Pro Bowl Voting needs to be reformatted or it has to matter less for legacy/contracts

[General Tso]

PB Voting is split 1/3rd between players, coaches, and fans. There is always going to be room for bias and uninformed research from any of those parties.

Pro Bowls are not just a game of flag football, but it affects tangible things. When players are considered for HOF, Pro Bowls is one of the immediate line items that is considered.  Isn't it kind of insane that we are letting a popularity contest have some influence on a legacy like that? 

Matthew Stafford has only made 2 Pro Bowls now and neither were during his 40 TD seasons. Maybe making a few more earlier on could help his HOF chances?

It also affects contracts as there are bonuses for making the Pro Bowl and also players have more/less demand depending on if they make it. Again, the popularity contest has some percentage of influence here.

L'Jarius Sneed got snubbed for the PB and has none to his name (at the moment) when he enters FA. Teams could use that against him.

I'm surprised there isn't more want to change this. Maybe because all parties are involved in voting, so they feel empowered.

So either reformat the Pro Bowl voting or don't involve it when we're talking about the HOF or contracts.

Edited January 4 by General Tso

[Steelersfan43]

Yeah, I hope when it's time for the HOF, the voters don't take the number of pro bowls seriously, especially for some are too inflated because of the number of times you can go as a alternate

Like Russell Wilson has 9 pro bowls, but I'm sure at least 4 or 5 were as alternate

[notthatbluestuff]

Are you sure Pro Bowls is a serious criteria when it comes to HOF voting?

[General Tso]

2 minutes ago, notthatbluestuff said:

Are you sure Pro Bowls is a serious criteria when it comes to HOF voting?

Im not a voter, so I can't say for sure, but it could definitely be a point of contention like Steelersfan has mentioned.

[notthatbluestuff]

4 minutes ago, General Tso said:

Im not a voter, so I can't say for sure, but it could definitely be a point of contention like Steelersfan has mentioned.

Perhaps I'm being a little naive here but I feel like HOF voters aren't complete idiots and do more than simply skim players' resumes on Wikipedia. I'm sure they have some background knowledge of the players they're voting for (or not voting for) and are at least equally if not more capable than us forum posters of understanding the context behind Pro Bowl selections.

[General Tso]

1 minute ago, notthatbluestuff said:

Perhaps I'm being a little naive here but I feel like HOF voters aren't complete idiots and do more than simply skim players' resumes on Wikipedia. I'm sure they have some background knowledge of the players they're voting for (or not voting for) and are at least equally if not more capable than us forum posters of understanding the context behind Pro Bowl selections.

So I am just learning this now, but here's the committee from last year https://futurefootballlegends.com/Selection_Committee/

I would generally trust the media members to do their research.

[ramssuperbowl99]

21 minutes ago, notthatbluestuff said:

Are you sure Pro Bowls is a serious criteria when it comes to HOF voting?

 

On 12/27/2023 at 7:30 PM, BroncoSojia said:

I'm going to die on the hill that Fred Taylor was not a HOF player. He only made one pro-bowl in his career and was he ever considered a top 5 RB in the league?

On 12/29/2023 at 10:20 AM, game3525 said:

Andre Johnson has no business being ahead of Gates. Gates is top 5 in every major TE statistics. More pro bowl, all decade team, and also a pioneer for the modern TE. Peppers is the only one who had a better overall career.

3 hours ago, Sllim Pickens said:

Gates, Peppers, Allen, Willis, and Evans should be the class. I wouldn't be mad if one of the WR's gets in which should go Johnson, Wayne, Holt. 

Gates is one of the best TEs in history.  Thats the whole point of the HOF.  He and Tony G changed the position from the bruising blockers who catch to pass catchers who blocked.  Easily should be in. 

Peppers is top 5 all time on the sack list.  Was the best DE in the game or at least top 3 for 2/3 of his career and still was productive as he aged. 

Jared Allen is above Freeney on the all time sack list (16th all time) by 10.5 sacks and did it in 4 years less than Freeney.  Crazy to go from a long snapper to one of the most dominant DE's in the league and he also was a top 3 DE in the league for most of his career. 

Patrick Willis was the best LB in the game for 7 years in a row starting with his rookie year.  He was the fastest, most instinctive LB I have ever seen.  Luke Kuechly took over as best LB in the league and in his career he had over 100 solo tackles 1 time, Willis did it 4 times.   

