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

3 minutes ago, Starless said:

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

I don’t think Martin or Bettis should’ve gotten in either.

Share this post


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

I don’t think Martin or Bettis should’ve gotten in either.

Be that as it may, Gore should be in for consistency's sake. Maybe not 1st ballot, but the ability to produce at a high level for a long time has gotten a lot of guys in who were never all-world. Tim Brown, Andre Reed, Art Monk are other examples. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Don't see how Suggs would be a remotely controversial inductee - he's pretty obviously going to make it and deservedly so. He has both longevity and the elite DPOY peak, top 10 in sacks all time with every player ahead of him already inducted, he's been a high profile player in terms of being a centerpiece for a team known for its defensive players, and he was a difference maker on a championship team in his prime. 

Edited by BaltimoreTerp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Starless said:

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

I'll say it again: I'm not chasing bad choices with more bad choices. I hate the precedent argument.

And Curtis Martin had a MUCH better career than Gore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Kiwibrown said:

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. 

And I probably wouldn't put Lynch or Holmes in either.

I don't want to get too in the weeds here, but IN GENERAL, when I'm judging a HoF resume, I kinda take a picture of the player's best 10-year stretch, more or less. From there, I want to see a few peak seasons that really pop, with mostly good consistency in between, i.e., not too many disaster seasons. So like, during their career, for a solid stretch, were they in the conversation for among the best in the league at their position, with a couple years where they had a good argument at being THE best. I don't want to get too bogged down with making it an exact science, and where this formula might come up short or not apply, but that's kinda, as a rule of thumb, where I start at least.

Edited by DannyB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, BaltimoreTerp said:

Don't see how Suggs would be a remotely controversial inductee - he's pretty obviously going to make it and deservedly so. He has both longevity and the elite DPOY peak, top 10 in sacks all time with every player ahead of him already inducted, he's been a high profile player in terms of being a centerpiece for a team known for its defensive players, and he was a difference maker on a championship team in his prime. 

Yeah, you wouldn't get much of an argument from me if we're just basing it on on-field performance. Great player, has been a part of a few high-profile defenses, got after the quarterback consistently, without being a one-trick pony.

I guess the only hesitancy would be off-field history. If people are apprehensive about Antonio Brown -- which I can TOTALLY understand, because the guy is a freaking skidmark, but otherwise BRILLIANT on the field -- then you have to hold Suggs to the same standard. And by many accounts, Suggs is an absolute monster of a human being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'd definitely vote Holmes in. Even if his greatest years were in a 3 year stretch, it's arguably the best 3 year stretch in NFL history for a runningback. 

Edited by PapaShogun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I voted for Talib only because he probably gets outshined by peers, also I was ill-informed... didn’t realize he made an All Pro team... so I would rescind that vote in retrospect.

But I would think Eli is the most controversial. Don’t think any on the list should be included except:

Suggs (not 1st ballot because of issues and production), AB (not 1st ballot because of issues), and I would leave it at that.

Suggs while not an elite pass rusher was an elite run stopper and a great pass rusher, considering his era being an elite run stopper was incredibly important. What’s more he was consistently a face of Baltimore for well over 5 years after Lewis/Reed left.

AB was on pace to be the best receiver of this generation before he went off the rails. I’m all for penalizing him, but he fits both the qualifications of talent and fame.

Beyond that Phillips Rivers and Reggie Wayne would both be borderline options. Both great players and both were certainly famous within the game. Though it’s a QB league and if we start letting in every popular franchise QB who has never won a ring or been on an All Pro team than we will be setting a terrible precedent considering the number of QBs of note we could have in the future with a similar Hall of Very Good type resume such as; Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Matthew Stafford... not to even consider this new wave where it seems every city has a franchise QB nowadays. At no point would I say Rivers was ever a top 3 QB in the league and he was also not a top 5 QB for his career either with his peers; Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Drew Brees, and Ben Roethlisburger. Though one could make a case for him over Ben or possibly as a 5b to Ben, but I think HOF needs to be reserved for top 3-5 QBs of an era. So if he makes it he should have to wait until the Wilson/Luck/Newton/Ryan/Stafford era to get in as that seems to have presented less elite options. Could sneak him in there and it wouldn’t look so bad.

With Wayne I think he could get in, but it would have to be well after a Tory Holt or Calvin Johnson or even Antonio Brown. Pivotal member for his squad, is one of the more popular players of his generation due to playing with Manning, has the All Pro, the ring, and at least 5 PBs to his resume. Similar resume to Talib no doubt, but he’s more notable/popular plus. I wouldn’t argue for him to make it, but if he did make it, similar to Rivers, I also could acknowledge why.

Edited by diamondbull424

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, PapaShogun said:

The HOF has guys like Martin or Riggins in though. They do value longevity with decent production more so than the shooting star effect with monster production (Preist Holmes). Not saying it's right, but that is how it's operated in the past. 

Again, I'm not sure how Martin is remotely a comp to Gore. MUCH better career.

As far as Riggins and Allen go, I think in the 70s and 80s, the HoF took things like being on "great" teams/eras for teams, and SB-winning teams much more into account.

