Kurt Warner Retires...

[Saintsfan]

It's probably quite natural for the HoF talk to get going once any player of note retires. I guess the reason for the wait for qualification is to help everybody put there careeres in context. My guess in the end is Warner's claim will hinge on how well people remember his down years, because his up years were freakin' awesome and saw 2 of the League's least succesful franchises get to 3 Superbowls between them. I guess it comes down to whether you regard the HoF as being reserved for the statistical greats, or whether the emotional storyline of some players' career are worthy of a blazer.

[OldRamsFan]

Then you're not reading or hearing the same "pundits" I am.

I guess I'm not. The pundits I'm talking about are former and current players. I've not heard a one of them say he's not a future HOFer. Not one.

Can you really sit there and tell me that you've heard very many former and current NFL players say that Kurt is not a future HOFer?

That aside, since when did the opinions of sports "pundits" start to carry so much weight? Hell, all it takes to be a sports "pundit" these days is a place to voice your opinion. Everyone here is a "pundit."

The pundits of whom I speak carry so much weight because they have played or are currently playing NFL football. Do you really expect me to apply as much weight to your opinion? Ha ha.

Oh and nice counter argument. Let me know how it goes when you and Kurt Warner head out for Canton.

When Kurt gets there, I'll be watching with a smile on my face. And you'll be shaking your head saying to yourself "How could I have been so wrong on this? I'm never wrong!"

[OldRamsFan]

I guess it comes down to whether you regard the HoF as being reserved for the statistical greats, or whether the emotional storyline of some players' career are worthy of a blazer.

Then Kurt's got it in a bag. He's got great stats and an emotional storyline.

[infrared41]

Then you're not reading or hearing the same "pundits" I am.

I guess I'm not. The pundits I'm talking about are former and current players. I've not heard a one of them say he's not a future HOFer. Not one.

Can you really sit there and tell me that you've heard very many former and current NFL players say that Kurt is not a future HOFer?

That aside, since when did the opinions of sports "pundits" start to carry so much weight? Hell, all it takes to be a sports "pundit" these days is a place to voice your opinion. Everyone here is a "pundit."

The pundits of whom I speak carry so much weight because they have played or are currently playing NFL football. Do you really expect me to apply as much weight to your opinion? Ha ha.

Oh and nice counter argument. Let me know how it goes when you and Kurt Warner head out for Canton.

When Kurt gets there, I'll be watching with a smile on my face. And you'll be shaking your head saying to yourself "How could I have been so wrong on this? I'm never wrong!"

1. Yes.

2. No. But that wasn't the point. The point was that just because a "pundit" says it doesn't necessarily mean it's true. That said, I hosted a radio sports talk show for three years and I covered professional and college sports for 5 years. That may not make me a pundit but I think it qualifies me to offer an opinion doesn't it? When was the last time you got to cover The NCAA Basketball Tournament? I've done it three times. (Sorry folks. I couldn't resist hitting this guy over the head with my resume. I'll try not to do it again...no promises though. )

3. Could be but at least I'm offering my own opinion. So far all you've done is show me is that you don't have any thoughts of your own on the matter. Instead of letting pundits do your thinking for you, why don't you tell me why you think Warner is HOF material? It's easy to let the Stuart Scotts and Chris Mortensens of the world make your arguments. Try making one of your own.

[Hat Boy]

It's easy to let the Stuart Scotts and Chris Mortensens of the world make your arguments. Try making one of your own.

Kurt Waner makes the HoF because he is cooler than the other side of the pillow.

[OldRamsFan]

1. Yes.

As many as you've heard say he is a future HOFer? I highly doubt it.

How about even half as many?

2. No. But that wasn't the point. The point was that just because a "pundit" says it doesn't necessarily mean it's true. That said, I hosted a radio sports talk show for three years and I covered professional and college sports for 5 years. That may not make me a pundit but I think it qualifies me to offer an opinion doesn't it? When was the last time you got to cover The NCAA Basketball Tournament? I've done it three times. (Sorry folks. I couldn't resist hitting this guy over the head with my resume. I'll try not to do it again...no promises though. )

If that's true, it means you're more qualified than I am to offer an opinion. But I never said you're not qualified to your opinion. I said your opinion doesn't carry as much weight with me as the pundits who have played NFL football.

