RedRider Posted November 24, 2017 Share Posted November 24, 2017 2 hours ago, EliteTexan80 said: Forgive me for a Senior moment, but isn't the cutoff 3 years from retirement? If so, shouldn't Tony Gonzalez be on the ballot? 5 years. But I believe Tony G is already at 4 years. His last season was 2013; Randy and Ray last played in 2012 and are up first-timers this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted November 24, 2017 Share Posted November 24, 2017 1 minute ago, RedRider said: 5 years. But I believe Tony G is already at 4 years. His last season was 2013; Randy and Ray last played in 2012 and are up first-timers this year. Ok, figured my math was off. Thanks for reminding me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp6488 Posted November 24, 2017 Share Posted November 24, 2017 1 hour ago, sunnygsm said: Someone did a stat comparison of John Lynch and Dawkins, honestly I was surprised that the gap was as big as it was. Yep. Dawk vs. Lynch: INTs: 37-513 vs. 26-204 FFs: 36 vs. 16 FRs: 19 vs. 9 Sacks: 26 vs. 13 Tackles: 895 vs. 736 Def TDs: 3 vs. 0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted November 24, 2017 Share Posted November 24, 2017 7 hours ago, LaserFocus said: No, because the voters are smart enough to recognize the strong linkage between star players are team success. And the primary function of team sports will always be to win. Yes, there are some great players in the HOF who were mired on mediocre teams, but they are in the minority. Never claimed 2002 was Ward's greatest season, and I've already explained speed wasn't his forte. You just weren't going to get the big chunks of yardage most other receivers obtained, and Ward didn't run a ton of deep routes. A blue collar receiver, Ward was great on those shorter routes, often inside. His toughness and physical presence helped pick up those first downs, which kept drives alive and helped win games. And the blocking helped protect a QB, assist the running game, and other receivers once they caught the ball. In a fantasy football era, it's easy to see how Ward is undervalued by some fans, many of whom only use box scores without watching the games. And while other receivers whined and complained about their own stats, embarrassing themselves, Ward helped mentor Antonio Brown at the end of his career. HOF voters don't care about what franchise a player plays for, it's about performance, and clearly, Ward has HOF-caliber credentials. Not an inner circle WR, but the totality of work will be sufficient sometime down the road. As I've said before, it's not all about the stats. The HOF also looks at what a candidate brings to the table which is different, and the blocking is just another facet of a great career. Thank you for explaining to the class why Ward shouldn't be a HOF. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Additionally: WARD 1999: Not in top 48 in First Down Receptions 2000: Not in top 48 in First Down Receptions 2001: 19th in First Down Receptions 2002: 4th in First Down Receptions 2003: 6th in First Down Receptions 2004: 20th in First Down Receptions 2005: 15th in First Down Receptions 2006: 21st in First Down Receptions 2007: 24th in First Down Receptions 2008: 12th in First Down Receptions 2009: 13th in First Down Receptions 2010: 43th in First Down Receptions 2011: Not in Top 48 First Down Receptions Let's say that I'm generous and give him 50th on the three seasons. The man averaged 25th in the league in First Down Receptions throughout his career. He had 2 years in the top 10. He had 6 years in the top 15. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ If the man's claim to fame is moving the chains, he certainly didn't do at a Hall of Fame level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted November 24, 2017 Share Posted November 24, 2017 Just a comparison to Jordy Nelson: 2017: 21st 2016: 6th 2015: Not in the Top 48 2014: 3rd 2013: 13th 2012: 49th 2011: 20th 2010: Not in top 48 2009: Not in top 48 2008: Not in top 48 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaserFocus Posted November 25, 2017 Share Posted November 25, 2017 3 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Thank you for explaining to the class why Ward shouldn't be a HOF. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Additionally: WARD 1999: Not in top 48 in First Down Receptions 2000: Not in top 48 in First Down Receptions 2001: 19th in First Down Receptions 2002: 4th in First Down Receptions 2003: 6th in First Down Receptions 2004: 20th in First Down Receptions 2005: 15th in First Down Receptions 2006: 21st in First Down Receptions 2007: 24th in First Down Receptions 2008: 12th in First Down Receptions 2009: 13th in First Down Receptions 2010: 43th in First Down Receptions 2011: Not in Top 48 First Down Receptions Let's say that I'm generous and give him 50th on the three seasons. The man averaged 25th in the league in First Down Receptions throughout his career. He had 2 years in the top 10. He had 6 years in the top 15. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ If the man's claim to fame is moving the chains, he certainly didn't do at a Hall of Fame level. Six years in the top 15 sounds pretty impressive to me, is this stat limited to the WR position only? You're forgetting the first downs in many wins over the years, catching those passes inside and getting blasted was a frequent occurrence during the career. The physicality he played with as a receiver was definitely at a HOF level. And we saw plenty of first down conversions in the postseason as well. Ward played SB 43 with a torn knee, injured in the AFC TG versus Baltimore. Obviously limited because of injury, Ward still caught a roughly 30 yard pass which helped stake Pittsburgh to the early lead. Not a huge play, but that's why we have to look inside the numbers. Jordy Nelson just isn't a realistic comp, he's roughly 200 receptions away from Donald Driver as Green Bay's franchise leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted November 25, 2017 Share Posted November 25, 2017 45 minutes ago, LaserFocus said: Six years in the top 15 sounds pretty impressive to me, is this stat limited to the WR position only? You're forgetting the first downs in many wins over the years, catching