Pro Football Hall of Fame announces nominees for 2013 class (1 Viewer)

[Bri]

I thought George Young and Sapp made it in last year...oops.

Sapp's obvious.

Young not being in is ridiculous. Get him in now.

If you take the key debates of like the last five years here, I bet he drafted or hired 30% of those guys. Get him in ASAP.

BB, Parcells, Fox, Coughlin...he hired them.

LT, Strahan, Carson, he drafted em'.

Great Giants D of the 80s, he built it.

Ever talk of college coaches not making it in the NFL? He hired college legend Ray Perkins and made the switch to BP.

Ever hear some fable how some high school coach will then coach college in the same area before eventually coaching the pro team in that area? Umm Young did that. He's but one reason why people dream it's possible.

NFL drug testing changes started with LT (probably high) bragging to an author about how he beat the test this way and that way. Young was all over that, as was the NFL, and there sorely needed to be changes even if his boy would be suspended in future years. The Mara family (already in the HOF) were high character people and Young was oh so similar.

All the debates here where people don't want rules to change, he was the guy at NFL meetings almost always voting for rules to the stay the same.

He was a major part of free agency discussions n debate when it first started.

He's like a quiet legend, NFL hired him for a few years and about wouldn't let him retire without picking his brain first.

 

[SSOG]

I want to personally punch every single person who voted for Tasker. If rather see Eddie Freaking DeBartolo get in than Tasker, and DeBartolo's only claim to fame is that he was rich and lucked into a HoF coach. If any one of those voters gives some garbage speech about how special teams is part of the game, I'm asking them when the last time was that they voted for a long snapper. And then I'm punching them in the freaking face. *Rage*Also wholly undeserving: 1. All non-players except for Parcells. You don't keep a player or coach out to put a contributor in. The only exceptions I would ever be willing to make to that rule are both named Sabol. 2. Roger Craig and Jerome Bettis. Craig was a great back, but never elite. Bettis is the Vinny Testeverde or Drew Bledsoe of the RB world.

I wholly agree with all of this except on Bettis. I think statistically Bettis looks a bit like Bledsoe, but the rest of his package is a lot better. It's the Hall of "Fame", not the hall of stats, and Bettis was definitely among the most famous players in the league when he played. Bledsoe and Testaverde were just guys.

Bettis also made 1st team All Pro 2 times and 2nd team All Pro 1 time. Neither Testaverde nor Bledsoe ever made 1st or 2nd team. It shows that Bettis had some strong peak seasons in addition to longevity.

I hate the "it's the hall of FAME, and he was famous" argument. If we're hinging a candidacy on the name of the place, then I'd say it's called the HALL of fame, and it's not actually a hallway, so nobody deserves to get in. I mean, putting someone in for something as ephemeral as "fame" opens the door to guys like Jesse Palmer (he was on The Bachelor!), Gary Hogeboom (he was on Survivor!), or Roy Williams (Horsecollar tackles!). If Fame was really one of the criteria being used, why has Pat Tillman's name never once showed up on so much as the initial candidates list?As for his qualifications on the field... Yes, he had two 1APs and a 2AP, and all three were deserved (if unspectacular- he averaged 1700 yards and 9 TDs in those years, which are great numbers, but historically speaking, are pretty mediocre compared to other all pro seasons- this isn't Terrell Davis, Priest Holmes, or Marshall Faulk we're talking about that). In addition to those three seasons, he had one more year over 4 ypc (although he missed 5 games to injury). He put up 9 years below 4 ypc, including three years of 3.3 ypc or worse. His career ypc was 3.9, which makes him one of just four RBs among the NFL's 50 career rushing leaders to post a sub-4.0 career ypc (the others are John Riggins, Eddie George, and Earnest Byner). When your two best comps are Riggins (arguably the RB equivalent of Charlie Joyner in undeservingness) and Eddie George, I think your case is in serious trouble. Bettis has 3 top 5 finishes in scrimmage yards (his three all pro years) zero top 5 finishes in TDs, and owes his career totals to ridiculously long stretches of outright poor production. We both tend to agree that it's silly to think that all that separates a HoFer from a non-HoFer is 5 extra years of below-average production to pad his career totals while he's playing out the string. Well, that's Jerome Bettis in a nutshell.

 

[CalBear]

I hate the "it's the hall of FAME, and he was famous" argument. If we're hinging a candidacy on the name of the place, then I'd say it's called the HALL of fame, and it's not actually a hallway, so nobody deserves to get in. I mean, putting someone in for something as ephemeral as "fame" opens the door to guys like Jesse Palmer (he was on The Bachelor!), Gary Hogeboom (he was on Survivor!), or Roy Williams (Horsecollar tackles!). If Fame was really one of the criteria being used, why has Pat Tillman's name never once showed up on so much as the initial candidates list?

You can like it or hate it, but it's part of the equation. There are no specific criteria for getting into the Hall, and some voters use fame as part of their consideration. "Could you tell the story of the NFL without this person?" is an argument appealing to fame. if there were a player with Bettis' stats and Bledsoe's fame profile (mostly known as the guy who got supplanted by a better player) that player wouldn't get near the Hall. But Bettis was personable, played for two highly visible franchises, had a cool nickname, TV commercials, etc. I would be surprised if he doesn't get in.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

I want to personally punch every single person who voted for Tasker. If rather see Eddie Freaking DeBartolo get in than Tasker, and DeBartolo's only claim to fame is that he was rich and lucked into a HoF coach. If any one of those voters gives some garbage speech about how special teams is part of the game, I'm asking them when the last time was that they voted for a long snapper. And then I'm punching them in the freaking face. *Rage*Also wholly undeserving: 1. All non-players except for Parcells. You don't keep a player or coach out to put a contributor in. The only exceptions I would ever be willing to make to that rule are both named Sabol. 2. Roger Craig and Jerome Bettis. Craig was a great back, but never elite. Bettis is the Vinny Testeverde or Drew Bledsoe of the RB world.

Tasker will get in some day via the Seniors Committee and I hope you're still around here. Can't wait for that rage.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I hate the "it's the hall of FAME, and he was famous" argument. If we're hinging a candidacy on the name of the place, then I'd say it's called the HALL of fame, and it's not actually a hallway, so nobody deserves to get in. I mean, putting someone in for something as ephemeral as "fame" opens the door to guys like Jesse Palmer (he was on The Bachelor!), Gary Hogeboom (he was on Survivor!), or Roy Williams (Horsecollar tackles!). If Fame was really one of the criteria being used, why has Pat Tillman's name never once showed up on so much as the initial candidates list?

You can like it or hate it, but it's part of the equation. There are no specific criteria for getting into the Hall, and some voters use fame as part of their consideration. "Could you tell the story of the NFL without this person?" is an argument appealing to fame.

If that is the standard, then the case for Terrell Davis over Jerome Bettis is even stronger that I already thought it was. You could easily tell the story of the NFL without talking about Jerome Bettis. He was never the best RB in the league, and the only championship team he was a part of not only had minimal contributions from him as the backup RB, but his only noteworthy play in the postseason was his fumble that nearly cost the Steelers their season. Bettis was never an integral part of a championship-winning team (unless you really think being a goal line back makes you integral). Meanwhile, Terrell Davis was mentioned in the same breath as Barry Sanders for several seasons when talking about the best RB in the league, and you cannot tell the story of the NFL without talking about him, since he was the best player on the teams that finally got John Elway his two rings, and many have said, "Elway never would have won a ring without Terrell Davis."

 

[CalBear]

You can like it or hate it, but it's part of the equation. There are no specific criteria for getting into the Hall, and some voters use fame as part of their consideration. "Could you tell the story of the NFL without this person?" is an argument appealing to fame.

If that is the standard, then the case for Terrell Davis over Jerome Bettis is even stronger that I already thought it was.

There is no standard. There are a bunch of voters, each with different standards.

 

[Ghost Rider]

You can like it or hate it, but it's part of the equation. There are no specific criteria for getting into the Hall, and some voters use fame as part of their consideration. "Could you tell the story of the NFL without this person?" is an argument appealing to fame.

If that is the standard, then the case for Terrell Davis over Jerome Bettis is even stronger that I already thought it was.

There is no standard. There are a bunch of voters, each with different standards.

I understand that, but I am just saying, anyone who uses the "Could you tell the story of the NFL without this person?" argument cannot possibly vote for Bettis and not Davis.

 

[SSOG]

I hate the "it's the hall of FAME, and he was famous" argument. If we're hinging a candidacy on the name of the place, then I'd say it's called the HALL of fame, and it's not actually a hallway, so nobody deserves to get in. I mean, putting someone in for something as ephemeral as "fame" opens the door to guys like Jesse Palmer (he was on The Bachelor!), Gary Hogeboom (he was on Survivor!), or Roy Williams (Horsecollar tackles!). If Fame was really one of the criteria being used, why has Pat Tillman's name never once showed up on so much as the initial candidates list?

You can like it or hate it, but it's part of the equation. There are no specific criteria for getting into the Hall, and some voters use fame as part of their consideration. "Could you tell the story of the NFL without this person?" is an argument appealing to fame. if there were a player with Bettis' stats and Bledsoe's fame profile (mostly known as the guy who got supplanted by a better player) that player wouldn't get near the Hall. But Bettis was personable, played for two highly visible franchises, had a cool nickname, TV commercials, etc. I would be surprised if he doesn't get in.

We're talking about different things. I'm talking "should". You're talking "will". Some people thought Charlie Joyner was worthy of the HoF. Those people were idiots who made a huge mistake. There's no telling whether this batch of voters are also idiots who will also make a huge mistake. I can't say what will happen, I can only point out what a ludicrous mistake it will be should it come to pass.

 

[Bri]

You can like it or hate it, but it's part of the equation. There are no specific criteria for getting into the Hall, and some voters use fame as part of their consideration. "Could you tell the story of the NFL without this person?" is an argument appealing to fame.

If that is the standard, then the case for Terrell Davis over Jerome Bettis is even stronger that I already thought it was.

There is no standard. There are a bunch of voters, each with different standards.

I understand that, but I am just saying, anyone who uses the "Could you tell the story of the NFL without this person?" argument cannot possibly vote for Bettis and not Davis.

I love TD but this argument is so weak considering Olandis Gary and Mike Anderson

 

[SSOG]

I want to personally punch every single person who voted for Tasker. If rather see Eddie Freaking DeBartolo get in than Tasker, and DeBartolo's only claim to fame is that he was rich and lucked into a HoF coach. If any one of those voters gives some garbage speech about how special teams is part of the game, I'm asking them when the last time was that they voted for a long snapper. And then I'm punching them in the freaking face. *Rage*Also wholly undeserving: 1. All non-players except for Parcells. You don't keep a player or coach out to put a contributor in. The only exceptions I would ever be willing to make to that rule are both named Sabol. 2. Roger Craig and Jerome Bettis. Craig was a great back, but never elite. Bettis is the Vinny Testeverde or Drew Bledsoe of the RB world.

Tasker will get in some day via the Seniors Committee and I hope you're still around here. Can't wait for that rage.

No way in hell. The normal admissions process is tough, but there's still room for idiots to waste everyone's time trying to make a personal statement that has no chance passing. The seniors process is even tougher, and those guys can't afford to waste one of their two selections on someone without a prayer. Plus, I'm pretty sure Randy Gradishar would hunt them down and kill them if they nominated a gunner over him.

 

[SSOG]

You can like it or hate it, but it's part of the equation. There are no specific criteria for getting into the Hall, and some voters use fame as part of their consideration. "Could you tell the story of the NFL without this person?" is an argument appealing to fame.

If that is the standard, then the case for Terrell Davis over Jerome Bettis is even stronger that I already thought it was.

There is no standard. There are a bunch of voters, each with different standards.

I understand that, but I am just saying, anyone who uses the "Could you tell the story of the NFL without this person?" argument cannot possibly vote for Bettis and not Davis.

I love TD but this argument is so weak considering Olandis Gary and Mike Anderson

I love Steve Young, but this argument is so weak considering Jeff Garcia. Also, Kurt Warner/Marc Bulger. In other words, elite player puts up historic numbers and is replaced by mediocre player who puts up decent-but-unspectacular numbers. How is this damaging to the player's hall chances, again?

 

[Ghost Rider]

You can like it or hate it, but it's part of the equation. There are no specific criteria for getting into the Hall, and some voters use fame as part of their consideration. "Could you tell the story of the NFL without this person?" is an argument appealing to fame.

If that is the standard, then the case for Terrell Davis over Jerome Bettis is even stronger that I already thought it was.

There is no standard. There are a bunch of voters, each with different standards.

I understand that, but I am just saying, anyone who uses the "Could you tell the story of the NFL without this person?" argument cannot possibly vote for Bettis and not Davis.

I love TD but this argument is so weak considering Olandis Gary and Mike Anderson

How many times did Gary or Anderson rush for 2,000 yards? How many postseasons did either dominate?How many MVP awards did Gary or Anderson win? Regular season or Super Bowl? Is Aaron Rodgers not that good cause of what Matt Flynn did Week 17 last year? Is Tom Brady not that good cause Matt Cassel (who we all see now stinks) led the Patriots to an 11-5 record in 2008? I'll hang up and listen.

 

[N Zone]

I think Bettis had a couple seasons where it could be argued he was the best RB in the league.

 

[Mentos]

I think Bettis had a couple seasons where it could be argued he was the best RB in the league.

No. His best seasons were 1996 and 1997. Barry Sanders and Terrell Davis were better than Bettis in each of those seasons.

 

[SSOG]

I think Bettis had a couple seasons where it could be argued he was the best RB in the league.

Not really. He had 4 great seasons and 9 below average seasons. His best argument comes in 1993, when he had 1675 yards and 7 scores. His problem in 1993, of course, is that's the year Emmitt Smith held out two games, watched his team go 0-2 without him, then returned and went for 1900 yards and 10 scores in just 14 games, leading the league in rushing yards and finishing 2nd in yards from scrimmage. Nobody in the universe would have called Bettis the best RB in the league that year, but it would have been reasonable to call him the second best. By the time his next great season rolled around, the league had added quite a few more contenders. In 1996, Bettis put up 1550 yards and 11 scores. He shared 1AP honors with Terrell Davis (1850 yards, 15 scores), while the league also saw great seasons from Curtis Martin (1480/17) and Ricky Watters (1850/13), and Emmitt/Barry were still in their prime, even if they both had a down season by their standards. In 1997, Bettis had his best statistical season (1775/9), but of course, Sanders was rushing for 2,000, Davis was leading his team to their first of two SBs, and Levens also had an unusually great seasons with 1800/12. And then, in 2001, Bettis saw a surprising renaissance cut short by injury, but 2001 was a sick year for RB production- Faulk and Holmes both had vintage Faulk and Holmes seasons, Ahman Green put up another vintage Faulk/Holmes type season, Shaun Alexander had 1650/16, Curtis Martin had 1825/10, and Tomlinson was just beginning to get the ball rolling on his career with a 1600/10 game.As I said, I think in 1993 you could have made a case Bettis was the 2nd best RB in the league based on production that season, or 4th best (behind Smith, Sanders, and Thurman Thomas) if you allowed yourself to be influenced by previous seasons' production. In 1996/1997, Bettis could make a reasonable case to being a top 5 RB. In 2001, he was a top 10 RB. Outside of those 4 seasons, though, he wasn't even that.

 

[pecorino]

a lot of the points made about bettis apply equally well to john riggins. and since they are both in the "big back" mold, i think it makes sense to compare them. riggins had one monster season (1300 yards, 24 touchdowns) during a year in which most impartial folks would still put eric dickerson as the top back (1800 yards and 18 TDs). aside from that he regularly rushed for under 4 ypc, and certainly did not qualify as the best RB in the league. he only had 5 seasons over 1000 yards--bettis had 8. since riggins got in to the HOF, bettis should too.

