Mile High Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 Nobody is responding to this post because its the truth. Watching Andre in a film clip does not do this man justice. With respect to the youngins here, your wrong. The guy should be in the HOF. Nice post Alaska Boy or whatever your name is. 338780[/snapback] I can't even believe that it's even being pondered. I mean seriously Andre was a game breaker in my opinion and even if people don't think he was the numbers don't lie. I don't understand the thinking of why he shouldn't go in. I always thought the locks in the HOF would be Jim, Thurman, Brue and Andre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 Fair enough. I did add this paragraph as you were typing your response: And no, Lofton did not put up staggering numbers for 5-6 years. He did not put up staggering numbers for one year. He put up staggering yards per catch numbers 2-3 years and that's it. He never caught a staggering number of passes, he never scored more than 8 TDs. In fact, his touchdowns for such a deep threat were more pedestrian than staggering. His two best seasons of such staggering numbers he caught 58 and 62 balls, with 7 and 8 TDs. I don't necessarily think reed will or deserves to go on the first ballot. I think that should be reserved for automatics. I am only saying that I watched a lot of Andre and a lot of Lofton and while different players and Lofton was more spectacular, they are equal as far as talent and production and success and scoring and making plays. Frankly, I was shocked that Andre scored 12 more touchdowns in 6 less games when I looked up the stats. Furthermore, I went to the Hall of Fame site and looked at all the inductees, and as I think you are a similar age as me and will recognize most but not all of the names, I defy you to look at that entire list and say voters look at a player's top prime seasons versus totality of their careers. 338754[/snapback] dog - i just looked lofton up. from 1980-1985, he was amazing. it's not the number of receptions; it's the quality of them. ypc is a great barometer too. as for tds, that's an overrated stat; it's typically out of the control of the individual rb or wr. if the team can't run the ball and is always starting at their 20 yard line, it's gonna be hard to score tds, even if you have a phenomenal receiver. by the way, the best individual season for a bills receiver i've ever seen by far is moulds in 1998, and he only had 68 receptions. but he had a spectacular ypc average, and it showed when watching games that year. he was freakin' unbelievable, a real difference maker that year. also recall that in 1982, the year lofton had 35 receptions for 696 yards, the season was only 9 games long due to the strike. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/LoftJa00.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 dog - i just looked lofton up. from 1980-1985, he was amazing. it's not the number of receptions; it's the quality of them. ypc is a great barometer too. as for tds, that's an overrated stat; it's typically out of the control of the individual rb or wr. if the team can't run the ball and is always starting at their 20 yard line, it's gonna be hard to score tds, even if you have a phenomenal receiver. by the way, the best individual season for a bills receiver i've ever seen by far is moulds in 1998, and he only had 68 receptions. but he had a spectacular ypc average, and it showed when watching games that year. he was freakin' unbelievable, a real difference maker that year. also recall that in 1982, the year lofton had 35 receptions for 696 yards, the season was only 9 games long due to the strike. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/LoftJa00.htm 338786[/snapback] p.s. recall that 80 receptions in the early 1980s was a ton. beginning in the mid-1980s, as teams became more pass-oriented and qb accuracy numbers skyrocketed, the number of receptions for receivers went up a lot as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mary owen Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 Caught the tail end of the Dan Patrick show today. He was running through a list of names to J Thiesman asking him if they should be in the HOF. Thiesman said NO to A Reed. 338693[/snapback] who the f#*@ is Joe Thiesman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mary owen Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 who the f*$@ is Len Pasquarelli? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 Pete says Len Pasquarelli is a fat bastard... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mary owen Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 Pete says Len Pasquarelli is a fat bastard... 338796[/snapback] that's good enough for me. Thanks Pete! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Wolf Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 For what it's worth, lets look at the respective resumes of Reed, Monk, and Watters. Andre Reed: 7 consecutive Pro Bowl appearances (1988-1994) Ranks 4th all time in receptions (951) Ranks 6th all time in receiving yards (13,198) Ranks 10th all time in receiving TD's (87) Art Monk: 3 time Pro Bowler (1984-86) Ranks 5th all time in receptions (940) Ranks 9th all time in receiving yards (12,721) Ranks 29th(t) all time in receiving TD's (68) Ricky Watters: Elected to 5 Pro Bowls (1992-96) Ranks 15th all time in rushing yards (10,643) Ranks 15th all time in rushing TD's (78) Ranks 12th all time in total yards from scrimmage I've also added one other component to the comparison: how each of these players performed in playoff games. I've taken their total stats from all of their playoff appearances and divided them into the number of playoff games they appeared in to represent a statistical average playoff game for each player. Here are the results: Andre Reed: 4.47 receptions, 64.7 yds (avg. 14.5 yds) 0.47 TD's Team: 10-9 in playoffs Ricky Watters: 60.6 yards rushing (avg. 3.8 yds) 3.7 receptions for 41 yds (avg. 11.08 yds) 1.09 TD's Team: 6-5 record in playoffs Monk: 4.6 receptions, 70.8 yds (avg. 15.4 yds) 0.47 TD's Team: 10-5 record in playoffs For what it's worth, those are the numbers I came up with. You can argue there's more than just pure stats involved in electing players to the hall of fame, but looking at the on field production I'd have to say of the 3 players in question here, Andre has the most impressive production on the field, and if you're even considering Monk or Watters, Reed has to be in. Though I'm a Bills fan, it's hard to see an objective argument that a WR elected to 7 consecutive Pro Bowls and ranking in the top 10 all time in all major statistical categories at his position, isn't a virtual lock for the Hall. Of all the WR's who have EVER played in the NFL... only 3 have caught more passes than Andre! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 p.s. recall that 80 receptions in the early 1980s was a ton. beginning in the mid-1980s, as teams became more pass-oriented and qb accuracy numbers skyrocketed, the number of receptions for receivers went up a lot as well. 338788[/snapback] It was, and Lofton never had more than 71. The top couple of receivers later on had in the 90s and low 80s but the 6-10 and below guys were still in the same range. And so I guess receptions are over rated and TDs are over rated and first downs are over rated and blocking is over rated and making tough catches over the middle is over rated but YPC is the one thing that shows how good a WR is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorCal Aaron Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 dog - i just looked lofton up. from 1980-1985, he was amazing. it's not the number of receptions; it's the quality of them. ypc is a great barometer too. . also recall that in 1982, the year lofton had 35 receptions for 696 yards, the season was only 9 games long due to the strike. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/LoftJa00.htm 338786[/snapback] Chris Burkett was a monster in 1986: 34 grabs 778 yards 22.9 ypc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarthur31 Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 A wishbone QB who was mediocre at best during his career. *snap* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralonzo Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 A wishbone QB who was mediocre at best during his career. 338810[/snapback] A wishbone quarterback until Lawrence Taylor made a wish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BILLS4LIFE Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 Like I care what Thiesman thinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 Hold on there now young fella. I do not think anyone is saying Reed was not an awesome WR, but i've been watching the NFL since 1970, when I was 7 yrs old. Reed was a very good receiver, and he would play on my team every day. Like I said, I think he should be there. How ever(in my best Stephen A voice) people outside of Buffalo see him as a possesion reciever, and a product of the K-GUN. PLease forget reality about the run pass ratio etc, and focus on the perception that the K-gun was a modified run and shoot. Again, we know that not to be true, but ask non-bills fans what they think. People just do not feel he was a game breaker. Best example I can give is the boy never went before mid 2nd rd in any fantasy draft in the dc Harea. 338657[/snapback] So, actually, if you were 7 in 1970, you are two years older than me...I understand your point completely, but, one would hope that one of the 39 HOF voters, one not affiliated with a team (that would be Pasquereli) would be able to understand the difference between national perception, and reality. If this thing was just based on the average football fans' opinion, how did Kelly make it in during his first year of elidgabilty? Kelly is rarely mentioned among the greats by the national media types. Last season, I was in New Orleans, for a weekend. We were doing some souvenier hunting. There was one shop that sold all sports related stuff, and had strings of beads, of all the NFL teams, except one. You guessed it, the Buffalo Bills! The guy behind the counter, probably about 30 said, "wow, that is the firt time anyone asked me for Buffalo beads....I almost forgot they had a team in Buffalo. It's just one of those teams you never think of...." This, from a friggin' Saints fan! What an insult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 I'm going to use 3 examples of Wr's during the same era. Someone tell me how Andre