those passes inside and getting blasted was a frequent occurrence during the career. The physicality he played with as a receiver was definitely at a HOF level. And we saw plenty of first down conversions in the postseason as well. Ward played SB 43 with a torn knee, injured in the AFC TG versus Baltimore. Obviously limited because of injury, Ward still caught a roughly 30 yard pass which helped stake Pittsburgh to the early lead. Not a huge play, but that's why we have to look inside the numbers. Jordy Nelson just isn't a realistic comp, he's roughly 200 receptions away from Donald Driver as Green Bay's franchise leader. It is not limited to only WRs. It includes all players. Only during Ward's career, so cutting off a good portion of a lot of these guys careers Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Marvin Harrison, Tony Gonzalez, Torry Holt, Chad Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, and Reggie Wayne all have as many or more top 15 first down seasons as Ward. The difference is that all of those players had more big play ability. Ward is bottom tier at the only relevant thing he does at a HOF level, and everything else he's subpar. Why is he a HOF? Every year 5 players make the HOF. Let's say that QB, RB, WR, TE, OT, IOL, DT, EDGE, ILB, CB, Safety are the positions who make the HOF. 10 positions, 5 players. Obviously not all is equal but that means on average you would put 1 WR into the HOF every other year. If we assume that there are no more WRs who will cut in front of Ward, (that seems a dumb assumption), he's not making the HOF for another 16 years. How the hell is this guy HOF worthy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaserFocus Posted November 25, 2017 Share Posted November 25, 2017 38 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: It is not limited to only WRs. It includes all players. Only during Ward's career, so cutting off a good portion of a lot of these guys careers Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Marvin Harrison, Tony Gonzalez, Torry Holt, Chad Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, and Reggie Wayne all have as many or more top 15 first down seasons as Ward. The difference is that all of those players had more big play ability. Ward is bottom tier at the only relevant thing he does at a HOF level, and everything else he's subpar. Why is he a HOF? Every year 5 players make the HOF. Let's say that QB, RB, WR, TE, OT, IOL, DT, EDGE, ILB, CB, Safety are the positions who make the HOF. 10 positions, 5 players. Obviously not all is equal but that means on average you would put 1 WR into the HOF every other year. If we assume that there are no more WRs who will cut in front of Ward, (that seems a dumb assumption), he's not making the HOF for another 16 years. How the hell is this guy HOF worthy? Since it includes all players, that helps Ward's ranking. Agree about other faster and better leaping receivers offering more big play ability, but Ward had elite physicality at the WR position. I think if we looked at first downs in winning games, Ward would be right there with other WRs already enshrined in Canton. The lifetime totals of receptions, TDs, and steller postseason play are of HOF quality. And toss in the all time leader of a storied franchise, plus the blocking, it just feels like a HOF selection down the line. I do agree with you the wait could be up to 16 years because of the competition. Ward also does possess the kind of signature moments we associate with HOF players, and I don't think the story of pro football in the 2000s can be told without Hines Ward. Don't think Chad Johnson has a prayer at Canton, he was a problem child, and being the franchise receiving leader of the Bengals isn't a big deal. I do think Reggie Wayne and Torry Holt will eventually earn Canton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted November 25, 2017 Share Posted November 25, 2017 2 minutes ago, LaserFocus said: Since it includes all players, that helps Ward's ranking. Agree about other faster and better leaping receivers offering more big play ability, but Ward had elite physicality at the WR position. I think if we looked at first downs in winning games, Ward would be right there with other WRs already enshrined in Canton. The lifetime totals of receptions, TDs, and steller postseason play are of HOF quality. And toss in the all time leader of a storied franchise, plus the blocking, it just feels like a HOF selection down the line. I do agree with you the wait could be up to 16 years because of the competition. Ward also does possess the kind of signature moments we associate with HOF players, and I don't think the story of pro football in the 2000s can be told without Hines Ward. Don't think Chad Johnson has a prayer at Canton, he was a problem child, and being the franchise receiving leader of the Bengals isn't a big deal. I do think Reggie Wayne and Torry Holt will eventually earn Canton. Ward is an accumultor. He's a guy who put together good but not elite production for a long time. He's got one elite season. He's the poster child for the Hall of Very Good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted November 25, 2017 Share Posted November 25, 2017 30 minutes ago, LaserFocus said: Don't think Chad Johnson has a prayer at Canton, he was a problem child, and being the franchise receiving leader of the Bengals isn't a big deal. I do think Reggie Wayne and Torry Holt will eventually earn Canton. Sorry, but neither is being the all time leading receiver for the steelers to a lot of people. Ward is a borderline guy. He's on the wrong side for me...hall of very good but I wouldn't be upset if he got in (would be if it was over more deserving players). He's right there with Boldin for me. If you put one in, i think the other has to be, that's how close i view their careers. They were both very good players whom i never quite thought "thats a hall of fame player" when i was watching, but it was close. Like i said though, wouldn't be upset if they got there though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted November 25, 2017 Share Posted November 25, 2017 Chad Johnson has 4 seasons of more yards than Ward's best. Ward just played more years than Johnson. While that