Jason Taylor. I’m just a guy. … This is about the Miami Dolphins, which are so much bigger than me.”

Palm Beach Post

 

[BoltBacker]

I feel sort of bad now. Before this press conference I kind of had the impression he was an ego-centric tool. But now that he's called a press conference to announce...Taylor will NOT attend this week’s OTAs or next weekend’s mandatory minicamp (sorry for the typo).“I won’t be at the deal (Monday), obviously, because I have a golf tournament,” Taylor said.“I’m playing ball in ‘08. If (a trade) doesn’t work out then I’m a Miami Dolphin."So to recap; he's going to go play golf instead of attending OTA's because he's just hell-bent on winning and he's a Miami Dolphin(?) for now. Keep us updated JT!

Hate to break your heart but the Miami Dolphin are not going anywhere this year. They have cleaned house, completly new system and no matter who starts at QB they will have question marks.I can't blame him going golfing as long as he's on the Dolphins. I would want to go to a better situation too.

Doesn't break my hart in the least. "ALL I care about is WINNING..... well, winning and golf but that's ALL I care about is WINNING and GOLF.... and of course dancing but that's really it! I'm ALL about WINNING and GOLF and DANCING... oh yeah, and my hollywood career..." Sounds to me like this guy is a big Steve Martin fan.Sounds like one gritty determined team leader to me.

 

[Tau837]

He still has work to do to become a borderline HOFer IMO.Not for that reason, but I doubt he will retire at this point, whether he says he will or not at the press conference.

A DPoY award, 100+ sacks, and a strong penchant for turnovers (7 ints are pretty impressive for a DE) make anyone a BORDERLINE HoF candidate. It's not enough to get him to the final 15, but it's more than enough to get him on the preliminary list, and possibly even enough to get him to the 25-man list.I think he has more work to do before he has even an outside shot at enshrinement, but he's definitely worked his way on the bubble. I'd like to see more All Pros out of him, and even his pro-bowl totals are disappointingly low, but then again, both are very competitive for DEs. I think Michael Strahan should be a first-ballot HoFer, and he only has one more of each. I like the fact that Jason Taylor didn't sell out against the run to achieve his success like his passrushing peers (Simeon Rice, Dwight Freeney, etc). The fact that the media likes him and his Man of the Year award will also help, whether they should or not.

We had this discussion last summer and you said:

Looking back at Taylor has caused me to re-evaluate him. I really thought his numbers were stronger than they were. I think the DPoY award helps his case, but he'll probably need 30-40 more sacks before he gets more than cursory consideration.

So I guess you think cursory consideration equates to being a borderline candidate. Let me rephrase what I said earlier. Regardless of whether one wants to call Taylor a borderline candidate, whatever that vague term means, he is not close to making the HOF as of today.Also, when Strahan is elected, IMO he will be one of the weaker DEs in the HOF. To suggest Taylor compares to him unfavorably just illustrates how weak a candidate Taylor is.Finally, I'd be interested to know how you judge whether a DE has "sold out" against the run to achieve pass rushing success. Is this just the eyeball test, are you looking at tackles, or what?

 

[Tecmo]

I like how he's handled this. He wants a trade, he's let it be known and the team does nothing. He waits patiently for the draft and still no trade. So he makes a little noise, like leaking news bits of how Parcell giving him the cold shoulder. He pushes Parcell's buttons saying he would rather be remembered for dancing than football. It's all just a ploy to get him out of there. He keeps making noise, but not the kind of noise that would ruin his trade chances. He's trying to say the right things to make it happen... he's walking a fine line of looking too selfish.

At this point, the Dolphins look like the bad guys to me. He doesn't want to play for your rebuilding team, trade him. Why are they being so hard-headed at keeping a borderline HoF DE with maybe 1-yr left in his career on a REBUILDING TEAM? Asking price = 1rst rounder... yeah right!!! CLICK

 

[Sabertooth]

The Packers should oughta trade for him.

 

[SSOG]

He still has work to do to become a borderline HOFer IMO.Not for that reason, but I doubt he will retire at this point, whether he says he will or not at the press conference.

A DPoY award, 100+ sacks, and a strong penchant for turnovers (7 ints are pretty impressive for a DE) make anyone a BORDERLINE HoF candidate. It's not enough to get him to the final 15, but it's more than enough to get him on the preliminary list, and possibly even enough to get him to the 25-man list.I think he has more work to do before he has even an outside shot at enshrinement, but he's definitely worked his way on the bubble. I'd like to see more All Pros out of him, and even his pro-bowl totals are disappointingly low, but then again, both are very competitive for DEs. I think Michael Strahan should be a first-ballot HoFer, and he only has one more of each. I like the fact that Jason Taylor didn't sell out against the run to achieve his success like his passrushing peers (Simeon Rice, Dwight Freeney, etc). The fact that the media likes him and his Man of the Year award will also help, whether they should or not.

We had this discussion last summer and you said:

Looking back at Taylor has caused me to re-evaluate him. I really thought his numbers were stronger than they were. I think the DPoY award helps his case, but he'll probably need 30-40 more sacks before he gets more than cursory consideration.

So I guess you think cursory consideration equates to being a borderline candidate. Let me rephrase what I said earlier. Regardless of whether one wants to call Taylor a borderline candidate, whatever that vague term means, he is not close to making the HOF as of today.Also, when Strahan is elected, IMO he will be one of the weaker DEs in the HOF. To suggest Taylor compares to him unfavorably just illustrates how weak a candidate Taylor is.Finally, I'd be interested to know how you judge whether a DE has "sold out" against the run to achieve pass rushing success. Is this just the eyeball test, are you looking at tackles, or what?

When I think "borderline HoFer", I think of the preliminary list and most especially the guys that survive the first cutdown. I think Taylor belongs in that category. I don't think he's HoF caliber, and I don't think he stands a shot at actually making the Hall as things currently stand today, so I guess the confusion arises from my use of the phrases "borderline candidate" and "cursory consideration". I guess I'm thinking of borderline guys as those guys who are receiving cursory consideration.As far as Strahan goes... there are 14 players in the HoF listed at DE (15 if you count Bruce Smith as a de facto HoFer). 2 of those are combo DE/DTs, 13 are "pure" DEs. Here's a comparison of Strahan to those notables.Michael Strahan- 7 Pro Bowls, 4 first-team AP All Pros, 141.5 sacksReggie White- 13 Pro Bowls, 8 first-team AP All Pros, 198 sacksBruce Smith- 11 Pro Bowls, 8 first-team AP All Pros, 200 sacksDeacon Jones- 8 Pro Bowls, 5 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacksElvin Bethea- 8 Pro Bowls, 0 first-team AP All Pros, 105 sacksFred Dean- 4 Pro Bowls, 2 first-team AP All Pros, ~100 sacksHowie Long- 8 Pro Bowls, 2 first-team AP All Pros, 91.5 sacksLee-Roy Selmon- 6 Pro Bowls, 1 first-team AP All Pro, 78.5 sacksJack Youngblood- 7 Pro Bowls, 5 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacksLen Ford- 4 Pro Bowls, 5 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacksCarl Eller- 6 Pro Bowls, 5 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacksWillie Davis- 5 Pro Bowls, 5 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacksDoug Atkins- 8 Pro Bowls, 2 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacksDan Hampton- 4 Pro Bowls, 1 first-team AP All Pro, ??? sacksGino Marchetti- 11 Pro Bowls, 7 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacksAndy Robustelli- 7 Pro Bowls, 7 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacksLooking at that list, Strahan's Pro Bowls and All Pros are clearly behind Reggie White and Bruce Smith (who are a tier unto themselves), as well as Marchetti and Robustelli (whose totals are at least partially inflated by the fact that they played in a radically smaller league and therefore had less competition for the honor). His numbers in that regard, however, compare favorably to the Deacon Jones/Carl Eller/Jack Youngblood/Willie Davis group, and are well ahead of the other six players. His sack numbers are up there with the elite passrushers, and this comes despite the fact that he was often among the (if not THE) best defensive ends in the league at defending the run as well. He has individual honors (1 DPoY award, another NFC DPoY award, the single-season sack record), and he has a SB ring (most importantly- he headlined the unit that everyone agrees is responsible for his team GETTING that ring).Michael Strahan is no Reggie White or Bruce Smith, but he'd be a LONG ways away from the worst DE in the HoF. I'd put him closer to the top of the list than the bottom. Like White and Smith, he was a true two-way player.As for how I tell whether a DE "sells out" against the run to get sacks... that's just an eyeball thing. When I see a DE constantly out of position to make plays, or when I see a team implement a strategy of simply pushing the DE up field and letting him take himself out of the play while the offense runs through the gap he vacated, I see a DE who "sells out" against the run. Jason Taylor rushed the passer with discipline and was not a liability against the run. He's also one of the best DEs I've seen in coverage. Very good all-around skillset rather than a mere 1-trick pony.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Taylor's not retiring. Parcells will move him somewhere. If he forces this guy to retire by not moving him for whatever his trade value would be, he'll be perceived as a villain on some level by alot of people. He doesnt want that. No matter what Parcells has accomplished in his career, Taylor is probably a more liked football figure. People certainly respect Parcells. I dont think you'll find a ton of people admitting to actually liking him. And the fact of the matter is, he hasnt led a team to a playoff win in 10 years. He's been unwilling to change his stubborn, old-school mentality to adjust to the modern player, and I think its hurt him somewhat. Look at what Coughlin did last year. Did Michael Strahan work out even once with the Giants last offseason?? To my knowledge he didnt. And it didnt exactly hurt his team. No. The head man made a reasonable exception for his star veteran player and good things came from it. Taylor has deserved the same respect, but imo he hasnt received any of that. And for what? For doing what he wants with his own time in March, April and May?? That's ridiculous. The guy had a fairly worthwhile committment, he stuck with it, and got ZERO support from his club. That's unfortunate because it could have been quite a positive. At this point, there's no mending fences with the Dolphins. But he's not retiring. Dont see it happening.

Listen. I am all for Jason Taylor getting what he wants. A trade, hollywood career after, whatever. Taylor does come off looking like a joke in this situation, calling a press conference to say that what he and Sparano talk about will remain behind closed doors. And that he wants to win and if he isn't traded he's a dolphin in 08. He already said before that he wasn't going to skip practice and he lied about that. He's obviously posturing to get what he wants without looking like he's selfish. It would be more honorable to me if he simply admitted that he wanted a trade to another team instead of acting like it's in Miami's best interest. There's nothing wrong with him wanting a trade in the first place.I don't think a Patriot fan needs to be told that it doesn't take a nice or well liked coach / staff to be successful in the NFL. It isn't Parcell's job to be liked. He's trying to turn the franchise around. I can imagine it's a headache dealing with people who aren't focused on playing football with your club, but that's part of the deal. It was definitely cold and uneccessary for Parcells to snub Taylor. He can't worry about one player though when he's trying to take a club from a one win season to bridge it to success.

Let me keep this real simple. Ive got a HUGE problem with people like you lableing a person like Jason Taylor a flat out LIAR. You have squat for information, and this guy is a class human being who cares about people to the point that his NFL peers voted him man of the year. Whatever criticism you have of the guy I could certainly accept. But again, claiming the man has LIED about the situation when you have not a lick of actual knowledge on the situation just has YOU sounding like a buffoon.

He did lie. When interviewed on Mike & Mike in the Morning during his stint on DWTS Greenie asked if he was going to attend all offseason activities. He said he was, and now he is not. It's kind of cut and dry. That's why I can say it was posturing. He was hoping for a resolution before then, he doesn't want to appear to be a bad guy, no trade worked out so far now he has to play hard ball. This is unfortunately how things work in the NFL, I can acknowledge that without having to like it.This story was reported atleast a week ago on NFL Live where they played the quote. Sorry if you feel that I am picking on him, but I'm not. It's a fact. I have no issues with Taylor beyond the charade. I have no questions about his character, his love for football, any of that. The only criticism I have is that he is playing the angles. It's his right, and I am sure this is how he is being instructed to play things via his agent, I would just like for a change of pace a player to calmy state his piece without fear of losing some advantage.

Apart from how vocally he's protested, and how he's behaved in interviews, I actually respected how open Chad Johnson has been regarding his wishes for a trade because he's stated his reason for leaving very clearly: he feels he was unfairly labelled the reason for the Bengals failure in spite of his production. Obviously his strategy hasn't worked out for him so far, but he also could have chosen to play a game and give other excuses for why he would want to leave. It goes without saying that Chad Johnson is no Jason Taylor.

 

[twitch]

Like I said, you really have no idea what's going on with the situation. Taylor may very well have been planning on attending all offseason activities once his dance gig was up. And his coach may have very well told him not to bother. Do you know for sure either way? Of course you dont, which is exactly the point. Charade? Come on, man.

Here's the link to his PC today. Taylor is a big fat liar.

Here's the key excerpt:

And on May 21, Sparano -- part of the huge overhaul after Miami's 1-15 season a year ago -- added even more drama.

Without offering much in the way of details, Sparano said Taylor would not be with the team for any minicamps or training camp.

"I'm glad we know this and we've gotten the information," Sparano said at the time, and neither he nor Parcells nor general manager Jeff Ireland has addressed it since.

So on Sunday, Taylor offered a sliver of his side on that story -- but again, stopping short of revealing all the details.

"I think what he was trying to accomplish was a little different than what may have came out," said Taylor, who met with Sparano last week. "But what Tony and I talk about closed doors, I think, needs to stay that way."

Now, were you behind those closed doors? A fly on the wall? Exactly. You have no idea what was said between these two men.

But Im done with this. Its not worth any more of my time. I just hate to see the word "liar" get thrown around freely by people irresponsibly. But you have it. Do your thing.

 

[Tau837]

As far as Strahan goes... there are 14 players in the HoF listed at DE (15 if you count Bruce Smith as a de facto HoFer). 2 of those are combo DE/DTs, 13 are "pure" DEs. Here's a comparison of Strahan to those notables.

Michael Strahan- 7 Pro Bowls, 4 first-team AP All Pros, 141.5 sacks

Reggie White- 13 Pro Bowls, 8 first-team AP All Pros, 198 sacks

Bruce Smith- 11 Pro Bowls, 8 first-team AP All Pros, 200 sacks

Deacon Jones- 8 Pro Bowls, 5 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacks

Elvin Bethea- 8 Pro Bowls, 0 first-team AP All Pros, 105 sacks

Fred Dean- 4 Pro Bowls, 2 first-team AP All Pros, ~100 sacks

Howie Long- 8 Pro Bowls, 2 first-team AP All Pros, 91.5 sacks

Lee-Roy Selmon- 6 Pro Bowls, 1 first-team AP All Pro, 78.5 sacks

Jack Youngblood- 7 Pro Bowls, 5 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacks

Len Ford- 4 Pro Bowls, 5 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacks

Carl Eller- 6 Pro Bowls, 5 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacks

Willie Davis- 5 Pro Bowls, 5 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacks

Doug Atkins- 8 Pro Bowls, 2 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacks

Dan Hampton- 4 Pro Bowls, 1 first-team AP All Pro, ??? sacks

Gino Marchetti- 11 Pro Bowls, 7 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacks

Andy Robustelli- 7 Pro Bowls, 7 first-team AP All Pros, ??? sacks

Looking at that list, Strahan's Pro Bowls and All Pros are clearly behind Reggie White and Bruce Smith (who are a tier unto themselves), as well as Marchetti and Robustelli (whose totals are at least partially inflated by the fact that they played in a radically smaller league and therefore had less competition for the honor). His numbers in that regard, however, compare favorably to the Deacon Jones/Carl Eller/Jack Youngblood/Willie Davis group, and are well ahead of the other six players. His sack numbers are up there with the elite passrushers, and this comes despite the fact that he was often among the (if not THE) best defensive ends in the league at defending the run as well. He has individual honors (1 DPoY award, another NFC DPoY award, the single-season sack record), and he has a SB ring (most importantly- he headlined the unit that everyone agrees is responsible for his team GETTING that ring).

