metzelaars_lives Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 I believe Tasker easily had the type of career required to make the hall of fame. Unfortunately he played ST. Yeah well the best pinch hitters or PK specialists or career 6th men aren't in their respective hall of fames either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 Yeah well the best pinch hitters or PK specialists or career 6th men aren't in their respective hall of fames either. With all due respect, you really don't seem to know what you're talking about in regards to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 I believe Tasker easily had the type of career required to make the hall of fame. Unfortunately he played ST. I don't think he'll ever get in but it 1/3 of the game. Plus before Tasker, no one put a premium on STs. Now, there is a pro bowl spot for STs. He revolutionized a position. That should count for something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjt328 Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 It's "criminal" and a "no-brainer" that a team that never won a Super Bowl and already has 5 hall of famers from the 1990-93 teams (Kelly, Thurman, Bruce, Lofton and Levy) doesn't have 4 more (Reed, Bennett, Tasker and Hull)? It's the hall of fame, not the hall of very good players. Sorry but Reed is borderline, although personally I don't think he's a hall of famer and Bennett, Tasker and Hull will never sniff it, nor should they. All very good players, don't get me wrong, but I'm not sure you understand the type of career required to make the hall of fame. And also, dude, Fred Smerlas, hall of famer? It's criminal (and downright ignorant) that Super Bowl wins are weighed so heavily in Hall of Fame voting. Reed played in 234 regular season games and 21 post season games at an all-time great level. Yet all the voters care about is the W/L outcome of Super Bowls 25, 26, 27 and 28. If Norwood made that kick, Reed would already be in. If Reed isn't HOF quality, somebody needs to yank the busts for guys like Michael Irvin, Art Monk and Lynn Swann out of Canton. And until he makes it, guys like Marvin Harrison and Isaac Bruce shouldn't even get consideration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 It's criminal (and downright ignorant) that Super Bowl wins are weighed so heavily in Hall of Fame voting. Reed played in 234 regular season games and 21 post season games at an all-time great level. Yet all the voters care about is the W/L outcome of Super Bowls 25, 26, 27 and 28. If Norwood made that kick, Reed would already be in. If Reed isn't HOF quality, somebody needs to yank the busts for guys like Michael Irvin, Art Monk and Lynn Swann out of Canton. And until he makes it, guys like Marvin Harrison and Isaac Bruce shouldn't even get consideration. I don't think they mean as much as you think. I'm the biggest Reed fan but Irvin and Carter were probably better receivers than him. Carter might have been the 2nd best wr ever when he retired and Irvin's per game averages were better than AR. Reed is better than Monk but Monk had to wait and so will Reed. But he's getting in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 I think Polian is the only lock, although would love to see Reed finally break through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 Please forgive my ignorance but if Tasker has no shot of getting in because he played ST then how come the HOF always lists him as a candidate? CBF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbosrrgood Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 (edited) I very much want Reed to get in, I believe he deserves to get in, and I still think he has a decent chance to get in (although the chance is slowly fading). However I understand why he is not. As great Reed was for Buffalo on a very good team, most non-Bills fans don't think of him as one of the top receivers of all time. Decades later his stats look good, but not great making it hard to quantify how valuable he was to that team if you didn't watch him live. This may not be a popular view, but taking an unbiased approach I think he should be in the HOF, but is by no means a lock to make it. I think he's got a 50/50 chance at this point, having narrowly missed out on his previous opportunities. I would argue that Steve Tasker is the guy that should be a lock for the HOF. Simply because he was the best ever at what he did. Edited September 12, 2013 by Turbosrrgood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 Please forgive my ignorance but if Tasker has no shot of getting in because he played ST then how come the HOF always lists him as a candidate? CBF He's technically eligible, but as a practical matter no one expects him to get in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsWatch Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 My argument for Tasker getting in has always been that they created a spot in the Pro Bowl for him. Now that that the Pro Bowl has taken out Kickoffs, I wonder if people (voters) will even remember that. I don't think he has a shot of getting in anyway, but aside from Andre I think he is the most deserving person on that list. They changed rules because teams could not stop him - look it up! Teams did game plans with three players assigned to stop him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 I very much want Reed to get in, I believe he deserves to get in, and I still think he has a decent chance to get in (although the chance is slowly fading). I actually think this year is one of his best shots, now that Carter has broken the three way tie. They changed rules because teams could not stop him - look it up! Teams did game plans with three players assigned to stop him. Why are you yelling at me? I said I think he deserves to be in. I just don't think it's likely