RSS Feed
Most Recent FO Features
» SDA/FEI Bowl Mash-Up Part III
Buckeyes or Longhorns? Refresh yourself with the wisdom of our college football experts before tonight's Fiesta Bowl, then use this thread for in-game comments.
Most Recent Extra Points
29 Jul 2008
The Hall of Fame Index, Part Two
by Mike Tanier and Doug Farrar
In late June, the Broncos blog Mile High Report investigated a phenomenon that has stuck in many a Broncos fan's craw for years. The Broncos have been an incredibly successful franchise since the mid-1970s, with six Super Bowl appearances, two championships, and tons of playoff appearances. But the Broncos have just two official representatives in the Hall of Fame: John Elway and Gary Zimmerman. The article calls the low Broncos representation a "snubbing" and a "gross injustice."
A couple of us at Football Outsiders decided to use the Mile High Report as a springboard for a larger Hall of Fame discussion. We wanted to know what the typical ratio of Hall members to franchise accomplishments truly is, and to determine what teams are over- or underrepresented. So we cooked up a method to measure each franchise's Hall of Famer-to-Accomplishment Index, then used the numbers as an excuse to publishing a rambling discussion about the Hall of Fame. This is the second part of that article; the method is described at the start of part one, which also includes discussion of teams from the Arizona Cardinals to the Miami Dolphins.
To aid in the discourse, we've linked every player's name to their page at the Hall of Fame site (for HoFers) or their page at pro-football-reference.com (for hopefuls).
The Teams, Part Two
Minnesota Vikings
Accomplishment Score: 165
Hall of Famers: 8
Index: 4.8
Doug: I'm going to assume that someone can explain to me why Jim Marshall is not in the Hall of Fame. 282 straight starts, 127 sacks (per the Vikings franchise), a key member of one of the all-time great defenses. I could go on and on, but I won't. I really like Chuck Foreman as the unheralded precursor to Roger Craig and Marshall Faulk (he led the NFL in receptions in 1975), but the career's too short. The Marshall omission is so ridiculous, it was tough to move on to other names. Who might you include?
Mike: NFL's Top 10 is running a show tonight (Tuesday) at 8pm on the top players not in the HAll of Fame, and Marshall is on the list. I taped a segment for the show and I mentioned that he's punished for running the wrong way after that fumble, punished for losing four Super Bowls, punished for playing on a line with two other all-time greats, and punished for playing in an era before official sack totals. I think the four Super Bowls are key. The Broncos lost four before they won two, and the Bills of course lost four. I would bet you a beer that many voters think losing a Super Bowl is worse than laboring for years on some average team. The Vikings were like the Broncos a few years ago, with very few HoFers before Ron Yary and Paul Krause got in. Mick Tingelhoff, a five-time first team All-Pro, still cannot get in, and when you ask older sportswriters they talk about his bad performance in Super Bowl IV.
And we agreed earlier that Cris Carter is an obvious choice.
Doug: Speaking of Vikings named C(h)ris snubbed by the Hall, what about Chris Doleman? Two-time All-Pro with eight Pro Bowl trips, fourth all-time with 150.5 sacks, 31st all-time in starts with 231. We talked about players penalized for losing Super Bowls. Doleman has been penalized for missing great eras with two different franchises. Playing for the Vikings from 1985 through 1993 meant that he missed the Bud Grant Super Bowl teams by a good decade, and the apex of the Denny Green/Carter/Moss/point-per-minute teams by a few years on the other side.
Then, he played for the 49ers from 1996 through 1998, when the team was great but couldn't get in the Super Bowl. Bonus points for playing in Atlanta in 1994 and 1995, just a few years before their only Super Bowl appearance, and in a mini-era best known for the sideline snit between June Jones and Jeff George. Doleman finished his career back in Minnesota in 1999, racking up eight sacks at age 38. Just because he kept missing the bus doesn't mean he shouldn't be considered. In fact, he's barely remembered. Was he even discussed on that Top 10 Pass Rushers show? An honorable mention? I don't think so.
New England Patriots
Accomplishment Score: 117
Hall of Famers: 4
Index: 3.4
Mike: The Patriots accomplishments are skewed recent; their 2001 Super Bowl win makes the list, but the others don't because we stop the study five years ago. Tom Brady will lead a host of recent Patriots into the Hall of Fame a decade or so down the road, though it's hard to sort out who will make it from the 2001-2008 teams.
Doug: I think Brady and Richard Seymour are locks. Everyone else is up in the air. I don't think of Junior Seau as a multi-team guy. Rodney Harrison?
Mike: Harrison should get in, and I do think of him as a two-team guy. Adam Vinatieri may get in, and will be the worst player in the Hall of Fame if he does.
New Orleans Saints
Accomplishment Score: 66
Hall of Famers: 0
Index: 0.0
Doug: The NFL Network recently voted the Mora-era linebacker corps as the NFL's all-time best (Hey, was Mike Tanier on that Top 10 show?). While that's good grist for argument, I don't think Rickey Jackson's credentials are in doubt. Six Pro Bowls, more sacks than Derrick Thomas, and the pointman for that wonderful Dome Patrol defense. Sam Mills may also have a shot down the road. Great leader, smart player, undersized linebacker in the Zach Thomas/Derrick Brooks/Lofa Tatupu line.
Mike: I wasn't on that show, but I would argue Jackson for the Hall if I was. Mills isn't a bad choice either. If Mills and Kevin Greene joined Reggie White, Panthers fans could at least take solace in the fact that they picked up lots of Hall of Famers near the ends of their careers.
New York Giants
Accomplishment Score: 155
Hall of Famers: 9
Index: 5.8
Doug: The modern accomplishments were pretty stacked around Parcells; the '70s were a vast wasteland for this franchise. Do more members of the Tuna's defenses get in?
Mike: I don't see it. I also don't see any New York bias in the voting. If anything, it seems like voters shy away from some "second-tier" candidates, like Phil Simms, and they took forever to decide on Harry Carson. Our list even includes Fran Tarkenton, a guy most people think of as a Vikings HoFer but who earns dual-citizenship for our purposes.
New York Jets
Accomplishment Score: 103
Hall of Famers: 3
Index: 2.9
Mike: The Jets' overall accomplishment list is pretty scant once you get past Super Bowl III. Still, the numbers say that their HoF total is pretty light. Is there someone who belongs in?
Doug: Yup. I'm gonna get my American Football League ya-yas out in this article, for sure. Defensive end Gerry Philbin. First-team All-Time All-AFL Team, and he was the man on that late-'60s defense. Unofficially, 19 sacks in 1968. Offensive tackle Winston Hill made eight All-Star Games/Pro Bowls in the AFL and NFL. Will Curtis Martin be a two-team guy?
Mike: I think of Martin as a Patriot and a Jet. Hill is an odd case because he was also one of the stars of Super Bowl III, with Matt Snell running right over him for 146 yards. I don't know why he and Philbin didn't merit more consideration.
Oakland Raiders
Accomplishment Score: 162
Hall of Famers: 12
Index: 7.4
Mike: Al Davis thinks there aren't enough Raiders in the Hall. Our numbers say otherwise. They top the AFL franchises by a wide margin, Index-wise.
Doug: And there aren't any unfairly denied stragglers. The most interesting thing to me about this franchise is that four different quarterbacks have taken the Raiders to the Super Bowl -- Daryle Lamonica, Ken Stabler, Jim Plunkett, and Rich Gannon -- and none of them, in my opinion, make the cut. Maybe Plunkett if your vote is heavily weighted in favor of the postseason, but that'd have to be a heavy weight to counterbalance 198 picks to 164 touchdowns. The appropriate four members of that unbelievable offensive line from the early '70s are in – Art Shell, Gene Upshaw, Jim Otto, and Bob Brown. Oakland's glory years were marked by a lot of castoffs on defense like John Matuszak and Lyle Alzado, and the ones who stayed around long enough to be truly great like Ted Hendricks (one of my all-time favorite players) are in there as Raiders. Maybe there's an argument for Todd Christensen in a slow year.
Mike: Christensen has a case. Stabler has a pretty good case. Plunkett is the worst quarterback ever to win two Super Bowls. He really had the Trent Dilfer career -- top pick, stunk early, bounced around a bit, stumbled onto a great team -- then picked up a bonus ring because Marc Wilson wasn't good enough to replace him and the Raiders stayed great. There's still a lot of support for Ray Guy, who was a finalist again this year. Do you wanna tackle the punter?
Doug: Well, if you're going to tackle anyone ... I can't sign on to the idea of a guy who did nothing but punt making the Hall. Unless he revolutionized the position, or put opposing teams in a field-position hole unlike any other punter in history. ANYthing that stands out. Was he the best punter of his era? Sure. Why not? And normally, being the best at your position in an era gets you in automatically. That's the argument for. The argument against is just as simple: He's a freakin' punter. I tend to err on that side.
Philadelphia Eagles
Accomplishment Score: 135
Hall of Famers: 9
Index: 6.7
Doug: I'll defer to your expertise on this fine franchise. Looks like a pretty fair representation to me. Is there anyone from the 1970s who merits consideration? Harold Carmichael is a name that comes to mind, but that could be a product of my childhood memories of his consecutive games streak. In PFP 2007, Ned Macey wrote about the longtime Art Monk debate in an article entitled, "What Makes a Hall of Fame Receiver?," and Carmichael's pretty high in the stats adjusted for era presented there.
Mike: Carmichel would be an excellent candidate. That's about it. Bill Bergey might have been a marginal candidate. The Eagles get a high representation score because they fielded championship teams in 1948 and 1949, just before our study begins. HoFers like Pete Pihos and Steve Van Buren made their bones with those teams.
With an Eagles guy and a Seahawks guy here, it's a good opportunity to bring up Ricky Watters. Are you a Watters Kool-Aid drinker?
Doug: Well, seven backs have amassed more than 10,000 rushing yards and 3,800 receiving yards in their careers: Marcus Allen, Marshall Faulk, Tiki Barber, Walter Payton, Thurman Thomas, Warrick Dunn, and Watters. But this is where you start to think about "stat collectors" again. How many of those guys aren't HoFers? We talked about Dunn, and Barber will get a good argument. Watters never made the Pro Bowl as a Seahawks player, though as we discuss in the Cortez Kennedy section, the Dennis Erickson Seahawks were about as juiceless a squad as you will ever see. There's also the perception of selfishness, and that could hurt Barber as well. This isn't supposed to be a popularity contest, but it's naïve to say that it isn't (see Mike's comment about Warren Sapp). Based on my own impressions, Barber and Watters are the two exclusions in that group.
Pittsburgh Steelers
Accomplishment Score: 175
Hall of Famers: 12
Index: 6.9
Mike: A few years back, I argued that the Steelers are almost comically overrepresented in the Hall. This was after Lynn Swann and John Stallworth got in, when the voters seemed determine to induct the whole starting lineup of those 1970s teams. Now, we've had six straight classes with no Steelers, and the ratios feel much better. The voters dip into the 1970s and grab a worthy player or two every year: Elvin Bethea, Roger Wehrli, Fred Dean, Carl Eller. The list of HoFers from that decade is a lot more inclusive, and the Steelers' overall inductees appear to be more in line with their accomplishments.
Doug: Right. The question becomes, who eventually goes in from the Blitzburgh teams of the mid-'90s? Rod Woodson is as sure a thing as there will ever be. I would be pretty shocked if Kevin Greene didn't make it. Dermontti Dawson has been on the top 25 list multiple times. Jerome Bettis down the road.
Mike: Greene's sack totals are hard to argue with. I am not sure about his reputation. He bounced around a lot and never engendered a lot of loyalty in any one city. Also, Derrick Thomas has been on the ballot for three years with no takers. High sack totals may not impress some voters, as I said earlier.
St. Louis/Los Angeles Rams
Accomplishment Score: 182
Hall of Famers: 12
Index: 6.6
Doug: It's too bad we're not doing coaches in this one; I'll have to save my Chuck Knox argument for another time. Linebacker Isiah Robertson is primarily known for the NFL Films highlight in which he gets gored by Earl Campbell, but the guy was a six-time Pro Bowler on a set of top-5 defenses. Anyone else we're missing before the Greatest Show on Turf?
Mike: Robertson was a great player, but I think the voters inducted Jack Youngblood, Merlin Olson, and Deacon Jones, then figured they had the Great Rams Defender of the 1960s-'70s category covered. I can't say I disagree. When Marshall Faulk, Orlando Pace, and some random assortment of Isaac Bruce or Torry Holt gets in, the Rams may look downright overrepresented in the Hall.
San Diego Chargers
Accomplishment Score: 107
Hall of Famers: 6
Index: 5.6
Mike: Fred Dean: borderline inductee? I am of two minds about him.
Doug: "Borderline" is a good way of putting it, though the general consensus was that he pushed that first Walsh San Francisco defense over the edge. There are more egregious inductees. I'd have liked to see Russ Washington elected before Dean, if we're talking Chargers linemen. One of the most underrated offensive tackles in the modern game. Five-time All-Pro. John Matuszak wrote that Washington was the one opponent that would have him tossing and turning the night before the game.
Mike: Washington's a good player. Dean's resume has a little of everything. Stats? He's got some. Great teams? Got some. He just doesn't have a lot of anything. And I remember that he had the "sacks only" reputation late in his career. Like I said, reputations fade.
San Francisco 49ers
Accomplishment Score: 188
Hall of Famers: 11
Index: 5.9
Doug: I tend to think that the Siefert/Young/Mariucci 49ers will eventually become one of those series of teams where you get random players inducted over time. I'm a bit more interested in the early '70s squads that couldn't ever get past Dallas in the playoffs. John Brodie put up some AFL numbers back when the NFL was an earthbound league, and he did it over a long period of time. He's my cause celebre, for the purposes of this article. Thoughts?
Mike: Look at Brodie, Roman Gabriel, and John Hadl side-by-side. Good numbers guys, played for successful teams, went to some Pro Bowls. Can you really advocate Brodie over the other two? And if you advocate all three, well, doesn't that open the door for Ken Stabler, Ken Anderson and about a dozen others?
Seattle Seahawks
Accomplishment Score: 53
Hall of Famers: 1
Index: 1.9
Doug: Cortez Kennedy: Eight-time Pro Bowler, 14.5 sacks in 1992 for a defense saddled with an offense that made the 2005 49ers look like the 1999 Rams. Basically unblockable through the 1990s. Not even on the list in his first year of eligibility. Duh, guys.
