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

[thebestever6]

11 minutes ago, lancerman said:

Okay what about Tuck? 2 time All Pro. Better at his position than Eli. Played on the defense that held the Pats to 14 and was dominant in the SB

No bro 4 double digit sack seasons don't think so

[lancerman]

8 minutes ago, thebestever6 said:

No bro 4 double digit sack seasons don't think so

That’s 2 more All Pros than Eli. 

[INbengalfan]

5 hours ago, thebestever6 said:

Dude Eli made a spectacular play on the three catch like he broke out of a sack come on now

So breaking out of a sure sack gets you into the HoF?

[DannyB]

5 hours ago, PapaShogun said:

- And every reasonable minded person would argue that Monk didn't deserve All Pro in 1984. So where did he have a year where he was thought of to be the best receiver in the NFL if we assume the voters, like for Jackie Smith, made a bad voting in 1984? Or Andre Reed? They're both in regardless though. Everyone enshrined doesn't necessarily have a season where they were thought to be arguably the best in the NFL at their position. Do you agree? 

- I'm talking about if Monk had retired in his prime he would not have had enough to dominate the record books as a receiver. He got to the record books by way of compiling. He has 3 Super Bowls though. I wasn't talking about Jackie Smith. 

- 1200 yards gained in 12 straight years is impressive. That's what I'm saying. No one has ever done that. You don't think it is. We don't agree there, so there isn't much else to say. 

- As for Carmichael, I don't see why it matters that he got in for the NFL's 100th anniversary extended class. How you got a seat at the high table is irrelevant to me. Especially since the voting system is so inconsistent in the first place. Yeah, he did lead the NFL in catches and yards one year. Ok. What's Andre Reed's excuse then if we're splitting hairs? He never led the NFL in any major statistical category for his position, and was never arguably the best receiver in the NFL. The bar wouldn't be lowered if Gore is in, because there are already players with similar careers enshrined. 

-Art Monk had multiple years where he was among the best at his position. I wouldn't say the best, and I wouldn't have given him 1st team AP in '84. But he also has three SB rings, so I understand that putting him over the top. And if he'd been left out, I don't think I would pitch a fit.

-1,200/12 years is impressive in its longevity, but not height

-I don't need the player to have a year where they had a claim to be THE best, but it helps if you're in the discussion for some time. It also helps when you win three Super Bowls like Art Monk.

-As stated before, I wouldn't have voted Andre Reed. But I still think he has a more legit claim than Gore: He was the #1 receiving on one of the best offenses in the league (for an extended number of years), and made it to the Super Bowl four times. He's like Michael Irvin-lite, since he never actually got over the hump and got a ring. Again, he wouldn't be in my Hall though.

-Honestly, I think every player we've talked about has a better case for the Hall than Gore (except maaaybe Carmichael), and many if them I still wouldn't have let in. Looking over the other running backs in the Hall of Fame, especially those from the 90s onward, whom I have a better grasp on, Gore would stick out like a sore thumb. Jerome Bettis and Curtis Martin might be the only ones that come close, but they both have much more legitimate claims (and Bettis would still be on the outside looking in for me). This is to say, I do think in a way the bar would be lowered by electing Gore, BUT, that still isn't the crux of my argument. Even if it WASN'T a case of lowering the bar, I don't think that's a good reason to let someone in. I feel like I have to asy this in every post: Just because there are members of the HoF who don't deserve to be there, doesn't mean we should add more members who don't deserve to be there

[DannyB]

54 minutes ago, INbengalfan said:

So breaking out of a sure sack gets you into the HoF?

His Madden rating for sack-breaking was 99. HoF lock.

[DannyB]

4 hours ago, thebestever6 said:

And I'm fine with Eli getting in he stopped the greatest qb and coach ever from winning two more Superbowls that doesn't mean anything? And he has enough bulk stats imo

Your posts suggest that you think Eli lined up on defense and personally sacked and intercepted Brady.

[DannyB]

2 hours ago, thebestever6 said:

No bro 4 double digit sack seasons don't think so

So despite winning two Super Bowls, a player's less-than-stellar regular season track record can preclude them from getting into the Hall of Fame?.....hmmmmmmmmm....

[thebestever6]

5 hours ago, DannyB said:

Your posts suggest that you think Eli lined up on defense and personally sacked and intercepted Brady.

No not at all you have ignorant posters on here just talking about the Tyree catch when there were two spectacular parts to that play.

5 hours ago, DannyB said:

So despite winning two Super Bowls, a player's less-than-stellar regular season track record can preclude them from getting into the Hall of Fame?.....hmmmmmmmmm....