Michael Strahan is no Reggie White or Bruce Smith, but he'd be a LONG ways away from the worst DE in the HoF. I'd put him closer to the top of the list than the bottom. Like White and Smith, he was a true two-way player.

This is a hijack, but I wanted to respond to this. You already conceded White and Smith as being better than Strahan, so there is no need to discuss them.The NFL didn't begin officially recocrding sacks until 1982. Jones' unofficial career sack count is 180.5... not as high as White or Smith, but he played 14 years to White's 15 and Smith's 19. Jones' unofficial sack total for 1967 was 26, higher than Strahan's single season record. Since 1971, the AP has awarded the NFL's defensive POY award... from 1966 to 1996, the Newspaper Enterprise Association awarded the George Halas trophy to the league's outstanding defensive player... so from 1966 to 1970, the NEA award was the only one for defensive POY. Jones won that award in 1967 and 1968. Jones was also named to the NFL's 75th Anniversary Team. From Wikipedia:

Jones was considered by many to revolutionize the position of defensive end. Jones was noted for coining the "sack". What separated Jones from every other defensive end was his blinding speed and his ability to make tackles from sideline to sideline, which was unheard of in his time.

He was elected to the Pro Football Hall of Fame in his first year of eligibility in 1980, and was named to the NFL's 75th Anniversary All-Time Team in 1994. In 1999, he was ranked number 13 on The Sporting News' list of the 100 Greatest Football Players, the highest-ranked player to have played for the Rams franchise, the highest-ranked defensive end, and the second-ranked defensive lineman behind Bob Lilly. The same year, he was named by Sports Illustrated as the "Defensive End of the Century."

IMO there is absolutely no doubt Jones was better than Strahan. I would rank him as the second best DE of all time, behind only White.Marchetti has a sizable edge on Strahan in All Pro and Pro Bowl selections and was NFL MVP in 1958. Marchetti was named to the NFL's 50th (1969), 75th (1994), and All-Time (2000) teams, and in 1999, he was ranked number 15 on The Sporting News' list of the 100 Greatest Football Players. From Wikipedia:

During his career, he was noted for being effective against the run and a relentless pass-rusher. Voted "the greatest defensive end in pro football history," as selected by the Hall of Fame 1969.

...Called by Sid Gillman, the Los Angeles Rams head coach, "(T)he greatest player in football. It's a waste of time to run around this guy's end. It's a lost play. You don't bother to try it."

IMO there is absolutely no doubt Marchetti was better than Strahan. I would rank him as the third best DE of all time.Jack Youngblood's unofficial career sack count is 151.5. He was the NFC defensive POY twice. He played 201 straight games, including famously playing an entire postseason with a fractured fibula, and is known as one of the toughest players in NFL history. His Wikipedia page says he has the second most career blocked kicks, with 8. From Wikipedia:

He had an uncredited 151.5 career sacks and led the Rams in sacks nine times despite playing first in assistant Coach Ray Malavasi's stop-the-run-first defensive scheme and then in his final two seasons in Defensive Coordinator Fritz Shurmer's 3-4 two-gap scheme which limited some pass rush opportunities to make sure the opponent's running game was handled.

...In 2000, Sports Illustrated ranked Youngblood as #4 in its list of the greatest pass rushers of all-time, behind only Deacon Jones, Reggie White and Lawrence Taylor.

IMO, Youngblood was clearly better than Strahan.Willie Davis only played DE for 10 seasons. He missed 2 seasons after being drafted while in the Army, and played other positions for his first 2 seasons with KC, before being traded to GB. From Wikipedia:

For 10 seasons, Davis anchored the Packers' defensive line, playing 138 consecutive regular-season games, part of 162 consecutive regular-season games for his NFL career. Davis was member to all 5 of Lombardi's NFL title-winning teams and played in Super Bowls I and II.

Davis played in an era when neither tackles nor sacks were official statistics. However, John Turney, a member of the Professional Football Researchers Association, and a painstaking, highly respected researcher/statistician, reports that his extensive research indicates Davis had in excess of 100 sacks during his 10-year Green Bay career (1960-69), "possibly more than 120," including a minimum of 40 over the 1963-65 seasons alone.

...Davis recovered 21 fumbles over his Packers career, which, more than three decades removed from his retirement, remains a team record.

Personally, I'd rank Davis higher than Strahan because he was a strong contributor to 5 championship teams. And 100-120 sacks in 138 games as a DE is better than 141.5 in 216 games.Carl Eller's unofficial career sack count is 133.5, close to Strahan's total. He was on the famous Purple People Eaters defensive line, and was a strong contributor to Minnesota's 1969 NFL championship and 4 Super Bowl appearances. He was NEA defensive POY in 1971. From Wikipedia:

He played in a total 225 regular season games. Is credited as the Vikings all-time sack leader with 130-1/2 [2]. Also had 3 sacks with Seahawks in 1979 for a career total of 133-1/2. Set career-high 15 sacks in 1969 and then matched that total eight years later. Has to his credit 7 seasons with 10 or more sacks.

I'd say it's close, but I'd give him a slight edge over Strahan.Selmon only played 9 seasons, because his career was cut short due to injury. During that time, he had 6 Pro Bowl selections, 1 1st team All Pro selection, and 1 defensive POY award. Curiously, AP only elected him 1st team All Pro once, but the Pro Football Writers and NEA each chose him 1st team 2 other times. In 2008, Pro Football Weekly named Selmon as one of the ends on its All-time 3-4 defensive front, based on the vote of over 40 former NFL players, coaches, and scouts. He also had the unfortunate distinction of being the Bucs' first draft pick ever, and, thus, playing his entire career for an expansion team. Comparing him to Strahan is difficult, since Strahan has played nearly twice as many games. Interestingly, Selmon still forced more fumbles (28.5 to 24) and recovered nearly as many (10 to 15). Selmon played at roughly the same sack pace as Strahan - both averaged roughly 0.65 sacks per game. Still, Strahan has to get some credit for doing it longer, the single season record, and for being an instrumental contributor to a Super Bowl. I'd say he narrowly edges Selmon, but more due to quantity than quality.

Having watched football since the beginning of the 1980s, my impression is that Howie Long was better than Strahan. However, it's hard to make a case on that based on the facts I could find on Long. I don't know as much about the others, and didn't want to spend more time hunting for info. What appears to be available about each of them is generally impressive, but I can't really compare them to Strahan. But just looking at what I showed above, I'd say Strahan will be middle of the pack at best.

...and Taylor isn't in the class of these greats.

 

[Ice Cream Man]

Only two comments:

1. A broken promise is not the same thing as a lie. A lie means you intentionally sought to deceive by not telling the truth. A broken promise is saying you will do one thing, but change your mind.