Mike: An absolutely great player at his peak, but no one cares about the Seahawks of the early 1990s. Seriously, talk about a team with no juice. I'm not sure Kennedy is a Hall of Famer, but he should be on the ballot. He should be talked about. Again, is this a sign of there being too many worthy players, or of a system that doesn't identify the best players quickly enough?
Doug: As much as I would love to say that Kenny Easley is a flat-out Hall-of-Famer, I just can't. There just aren't enough years in the career, and the curve of excellence just doesn't look quite right, though he was as much of a joy to watch as any player I've ever seen. Mike, I've been going back and forth on Dave Krieg for years. Is he one of those Steve DeBerg/Vinny Testaverde guys who just racked stats in a long career, or is he one all-time fumbles record away from a bust in Canton?
Mike: Homer alert. Homer alert. Back away from the Dave Krieg cigarettes. Yes, he is one of those DeBerg/Testaverde guys.
Doug: Yeah, I know. But I had to bring him up, because if you write about the Seahawks long enough, you get people saying, "But Krieg is in the all-time Top 10 in X number of categories (paints face blue)!"
Interesting thing about the 1980s Seahawks, and I think this true of most teams coached by Chuck Knox though his career, is that there were lot of good-but-not great players that skew the accomplishment/talent ratio to a point. Many high (over)achievers in the 1980s. The 1990s featured long stretches of mediocrity broken up with a patch of suckitude. If you include their current head coach (and I think most people would), there may be as many potential inductees on the current team as there have been in franchise history. Low indexes can mean different things. The Broncos have been screwed by the voters. The Seahawks just haven't had that many HoFers.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Accomplishment Score: 73
Hall of Famers: 1
Index: 1.4
Doug: When you go 15 straight seasons without a winning record, it's tough to argue that you're being ignored at the Podium of Destiny. There will be enough to talk about when Warren Sapp, Derrick Brooks and John Lynch go in. I'm voting Warrick Dunn in as the last back under 200 pounds who will ever rush for more than 10,000 yards. Anyone we're missing here?
Mike: I don't think Lynch is a shoo-in, and I am not even certain about Sapp, who may become the victim of a backlash in the next few years. He's one of those guys for whom it is very easy to remember the "downs" with the ups, and it may take voters a few years to forget his off years and sometimes dumb behavior.
Tennessee Titans/Houston Oilers
Accomplishment Score: 139
Hall of Famers: 8
Index: 5.8
Mike: The Titans/Oilers franchise is pretty high on the "accomplishments" list because they racked up a lot of secondary accomplishments: a lost Super Bowl, two AFL titles, scads of playoff appearances. When you look at their HoF members, there's a good balance of 1970s, '80s, and '90s players on the list. The one guy I would add, Curley Culp, would count for both the Oilers and Chiefs in our study. Culp was an outstanding defensive tackle, a starter on the Chiefs team that won Super Bowl IV, then played on that great Oilers defense of the 1970s.
Doug: Agreed on Culp. I don't see anyone from the Bum Phillips days that isn't in there and really should be. Eddie George just got beaten down a few years too soon.
Steve McNair: HoF-level great or stat collector?
Mike: Neither. A great player and competitor who just comes up short. You can make a pretty impressive grouping of sub-HoF quarterbacks who were still very good: McNair, Phil Simms, Ken Anderson, Ken Stabler. Joe Theismann fits in here, as do some guys like John Brodie that we mention elsewhere. You can do the same at every position. The fact that there are quite a few guys and that it is hard to put them in an order everyone can agree upon makes a good argument that they didn't separate themselves enough to become true Hall of Famers.
Washington Redskins
Accomplishment Score: 142
Hall of Famers: 10
Index: 7.4
Doug: At least one of the Hogs has to get in, right? Which one?
Mike: Russ Grimm, probably. Though when you look at each Hog individually, you don't see a great HoF resume among them. Grimm was a consensus All-Pro during the Redskins' best seasons, so he's a good candidate.
With Art Monk's enshrinement, it seems like the voters are just getting around to those 1980s Redskins. Darrell Green and Riggo are in, and I have a hunch Grimm will join Monk, and that will probably wrap things up.
The Expansion Teams
Baltimore Ravens
Accomplishment Score: 27
Hall of Famers: 0
Index: 0.0
Mike: The least accomplished team on our list to win a Super Bowl. Of course, the Ravens have two HoFers in the pipeline in Jonathan Ogden and Ray Lewis. And Shannon Sharpe if you count him as a dual-team star.
Doug: I would. And add Ed Reed if things keep going as they are.
Carolina Panthers
Accomplishment Score: 14
Hall of Famers: 0
Index: 0
Doug: I think Kevin Greene is a future Hall-of-Famer, though most people think of him as a Ram or Steeler. Looking at Carolina's history, I don't know if they have a homegrown immortal yet. Steve Smith would have to put a lot more together, and those defensive linemen -- I just don't see it yet. Am I missing someone?
Mike: Let's see if Julius Peppers bounces back in a big way. There's nobody who is even halfway in right now.
Houston Texans
Accomplishment Score: 4
Hall of Famers: 0
Index: 0.0
Mike: We'll be arguing about Mario Williams in the year 2025 or so.
Doug: Not to mention all-time passing leader David Carr! Yeah, that's a team in need of a little more history.
Jacksonville Jaguars
Accomplishment Score: 34
Hall of Famers: 0
Index: 0.0
Mike: Tony Boselli had a chance to be the first Jaguars player in the Hall, but injuries cut his career short. I don't think Jimmy Smith belongs in. Any Jaguars HoFers on the horizon?
Doug: Nobody stands out, though if the team keeps preserving Fred Taylor in whatever solution they've been dipping him in over the last few seasons, he might amass enough yardage to tag some votes.
Closing Arguments
Mike: After the 1960s Packers and the 1970s Steelers, I think we have an expectation that a team that wins multiple Super Bowls should have six or seven Hall of Famers. Isn't that over-optimistic?
Doug: I think it depends how the team is built, and how many years the span of excellence goes. With the 49ers, you're talking about a Super Bowl era from 1981-1994, where they were never really out of contention. That's going to bring more players to the fore than a team like the Cowboys of the early 1990s, where it's basically the same team in a more condensed timeframe.
Mike: Another question: Is there a backlog of exceptional candidates? If we're still trying to push the best players from the 1980s through in 2008, should the Hall have a few nine-member classes so we can celebrate recent-era greats while we still remember them?
Doug: If that's done, it had better be done soon. More and more, as the bar is raised, you're going to get guys from prior eras losing out because the standard has changed. That's always the case, but my sense is that it's accelerated in the last 15 years or so.
I'm all for the Bill Simmons concept of tiers in the Hall of Fame. You start at the bottom with the guys who are on the bubble, and move up to the top of the pyramid where the all-time greats reside. I think it adds more potential for discussion (Ken Stabler can go in now, but in Level Three or Level Four?), which is the foundation of fandom. You're allowing for the remembrance of those players who currently fall just short, without denying the greats their greatness.
Mike: Oh, I can hear it now. "It's a travesty that Cris Carter is only going in as a Level Two Hall of Famer!" Do the Level Four guys get teeny-weenie busts and 30-second acceptance speeches? The levels are great to talk about, because it helps frame discussion. You can call Dave Kreig a Level Four HoFer, while Randy Gradishar might be a Level Two guy. But you couldn't actually build such a hall.
Doug: Sure you could. So, it looks like the Luxor Hotel instead of a giant grapefruit squeezer. What's wrong with that?
Mike: Visit Cooperstown, and you will see that baseball's Hall of Fame is filled with little shrines to the best teams. I always tell Phillies fans that Garry Maddox and Bob Boone are in the Hall of Fame: There's an exhibit about the 1980 Phillies, and you can see pictures of the second-tier stars, memorabilia, and other trinkets. Canton doesn't have as many exhibits. Maybe they can become more inclusive by beefing up the museum part of the Hall of Fame museum.
But first, they should induct a few more Broncos.
The Numbers
Here are the final results, with every franchise ranked by HoF Index:
| Franchise | Accomplishments | HoFers | HoF Index |
| Cardinals | 73 | 7 | 9.6 |
| Bears | 138 | 12 | 8.7 |
| Lions | 133 | 11 | 8.3 |
| Packers | 170 | 14 | 8.2 |
| Browns | 190 | 15 | 7.9 |
| Raiders | 162 | 12 | 7.4 |
| Redskins | 142 | 10 | 7.0 |
| Steelers | 175 | 12 | 6.9 |
| Eagles | 135 | 9 | 6.7 |
| Rams | 182 | 12 | 6.6 |
| Niners | 188 | 11 | 5.9 |
| Giants | 155 | 9 | 5.8 |
| Oilers/Titans | 139 | 8 | 5.8 |
| Chiefs | 122 | 7 | 5.7 |
| Colts | 159 | 9 | 5.7 |
| Chargers | 107 | 6 | 5.6 |
| Franchise | Accomplishments | HoFers | HoF Index |
| Dolphins | 159 | 8 | 5.0 |
| Vikings | 165 | 8 | 4.8 |
| Bills | 140 | 6 | 4.3 |
| Cowboys | 212 | 9 | 4.2 |
| Patriots | 117 | 4 | 3.4 |
| Jets | 103 | 3 | 2.9 |
| Bengals | 75 | 2 | 2.7 |
| Broncos | 131 | 3 | 2.3 |
| Seahawks | 53 | 1 | 1.9 |
| Buccaneers | 73 | 1 | 1.4 |
| Falcons | 75 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Saints | 66 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Jaguars | 34 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Ravens | 27 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Panthers | 14 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Texans | 4 | 0 | 0.0 |
I think Pat Swilling should get consideration along with Ricky Jackson and Sam Mills. He compares well with Andre Tippett, I think.
For the Rams/Oilers/Redskins, I have a soft spot for two WRs who began as kick returners and blossomed late in their careers, and were very productive late (one sign of a very good player).
Henry Ellard
Drew Hill
Were they Hall-worthy? Probably not. But I think they deserve some discussion. They are hurt by playing on some non-descript teams (especially Ellard) and for racking up numbers in a gimmicky-pass offense (Hill).
But if one of the Oiler run-and-shoot receivers deserves to go, it's Hill.
Redskins that I think belongs in the Hall: Gary Clark. Deserving consideration: Dave Butz.
I'll repost from the other thread, while asking how you guys ignored a guy with nine All-Pro selections, while mentioning Chris Doleman?
My synopsis of Vikings who are possibles….
Tinglehoff: should be in. Is hurt by Super Bowl performances when he was past his prime. In his prime, Butkus said he was the center who played him toughest, and praise doesn’t get more authoritative than that.
Marshall: Very, very, good player, but not quite dominant enough, and a HOF caliber guy shouldn’t get TOO much credit for longevity and durability, even when those qualities are possessed in ridiculous amounts, as in the case of Marshall.
Browner: Not dominant enough for long enough, in my opinion.
Doleman: Never was committed to being a great player versus the run. No.
Randle: Same as Doleman.
McDaniel: Obviously yes. Yes, Pro Bowl and All Pro selections are flawed measures of performance, but when it gets to the point that there are 12 Pro Bowls and 9 All-Pro selections, even flawed measures of performance can demonstrate worthiness.
Cris Carter: Obviously yes. Any system of evaluation which leaves out a guy who was as dominant as Carter was in the red zone passing game is missing something. Ask defensive coordinators what it means to have a receiver who can just flat out beat dbs on a very short field, time after time.
Regarding over-representation; it's unfortunate that a guy like L.C. Greenwood, who, in my opinion, is more worthy than Fred Dean or Jim Marshall, gets snubbed because people think enough Steelers from the era are in. I think Greenwood was more dominant at his position than either Swann or Stallworth were at their position.
Will, I expected you to mention Henry Thomas. He had 1000 tackles and 100 sacks as a nose tackle. I can't think of anyone who comes close to that.
Do the niners get any credit for Ricky Jackson and Deon Sanders from the 94 championship team?
What about Joe Klecko? The ever-controversial Jack Tatum? People forget how good he really was (not that I expect to see Pats fans willing to give him a fair shake). Robert Brazile and Bruce Matthews? If they're not in, they should be.
Eric Allen wasn't mentioned, and he deserves enshrinement. Six pro bowls. Once first-team all-pro. 54 INTs (18th all-time) for 820 yards (20th all time) and 8 TDs (5th all time). Started 214 games (29th all time). And that's just the numbers. In terms of impact, he was the guy in the secondary making the big play at the crucial time. If it wasn't for Eric Allen, then Randall Cunningham wouldn't have had nearly as many opportunities to choke.
Do any of Dan Fouts's old linemen deserve mention? Louie Kelcher? Big Hands Johnson? (heh, heh)
It's been discussed to death, but Jerome Bettis is NOT Hall-worthy. (And neither are Warrick Dunn and Tiki Barber, for that matter)
Nice to see some love for Winston Hill.
Almost forgot - yeah, the Steelers are over-represented, but what about Donnie Shell?
Sorry for the triple post but I forgot to mention my number one niner who should be in the HOF.
Tom Rathman
Yes, I know he's a fullback but he was a vital part of the greatest offensive machine ever assembled. In the modern era fullback has been a part of most offenses (I know it's decreased in use but that is partly because noone uses their fullbacks as a run-pass-block threat anymore) I have never seen another fullback that is much better than Rathman as either a blocker (pass or lead), runner or receiver (OK Larry Centers there)
He was an awesome player who did great things in big games and personally I hate the Hall's approach that any half decent qb gets in while greats from less glamorous spots are overlooked.
The selectors would need to maximize inductions for at least five years to get even close to having all the guys in who deserve to be.
As far as the Giants go, besides Simms, Carl Banks should at least be in the discussion considering some of the other borderline candidates mentioned here. That defense wasn't all LT. Banks was thought highly enough of to be named to the 80s all-decade team after all.
Landeta and Marshall would be the other guys who you can at least realistically raise. Once he's eligible, Jesse Armstead will garner some discussion too. Unfortunately, he was stuck on some god-awful Reeves era teams.
As far as the Hogs go, Grimm seems like the best candidate. You also had to respect Gary Clark on those Washington teams, and I think he would have been a much better addition to the Hall than Monk. Chris Hanburger was before my time, but 9 Pro Bowls at least warrants a second look.
Hanburger is glaring evidence as to the under-representation of linebackers.
Suprised to not see any Randy Moss discussion. Does he fall short or do we need to wait and see?
If we're counting Shannon Sharpe for the Ravens as a dual-teamer, then Rod Woodson should be on the Ravens list also.
From the Bucs, Brooks is definitely a lock. Sapp should be, even if he had some downs. He was maybe the most dominant pass rushing tackle of his era, and the centerpiece (or at least mouthpiece) of the best defense of the DVOA era. While I would like Lynch to be in, I'm not as sure. He seemed like a more replaceable commodity than the other two. Dunn may have made up for it in Atlanta, but I think his case suffers from the overall suckitude of the Bucs offense when he was there.
Not mentioned in the article (great article, btw), I think that Ronde has a real argument. He's criticized for being a system guy, but really, every player in any system is a product of what's around him and what his job is. I think that his run support and pass rushing makes him different (the only CB with 20 ints and 20 sacks), and there's something to be said for uniqueness.
While I'm not going to argue here for Donnie Abraham and Hardy Nickerson, I think they're closer than people give them credit for, especially Nickerson.
Some random thoughts on this very fun exercise:
1) I'm a Patriots diehard, and (counting Seau as a Charger) Brady is the only one from this decade that I can say "absolutely Hall-worthy". I could see Rodney making in as well in a lean year. There haven't been many safeties who have been better over the last 10 years. From earlier teams, I've maintained for years that if Stanley Morgan played for a better team in the 80s, not even a great team, but maybe the Browns or Oilers, he'd be getting strong HoF consideration.
2) I still say the only reason Ray Guy gets so much love is that John Madden has been pounding it into our heads for over two decades now. I mean, was he really the best punter ever? Based on what? Was he decidedly, or even a little bit, better than guys like Luke Prestrige, Reggie Roby, Rich Camarillo, or Rohn Stark, just to think back of my football cards from the era?
3) Dave Krieg in the HoF? Really? Was he any better than guys like Steve Bartkowski, Bert Jones, Danny White, Craig Morton, Pat Haden, Bobby Hebert, Neil Lomax, Lynn Dickey, Brian Sipe, Tommy Kramer, David Woodley, or Steve Grogan? I don't even think he's on Testaverde's level, although that's probably the best comp. Even staying within Seattle history, wasn't Jim Zorn a better quarterback?
4) Warren Sapp should be a no-brainer on the first ballot. If he's not, start taking away some people's right to vote.
I know this is a touch of a contraversial (or inflammatory) topic, but I think that the Hall voters made a huge mistake when they finally succumbed to the pressure and put Art Monk into the Hall. In the end it seemed like the two main reasons for enshrining Monk were his statistical production and the rabid support of his Washington fanbase. If he had put up the same numbers for a team like Jacksonville or Seattle he would never have gotten a sniff. Hardly anyone ever thought he was one of the elite receivers in the game.
It isn't really Monk himself that winds me up, but rather that his name can now be used as an example for every productive but non-elite player with a long career on a big market team. Curtis Martin for example; was he really a great player? No, but I bet he ends up in after Monk did. While all this is going on offensive and defensive linemen, linebackers and defensive backs are getting ignored because their stats never show up in fantasy football. And some morons want to put punters and kickers in??!!
If people want to see a better Hall of Fame then the first thing that needs to change is the selection method. Closely followed by the Selectors themselves, at least half of them appear to be cretins.
Whelk, I'm with you on Nickerson but not Abraham.
Re Randy Moss: Of course he goes in, he's the most talented receiver ever to play the game and the best deep theat too. If it wasn't for Jerry Rice you could have argued that Moss was the greatest ever. Same goes for Owens. (I'm going to clarify this, I'm not saying Moss or Owens is the 2nd best WR ever, just that they're good enough to be considered.
Dryheat: The issue with Sapp isn't that he won't get in but rather due to the crush of very good players who retired. Personally I think Bryant Young was a better player than Sapp, they were comparable as pass rushers (though Sapp was probably a little better there, partially due to the Tampa 2 scheme) but BY is so much better in run defence than Sapp, for me he's the better DT.
The problem with this exercise is that the hall of fame is pretty silly. Maybe if you redid it and had the gms/scouts from each era or scouts take a vote. Even then by now history will have changed the memories of the old ones. Maybe take some present days GMs/scouts and watch all the old tapes.
In any case, I think the institution is too flawed to care about. Nice article though.
If Sapp gets in before Bryant Young (assuming that BY stays retired) then it is a traversty. The only argument for Sapp is that he was a better pass rusher. Even that probably wsn't true as they had similar levels of sacks and Young played on far worse defenses for most of his career. Young was a HOF calibre pass rusher and run stuffer, even his biggest fans wouldn't make both those claims for Sapp. I do think Sapp should get in, just not before Young.
Why Dave Krieg or Testaverde or any of the marginal QBs when there are already so many in the Hall. If you couldn't get in ahead of Warren Moon then tough, you clearly aren't good enough as Moon was at least one QB too far in my opinion. More Marshalls, McDaniels and their ilk, fewer QBs, RBs, and WRs. No Ray Guy or Viniatieri until every single OG, DT, LBer or DB who merits selection gets in. As that will never happen, keep them out while more deserving people are made to wait as well.
Bruce Matthews is in. I did my own analysis of which Tennessee-era Oilers/Titans should make the Hall, and concluded none other than Matthews would. Keith Bulluck may end up deserving to (top 5 OLB for 5 years in a row, top OLB in 2004 and maybe 05 or 03, too). Seriously, though, does anybody outside Tennessee think Frank Wycheck deserves to be in the Hall of Fame?
Players mentioned:
-I loved Drew Hill, and was sad to see him go to the Falcons, but he's not very close to enshrinement.
-I would have been happier to see Henry Ellard go in than Art Monk. I'm waiting to see his 1996 DYAR-52 catches, 19.5 ypc, tops in the NFL at age 35. Stat-wise, I'd say he compares favorably to Stanley Morgan.
-Randall McDaniel should be in. C'mon, did he have to make 3 All-Decade teams instead of just 2?
-I felt like a lonely voice when I argued last offseason Randy Moss deserved to be in the Hall of Fame. I feel less lonely now.
-Richard Seymour is probably deserving in in my book.
-Derrick Brooks yes, yes, a thousand times yes.
-Dave Krieg no, no, a thousand times no.
-Ray Guy only after Dave Krieg. And after Shane Lechler and Tommy Davis, too.
-Dunn to me has a shot at making it because of the guy he's been, and, you know, that doesn't bother me at all.
For the Vikings, I think Randle, Carter, and when he's eligible Moss should be in. Surprised Randle wasn't even mentioned when so few DTs have several years of double digit sacks. In a couple years, Bryant Young of the 49ers should be a lock. Agree with Tatum, even if the Raiders are over-represented. I'm not sure I agree with Bettis, but shouldn't he be a two-team guy. He was ROY with the Rams and their only offensive threat in the bad years before the Greatest Show on Turf. Finally, Hardy Nickerson (Tampa, Steelers) was the MLB on the first of those great Tampa-2 defenses and on the NFL's all-1990s team.
Woops, posted this in the wrong spot, so I'll repost:
I heard an interesting theory about why the Broncos players get shafted (besides geopolitics), which is that so many of their greats played the middle of the field, where HOFers are few and far between. Safeties and linebackers have a hard time getting in, and Denver’s most obviously over-looked guys are a safety and two linebackers.