to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 (edited) It's "criminal" and a "no-brainer" that a team that never won a Super Bowl and already has 5 hall of famers from the 1990-93 teams (Kelly, Thurman, Bruce, Lofton and Levy) doesn't have 4 more (Reed, Bennett, Tasker and Hull)? It's the hall of fame, not the hall of very good players. Sorry but Reed is borderline, although personally I don't think he's a hall of famer and Bennett, Tasker and Hull will never sniff it, nor should they. All very good players, don't get me wrong, but I'm not sure you understand the type of career required to make the hall of fame. And also, dude, Fred Smerlas, hall of famer? Lofton wasn't enshrined for his Bills years; and wasn't the best receiver on his own team during that era. Lofton was enshrined for his Packer years where he was a 6 time All-Pro. Reed was the best receiver in this prolific passing offense, and was arguably the second best receiver of his entire era, outshined only by Jerry Rice. You argument that the Excellence of Smith, Kelly, and Thomas (I'm excluding Levy from this list because he's a contributor, rather than a player) somehow mitigates the greatness of other best-of-their-generation Super Stars is absurd. Bennett may well have been the most complete OLB of his era: he won a two DPOY Awards, and was a 5 time pro-bowler. Smerlas changed the way the NT position was played, and revolutionized the game. He is regarded by his peers as the best of his era along with Burt and Krumrie, but it was Smerlas who was elected to the All-80's team. As to Tasker and Hull? Tasker was the very best ever player at what he did, and was a 7 time All-Pro, but as I said, the bias against special teams will likely keep him out. Hull was also either the best or second best of his era, but when it comes to interior linemen, the HOF typically only elects one per position by era, and Dermontti Dawson already holds Hull's spot, which will keep him out as well. To the rest of your post, I'm not sure your reading comprehension is all that great, as you largely misrepresented a good portion of what I said. Additionally, I had no idea that you were the designated authority assigned to determine HOF worthiness; and for that I owe you my appologies. Though you can easily see how one could make that mistake, given the "quality" of your posts which otherwise might lead one to believe that you were simply a neck-beard posting to an internet message board from the relative comfort of your mother's basement. Edited September 12, 2013 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 Canidate was a marginal NFL player, much less a guy who belongs in the HOF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsWatch Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 Please forgive my ignorance but if Tasker has no shot of getting in because he played ST then how come the HOF always lists him as a candidate? CBF There are some Hall of Fame voters like metzelaars_lives who dismiss anything about special teams but I think most are old and soon will retire or die or maybe just put in a home from their diminished mental capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Jack Posted September 12, 2013 Author Share Posted September 12, 2013 Why are you yelling at me? Because Glenn has a man love for Tasker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 Because Glenn has a man love for Tasker. But so do I! There are some Hall of Fame voters like metzelaars_lives who dismiss anything about special teams but I think most are old and soon will retire or die or maybe just put in a home from their diminished mental capacity. Congrats metzelaars_lives on your HOF voting status. That's pretty cool. I didn't see your name on the list, but it's probably just not updated yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRH Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 If Saban gets in, will Ralph do the introduction? Canidate was a marginal NFL player, much less a guy who belongs in the HOF. I see what you did there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Jack Posted September 12, 2013 Author Share Posted September 12, 2013 If Saban gets in, will Ralph do the introduction? Oh God, please no, to both (Mr. Wilson giving a speech and Saban getting in). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkyMannn Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 Bennett may well have been the most complete OLB of his era: he won a two DPOY Awards, and was a 5 time pro-bowler. Reed deservedly gets a lot of love from Bills fans, but this guy is over-looked for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 I don't think he'll ever get in but it 1/3 of the game. Plus before Tasker, no one put a premium on STs. Now, there is a pro bowl spot for STs. He revolutionized a position. That should count for something. ive been on the fence. while i agree he was a trailblazer at the position, and special teams is important i dont think anyone realistically counts it as 1/3 of the game. especially when you break out things like extra points, field goals, etc... that he didnt have an impact on. When compared to a full time offensive or defensive player, even a great special teamer is hardpressed have the impact of a very good player at another position - though they obviously still have a value. it should count for something but im not sure if simply getting the annual mention is enough, or if an actual spot is warranted. Please forgive my ignorance but if Tasker has no shot of getting in because he played ST then how come the HOF always lists him as a candidate? CBF that might be the extent to which the committees feel comfortable honoring a player of his mold? or they may feel its a worthy discussion to revisit as opinions change in a fluid discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts