Mr. T Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 I know this can and will probably be taken wrong by some, but I'll say it anyway and hope for the best. Warren Moon was elected to the HOF not based on his credentials, but based on a black quarterback needing to be in the HOF and Moon was available. Moon was a fine QB, better than most during his day, but clearly not one of the best. Name one significant playoff game he won. Never played in the Super Bowl, and I'm not sure if any of his teams ever played in the conference championship game. All the stats that got him in the Hall were almost entirely based upon regular season games. So why does he go in the first year of eligibility and not Thurman. Because there are plenty of black running backs in the HOF but not one QB. The same bias that was used as a basis to keep Thurman out yesterday was not applied to Moon. Some voters said that Thomas was a great back but not one of the best of all times, so he was not viewed as meriting being selected the first year. But Moon is? This is not intended to start a racial issue, please believe me, but it seems so obvious to me that the voters have made race an issue in selecting Moon. Does he deserve to be a HOF, probably, at least eventually, but not selected first time out. I guess it's true, timing is everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Er...5 straight Grey Cup championships, 17 years in the NFL, 9 pro-bowls, near - 50,000 pass yards, 291 td's, and 22 rushing td's. Sounds HOF to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Sorry, I disagree. If Moon started in the league as a rookie, he probaly would have thrown for more yards than Marino. The fact that it took so long for him to get to the NFL is a disgrace in itself. This aside, the man is 4th in all time passing yardage. I know that stats don't tell the whole story, but check this out. See what I mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 I don't think the question is whether or not Moon should be in the Hall. I think the question is should he have gotten in on his first ballot or in front of Thomas. Moon has the numbers (which, for better or worse, is usually what is looked at) to be in the Hall, I just have a problem with how it shook out this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 didn't moon go to 8 straight pro bowls? that's just nuts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 I think both points have merit. The fact that Moon is black isn't the reason he's in the HoF but it quite probably had an effect on some of the voters. I think he belongs. There aren't many QBs I've seen who threw a better deep ball than Warren Moon. His teams didn't win big games but it had alot more to do with their coaching than with anything negative Warren Moon did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted February 5, 2006 Author Share Posted February 5, 2006 Er...5 straight Grey Cup championships, 17 years in the NFL, 9 pro-bowls, near - 50,000 pass yards, 291 td's, and 22 rushing td's. Sounds HOF to me. 594964[/snapback] I agree his stats are clearly good enough for the HOF but so are Thurman's. The issue is why Moon was selected first time and Thomas was not. I'm convinced the issue was the that Moon is the first black QB to be voted in and the HOF voters were making that an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 I agree his stats are clearly good enough for the HOF but so are Thurman's. The issue is why Moon was selected first time and Thomas was not. I'm convinced the issue was the that Moon is the first black QB to be voted in and the HOF voters were making that an issue. 594973[/snapback] TT's may be, but Moon was a qb - and any qb that put up such numbers for such a long time trumps a rb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Lamb Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 I think both points have merit. The fact that Moon is black isn't the reason he's in the HoF but it quite probably had an effect on some of the voters. I think he belongs. There aren't many QBs I've seen who threw a better deep ball than Warren Moon. His teams didn't win big games but it had alot more to do with their coaching than with anything negative Warren Moon did. 594970[/snapback] Look at the career passing yards on this chart - that doesn't count his CFL years If Fran T. can be there - Warren can too - black, white or sepia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Here's something I just found on the NFL site that I found interesting. Both Michael Irvin and Thurman Thomas were selected to the 90s "All Decade Team" (and Monk is on the 80s team) yet Moon got into the HoF before all of these players. To be fair RB and WR each get 4 players while QB only gets 2 but even if the numbers were equal and the QBs got 4 does anybody think Moon would be on the team? I don't. Moon wasn't considered a top 3-4 QB at any point during his career yet he gets in over players who are considered top 4 for an entire decade? I'm still scratching my head over Moon's selection in front of these other players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Here's something I just found on the NFL site that I found interesting. Both Michael Irvin and Thurman Thomas were selected to the 90s "All Decade Team" (and Monk is on the 80s team) yet Moon got into the HoF before all of these players. To be fair RB and WR each get 4 players while QB only gets 2 but even if the numbers were equal and the QBs got 4 does anybody think Moon would be on the team? I don't. Moon wasn't considered a top 3-4 QB at any point during his career yet he gets in over players who are considered top 4 for an entire decade? I'm still scratching my head over Moon's selection in front of these other players. 