Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Pro Football Hall of Fame: The 2015 Class (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Faust
- Start date
Faust
MVP
fantasy stud
Footballguy
I think warner is very debatable but seems like he will get in in the next few years.
ICON211
Footballguy
Tau837
Footballguy
First off, I believe you named 6 non-seniors/non-contributors, which is one too many.
Surprised to see Kevin Greene and Ty Law mentioned here. IMO neither is HOF worthy, and neither stands a chance any time soon given the backlog of worthy players.
I don't think Lynch is worthy, either, but he will probably make it eventually on reputation. But not this year.
Charles Haley won't make it in until he makes amends with the writers and issues some sort of public apology, or perhaps does some human interest piece with a Dallas writer where he acknowledges how much of corksmoker he was to them and how he has softened up in his old age.
Till then, he'll remain as the only guy with more rings than anyone in the HOF yet still looking in.
Till then, he'll remain as the only guy with more rings than anyone in the HOF yet still looking in.
Tau837
Footballguy
IMO this should be the non-senior class of 2015:
Seau
Warner
Pace
Shields
Harrison
Tagliabue (contributor)
Sabol (contributor)
I wouldn't be surprised to see Bettis get in, probably over Shields. And I wouldn't be surprised to see another contributor instead of Sabol.
Seau
Warner
Pace
Shields
Harrison
Tagliabue (contributor)
Sabol (contributor)
I wouldn't be surprised to see Bettis get in, probably over Shields. And I wouldn't be surprised to see another contributor instead of Sabol.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hooper31
Footballguy
What's your metric of choice? Pro-bowls and/or All-pro lists? Stats? Eye ball test? Gut?
Tau837
Footballguy
IMO it should be mostly about the following, in order of importance:
1a. Honors/awards
1b. Metrics/statistics
3. Winning, especially in postseason
4. Fame/reputation
5. Memorable games/plays, especially in postseason
Also, context matters.
Raider Nation
Devil's Advocate
I'm rooting for Warner simply because I think he'll deliver an amazing speech. What a story he has to tell.
Hooper31
Footballguy
Looks to me like you think Greene and Law should be in. Perhaps not next year, but eventually.
Tau837
Footballguy
No, I don't. As I already posted.
Greene was 1st team All Pro 2 times and won no other significant awards. He was a one dimensional player and ranks high in just one thing - sacks. And his place on that list is artificially high since individual sacks weren't tracked until 1982.
Law was 1st team All Pro 2 times and won no other significant awards. His highest rank at anything is . At least three other CBs of his era were clearly better: Champ Bailey, Charles Woodson, and Ronde Barber. All three of them are likely to make the HOF. There are currently only 15 modern era CBs in the HOF, dating back to 1951. There does not seem to be any compelling reason to put Law in as the 4th best in his own era.
Unfortunately, I do think Greene will get in, based on how far he has made it in the voting since he became eligible. But I don't see Law making it.
Hooper31
Footballguy
Now you're just hunting for contrived reasons NOT to include the guy. That's sad. No other significant awards or anything worth mentioning? That comes off as just intentionally ignoring other qualifications. I'm confident you can do much better.
Somehow, I think when Brady goes into the HOF they'll mention his 3 super bowl victories. Shame that he gets credit it for them, but stars of that defense that shut down the Rams don't. Hypocritical, but understandable in a world where fantasy football mentality trumps understanding real football. Further, Law made Manning his ##### too many times to count. That's my lasting memory of Law.
Tau837
Footballguy
My stance on Greene isn't contrived. What I posted about him is fact. Maybe I overstated how many older players would be ahead of Greene on the list if sacks were tracked earlier... it's hard to tell since they weren't tracked. I know he would be behind Deacon Jones, and I assume there would be others (e.g., Marchetti, Youngblood...?).
As for Law, you completely ignored that he is at best the #4 CB of his own era. He "gets credit" for the Super Bowl victories; without them, he wouldn't be in the HOF conversation.
Hooper31
Footballguy
I think trying to argue that someone isn't worthy of the hall of time is a waste of time. In fact, I think the only conversation worth having is promoting players. When people start trying to tear down these guys it just becomes pathetic in my opinion. It just leads to hyperbole and contrived half truths. Both Kevin Greene and Ty Law were phenomenal football players. Both are worthy of respect whether or not you think they should be in the hall of fame.
I understand your opinion that Law is the fourth best CB of his era. You're entitled to that opinion. No matter how many times you try to say otherwise, its an opinion. Its an opinion that I probably agree with. Just like the current "glut" of WRs that are having to wait (Carter, Reed, Brown - and Holt and Bruce are about to join them on the sidelines) I won't be surprised to see a similar situation with the CBs. That said, limiting the number of players at a certain position because there are too many good ones in any given era is a weak position.
Agree to disagree.
I understand your opinion that Law is the fourth best CB of his era. You're entitled to that opinion. No matter how many times you try to say otherwise, its an opinion. Its an opinion that I probably agree with. Just like the current "glut" of WRs that are having to wait (Carter, Reed, Brown - and Holt and Bruce are about to join them on the sidelines) I won't be surprised to see a similar situation with the CBs. That said, limiting the number of players at a certain position because there are too many good ones in any given era is a weak position.
Agree to disagree.
fantasy stud
Footballguy
I promise not to tear him down , I would like somebody to justify why Kurt warner is worthy of being a first ballot hall of famer cause I just don't see it.
Chaka
Footballguy
Tau837
Footballguy
I'm not tearing anyone down. Saying these guys aren't HOF worthy isn't tearing them down. I agree they were among the best of their era. They join a long list of great players who aren't HOF worthy. That's no slight.
Of course I am posting my opinions. That goes without saying.
As for limiting players at a certain position in a certain era, it is a natural outcome of what the HOF stands for. It is for the best of the best among peers.
Tau837
Footballguy
- He was the QB of one of the greatest offenses of all time. You can't tell the story of the NFL in that time period without talking about him.
- He won 2 MVP awards, 1 Super Bowl MVP, and 1 MOY award (don't underrate this). How many eligible QBs that have 2 MVPs are not in the HOF?
- He led his teams -- and 2 franchises -- to 3 Super Bowls and won one. He has a 9-4 postseason record.
- He currently ranks in the top 8 all time in these metrics: passer rating (8), completion percentage (4), passing yards/game (4), YPA (6).
- He owns or shares several records.
YMMV on how compelling you find that case, but that is essentially it.
Grigs Allmoon
Footballguy
I saw something today on NFLN about Edgerrin James being eligible next year. Does anyone really think he's worthy of being in consideration?
Faust
MVP
Shane Falco
Footballguy
well that's stupid. It's practically every one when you vote for 15 of them
Tim Brown
Don Coryell
Charles Haley
Marvin Harrison
Orlando Pace
Junior Seau
IMO- Shields, Mawae and Warner should be in too this year if there was no cap
fantasy stud
Footballguy
The counter argument to this is the fact that he did this in great offenses with great players around him.Marc Bulger put up big numbers in that offense. Then, he had that awful stretch from 2002-2006. In those 5 seasons he was 8-23 as a starter and threw 27 td, 30 ints. What hall of fame qb has 5 years in the middle of their career like that? He basically played for 11 seasons. Take away those 3 super bowl years and what are you left with? 8 seasons- 31-37 win loss record, 1-2 playoff record, 101 td, 79 int.
So, what you have with Warner is a guy who when healthy with great players around him could put amazing numbers and lead the team to the super bowl. When he wasn't in great situations like 8 out of 11 seasons, he wasn't anything special. Hall of fame? I don't know. If he is then Terrell Davis should get some love.
Deranged Hermit
Not cool & Pissed
If I were voting:
No brainers (in my view anyway):
Charles Haley- Absolute dominance every time I watched him play. Would already be in is he wasn't such a ####.
Orlando Pace- He'll be in for sure.
Terrell Davis- A crime he isn't in already. Injuries killed his career, but his body of work was record breaking.
Darren Woodson- Safeties are tough sells, but he has the resume. 3 rings, 3 All-Pro, team player.
Have a great chance:
Kurt Warner- I wouldn't vote him first ballot, but he's a great story and he's well liked. Basically the anti-Haley.
Brown/Harrison- WR are usually tough sells as well. One should get in and I'm guessing Harrison.
Dungy/Jimmy- Can't see both going in, but one probably will.