 

[SSOG]

a lot of the points made about bettis apply equally well to john riggins. and since they are both in the "big back" mold, i think it makes sense to compare them. riggins had one monster season (1300 yards, 24 touchdowns) during a year in which most impartial folks would still put eric dickerson as the top back (1800 yards and 18 TDs). aside from that he regularly rushed for under 4 ypc, and certainly did not qualify as the best RB in the league. he only had 5 seasons over 1000 yards--bettis had 8. since riggins got in to the HOF, bettis should too.

See, I'd go the other way. Since Riggins is one of the three biggest mistakes the HoF electors ever made, they'd be idiots to compound it by electing every undeserving RB on the ballot because, well, he's better than Riggins. That'd be like using Charlie Joyner as the new standard by which potential HoF WRs are judged against.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

a lot of the points made about bettis apply equally well to john riggins. and since they are both in the "big back" mold, i think it makes sense to compare them. riggins had one monster season (1300 yards, 24 touchdowns) during a year in which most impartial folks would still put eric dickerson as the top back (1800 yards and 18 TDs). aside from that he regularly rushed for under 4 ypc, and certainly did not qualify as the best RB in the league. he only had 5 seasons over 1000 yards--bettis had 8. since riggins got in to the HOF, bettis should too.

See, I'd go the other way. Since Riggins is one of the three biggest mistakes the HoF electors ever made, they'd be idiots to compound it by electing every undeserving RB on the ballot because, well, he's better than Riggins. That'd be like using Charlie Joyner as the new standard by which potential HoF WRs are judged against.

That's the second time I've seen you do that. It's Joiner, isn't it?

 

[ConstruxBoy]

I want to personally punch every single person who voted for Tasker. If rather see Eddie Freaking DeBartolo get in than Tasker, and DeBartolo's only claim to fame is that he was rich and lucked into a HoF coach. If any one of those voters gives some garbage speech about how special teams is part of the game, I'm asking them when the last time was that they voted for a long snapper. And then I'm punching them in the freaking face. *Rage*Also wholly undeserving: 1. All non-players except for Parcells. You don't keep a player or coach out to put a contributor in. The only exceptions I would ever be willing to make to that rule are both named Sabol. 2. Roger Craig and Jerome Bettis. Craig was a great back, but never elite. Bettis is the Vinny Testeverde or Drew Bledsoe of the RB world.

Tasker will get in some day via the Seniors Committee and I hope you're still around here. Can't wait for that rage.

No way in hell. The normal admissions process is tough, but there's still room for idiots to waste everyone's time trying to make a personal statement that has no chance passing. The seniors process is even tougher, and those guys can't afford to waste one of their two selections on someone without a prayer. Plus, I'm pretty sure Randy Gradishar would hunt them down and kill them if they nominated a gunner over him.

I think it will happen. By then Gradishar will be in though, so no worry there.

 

[Mentos]

a lot of the points made about bettis apply equally well to john riggins. and since they are both in the "big back" mold, i think it makes sense to compare them. riggins had one monster season (1300 yards, 24 touchdowns) during a year in which most impartial folks would still put eric dickerson as the top back (1800 yards and 18 TDs). aside from that he regularly rushed for under 4 ypc, and certainly did not qualify as the best RB in the league. he only had 5 seasons over 1000 yards--bettis had 8. since riggins got in to the HOF, bettis should too.

See, I'd go the other way. Since Riggins is one of the three biggest mistakes the HoF electors ever made, they'd be idiots to compound it by electing every undeserving RB on the ballot because, well, he's better than Riggins. That'd be like using Charlie Joyner as the new standard by which potential HoF WRs are judged against.

That's the second time I've seen you do that. It's Joiner, isn't it?

It is Joiner. At least it is not as bad as the Chris Carter mistake that many people make.

The guy played from 1987-2002 and is now a TV commentator, yet many do not know how to write his name. It is amazing.