2. Just watching Taylor and Strahan play, I think Taylor is the superior player. Forget sacks. As a defensive force, Taylor is an all-around athlete that few at his position are. He's good against the run, pass coverage, not to mention great game breaking ability (many forced fumbles and INT returns). I think looking at a single stat is a poor way of judging a player like Taylor.

 

[westbrook36]

I hope so. He's the Donovan McNabb of lineman. Quick your crying and just shut up and play or retire.

 

[SSOG]

Having watched football since the beginning of the 1980s, my impression is that Howie Long was better than Strahan. However, it's hard to make a case on that based on the facts I could find on Long. I don't know as much about the others, and didn't want to spend more time hunting for info. What appears to be available about each of them is generally impressive, but I can't really compare them to Strahan. But just looking at what I showed above, I'd say Strahan will be middle of the pack at best....and Taylor isn't in the class of these greats.

I have no problem with characterizing Strahan as "middle of the pack" when it comes to HoF DEs. I disagree with characterizing him as "one of the weaker DEs in the HoF", especially because he's one of those rare birds who is equally dominant in run support as he is in rushing the passer. In my opinion, he's a clear first-ballot HoFer, no question.I also agree that Jason Taylor is not in Strahan's league (or the league of White, Smith, Jones, Youngblood, Eller, Marchetti, etc). However, there's a difference, in my mind, between "not in the league of a first-ballot HoFer" and "not a borderline HoF candidate".

 

[Ice Cream Man]

I also agree that Jason Taylor is not in Strahan's league

Are you guys watching a different sport than I am? Where in the world is this coming from???From any game I've watched, Strahan is not quite the athlete as Taylor, and I think Taylor is better than Strahan is almost every part of the game.

Statistically, it's not even close.

In terms of sacks, Strahan has more, but he's also played 40 more games. Controlling for this:

Sacks per game:

Strahan (0.655), Taylor (0.680).

But in other respects, Taylor's stats really come to reflect his superior skills. Keep in mind Strahan has played 40 more games than Taylor and consider these career defensive stats:

Forced Fumbles:

Strahan (24), Taylor (39)

Fumbles Recovered:

Strahan (15), Taylor (26)

Fumble TDs:

Strahan (1), Taylor (5)

Interceptions:

Strahan (4), Taylor (7)

Int TDs:

Strahan (2), Taylor (3)

Passes Defensed (per game):

Strahan (0.166), Taylor (0.491)

Total Tackles per game:

Strahan (3.953), Taylor (3.785)

Ok.

I know stats can distort reality. But on every important measure of defensive ability, Taylor is superior.. and often significantly so. The only stat where Strahan comes ahead is on tackles, and that's not even an official NFL stat (IIRC).

 

[Tau837]

Having watched football since the beginning of the 1980s, my impression is that Howie Long was better than Strahan. However, it's hard to make a case on that based on the facts I could find on Long. I don't know as much about the others, and didn't want to spend more time hunting for info. What appears to be available about each of them is generally impressive, but I can't really compare them to Strahan. But just looking at what I showed above, I'd say Strahan will be middle of the pack at best....and Taylor isn't in the class of these greats.

I have no problem with characterizing Strahan as "middle of the pack" when it comes to HoF DEs. I disagree with characterizing him as "one of the weaker DEs in the HoF", especially because he's one of those rare birds who is equally dominant in run support as he is in rushing the passer. In my opinion, he's a clear first-ballot HoFer, no question.I also agree that Jason Taylor is not in Strahan's league (or the league of White, Smith, Jones, Youngblood, Eller, Marchetti, etc). However, there's a difference, in my mind, between "not in the league of a first-ballot HoFer" and "not a borderline HoF candidate".

Well, the difference in saying "one of the weaker" and "middle of the pack at best" is pretty negligible... kind of like the difference between "borderline candidate" and "cursory consideration". Also, let me make it clear, that I said "at best" because I find it harder to compare some of the older DEs. Like Robustelli, for example. His achievements are quite impressive, but it is very difficult to effectively compare him to Strahan due to limited information and the difference in eras. It is very possible that Robustelli would win such a comparison if it could be made effectively.I only found two HOF DEs I looked at who I would say Strahan is better than... Selmon and Long. But as a fan I remember Long as being better. And I think Strahan compares favorably to Selmon only because Selmon's career was cut short due to injury. Finally, I think your statement that Strahan is "one of those rare birds who is equally dominant in run support as he is in rushing the passer" is something that could be said about all of the HOF DEs. If not, please cite the ones to whom it does not apply. My point being, that does not make Strahan stand out in this context. And, frankly, I'd like to see some evidence to support that claim anyway... I'm not saying Strahan is bad at run defense, I am just not convinced that he is a standout. But that can be for another thread, to end this hijack.

 

[Tau837]

I also agree that Jason Taylor is not in Strahan's league

Are you guys watching a different sport than I am? Where in the world is this coming from???From any game I've watched, Strahan is not quite the athlete as Taylor, and I think Taylor is better than Strahan is almost every part of the game.

Statistically, it's not even close.

In terms of sacks, Strahan has more, but he's also played 40 more games. Controlling for this:

Sacks per game:

Strahan (0.655), Taylor (0.680).

But in other respects, Taylor's stats really come to reflect his superior skills. Keep in mind Strahan has played 40 more games than Taylor and consider these career defensive stats:

Forced Fumbles:

Strahan (24), Taylor (39)

Fumbles Recovered:

Strahan (15), Taylor (26)

Fumble TDs:

Strahan (1), Taylor (5)

Interceptions:

Strahan (4), Taylor (7)

Int TDs:

Strahan (2), Taylor (3)

Passes Defensed (per game):

Strahan (0.166), Taylor (0.491)

Total Tackles per game:

Strahan (3.953), Taylor (3.785)

Ok.

I know stats can distort reality. But on every important measure of defensive ability, Taylor is superior.. and often significantly so. The only stat where Strahan comes ahead is on tackles, and that's not even an official NFL stat (IIRC).

Like it or not, from a statistical standpoint, modern DEs will be measured much more on sacks than any other statistic... and Strahan has the official single season sack record to go along with the third highest official sack total in history. The fumbles forced and recovered and tackles will be next IMO... passes defensed and the other things, not so much. And Strahan has been an instrumental player on a Super Bowl winner... Taylor hasn't.

To me, your post illustrates more why I think of Strahan as a lesser HOF candidate than SSOG and perhaps most others do. I still think Taylor has to do more to be HOF worthy.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

I also agree that Jason Taylor is not in Strahan's league

Are you guys watching a different sport than I am? Where in the world is this coming from???From any game I've watched, Strahan is not quite the athlete as Taylor, and I think Taylor is better than Strahan is almost every part of the game.

Statistically, it's not even close.

In terms of sacks, Strahan has more, but he's also played 40 more games. Controlling for this:

Sacks per game:

Strahan (0.655), Taylor (0.680).

But in other respects, Taylor's stats really come to reflect his superior skills. Keep in mind Strahan has played 40 more games than Taylor and consider these career defensive stats:

Forced Fumbles:

Strahan (24), Taylor (39)

Fumbles Recovered:

Strahan (15), Taylor (26)

Fumble TDs:

Strahan (1), Taylor (5)

Interceptions:

Strahan (4), Taylor (7)

Int TDs:

Strahan (2), Taylor (3)

Passes Defensed (per game):

Strahan (0.166), Taylor (0.491)

Total Tackles per game:

Strahan (3.953), Taylor (3.785)

Ok.

I know stats can distort reality. But on every important measure of defensive ability, Taylor is superior.. and often significantly so. The only stat where Strahan comes ahead is on tackles, and that's not even an official NFL stat (IIRC).

I think there's a Moss / Rice analogy here. Strahan has shown the ability to be spectacular, but Taylor shows up every day. If I got a vote, they'd both be HOFers.

 

[fatness]

"ALL I care about is WINNING..... well, winning and golf but that's ALL I care about is WINNING and GOLF.... and of course dancing but that's really it! I'm ALL about WINNING and GOLF and DANCING... oh yeah, and my hollywood career..." Sounds to me like this guy is a big Steve Martin fan.

And that's it and that's the only thing I need, is this. I don't need this or this. Just this ashtray. And this paddle game, the ashtray and the paddle game and that's all I need. And this remote control. The ashtray, the paddle game, and the remote control, and that's all I need. And these matches. The ashtray, and these matches, and the remote control and the paddle ball. And this lamp.

 

[ookook]

The Packers should oughta trade for him.

I have been saying this for two months, but other Packers fans get a little bent when I do. Glad to hear Saber and I are on the same page.What draft pick would he be worth?

 

[Ice Cream Man]

Like it or not, from a statistical standpoint, modern DEs will be measured much more on sacks than any other statistic... and Strahan has the official single season sack record to go along with the third highest official sack total in history.

With all due respect, this sounds like a total copout.This is the Shark Pool. I think it's obvious that we respect more independent thought and deep analysis, than the rest of the herd.

So for everyone on this board to claim Strahan is superior, yet be unwilling to look at how much Taylor has outplayed him in almost every aspect of the game, is surprising. Yeah, his higher sack totals (career wise, purely a function of having played a couple more years) and winning a championship are things the laymen picks up on. But I hope I'm not talking to laymen.

If Taylor plays a year or two more, he'll likely have comparable sack totals, and has already dominated Strahan in every other statistical category. For the "Sharks" to dismiss Taylor as not in Strahan's league, let alone not see Taylor as the superior player, seems just biased or very uninformed.

 

[Tau837]

Like it or not, from a statistical standpoint, modern DEs will be measured much more on sacks than any other statistic... and Strahan has the official single season sack record to go along with the third highest official sack total in history.

With all due respect, this sounds like a total copout.This is the Shark Pool. I think it's obvious that we respect more independent thought and deep analysis, than the rest of the herd.

So for everyone on this board to claim Strahan is superior, yet be unwilling to look at how much Taylor has outplayed him in almost every aspect of the game, is surprising. Yeah, his higher sack totals (career wise, purely a function of having played a couple more years) and winning a championship are things the laymen picks up on. But I hope I'm not talking to laymen.

If Taylor plays a year or two more, he'll likely have comparable sack totals, and has already dominated Strahan in every other statistical category. For the "Sharks" to dismiss Taylor as not in Strahan's league, let alone not see Taylor as the superior player, seems just biased or very uninformed.

You quoted me. I have mostly been arguing that Strahan will be a weak DE in comparison to the others in the HOF. And I have said from the outset that I don't believe Taylor is HOF worthy at this point.I am making these arguments from the standpoint of what it takes to make the HOF. What you quoted above is true IMO. If you think it's a copout, so be it. Even though I think Strahan will not measure up to most of his HOF peers, there is basically no chance that he won't make the HOF, due to his sacks. Making the HOF is more about accomplishments than ability. I think Strahan is more accomplished, even if Taylor has been a better player for a shorter period of time. Consequently, I think Strahan gets in and Taylor doesn't.

If Taylor plays a few more years, he may achieve more statistically that would help his case and/or he could win more honors and/or he could even win a Super Bowl (if he is traded ). But as of today, none of that has happened. And he has just indicated that he will retire after this upcoming season, so it seems unlikely any of that will happen. Look at it this way: if Strahan had retired after his 12th season (this year will be Taylor's 12th), he would have 23.5 fewer sacks, about 180 fewer tackles (including assists), and no Super Bowl ring. That would make his HOF candidacy much more questionable IMO.

I think Taylor has arguably been a better player, albeit for a shorter period of time, but is still less HOF worthy than Strahan. I don't think that is inconsistent; I think that's how it is.

 

[Ice Cream Man]

I think Taylor has arguably been a better player, albeit for a shorter period of time, but is still less HOF worthy than Strahan. I don't think that is inconsistent; I think that's how it is

Thanks. You've cleared up my misunderstanding. Still, I think other posters perceive Taylor to be a lesser player than Strahan, not just from the HOF's perspective, but from their own as well. I'd be interested in knowing why.

 

[teamroc]

I also agree that Jason Taylor is not in Strahan's league.

Based on?

 

[Chase Stuart]

Lots of serious underrating of Strahan and Taylor in this thread.

Putting aside Smith and White, and the guys drafted before 1970, who else do you have?

Youngblood, Doleman and Strahan are at the top of the list. But Taylor, Hampton, Long and Jones, are right behind them. I think Taylor's right on the outside of the top 5 DEs of the last 30 years, and will make the HOF. Chris Doleman should be in the HOF, Youngblood and Strahan will make the HOF. I think Taylor's right behind them, and will make it as well. And Taylor won't even be in the bottom third of DEs inducted.

 

[Tau837]

Lots of serious underrating of Strahan and Taylor in this thread.Putting aside Smith and White, and the guys drafted before 1970, who else do you have?Youngblood, Doleman and Strahan are at the top of the list. But Taylor, Hampton, Long and Jones, are right behind them. I think Taylor's right on the outside of the top 5 DEs of the last 30 years, and will make the HOF. Chris Doleman should be in the HOF, Youngblood and Strahan will make the HOF. I think Taylor's right behind them, and will make it as well. And Taylor won't even be in the bottom third of DEs inducted.

Some of this post is confusing.1. Youngblood is already in the HOF.2. You appear to say Deacon Jones is behind Youngblood, Doleman, and Strahan in your ranking of these players, but I assume I am reading that wrong.3. You appear to narrow the group by cutting it off as those drafted in 1970 or later, but then refer to DEs of the last 30 years.Anyway, if the goal is to somehow rank the DEs that were drafted in 1970 or later, that eliminates these guysoug AtkinsElvin BetheaWillie DavisCarl EllerLen FordDeacon JonesGino MarchettiAndy RobustelliTheir collective careers spanned the years 1948 to 1984 - 37 years. Almost the same as 1970 to 2007 - 38 years. 8 DEs made it in that first 37 year span. Interestingly, we already have 6 in since then, counting Hampton, with Smith and Strahan locks to make it 8. This is one reason that I'm not sure all of Doleman, Richard Dent, or Taylor will make it.Personally, I think Hampton is different. He was a DE/DT. According to pro-football-reference.com, he played 6.5 seasons at DE and 4.5 at DT. That is a far smaller sample size at DE than any of the others being discussed here. So I'm not including him in my ranking. I'd rank the DEs drafted since 1970 like this:1. White2. Smith3. Youngblood4. Strahan5. Selmon6. Long7. Doleman8. Dent9. Taylor10. DeanNow, back to my earlier statements. I'd rank Strahan ahead of at least 3 current HOF DEs, and maybe another 3 others that I don't know much about (Atkins, Bethea, Ford). I think Hampton is an apples and oranges comparison, but I'd rather have Hampton on my team than Strahan.And I'd rank Taylor above only 1 current HOF DE for sure - Dean. Again, not sure about Atkins, Bethea, and Ford.In general, this is a pretty awesome group, so it's not like it is putting Strahan and Taylor down to say they don't measure up to all these greats.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Lots of serious underrating of Strahan and Taylor in this thread.Putting aside Smith and White, and the guys drafted before 1970, who else do you have?Youngblood, Doleman and Strahan are at the top of the list. But Taylor, Hampton, Long and Jones, are right behind them. I think Taylor's right on the outside of the top 5 DEs of the last 30 years, and will make the HOF. Chris Doleman should be in the HOF, Youngblood and Strahan will make the HOF. I think Taylor's right behind them, and will make it as well. And Taylor won't even be in the bottom third of DEs inducted.

Some of this post is confusing.1. Youngblood is already in the HOF.2. You appear to say Deacon Jones is behind Youngblood, Doleman, and Strahan in your ranking of these players, but I assume I am reading that wrong.3. You appear to narrow the group by cutting it off as those drafted in 1970 or later, but then refer to DEs of the last 30 years.Anyway, if the goal is to somehow rank the DEs that were drafted in 1970 or later, that eliminates these guysoug AtkinsElvin BetheaWillie DavisCarl EllerLen FordDeacon JonesGino MarchettiAndy RobustelliTheir collective careers spanned the years 1948 to 1984 - 37 years. Almost the same as 1970 to 2007 - 38 years. 8 DEs made it in that first 37 year span. Interestingly, we already have 6 in since then, counting Hampton, with Smith and Strahan locks to make it 8. This is one reason that I'm not sure all of Doleman, Richard Dent, or Taylor will make it.Personally, I think Hampton is different. He was a DE/DT. According to pro-football-reference.com, he played 6.5 seasons at DE and 4.5 at DT. That is a far smaller sample size at DE than any of the others being discussed here. So I'm not including him in my ranking. I'd rank the DEs drafted since 1970 like this:1. White2. Smith3. Youngblood4. Strahan5. Selmon6. Long7. Doleman8. Dent9. Taylor10. DeanNow, back to my earlier statements. I'd rank Strahan ahead of at least 3 current HOF DEs, and maybe another 3 others that I don't know much about (Atkins, Bethea, Ford). I think Hampton is an apples and oranges comparison, but I'd rather have Hampton on my team than Strahan.And I'd rank Taylor above only 1 current HOF DE for sure - Dean. Again, not sure about Atkins, Bethea, and Ford.In general, this is a pretty awesome group, so it's not like it is putting Strahan and Taylor down to say they don't measure up to all these greats.

I was intentionally limiting it to just post-merger players. Last 30 years was a rough approximation there, but basically talking about productivity in the last 30 years or so.Yes, I know Youngblood is in the HOF. I meant Youngblood and Strahan are in the HOF -- I think Strahan is an absolute lock. I agree with you putting him 3rd or 4th on the post-merger list.I think Selmon, Long and Dent are at best on the same level as Taylor. Sure, I like Selmon -- but he played a lot less than Taylor.In Taylor's worst three seasons, he had 16 sacks total, and he was still an above average DE. Take them out, and compare their two careers:Taylor: 128 games, 101 sacks, 6 PB, 3 first team APSelmon: 121 games, 6 PB, 1 first team AP, 23 sacks in the last 19 games of his career (when sack data was official)Unless you want to argue that Taylor's worse three years are a negative -- which I don't think is justifiable -- Taylor's numbers look better than Selmon in every respect. Dent's a close call, and he does have a small edge in sacks. But Taylor destroys him in TDs, fumble recoveries, and wins in Pro Bowls and APs, too. And Dent certainly benefitted from better teammates than Taylor.Long made 8 pro bowls, but fewer APs, and has a lot less sacks, FRs and INTs. He wasn't the playmaker Taylor was.I think Taylor and Dent and Long are on the same level, with Taylor maybe being the best. But Taylor definitely isn't a tier below them.

 

[Tau837]

I think Selmon, Long and Dent are at best on the same level as Taylor. Sure, I like Selmon -- but he played a lot less than Taylor.In Taylor's worst three seasons, he had 16 sacks total, and he was still an above average DE. Take them out, and compare their two careers:Taylor: 128 games, 101 sacks, 6 PB, 3 first team APSelmon: 121 games, 6 PB, 1 first team AP, 23 sacks in the last 19 games of his career (when sack data was official)Unless you want to argue that Taylor's worse three years are a negative -- which I don't think is justifiable -- Taylor's numbers look better than Selmon in every respect.

I don't get your removing Taylor's worst 3 seasons. I must be missing your rationale on that.Selmon played 121 games. He had 742 tackles, 78.5 sacks, 28.5 forced fumbles, and 10 fumble recoveries; won 1 DPOY; was NFLPA DLOY 4 times; made 1st team All Pro 1 time; made 6 Pro Bowls.In Taylor's first 124 games (his first 8 seasons - as close as I can get at pfr), he had 461 tackles, 80.5 sacks, 23 forced fumbles, and 19 fumble recoveries; won 1 DPOY; made 3 Pro Bowls; and made 1st team All Pro 2 times.Sacks and fumbles are basically a wash, but Selmon had a huge edge in tackles. Selmon had 1 fewer 1st team All Pro selection, but was named 1st team 2 other times by the PFWA and NEA, and doubled Taylor's Pro Bowls. Selmon was NLFPA Defensive Lineman of the Year 4 times; I don't know where to find those annual awards, but I assume that is more than Taylor won during his first 8 seasons.Sorry, I don't see where Taylor was better. Some of Selmon's statistics are unofficial, but to ignore them means you might as well not make the comparison. And, in case anyone wants to suggest we should use Taylor's first 9 seasons, since Selmon played 9 seasons, let me point out that Selmon played 9 out of 9 possible games in 1982 due to the strike, and it isn't fair to penalize him for that in this comparison... plus the league only played 14 game regular seasons in his first two seasons.Sure, Taylor has had 3 excellent seasons since then, but Selmon didn't have the opportunity to have those same seasons. And, since you pointed out that Dent played with much better teammates, let me reiterate that Selmon played his whole career with an expansion team. If anything, he was at a disadvantage there.

Dent's a close call, and he does have a small edge in sacks. But Taylor destroys him in TDs, fumble recoveries, and wins in Pro Bowls and APs, too. And Dent certainly benefitted from better teammates than Taylor.

Dent's small edge in sacks is 137.5 to 117. That's a decent gap as of right now, which is what my ranking is based on.Dent forced 37 fumbles in his career to 39 for Taylor. Dent recovered 13, to Taylor's 26. A sizable edge in fumble recoveries for Taylor, but close to a wash in forced fumbles. Perhaps you are saying he destroyed him because Dent played 31 more games than Taylor (as of now). If so, you should be aware that Dent's last 36 games were as a bit player... he really did not pad his stats with them - 13 sacks, 3 forced fumbles, and 36 tackles over his last 36 games, including only 4 starts, spread over 4 years.Speaking of tackles, they are very close. Dent had 677, compared to Taylor's 651 and counting.Yes, Taylor has more honors - Pro Bowls, All Pros, and the DPOY. Dent was Super Bowl MVP but doesn't measure up here. Of course, being a key player on a Super Bowl winner is important, and Dent has that edge.Yes, Dent had better teammates. But to me he deserves some credit for being a strong player on arguably one of the best defenses of all time.Like you said, this one is close. I favor Dent by a small margin. Small enough that assuming Taylor has a good season this year, he will pass Dent in my ranking.

Long made 8 pro bowls, but fewer APs, and has a lot less sacks, FRs and INTs. He wasn't the playmaker Taylor was.

Long is the one guy in my ranking I have a hard time defending. Where I rank him is based more on my impression of watching him play. Perhaps I should move him down.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I think Selmon, Long and Dent are at best on the same level as Taylor. Sure, I like Selmon -- but he played a lot less than Taylor.In Taylor's worst three seasons, he had 16 sacks total, and he was still an above average DE. Take them out, and compare their two careers:Taylor: 128 games, 101 sacks, 6 PB, 3 first team APSelmon: 121 games, 6 PB, 1 first team AP, 23 sacks in the last 19 games of his career (when sack data was official)Unless you want to argue that Taylor's worse three years are a negative -- which I don't think is justifiable -- Taylor's numbers look better than Selmon in every respect.