But for Tombstone Jackson — there’s no excuse. Who hasn’t heard of Tombstone Jackson?
To pervert an old, bad argument, it’s called the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Excellence.
You know, before I read these articles, it had never even occurred to me that Dunn might get HoF consideration. Was he ever even one of the five best backs in football?
I have said this before and I will say it again: If Lynch gets in before Dawkins, then I will travel to the home of every HOF selector and punch him in the face.
I'm going to throw two names out there who I think are borderline, but didn't get a mention that I noticed:
Randall Cunningham
Kurt Warner
I never saw him play, but it is my impression that Hanburger is the most deserving Redskin not yet in the Hall. 9 Pro Bowls, 4 1st team all-pro selections, 1972 NFC DPOY (Kansas City Committee of 101, see link in name).
True, some of his accomplishments were pre-merger (when there was less competition), but the majority of his Pro Bowls, all-pro selections, and his DPOY came after the merger. He is generally viewed by fans as the best LB in Redskins history (including Sam Huff and Wilbur Marshall).
RE#20 - I'll gladly help! Dawkins is the single best safety of the last 20 years, bar none. Six time pro-bowler. 4 times first-team all pro. THE undisputed leader of Philly's defense for a decade now. The only player in NFL history with 15 sacks, 15 interceptions, 15 fumbles forced, and 15 fumbles recovered. No other player has 15 in any 3 of the 4 categories. One of only 6 players with 30 INTs and 15 sacks. 15 fumble recoveries ranks 18th all time. 18 sacks is 5th all time among DBs. Forced fumbles doesn't have an all-time list that I could find, but he's done that 26 times. Oh yeah, and 34 picks - despite being a safety. He's the only player in NFL history to have a sack, INT, fumble recovery and TD all in the same game. He needs one more INT to tie Eric Allen for the teams all-time lead. I think that he's been so good for so long that people have started taking him for granted and have forgotten just how incredible a player he really is.
RE#21 - Kurt Warner - a couple good years, but not great over a long enough period, so no.
Randall Cunningham???? Randall Freakin' Cunningham??? As an Iggles fan, I say no, no, a thousand times no! He never met a big game he couldn't choke in. If you induct Randall, you may as well let in Kordell Stewart and Michael Vick.
He's not even in the top 5 QBs in Eagles history, let alone worrying about his place in league history.
There's probably a dozen or so names (Stabler, Brodie, Kreig, et al) who have been mentioned and don't belong, yet all of them should be in line ahead of Randall Cunningham.
I'm surprised there's no mention of Harold Jackson in the Rams comment. The 2007 Prospectus made a good case for him in the Monk article. Jackson's been hurt by a few things: (1) his athletic peak coincided with the 70's "dead-ball" era; (2) he played with horrible QB's; and (3) his Rams teams could never get past Minnesota and Dallas (and the QB position pretty much tells the tale as to why). He never played in a Super Bowl but Jackson had a number of big catches in the postseason; I think he's third all-time in postseason YPC. In my opinion he was a better player than Charlie Joiner, his almost-exact contemporary, but Joiner had the benefit of a late-career statistical surge thanks to Air Coryell.
23 - Not saying you're wrong, but name five Eagles QBs better than Cunningham.
20,23 - Totally agree on Brian Dawkins.
I perused Dunn's stats. It doesn't look like he's ever sniffed top 5 in rushing DPAR, and he's not been that outstanding in receiving either. He was a really good player, but I think he goes in the stat collector box.
warrick dunn in the HOF? - WTF -
The argument is whether or not Warrick Dunn should have ever been a starter.
I don't believe that Dunn would have been a starter on most teams. He was a pretty decent back-up, I'll give him that. Which categorizes him with about 100 other stiffs.
Warrick Dunn.
Unbelievable.
I am so disappointed in this site now.
People questioning Curtis Martin, and putting Warrick Dunn in the HOF?
I need a drink.
23,25. Interesting question!
I'd probably put Cunningham in the top 5 of eagles QBs, but it's close.
The contenders:
McNabb
Van Brocklin
Jurgensen
Jaworski
Roman Gabriel
Who else is there? Even van Brocklin, Gabriel, and Jurgensen could be said to have had their better years with other teams, no?
Hell, Cunningham might be number two. Kind of depends how good you think Jaworski was.
If John Randle ever finishes ahead of Randall McDaniel in the selection process, to say nothung of actually being inducted before McDaniel, the HOF shuld be dissolved, it will have become so silly.
#26 - well said.
#25 - Donovan McNabb is the best QB in team history.
Norm Van Brocklin is a Hall Of Famer who lead them to their last championship. Yes, his best years were on other teams, but he wasn't washed up in Philly, and he got us a championship.
After that, Jaws.
4th? Tommy Thompson was one of the best QBs of his era, and lead Philly to 2 championships.
5th? Sonny Jurgensen is another Hall Of Famer. Yeah, he didn't play in Philly long, but he gave us 3 years of elite play, one of which he was 1st team all pro.
Don't like those guys? Norm Snead was no slouch, either, and he gave us 8 good years when the team was awful around him. Roman Gabriel was decent, even if we got him at the end of his career.
I'd probably rank Randall 7th, between Snead and Gabriel.
Some numbers to back up Randall Cunningham choking in the playoffs:
We all know Passer Rating isn't much of a barometer of anything, but for an 80's/90's QB, a rating of 74.3 wasn't anything to brag about, yet that's his rating is in 12 playoff games. His vaunted rushing skills amounted to just under 23 yards/game in the playoffs. His two rushing TDs were a 2nd QTR 1-yard sneak in the Minnesota/Atlanta game, and a garbage time run to turn a blowout into slightly less of a blowout in the '96 Philly/Dallas game.
12 TDs/9 INTs isn't anything to brag about.
6.6 yards per attempt (which, IMO, IS a good barometer) is downright awful.
I'm not a Cunningham fan, primarily because I very much dislike qbs with big wind-ups, but I would caution anyone against evaluating career performance via small samples of playoff games.
Then again, Cunningham's wind-up cost the Vikings 7 points just before halftime in the Conference Championship game against the Falcons, and then he underthrew a completely wide open Randy Moss, fifty yards downfield, in ot in the same game, which allowed the db to close and break up the pass, so to hell with ol' Randall!!!!!!
Re #26
Ok, fine, so it's laughable for Warrick Dunn to be in the discussion. But if he is, it's also laughable for Eddie George to be in the discussion. Dunn has almost as many rushing yards, averaged half a yard more a carry over the course of his career, and did far more catching the ball. The man's 18th in career rush attempts, 21st in rush yards, and 20th in yards from scrimmage. Those are IN NFL HISTORY, not "among last year's NFC South running backs."
Ok, there's a very reasonable argument that his peak value wasn't high enough to deserve enshrinement, and I agree with it. But, he's provided a whole lot of value over the course of his career. Oh, and since you mentioned it, he was the best running back on his team the first 9 years of his career except maybe 2003 because he missed 5 games.
Warrick Dunn : RBs :: Dave Kreig : QBs
#26
I chose Martin as a good example of the kind of player I was referring to; good player, great longevity, played for big market teams. I don't think Dunn should go in ahead of him. I don't think either of them should go in.