3. Could be but at least I'm offering my own opinion. So far all you've done is show me is that you don't have any thoughts of your own on the matter. Instead of letting pundits do your thinking for you, why don't you tell me why you think Warner is HOF material? It's easy to let the Stuart Scotts and Chris Mortensens of the world make your arguments. Try making one of your own.

That's precisely the strength of my argument. I'm not basing my belief in Warner's HOF possibilities on my own opinion (I'm just a guy who likes football). I'm basing it on the opinion of people who know and have lived the NFL experience. Their opinion carries much more weight than mine ever would.

[BBTV]

Agreed with whoever said that the Pro Football HOF isn't really that hard to get in to (compared to baseball at least.) Based only on his NFL career, I don't look at Warner as a HOFer. I don't really care about numbers - my thought has always been that if you have to look at the numbers, chances are the player shouldn't be in the Hall (of course this isn't always the case, but generally it is.) However, I think that you have to factor in the backstory - his going from Arena, to bagging groceries, to holding a clipboard, to winning a SB. His story was one of the most celebrated in all of sports in the early 2000s, and for a little while, I think Warner transcended sports and became known to a lot of the general non-sports loving public. I think that all things considered, he is probably HOF worthy.

That being said, whether he goes in or not doesn't change my life one bit, so I don't really care.

[Saintsfan]

Just a quick thought, how many guys who've been league MVP and are qualified have not been inducted into the Hall?

Personally I think Warner's story should get him in, combined with his achievements. I don't think the two can be seperated easily, the story somehow magnifies the bare numbers and awards.

[rams80]

Terrell Davis, Boomer Esiason, Mark Moseley (PK....I you not, a kicker was the 1982 NFL MVP), Ken Anderson, Brian Sipe, Bert Jones, Ken Stabler, Larry Brown, John Brodie, Roman Gabriel

[Saintsfan]

Terrell Davis, Boomer Esiason, Mark Moseley (PK....I you not, a kicker was the 1982 NFL MVP), Ken Anderson, Brian Sipe, Bert Jones, Ken Stabler, Larry Brown, John Brodie, Roman Gabriel

Thats a longer list than I had expected. But doesn't include any 2 time winners (I am right there yes?) That has to put Warner close to automatic. Beyond the inconsistency of a few bad years, I am struggling to find a reason to be against Warner's inclusion. And even then, the fact that he came back from the mid career dip and lead the Cardinals (the Cardinals for goodness sake) to the Superbowl adds to his claims IMO.

[NJTank]

Heres the deal with Warner

Two time MVP

Three times starting QB in the Super Bowl, where he holds the single game and career record for passing yards.

He turned around two teams, keep in mind in 1999 when the Rams won the Super Bowl they had gone ten years without the playoffs, and then you have his Cardinals career.

If that is not Hall worthy I don't know what is.

[infrared41]

1. Yes.

As many as you've heard say he is a future HOFer? I highly doubt it.

How about even half as many?

50/50 split. And on what exactly are you basing your doubt? The fact that I listen to different stations than you do? So you doubt it. Fine. If you're going to make the accusation that I'm padding the truth or whatever it is you're doing then at least have the decency to state why you doubt what I'm saying.

In my opinion, and I've said this on numerous occasions, if you have to "make a case" for a player to be inducted into the Hall Of Fame then he probably isn't HOF material to begin with. That appears be the case with Warner. For example, if Joe Montana retired yesterday would we even be having this debate today? No. If Tom Brady retires tomorrow are we debating whether or not he's HOF material? Petyon Manning? You get the point.

It's the Hall of Fame. My belief is it should only include extraordinary players. Kurt Warner, for all his accomplishments, was never extraordinary. Extraordinary players don't disappear for 5 years in the middle of their career. Warner's story is definitely movie of the week material and he did appear in three Super Bowls but he also sucked for 5 seasons in the middle of his career. As a rule, HOF QBs are consistently great throughout their playing career. They don't disappear off the face of the Earth for 5 seasons.

