Will Warner make the HOF? (1 Viewer)

[moleculo]

Obviously there is a lot of emotion right now for Warner, that's cool. I never said he was a total null vote for the HoF, and Peter King did come out and say he wouldn't vote for Warner right now and he sits on the voting committee(scary).I think Warner needs to at least surpass 35,000 yds passing IMHOI feel Warner needs more TD passes which he will get if he stays in AZ. But I am not tryign to come across like he is not a future HoF candidate, but if he retired after the SB I would not vote for him, and I think he will need some help getting in. I'm just one voice though so just ignore me.

so we'll mark you down as a fan of compilers. That's cool.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

Very similar to Ken Anderson in a lot of ways. Huge numbers but detractors will always say the system/WRs deserve much of the credit. More on point, Anderson had three truly spectacular seasons -- '74, '75 and '81. That's kind of like Warner's '99, '01 and '08. Both made the SB in that last out of nowhere year. Anderson actually followed it up with another monster year in the strike shortened '82 seasons.

Career pattern I'd agree. But Warner's big years I thought were much bigger.

Favre also had a huge lull between big years in '01 and '07. Everyone thought he was done and 2007 really came out of nowhere.

I think this is inaccurate. 2005 & 2006 were bad years for sure. But 2002-2004 I wouldn't classify as lulls. Maybe not his best, but still very good.

It's very easy to forget it now but Elway had a similar pattern. He was good in '86 and great in '87 when he took Denver to the SB. But he had a very down year in '89 when they went, and really lost his way from '88 to '92. He was great in '87 and '93 but those in between years he had seven more INTs than TDs and just average numbers overall.

Elway is the better example in terms of career lull. Those Denver years you referred to certainly were not very good. And I know that alot of people when talking about greatest QB's of all-time, put Elway in that discussion. But I wouldn't. That said, the one thing Elway had going for him and I think it means more than it is given credit for is that he was the image of that franchise. And in alot of ways still is. There is something to be said for the impact you leave behind of the history of an NFL franchise. So while his production wained, his relevance did not. For Warner, his lull included his diminshed relevance to the Rams and to the NFL.

Sonny Jurgensen, another HOFer, had an awesome year in '61 and then was inconsistent before having another huge season in '67 for a new team. A couple of old 49ers QBs fit the bill, too. John Brodie had a very good year in '61 and then didn't do much (was okay in '65) until 1970 when he had a breakout year at the age of 35. Y.A. Tittle had big years in '53 and '54 and then was just kind of mediocre for a long stretch of years before back to back 30 TD seasons in '62 and '63.

I think when you go back that far - the comparisons are tough to keep on an apples to apples basis.

And then there's Randall. He was great in the late '80s, then was never the same after the injury, wasn't heard of for awhile, became a carpenter, and then all of the sudden he got two awesome WRs and he had arguably the best season of his career.

He certainly had that one season...and the NFL is a game where you can't assume the Kurt Warner you got in 2008 is the one you'll get in 2009. DY said Warner showed no signs of slowing down, but in reality, signs simply don't need to be shown. This isn't a prediction, but like has been referenced, Warner is 39 next year. And at this point in anyones career, success no matter how prolific, is a year to year proposition, especially in todays parity driven NFL. It's entirely possible that he doesn't have Anquan Boldin next year. What could that mean to the Cardinals and Warner? This isn't a detraction, just a statement.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Obviously there is a lot of emotion right now for Warner, that's cool. I never said he was a total null vote for the HoF, and Peter King did come out and say he wouldn't vote for Warner right now and he sits on the voting committee(scary).I think Warner needs to at least surpass 35,000 yds passing IMHOI feel Warner needs more TD passes which he will get if he stays in AZ. But I am not tryign to come across like he is not a future HoF candidate, but if he retired after the SB I would not vote for him, and I think he will need some help getting in. I'm just one voice though so just ignore me.

so we'll mark you down as a fan of compilers. That's cool.

C'mon now...the guy has 3 Pro bowls and 2 All Pros...what do you want me to base it on if not stats? You need a combination of things but I think for some it rests totally on stats like Marino, others have a nice blend like Montana, and others are based purely on post season like Aikman.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Did Warner's ability to turn the ball over a lot completely fly out the window? I seem to remember this board saying he was D-O-N-E, especially afte the thumb injury and holding the ball, he couldn't do anything anymore...now we are ready to put him in the HoF.

I'm not a Warner hater at all...I was genuinely happy for him yesterday, just not sure he passes what I feel QBs need for the HoF, but I am one faint voice on a board of thousands...Peter king a voting member of a 44 man group for the HoF concurs but I'll stop as this just gets into a pissing match after awhile.

When it came to Dungy I stopped debating because I truly feel he will go in 1st ballot no questions asked. With Warner, I have seen very few people say anything like that and we even have 1/44 of the voting panel that seems to think he wouldn't get in right now as well.

Manning, Favre, Brady...how many of this era are we going to put in? Something has to account for the modern era and all the passing that is on display now.

They can't all be Hall of Famers

 

[Chase Stuart]

Good points, TDW. The one thing I'll say is Anderson's numbers were every bit as good as Warner's, IMO, once you account for era. Warner's 99 was better than anything Anderson did, but Anderson's '81 was better than any other Warner year. Anderson's '74 and '75 were as good as Warner's '01 and his '82 was very, very good.

Looking at it another way, Anderson was the best QB in the NFL in '74 and '75 and was second best (behind some all time great Dan Fouts years) in '81 and '82. I'd also compare his '73 to Warner's '08 in the "very good but not the best" sense. Warner was tops in '99 and '01, and would have been tops in '00 had he kept playing, and was very good but not the best this year.