Dunn would be most suitable for a Hall of Awesome People rather than the Pro Football Hall of Fame.
#23
Dawkins is the single best safety of the last 20 years, bar none.
I think in 1988 Ronnie Lott would have disagreed with you.
Please don't take that to mean that Dawkins shouldn't get in, he should, quickly, he is a very deserving player. I would put Lynch in too though, not enough safeties make it.
#11, what you said regarding Ronde Barber. I realize stats don't tell it all, but he's the kind of guy who in a roto league would be great--he gets INTs, sacks, TDs, pass defenses, you name it. His picture should be next to the words "complete CB" in the dictionary; maybe he isn't the flashiest cover guy or the fastest runner, but he's good at basically *everything* he does. Oddly enough, while he has four Pro Bowl appearances, he's got five All Pro nominations. Would think Pro Bowls would be more common than All Pro, but I guess that's an artifact of the Pro Bowl voting process.
20 INTs, 20 sacks, 11 return TDs, league recognition . . . does he not even deserve a sniff? Brooks should absolutely go right away, Sapp was dominant for a number of years, and I'd probably throw Barber third on the pile, ahead of Lynch and certainly Dunn (if there's ever a Decent Human Being Hall of Fame, he's a first-teamer, though). Barber may not make it, but he at least should be in the conversation.
Anyone else notice how low the bar gets set for RBs? I understand the "Hall of Fame" v. "Hall of guys who actually help the team win" argument, but that doesn't mean I agree with it. Dunn? George? Bettis? No thanks. If you're going to make it in because you're famous, you'd better have been a trendsetter. What backs are in the league because Warrick Dunn blazed a trail for them? Sure, he's a great guy and a damn good football player, but he doesn't belong in the HOF.
That being said, Cunningham (to me) absolutely merits discussion at least. Three split MVPs, the first dual threat QB of my lifetime who was actually a threat both ways ... basically a perennial playoff QB and THE weapon on the Eagles' offense ... sure they never won it all, but trying to make it through the Cowboys, Niners, and Giants in that era was NOT easy.
Of course, as a Viking fan, I do agree with Will on '98 and Cunningham's role in it ... but a handful of bad games are no reason to keep a guy out of the HOF. Let's remember 2007 Week 10 when Eli gets inducted in 10 years ...
... not that I'm advocating that, by the way.
Oh, and Warner is an interesting case, but look at the INT numbers from '99-'02. Of course ... yeah, that crappy joke belongs in the spygate thread ...
RE#33 - I'll give you Ronnie Lott. I suppose he was pretty good. :)
In a totally unrelated bit of news that hopefully won't completely hijack this thread, profootballtalk is reporting that Emmitt Smith is out at ESPN!
The world just became a better (if less interesting) place.
His contract has been "blowed out." Chris Carter "inherit this success." Apparently, "it take a [analyst] who know how to communicate" after all. As we know, "all those things messes with the mentality of your [studio program]." Now, Carter will undergo the "rice of passage." Fortunately, he appears to have "all the confidences he needs."
Apparently, the networks agreed with the idea that "the way you perform make them feel about you different." My advice to Emmitt? "Don't quit. Don't even give up." Even if you get "blindsided by Al Wi... Al Wi... Al Jackson." After all, "you cannot change the stripes of a leopard."
This just shows that "the leadership definitely have to come from the leaders," who have chosen Chris Carter. Hopefully, Carter is aware that "the percentages for teams that go into score before the first half is pretty high that they wins the game." If not, at least he can enlighten us with nuggets like "as my offense get better, my defense is goin be that much more better." I just hope he doesn't remind us how "that defense got after Tom Brady's behind today." Emmitt would know - he watched Aikman all those years. Maybe that's where he learned about "carousing the football carrier?" I'm pretty sure that's what he was talking about when he said "that can be a swing their way eventually. I just hate to be the team that they winned it against."
Hopefully, this doesn't mean Emmitt's entire life "got debacled."
I think I'm actually a little sad about this. The world just became a more boring place.
Why all the hate for kickers? I undertand that they're 150-pounds-soaking-wet headcases that have no earthly business sharing a field with all the real "atheletes", but they can really impact a game in an individual fashion more than anybody except a quarterback. I mean, kicking the ball 40+ yards in the wind/rain with the entire team's fortune riding on the result is a pretty mean feat. Saying they have no business in the hall is (to me) analogous to saying that closers shouldn't get into Cooperstown. They both have specific roles, at specific points in the game, and can totally change the outcome based on their performance.
Punters I won't really argue for, as they rarely have an impact on the games final result (6 yard shanks from your own 2 notwithstanding).
That being said, what kickers out there should at least get a mention?
Morten Andersen and Gary Anderson-1 and 2 all time in just about every category, and if they would just stay retired, we might actually get them put to a vote in a few years. I say they should both be in. Yes, they were definitely stat compilers, but when you are far and away the most prolific of all time at a position, you should probably get some recognition for it.
Matt Stover should at least get a nomination, if not for singlehandedly carrying the SB-winning Ravens "offense" through a 5 game TD-less stretch, for being one of the most reliable and accurate kickers in the league for 15 years.
Jason Elam might get consideration, but I think the "Denver Air" qualifier knocks him right out.
Anybody else warrant any mention at all?
"I’m going to assume that someone can explain to me why Jim Marshall is not in the Hall of Fame."
I'll give it a shot. How about the fact that he was only selected to the Pro Bowl twice during his long career? How about the fact that he was never named first-team All Pro (or maybe even second-team)? On the surface, the 127 sacks looks very impressive until, again, you take into the account that he played for twenty years. Don't get me wrong, Marshall had a very nice career, but I don't should be in just because he played forever. And, yes, I think that if two guys from the same line are already in the HOF, the third guy needs to have a very strong case. What makes Marshall so much more deserving than guys like Claude Humphrey and L.C. Greenwood? I think Tinglehoff's the bigger snub from the Vikings of that era.
Another pass-rusher from that era I'd add is Cedrick Hardman. I didn't see him in the section for the 49ers. Unofficially, he's credited with around 120 sacks. Probably deserves at least a mention.
Also, I'd add Robert "Dr. Doom" Brazile for the Oilers. And I don't understand why John Randle was at least discussed as one of the possibilities for the Vikings. If Warren Sapp ever makes it in, then Randle should, as well.
Kurt Warner??? He ony had 2 great years and nothing since. Terrel Davis deserves in before Warner.
And Sapp can drop dead, as far as I'm concerned. Cheap shot blabbermouth.
I was a little surprised with the lack of discussion over Stanley Morgan's credentials. Like dryheat, I feel that had Morgan played for a more successful team, he'd probably be a more popular pet selection in the mold of Art Monk.
I think Rodney Harrison has a tough time making the Hall. He's more than deserving but that "dirty player" stigma plus his general cockiness will probably demerit him a few votes.
Finally, maybe it's just me but I always felt that Steve Wisniewski deserved more serious consideration than he has received. He kind of gets lost in the shuffle of great interior linemen of the early 1990s but it's hard to argue against his credentials (8 Pro Bowls, All-1990s Team).