Will Shields-Should be a no brainer, but Guards never are. 7 All Pro, a million Pro Bowls, All decade team.
Outside looking in:
Bettis- Never viewed him as a HoF.
Edge- Closer than Bettis IMO. Much more complete RB.
Greene- Eh, he will eventually, but not now.
Seau- See Greene.
I'd go: TD, Haley, Pace, Woodson, Shields, Dungy and feel good about it.
No brainers (in my view anyway):
Charles Haley- Absolute dominance every time I watched him play. Would already be in is he wasn't such a ####.
Orlando Pace- He'll be in for sure.
Terrell Davis- A crime he isn't in already. Injuries killed his career, but his body of work was record breaking.
Darren Woodson- Safeties are tough sells, but he has the resume. 3 rings, 3 All-Pro, team player.
Have a great chance:
Kurt Warner- I wouldn't vote him first ballot, but he's a great story and he's well liked. Basically the anti-Haley.
Brown/Harrison- WR are usually tough sells as well. One should get in and I'm guessing Harrison.
Dungy/Jimmy- Can't see both going in, but one probably will.
Will Shields-Should be a no brainer, but Guards never are. 7 All Pro, a million Pro Bowls, All decade team.
Outside looking in:
Bettis- Never viewed him as a HoF.
Edge- Closer than Bettis IMO. Much more complete RB.
Greene- Eh, he will eventually, but not now.
Seau- See Greene.
I'd go: TD, Haley, Pace, Woodson, Shields, Dungy and feel good about it.
moleculo
Footballguy
huh? Bulger put up some good games, but made the playoffs twice in 8 seasons, winning one playoff game, and was never considered one of the top QB's, despite throwing to Bruce/Holt. Bulger never came close to doing what Warner did.fantasy stud said:
his down-years began as a result of a broken finger and hand, right? Not sure how it cascaded away from him from there. I guess NYG chose eli as the QBotF, and only viewed Warner as a seat-warmer until eli was ready. I guess it was the same story in Arizona w/ Leinart - near as I can recall, coaches didn't view Warner, a QB in his mid 30's, as someone they wanted to build on. Not sure how that plays into his legacy - the fact that coaches can be idiots.fantasy stud said:
why would you take those away? If you take away the three best seasons of almost any HoF player not named Jerry Rice, their stats are probably going to be fairly pedestrian.fantasy stud said:
I think he's pretty similar to Terrell Davis, personally. The fact that these two guys have both SB MVP's and NFL MVP's makes me think they should be in.fantasy stud said:
I'm one of those guys that thinks short, brilliant careers is more important than sustained better-than-average. I believe that awards (MVP's) are important, and playoff games are more important than regular seasons. I know some folks like to discount these things and that's ok.
Last edited by a moderator:
johnnyboy8102
Footballguy
Will Shields- 1st or 2nd Team All Pro 7x/2000'S All Decade Team
Junior Seau- 1st or 2nd Team All Pro 10x/1990's All Decade Team
Those are my only two no-brainers. Deciding between the WR is difficult again.
My dark horse candidate is Kevin Mawae. He was an 8x All Pro including 7 1st time selections by one of the main selectors. (AP, SN, PFW)
Junior Seau- 1st or 2nd Team All Pro 10x/1990's All Decade Team
Those are my only two no-brainers. Deciding between the WR is difficult again.
My dark horse candidate is Kevin Mawae. He was an 8x All Pro including 7 1st time selections by one of the main selectors. (AP, SN, PFW)
Rockchild
Footballguy
Before his injury he looked as good as any RB out there. He was smooth, fast, could catch, block and was in a high power offense and no doubt would have put up some big big numbers. He just never seemed to get back to his old self after his ACL injury. Close but, unfortunately, no cigar IMO.