I don't get your removing Taylor's worst 3 seasons. I must be missing your rationale on that.Selmon played 121 games. He had 742 tackles, 78.5 sacks, 28.5 forced fumbles, and 10 fumble recoveries; won 1 DPOY; was NFLPA DLOY 4 times; made 1st team All Pro 1 time; made 6 Pro Bowls.In Taylor's first 124 games (his first 8 seasons - as close as I can get at pfr), he had 461 tackles, 80.5 sacks, 23 forced fumbles, and 19 fumble recoveries; won 1 DPOY; made 3 Pro Bowls; and made 1st team All Pro 2 times.Sacks and fumbles are basically a wash, but Selmon had a huge edge in tackles. Selmon had 1 fewer 1st team All Pro selection, but was named 1st team 2 other times by the PFWA and NEA, and doubled Taylor's Pro Bowls. Selmon was NLFPA Defensive Lineman of the Year 4 times; I don't know where to find those annual awards, but I assume that is more than Taylor won during his first 8 seasons.Sorry, I don't see where Taylor was better. Some of Selmon's statistics are unofficial, but to ignore them means you might as well not make the comparison. And, in case anyone wants to suggest we should use Taylor's first 9 seasons, since Selmon played 9 seasons, let me point out that Selmon played 9 out of 9 possible games in 1982 due to the strike, and it isn't fair to penalize him for that in this comparison... plus the league only played 14 game regular seasons in his first two seasons.Sure, Taylor has had 3 excellent seasons since then, but Selmon didn't have the opportunity to have those same seasons.

How can you discount three of Taylor's best seasons?The reason I discounted Taylor's three worst seasons was that they're still better than Selmon's 2-3 years of not playing. Your point about the strike is a good one.But you absolutely can't discount Taylor's best years because Selmon's career was cut short. Taylor has been a stud for a decade, and that's a big point in his favor over Selmon.You might be abel to argue that Selmon was slightly better in his prime, but Taylor's career length gives him the advantage IMO.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I think Selmon, Long and Dent are at best on the same level as Taylor. Sure, I like Selmon -- but he played a lot less than Taylor.In Taylor's worst three seasons, he had 16 sacks total, and he was still an above average DE. Take them out, and compare their two careers:Taylor: 128 games, 101 sacks, 6 PB, 3 first team APSelmon: 121 games, 6 PB, 1 first team AP, 23 sacks in the last 19 games of his career (when sack data was official)Unless you want to argue that Taylor's worse three years are a negative -- which I don't think is justifiable -- Taylor's numbers look better than Selmon in every respect.

I don't get your removing Taylor's worst 3 seasons. I must be missing your rationale on that.Selmon played 121 games. He had 742 tackles, 78.5 sacks, 28.5 forced fumbles, and 10 fumble recoveries; won 1 DPOY; was NFLPA DLOY 4 times; made 1st team All Pro 1 time; made 6 Pro Bowls.In Taylor's first 124 games (his first 8 seasons - as close as I can get at pfr), he had 461 tackles, 80.5 sacks, 23 forced fumbles, and 19 fumble recoveries; won 1 DPOY; made 3 Pro Bowls; and made 1st team All Pro 2 times.Sacks and fumbles are basically a wash, but Selmon had a huge edge in tackles. Selmon had 1 fewer 1st team All Pro selection, but was named 1st team 2 other times by the PFWA and NEA, and doubled Taylor's Pro Bowls. Selmon was NLFPA Defensive Lineman of the Year 4 times; I don't know where to find those annual awards, but I assume that is more than Taylor won during his first 8 seasons.Sorry, I don't see where Taylor was better. Some of Selmon's statistics are unofficial, but to ignore them means you might as well not make the comparison. And, in case anyone wants to suggest we should use Taylor's first 9 seasons, since Selmon played 9 seasons, let me point out that Selmon played 9 out of 9 possible games in 1982 due to the strike, and it isn't fair to penalize him for that in this comparison... plus the league only played 14 game regular seasons in his first two seasons.Sure, Taylor has had 3 excellent seasons since then, but Selmon didn't have the opportunity to have those same seasons. And, since you pointed out that Dent played with much better teammates, let me reiterate that Selmon played his whole career with an expansion team. If anything, he was at a disadvantage there.

Dent's a close call, and he does have a small edge in sacks. But Taylor destroys him in TDs, fumble recoveries, and wins in Pro Bowls and APs, too. And Dent certainly benefitted from better teammates than Taylor.

Dent's small edge in sacks is 137.5 to 117. That's a decent gap as of right now, which is what my ranking is based on.Dent forced 37 fumbles in his career to 39 for Taylor. Dent recovered 13, to Taylor's 26. A sizable edge in fumble recoveries for Taylor, but close to a wash in forced fumbles. Perhaps you are saying he destroyed him because Dent played 31 more games than Taylor (as of now). If so, you should be aware that Dent's last 36 games were as a bit player... he really did not pad his stats with them - 13 sacks, 3 forced fumbles, and 36 tackles over his last 36 games, including only 4 starts, spread over 4 years.Speaking of tackles, they are very close. Dent had 677, compared to Taylor's 651 and counting.Yes, Taylor has more honors - Pro Bowls, All Pros, and the DPOY. Dent was Super Bowl MVP but doesn't measure up here. Of course, being a key player on a Super Bowl winner is important, and Dent has that edge.Yes, Dent had better teammates. But to me he deserves some credit for being a strong player on arguably one of the best defenses of all time.Like you said, this one is close. I favor Dent by a small margin. Small enough that assuming Taylor has a good season this year, he will pass Dent in my ranking.

Long made 8 pro bowls, but fewer APs, and has a lot less sacks, FRs and INTs. He wasn't the playmaker Taylor was.

Long is the one guy in my ranking I have a hard time defending. Where I rank him is based more on my impression of watching him play. Perhaps I should move him down.

I think Dent and Long are great; I just don't think they're on another level than Taylor. I'd have a hard time arguing that. Outside of Strahan, Taylor's been the best DE of the past 10 years, and since the merger, I think you can only say that White, Smith, Youngblood and Strahan were clearly better DEs.Taylor has been a star on a very good defense for a large part of his career. He's got decent longevity and he won a DPOY award. Great athlete and a heady player. To me, he's your prototypical HOF player. You can build a team around him, and he's flawless (character guy, athletic, intelligent, plays the run, plays the pass).

 

[ClownDogs]

Just curious, did the press conference happen?

 

[Tau837]

I think Selmon, Long and Dent are at best on the same level as Taylor. Sure, I like Selmon -- but he played a lot less than Taylor.In Taylor's worst three seasons, he had 16 sacks total, and he was still an above average DE. Take them out, and compare their two careers:Taylor: 128 games, 101 sacks, 6 PB, 3 first team APSelmon: 121 games, 6 PB, 1 first team AP, 23 sacks in the last 19 games of his career (when sack data was official)Unless you want to argue that Taylor's worse three years are a negative -- which I don't think is justifiable -- Taylor's numbers look better than Selmon in every respect.