[infrared41]

3. Could be but at least I'm offering my own opinion. So far all you've done is show me is that you don't have any thoughts of your own on the matter. Instead of letting pundits do your thinking for you, why don't you tell me why you think Warner is HOF material? It's easy to let the Stuart Scotts and Chris Mortensens of the world make your arguments. Try making one of your own.

That's precisely the strength of my argument. I'm not basing my belief in Warner's HOF possibilities on my own opinion (I'm just a guy who likes football). I'm basing it on the opinion of people who know and have lived the NFL experience. Their opinion carries much more weight than mine ever would.

Parroting someone else isn't an argument at all and it certainly isn't "your" argument. If all you're going to do is come in here and parrot what other people say then why even bother? It's a pretty safe bet that the majority of us have heard or read the same stuff well before you decided to come in here and reiterate what you just saw on SportsCenter.

Seems like a colossal waste of time on your part if you ask me.

[infrared41]

2. No. But that wasn't the point. The point was that just because a "pundit" says it doesn't necessarily mean it's true. That said, I hosted a radio sports talk show for three years and I covered professional and college sports for 5 years. That may not make me a pundit but I think it qualifies me to offer an opinion doesn't it? When was the last time you got to cover The NCAA Basketball Tournament? I've done it three times. (Sorry folks. I couldn't resist hitting this guy over the head with my resume. I'll try not to do it again...no promises though. )

If that's true, it means you're more qualified than I am to offer an opinion. But I never said you're not qualified to your opinion. I said your opinion doesn't carry as much weight with me as the pundits who have played NFL football.

That's like the third or fourth time you've basically called me a liar. Are you insinuating that I made it up? Don't flatter yourself. You aren't important enough for me to go to the trouble of lying to you about anything. Especially over something as silly as a debate over whether or not Kurt Warner is a hall of famer.

Just for fun and also because when it comes to clowns like you I just can't help myself, I have to ask, how could I possibly benefit in anyway by lying to some idiot on a sports message board? What would my motivation be?

[The_Admiral]

On occasion the 'really good but not elite' will sneak into Cooperstown (I'm looking at you Jim Rice)

Rice didn't sneak in so much as get pushed in by New England sports media.

[OldRamsFan]

If that's true, it means you're more qualified than I am to offer an opinion. But I never said you're not qualified to your opinion. I said your opinion doesn't carry as much weight with me as the pundits who have played NFL football.

That's like the third or fourth time you've basically called me a liar. Are you insinuating that I made it up? Don't flatter yourself. You aren't important enough for me to go to the trouble of lying to you about anything. Especially over something as silly as a debate over whether or not Kurt Warner is a hall of famer.

What? When have I ever called you a liar? Please point me to the posts.

"If that's true" means "I have no way of knowing if you're telling the truth, but if you are telling the truth..."

Good grief, man, you need to take some reading comprehension courses.

Just for fun and also because when it comes to clowns like you I just can't help myself, I have to ask, how could I possibly benefit in anyway by lying to some idiot on a sports message board? What would my motivation be?

I never called you a liar. And I never personally insulted you like you have insulted me.

[rangerfan94]

Kurt Warner helped turn chicken into chicken soup on two teams. He was only as good as the coach on the other.

and his Post season stats speak for themselves. HOF....Yep

[dfwabel]

1. Yes.

As many as you've heard say he is a future HOFer? I highly doubt it.

How about even half as many?

50/50 split. And on what exactly are you basing your doubt? The fact that I listen to different stations than you do? So you doubt it. Fine. If you're going to make the accusation that I'm padding the truth or whatever it is you're doing then at least have the decency to state why you doubt what I'm saying.