They strike me as very similar QBs because of the supporting casts argument, and the Walsh/Martz system arguments. Anderson didn't win the SB which is what's kept him out of the HOF. But his best three to five years match up with Warner's and almost every other QB in NFL history.

 

[moleculo]

Obviously there is a lot of emotion right now for Warner, that's cool. I never said he was a total null vote for the HoF, and Peter King did come out and say he wouldn't vote for Warner right now and he sits on the voting committee(scary).

I think Warner needs to at least surpass 35,000 yds passing IMHO

I feel Warner needs more TD passes which he will get if he stays in AZ.

But I am not tryign to come across like he is not a future HoF candidate, but if he retired after the SB I would not vote for him, and I think he will need some help getting in.

I'm just one voice though so just ignore me.

so we'll mark you down as a fan of compilers. That's cool.

C'mon now...the guy has 3 Pro bowls and 2 All Pros...what do you want me to base it on if not stats? You need a combination of things but I think for some it rests totally on stats like Marino, others have a nice blend like Montana, and others are based purely on post season like Aikman.

My criteria for skill position HOF is pretty simple: look in the "awards" box in the PFR page - it better not be empty. I want to see MVPs. I want to see Superbowl MVP's. I want to see all-pro's. I want to see pro-bowls. I want to see multiple seasons in the top five in multiple categories. Basically, I want to see more than a couple of seasons where player X was head and shoulders above his peers, and I want to see playoff excellence. Saying "player X" must reach some career milestone - that's an argument for compilers. Pure compilers, IMO, have no business getting into the HOF without a paid admission. 35k yards - Kerry Collins has 37k yards. Does he seem like HOF material to you? To me, the "awards" is what separates the cream from the crop.

I can accept that an NFL MVP isn't in the HOF, and I can accept a SB MVP not being in the HOF, but it's really tough for me to accept a multi-season MVP and SB MVP winner sits on the outside looking in. It simply doesn't jive with me. Someone once asked - can the story of the NFL be told without mentioning this guy? I think that based on the awards in Warners trophy case, it would be tough to do so.

 

[bryan215]

Tom Brady: 111 starts, 63.0 comp%, 26446 yards, 197 td, 86 int, 7.2 ypa, 92.9 rating

Kurt Warner:101 starts, 65.4 comp%, 28591 yards, 182 td, 114 int, 8.0 ypa, 93.8 rating

 

[David Yudkin]

Tom Brady: 111 starts, 63.0 comp%, 26446 yards, 197 td, 86 int, 7.2 ypa, 92.9 ratingKurt Warner:101 starts, 65.4 comp%, 28591 yards, 182 td, 114 int, 8.0 ypa, 93.8 rating

This was the EXACT comparison I was going to make.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

Good points, TDW. The one thing I'll say is Anderson's numbers were every bit as good as Warner's, IMO, once you account for era. Warner's 99 was better than anything Anderson did, but Anderson's '81 was better than any other Warner year. Anderson's '74 and '75 were as good as Warner's '01 and his '82 was very, very good.Looking at it another way, Anderson was the best QB in the NFL in '74 and '75 and was second best (behind some all time great Dan Fouts years) in '81 and '82. I'd also compare his '73 to Warner's '08 in the "very good but not the best" sense. Warner was tops in '99 and '01, and would have been tops in '00 had he kept playing, and was very good but not the best this year.They strike me as very similar QBs because of the supporting casts argument, and the Walsh/Martz system arguments. Anderson didn't win the SB which is what's kept him out of the HOF. But his best three to five years match up with Warner's and almost every other QB in NFL history.

I guess when you compare both in the context of the eras they played in, the gap lessens. I can't agree though with the statement that Anderson's best 3-5 seasons match-up with Warner's. What Warner has going for him IMO is that his best 5 years, might be the best 5 years a QB has ever put up.Consider that in 73 games (in those best 5 years), he's put up:A 66.7% Completion RateAn 8.44 YPA282.3 YPG155:84 TD/INT ratio3 SB appearances...What he doesn't have going for him is that these are his 5 only good years.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Jim Plunkett threw 164 TDs in 144 career starts. Kurt Warner has thrown 182 TDs in 85 career starts.Plunkett threw 34 more career INTs than TDs. Warner has thrown 68 more career TDs than INTs.Plunkett threw 20 or more TDs in a season once. Warner has done so five times, and has thrown 30 or more three times.Plunkett never made a Pro Bowl (not that making a Pro Bowl is that important, but never having even made one is significant), was never an All-Pro and has zero MVP awards. Warner has been an All-Pro twice, and has three MVP awards (two regular season and one Super Bowl).

MOP, why are you afraid to address this? This is the second thread now you have ignored these points in response to your "Warner reminds me of Plunkett" comment. And saying, "They throw a similar deep ball," is not a good argument.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Good points, TDW. The one thing I'll say is Anderson's numbers were every bit as good as Warner's, IMO, once you account for era. Warner's 99 was better than anything Anderson did, but Anderson's '81 was better than any other Warner year. Anderson's '74 and '75 were as good as Warner's '01 and his '82 was very, very good.Looking at it another way, Anderson was the best QB in the NFL in '74 and '75 and was second best (behind some all time great Dan Fouts years) in '81 and '82. I'd also compare his '73 to Warner's '08 in the "very good but not the best" sense. Warner was tops in '99 and '01, and would have been tops in '00 had he kept playing, and was very good but not the best this year.They strike me as very similar QBs because of the supporting casts argument, and the Walsh/Martz system arguments. Anderson didn't win the SB which is what's kept him out of the HOF. But his best three to five years match up with Warner's and almost every other QB in NFL history.

