Jump to content

Matthew Slater, HoFer?


patriotsheatyan

Recommended Posts

Hell no. First of all the Pro Bowl is nothing but a popularity contest so I don't even count that in this day and age. Most of the rest of your criteria is what the team accomplished not him is an individual. I didn't hear a single statistic that supports him being in the Hall of Fame. Hell no never should he be voted into the Hall of Fame not remotely I mean seriously are you just at this point trolling everyone?

First you make a thread about the Steelers and how apparently you think they are going to plummet and now you're talkin Hall of Fame for an otherwise irrelevant special team Ace?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/7/2019 at 12:29 AM, Forge said:

I don't think that's the case. I Think the problem is their position / role. It's not big enough to warrant HOF induction in the eyes of most people. Great players are great players, regardless of super bowl. It's not like the Patriots were winning those super bowls because Slater, and it's not like the Bills lost theirs because of Tasker. 

Yeah...the ring argument stack for a special teams gunner is pretty ridiculous. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See this to me is as simple as both a yes and a no.

Is Matthew Slater a great player within the perspective of the position and role he plays? Yes. Really that's almost undeniable.

Does his role have a place in the Hall of Fame? No it really really doesn't. It is so minor for the lack of a better way to say it in the grand scheme of things and in comparison to the roles and positions that are deemed Hall of Fame criteria that you just no way you would ever be voted into the Hall of Fame

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2019 at 11:16 PM, ET80 said:

Unless he can start blocking kicks and suddenly turns into a Hester-type return man. Which, you know... that ain't happening.

Hester will likely get in someday though, and all he did was return kicks (although he ended up being the best ever at it) and a completely mediocre WR.

Honestly, I think Slater should get in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/6/2019 at 11:29 AM, Forge said:

I don't think that's the case. I Think the problem is their position / role. It's not big enough to warrant HOF induction in the eyes of most people. Great players are great players, regardless of super bowl. It's not like the Patriots were winning those super bowls because Slater, and it's not like the Bills lost theirs because of Tasker. 

I get you but it's the Hall of Fame. The Patriots dynasty is talked about as perhaps the greatest in all sports (I don't really agree but just saying) and they will get quasi-Hall of Famers because of it.

I'd put Matt Light in ahead of Slater but buddy didn't have the All-Pros. Presenting a 4-time (if he gets it) Super Bowl champions as a member of the Patriots dynasty and 4-time All-Pros Matthew Slater is conceivable. Take Russ Grimm for example, now he was great when he was on but it wasn't a very long prime period and he was a guard. He didn't even start 2 of the 3 Super Bowls he got a ring for but it didn't matter. John Riggins was the only Hall of Famer from those Skins teams and Grimm was coaching and visible in the league so he got in. Joe Jacoby actually starts all 3 Super Bowl victories and he's still not in but probably will be on a seniors ballot.

Those kind of cases make me look at this and think he has a shot with 4 rings. Because 4 rings is special, very few players get them on the field (about a dozen) and even less as starters. Now you got Matt Millen as an example but Millen wasn't a starter and no all-pros (legitimate ones) and he got them on the Raiders, 49ers and Skins with being closest associated to Raiders who got their guys in.

So right now you got Brady, Gronkowski and probably Gostkowski. Ty Law just got in and Vinatieri is a lock but now played more seasons for the Colts. Maybe those 5 is enough with Richard Seymour looking good too. I don't know, but those all-pros and being a Pats player with 4 rings looks appetizing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/9/2019 at 6:39 PM, Art_Vandalay said:

If a punter can get in, why not Slater?

Ray Guy actually changed the position and how it was played from that point forward in history. As great as Slater has been, the only difference between him and Tasker IMO, is one lost 4 SB.

If Slater had the exact  same stats, impact on the game,  accolades but Not a Patriot riding the coattails of Brady Belicheck,  no one would dare think  about asking this question.

SB aren't everything. HELL NO!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nabbs4u said:

Ray Guy actually changed the position and how it was played from that point forward in history

I don't know what this means. Punting still involves just punting a ball. Guy didn't change anything. He was just the best at it. Guy and Slater have the same number of Pro Bowls and SB wins. Guy does have two more 1st team all pros. So, pretty similar overall. I'm not saying I would vote for Slater to be inducted. But it's not some absurd notion as a lot of people are saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the HOF has ever inducted a 'special teams cover guy' before. 

Leaving that issue aside, I think there are numerous other Patriots ahead of him in line, and I actually think there will be some anti-Patriots bias when some of these guys come up for consideration.  I guarantee that Tom Brady WON'T be a unanimous first ballot hall of famer.  I'll bet at least two voters leave him off just out of bitterness and spite.  Some deserving players are going to have a hard time just because of their uniform.  Which is sad. 

So, given his role and his team, I don't think Slater has a shot in the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...