Jump to content

Unworthy HOF members


Recommended Posts

 

I'm definitely not leading the parade for him to get in the HOF but with 2 rings, will have over 50,000 passing yards when he retires, will probably have close to 400 passing TD's and he's likable to the writers....I think they vote him in.

 

Yeah - he won't be a first ballot guy without an MVP or all-pro appearance. 200 straight games and counting though is pretty cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 172
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Troy Aikman. Got to QB an offense with one of the greatest RBs ever (is Emmitt top 3 or top 5?), a top notch blocking FB, an amazing talent at WR in Irvin, and unbelievable OL.

 

He's 34th all time in yards, by my look 16 of the guys ahead of him retired after him or are still active. 68th in TDs. Career stats averaged out over his 12 years: 2745 yards, 13.75 TD, 11.75 INT. Even though he didn't play in the same era as today's QBs, that's....kind of putrid. The only thing he has going for him is 3 rings.

 

I argued this very same player not being HOF worthy on the other message board and I get flamed hard for it. I think he benefited from a great team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Baseballs only tricky because the old timers actually played significantly longer than they do now. So like the 300 win threshold is sooo much tougher for pitchers now. And 3000 hits is just a gauntlet

Fair points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's look at the list...

 

Here's 12 I'd move to the Hall of Good:

Jerome Bettis

Nick Buoniconti

Harry Carson

Cris Carter

Fred Dean

Tony Dungy

Cortez Kennedy

Art Monk

Jackie Smith

Jason Taylor

Andre Tippett

Aeneas Williams

 

And obviously 1 ex-Bill goes to the Hall of Shame:

Ralph C. Wilson

 

you're off base with Jason Taylor and Andre Tippett.

 

Tippett was the 2nd most feared LB of the 80s after LT. He played the same style and was a force, just overshadowed by LT. 100 sacks for a linebacker is absurd and he was named to the 2nd team all 80s by the HOF.

 

Jason Taylor is one of the premier DE/LB of the 00s, in his prime no one was feared more because he could change the game with a strip, pick or sack.

 

139.5 sacks

775 tackles

46 forced fumbles

29 recoveries

8 int

9 td

1x DPOY, 3x 1st team All Pro, 2nd team All 00s team by HOF

 

 

Carter and Monk look worse now because of the explosion of passing in the game, but at the time they retired they were #2 and #3 in receptions and yards. That's a HOF'er

Edited by Runninrams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also do not think Terrell Davis should be in. He had 4 good years, 3 mediocre years. He played on a team that chop blocked like crazy. I am always surprised how much support he gets.


 

It's kind of inconsistent though. When a guy like T.O. isn't in yet it doesn't seem like it is too easy to make the HOF. Tim Brown is another guy I thought had to wait longer than he should have.

 

TO should be in based on numbers alone but he destroyed locker rooms and was a terrible teammate.....I think it is fair that is considered. At times he made his team worse even with his immense talent. I do still think he should be in but that is the reason he is not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe Namath definitely belongs in the HOF. It's not always about stats, but the impact they had on the game during their era. His stats

don't stink, although in 1967 he did become the first qb to throw for over 4,000 yards ( in 12 games). But I think he's mainly in the

Hall because of this:

 

He quarterbacked the first AFL team to win the Super Bowl, and it was not a fluke win.

This was a huge breakthrough for the league which, at the time, a big part of the nation viewed the AFL as a bush league.

He influenced the personality of professional sports just simply by how he lived off the field in a glamorous city, NYC. (the cult of

personality, if you will.)

The impact of the above points, influenced other sports and athletes for many years afterward.

 

He really did leave quite a legacy, and by 1985, he was voted in. It's a game of human beings, not machines or computers spitting

out stats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe Namath should not be in the HOF. Overall, he was a terrible QB.

 

He was the man.

 

He won the game.

 

Sorry that modern day stats, screamed out by people who couldn't throw a spiral 10 feet, have convinced people he wasn't great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a decent story, quite a bit overblown in my opinion. Should have nothing to do with being a HOF'er or not.

I disagree and I have consistently argued that the HoF should be about stories as much as stats.

 

EDIT: same applies to Namath for me. Stories as much as stats.

Edited by GunnerBill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

He was the man.

 

He won the game.

 

Sorry that modern day stats, screamed out by people who couldn't throw a spiral 10 feet, have convinced people he wasn't great.

He didn't have good stats in any era. In fact....they were awful.

He won the game? His zero TD performance and 206 yards won that game?

 

Maybe you're impressed by his career 50% completion percentage? Maybe him throwing 47 more INT's than TD's? Maybe that he only threw for more than 3,000 yards twice....197 yards per game average?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not read thru all the pages, but seeing people on here question joe namath's induction into the HOF tells me there are lots of total jackasses on here.. is this place full of uninformed , know-it-all millennials? for crissakes, nobody had the accuracy, release like him.. he had two damaged knees.. mind-boggling

Edited by dwight in philly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...