Jump to content

Pro Football Hall of Fame Class of 2017


neo_prankster

Recommended Posts

I can't argue against any of the 5 that got in (Warner is probably the closest but IMO he's a HOFer) but it's disappointing that Brian Dawkins didn't make it on his first ballot and that TO didn't get it.  TO has all of the measurables that you need, while Dawkins pretty much redefined what a free safety was.  Jim Johnson built the whole derense around him - not sure how many other safeties you can say that about.  John Lynch was a great player too, but between the two, Dawkins was far more dynamic and valuable to his team.  9 pro bowls, including 2 when he was thought to be washed up and reluctantly playing in Denver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 2001mark said:

Fascinating perspective from such a learned individual.  

He'll eventually get in.  This isn't some rigged bs.

 

Oh but it is.  Anytime you have sports writers who feel that it's their duty to "punish" players, or hold grudges because said player didn't give them an interview, there's the opportunity for rigging.

 

When you think about it, sports writers really contribute nothing to the world.  They write about... sports.  Not anything of consequence.  I get that there are some sporting events that have transcended athleticism and taken on some kind of world meaning, but while that may be fact, it's silly.  You have news anchors talking about major world stories, terrorist attacks, etc., and then you cut over to the guy who talks for two minutes about how a referee blew a holding call.

 

We see it in baseball all the time.  These guys who mean nothing need to give themselves some sense of meaning so they anoint themselves the "caretakers" of the game.  It's pathetic.  

 

Much like he was almost every step of the way during his playing days, TO is correct.  I guess since there's a limit of 5 (I think?) it's reasonable that Dawkins wouldn't make it this year, but TO should have gotten in on his first year of eligibility.  If he's not a HOFer, I'd question why you have a HOF.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

Oh but it is.  Anytime you have sports writers who feel that it's their duty to "punish" players, or hold grudges because said player didn't give them an interview, there's the opportunity for rigging.

 

When you think about it, sports writers really contribute nothing to the world.  They write about... sports.  Not anything of consequence.  I get that there are some sporting events that have transcended athleticism and taken on some kind of world meaning, but while that may be fact, it's silly.  You have news anchors talking about major world stories, terrorist attacks, etc., and then you cut over to the guy who talks for two minutes about how a referee blew a holding call.

 

We see it in baseball all the time.  These guys who mean nothing need to give themselves some sense of meaning so they anoint themselves the "caretakers" of the game.  It's pathetic.  

 

Much like he was almost every step of the way during his playing days, TO is correct.  I guess since there's a limit of 5 (I think?) it's reasonable that Dawkins wouldn't make it this year, but TO should have gotten in on his first year of eligibility.  If he's not a HOFer, I'd question why you have a HOF.

 

 

Exactly.

 

Terrell Davis didn't get in until today because he lacked longevity as a player.

 

T.O. doesn't have that issue, therefore what is it, outside of personal distain for him not to be enshrined?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BringBackTheVet said:

I can't argue against any of the 5 that got in (Warner is probably the closest but IMO he's a HOFer) but it's disappointing that Brian Dawkins didn't make it on his first ballot and that TO didn't get it.  TO has all of the measurables that you need, while Dawkins pretty much redefined what a free safety was.  Jim Johnson built the whole derense around him - not sure how many other safeties you can say that about.  John Lynch was a great player too, but between the two, Dawkins was far more dynamic and valuable to his team.  9 pro bowls, including 2 when he was thought to be washed up and reluctantly playing in Denver.

 

While you don't have to tell me how good Brian Dawkins was and his legacy to the sport...there's no comparing a free safety like Dawkins to a strong safety like Lynch. Those are two completely different positions with different functions. Not really sure what one has to do with the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, rickyISking said:

T.O's HoF speech will be funny. Don't know how he'll explain that tweet. Oh well, he'll just delete the tweet and everybody will forget about it.

 

John Lynch deserves to be in. Shame he has to wait another year.

 

If Lynch gets in before Dawkins that would be a shame.  I saw Lynch play and while I don't see him as a lead-pipe-lock HOFer, I certainly wouldn't say he's not deserving.  Dawkins is just a whole level above IMO.  Splitting the vote might hurt them, if there's people who will only vote for one safety because they're douchebags, but in an ideal world they would both get in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kramerica Industries said:

 

While you don't have to tell me how good Brian Dawkins was and his legacy to the sport...there's no comparing a free safety like Dawkins to a strong safety like Lynch. Those are two completely different positions with different functions. Not really sure what one has to do with the other.

 

Fair enough - it's just that from everything I've been hearing, safety = safety as far as douchebag HOF voters are concerned.

 

I mean you could say that MLB and OLB are totally different positions too (and you wouldn't be wrong) but when it comes to things like this, the players are compared equally.

 

FWIW, Not to take anything away from Lynch (I don't think it should be a competition), but Dawkins lined up as strong safety many times, and in some defenses was essentially a linebacker.  He probably could have played corner had they needed him to.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

re. Terrell Davis' enshrinement, while I appreciate that this sets a precedent of sorts for shorter stints/higher highs as it were, I would also like to think that all this time marinating whether or not he should or should not be a HOFer was valid too.

I hope writers don't say well, TD got in, let's open the flood gates through the future.  No, let's not.  Let's have writers step back on these guys like TD & take a few years to see if they think their cases grow.  

Apples & oranges, Don Mattingly went through a bit of this, & after so much time wasn't considered worthy enough.  But it was good that he was at least considered to think about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gave this some thought today. 100% copypasta from Facebook.

 

Morten Andersen: ? Love it. No-brainer. All-time leading scorer in NFL history, all-time leader in games played, absolute kicking machine. Kickers are underrated. Also, who doesn't like Denmark? ??????

 

Terrell Davis: ? Don't like it. I loved TD as a player, and I know his career was cut very short due to injury. 2,008 rushing yards/23 combined TDs in 1998 is an absolute monster season. But... the career numbers just aren't there. It's not the Hall of What If? or the Hall of Three Great Seasons. Will Chris Johnson or Jamal Lewis get in because of their 2,000 yard seasons? I hope not...

 

Kenny Easley: ❔ Meh. He's before my time, but I consider myself well-versed in football history, and I've never heard of this guy. If you'd asked me a week ago who Kenny Easley was, I would've said "the founder of Easley, South Carolina?" Played 7 seasons, career cut short by kidney disease, led the league in interceptions (10) once, 1 NFL Defensive POY, only two seasons with more than 4 INTs. Seems like a classic case of the Hall of Very Good.

 

Jerry Jones: ? Well-deserved. Love him or hate him, he's one of the reasons the NFL is what it is today. One of the most influential sports owners in history.

 

Jason Taylor: ? Love it. Longevity, reliability, dominance. 6 seasons with double-digit sacks, 7th all-time. No complaints here.

 

LaDainian Tomlinson: ? Love it. 5th all-time in rushing yards, 2006 season (1,815 rushing yards, 28 rushing TD, 508 receiving yards, 31 combined TD) is one of the best ever. Managed to stay healthy, 8 straight seasons with at least 1,100 rushing yards AND 10 rushing TD. There aren't too many like LT.

 

Kurt Warner: ⁉ Eh, I guess. I think everybody gets wrapped up in his feel-good story, or maybe it's the fact I really disliked the Greatest Show on Turf. Throwing for 4,830 yards and/or 41 TD in a season doesn't seem quite as bonkers as it did in 1999/2001, but then again, part of sports analysis is taking historical context into account. It was damn near unheard of then. 1999-2001 Kurt Warner was scorching, 2007-2009 Kurt Warner was more than solid, but 2002-2006 Kurt Warner was steaming garbage. Remember when he got benched for Matt Leinart? Apparently, neither does the HOF selection committee. But I guess a few amazing seasons are enough to get in? I'll allow it, although slightly begrudgingly.

 

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, sc49erfan15 said:

 

 

Thoughts?

I'm not a huge TD pro HOF fan here either, yet it doesn't bother me.  A wash.  I get it.  He looked like a HOFer as he played - more so than many HOFers who eke in elsewhere.  The eye test is such a cliche, yet it's there.

 

Owens, he'll get in, guaranteed.  Writers just wanted to penalize him a few years for being such a jack, & not just on them but teams & teammates & the rest.


Warner helped bring 3 teams to the SB, & he had pretty prolific seasons at his height.  I'm good.  I don't think everyone playing QB has to be Favre or Montana or Graham to be eligible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could go either way on Terrell Davis. I didn't think he'd get in because seemingly every Broncos running back in the era was gaining 1500 yards a season. His numbers seemed less special after he left and randos were picking up similar stats. It's too bad the injury ended his career early. I feel like he was voted in because of a few great seasons and he was gifted lost potential. There's a lot of other guys who won't get considered who have as much of a case as Terrell Davis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, 2001mark said:

I'm not a huge TD pro HOF fan here either, yet it doesn't bother me.  A wash.  I get it.  He looked like a HOFer as he played - more so than many HOFers who eke in elsewhere.  The eye test is such a cliche, yet it's there.

 

Owens, he'll get in, guaranteed.  Writers just wanted to penalize him a few years for being such a jack, & not just on them but teams & teammates & the rest.


Warner helped bring 3 teams to the SB, & he had pretty prolific seasons at his height.  I'm good.  I don't think everyone playing QB has to be Favre or Montana or Graham to be eligible.

35 minutes ago, McCarthy said:

I could go either way on Terrell Davis. I didn't think he'd get in because seemingly every Broncos running back in the era was gaining 1500 yards a season. His numbers seemed less special after he left and randos were picking up similar stats. It's too bad the injury ended his career early. I feel like he was voted in because of a few great seasons and he was gifted lost potential. There's a lot of other guys who won't get considered who have as much of a case as Terrell Davis. 

 

Seriously. Whatever happened to Olandis Gary, anyway?

 

I really, really liked TD and those Elway/Davis/Smith/Sharpe/Atwater Broncos teams. TD definitely passed the "eye test," but he didn't do it for very long. There have been tons of running backs who had 3-4 good seasons and disappeared into the abyss. It's what happens to running backs. Chris Johnson passed the "eye test" at one time. Michael Turner? Arian Foster? Larry Johnson? I'm not necessarily equating Terrell Davis to those guys, but what's the difference between having a career cut short by injury vs. being allowed to fade out? I think we're looking at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jmac11281 said:

It will be interesting to see how RBs in this era are judged as far as HOF worthiness. Tomlinson was probably the last RB to have a long successful career despite taking on a huge workload each season.

 

Yeah, I think number 2 on the list for this "era" is Steven Jackson and no way the HOF voters give him THAT BIG of a mulligan for "played for the Rams".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.