Riggins and Allen have much better hardware: SB winners, SB MVPs, Allen was the damn league MVP,  first-team All-Pros, Pro Bowls when half the league didn't pull out with hamstring soreness and need replacing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, DannyB said:

I guess the only hesitancy would be off-field history. If people are apprehensive about Antonio Brown -- which I can TOTALLY understand, because the guy is a freaking skidmark, but otherwise BRILLIANT on the field -- then you have to hold Suggs to the same standard. And by many accounts, Suggs is an absolute monster of a human being.

Not to be crass about it but I just don't think the off the field stuff with Suggs is as big a story as you'd think. The diehards may know about it but the reality is he was never arrested or convicted of anything - though there was a temporary order that was lifted after he reconciled with his wife - and he never served a suspension from the league. Short of his now ex-wife making it a point to campaign against him I'm not sure there's gonna be enough to bury him on when it didn't dog him during his career really. Pats fans have the details of that stuff burned into their memory because the protective order happened while we were their biggest challengers in the AFC but I've never really seen any indication that it became a biggest story beyond the message board bubbles. 

I mean, if Ray Lewis was able to sail through the HoF process with a much more substantive rap sheet, I'd be surprised if Suggs is where they draw the line. 

Edited by BaltimoreTerp

Share this post


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

Not to be crass about it but I just don't think the off the field stuff with Suggs is as big a story as you'd think. The diehards may know about it but the reality is he was never arrested or convicted of anything - though there was a temporary order that was lifted after he reconciled with his wife - and he never served a suspension from the league. Pats fans have the details of that stuff burned into their memory because the second incident happened while we were their biggest challengers in the AFC but I've never really seen any indication that it became a biggest story beyond the message board bubbles. 

I mean, if Ray Lewis was able to sail through the HoF process with a much more substantive rap sheet, I'd be surprised if Suggs is where they draw the line. 

Oh I don't disagree with you about it perhaps not mattering to the voters in the end. Especially since a lot of this was pre-Ray Rice, when a lot of people somehow didn't realize that physically terrorizing a wife, girlfriend, or child, is sorta not okay.

And yeah, the Ray Lewis thing is kinda miraculous. I mean it happened very early in his career, and he was really able to somehow sway public perception toward him being kinda this...evangelical voice of conviction, ethics and morality, without ever truly having to reconcile with his first-hand role in the murder of two people. Unbelievable. But, y'know...hell of a football player, that guy

Share this post


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

Oh I don't disagree with you about it perhaps not mattering to the voters in the end. Especially since a lot of this was pre-Ray Rice, when a lot of people somehow didn't realize that physically terrorizing a wife, girlfriend, or child, is sorta not okay.

And yeah, the Ray Lewis thing is kinda miraculous. I mean it happened very early in his career, and he was really able to somehow sway public perception toward him being kinda this...evangelical voice of conviction, ethics and morality, without ever truly having to reconcile with his first-hand role in the murder of two people. Unbelievable. But, y'know...hell of a football player, that guy

Given the post-Ray Rice state of the NFL when it comes to matters of domestic violence, I think it's 100% a fair question how Suggs' off-the-field reputation might affect his candidacy. True, the PFHOF doesn't weigh character the way Baseball does, but I don't think individual voters can be counted on to not consider these things in making their decision. Especially with a guy who played at a time when so many others at his position warrant induction. 

Share this post


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

Why aren't longevity and durability related stats looked at like any other impressive statistic players add to their hall of fame resumes?

I don’t think anyone with sense would say it’s unimpressive. The key thing is that does longevity equate to or outweigh greatness? Plenty of people (like myself) don’t want to see players in the Hall that were pretty much never in the discussion for best at their position. Durability is a rare trait to have especially at that position, but does that make him great? I’d say no. 

I am much more comfortable voting for a guy like Calvin Johnson (who massacred the league, had no equal for most of his career, but perhaps retired too early) than a guy like Gore (who played at a consistently good level for longer than most). Keep the Hall of Fame filled with players who dominated the league, not ones that dominated the stat sheet by playing for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

I don’t think anyone with sense would say it’s unimpressive. The key thing is that does longevity equate to or outweigh greatness? Plenty of people (like myself) don’t want to see players in the Hall that were pretty much never in the discussion for best at their position. Durability is a rare trait to have especially at that position, but does that make him great? I’d say no. 

I am much more comfortable voting for a guy like Calvin Johnson (who massacred the league, had no equal for most of his career, but perhaps retired too early) than a guy like Gore (who played at a consistently good level for longer than most). Keep the Hall of Fame filled with players who dominated the league, not ones that dominated the stat sheet by playing for a while.

The point I'm trying to make is that the two aren't mutually exclusive. Longevity contributes to greatness; longevity can be why a player is great. Obviously though, like anything else, it can't be the only reason someone gets into the hall of fame. Gore has other accomplishments, along with his longevity, that I think should get him in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rivers. People care more about QBs, and remember their careers the most. A QB with as little postseason success as Rivers getting in would make for a lot of debates. I feel people are 50/50 on whether he deserves it, but almost nobody expects him to make it, so it'd be a shocker.

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



×