People who belong in the Hall Of Fame

[CW McGraw]

Quote: Originally Posted by Ewing

I have a name that is never talked about for the Hall Of Fame, but should be. I'm not going to name him, yet. I'm going to compare him with two other players during the same era. Here are the credentials... Per Sixteen Games Player A: 75 receptions, 1197 yards, 6 touchdowns Player B: 75 receptions, 950 yards, 9 touchdowns Player C: 85 receptions, 1162 yards, 9 touchdowns Years Leading NFL in Receptions Player A: 0 Player B: 1 Player C: 3 Years Leading NFL in Receiving Yards Player A: 1 Player B: 0 Player C: 1 Years Leading NFL in Touchdown Receptions Player A: 0 Player B: 3 Player C: 2 First-Team All-Pro Player A: 1-time Player B: 2-time Player C: 3-time Player A is Michael Irvin, he made into the Hall of Fame on the first ballot. Player B is Cris Carter, widely regarded as one of the top five receivers of all-time. Just who is Player C? Sterling Sharpe. He lead the NFL in receptions more times than either Irvin or Carter, he lead the NFL in yards as many times as Irvin and he lead the NFL in touchdown receptions only one time less than Carter. Per full season, Sharpe caught more passes than either of them along with as many touchdowns as Carter and only a handful of yards less than Irvin. He was named as a first-team All-Pro as many times as Carter and Irvin COMBINED. Carter and Irvin both played over a decade in the NFL; sixteen and twelve seasons respectively. Sharpe only played seven seasons yet was far more dominant than either of them. The fact Sterling Sharpe isn't even in the discussion for the Hall Of Fame is beyond me.

Sterling Sharpe's dilemma is two fold. Not only was his career injury shortened, but he is also a WR in an era with a logjam of HOF caliber WRs. I think he should get in, but the likelihood of it happening within the next ten years is very small, IMO.

[shnuskis]

Quote: Originally Posted by CW McGraw

Sterling Sharpe's dilemma is two fold. Not only was his career injury shortened, but he is also a WR in an era with a logjam of HOF caliber WRs. I think he should get in, but the likelihood of it happening within the next ten years is very small, IMO.

I agree with both points but 7 full productive seasons ending in injury has been acceptable in the past and like you said, these are HOF caliber WR's. Lets get em in there.

[ZB9]

the pro football HOF is not simply a stats comparison

that is only part of it

[AlexBrady]

Quote: Originally Posted by ZB9

the pro football HOF is not simply a stats comparison that is only part of it

It probably plays a larger role than you may think unfortunately. How else can gold ringed losers like Warren Moon get in? The voters realize the offense he played in was conducive to putting up big numbers right?

[ZB9]

Quote: Originally Posted by AlexBrady

It probably plays a larger role than you may think unfortunately. How else can gold ringed losers like Warren Moon get in? The voters realize the offense he played in was conducive to putting up big numbers right?

I dont know about Moon being a "loser" lol, but I agree with you that many voters sometimes put too much weight on comparing players' stats in a vacuum. Stats should hold some weight obviously, but in the CONTEXT of the individual situation and player.

Every situation is different, so it doesnt always make sense to put ALL of the importance on comparing stats across the board....especially across different eras. Someone who played in a pass heavy offense like the run and shoot or in a pass heavy era like today's is going to have better stats, but that doesnt necessarily mean they are the better player.

[AlexBrady]

Quote: Originally Posted by ZB9

I dont know about Moon being a "loser" lol, but I agree with you that many voters sometimes put too much weight on comparing players' stats in a vacuum. Stats should hold some weight obviously, but in the CONTEXT of the individual situation and player. Every situation is different, so it doesnt always make sense to put ALL of the importance on comparing stats across the board....especially across different eras. Someone who played in a pass heavy offense like the run and shoot or in a pass heavy era is going to have better stats, but that doesnt necessarily mean they are the better player.

I hate using the term as well but I will use it on the select few players that I feel earned the label. I agree with all your points.

[yvesdereuter]

Quote: Originally Posted by AlexBrady

It probably plays a larger role than you may think unfortunately. How else can gold ringed losers like Warren Moon get in? The voters realize the offense he played in was conducive to putting up big numbers right?

Which does not explain why Lynn Swann is in.

[AlexBrady]

Quote: Originally Posted by yvesdereuter

Which does not explain why Lynn Swann is in.

He had to wait over an entire decade for enshrinement though. He was a first ballot hall of famer in my eyes.

[shotgun styles]

Quote: Originally Posted by AlexBrady

He had to wait over an entire decade for enshrinement though. He was a first ballot hall of famer in my eyes.

People weigh different criterion in various ways. I would say that stats should only be a serious consideration if someone hasn't done anything else. Doug Williams belongs in the Hall of Fame. Period. Guys still wear number 17 in his honor.

[bkrich83]

Quote: Originally Posted by shotgun styles

People weigh different criterion in various ways. I would say that stats should only be a serious consideration if someone hasn't done anything else. Doug Williams belongs in the Hall of Fame. Period. Guys still wear number 17 in his honor.

Why exactly would Doug Williams deserve to be in the HOF?