Reed is not A HALL OF FAMER......... ANDRE REED- TOTAL | 227 | 75 500 6.7 1 | 951 13198 13.9 87 Among the league's all-time top 50 Receptions: 4 Receiving yards: 6 Receiving TDs: 10 Yards from scrimmage: 19 Rush/Receive TDs: 24t Mike Irvin- TOTAL | 159 | 6 6 1.0 0 | 750 11904 15.9 65 Among the league's all-time top 50 Receptions: 16t Receiving yards: 11 Receiving TDs: 34t Yards from scrimmage: 31 Chris Carter- TOTAL | 234 | 13 41 3.2 0 | 1101 13899 12.6 130 Among the league's all-time top 50 Receptions: 2 Receiving yards: 4 Receiving TDs: 2 Yards from scrimmage: 17 Rush/Receive TDs: 5 I used 3 examples of guys from the same era. I remember last year people were saying Michael Irvin should be a shoe in for the hof. He wasn't 1st ballot but if Irvin does make the hof there is no reason why Andre Reed should not. Chris Carter is a lock imo and his #'s are all similar to reed. Both Top 10 ALL TIME in receptions, yards and td's which should be the barometer by which The Hall of Fame is measured for receiver. Here are their Career playoff stats Chris Carter- TOTAL | 0 0 0 | 63 860 8 Michael Irvin- TOTAL | 0 0 0 | 87 1314 8 Andre Reed- TOTAL | 7 27 0 | 85 1230 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 Andre Reed-TOTAL | 227 | 75 500 6.7 1 | 951 13198 13.9 87 | +----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+ Seasons among the league's top 10 Receptions: 1987-8, 1989-2, 1990-10t, 1991-5t, 1994-6 Receiving yards: 1989-5, 1991-6, 1994-5 Receiving TDs: 1989-6t, 1990-6t, 1991-5t, 1994-8t Yards from scrimmage: 1991-9, 1994-10 Among the league's all-time top 50 Receptions: 4 Receiving yards: 6 Receiving TDs: 10 Yards from scrimmage: 19 Rush/Receive TDs: 24t Post Season- TOTAL | 7 27 0 | 85 1230 9 James Lofton TOTAL | 233 | 32 246 7.7 1 | 764 14004 18.3 75 | +----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+ Seasons among the league's top 10 Receptions: 1980-5t, 1981-7t Receiving yards: 1980-3, 1981-2, 1982-5, 1983-3, 1984-5, 1985-6, 1987-10, 1991-9 Receiving TDs: 1981-8t, 1982-10t, 1983-7t, 1991-9t Yards from scrimmage: 1984-10 Among the league's all-time top 50 Receptions: 14 Receiving yards: 3 Receiving TDs: 22 Yards from scrimmage: 16 Rush/Receive TDs: 46t Post Season- TOTAL | 3 55 1 | 41 749 8 Steve Largent- TOTAL | 200 | 17 83 4.9 1 | 819 13089 16.0 100 Seasons among the league's top 10 Receptions: 1976-6t, 1978-3, 1979-7, 1980-9, 1981-6, 1983-10, 1984-9, 1985-6, 1987-6t Receiving yards: 1978-2, 1979-1, 1980-6, 1981-5, 1984-8, 1985-1, 1986-10, 1987-9 Receiving TDs: 1977-2, 1978-8t, 1979-5t, 1981-4t, 1983-4t, 1984-2t, 1986-8t, 1987-3t Rush/Receive TDs: 1977-5, 1984-7t, 1987-8t Among the league's all-time top 50 Receptions: 9 Receiving yards: 7 Receiving TDs: 3t Yards from scrimmage: 23 Rush/Receive TDs: 12t Post season- TOTAL | 1 -2 0 | 23 434 4 All Pretty comparable. Reed obviousily having the better post season #'s. Being top 10 out of the all time top 50 in receptions, yards and td's. If Reed isn't a 1st ballot I will be downright baffled Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalkie Gerzowski Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 Another thing working against Andre is that the Bills have had five guys inducted into the HOF over the past six years: Joe D (2003) James Lofton (2003) Jim Kelly (2002) Marv Levy (2001) Billy Shaw (1999) The selectors probably will want to take a break on the Bills players for a few years. 338776[/snapback] That never stopped them from having every Steeler put in the HOF. Doesn't Neil O'Donnell go in this year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 Lori, are there receivers in the HOF with stats that are clearly inferior to those of Andre? 338502[/snapback] Sure...The steeler guy who made it to the Hall a few years ago (of course after waiting for 30years) definitely had much lesser #s than Reed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 One of the mistakes Reed made was not retiring right on the dot when the bills were struggling. Rather he tried to make teams in Washington, and Denver and couldn't even make in as the 4th receiver on the team. Plus, you need to hang around the media types by getting a TV gig so that you are always around and get to be buddies with these guys voting and you kind of have a good chance to make it in, if you are on the borderline. At least it helped the guy in Fox (from the Oakland team) to get to the Hall sooner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 It was, and Lofton never had more than 71. The top couple of receivers later on had in the 90s and low 80s but the 6-10 and below guys were still in the same range. And so I guess receptions are over rated and TDs are over rated and first downs are over rated and blocking is over rated and making tough catches over the middle is over rated but YPC is the one thing that shows how good a WR is? 338807[/snapback] well, we'll just have to agree to disagree. receiever blocking is of negligible importance when assessing a receiver's quality (otherwise randy moss wouldn't be considered the best receiver in the game right now), and i stand by what i said about tds. as for first downs, it would seem to me that a guy averaging 19 ypc probably holds his own in that category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts