People who belong in the Hall Of Fame

[TheWatcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by CW McGraw

He's had 6 winning seasons in 15 years as a head coach. He's not that great, even if he almost won a SB. By contrast, Mike Shanahan had 5 non winning seasons in Denver. Fisher wouldn't even make my Hall of Very Good. He's been an above average coach whose been lucky enough to have a patient front office.

I can't say Fisher was ever blessed with a ton of great talent on the offensive side of the ball. Outside of McNair and George, it was pretty thin. It should also be noted that he had 4 seasons where he went 8-8 which isn't bad at all since that can sometimes get you into the playoffs (although it didn't in his case). Those records really say more about the average talent he had in many years in my opinion.

As for Shanahan, I have little doubt that he'll make it. He was instrumental in making a number of personnel moves that helped the Broncos become a force in the mid-late 90's (although we now know he fudged some numbers to make some of the moves), and he did with John Elway what no one else could.

[TheWatcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by wwharton

Especially when that team's been one of the most successful franchises in the NFL during that time, including a trip to the SB and about an inch from winning it.

They actually would've only tied the game if they'd scored, provided they made the extra point.

[TheWatcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by SPTO

Moon won a number of Grey Cups so that has to count for something.

5 consecutive Grey Cups to be exact. A feat that will never be duplicated, and he did it during a time when the CFL's talent was high unlike now. I think the HOF panel took that into consideration when voting.

[TheWatcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by shotgun styles

You're stomping on your pro-Tom Brady argument elsewhere on the forums. Tom won because of his kicker. All three AFC Championship games, and all three Superbowls came off Vinietari's foot.

Shotgun.. didn't we go through this already? The third title was not won by a GW field goal. The Patriots were ahead 24-14, when Dexter Reid gave up a late TD to make it 24-21. Again, it was not won by a GW field goal.

I gave up on the other debate about Brady because of all the hating, lol. But seriously, Let's at least get the facts straight...

It doesn't matter how you win, it just matters that you win. Adam Vinatieri is a great player, he'll be in the HOF. But he would've never been in a position to do a single thing had Brady and the team overall not put him in position to do so. Kickers don't make reads, and they don't throw clutch passes. You need those things throughout the course of an entire game to even have a chance. QB's do those things, and that's what Brady did in all 4 Super Bowls including the one that was lost.

I'll also reiterate once again the following:

*During the TWO (only two) times that a GW FG was needed for the Pats to win the Super Bowl, the games were tied... tied. So even if Vinatieri had missed, the Patriots would not have lost right then and there. It would have at least gone to overtime.

Let's not allow hate to distort the facts. Now this is the second time I'm telling you this... when you will accept these facts?

Quote: Originally Posted by shotgun styles

Remember "Wide Right"? If Kelly has a better kicker, he wins at least one of those games.

I'll never blame Scott Norwood for that loss. Never. The Bills were stacked with talent, and were simply a better team than the Giants. It should've never come down to a field goal. Marv Levy got out-coached and the Bills overall got out-physicaled. It's the one Super Bowl I can say for sure they should've won. The next three? Not so much.

[TheWatcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by shotgun styles

Admittedly, I do say some outlandish things. But that does not mean they aren't true, it just means they don't conform to the popular view. All ribbing aside, you've been a good sport and I appreciate that. Ok, you just called Dieon Branch and Troy Brown "inept". These were two of the smartest players of their time, and made up for a lack of overall size and speed with VERY good hands and savvy route running skills. You could not be more wrong here.

LOL. Deion Branch was/is a marginal player. He's been garbage away from Brady, and with Brady he never even cracked 1,000 yards receiving. He can be smart all day, Rick Mirer was smart, what does that mean? Deion Branch wasn't that good and since getting away from the future HOF QB he had in Brady, he's been exposed.

As for Troy Brown, this one is simple; look at his number before Brady (garbage), and then look at his numbers with Brady (Pro Bowler, near the top of the league).

Brady made these guys stars. Now let's see how you hate your way out of this one, lol.

[TheWatcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cebby

They suck for today's game, but they were good enough for 5 pro bowls and 2 player of the year awards.

I think Namath was the most overrated player to ever hit the field. People tend to bring up his era as an excuse for his weak overall numbers, but there are plenty of QB's who had far better numbers, some of which would still hold up well today. Johnny Unitas' numbers come to mind.

Speaking of Johnny Unitas... during an interview once, a reporter asked this: "So, Johnny... when you think of some of the great QB's today like (insert 3 names) and Joe Namath, where do you think you fall?"

Unitas replied "Joe Namath? How is he a great QB? You mean he's suddenly great because of one game (Super Bowl 3) where we didn't play well?"

Outside of Super Bowl 3 and a regular season shootout against Unitas and the Colts, what other memorable games do we recount of Joe Namath? Exactly.

[Coug00]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

LOL. Deion Branch was/is a marginal player. He's been garbage away from Brady, and with Brady he never even cracked 1,000 yards receiving. He can be smart all day, Rick Mirer was smart, what does that mean? Deion Branch wasn't that good and since getting away from the future HOF QB he had in Brady, he's been exposed.

I'm not the biggest Deion fan in the world, but the guy is a quality receiver. His problem is that he can't stay healthy. The only "exposure" he's had is too many visits to the operating table since becoming a Seahawk.

[TheWatcher]

^^^ But he missed plenty games in NE, too. Only difference is that when he was on the field he had a future HOF'er throwing to him, and he looked a lot better. Playing with Hasselbeck--who is a good QB--is no Tom Brady. Deion is suddenly not even at the mediocre level he enjoyed in NE. Can't blame it on injury because that's been an issue for him since day one.

And when he's in the game he's often spotted having trouble getting open against mediocre CB's. He's only quality in the sense that he plays at the NFL level and that's about it. He's a second receiver rapidly declining to a third.

[Coug00]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

^^^ But he missed plenty games in NE, too. Only difference is that when he was on the field he had a future HOF'er throwing to him, and he looked a lot better. Playing with Hasselbeck--who is a good QB--is no Tom Brady. Deion is suddenly not even at the mediocre level he enjoyed in NE. Can't blame it on injury because that's been an issue for him since day one. And when he's in the game he's often spotted having trouble getting open against mediocre CB's. He's only quality in the sense that he plays at the NFL level and that's about it. He's a second receiver rapidly declining to a third.

We'll have to agree to disagree. IMO Deion wasn't a marginal receiver or garbage like you said, he was a solid #2 receiver who has faced the opposing teams top corner for the last 3 years and still produced on the field. As we've discussed, his problem is that he's made of glass.

And you could be right about him declining. It wouldn't be surprising to see a 30 year old receiver decline following major knee reconstruction.

[wwharton]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

^^^ But he missed plenty games in NE, too. Only difference is that when he was on the field he had a future HOF'er throwing to him, and he looked a lot better. Playing with Hasselbeck--who is a good QB--is no Tom Brady. Deion is suddenly not even at the mediocre level he enjoyed in NE. Can't blame it on injury because that's been an issue for him since day one. And when he's in the game he's often spotted having trouble getting open against mediocre CB's. He's only quality in the sense that he plays at the NFL level and that's about it. He's a second receiver rapidly declining to a third.

All injuries aren't created equal. In Seattle he's rushed back early... I don't know if he's ever been 100%. That's not the same as in NE. He may never be 100% again, but I can't see how you can say anything about him (good or bad) since leaving NE if you go through the few games he's been even close to 100% over there.