I don't get your removing Taylor's worst 3 seasons. I must be missing your rationale on that.Selmon played 121 games. He had 742 tackles, 78.5 sacks, 28.5 forced fumbles, and 10 fumble recoveries; won 1 DPOY; was NFLPA DLOY 4 times; made 1st team All Pro 1 time; made 6 Pro Bowls.In Taylor's first 124 games (his first 8 seasons - as close as I can get at pfr), he had 461 tackles, 80.5 sacks, 23 forced fumbles, and 19 fumble recoveries; won 1 DPOY; made 3 Pro Bowls; and made 1st team All Pro 2 times.Sacks and fumbles are basically a wash, but Selmon had a huge edge in tackles. Selmon had 1 fewer 1st team All Pro selection, but was named 1st team 2 other times by the PFWA and NEA, and doubled Taylor's Pro Bowls. Selmon was NLFPA Defensive Lineman of the Year 4 times; I don't know where to find those annual awards, but I assume that is more than Taylor won during his first 8 seasons.Sorry, I don't see where Taylor was better. Some of Selmon's statistics are unofficial, but to ignore them means you might as well not make the comparison. And, in case anyone wants to suggest we should use Taylor's first 9 seasons, since Selmon played 9 seasons, let me point out that Selmon played 9 out of 9 possible games in 1982 due to the strike, and it isn't fair to penalize him for that in this comparison... plus the league only played 14 game regular seasons in his first two seasons.Sure, Taylor has had 3 excellent seasons since then, but Selmon didn't have the opportunity to have those same seasons.

How can you discount three of Taylor's best seasons?The reason I discounted Taylor's three worst seasons was that they're still better than Selmon's 2-3 years of not playing. Your point about the strike is a good one.But you absolutely can't discount Taylor's best years because Selmon's career was cut short. Taylor has been a stud for a decade, and that's a big point in his favor over Selmon.You might be abel to argue that Selmon was slightly better in his prime, but Taylor's career length gives him the advantage IMO.

There are different ways to approach it. One is to give Taylor his best years - you did that. One is to compare them for the same period of their careers - I did that.Yes, I think Selmon was better in his prime, and that is obviously why I rank him higher. I find it interesting that you essentially ignore the huge edge in tackles Selmon had.I grudgingly give Strahan an edge over Selmon due to achievements enabled by his greater longevity, but his career is much longer - 95 more games than Selmon; Taylor is has played 51 more games. Maybe Taylor will pass him if he plays on long enough at a high level.

 

[Tau837]

OK, good arguments in here by many people. I concede... I am now convinced that Taylor deserves HOF consideration. I still stand by the rankings I posted earlier, but Taylor can and probably will pass some of those I ranked ahead of him, especially if he plays more than one more year.

 

[SSOG]

I think Taylor has arguably been a better player, albeit for a shorter period of time, but is still less HOF worthy than Strahan. I don't think that is inconsistent; I think that's how it is

Thanks. You've cleared up my misunderstanding. Still, I think other posters perceive Taylor to be a lesser player than Strahan, not just from the HOF's perspective, but from their own as well. I'd be interested in knowing why.

Strahan's so much better against the run that it's not even funny. Not that Taylor was any slouch in that respect, but Strahan spent his career at RDE (strongside DE) while Taylor spent his career at LDE (weakside DE), and that was for a reason- Strahan is your prototypical run-stuffing end in addition to being a passrushing dynamo. Strahan also made most of his accomplishments with a far inferior supporting cast. Seriously, for a long while, Jason Taylor had the best CB tandem in the league backing him up (when Madison and Surtain were in their primes). You don't think that that incredible coverage advantage inflated Taylor's sack totals? Behind Taylor he had Zach Thomas, one of the biggest tackling machines the game has seen since Randy Gradishar. That didn't give Taylor the freedom to play a bit more undisciplined when pinning his ears back?Also, comparing per-game numbers is a little misleading because Taylor is just getting past his prime, while Strahan has been past it for a while (which negatively impacts his per-game numbers). Through his first 11 seasons, Taylor has 117 sacks in 172 games. Through his first 11 seasons, Strahan had... 114 sacks in 167 games. Consider Strahan was a relatively late bloomer (5.5 sacks his first two years combined) and I don't see any evidence that Taylor has been more successful at rushing the passer- which, when combined with the supporting cast and coaching that Taylor has been working with, as well as the fact that Strahan's sacks came from a position not designed to generate sacks (the RDE generally has an extra blocker to contend with, which generally makes sacks harder to come by), suggests to me that Strahan was the better passrusher. So, Strahan's better against the pass, and he's better against the run. That pretty much sums up why I think Taylor is a lesser player than Strahan.Not that it's an insult to Taylor. When you're being compared to a guy I think should be a first-ballot HoFer, almost everyone is going to wind up coming out as a lesser player.

 

[comfortably numb]

Just curious, did the press conference happen?

 

[Gatorman]

I think Taylor has arguably been a better player, albeit for a shorter period of time, but is still less HOF worthy than Strahan. I don't think that is inconsistent; I think that's how it is

Thanks. You've cleared up my misunderstanding. Still, I think other posters perceive Taylor to be a lesser player than Strahan, not just from the HOF's perspective, but from their own as well. I'd be interested in knowing why.

Strahan's so much better against the run that it's not even funny. Not that Taylor was any slouch in that respect, but Strahan spent his career at RDE (strongside DE) while Taylor spent his career at LDE (weakside DE), and that was for a reason- Strahan is your prototypical run-stuffing end in addition to being a passrushing dynamo. Strahan also made most of his accomplishments with a far inferior supporting cast. Seriously, for a long while, Jason Taylor had the best CB tandem in the league backing him up (when Madison and Surtain were in their primes). You don't think that that incredible coverage advantage inflated Taylor's sack totals? Behind Taylor he had Zach Thomas, one of the biggest tackling machines the game has seen since Randy Gradishar. That didn't give Taylor the freedom to play a bit more undisciplined when pinning his ears back?Also, comparing per-game numbers is a little misleading because Taylor is just getting past his prime, while Strahan has been past it for a while (which negatively impacts his per-game numbers). Through his first 11 seasons, Taylor has 117 sacks in 172 games. Through his first 11 seasons, Strahan had... 114 sacks in 167 games. Consider Strahan was a relatively late bloomer (5.5 sacks his first two years combined) and I don't see any evidence that Taylor has been more successful at rushing the passer- which, when combined with the supporting cast and coaching that Taylor has been working with, as well as the fact that Strahan's sacks came from a position not designed to generate sacks (the RDE generally has an extra blocker to contend with, which generally makes sacks harder to come by), suggests to me that Strahan was the better passrusher. So, Strahan's better against the pass, and he's better against the run. That pretty much sums up why I think Taylor is a lesser player than Strahan.Not that it's an insult to Taylor. When you're being compared to a guy I think should be a first-ballot HoFer, almost everyone is going to wind up coming out as a lesser player.

I shudder to enter this argument, but taylor has to be given consideration for the HOF as one of the best players at his position for this era of football. Maybe Freeney comes close, but taylor has been double and triple teamed (by New England) to keep him from the QB and he still gets sacks. Also, lets look at the sacks the guy playing opposite him have gotten in that span... Adawale Ogunglye can thank JT for his contract in chicago. I am not the stat geek most are around here, but young player and aging veteran alike have seen double digit sacks on THE OTHER SIDE of the line b/c of what taylor does on his side. People run at him not b/c he is weak vs the run, but b/c he catches them down the line if they run away from him. Even when the dolphin D has been bad, Taylor is the guy making a play 20 yards down the field from the LOS, or in coverage, etc.I think if you asked Bill Bellicheck if Taylor is a HOF, he would say yes. Taylor did by himself to New England (at times) what it took the giants Front 5 to do vs. then in the last SB.I hate to see the phins/taylor saga drag on... He is the Defensive Dan Marino of this team (Strong defender with no Offense to get him anywhere)