In my opinion, and I've said this on numerous occasions, if you have to "make a case" for a player to be inducted into the Hall Of Fame then he probably isn't HOF material to begin with. That appears be the case with Warner. For example, if Joe Montana retired yesterday would we even be having this debate today? No. If Tom Brady retires tomorrow are we debating whether or not he's HOF material? Petyon Manning? You get the point.

It's the Hall of Fame. My belief is it should only include extraordinary players. Kurt Warner, for all his accomplishments, was never extraordinary. Extraordinary players don't disappear for 5 years in the middle of their career. Warner's story is definitely movie of the week material and he did appear in three Super Bowls but he also sucked for 5 seasons in the middle of his career. As a rule, HOF QBs are consistently great throughout their playing career. They don't disappear off the face of the Earth for 5 seasons.

From what I can remember and tell, there is/was only one HOFer who had a lull and still made it in...John Riggins. Riggins started out well with the Jets, but then had a donut in his career middle. He was All Pro once (Warner was twice). The other QB who had comeback would be Plunkett, and he is not in. We may have to compare his best 5-6 seasons with Steve Young.

[infrared41]

What? When have I ever called you a liar? Please point me to the posts.

"If that's true" means "I have no way of knowing if you're telling the truth, but if you are telling the truth..."

I never called you a liar. And I never personally insulted you like you have insulted me.

I said you "basically called me a liar." You appear to be questioning the truthfulness of everything I have posted in response to you.

For example; "I have no way of knowing if you're telling the truth, but if you are telling the truth..." isn't that more or less questioning the veracity of the statement in the first place?

Can you really sit there and tell me that you've heard very many former and current NFL players say that Kurt is not a future HOFer?

Either you thought I was lying or you can't comprehend the idea that a pundit didn't see it the same way you do.

As many as you've heard say he is a future HOFer? I highly doubt it.

You highly doubt it? So I must have been lying about it when I said I had?

At no point did I question the legitimacy of your claim that every pundit you've heard says Warner is a hall of famer. This despite the fact that, if for no other reason, I find it hard to believe that any medium that involves multiple opinions could possibly be in 100% agreement on anything. They aren't paid to sit there and agree with each other.

So either you thought I was making things up or you were really overstating what you claim you heard.

[OldRamsFan]

I said you "basically called me a liar." You appear to be questioning the truthfulness of everything I have posted in response to you.

For example; "I have no way of knowing if you're telling the truth, but if you are telling the truth..." isn't that more or less questioning the veracity of the statement in the first place?

Can you really sit there and tell me that you've heard very many former and current NFL players say that Kurt is not a future HOFer?

Either you thought I was lying or you can't comprehend the idea that a pundit didn't see it the same way you do.

As many as you've heard say he is a future HOFer? I highly doubt it.

You highly doubt it? So I must have been lying about it when I said I had?

At no point did I question the legitimacy of your claim that every pundit you've heard says Warner is a hall of famer.

This despite the fact that, if for no other reason, I find it hard to believe that any medium that involves multiple opinions could possibly be in 100% agreement on anything. They aren't paid to sit there and agree with each other.

So either you thought I was making things up or you were really overstating what you claim you heard.

If you thought I was calling you a liar, I am sorry. But I was not calling you a liar. To explain this, I will summarize our entire discussion.

1. You said Kurt Warner would not make the HOF.

2. I replied that your opinion is in the minority, that most pundits think he is.

3. You said that I must not be hearing the same pundits as you. You also wrote about your resume.

4. In referring to your resume, I wrote "If that's true", which is simply me saying "I have no way of knowing if that's true or not, but let's assume it is". In no way was I calling you a liar. I have no idea or opinion as to whether you are who you say you are.

In that same post, I specified that by "pundits", I am referring to those pundits who have played or are playing NFL football. I then asked you if you had heard "very many" NFL pundits say that Kurt is not HOF material.

5/ You said "Yes". I accepted that answer and asked you if you had heard as many say that as those who say he is. I then said I doubt it. You will notice that the "I doubt it" was not in response to your "yes" answer, but was in fact a prediction of the way you would answer the question "As many as you've heard say he is a future HOFer?".

No "liar" accusation have I made against you.