I guess when you compare both in the context of the eras they played in, the gap lessens. I can't agree though with the statement that Anderson's best 3-5 seasons match-up with Warner's. What Warner has going for him IMO is that his best 5 years, might be the best 5 years a QB has ever put up.Consider that in 73 games (in those best 5 years), he's put up:A 66.7% Completion RateAn 8.44 YPA282.3 YPG155:84 TD/INT ratio3 SB appearances...What he doesn't have going for him is that these are his 5 only good years.

Without accounting for era, you're not going to be able to meaningfully compare the two. Warner's post-season performances probably put him over the edge against Anderson, but I believe Anderson's regular season performance to be better. He played in a much tougher era and it was also just a 14 game season for three of his biggest years and only a nine game season for another one. That's not his fault nor does it take away how valuable he was. In '73, Anderson ranked 4th in adjusted net yards per attempt. In '74, he ranked 3rd. In '75 he ranked 1st. In '81 he ranked 1st. In '82 he ranked 2nd. That's 1-1-2-3-4.For Warner, he ranked 1st in '99, 1st in '00 (but missed five games), 1st in '01, 7th in '07 and 8th in '08. That's 1-1-1-5-7.Considering they both had a five year gap in the middle of their careers sandwich around excellent performance, these two guys are a lot more similar than I even initially realized.

 

[BR33ZE]

Before this season, NO.

Now, yes, he gets in.

 

[Koya]

Good points, TDW. The one thing I'll say is Anderson's numbers were every bit as good as Warner's, IMO, once you account for era. Warner's 99 was better than anything Anderson did, but Anderson's '81 was better than any other Warner year. Anderson's '74 and '75 were as good as Warner's '01 and his '82 was very, very good.Looking at it another way, Anderson was the best QB in the NFL in '74 and '75 and was second best (behind some all time great Dan Fouts years) in '81 and '82. I'd also compare his '73 to Warner's '08 in the "very good but not the best" sense. Warner was tops in '99 and '01, and would have been tops in '00 had he kept playing, and was very good but not the best this year.They strike me as very similar QBs because of the supporting casts argument, and the Walsh/Martz system arguments. Anderson didn't win the SB which is what's kept him out of the HOF. But his best three to five years match up with Warner's and almost every other QB in NFL history.

I guess when you compare both in the context of the eras they played in, the gap lessens. I can't agree though with the statement that Anderson's best 3-5 seasons match-up with Warner's. What Warner has going for him IMO is that his best 5 years, might be the best 5 years a QB has ever put up.Consider that in 73 games (in those best 5 years), he's put up:A 66.7% Completion RateAn 8.44 YPA282.3 YPG155:84 TD/INT ratio3 SB appearances...What he doesn't have going for him is that these are his 5 only good years.

Without accounting for era, you're not going to be able to meaningfully compare the two. Warner's post-season performances probably put him over the edge against Anderson, but I believe Anderson's regular season performance to be better. He played in a much tougher era and it was also just a 14 game season for three of his biggest years and only a nine game season for another one. That's not his fault nor does it take away how valuable he was. In '73, Anderson ranked 4th in adjusted net yards per attempt. In '74, he ranked 3rd. In '75 he ranked 1st. In '81 he ranked 1st. In '82 he ranked 2nd. That's 1-1-2-3-4.For Warner, he ranked 1st in '99, 1st in '00 (but missed five games), 1st in '01, 7th in '07 and 8th in '08. That's 1-1-1-5-7.Considering they both had a five year gap in the middle of their careers sandwich around excellent performance, these two guys are a lot more similar than I even initially realized.

Good discussion here... and highlights two things imo - (1) How quickly we have forgotten what football looked like before 1985. (2) When you basically conclude that Anderson and Warner have very similar careers, when discussing the HoF I believe all the more reason Warner is now in.Take Anderson, add another MVP, a SB ring and two additional SB appearances and its tough to keep Warner out.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

Good points, TDW. The one thing I'll say is Anderson's numbers were every bit as good as Warner's, IMO, once you account for era. Warner's 99 was better than anything Anderson did, but Anderson's '81 was better than any other Warner year. Anderson's '74 and '75 were as good as Warner's '01 and his '82 was very, very good.Looking at it another way, Anderson was the best QB in the NFL in '74 and '75 and was second best (behind some all time great Dan Fouts years) in '81 and '82. I'd also compare his '73 to Warner's '08 in the "very good but not the best" sense. Warner was tops in '99 and '01, and would have been tops in '00 had he kept playing, and was very good but not the best this year.They strike me as very similar QBs because of the supporting casts argument, and the Walsh/Martz system arguments. Anderson didn't win the SB which is what's kept him out of the HOF. But his best three to five years match up with Warner's and almost every other QB in NFL history.

I guess when you compare both in the context of the eras they played in, the gap lessens. I can't agree though with the statement that Anderson's best 3-5 seasons match-up with Warner's. What Warner has going for him IMO is that his best 5 years, might be the best 5 years a QB has ever put up.Consider that in 73 games (in those best 5 years), he's put up:A 66.7% Completion RateAn 8.44 YPA282.3 YPG155:84 TD/INT ratio3 SB appearances...What he doesn't have going for him is that these are his 5 only good years.

