Jump to content
Starless

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

Which of these would be the most objectionable to you?  

99 members have voted

  1. 1. Which of these would be the most objectionable to you?

    • Eli Manning
      18
    • Philip Rivers
      12
    • Priest Holmes
      9
    • Antonio Brown
      16
    • Reggie Wayne
      1
    • Terrell Suggs
      2
    • Robert Mathis
      9
    • Aqib Talib
      33


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Starless said:

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)

In order of most objectionable to least:

(1) Antonio Brown

(2) Aqib Talib

(3) Philip Rivers

(4) Priest Holmes

(5) Robert Mathis

(6) Reggie Wayne

(7) Eli Manning

(8) Terrell Suggs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, mission27 said:

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

Because he's probably the least qualified after Holmes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

In order of most objectionable to least:

(1) Antonio Brown

(2) Aqib Talib

(3) Philip Rivers

(4) Priest Holmes

(5) Robert Mathis

(6) Reggie Wayne

(7) Eli Manning

(8) Terrell Suggs

Are you taking account off field issues, or purely on field production?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guy who’s a lock that I have a problem with is Frank Gore. Fringe top 5 back in his prime. Never felt like you were watching a Hall of Famer. Then he passed like 20 guys on the all time rushing list after he stopped being good and all of a sudden he’s a HOFer.

At his best I don’t think he wasn’t as good as Jamal Lewis, Shaun Alexander, Priest Holmes, Fred Taylor and there’s a few others you could throw in there. Wasn’t in the same universe as Edgerrin James whose induction was controversial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, DontTazeMeBro said:

The guy who’s a lock that I have a problem with is Frank Gore. Fringe top 5 back in his prime. Never felt like you were watching a Hall of Famer. Then he passed like 20 guys on the all time rushing list after he stopped being good and all of a sudden he’s a HOFer.

Oh my god don't get me started on Frank Gore. If there was a jury trial to determine Hall of Fame inclusion, I would be the lawyer arguing to keep him out. He and Eli are probably my two biggest "I will die on this hill" players as far as that goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Define controversial. 

 

Talib would be a blip on most people's radar IMO. If he were to get in people would mostly shrug and think, maybe he didnt deserve it but ultimately not care much at all. 

 

Eli would cause debate across the board. Nature of his market and position. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frank Gore has never been a hall of Famer until he started tacking on the worst seasons of his career one after the other after the other.... he is the hall of a long time, not the hall of fame. 

He was never the best back in the league, never carried his team. 

Never a serious offensive player of the year candidate. 

I'd much rather see guys like Priest Holmes, or Marshawn Lynch, or Torry Holt who dominated the league for a short period of time get in over him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kiwibrown said:

Frank Gore has never been a hall of Famer until he started tacking on the worst seasons of his career one after the other after the other.... he is the hall of a long time, not the hall of fame. 

It's the dumbest thing in the world. Be pretty good, but for an uncommonly long time? HALL OF FAME! Oh my god I'm about to derail this thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Kiwibrown said:

Frank Gore has never been a hall of Famer until he started tacking on the worst seasons of his career one after the other after the other.... he is the hall of a long time, not the hall of fame. 

He was never the best back in the league, never carried his team. 

Never a serious offensive player of the year candidate. 

I'd much rather see guys like Priest Holmes, or Marshawn Lynch, or Torry Holt who dominated the league for a short period of time get in over him. 

if LT didn''t exist, I would say 06 Gore was the best back in the league. He avg 5.2 ypc and was third in rush yards behind LT and a run into the ground Larry Johnson who had 104 more carries than Gore to beat him by less than 100 yards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DannyB said:

It's the dumbest thing in the world. Be pretty good, but for an uncommonly long time? HALL OF FAME! Oh my god I'm about to derail this thing.

Yea that's tough, but should durability be counted? It's like Sayers played basically 5 seasons worth of football (due to injury), but still made the Hall of Fame because he was a brilliant talent. However, had Sayers played only 2 or 3 seasons I doubt he gets in despite his obvious talent. There is a balance for "how long" you have to play but does another line exist that says "too long" and thus your numbers are tainted? Honestly, not sure which way I want to go with Gore.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, kwolf68 said:

Yea that's tough, but should durability be counted? It's like Sayers played basically 5 seasons worth of football (due to injury), but still made the Hall of Fame because he was a brilliant talent. However, had Sayers played only 2 or 3 seasons I doubt he gets in despite his obvious talent. There is a balance for "how long" you have to play but does another line exist that says "too long" and thus your numbers are tainted? Honestly, not sure which way I want to go with Gore.  

Durability absolutely come into play, but no amount of it will make up for lack of true greatness. I will never penalize a player for playing more seasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, DannyB said:

It's the dumbest thing in the world. Be pretty good, but for an uncommonly long time? HALL OF FAME! Oh my god I'm about to derail this thing.

It doesn't stack up for me, I don't value longevity over brilliance. It's the hall of fame not the hall of a long long time. 

Torry Holt was way more dominant than Gore. So was Lynch and Holmes, Holmes scored 66 touchdown in 3 seasons, it takes Gore almost a decade to get there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Deadpulse said:

if LT didn''t exist, I would say 06 Gore was the best back in the league. He avg 5.2 ypc and was third in rush yards behind LT and a run into the ground Larry Johnson who had 104 more carries than Gore to beat him by less than 100 yards. 

One year when he was a distant 2nd. 

I like Gore, he just isn't hall of fame. His hall of fame case exists at the moment because his longevity gives the media something to talk about. If he comes out and crushes it this year in yards, big plays, playoff success or touchdowns I'll change my mind. 

He has a had a few great seasons, nothing dominant and then like 5 years of average play that has padded his stats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why aren't longevity and durability related stats looked at like any other impressive statistic players add to their hall of fame resumes? Frank Gore has 9 seasons of 1000+ yards rushing, and another 2 where he was less than 40 yards away. That's as impressive, if not more so, than a 2000 yard rushing season to me.

I think there is space for guys like Frank Gore and Terrell Davis in the HoF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DontTazeMeBro said:

The guy who’s a lock that I have a problem with is Frank Gore. Fringe top 5 back in his prime. Never felt like you were watching a Hall of Famer. Then he passed like 20 guys on the all time rushing list after he stopped being good and all of a sudden he’s a HOFer.

With guys like Marcus Allen, Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis already in, I don't see the issue with Gore making it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×