has some value, peak play should be a bigger factor than longevity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breesus mode Posted November 25, 2017 Share Posted November 25, 2017 On 11/22/2017 at 3:55 PM, LaserFocus said: blind homerism There, I fixed your post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TecmoSuperJoe Posted November 25, 2017 Share Posted November 25, 2017 16 hours ago, LaserFocus said: No, because the voters are smart enough to recognize the strong linkage between star players are team success. And the primary function of team sports will always be to win. Yes, there are some great players in the HOF who were mired on mediocre teams, but they are in the minority. Never claimed 2002 was Ward's greatest season, and I've already explained speed wasn't his forte. You just weren't going to get the big chunks of yardage most other receivers obtained, and Ward didn't run a ton of deep routes. A blue collar receiver, Ward was great on those shorter routes, often inside. His toughness and physical presence helped pick up those first downs, which kept drives alive and helped win games. And the blocking helped protect a QB, assist the running game, and other receivers once they caught the ball. In a fantasy football era, it's easy to see how Ward is undervalued by some fans, many of whom only use box scores without watching the games. And while other receivers whined and complained about their own stats, embarrassing themselves, Ward helped mentor Antonio Brown at the end of his career. HOF voters don't care about what franchise a player plays for, it's about performance, and clearly, Ward has HOF-caliber credentials. Not an inner circle WR, but the totality of work will be sufficient sometime down the road. As I've said before, it's not all about the stats. The HOF also looks at what a candidate brings to the table which is different, and the blocking is just another facet of a great career. He was a limited player then. He shouldn't get a pass for not being as productive as players that were more productive than he was at the time he played. It's like excusing a running back for averaging three yards a pop due to slowness/lackluster vision, but having a ton of yards, and saying he should be in because he was a tough, hard nose, blue collar, had a high motor, brought his lunch pail, insert irrelevant adjective. This is why someone like Eddie George isn't enshrined. And even he has a first team All Pro to his credit. By the way what was Ward's greatest season then? He has nothing on Bruce's best whatever it was. Inner circle receiver. What does that even mean? I think you made it up. If it was all about performance only and no bias, then certain players would have never had to wait ridiculously long and/or still wouldn't be waiting. Like Jerry Kramer. Or Randy Gradishar, yet Harry Carson is in. Terrell Owens has been snubbed twice already. The voting system is not that good, let lone perfect like I said earlier. Ward doesn't have HOF credentials, largely because he didn't stack up to the majority of his peers that dominated during the time he played. Fortunately for him, he may be able to get in because of the inconsistent voting standards already in place. So that's cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted November 25, 2017 Share Posted November 25, 2017 On 11/23/2017 at 2:34 PM, LaserFocus said: Winning is both a team and individual accomplishment, and the players which contribute to that success, deserve to be recognized. It's just more difficult for a great player to excel in a bad organization. There's a reason why the overwhelming number of HOF players come from winning organizations. I don't know that you can claim that this is because voters put an emphasis on playing for a winning teams. Great teams are typically great because they have great players. Great players are typically enshrined in the hall of fame. Thus, it's only natural for a chunk of the people enshrined to come from winning organizations during certain periods of time. That reasoning is just as valid as believing the voters put some sort of emphasis on having a ring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaserFocus Posted November 25, 2017 Share Posted November 25, 2017 9 hours ago, Forge said: Sorry, but neither is being the all time leading receiver for the steelers to a lot of people. Ward is a borderline guy. He's on the wrong side for me...hall of very good but I wouldn't be upset if he got in (would be if it was over more deserving players). He's right there with Boldin for me. If you put one in, i think the other has to be, that's how close i view their careers. They were both very good players whom i never quite thought "thats a hall of fame player" when i was watching, but it was close. Like i said though, wouldn't be upset if they got there though 5 hours ago, Forge said: I don't know that you can claim that this is because voters put an emphasis on playing for a winning teams. Great teams are typically great because they have great players. Great players are typically enshrined in the hall of fame. Thus, it's only natural for a chunk of the people enshrined to come from winning organizations during certain periods of time. That reasoning is just as valid as believing the voters put some sort of emphasis on having a ring. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but when a player is able to surpass other greats in becoming a franchise leader, it's just more prestigious than others. It's yet another added value on the list of qualifications. Lesser franchises usually don't have the accomplishments or greats which made the success possible. And voters should always consider the value of rings, along with team success, when making these HOF decisions. It's not a coincidence these great players help organizations win, and I've I've said before, winning is the ultimate objective of team sports. It's not some random event, or pure luck. Winning isn't the end all in making HOF decisions, that's why Jim Plunkett won't be in Canton. But it must always be part of the overall consideration of a player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.f40f9543097d7c33ae4ad1ba4b0e906b.png)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.