infrared41

The USFL.

Say what you want about Brady, but all the posts about him in this thread make me think that the NFL is more interesting with him than it is without him.

Whatever. Montana is still better.

No.

According to this piece from Awful Announcing, FOX and ESPN might do some sort of deal that lets Buck out of his contract a year early so he and Aikman can move to MNF together. Provided that Buck wants to leave FOX to stay paired with Aikman, of course.

Hamiln's car didn't seem to get hit that hard and still came out of the Burton wreck looking like this. (1:52 if my attempt to set the start point didn't work.)

Well, they spend a lot of money and people call them gay.

The racing was really good, but the cars need some serious tweaking. Too many tire and wheel issues among other things. We can't have cars being stuck wherever they are when they get a flat. NASCAR is on the right track with the Next Gen car, but I think they may have gone to it one year too early. Seems like it could have used one more year of really intense testing. Now is not the time to find out the wheels may not be quite there yet.

This Rick Ohrnberger cat might want to consider finding some more reliable sources. Then again, are we sure he's not a parody account like Ballsack Sports and he's just making up to troll people?

Yes.

People love to knock Namath and Bradshaw for the INTs, but they seem to forget that those guys played in an era when DBs could basically beat the out of receivers every step of the way for the entire route. The no contact after five yards and no contact period once the ball was in the air rules were implemented in 1978. Point being, finding a wide open receiver in the days before the '78 rule changes was a bit more difficult than it is today. Having had the benefit of seeing both of them play, I can assure you that Namath was, in fact, good. It's not his fault that the Jets won Super Bowl III and then proceeded to be the Jets for the next 50+ seasons. Dude played most of his career on knees that were held together with rubber bands and athletic tape and he still managed to be the first QB to throw for 4000 yards in a season. Bradshaw was one of the elite QBs of his era. Dude won four Super Bowls and people still want to drag him because his stats from the 70's don't look like stats from 2021. Bradshaw played exactly three healthy seasons after the rule changes of '78. He was all but done by the '81 season. (Think Peyton Manning's final season level) Bradshaw was a no-brainer for the HOF. Who was better than Bradshaw back then? You could argue Roger Staubach, but that's about it. Fran Tarkenton put up huge numbers and made three Super Bowls with the Vikings - losing them all. After those two, the pickings get pretty slim. Ken Stabler was pretty solid, but he's definitely a tier lower than the other three. After that, we're talking Jim Hart who probably has most of you thinking "who?" The belabored point I'm trying to make is that it's unfair to hold players from the 70's, 80's, and 90's to the arcade game statistical standards of today.

We'll see.

...and the Dolphins in 1984. ...and the Packers in 2010.

People were saying the same thing about the Bengals in 1988.

We have come full circle.

As a media person is the only way Romo gets in. Does the football HOF even do the broadcaster thing or is that just a baseball deal?

Exactly. We all remember the "Marks Brothers", but what about the immortal Jim Jensen? (Jensen was basically the prototype for Taysom Hill) Marino's RBs were a bunch of guys named Tony Nathan and Woody Bennett. At least Elway had Sammy Winder and Steve Sewell in the backfield and Montana had guys like Roger Craig and Tom Rathman to go along with Rice and Taylor. Damn, those Niners teams were stacked.

Jim Plunkett 2x SB Champion (and unlike Rypien, Plunkett started in both of his SB appearances.) 1x SB MVP 1980 Comeback Player of the Year

If Tony Romo gets in, my first move will be to start the Bernie Kosar for the HOF committee - and as much as I enjoyed him during his time with the Browns, he has no business being in any HOF discussion. Kosar has a better HOF case than Romo and Kosar has no case. And don't even get me started on Ken Anderson at that point. Tony Romo is not, in any way, a HOF QB. Not even close.

Here's another question I'll throw into the mix: Would Stafford have similar stats in a different era? For example, I think most of us would agree that Montana, Elway, and Marino would be just as good, if not better, playing today as they were in the 80's. Same deal for Kelly, Aikman, and Favre in the 90's. I think most of us would also agree that Brady, Manning, Brees, and Rodgers would play well in any era. I'm not sure you can say that about Stafford. Speaking of Elway, he did what he did in the 80's throwing to a bunch of guys named Vance Johnson. Imagine Elway with a WR like Calvin Johnson.

Just curious, would apply the same standard to someone like Ernie Banks if we were debating the baseball HOF? Anyway, by today's football HOF standards (or lack thereof) Stafford is a Hall of Famer. By infrared41's football HOF standards, he ain't even close.

It was a different time. Back then, you could commit a crime and as long as you were a good player, the NFL would look the other way...which now that I think about it is pretty much what the NFL still does today.

Richard Sherman is right on the money with this. Unfortunately, he's not part of the group that does the voting - but he should be.

I doubt we'd be having the debate, but I'd still be making Stafford's case for the HOF. My feeling is titles are weighted much too heavily by the HOF voters. Some times you gotta give the guys who managed to put up huge numbers on bad teams their due too. No one is arguing that Jim Plunkett and his two SB wins should be in over Dan Fouts and his zero SB appearances. Fouts was a no-brainer and Jim Plunkett is a flat out no. Maybe a better example is the HOF QBs who don't have a SB win, are in the top 20 in all time passing yards, and have less passing yards than Stafford does at #12 all time. Warren Moon - 13 Fran Tarkenton - 14 Dan Fouts - 18 Point being that big numbers has to play a role in HOF selection at some point. There are players who got in on their numbers and players who got in because they were famous. I'd argue that the HOF as currently set up has room for both. All that being said, if I had my way, we'd be talking about all the undeserving players who need to be removed from the HOF and placed in the Hall of the Really Good. But the Pro Football HOF is hell bent on making sure we get at least 4-5 new names every year so here we are debating the merits of two QBs that I probably wouldn't vote for anyway.