Without accounting for era, you're not going to be able to meaningfully compare the two. Warner's post-season performances probably put him over the edge against Anderson, but I believe Anderson's regular season performance to be better. He played in a much tougher era and it was also just a 14 game season for three of his biggest years and only a nine game season for another one. That's not his fault nor does it take away how valuable he was. In '73, Anderson ranked 4th in adjusted net yards per attempt. In '74, he ranked 3rd. In '75 he ranked 1st. In '81 he ranked 1st. In '82 he ranked 2nd. That's 1-1-2-3-4.For Warner, he ranked 1st in '99, 1st in '00 (but missed five games), 1st in '01, 7th in '07 and 8th in '08. That's 1-1-1-5-7.Considering they both had a five year gap in the middle of their careers sandwich around excellent performance, these two guys are a lot more similar than I even initially realized.

I would not have thought as highly of Anderson unless shown. The period he played in was a bear for QB's up until about the late 70's when passing conditions eased up. Not having really seen Anderson play with the exception of his late career re-emergence (and even that's fuzzy), I can't apply an eyeball test. But I'm surprised at the statisitical similarity.

 

[David Yudkin]

Warner has also averaged 299 yards passing and 2.3 TD per game in the post season, which I'm guessing will only help his cause.

 

[gianmarco]

Has any other QB taken two different teams to the SB?

Craig Morton

# of years between Morton's 2 Super Bowls with different teams -- 7# of years between Warner's 2 Super Bowls with different teams -- 7whoa

 

[DeCleater]

Has any other QB taken two different teams to the SB?

Craig Morton

# of years between Morton's 2 Super Bowls with different teams -- 7# of years between Warner's 2 Super Bowls with different teams -- 7whoa

I don't think that is correct. Morton was the QB in 72 for the Cowboys and 77 for the Broncos. How does 77-72=7But if the Cards win, Warner will be the only QB to ever WIN SB's with different teams. That alone should get you in if Namath can get in for SB III.Here is another angle. Is there a QB that has started more than 2 SB's that is not in the HOF. I can think of Tarkenton, Bradshaw, Elway, Montana, Kelly, and Aikman. Brady and Warner are still active.

 

[Addai's Adidas]

I also vote for the Hall of fame. If he wins this year he gets my vote.

 

[gianmarco]

Has any other QB taken two different teams to the SB?

Craig Morton

# of years between Morton's 2 Super Bowls with different teams -- 7# of years between Warner's 2 Super Bowls with different teams -- 7whoa

I don't think that is correct. Morton was the QB in 72 for the Cowboys and 77 for the Broncos. How does 77-72=7But if the Cards win, Warner will be the only QB to ever WIN SB's with different teams. That alone should get you in if Namath can get in for SB III.Here is another angle. Is there a QB that has started more than 2 SB's that is not in the HOF. I can think of Tarkenton, Bradshaw, Elway, Montana, Kelly, and Aikman. Brady and Warner are still active.

1970, not 1972, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[gianmarco]

Someone may have to doublecheck this, but.......

There are 10 QBs who have started in 3 or more Super Bowls

Of those 10 QBs, 8 of them are in the HOF.

The 2 of those 10 that are not in the HOF---Tom Brady and Kurt Warner

ETA---In addition to that, there are 6 QBs who have started in at least 2 Super Bowls. Of those 6:

2 are in the HOF -- Len Dawson and Bart Starr

1 will be in the HOF -- Brett Favre

3 are not in the HOF -- Craig Morton, Joe Theismann, Jim Plunkett

 

[Dentist]

Once Marcus Allen got into the Hall of Fame on the first ballot despite only have 1 great season, 2 good seasons, and a bunch of mediocre crap, I decided that they would let anyone in.

Kurt Warner shouldn't be a hall of famer based on 4-5 good seasons, but neither should Marcus Allen for 1 great season and then just hanging around for a really effing long time so that he had good career numbers.

So after that atrocity, I decided it would take a lot for me to keep anyone out.

if you've had a few good seasons.. get in...

The number of current players that should be shoo-ins based on my Marcus Allen theory are staggering....

Yet almost everyone I talk to says that Marcus Allen is a fantastic football player and a worthy 1st ballot player.. yet you look at his season by season stats and just want to vomit

I'm sick:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/A/AlleMa00.htm

 

[CalBear]

Personally, I think he's made it now. But even if you want to knock him down based on career stats, consider this: Warner is 4600 career passing yards and 50 career passing TDs behind Steve Young. If he plays two more years he'll pass Young easily (along with Aikman and others), and then how could you possibly keep him out? Even if he gets hurt and comes up a little short, his career numbers are getting into the territory of other modern HOFers.

 

[gianmarco]

Personally, I think he's made it now. But even if you want to knock him down based on career stats, consider this: Warner is 4600 career passing yards and 50 career passing TDs behind Steve Young. If he plays two more years he'll pass Young easily (along with Aikman and others), and then how could you possibly keep him out? Even if he gets hurt and comes up a little short, his career numbers are getting into the territory of other modern HOFers.

Which is exactly why it's silly to think he needs those #'s to make it based on career totals. Warner could play 3 more seasons and throw for a very average 1700 yds and 17 TDs to hit those #'s you state. Why would 3 more yrs of those crappy #'s make him any more HOF-worthy than he is this very day? It doesn't.

 

[CalBear]

Once Marcus Allen got into the Hall of Fame on the first ballot despite only have 1 great season, 2 good seasons, and a bunch of mediocre crap, I decided that they would let anyone in.

Marcus Allen had 10+ TDs seven times. He was top-4 in yards from scrimmage 3 times (#1 twice), and top-10 three additional times. He was a first-team All-Pro twice and went to 6 Pro Bowls.The reason no one agrees with you is that you're wrong.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Kurt Warner shouldn't be a hall of famer based on 4-5 good seasons,

His best seasons haven't been just good. In his five best seasons, he has thrown 155 TD passes (an AVERAGE of 31 a season), and has a W/L record of 49-21 (.700 winning percentage) in the games he started. And that is not even counting his incredible playoff numbers.

And let's not forget his three MVP awards and the fact that he has been a first team All-Pro twice.

 

[Mario Kart]

If Warner can pull the Cardinals to an upset in this years Superbowl... Warner will no doubt be a 1st ballot Hall of Famer. I won't say that is the right thing or not, but the end results of his career, if this was his last year, would be enough for the Hall. His great years were pretty great though compared to other great years. His emergence is what great stories are written about. The only debate is between 1st vs. (other ballot) vote in.

 

[moleculo]

Once Marcus Allen got into the Hall of Fame on the first ballot despite only have 1 great season, 2 good seasons, and a bunch of mediocre crap, I decided that they would let anyone in.

Kurt Warner shouldn't be a hall of famer based on 4-5 good seasons, but neither should Marcus Allen for 1 great season and then just hanging around for a really effing long time so that he had good career numbers.

So after that atrocity, I decided it would take a lot for me to keep anyone out.

if you've had a few good seasons.. get in...

The number of current players that should be shoo-ins based on my Marcus Allen theory are staggering....

Yet almost everyone I talk to says that Marcus Allen is a fantastic football player and a worthy 1st ballot player.. yet you look at his season by season stats and just want to vomit

I'm sick:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/A/AlleMa00.htm

Allen:1982 NFL AP Offensive Rookie of the Year

1983 NFL Super Bowl MVP

1985 NFL AP MVP

1985 NFL PFWA MVP

1985 NFL AP Offensive Player of the Year

1993 NFL AP Comeback Player of the Year

top 5 in rushing TD's 6x

top 5 in rushing yards 2x

6 pro-bowls

2 all-pro teams

not too shabby - he's not the strongest case, but much better than say, Curtis Martin.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

He has certainly been the beneficiary of some top, top WR talent. He has a good story, and if he manages to win it this year a great story. You can't keep a great story out of the HOF. The HOF is not about compiling #'s, it is the place where the story of the NFL gets told. Become part of that story and you are in.

 

[Dentist]

Once Marcus Allen got into the Hall of Fame on the first ballot despite only have 1 great season, 2 good seasons, and a bunch of mediocre crap, I decided that they would let anyone in.

Kurt Warner shouldn't be a hall of famer based on 4-5 good seasons, but neither should Marcus Allen for 1 great season and then just hanging around for a really effing long time so that he had good career numbers.

So after that atrocity, I decided it would take a lot for me to keep anyone out.

if you've had a few good seasons.. get in...

The number of current players that should be shoo-ins based on my Marcus Allen theory are staggering....

Yet almost everyone I talk to says that Marcus Allen is a fantastic football player and a worthy 1st ballot player.. yet you look at his season by season stats and just want to vomit

I'm sick:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/A/AlleMa00.htm

Allen:1982 NFL AP Offensive Rookie of the Year

1983 NFL Super Bowl MVP

1985 NFL AP MVP

1985 NFL PFWA MVP

1985 NFL AP Offensive Player of the Year

1993 NFL AP Comeback Player of the Year

top 5 in rushing TD's 6x

top 5 in rushing yards 2x

6 pro-bowls

2 all-pro teams

not too shabby - he's not the strongest case, but much better than say, Curtis Martin.

Pro Bowls are not that great of an indicator for someone's HOF career, the process is a sham.all the awards you mentioned were in his 3 good seasons... and comeback player of the year award isn't anything to get that excited about.

Yes, there's no denying his career numbers are great because he played so long, which is impressive no doubt.

But Curtis Martin was far superior and had much better stats.

allen's gaudy career numbers got him into the Hall, but he was only a dominant player for 2-3 seasons MAX and a solid contributor the rest of the time - solid contributor isn't HOF material.

 

[Dentist]

Kurt Warner shouldn't be a hall of famer based on 4-5 good seasons,

His best seasons haven't been just good. In his five best seasons, he has thrown 155 TD passes (an AVERAGE of 31 a season), and has a W/L record of 49-21 (.700 winning percentage) in the games he started. And that is not even counting his incredible playoff numbers.

And let's not forget his three MVP awards and the fact that he has been a first team All-Pro twice.

TWO MVP's

 

[Dentist]

Once Marcus Allen got into the Hall of Fame on the first ballot despite only have 1 great season, 2 good seasons, and a bunch of mediocre crap, I decided that they would let anyone in.

Marcus Allen had 10+ TDs seven times. He was top-4 in yards from scrimmage 3 times (#1 twice), and top-10 three additional times. He was a first-team All-Pro twice and went to 6 Pro Bowls.The reason no one agrees with you is that you're wrong.

That's 10+ TD thing is rigged because the chiefs used him as their goal line man for years.The Fridge could've had 7 10 TD plus seasons if they'd pulled sweetness and put in the fridge inside the 2 yard line EVERY time.I'm not wrong... look at his year by year stats.. you have 1 AWESOME season, 2 VERY GOOD seasons.. and the rest are all just role player/goal line man stats.Also, he wouldn't sign my rookie card of him when I saw him at a charity golf event when he was in KC and seemed like a real tool when i would see him around at night clubs.

 

[David Yudkin]

Once Marcus Allen got into the Hall of Fame on the first ballot despite only have 1 great season, 2 good seasons, and a bunch of mediocre crap, I decided that they would let anyone in.

Kurt Warner shouldn't be a hall of famer based on 4-5 good seasons, but neither should Marcus Allen for 1 great season and then just hanging around for a really effing long time so that he had good career numbers.

So after that atrocity, I decided it would take a lot for me to keep anyone out.

if you've had a few good seasons.. get in...

The number of current players that should be shoo-ins based on my Marcus Allen theory are staggering....

Yet almost everyone I talk to says that Marcus Allen is a fantastic football player and a worthy 1st ballot player.. yet you look at his season by season stats and just want to vomit

I'm sick:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/A/AlleMa00.htm

Allen:1982 NFL AP Offensive Rookie of the Year

1983 NFL Super Bowl MVP

1985 NFL AP MVP

1985 NFL PFWA MVP

1985 NFL AP Offensive Player of the Year

1993 NFL AP Comeback Player of the Year

top 5 in rushing TD's 6x

top 5 in rushing yards 2x

6 pro-bowls

2 all-pro teams

not too shabby - he's not the strongest case, but much better than say, Curtis Martin.

Pro Bowls are not that great of an indicator for someone's HOF career, the process is a sham.all the awards you mentioned were in his 3 good seasons... and comeback player of the year award isn't anything to get that excited about.

Yes, there's no denying his career numbers are great because he played so long, which is impressive no doubt.

But Curtis Martin was far superior and had much better stats.

allen's gaudy career numbers got him into the Hall, but he was only a dominant player for 2-3 seasons MAX and a solid contributor the rest of the time - solid contributor isn't HOF material.

Top 5 rankings . . . Rushing yards, YFS, rushing TD

Allen

2 + 3 + 6 = 11

Martin

4 + 2 + 3 = 9

I'm not a huge fan of either one, but Martin had a couple of huge seasons and the others were not that much better than his peers.

 

[moleculo]

Once Marcus Allen got into the Hall of Fame on the first ballot despite only have 1 great season, 2 good seasons, and a bunch of mediocre crap, I decided that they would let anyone in.

Kurt Warner shouldn't be a hall of famer based on 4-5 good seasons, but neither should Marcus Allen for 1 great season and then just hanging around for a really effing long time so that he had good career numbers.

So after that atrocity, I decided it would take a lot for me to keep anyone out.

if you've had a few good seasons.. get in...

The number of current players that should be shoo-ins based on my Marcus Allen theory are staggering....

Yet almost everyone I talk to says that Marcus Allen is a fantastic football player and a worthy 1st ballot player.. yet you look at his season by season stats and just want to vomit

I'm sick:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/A/AlleMa00.htm

Allen:1982 NFL AP Offensive Rookie of the Year

1983 NFL Super Bowl MVP

1985 NFL AP MVP

1985 NFL PFWA MVP

1985 NFL AP Offensive Player of the Year

1993 NFL AP Comeback Player of the Year

top 5 in rushing TD's 6x

top 5 in rushing yards 2x

6 pro-bowls

2 all-pro teams

not too shabby - he's not the strongest case, but much better than say, Curtis Martin.

Pro Bowls are not that great of an indicator for someone's HOF career, the process is a sham.all the awards you mentioned were in his 3 good seasons... and comeback player of the year award isn't anything to get that excited about.

Yes, there's no denying his career numbers are great because he played so long, which is impressive no doubt.

But Curtis Martin was far superior and had much better stats.

allen's gaudy career numbers got him into the Hall, but he was only a dominant player for 2-3 seasons MAX and a solid contributor the rest of the time - solid contributor isn't HOF material.

Top 5 rankings . . . Rushing yards, YFS, rushing TD

Allen

2 + 3 + 6 = 11

Martin

4 + 2 + 3 = 9

I'm not a huge fan of either one, but Martin had a couple of huge seasons and the others were not that much better than his peers.

right. Here's the significant difference between Allen and Martin:Allen:

1982 NFL AP Offensive Rookie of the Year

1983 NFL Super Bowl MVP

1985 NFL AP MVP

1985 NFL PFWA MVP

1985 NFL AP Offensive Player of the Year

1993 NFL AP Comeback Player of the Year

Martin:

1995 NFL AP Offensive Rookie of the Year

IMO, NFL MVP + SB MVP makes up for a lot of statistical warts. To me, that's what separates these two guys.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Kurt Warner shouldn't be a hall of famer based on 4-5 good seasons,

His best seasons haven't been just good. In his five best seasons, he has thrown 155 TD passes (an AVERAGE of 31 a season), and has a W/L record of 49-21 (.700 winning percentage) in the games he started. And that is not even counting his incredible playoff numbers.

And let's not forget his three MVP awards and the fact that he has been a first team All-Pro twice.

TWO MVP's

Two regular season MVP awards + one Super Bowl MVP award = three MVP awards

 

[sofakinggood]

I think he is IN.....a SB win will remove any doubt!

 

[CalBear]

I'm not wrong... look at his year by year stats.. you have 1 AWESOME season, 2 VERY GOOD seasons.. and the rest are all just role player/goal line man stats.

Role player/goal line men don't end up in the top 10 in yards from scrimmage, which Allen did six times.

Also, he wouldn't sign my rookie card of him when I saw him at a charity golf event when he was in KC and seemed like a real tool when i would see him around at night clubs.

That at least explains why you're ignoring the facts.

 

[chitlins3]

Once Marcus Allen got into the Hall of Fame on the first ballot despite only have 1 great season, 2 good seasons, and a bunch of mediocre crap, I decided that they would let anyone in.

Marcus Allen had 10+ TDs seven times. He was top-4 in yards from scrimmage 3 times (#1 twice), and top-10 three additional times. He was a first-team All-Pro twice and went to 6 Pro Bowls.The reason no one agrees with you is that you're wrong.

That's 10+ TD thing is rigged because the chiefs used him as their goal line man for years.The Fridge could've had 7 10 TD plus seasons if they'd pulled sweetness and put in the fridge inside the 2 yard line EVERY time.I'm not wrong... look at his year by year stats.. you have 1 AWESOME season, 2 VERY GOOD seasons.. and the rest are all just role player/goal line man stats.Also, he wouldn't sign my rookie card of him when I saw him at a charity golf event when he was in KC and seemed like a real tool when i would see him around at night clubs.

Allen had 10+ TDs only twice with the Chiefs, 5 times with the Raiders.Which season is the awesome season, and which two are the very good seasons? I am having a hard time distinguishing.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Also, he wouldn't sign my rookie card of him when I saw him at a charity golf event when he was in KC and seemed like a real tool when i would see him around at night clubs.

That at least explains why you're ignoring the facts.

I think you are forgetting that Hall of Fame players are not known for acting like tools when they frequent night clubs. I thought this was common knowledge.

 

[craxie]

Role player/goal line men don't end up in the top 10 in yards from scrimmage, which Allen did six times.

five

 

[Dentist]

I'm not wrong... look at his year by year stats.. you have 1 AWESOME season, 2 VERY GOOD seasons.. and the rest are all just role player/goal line man stats.

Role player/goal line men don't end up in the top 10 in yards from scrimmage, which Allen did six times.

top 10 in yards from scrimmage isn't crap when there's only 30 teams in the leaguetop 5 is impressive... you'd have to be in the top 3 to be in the top 10 %.

 

[David Yudkin]

I'm not wrong... look at his year by year stats.. you have 1 AWESOME season, 2 VERY GOOD seasons.. and the rest are all just role player/goal line man stats.

Role player/goal line men don't end up in the top 10 in yards from scrimmage, which Allen did six times.

top 10 in yards from scrimmage isn't crap when there's only 30 teams in the leaguetop 5 is impressive... you'd have to be in the top 3 to be in the top 10 %.

Martin had one season in the Top 3 in YFS (at #3). Allen did it twice and ranked first in the league both times.

 

[Dentist]

I'm not wrong... look at his year by year stats.. you have 1 AWESOME season, 2 VERY GOOD seasons.. and the rest are all just role player/goal line man stats.

Role player/goal line men don't end up in the top 10 in yards from scrimmage, which Allen did six times.

top 10 in yards from scrimmage isn't crap when there's only 30 teams in the leaguetop 5 is impressive... you'd have to be in the top 3 to be in the top 10 %.

Martin had one season in the Top 3 in YFS (at #3). Allen did it twice and ranked first in the league both times.

well fine, keep him out too then.but Allen sure as hell shouldn't be in there.

When I take over the entire world, removing Allen from the hall of fame will be at least one of the first 100 things I do.

 

[JamesTheScot]

I think he is proving in AZ that he wasn't just a product of Martz's system. But he probably needs at least a couple more high level years to make the HOF. I think he's close.

Or is he simply proving that when he has two elite WR's he can put up pretty gaudy numbers?I think I'd take Fitz+Boldin over Holt+Bruce (even in their prime). Fitz in particular may be emerging as a guy that can demand targets even when covered well. I don't know that Holt or Bruce were ever that good.To put it another way, I think Trent Green, pre-concussions, would be lighting it up having Fitz and Boldin to throw to?I'm not saying Warner isn't HOF material. I'm still undecided. But I disagree that his play in AZ proves he isn't a product of a system or his surrounding cast. In fact, it may actually support the opposite conclusion. Think back to NY. His stats weren't horrible in NY, but I think they look better than he actually played there. I also think Bulger was clearly outplaying him in SL just prior to his exit from there. Was that SL team devolving? Sure. But he wasn't capable of holding things together and carrying the team which is something the HOF QB's I always recall were capable of doing.When things are going great, he does great. When things aren't going to great...I'm not sure he has that ability to really carry the team in the face of adversity like the legends do.I really like Warner as a person and I genuinely like to see him succeed. I'm just not ready yet to say he's HOF material.

 

[David Yudkin]

I'm not wrong... look at his year by year stats.. you have 1 AWESOME season, 2 VERY GOOD seasons.. and the rest are all just role player/goal line man stats.

Role player/goal line men don't end up in the top 10 in yards from scrimmage, which Allen did six times.

top 10 in yards from scrimmage isn't crap when there's only 30 teams in the leaguetop 5 is impressive... you'd have to be in the top 3 to be in the top 10 %.

Martin had one season in the Top 3 in YFS (at #3). Allen did it twice and ranked first in the league both times.

well fine, keep him out too then.but Allen sure as hell shouldn't be in there.

When I take over the entire world, removing Allen from the hall of fame will be at least one of the first 100 things I do.

As I already said, I am not a huge fan of either guy. Both had a few top seasons. Martin had more average to above average seasons, but both look to fall in the compiler category.

 

[Dentist]

I think he is proving in AZ that he wasn't just a product of Martz's system. But he probably needs at least a couple more high level years to make the HOF. I think he's close.

Or is he simply proving that when he has two elite WR's he can put up pretty gaudy numbers?

Agree here... but there's always the argument in team sports of "who made who"did montana and young make rice, or did he make them?was priest holmes actually good, or was it just the KC line?Was Culpepper ever good or did Moss and Carter make him?Was cunningham's comeback in '98 just because of the same two guys?was terrell davis actually good, or just in a good system at the right time?Was Steve Nash REALLY the mvp two years straight, or did SSOL make him? - probably the best example of them all

 

[Ghost Rider]

Think back to NY. His stats weren't horrible in NY, but I think they look better than he actually played there. I also think Bulger was clearly outplaying him in SL just prior to his exit from there. Was that SL team devolving? Sure. But he wasn't capable of holding things together and carrying the team which is something the HOF QB's I always recall were capable of doing.

Warner had an injury to his hand that took years to fully recover from. Had he kept playing full-time back then, he would be retired by now. He has such as much to a reliable St. Louis reporter. Also, while he didn't put up huge numbers in NY, they were 5-4 with him as the starter, and then went 1-6 down the stretch when he was replaced by Eli, whom they wanted to get in there to take his lumps and gain some experience. Same thing in '00. The Rams offense was unstoppable the first six games of the season, but when Warner got hurt, Trent Green came in and the team went 2-3 with him in there. Green put up good numbers, but the team didn't win like they did with Warner in there.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Think back to NY. His stats weren't horrible in NY, but I think they look better than he actually played there. I also think Bulger was clearly outplaying him in SL just prior to his exit from there. Was that SL team devolving? Sure. But he wasn't capable of holding things together and carrying the team which is something the HOF QB's I always recall were capable of doing.

Warner had an injury to his hand that took years to fully recover from. Had he kept playing full-time back then, he would be retired by now. He has such as much to a reliable St. Louis reporter. Also, while he didn't put up huge numbers in NY, they were 5-4 with him as the starter, and then went 1-6 down the stretch when he was replaced by Eli, whom they wanted to get in there to take his lumps and gain some experience. Same thing in '00. The Rams offense was unstoppable the first six games of the season, but when Warner got hurt, Trent Green came in and the team went 2-3 with him in there. Green put up good numbers, but the team didn't win like they did with Warner in there.

Surely you're not saying Trent Green was the reason the Rams lost those games.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Think back to NY. His stats weren't horrible in NY, but I think they look better than he actually played there. I also think Bulger was clearly outplaying him in SL just prior to his exit from there. Was that SL team devolving? Sure. But he wasn't capable of holding things together and carrying the team which is something the HOF QB's I always recall were capable of doing.

Warner had an injury to his hand that took years to fully recover from. Had he kept playing full-time back then, he would be retired by now. He has such as much to a reliable St. Louis reporter. Also, while he didn't put up huge numbers in NY, they were 5-4 with him as the starter, and then went 1-6 down the stretch when he was replaced by Eli, whom they wanted to get in there to take his lumps and gain some experience. Same thing in '00. The Rams offense was unstoppable the first six games of the season, but when Warner got hurt, Trent Green came in and the team went 2-3 with him in there. Green put up good numbers, but the team didn't win like they did with Warner in there.

Surely you're not saying Trent Green was the reason the Rams lost those games.

The sole reason? No, of course not. But his inability to avoid sacks killed them in several of those games. Warner's ability to avoid the rush back then was so awesome, it made a huge difference at critical times. I was at the game where they lost 27-24 to Carolina at home, and while Green's stat line was dynamite, he tool several critical drive-killing sacks by standing in the pocket too long; that didn't happen with Warner, who would always find an open receiver, so he never had to hold on to the ball a long time back there. Are we supposed to believe that the offensive line magically got worse when Green played and then all of a sudden better again when Warner played? Of course not. Consider that Warner started 11 games and was sacked 20 times. Trent Green started 5 games and was sacked 24 times. Plus, the Rams averaged 5 more points per game when Warner started, and that was even with them only scoring 3 in Warner's first game (a game at Carolina that he should not have played in, as he came back a week too soon). Green's raw numbers were technically better for the season (especially since Warner's first game back resulted in 0 TDs and 4 INTs), but the team was better off overall when Warner was in there, except for that Carolina game.

 

[CalBear]

top 10 in yards from scrimmage isn't crap when there's only 30 teams in the leaguetop 5 is impressive... you'd have to be in the top 3 to be in the top 10 %.

Here is the complete list of RBs who were in the top 5 in yards from scrimmage more than 3 times (Allen did it 3 times):Jim BrownBarry SandersWalter PaytonEmmitt SmithOJ SimpsonEric DickersonThurman ThomasI can agree that Allen does not belong in this group.Here is the list of Hall of Fame RBs who were top 5 in yards from scrimmage fewer than 3 times:Tony Dorsett John RigginsFranco HarrisLarry CzonkaExactly 3 times:Marcus AllenEarl CampbellLeroy KellyGale SayersOllie MatsonI think it's ridiculous to claim that the backs in this group significantly outperformed Allen. Sayers and Campbell, maybe; I'd take Allen over any of the others.Allen also has an impressive post-season record, where he averaged 117 yards from scrimmage per game with 5.0 yards per carry. In the Raiders' Super Bowl win he had 191 rushing yards (209 total) and two TDs. In fact, that Super Bowl run is one of the most impressive RB playoff performances in history: he averaged 155 rushing yards per game and over 8 yards per carry, plus almost 30 receiving yards per game, with five TDs in three games. That's as good as TD's showings in Denver.Marcus Allen is a 100% solid Hall of Famer. You're allowing your personal dislike of him to cloud your judgement.

 

[Ice Cream Man]

Leinart wasn't so hot at the helm (and Plummer when he had good weapons), so clearly not anyone can or did make it work in Arizona.

Good WR's don't make a QB, though it certainly helps.