Less than stellar the guy threw for 337 TDS and 57009 yards lmao come on dude Kurt Freaking Warner made the HOF wifh less than that and less Superbowls it is what it is lol

[DannyB]

24 minutes ago, thebestever6 said:

No not at all you have ignorant posters on here just talking about the Tyree catch when there were two spectacular parts to that play.

Less than stellar the guy threw for 337 TDS and 57009 yards lmao come on dude Kurt Freaking Warner made the HOF wifh less than that and less Superbowls it is what it is lol

Oh dude, if you wanna go stats, I can go with stats. Pro tip: If you're trying to plead Eli's case, DON'T GO WITH STATISTICS...

If you break down his bulk stats and make a career average year, it's like 3,800 yards, 25 TDs, 16 interceptions. Eli played FULLY in the pass-happy era, and feasted on the passing yards boom that was taking shape in the late 00's. That stat line, in this era, is straight mediocre.

He's averaged 241 yards per game. That's worse than Ben, Philip, Carson Palmer, Matthew Stafford, and Matt Ryan, and that's not even getting into obvious superiors like Peyton, Brady, Rodgers, etc. 241/game is more akin to Drew effing Bledsoe during his Patriots years, in a totally different era.

Those QBs mentioned above also ALL have better TD% to INT% ratios.

Kurt Warner on the other hand, has an average 16 start season of 4,400 yards, 28 TDs, and 17 interceptions. And a major bulk of those numbers are from pre-pass happy rules era (of course he had insane weapons, but the rules also allowed the defense to be much more physical).

Warner has been to three Super Bowls and has a ring. His postseason passer rating is a stellar 102.8 over the course of 13 games, with only a single one-and-done. For it being the centerpiece of his resume, Eli's postseason passer rating is actually only 87.4, with four one-and-dones. His only claim for the Hall is a good '07 postseason, and an admittedly stellar 2011 run.

I've been at this post too long. You could write an effing dissertation about why Eli doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame.

[thebestever6]

50 minutes ago, DannyB said:

I've been at this post too long. You could write an effing dissertation about why Eli doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame.

Funny thing is I never once said he deserves too I just said I won't be mad if he gets in . Let's not act like his Giants teams were loaded on O like Warner's or Brees offenses outside of the lune OBJ who fights with a net and Hakeem Nick's who had a short shelf life he's been pretty lacking especially run game pre Barkley.

I only get to the point of defending Eli when people omit his part in a critical super bowl catch and when someone says Ron Jawarski was better other than that I don't care

[DannyB]

10 minutes ago, thebestever6 said:

Funny thing is I never once said he deserves too I just said I won't be mad if he gets in . Let's not act like his Giants teams were loaded on O like Warner's or Brees offenses outside of the lune OBJ who fights with a net and Hakeem Nick's who had a short shelf life he's been pretty lacking especially run game pre Barkley.

I only get to the point of defending Eli when people omit his part in a critical super bowl catch and when someone says Ron Jawarski was better other than that I don't care

So your whole point is that he deserves a fair amount of credit for his escape artist act and hucking one up to the football gods on a wing and a prayer in the '07 Super Bowl? I mean...yeah, then. That play is legendary. But then I don't know why you start bringing the rest of his mediocre career into the equation.

[Soko]

3 hours ago, thebestever6 said:

Less than stellar the guy threw for 337 TDS and 57009 yards lmao come on dude Kurt Freaking Warner made the HOF wifh less than that and less Superbowls it is what it is lol

“Player X is better/has better stats than Player Y, and Player Y is in the HOF, so Player X should be too.”

That’s a dangerous and horrible slope to go down.

[ninjapirate]

I wanted to say eli manning because he sucked his whole career but you added talibs names and he has zero business even being in the conversation for the hall of fame. 

[thebestever6]

2 hours ago, DannyB said:

So your whole point is that he deserves a fair amount of credit for his escape artist act and hucking one up to the football gods on a wing and a prayer in the '07 Super Bowl? I mean...yeah, then. That play is legendary. But then I don't know why you start bringing the rest of his mediocre career into the equation.

Because your less than stellar comment is a joke dude was he amazing no but less than stellar comment is a joke man. Eli did more with less talent on offense than you give him credit for that's all I'm saying.

[thebestever6]

47 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

“Player X is better/has better stats than Player Y, and Player Y is in the HOF, so Player X should be too.”

That’s a dangerous and horrible slope to go down.

Oh I completely agree I don't think Warner warrants getting in tbh. And Eli even if he won more Superbowls I still don't think he should get in. 

I just don't know why people feel the need to paint the narrative that he sucked in order to make the argument he shouldn't make the HOF. There's a ton of NFL teams that would have loved to have Eli for the stretch of his career.

Maybe it's the recency effect that his last couple of years in the league were bad. Even though the Giants front office did nothing to help him on offense.

Eli was a pretty damn good QB may not make the Hall but he's in the Hall of pretty good.