HoF Semifinalists Announced

[AlexGreen#20]

Even if we acknowledge that there is some idiot somewhere who tried to make a statistically based argument that Manning wasn't horrible in that game (and there's still been no evidence presented that such arguments were made) that doesn't invalidate all statistical analysis. There's plenty of idiots all over the country who freaking raved about Mark Sanchez's charisma and leadership, and stating that he passed the "eye test". Nobody is writing off your argument because some idiot somewhere was wrong about a completely unrelated argument. 

Bob Hayes impacted the NFL with his incredible speed by exposing vulnerabilities in previous generations defensive alignments and game plans. That's changing the NFL with incredible ability. If Hines Ward affected the NFL with his blocking, it was only because he was a dirty, two-faced, cheap shot artist who brought to light a safety vulnerability in the rules. That's not a HOF worthy addition. Ear holing unsuspecting defenders on schemed blocks is bull**** and dangerous and should damage his legacy.

When did Hines Ward have an elite season? 2002 and? Don't you feel like a player should have at least 3 elite seasons to be HOF Worthy?

 

[LaserFocus]

1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Even if we acknowledge that there is some idiot somewhere who tried to make a statistically based argument that Manning wasn't horrible in that game (and there's still been no evidence presented that such arguments were made) that doesn't invalidate all statistical analysis. There's plenty of idiots all over the country who freaking raved about Mark Sanchez's charisma and leadership, and stating that he passed the "eye test". Nobody is writing off your argument because some idiot somewhere was wrong about a completely unrelated argument. 

Bob Hayes impacted the NFL with his incredible speed by exposing vulnerabilities in previous generations defensive alignments and game plans. That's changing the NFL with incredible ability. If Hines Ward affected the NFL with his blocking, it was only because he was a dirty, two-faced, cheap shot artist who brought to light a safety vulnerability in the rules. That's not a HOF worthy addition. Ear holing unsuspecting defenders on schemed blocks is bull**** and dangerous and should damage his legacy.

When did Hines Ward have an elite season? 2002 and? Don't you feel like a player should have at least 3 elite seasons to be HOF Worthy?

 

Ward was a four time pro bowler, with 1000 career receptions, and a SB MVP. I do think 95 receptions would be considered elite, that was his 2009 total. His blocking did indeed affect the NFL, the overwhelming majority of those blocks were perfectly clean. It takes a special player to have that kind of physicality for over decade. Ward delivered and took a ton of punishment, it was just his style of play. Agree that not all statistical analysis is bad, but I don't think it's a foolproof way to evaluate the game. Tony Romo's postseason struggles are another good example of what I'm talking about. He had a good rating and TD/INT ratio, but always seemed to come up short when it came to making those key plays other, more successful QBs make. The guy we saw in the regular season just rarely showed up in the postseason. whether it was dropping the snap in Seattle, or other issues.     

[AlexGreen#20]

3 minutes ago, LaserFocus said:

Ward was a four time pro bowler, with 1000 career receptions, and a SB MVP. I do think 95 receptions would be considered elite, that was his 2009 total. His blocking did indeed affect the NFL, the overwhelming majority of those blocks were perfectly clean. It takes a special player to have that kind of physicality for over decade. Ward delivered and took a ton of punishment, it was just his style of play. Agree that not all statistical analysis is bad, but I don't think it's a foolproof way to evaluate the game. Tony Romo's postseason struggles are another good example of what I'm talking about. He had a good rating and TD/INT ratio, but always seemed to come up short when it came to making those key plays other, more successful QBs make. The guy we saw in the regular season just rarely showed up in the postseason. whether it was dropping the snap in Seattle, or other issues.     

That 95 reception season was an 1167 yard/6 TD season.

Ward had two seasons that met that standard.

Moss had 8

Bruce had 4

Holt had 7

Chad Johnson had 5

Fitzgerald has 5

Andre Johnson has 3.

Calvin Johnson had 4.

Jordy Nelson has 4.

Donald Driver had 2.

Antonio Freeman had 2.

Antonio Brown has 4.

Julio Jones has 4.

I'm sure there are a dozen more. Your elite season isn't an elite season.

[LaserFocus]

3 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

That 95 reception season was an 1167 yard/6 TD season.

Ward had two seasons that met that standard.

Moss had 8

Bruce had 4

Holt had 7

Chad Johnson had 5

Fitzgerald has 5

Andre Johnson has 3.

Calvin Johnson had 4.

Jordy Nelson has 4.

Donald Driver had 2.

Antonio Freeman had 2.

Antonio Brown has 4.

Julio Jones has 4.

I'm sure there are a dozen more. Your elite season isn't an elite season.

But it's an elite season when it comes to age 33 HOF receivers, even adjusting for era. A number of HOF receivers were finished, or less effective by that age. And if we see more HOF type receivers quitting early, that should help Ward in the conversation. Thinking about this more, Bob Hayes is a really good comp, even beyond the similarity of doing something better(or different) from the WR position. Both were stars for storied franchises, Ward with more catches and TDs, while Hayes was more explosive with yardage. Ward's big advantage in postseason production helped the Steelers win two Super Bowls, while Hayes could manage only a single 100 yard receiving game as those Cowboys teams fell short during his career. Hayes has a kick return advantage, but also faded earlier, and drug problems after his career ended likely delayed his HOF selection. If you don't believe Bob Hayes is an authentic HOF pick that's fine, but I fail to see how Ward isn't worthy when comparing the qualifications. If you're saying Ward had more postseason opportunities, that's correct, but his regular season play helped the Steelers earn those spots. 

Two completely different players, two great careers. As I said before, there's no cookie-cutter route to Canton, regardless of position.    

[AlexGreen#20]

1 hour ago, LaserFocus said:

But it's an elite season when it comes to age 33 HOF receivers, even adjusting for era. A number of HOF receivers were finished, or less effective by that age. And if we see more HOF type receivers quitting early, that should help Ward in the conversation. Thinking about this more, Bob Hayes is a really good comp, even beyond the similarity of doing something better(or different) from the WR position. Both were stars for storied franchises, Ward with more catches and TDs, while Hayes was more explosive with yardage. Ward's big advantage in postseason production helped the Steelers win two Super Bowls, while Hayes could manage only a single 100 yard receiving game as those Cowboys teams fell short during his career. Hayes has a kick return advantage, but also faded earlier, and drug problems after his career ended likely delayed his HOF selection. If you don't believe Bob Hayes is an authentic HOF pick that's fine, but I fail to see how Ward isn't worthy when comparing the qualifications. If you're saying Ward had more postseason opportunities, that's correct, but his regular season play helped the Steelers earn those spots. 

Two completely different players, two great careers. As I said before, there's no cookie-cutter route to Canton, regardless of position.    

But it's not like Ward was having elite seasons previous to that season. He had the worst 20s of any receiver in the HOF discussion in the modern era. A second very good season in his early 30s helps, but it doesn't retroactively make his career prior to that point HOF caliber.

Bob Hayes retired 20 years before Ward's first game. That's not a good comparison.

Ward just flat out doesn't have the body of work. One elite season and another borderline one isn't HOF worthy.

[TecmoSuperJoe]

15 hours ago, LaserFocus said:

Hall of Famers come in different versions, lifetime totals is one reason Eddie George isn't in the HOF. Inner circle is a common term to describe a HOF player in all sports who is on the tiny list of all time greats at his position. Jerry Rice would lead that list at the WR position. At the RB position, that's players like Jim Brown, Walter Payton, etc.

It's not the HOF of yards per catch, and Ward made up for his lack of speed by excelling in other areas as I've described before. The value he added to those strong Steelers teams was high, and his excellence in catching passes in often tight quarters was known for anyone watching football in the 2000s. The physicality in taking those hits, then also helping in the blocking aspect was certainly different. While I agree with Bruce as a HOF pick down the line, he played a game better suited to his strengths. WRs like that would have been less effective, it would have been the same as asking Ward to consistently run deep routes. Terrell Owens should wait because he was a selfish, childish, player.

No voting system is perfect, but I'll take someone with extensive experience watching football who uses stats as a general guideline, as opposed to someone who relies 100% on data.