 

[Koya]

Michael Strahan leads my Hall of Fame list

By Mike Freeman | National NFL Insider

November 30, 2012 4:14 pm ET

The complete list of Hall of Fame candidates is out and may be the most comprehensive list of greats ever put together. I mean, when Cris Carter, one of the more lethal wide receivers in the NFL's history, is a borderline candidate to make it, that tells you all you need to know.

This is the list of finalists I'd put in and it begins with Michael Strahan.

I covered Strahan when I was a beat writer covering the Giants for The New York Times. He was a gap-toothed kid upon entering the sport and a gap-toothed man when he left. There were two defensive linemen I personally covered who utterly dominated the position: one was Strahan and the other was Warren Sapp. Few others in this class at their positions dominated the way Strahan and Sapp did.

The numbers I will leave for later and others to digest, though they are impressive. I'm strictly talking playing and dominating. The linemen you see now, the J.J. Watt types, well, Strahan was one of the first -- if not the first-- of that mold: skinny waist, massive upper body, highly athletic and fast. Strahan could stuff the run or pick a pass out of the air. The Giants sometimes used Strahan in coverage and he was actually pretty good at it.

Reggie White, the best defenisve lineman ever, was massive and fast but Strahan was the beginning of the highly-athletic lineman.

I never saw Strahan take a play off. Not one. I also never saw him totally dominated.

The other choices on my Hall of Fame ballot:

2. Sapp. I'm fairly certain I wrote about one game where Sapp was covered by a lineman, a tight end and a back. I'm fairly certain of that. He was that terrific. Just absolutely smashed people. A round mound of disruption.

3. Bill Parcells. Will be one of the most hotly-debated (second only to the person next on my list). Parcells was not a great person and he did not treat people well but there cannot be a Hall of Fame without him. He helped transform a Giants franchise (behind the drafts of George Young, who is also a Hall of Fame nominee) into a multiple Super Bowl winner, turned the sorry Patriots into a Super Bowl team, the even sorrier Jets into winners, and did some good things in Dallas. The two greatest player motivators in history were Don Shula and Parcells. Parcells wasn't loyal or decent but he was historic.

4. Art Modell. The history of the NFL cannot be written without Modell. It just can't be and to pretend otherwise would be foolish and vindictive. Hated Modell moving the team but Al Davis moved the Raiders 476 times and he's a Hall of Famer.

5. Jonathan Ogden. I always thought of Ogden as the offensive line equivalent of Strahan. Ogden made the Pro Bowl nine times and I covered most of his career. He buried guys (without holding them) because he was so large and fast.

Because this class is so superb, good players will be left out, one of them being Carter. He deserves to be in but he'll likely have to wait a little longer.

Sure it can. Just like he had to leave the Browns name behind and act like the Ravens weren't the Browns, we can simply omit him from the list of people who were legendary to the league.

It amazes me how people blame modell, whom it seeme tried his best to keep the team in Cleveland and even left graciously enough to leave the name and traditions behind, unlike Irsay who lied and snuck out of Baltimore. Unless I am wrong in my history , Irsay diligently tried to get a stadium financed and was always rebuffed, only to have the City do just what he asked for after he left... But he left at least with his cards on the table. Seems municipal leadership is far more to blame than Modell.

 

[SSOG]

a lot of the points made about bettis apply equally well to john riggins. and since they are both in the "big back" mold, i think it makes sense to compare them. riggins had one monster season (1300 yards, 24 touchdowns) during a year in which most impartial folks would still put eric dickerson as the top back (1800 yards and 18 TDs). aside from that he regularly rushed for under 4 ypc, and certainly did not qualify as the best RB in the league. he only had 5 seasons over 1000 yards--bettis had 8. since riggins got in to the HOF, bettis should too.

See, I'd go the other way. Since Riggins is one of the three biggest mistakes the HoF electors ever made, they'd be idiots to compound it by electing every undeserving RB on the ballot because, well, he's better than Riggins. That'd be like using Charlie Joyner as the new standard by which potential HoF WRs are judged against.

That's the second time I've seen you do that. It's Joiner, isn't it?

Yup. I blame KC Joyner.

 

[Bri]

You can like it or hate it, but it's part of the equation. There are no specific criteria for getting into the Hall, and some voters use fame as part of their consideration. "Could you tell the story of the NFL without this person?" is an argument appealing to fame.

If that is the standard, then the case for Terrell Davis over Jerome Bettis is even stronger that I already thought it was.

There is no standard. There are a bunch of voters, each with different standards.

I understand that, but I am just saying, anyone who uses the "Could you tell the story of the NFL without this person?" argument cannot possibly vote for Bettis and not Davis.

I love TD but this argument is so weak considering Olandis Gary and Mike Anderson

I love Steve Young, but this argument is so weak considering Jeff Garcia. Also, Kurt Warner/Marc Bulger. In other words, elite player puts up historic numbers and is replaced by mediocre player who puts up decent-but-unspectacular numbers. How is this damaging to the player's hall chances, again?

The reply was to a specific sentiment about telling a story.I don't really find TD and Bettis comparable, well...there's better comparisons. Priest and LJ were great for brief periods but IIRC TD played at a high level longer than those two. I'd have to look. Earl Campbell maybe. The longevity seems to paint a different picture for those two.I'm not a Bettis fan. I get beat up for that here but he never seemed special or the best to me. Bam Morris and Christian Okoye were two of my fave bruising runners, Jacobs was unstoppable in that bruising fashion(not CJ dashing 60 yards but oh no here he comes again for 5 6 yards and again and again) . Stacey Mack...old Bettis reminded me of him, not when he was young, but when he became the short yardage back I thought he soooo looked like Mack. Alstott...possibly my favorite player to watch ever, like Mark Bavaro. I know they aren't HOF eligible really, but they just make me think wow I'm glad I got the chance to watch them play. Few players truly give you that feeling. When I go to games, I'm thrilled I saw a team play and maybe I saw a highlight folks will talk about for years. Bavaro and Alstott I just appreciated so very much. I think it has something to do with originality. Brees picking apart a D might seem less special after watching Peyton and Brady. Maybe? Maybe those two were just so unique they had no similar players no real peers in their unique styles? They are very odd in a super way. Anyhow....ramble....I never saw Bettis do anything I didn't think Alstott could do and do better. IMO Bettis' best quality or most overlooked is how long he played. His bruising style....he may have played the longest ever of the bruising backs. He was fun. He was a charismatic guy and the camera loved him. The Bus was an awesome nickname.When we are in this best of the best mode though I don't feel Bettis measures up. Special guy, special player, but I don't think he belongs in the HOF.Well ramble some more...One thing that bothers me about Bettis and how we always talk about peers here....Curtis Martin was a pittsburgh native and the fans in Pittsburgh often wanted Curtis. Sure it was a "pipe dream" and all sorts of nonsense, but the Bears fans weren't hoping for some hometown boy to replace Sweetness, no Vikings fan now is hoping some local boy replaces ADP. I believe that this was an inadvertent slap to Bettis, someone that the fans adored so much in Pittsburgh.

 

[Bri]

It amazes me how people blame modell, whom it seeme tried his best to keep the team in Cleveland and even left graciously enough to leave the name and traditions behind, unlike Irsay who lied and snuck out of Baltimore. Unless I am wrong in my history , Irsay diligently tried to get a stadium financed and was always rebuffed, only to have the City do just what he asked for after he left... But he left at least with his cards on the table. Seems municipal leadership is far more to blame than Modell.

The NFL only had a few legends when he bought the Browns and one of them was Paul Brown. He fired him and this was like something that can't happen, almost against the law. It was a shock nothing like in today's sports world. He had an excellent team. He had a tradition of winning. Maybe if BB coaches 10 more years, looks sure to win another Super, then bam Kraft fires him. Maybe that would be similar. I doubt it though. The Browns were awesome and you'd be lucky to beat them back then. It was an assumed loss. They made the championship without Brown, there's no debating it was an awesome team. The legend was replaced though.Your Giants lost Parcells and went with the wrong replacement coach(Handley over BB) and fans were furious as all....they were terrible right away due to poor coaching and huge player turnover. (Mara was so dear and sweet tough to use as analogy) If Mara had moved the Giants to Ohio, how would you have felt then? Sure BP only coached like 7 years as HC then and it was many years later that the Browns moved...just trying to stir up some feelings is all. Modell had issues with the Indians (probably many Browns fans favorite baseball team) and he was tough for Browns fans to deal with.

