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

[Ray Reed]

17 hours ago, DannyB said:

That's such a weird take. Like...I'm not saying he definitely does or doesn't, I've just literally NEVER considered him until this thread, and it doesn't sound like I'm the only one.

Yeah it’s odd for sure.

NGL, the OP seems like it’s kind of framed with a bias towards Talib too. Some questionable “qualifications” spoken like they’re supposed to be slam dunk notches in his belt. “Active leader in interceptions among current players”...well, that’s 35, not exactly eye raising. “Key cog in a historically great defense”....i’m assuming he meant the 2015 Broncos? I don’t think many people at all look at the ‘15 Broncos as one of the league’s preeminent defenses...certainly not to the level of where being a player on that team would increase your standing for a HOF bid...good as they may have been.

The whole Talib thing just feels kind’ve shoehorned in there imo

Edited May 24, 2020 by Ray Reed

[TecmoSuperJoe]

36 minutes ago, DannyB said:

This whole argument has been based on, has X player EVER been the best at his position, or had a very clear, solid case for being the best? Jackie Smith WAS the best tight-end in 1967. Every reasonable minded person would agree with that. That's the point.

 

Not yards for a receiver. Receiving yards for a tight end. Again, the stats aren't the easiest to quickly parse out, but as best I can figure: Mike Ditka had the record before Smith, with 5.8k. After 8 years of playing in the NFL, Jackie Smith also had 5.8k yards receiving. Almost literally tied for the record of most receiving yards for a tight end. The next season he tacked on another 300+, so he could have retired after 9 years, and been the record holder.  Instead, he played another several years, with the first 3 and a half of those years netting SOLID production (another 1,500+ yards to his already record-breaking career). If you don't see how that's different from Gore, I don't know what to tell you.

I don't think Jackie Smith won a Super Bowl. I think he appeared in one with Dallas though, way at the end.

It doesn't matter how the yards are gained. My point is 1,200 TOTAL yards gained isn't that impressive for a running back. Can somebody else tell me if I'm not being clear or something!? 1,200 yards is not great running back production. My only point in saying total YFS is so people didn't think I meant 1,200 rushing yards. 1,200 rushing yards, combined with what RBs usually gain through the air, like 2-300, now that's a solid season.

I don't care HOW they're split up, I'm just totaling the player's production. 1,200 total YFS per year is, IN GENERAL good for like 10-15th best in the league for a running back, over the course of Gore's career. I don't care how many years you're the 10th best running back in the league, it's not Hall worthy.

Again, if you are telling me what the voting body is GOING TO DO, fine, maybe, that's not my point. Of course the bar has been lowered, and I disagree with it. And as I've said all along, YES there are other players who shouldn't be in there! I've said that over and over. I wouldn't have voted Jerome Bettis in, but I can at least slightly more understand his case. I also don't think I would've voted Kurt Warner in. But I also understand his case more. So these are guys that I think are more deserving than Frank Gore, that I would NOT have voted in.

Just because there are bad choices already in the hall doesn't mean I want to add more bad choices to it.

**********************************************

 

UPDATE: Also, I just look into Carmichael more. A few things: First, he wasn't even voted in the normal way we're talking about here. He's part of this "Centennial Class" thingy they're doing, not the normal classes they vote on. Second, Carmichael did league the lead in receiving yards for a year, and thus had a year where he could say he was the best at his position. He also had another year where he was 3rd. So that's better than Gore can say. Nonetheless, Carmichael still wouldn't get my vote.

- 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. 

[Elky]

Warren Moon is one of the most overrated players of all time.

[thebestever6]

57 minutes ago, INbengalfan said:

Manning shouldn't even be in the discussion.  .500 career winning %.  The only reason he gets mentioned (besides last name) are the two SBs, which were made possible by incredibly awesome catches by Manningham and Tyree.  Without those two catches, is he even in the discussion?

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

[BroncoSojia]

I thought players like Lesean McCoy and Jamaal Charles were better than Frank Gore in their prime, and those two are probably in the hall of very good.

[lancerman]

1 hour ago, thebestever6 said:

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

Should that make him a HOF’er? Should he get the amount of credit he gets specifically for that game when his offense only put up 17 points and his defense held the greatest offense ever to 14? And should that be a substantially large feature of his HOF case 

[lancerman]

2 hours ago, Elky said:

Warren Moon is one of the most overrated players of all time.

Moon mostly gets in for longevity and historical purposes 

[thebestever6]

Just now, lancerman said:

Should that make him a HOF’er? Should he get the amount of credit he gets specifically for that game when his offense only put up 17 points and his defense held the greatest offense ever to 14? And should that be a substantially large feature of his HOF case 

I never said that but don't act like he made no impact lol

[thebestever6]

2 minutes ago, lancerman said:

Should that make him a HOF’er? Should he get the amount of credit he gets specifically for that game when his offense only put up 17 points and his defense held the greatest offense ever to 14? And should that be a substantially large feature of his HOF case 

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

[lancerman]

Just now, thebestever6 said:

I never said that but don't act like he made no impact lol

He definitely had an impact. But clearly when the best offense ever is being held to 14 points and your team only gets 17, the defense is the primary focal point. 
 

That means something when that specific game is going to be a massive part of someone’s argument. There’s a lot of QB’s in the HOF where you can take out a game and they still easily get in 

[lancerman]

10 minutes 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

No it’s a SB. The 2011 Pats were not a great team and beat one winning team all year (in the AFCCG and off a missed field goal at that). Then like we said, holding one of the greatest offenses ever to 14 points is more on the defense). If they were held to 14 and Eli controlled the game and but up 28-35 points that would be one thing. But Eli leaned on his defense that year he went 19/34, 55%, 2TD’s 1INT, and an 88 passer rating. That’s an average game at best with him having a good comeback drive at the end. 
 

And no I don’t think someone else’s legacy should factor into your specific Hall of Fame case. That’s basically taking someone else’s work and making it part of your argument. So if butler dropped an INT,  Hightower doesn’t get a strip sack, and Vinatieri misses some kicks now all of a sudden Eli has a weaker case even if nothing in his career changes? 
 

Joe Flacco stopped the Patriots in 09 and 12., should he get in the Hall? 

[thebestever6]

42 minutes ago, lancerman said:

And no I don’t think someone else’s legacy should factor into your specific Hall of Fame case. That’s basically taking someone else’s work and making it part of your argument. So if butler dropped an INT,  Hightower doesn’t get a strip sack, and Vinatieri misses some kicks now all of a sudden Eli has a weaker case even if nothing in his career changes? 
 

Joe Flacco stopped the Patriots in 09 and 12., should he get in the Hall? 

Dude, Pat's have the greatest dynasty of our generation if you think beating the greatest qb and coach of all time has no merit and doesn't mean more than just a hot team I don't know what to tell you. 

[lancerman]

27 minutes ago, thebestever6 said:

Dude, Pat's have the greatest dynasty of our generation if you think beating the greatest qb and coach of all time has no merit and doesn't mean more than just a hot team I don't know what to tell you. 

So should David Tyree make the HOF. Should all the players on those Giants team make the HOF? 

[thebestever6]

4 minutes ago, lancerman said:

So should David Tyree make the HOF. Should all the players on those Giants team make the HOF? 

You're just being ridiculous now this doesn't warrant a response Couglin should though

[lancerman]

49 minutes ago, thebestever6 said:

You're just being ridiculous now this doesn't warrant a response Couglin should though

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