When everything is considered, Ward definitely has HOF credentials. Impressive lifetime stats, stellar postseason play, key cog in a contender(2x SB champ), alltime receiving leader of a prestigious franchise, and excelling in something unusual at his position. It'll take a while, but Ward is a HOF player, and time will prove me correct.     

Eddie George ranks 27th in total rushing yards. Hines Ward ranks 25th in total receiving yards. So that knock should be held against HInes Ward too. 

I've never heard the term "inner circle" attributed to sports Hall of Famers. I think you made it up, which is fine, but it's not some universal term that is commonly recognized. Even so, everyone's inner circle would be subjective based on their interpretation of the arbitrary meaning. 

Hall of Fame players usually come in different versions. Ok, sure. But usually they were comparable to the best of their peers at some point during their careers. Ward was never that. And saying he played in a different offense, didn't have X attribute so that is why his numbers aren't so good or whatever really comes off as an excuse to me as to why he didn't get it done compared to others at the time who did. You can use that excuse for anyone really. Most likely is that he wasn't that good compared to guys like Harrison, Owens, Moss, Holt, or Bruce. I asked you last time what you think Hines Ward's best season was. So what is it? 

Yeah it's not the HOF of yards per catch. It's also not the Hall of Very Good. I watched football in the 2000's. Ward didn't dominate like the other dominate receivers of his era. You didn't even have to look at the numbers to know this. They just back up what was already apparent. No one is saying he wasn't productive or didn't help his team win. But that doesn't mean you are a Hall of Fame player. Also, I don't know why you're bringing up the "prestigious franchise" card. I thought you said that franchise doesn't matter for the voters. So then why are you even saying anything about Ward being the leading receiver for a prestigious franchise as if it should matter then? To be fair, if you had said that franchise does matter then I might agree with you, because the voters have made blunders based on this illogical rhetoric before. Kind of why Lynn Swann is in, but Cliff Branch isn't...which doesn't make sense at all. That's the Pro Football Hall of Fame though. Terrell Owens was labeled as selfish, but Ray Lewis who was connected to a double murder and Lawrence Taylor who was a coke head and into drugs for a long time (which did hurt his team when he was suspended) is cool. I'm sure Randy Moss will get in first ballot even though he quit on multiple teams and claimed he plays when he wants to. Then there are cases of a ton of other players that I already mentioned that have been screwed because of the inconsistent system that seems to lead to favoritism sometimes. 

You say that time will prove he will get in. Believe what you want. Could be an endless wait though. At least if he's fairly judged by his accomplishments. 

[LaserFocus]

3 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

But it's not like Ward was having elite seasons previous to that season. He had the worst 20s of any receiver in the HOF discussion in the modern era. A second very good season in his early 30s helps, but it doesn't retroactively make his career prior to that point HOF caliber.

Bob Hayes retired 20 years before Ward's first game. That's not a good comparison.

Ward just flat out doesn't have the body of work. One elite season and another borderline one isn't HOF worthy.

You and I just have different definitions of elite. Four Pro Bowls, 1000 receptions, SB MVP, and the blocking skill do compare with a HOF player like Bob Hayes. Both players had areas which could have been better, but both were great.

[LaserFocus]

52 minutes ago, PapaShogun said:

Eddie George ranks 27th in total rushing yards. Hines Ward ranks 25th in total receiving yards. So that knock should be held against HInes Ward too. 

I've never heard the term "inner circle" attributed to sports Hall of Famers. I think you made it up, which is fine, but it's not some universal term that is commonly recognized. Even so, everyone's inner circle would be subjective based on their interpretation of the arbitrary meaning. 

Hall of Fame players usually come in different versions. Ok, sure. But usually they were comparable to the best of their peers at some point during their careers. Ward was never that. And saying he played in a different offense, didn't have X attribute so that is why his numbers aren't so good or whatever really comes off as an excuse to me as to why he didn't get it done compared to others at the time who did. You can use that excuse for anyone really. Most likely is that he wasn't that good compared to guys like Harrison, Owens, Moss, Holt, or Bruce. I asked you last time what you think Hines Ward's best season was. So what is it? 

Yeah it's not the HOF of yards per catch. It's also not the Hall of Very Good. I watched football in the 2000's. Ward didn't dominate like the other dominate receivers of his era. You didn't even have to look at the numbers to know this. They just back up what was already apparent. No one is saying he wasn't productive or didn't help his team win. But that doesn't mean you are a Hall of Fame player. Also, I don't know why you're bringing up the "prestigious franchise" card. I thought you said that franchise doesn't matter for the voters. So then why are you even saying anything about Ward being the leading receiver for a prestigious franchise as if it should matter then? To be fair, if you had said that franchise does matter then I might agree with you, because the voters have made blunders based on this illogical rhetoric before. Kind of why Lynn Swann is in, but Cliff Branch isn't...which doesn't make sense at all. That's the Pro Football Hall of Fame though. Terrell Owens was labeled as selfish, but Ray Lewis who was connected to a double murder and Lawrence Taylor who was a coke head and into drugs for a long time (which did hurt his team when he was suspended) is cool. I'm sure Randy Moss will get in first ballot even though he quit on multiple teams and claimed he plays when he wants to. Then there are cases of a ton of other players that I already mentioned that have been screwed because of the inconsistent system that seems to lead to favoritism sometimes. 

You say that time will prove he will get in. Believe what you want. Could be an endless wait though. At least if he's fairly judged by his accomplishments. 

It's illogical to compare a RB's yardage total to a WR's yardage total when talking about the HOF. The main responsibility of a receiver is to catch the ball, and Ward was a top ten guy at the time of his retirement, vastly better than George's ranking. Few people care about rushing attempts, because it doesn't take any skill to take a handoff. 

The term "inner circle" has been used by others to describe baseball, basketball, and hockey hall of famers. I have no reason to make stuff up.

Ward is comparable to the top grouping of receivers of his era, as the four Pro Bowls, 1000 receptions, and 85 TDs will attest. We also have to include the postseason as well. Ward wasn't as good as Moss, Owens, or Harrison, but those players aren't the cutoff point for the HOF. Ward's level was more like Bruce, Holt, and older HOF WRs like Bob Hayes.

Ward wasn't flashy like Bruce, he just did his damage in other ways. It wasn't pretty, just effective, and we have to remember many of those Steelers teams favored a rushing attack instead of throwing the ball on turf inside. Players like Bruce and Holt greatly benefited from the cutting edge offense which was innovative and very successful. The Steelers preferred to run before Big Ben, and didn't change their approach until 2008. People forget Willie Parker had a monster season in 2007, and finished as the third leading rusher in club history. Ward simply wasn't featured the way other WRs were, but that's fine. It will take time, but Ward will eventfully earn his rightful place in Canton. I think his career will be appreciated more in retrospect.

I do think Cliff Branch has a case, and glad Ken Stabler got in before Ken Anderson did.        

 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

33 minutes ago, LaserFocus said:

It's illogical to compare a RB's yardage total to a WR's yardage total when talking about the HOF. The main responsibility of a receiver is to catch the ball, and Ward was a top ten guy at the time of his retirement, vastly better than George's ranking. Few people care about rushing attempts, because it doesn't take any skill to take a handoff. 

The term "inner circle" has been used by others to describe baseball, basketball, and hockey hall of famers. I have no reason to make stuff up.

Ward is comparable to the top grouping of receivers of his era, as the four Pro Bowls, 1000 receptions, and 85 TDs will attest. We also have to include the postseason as well. Ward wasn't as good as Moss, Owens, or Harrison, but those players aren't the cutoff point for the HOF. Ward's level was more like Bruce, Holt, and older HOF WRs like Bob Hayes.

Ward wasn't flashy like Bruce, he just did his damage in other ways. It wasn't pretty, just effective, and we have to remember many of those Steelers teams favored a rushing attack instead of throwing the ball on turf inside. Players like Bruce and Holt greatly benefited from the cutting edge offense which was innovative and very successful. The Steelers preferred to run before Big Ben, and didn't change their approach until 2008. People forget Willie Parker had a monster season in 2007, and finished as the third leading rusher in club history. Ward simply wasn't featured the way other WRs were, but that's fine. It will take time, but Ward will eventfully earn his rightful place in Canton. I think his career will be appreciated more in retrospect.