Adam Harstad
Moderator
I agree with the bolded, and have made the comparison several times. I think Kurt Warner and Terrell Davis both have extremely similar resumes. Massive short-term dominance, huge postseason success, tons of records (both regular-season and postseason). Both were replaced by mediocre players who put up superficially solid statistics, but never came anywhere near the same stratosphere of Warner/Davis. Both had strong supporting casts. Both had very short peaks for their position. Warner had success with a second franchise, which is a point in his favor compared to Davis, but I think that success gets overstated- he really only had one truly great year with Arizona, plus two more good ones. At the same time, Davis' fall-off was clearly due to injury, whereas Kurt Warner three times got benched for a younger QB while he was healthy (Marc Bulger, Eli Manning, and Matt Leinart), which is a point against him. Warner's peak was slightly longer, but his position typically has much more longevity than Davis' position, so relatively speaking it's about a wash.fantasy stud said:
Like I said, very comparable resumes. I happen to believe that both resumes are absolutely and unequivocally HoF worthy. Both could make a credible argument for the most dominant 3-season stretch at their position in modern NFL history, both were multiple-All Pros, both won three major awards (Davis = 1 MVP, 2 OPoY; Warner = 2 MVP, 1 MotY), both had tremendous postseason success (Davis was the most dominant postseason RB in NFL history, Kurt Warner owns each of the top 3 passing yardage totals in SB history, both won a SBMVP award), both have rings (Davis has two, Warner only has one but he made two others, including being on the very short list of QBs to reach the SB with multiple franchises). There are few guys not currently in the Hall who have anywhere near that much "black ink".
One way to look at it is that each Hall of Famer has a positive case for and a negative case against. In terms of the sheer size of the "negative case against", Terrell Davis and Kurt Warner both probably rank in the top 5 of all players to receive serious HoF consideration in the last 30 years. So if your idea of a Hall of Famer is the guy with the fewest holes in his resume, you probably don't like Kurt Warner and Terrell Davis.
On the other hand, the size of the "positive case for" both Warner and Davis is among the biggest of any player to come up for consideration in the last 30 years, too. They were dominant legends who rewrote the record books and secured glory and championships during their brief playing careers. If your idea of a Hall of Famer is the guy with the most impressive resume, holes be damned, then you no doubt love Kurt Warner and Terrell Davis.
A guy like Curtis Martin makes the Hall of Fame simply because the negative case against him is pretty negligible. I mean, there aren't really any nits to pick in his resume. He had success for two different teams, he never really struggled, never really had a bad year. He didn't win a title, but he's an RB, so that's not really his fault, especially since his postseason numbers are pretty solid. On the other hand, what's the positive case for Curtis Martin? Where's the black ink? He won one rushing title. He earned one first-team AP All Pro. He was rookie of the year. Mostly, Martin is famous for meeting a basic minimum level of competency (1,000 rushing yards) for an obscenely long stretch of time (10 straight years). He wasn't ever one of the top 3 RBs in the NFL. He was pretty solidly behind Sanders, Smith, and Davis early in his career, and then by the time those guys were winding down you had Marshall Faulk, Priest Holmes, and Tiki Barber blowing up and Edgerrin James, LaDainian Tomlinson, Clinton Portis, and Ricky Williams entering the league. In terms of player quality, Curtis Martin wasn't really any better than, say, Ricky Watters... he just managed to do it for longer. And that's good, that's a Hall of Fame worthy resume. Curtis Martin, in my mind, clearly belongs.
I just think there should be more to the Hall of Fame than a bunch of boring guys that it's hard to argue too hard against. I think there should be a place for guys like Terrell Davis and Kurt Warner, guys who had their share of flaws but who for nearly half a decade were among the most exciting, most electric, most awe-inspiring, most destructive forces of nature the league had ever seen.
I understand Dungy had some bad PR but few coaches were as adored as him. Anything "extra" that might put someone in, he has going for him.
Coryell's impact on the game....he should already be in.
Players-
I appreciate Tim Brown more and more as time goes by and the Raiders continue to stink. It's a team game and he often felt like the only weapon or one of few for their offense and....it's really hard to quantify a class act on a bad team giving it his all.
Seau was outstanding and should be in. He played on some teams that were so bad and yet the D was a top D. With respect, he was the new Hardy Nickerson and when the Chargers finally got some talent on D he still shined as one of the best.
If you played FF and you don't say Ty Law, I want to call you a liar. Few CBs have made you sit a WR like Law did.
