Which of these would be the most controversial Hall of Fame inclusion?

[Apparition]

Eli Manning

Pros: 2-time Super Bowl MVP; 4x Pro Bowler; 366 career TD passes 2016 Walter Payton Award winner

Cons: Never led the league in any official statistic other than interceptions (3x); Average to below-average passing efficiency stats for almost his entire career; barely top-50 all-time in passer rating; exactly .500 as a starter in the regular season

 

Philip Rivers

Pros: Will likely retire in the top-5 all-time in yards, completions and TDs; Currently 10th in passer rating

Cons: 5-6 for his career in the playoffs; never played in a Super Bowl; throws considerably more picks than most of his peers

 

Priest Holmes

Pros: Set single-season TD record in 2003; multiple 20-TD seasons; Scored 66 TDs in three seasons; twice led the league in yards from scrimmage; 3x first-team All-Pro; Super Bowl XXXV champion

Cons: Only three years of elite production; not in the top-10 in any major statistical category; barely top-50 in rushing yards; not a major factor in Ravens Super Bowl run

 

Antonio Brown

Pros: Most productive receiver in the league for a 6-year span from 2013 to 2018; 7x Pro Bowler, 4x first-team All-Pro; All-Decade Team

Cons: Forced out of the league when he should've been still in his prime; Almost unanimously viewed as a toxic character; multiple sexual misconduct allegations

 

Reggie Wayne

Pros: Top-10 all-time in receptions and yards; 82 career touchdowns; 6-time Pro-Bowler; Super Bowl XLI champ; top-5 all-time in postseason receptions and yards

Cons: never viewed as an elite performer despite production; only led the league in any category one time; inconsistent in the postseason (played in 21 games but one game accounted for almost 20% of his total output)

 

Terrell Suggs

Pros: 8th all-time in sacks; 7-time Pro Bowler; DROY, DPOY winner; Won the Super Bowl with two different teams

Cons: Never led the league in sacks; highest single-season total was 14; history of dometic violence

 

Robert Mathis

Pros: 123 career sacks; all-time leader in forced fumbles; 19.5 sacks and 10 FF in 2013; Super Bowl XLI champ

Cons: Played second fiddle to Dwight Freeney for most of his career; Only 6.5 career postseason sacks in 18 games; Popped for PEDs after his best season

 

Aqib Talib

Pros: Active career interceptions leader (tied with Richard Sherman); 5x Pro Bowler, 1x All-Pro; Key cog in one of the league's historically great defenses; 10 career pick-sixes (4th all-time)

Cons: Only thought to have five elite seasons; Outshined by a number of his peers (Sherman, Peterson, Revis, Gilmore, Harris)

[Nabbs4u]

Priest Holmes. Simply didn't play long enough and unlike TD, doesn't have 2 SB rings.

Then

Talib

Mathis

......

Everyone else probably makes it with AB waiting longer then most.

[Apparition]

1 minute ago, Nabbs4u said:

Priest Holmes. Simply didn't play long enough and unlike TD, doesn't have 2 SB rings.

Then

Talib

Mathis

......

Everyone else probably makes it with AB waiting longer then most.

This is a pretty solid video outlining the case for Talib

 

 

[OkeyDoke21]

Talib, Mathis, or Holmes, for me.  I ultimately went with Talib, but was between those 3.   I didn't realize that Mathis was the all time leader in FF.   I think Suggs and Manning are pretty much absolutes.  I wouldn't put them in that group.  AB probably goes in, but might wait a bit, due to off the field and compilation numbers.  If you think Calvin Johnson is a HOF'er though, I don't know how you wouldn't have AB in.  Rivers probably still goes in, due to comp numbers.  Wayne might do the same, but I could also seem him getting buried. 

[cp0k2]

50 minutes ago, Starless said:

Eli Manning

Pros: 2-time Super Bowl MVP; 4x Pro Bowler; 366 career TD passes 2016 Walter Payton Award winner, last name

Cons: Never led the league in any official statistic other than interceptions (3x); Average to below-average passing efficiency stats for almost his entire career; barely top-50 all-time in passer rating; exactly .500 as a starter in the regular season

Fixed.