I do think Cliff Branch has a case, and glad Ken Stabler got in before Ken Anderson did.        

 

Says who? You're talking about production for their position in comparison to others that played the same position. It's not illogical, and it's pretty simple to understand. And that's one of the main ways that inductees are considered. This has been done for years. Ward was a top ten guy in what statistical area for his position? Whatever it was it's been surpassed in a very short amount of time since his highest ranking for any major statistical category (yards, receptions, touchdowns) is 14th. He's not in the top ten for any category for his position and he retired only a few years ago. That's not good. As for rushing attempts I'm not sure what that has to do with what I said. I was talking about yards.

I just typed "inner circle sports" in google. I also typed "inner circle sports phrase" in Google. Nothing came up in the immediate area of results to denote a universal phrase that is widely used in the world of sports. At least with the NFL I couldn't find anything. It doesn't matter, like I said it's a phrase that is extremely subjective. Just like when someone says "can you tell the story of the NFL without X player/coach". Depends on the one telling the story. 

LOL Ward wasn't as good as Bruce or Holt. I already outlined Bruce's career against Ward's and how his production was vastly superior in every way. Holt went to 7 Pro Bowls and was a first team All Pro. He had at least one season where he was considered the best receiver in the NFL. Ward has never had that. Not once. Moss, Owens, and Harrison aren't the cutoff point. But they were Ward's peers. He didn't stack up to any of those guys I mentioned. Not one. 

Bruce wasn't flashy. Unless having crisp routes means he was flashy. Again, I'm not saying Ward wasn't effective. He just didn't produce at a HOF level. Michael Irvin played on a run first team. Still dominated. Bad excuse for Ward. Bruce and Holt benefited because they were good players. That is the difference between guys like them and guys like Rickey Proehl or Az-Zahir Hakim who played in the same "cutting edge" offense. Also, Bruce had his finest season outdoors on grass before Warner and Martz were even in the picture. 

So...I think we're going in circles as this point. Clearly. You think Ward will get in. He may. Personally I don't think he deserves it, but it's not like the HOF is consistent with their selections anyway.  But yeah, done talking about Ward and his "case". 

 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

On to something else, I hate to say it because he's a Cowboy, but Chuck Howley deserves his spot. 

Also, Steve Wisniewski.

[TecmoSuperJoe]

This video is exactly what I'm talking about. Shannon Sharpe says it twice that the original bylaws that that off the field issues should not come into play when it comes to voting for a player to be enshrined. Yet guys like Owens, Watters, and Barber are left to languish because they came off as selfish players or said something one time that rub the people in power the wrong way. This is why the voting system is doo doo. Eric Dickerson's story on why one person decided not to vote for him is pretty ridiculous. 

 

[AlexGreen#20]

1 hour ago, LaserFocus said:

You and I just have different definitions of elite. Four Pro Bowls, 1000 receptions, SB MVP, and the blocking skill do compare with a HOF player like Bob Hayes. Both players had areas which could have been better, but both were great.

What is your definition of elite, top 2, 3, 5, 10?

[Danger]

Ward didn't put up HoF numbers in his career, the only season where it could have been considered would be 2002. In all other 13 seasons he has no business even being discussed for the HoF. If he didn't win multiple Super Bowls with Pittsburgh, we aren't having this discussion at all. If he played for the Jaguars, many people would have likely forgot he existed. If Hines Ward is a HoF then you have to put the likes of AnQuan Boldin and Brandon Marshall in there as well.

I feel like there are many people in this community who have very low standards for the HoF.

[LaserFocus]

8 hours ago, PapaShogun said:

Says who? You're talking about production for their position in comparison to others that played the same position. It's not illogical, and it's pretty simple to understand. And that's one of the main ways that inductees are considered. This has been done for years. Ward was a top ten guy in what statistical area for his position? Whatever it was it's been surpassed in a very short amount of time since his highest ranking for any major statistical category (yards, receptions, touchdowns) is 14th. He's not in the top ten for any category for his position and he retired only a few years ago. That's not good. As for rushing attempts I'm not sure what that has to do with what I said. I was talking about yards.