Evans was the top OG in the league for a 5 year stretch.  Its hard to grade interior OL but his first four years in the league he had PFF grades of 85, 88, 90, and 91.  He fell off after that but only had one season below 70 which was an injury shortened season.  Definitely deserves it with the AP 1st teams and Pro Bowls.  

The group of WRs all should get in eventually.  However I feel like Steve Smith is a glaring omission.  He is higher than all of them on the all time yards list and was a dangerous return man before they allowed him to be a full time WR.  He would be top 3 in career yards if the Panthers played him at WR more his first few years. But of the three who are finalists, Andre Johnson was the best of the WRs ability wise.  He was a top 3 WR for the prime of his career even with lackluster QB play.  Wayne has the numbers to be next.  More yards, receptions, TDs than Holt and both benefited from great systems and supporting casts.  Wayne was still elite after Marvin retired and even had good seasons with Curtis Painter at QB and then the next year at age 34 made a pro bowl with Luck.  He was a top 5 WR for a stretch of his career.  Holt had some amazing years with Warner and some very good years with Bulger.  7 Pro Bowls, 2 AP teams in an era that had TO, Moss, Marvin Harrison, Chad Johnson, Larry Fitz and others to be a AP and Pro Bowl WR is impressive.  Holt has the best per season numbers compared to Wayne so wouldn't be mad at him going in before Wayne.  

Hester absolutely changed the return game. Teams were afraid of him every punt and kickoff and did their best to not allow a return. If we are going to put in specialists like kickers then we should add return men specialists but I am not saying he has to be in now.  He can wait until some of these guys who are top 20 all time at more important positions get in. 

Freeney should be in eventually but Allen should get in first.  I wouldn't be mad if he gets in but I don't think he ever was as highly regarded in any season as Allen or Peppers.  He deserves it eventually though. 

Allen, Woodson and Harrison have a case but I don't feel like their stretch of being one of the best S's in the game lasted long enough.  Allen has the best case of any of them IMO given the pro bowls but again I never remember him being one of the more feared DBs in any year.  Woodson has more of a case than Harrison at his peak but Harrison lasted longer obtaining more career stats. 

Fred Taylor is iffy IMO but eventually will get in.  The durability at RB moved him up the all time list which is impressive but he wasn't ever a top 5 RB in the league IMO.  Guys like him, Corey Dillon, Warrick Dunn, Ricky Waters all have the career numbers but don't belong in the HOF IMO.  There are guys with less yards like Shaun Alexander, Priest Holmes, Jamal Lewis and Chris Johnson who had better careers with less total yards and given they put in Terrell Davis, they should consider these guys.  Alexander won MVP while Holmes, Lewis and Johnson were OPOY with multiple Pro Bowls.  Their peaks were relatively short but their down years were about what Fred Taylor did in his peak.  Even guys like Eddie George, Steven Jackson, Ricky Williams, and Clinton Portis I feel like were better backs than Taylor was but didn't have  the longevity.  Marshawn Lynch could be in that group as well if looking at peaks.  All more feared than Taylor.  

 

I should say I'm not quoting any of these guys to criticize their posts.

Even in the HoF thread here the pro bowls are used as a metric. And this is a website full of hardcore football fan Millenials who hate reddit and twitter, so if there's any group of people who would forget the Pro-Bowls and think of the film of the guys we grew up watching, it's us. And yet we still think about pro bowls.

[Soko]

Unless you dissolve the PB altogether, how would you go about actually making it a non-factor in players’ resumes? How could we control their negotiations? 

I actually think this year’s list only contains a couple true head scratchers. Like, 2012 Jeff Saturday level head scratching. 

The Pro Bowl itself is a hack, and the way they give alternates the credit as if they were the ones voted in is a travesty (looking at you, Mac Jones). Shrug. Maybe I just don’t see it as that big a deal. For a guy to play 12-16 seasons and make zero or one PBs, I don’t know if I’m going to feel all that passionate about that guy not getting HOF recognition. It’s just one little piece to the puzzle that I think most of us here recognize is pretty flawed, but accept.

[Sllim Pickens]

12 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

 

 

I should say I'm not quoting any of these guys to criticize their posts.

Even in the HoF thread here the pro bowls are used as a metric. And this is a website full of hardcore football fan Millenials who hate reddit and twitter, so if there's any group of people who would forget the Pro-Bowls and think of the film of the guys we grew up watching, it's us. And yet we still think about pro bowls.

Pro Bowls are dumb but they do matter when looking at a career.  I wouldn't use it as an only metric but it is something that can help understand a players career.  Even Jahri Evans remained in the Pro Bowl a couple years after he started falling off but they make up for his first couple not getting selected.  It still means you were viewed by the fans and coaches as a top player at your position.  Given Fred Taylor only made 1, its fair to say that he wasn't considered a top RB while he was playing.  And thats what the HOF should be putting into Canton. 

[ramssuperbowl99]

3 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

Pro Bowls are dumb but they do matter when looking at a career.  I wouldn't use it as an only metric but it is something that can help understand a players career.  Even Jahri Evans remained in the Pro Bowl a couple years after he started falling off but they make up for his first couple not getting selected.  It still means you were viewed by the fans and coaches as a top player at your position.  Given Fred Taylor only made 1, its fair to say that he wasn't considered a top RB while he was playing.  And thats what the HOF should be putting into Canton. 

Yeah I'm not trying to make an example of you, @BroncoSojia, or @game3525 or saying that you guys are wrong or anything like that. The only thing I was saying was that pro bowls are still used, even by the people who watched these guys growing up.

Edited January 4 by ramssuperbowl99

[Soggust]

1 hour ago, General Tso said:

It also affects contracts as there are bonuses for making the Pro Bowl and also players have more/less demand depending on if they make it. Again, the popularity contest has some percentage of influence here.

Asking legitimately, but is this a feature or a bug?

Meaning, do teams actually like and want to incentivize the popularity contest aspect?

I'm asking in good faith because I'm not really aware of how affected teams are with profit sharing compared to some other leagues, but on it's surface it feels like the team/player might want to factor more compensation into the contracts, given the extra marketability? 

[Sllim Pickens]

10 minutes ago, Soggust said:

Asking legitimately, but is this a feature or a bug?

Meaning, do teams actually like and want to incentivize the popularity contest aspect?

I'm asking in good faith because I'm not really aware of how affected teams are with profit sharing compared to some other leagues, but on it's surface it feels like the team/player might want to factor more compensation into the contracts, given the extra marketability? 

The fifth year option for first round rookies is completely based off Pro Bowls.  2 Pro Bowls and its the franchise tag, 1 Pro Bowl and its the transition tag amount, no pro bowls and its the average of the top 20 at the position.  It may be a bug for the teams but its a feature for the players I believe and both sides agreed to it.  

[FrantikRam]

10 minutes ago, Soggust said:

Asking legitimately, but is this a feature or a bug?

Meaning, do teams actually like and want to incentivize the popularity contest aspect?

I'm asking in good faith because I'm not really aware of how affected teams are with profit sharing compared to some other leagues, but on it's surface it feels like the team/player might want to factor more compensation into the contracts, given the extra marketability? 

Yea and I think first and second team all pro is basically the equivalent of a pro bowl spot right? We all take all pros more seriously, but if I'm a player....you have a much better chance of making the pro bowl - and making it year in and year out - due to opt outs.

Although now that I type that.....I'm assuming every player who is voted and then ends up an alternate ALL get credit for being a "pro bowler"?

[Sllim Pickens]

Just now, FrantikRam said:

Yea and I think first and second team all pro is basically the equivalent of a pro bowl spot right? We all take all pros more seriously, but if I'm a player....you have a much better chance of making the pro bowl - and making it year in and year out - due to opt outs.

Although now that I type that.....I'm assuming every player who is voted and then ends up an alternate ALL get credit for being a "pro bowler"?

I don't typically compare Pro Bowls and All Pro.  But in essence if you make one of those All-Pro teams you should likely be a Pro Bowler.  However for lineman especially, the All Pro's are more important given most fans don't understand what they are voting for.  But being a first team All pro is a big deal IMO for the HOF.  It means you were the best or top 2 at your position despite your conference and writers/press tend to have a slightly better handle on things opposed to the general public.  At least the Pro Bowl does have some aspect of players and coaches voting though but still see name recognition a lot more than production/impact.  

[FrantikRam]

3 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

I don't typically compare Pro Bowls and All Pro.  But in essence if you make one of those All-Pro teams you should likely be a Pro Bowler.  However for lineman especially, the All Pro's are more important given most fans don't understand what they are voting for.  But being a first team All pro is a big deal IMO for the HOF.  It means you were the best or top 2 at your position despite your conference and writers/press tend to have a slightly better handle on things opposed to the general public.  At least the Pro Bowl does have some aspect of players and coaches voting though but still see name recognition a lot more than production/impact.  

 

Yea I was just saying for incentives and stuff like that, if I'm a player, pro bowl over all pro all day. I have much better odds between fan voting and opt outs of being a pro bowler than I do of being an all pro.