If the voters had chosen to induct the entire Steel Curtain defense (picking and choosing from various lineups), there wouldn't be that many bad choices:
LC Greenwood
Joe Greene
Ernie "Fats" Holmes
Dwight "Mad Dog" White
Jack Ham
Jack Lambert
Andy Russell
Mel Blount
Mike Wagner
Donnie Shell
Ron Woodson
I wouldn't care to make a HoF case for Holmes or White, but the HoF would not be worse off with Greenwood/Russell/Wagner/Shell (and Woodson, eventually).
Of course, I'd agree with those who would say that Chris Hanburger should be in before Russell, and various others before Wagner/Shell ... but I'd guess that many people here would tend to say that the Hall would be better off with more "trench warriors" and fewer RB/WR types.
Jan Stenerud is the only (pure) placekicker in the HoF. I'm not sure how I feel about that ... I guess if any pure kicker should be in, it's him.
Speaking as a Seahawks fan:
No, Jim Zorn wasn't better than Dave Krieg. Not demonstrably. Then again, Zorn was forced into the Tarkenton school of quarterbacking by the lack of a solid offensive line, so it's hard to say what he could have done with a better supporting cast. But no, neither one of them belongs in the HoF.
Ken Easley...It was my impression (and I wasn't that old at the time) that Easley was good enough to alter the way opposing teams played--he could play very good pass defense and also be a real force against the run. Purely subjectively, I would have thought he belonged--but I haven't checked the stats (although safeties' stats are very defensive system-dependent) and haven't seen film of that era in a very long time. I do recall that he returned punts for a year or so after Paul Johns hurt his neck and had to retire abruptly, though, (and served as the disaster quarterback before Mike Tice arrived, back when teams *had* disaster quarterbacks that weren't just an immediately activatable third quarterback) and gave every evidence that he would do anything to make his team better that he possibly could.
Circumstances conspired to prevent me from watching as much football as I would have liked during the Tez era, but I would certainly say that during my time in the Navy he was the Seahawks player who was consistently mentioned by fans of other teams--even in conversations that weren't otherwise about Seattle.
Other than that, there's reason to expect Walter Jones and Shaun Alexander to get in, and presumably Lofa Tatupu barring anything career-altering, so I think we're doing OK.
Re #35
Yeah, the bar is set lower for RBs than it is for, say, most OL or CB or S. To some extent that makes sense, as RBs are probably elite for a shorter period of time than any other position. I don't really like it that a guys like Randall McDaniel and Dermontti Dawson, who were All-Pro 9 and 6 times respectively, aren't in, but I think you have to look at players at the position they played in context of the position they played and the bar set for that position.
#29 I think his point was that the competition is between Jaws and Cunningham for second, not between Jaws and McNabb for first.
Cunningham is hard to evaluate. He had freakish skills, but played for a coach who knew little and cared less about offensive football and openly disparaged the very concept of spending money on offensive linemen. Buddy Ryan was an oaf who wasted an incredible accumulation of talent.
And why no love for Seth Joyner? One of only nine men with at least 20 sacks and 20 INTs, SI Player of the Year, runner-up Defensive Player of the Year. Played with a 102-degree fever against the Oilers in 1991 and recorded eight solo tackles, two forced fumbles, two fumble recoveries and two sacks. His stats that year were unreal, 110 tackles, 6.5 sacks, six forced fumbles and 3 INTs. Plus, he'd decleat his momma if she was wearing the wrong jersey. The very epitome of what an NFL LB should be.
We all know Passer Rating isn’t much of a barometer of anything, but for an 80’s/90’s QB, a rating of 74.3 wasn’t anything to brag about, yet that’s his rating is in 12 playoff games.
On average, everyone's passer rating goes down in playoff games. Because, y'know, the teams are better. So that's a silly argument to make.
I prefer a much simpler argument against Cunningham - there was only one year at all where he rightfully was one of the best quarterbacks in the league, and that was the rookie year of some guaranteed future Hall of Fame receiver (who tends to make every quarterback he plays with look fantastic) you might've heard about.
His three Pro Bowls before 1998 were akin to Michael Vick getting voted in: highlight plays dominating the public opinion rather than actual football value. He wasn't bad those years, but he certainly didn't deserve to go to the Pro Bowl (except maybe in 1990).
With to the regards to the Seahawks, Cortez Kennedy should be a lock. Defensive player of the year on a 2-14 team in 1992 is one of the most impressive achievements in the history of the defensive tackle position. He was a rock in the run game and a frightening pass rusher.
Dave Krieg doesn't deserve to get by any stretch, but I do think he deserves to get mentioned in articles like this. If the Hawks had won the 1984 AFC championship on gone to (and quite possibly won) the Super Bowl, he might warrant a spot on the ballot, but he was one of those guys who was always pretty good and never dominated.
Walter Jones deserves it, of course, but it is interesting to see Shaun Alexander mentioned in comment #42. I worry that his last two bad years will make people forget how good he was. He was an incredible cutback runner, and is currently the only player in NFL history to have scored 15 or more touchdowns in 5 consecutive seasons, which I think gives him reasonable claim to be possibly the best fantasy football player of all time. Of course, FO's stats don't like him, and his career is basically over now, preventing him from getting some of the gaudy career stats he had potential for (500 yards away from 10,000). Shaun doesn't deserve the Hall, I think, but for a couple of years there, he made you say "Wow!" a couple of times every game.
His three Pro Bowls before 1998 were akin to Michael Vick getting voted in: highlight plays dominating the public opinion rather than actual football value. He wasn’t bad those years, but he certainly didn’t deserve to go to the Pro Bowl (except maybe in 1990).
In 1990, Cunningham was second in touchdown passes and fifth in rating, and also ninth IN THE NFL in rushing. He should have been MVP that year.
Yeah, I think Tez should be in. Tez, Atwater, and Derrick Thomas are the first 3 90's defensive stars that I think of as far as who should be in the Hall. As far as Rodney Harrison is concerned, his cheap shot rep will keep him out. Also, I don't know if Seymour is a lock, and, after Spygate, Brady shouldn't be a first-ballot HOFer anymore.
And, as far as the Texans are concerned, don't forget about Dunta Robinson, Andre Johnson, and Amobi Okoye getting discussed someday as well.
Re: #46.
If "wow" was a factor, Randall Cunningham would be a first ballot selection. The TD to Jimmie Giles after being hit on MNF would be enough. Unfortunately, you also have the "oh, WOW!" factor, in which I put my head in my hand and said "oh, wow! How could he be so dumb?". That happened far too often as I sat in the Vet in the 80's and 90's for him to ever deserve the HoF.
Unfortunately for Shaun, his "oh wow" moment was "oh wow, without Hutchinson this guy isn't much".
Re: 37. Your point is noted. However, imagine that the NFL changes field goals so that they're decided by coin toss. Each team has their own coin tosser who comes out on the field, and flips a coin to decide whether the FG makes it or not. Do these coin flippers make it into the HoF?
The problem with kickers is that there is no consistency, making it impossible to identify the top performers. In turn, you're basing a HoF pick entirely on longevity (which is what you're doing for Morten and Gary) or on anecdotal evidence based on a small sample size (Vinatieri). I mean, the holder of the highest career FG percentage is still Vanderjagt.
And Stover's a fine player, but in no way does he have the accolades that the first HoF kicker since Jan Stenrud should have. Stenrud was a 6-time Pro Bowler. Stover's been there once.