I just typed "inner circle sports" in google. I also typed "inner circle sports phrase" in Google. Nothing came up in the immediate area of results to denote a universal phrase that is widely used in the world of sports. At least with the NFL I couldn't find anything. It doesn't matter, like I said it's a phrase that is extremely subjective. Just like when someone says "can you tell the story of the NFL without X player/coach". Depends on the one telling the story. 

LOL Ward wasn't as good as Bruce or Holt. I already outlined Bruce's career against Ward's and how his production was vastly superior in every way. Holt went to 7 Pro Bowls and was a first team All Pro. He had at least one season where he was considered the best receiver in the NFL. Ward has never had that. Not once. Moss, Owens, and Harrison aren't the cutoff point. But they were Ward's peers. He didn't stack up to any of those guys I mentioned. Not one. 

Bruce wasn't flashy. Unless having crisp routes means he was flashy. Again, I'm not saying Ward wasn't effective. He just didn't produce at a HOF level. Michael Irvin played on a run first team. Still dominated. Bad excuse for Ward. Bruce and Holt benefited because they were good players. That is the difference between guys like them and guys like Rickey Proehl or Az-Zahir Hakim who played in the same "cutting edge" offense. Also, Bruce had his finest season outdoors on grass before Warner and Martz were even in the picture. 

So...I think we're going in circles as this point. Clearly. You think Ward will get in. He may. Personally I don't think he deserves it, but it's not like the HOF is consistent with their selections anyway.  But yeah, done talking about Ward and his "case". 

 

Top ten lifetime in receptions at the time of his retirement, that's HOF territory. And an impressive 11th in TDs, tied with Lance Alworth and Paul Warfield. Players have to be considered where they stood in the context of their eras, it's just common sense. Obviously, guys were going to pass Ward since 2011, because the game has made it even easier to throw the ball. The player safety rules have benefited offenses since then. Context, context, context. Many HOF players are down the current lifetime lists, it's just the way it is. Eddie George's ranking in yards when he retired just doesn't cut it when we're talking about a back who last had a 1100 yard season at age 29, and faded. Excellent career, but won't make Canton unless they change the standards.

Type "inner circle hall of fame or famer", you'll see plenty of hits.

Ward, Bruce, and Holt are definitely in the same grouping of WRs. You just haven't listened about context in these discussions. The HOF doesn't have a binary approach on stats, or personal awards. If you think helping a team capture 2 SBs is just luck, and the cookiecutter approach is how the HOF works, I can't help you. If you think playing indoors and/or a warmer climate with a better QB is the same as playing in outdoors in a northern climate with a lesser QB, I can't help you. Context, context, context.

And if you don't think speed boosts yardage totals, I can't help you. Producing at an HOF level means doing whatever is required for that team. Blocking, running inside routes, and that physicality helped the Steelers contend for many years. Ward's lifetime totals at the time of his retirement are HOF territory, combined with the blocking, and postseason.

It's still a compelling case, and whether it happens 10 years from now or sooner, I like his chances, especially when you look closely at other HOF players.       

[LaserFocus]

17 minutes ago, Danger said:

Ward didn't put up HoF numbers in his career, the only season where it could have been considered would be 2002. In all other 13 seasons he has no business even being discussed for the HoF. If he didn't win multiple Super Bowls with Pittsburgh, we aren't having this discussion at all. If he played for the Jaguars, many people would have likely forgot he existed. If Hines Ward is a HoF then you have to put the likes of AnQuan Boldin and Brandon Marshall in there as well.

I feel like there are many people in this community who have very low standards for the HoF.

It depends on how you feel about winning. If you believe it's luck, by all means put in a receiver like Brandon Marshall who somehow hasn't made a single postseason and been passed around the league(along with his problems. Boldin does have a case. If you think winning a SB MVP and having a strong postseason history is also luck, you're entitled to your opinion.

If you somehow think finishing a career in the top ten lifetime in the NFL isn't HOF territory(along with other qualifications), you're entitled to your opinion. It's not all about the individual numbers, people. This is one of the negative aspects to the growth of fantasy football.