[aceinthehouse]

Eli Manning is borderline, imo. 

Do I think he will get in? Yes, it's a no-brainer. Both  Brothers making the HOF is a sportswriters dream.

But should he?

Again, I think it's borderline. 

I compare Eli Manning's career with none other, than a fellow QB some of you may have heard of.

QB Jim Plunkett

2-tine SB winner

Played in half the games Eli has, which is understandable. (Considering the era he played)

Has half the yardage

22 GW drives, to Eli's 37

His pass percentage is lower of 53 to Eli's 60.

Interestingly enough, I've always thought Plunkett was a HOFer.

So having said that, I hesitantly have to include Eli as well. He probably should be in the HOF, with the career he's had.

So really, the question is simple....

Do you think Jim Plunkett should be in the HOF?

If you do, then Eli belongs as well.

If you don't, then Eli shouldn't be on your list either.

Oh...btw...

Jim Plunkett is NOT currently in the HOF.

And he too, won 2 SB's

 

[Forge]

My first thought when looking at the names was holmes, just because of the short time. I'm a fan of elite, short term producers getting in, but I think that even then there is a bar you have to clear. He may be just short of that bar...but hot damn was he good. 

 

[kwolf68]

Honestly, only Manning, Rivers, Suggs, and Talib are in for me. But I am sure most of the others will get in. Which is fine. 

Rivers gets in simply because of the stats, period. And the stats are a testament to his longevity and above average talent. Manning gets in because of 2 rings, period. Otherwise, he was pretty pedestrian and the poster above who brings up Plunkett makes some good points. I am torn on a QB having to win it all to validate their career. I'd take Fouts, Marino, or Tarkenton everyday over Eli. Fouts/Marino did all they could do to win, their defenses were historically bad most of their years. Fran was great, but his teams ran into the Super Bowl 8 Dolphins, Super Bowl 9 Steelers and Super Bowl 11 Raiders...for my  money the Dolphins of 73 and Steelers of 74 were the most dominant teams of the 1970s (that 76 Raiders team is damn awesome too), so its really no shame in Minnesota losing there. Vikings needed to get into the Super Bowl against the Colts (in 5) or Denver (in SB 12) to really have a legit chance at a Super Bowl (though Fran was not with them in 1970). Otherwise, if you were an NFC team in the 1970s, you either had to deal with the Dolphins before 74 and the Steelers after 74 (those two teams won 6 of the 10 Super Bowls). Vikings just picked the wrong years to win the NFC. I think the 75 Vikings (who lost in the Hail Mary throw to Pearson) may have been their best team of the decade, but the Steelers would have rolled them again, Pittsburgh was just that good. 

Edited May 22, 2020 by kwolf68

[bigbadbuff]

Either Holmes or Talib

[Apparition]

Did not at all expect Talib to be running away with this. 

[patriotsheatyan]

I voted Rivers because QBs get more controversy. Rivers could of course make it less controversial with any degree of success in Indy, but I’m writing this as if he retired today.

[mission27]

8 hours ago, Nabbs4u said:

Priest Holmes. Simply didn't play long enough and unlike TD, doesn't have 2 SB rings.

Then

Talib

Mathis

......

Everyone else probably makes it with AB waiting longer then most.

Just because hes crazy?  I mean hes prob the best player on the list tbh

[Cheesehawk]

I hate to say Holmes because he is truly one of the most underappreciated backs of all time. People forget how good he was over those 3 seasons. 

So I'm gonna say Rivers. 

[Soko]

Wouldn’t really bang the table for any of them to be in the HOF, tbh. So no inclusion phases me. The only one I’d maybe vote for is Suggs. 

[JAF-N72EX]

Would say Holmes because of circumstances out of his control but an argument could be made for Rivers too.