Isaac Bruce is one of my favorite players. I believe he was part of the change from a previous era to another that involved more passing. (and then there's a third era where we have even more) JWB has posted stats on him in the past...been there, done that. Very few WRs dominate games-they are effective or efficient and very good at their jobs, but don't dominate. Bruce had some games that blew me away. In hindsight, there's only maybe a dozen games by WRs that were as dominating as I've seen Bruce have at least 8 of. Moss had a couple, Owens 24? catch game, Galloway had an amazing game....there's few that match up for me. God Bless Welker and his 10 catch games, but it's not the same vibe as a 170 yard game with big catches on every highlight reel, speeding by a top corner like he's nothing....hard to word, but yeah Bruce was one of my faves.
I don't think Jimmy Johnson coached long enough at a high level. I didn't see his system as having success in Miami, but still hung on the outstanding draft of the Cowboys.
I'm totally fine with Morten.
I think Torry Holt is the fastest WR ever. I've never seen someone not slow down to turn and cut like he did. To reiterate, the way he ran routes was faster than anyone I've ever noticed.
Coryell's impact on the game....he should already be in.
Players-
I appreciate Tim Brown more and more as time goes by and the Raiders continue to stink. It's a team game and he often felt like the only weapon or one of few for their offense and....it's really hard to quantify a class act on a bad team giving it his all.
Seau was outstanding and should be in. He played on some teams that were so bad and yet the D was a top D. With respect, he was the new Hardy Nickerson and when the Chargers finally got some talent on D he still shined as one of the best.
If you played FF and you don't say Ty Law, I want to call you a liar. Few CBs have made you sit a WR like Law did.
Isaac Bruce is one of my favorite players. I believe he was part of the change from a previous era to another that involved more passing. (and then there's a third era where we have even more) JWB has posted stats on him in the past...been there, done that. Very few WRs dominate games-they are effective or efficient and very good at their jobs, but don't dominate. Bruce had some games that blew me away. In hindsight, there's only maybe a dozen games by WRs that were as dominating as I've seen Bruce have at least 8 of. Moss had a couple, Owens 24? catch game, Galloway had an amazing game....there's few that match up for me. God Bless Welker and his 10 catch games, but it's not the same vibe as a 170 yard game with big catches on every highlight reel, speeding by a top corner like he's nothing....hard to word, but yeah Bruce was one of my faves.
I don't think Jimmy Johnson coached long enough at a high level. I didn't see his system as having success in Miami, but still hung on the outstanding draft of the Cowboys.
I'm totally fine with Morten.
I think Torry Holt is the fastest WR ever. I've never seen someone not slow down to turn and cut like he did. To reiterate, the way he ran routes was faster than anyone I've ever noticed.
GROOT
Footballguy
Jerry Curl
Footballguy
Its about narrowing it down. From 25 to 15 so seems about right, after this then we voye on the 15 then its the finalists, right?
Fariq
Footballguy
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
pains me that JR Seau wont be alive to get inducted what a shame, put the charger franchise back on the relavant NFL map all by himself
5Rings
Lurker
Good list, I'd be ok if only half got in. Weak class. This class is chick full of "pretty good" players who really don't belong I'm Canton.
Adam Harstad
Moderator
That's why I used the quotation marks. "Black ink" is the name of an unofficial test baseball fans use when determining whether someone should be in the Hall of Fame. Curtis Martin does great on the "grey ink" test, but his resume lacks "black ink". Terrell Davis is the opposite- he's dripping with black ink, but his early injury meant he never had a chance to add as much of the grey.
CalBear
Footballguy
Averages:
Bulger: 7.2 YPA, 3.8 TD%, 2.9 INT%, 84.4 passer rating
Warner (career): 7.9 YPA, 5.1 TD%, 3.1 INT%, 93.7 passer rating
Best season:
Bulger: 4300/24/8, 62.0% completions, 7.3 YPA, 92.9 rating
Warner: 4830/36/22, 68.7% completions, 8.8 YPA, 101.4 rating
And Bulger had only one season that looked anything like that. Warner had three massive seasons, one where he threw 41 TDs on just 499 attempts (8.2%, which, prior to 2000, had only been done twice in the Super Bowl age [Marino and Stabler]). Another where he averaged 9.9 YPA (still best in the Super Bowl era).
I think he belongs and I think he gets in first ballot.
Warrior
Footballguy
Similar threads