 

[GregR]

Very very minor quibble, and I know it will never happen. but this is the PRO FOOTBALL Hall of Fame, not the NFL Hall of Fame. The players who spent time in the USFL should have those years be recognized too. For example, Gary Clark didn't start his pro career with the Redskins in 1985, it was with the Jacksonville Bulls in 1984. Same with Herschel Walker and Sean Landeta among others.:end of soapbox rant:

It's "Pro Football" because it includes the AFL. It doesn't include the USFL, the Candian, the Arena, or the Lingere Football League.

Dibs on creating the Lingerie Football Hall of Fame.Can't wait to enshrine the first set of busts.

 

[Mentos]

Very very minor quibble, and I know it will never happen. but this is the PRO FOOTBALL Hall of Fame, not the NFL Hall of Fame. The players who spent time in the USFL should have those years be recognized too. For example, Gary Clark didn't start his pro career with the Redskins in 1985, it was with the Jacksonville Bulls in 1984. Same with Herschel Walker and Sean Landeta among others.:end of soapbox rant:

It is the NFL Hall of Fame. They just felt Pro Football Hall of Fame was a better name. That way other leagues, such as the early AFLs and the AAFC and the at-the-time fledgling 1960s AFL, could be noted by the museum in various ways. Go visit the museum and you will see if is the NFL hall of fame even though the name is Pro Football Hall of Fame. There is an "other leagues" room in the museum.

 

[Mentos]

One of the most absurd things I ever encountered on a message board was a fellow arguing for Damon Allen's induction into the PFHOF. The guy said he was a great CFL player. I then noted Allen was not good enough to make an NFL roster. This fellow wanted Allen in the Hall of Fame over actual NFL stars.

When I became convinced this was not schtick, I left the forum. Football Fever it was called. Not sure if it exists anymore.

 

[Bri]

One of the most absurd things I ever encountered on a message board was a fellow arguing for Damon Allen's induction into the PFHOF. The guy said he was a great CFL player. I then noted Allen was not good enough to make an NFL roster. This fellow wanted Allen in the Hall of Fame over actual NFL stars. When I became convinced this was not schtick, I left the forum. Football Fever it was called. Not sure if it exists anymore.

That makes you leave? wow.Allen "was not good enough to make an NFL roster" has to be clarified. There are not many spots in the NFL and most of us would probably agree a CFL boy would have to come in as a backup and be groomed. He was an excellent college player and went on to throw for 72,000 yards winning four championships too. That's nothing to shake a stick at.It'd be worse if the PFHOF didn't consider him. He can lose every year, for all I care, but he earned a spot on a ballot. The leagues are not identical. Doug Flutie lacked confidence as a young NFL player and got shellacked. He didn't look good initially in CFL, built back his confidence and he was a good NFL quarterback when he returned. I don't know Allen enough re tryouts and teams and all. I want to know more about his attempts to play in the NFL.There are MANY football fans that believe Tommy Frazier and Major Harris would have been good NFL QBs and deserved a shot they didn't get. I wanna know more about Allen in NFL world. I've watched some Arena league(? long time ago) guys grab balls out of the air while getting smashed into the wall. I don't know that every NFL guy can make those catches.Orande Grandison(sp?) seemed to play in every league before doing well for the Dolphins for (too) brief time. Warner played in two before the NFL. Moon often gets debated if we should include CFL stats. I'm not sure what the right standard is to evaluate these guys in other leagues at all. This is a forum for discussion. If there are great players, let's hear about em'.I want to hear about Australian legends if there are any.I have no doubt there is or will be an NFL equivalent to Oscar Schmidt. Let's hear about em.

 

[Mentos]

Yeah, it was enough to make me leave. It was that bad.

I cannot even take your post seriously.