594981[/snapback] Moon lost many years in Canada and is 4th in all-time passing yardage. Here is where Thurman ranks in rushing yards. I know that Thurman also was a great blocker and receiver. I too wish that he got in and I am sure that he will, and hopefully very soon. Either way, Moon deserved it imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 I know this can and will probably be taken wrong by some, but I'll say it anyway and hope for the best. Warren Moon was elected to the HOF not based on his credentials, but based on a black quarterback needing to be in the HOF and Moon was available. Moon was a fine QB, better than most during his day, but clearly not one of the best. Name one significant playoff game he won. Never played in the Super Bowl, and I'm not sure if any of his teams ever played in the conference championship game. All the stats that got him in the Hall were almost entirely based upon regular season games. So why does he go in the first year of eligibility and not Thurman. Because there are plenty of black running backs in the HOF but not one QB. The same bias that was used as a basis to keep Thurman out yesterday was not applied to Moon. Some voters said that Thomas was a great back but not one of the best of all times, so he was not viewed as meriting being selected the first year. But Moon is? This is not intended to start a racial issue, please believe me, but it seems so obvious to me that the voters have made race an issue in selecting Moon. Does he deserve to be a HOF, probably, at least eventually, but not selected first time out. I guess it's true, timing is everything. 594949[/snapback] I disagree, I think he went in on the 1st-ballot to be the 1st black QB to make it... JMO, and I may be many things, but I'm not a dittohead. He would not have gotten my vote. Great regular season stats, huge big-game loser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taterhill Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 i pity the fool that talks nonsense like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typical TBD Guy Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 That's a nicely laid out argument, Mr. T. I think you're onto something. Just like racism is argued to be subconscious in some, one could say that AA activism was a subconscious thought for many of the HOF judges. Maybe this was how Moon got in the HOF this year. Slightly off topic: I know comparing QB's and WR's is an apples to oranges situation, but do you think Moon's first-ballot induction helps Reed's eventual chances? The assumption with Moon's induction is that amazing stats and consecutive Pro Bowl appearences can trump postseason accolades. So shouldn't Reed, who is 4th in career receptions, 6th in career yards, 10th in career TD's, and who had 7 straight Pro Bowl appearences, have a better shot now in the eyes of the future HOF judges? Maybe Reed didn't dominate in the Super Bowl, but Moon never dominated in the PLAYOFFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted February 5, 2006 Author Share Posted February 5, 2006 Look at the career passing yards on this chart - that doesn't count his CFL years If Fran T. can be there - Warren can too - black, white or sepia 594978[/snapback] OK let's use your logic than. There is a certain QB playing for Dallas these days that used to hang around these parts. His career passing yds are up there also. By the time he's finished playing all his stats are going to look impressive, but I think we'll all agree on the fact that this putz shouldn't be a HOF. Looking at stats only, how do you keep him out. Still on the issue of stats, Art Monk's stats sure look impressive, but he is still on the outside looking in. And those of you who keep throwing around all the pro-bowl games a player is in, please get real. That is popularity not merit. Ruben Brown played in how many? Don't think he'll ever be considered for HOF, but he was popular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Moon lost many years in Canada and is 4th in all-time passing yardage. Here is where Thurman ranks in rushing yards. I know that Thurman also was a great blocker and receiver. I too wish that he got in and I am sure that he will, and hopefully very soon. Either way, Moon deserved it imo. 594983[/snapback] Stats can be compiled by playing a lot of years. Personally I'm not a big fan of stats being the sole factor of who gets into the Hall. That being said, I too think Moon deserves to go but not in front of some of these other players. I think a bigger factor should be "was this guy one of the absolute best during most of his career?" Moon was not one of the very best at his position for most of his career. Thurman was. Irvin, while not a big stat guy, was also considered one of the best. I can see some people arguing about Monk as he was a guy that also put up stats over a long period of time and was never really a dominant player. I don't think Testiverde deserves to be in the Hall and I don't think Bledsoe does either. But if you go by just stats they'll get in. This is why people are making decisions about who gets in and not computers. If it was just a stat thing people could program a computer to make selections for us. It’s really the Gale Sayers thing. Is Jerome Bettis a better back than Sayers was? Is he better than Jim Brown? Granted durability counts for something but I’m a big believer is a player needing to be dominant to be considered a first ballot HoFer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billfan63 Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Look at the career passing yards on this chart - that doesn't count his CFL years If Fran T. can be there - Warren can too - black, white or sepia 594978[/snapback] Back in the day when Bud Grant didn't even heat the benches or allow long shirts Fran T. put up his numbers outdoors in Minn., wind, ice, freezing tmps. Comparing his stats with Moon who played at least one half of his career in a dome is unfair. I think Tarenkton, Farve, etc stats are far more impressive and I would think anyone who threw a football outside in the fall north of the Mason Dixon would concur. Is it harder to throw a 15 yd. out at the Ralph or in the astrodome? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 I agree his stats are clearly good enough for the HOF but so are Thurman's. 594973[/snapback] Couldn't the arugment be made that Moon didn't have the surrounding talent that TT had and succeded anyway? I'm not hung up on this "first year" argument as much as some seem to be. He's a lock for next year and a decade from now, who outside of Buffalo will remember whether he made it in his first or second year of eligibility? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 OK let's use your logic than. There is a certain QB playing for Dallas these days that used to hang around these parts. His career passing yds are up there also. By the time he's finished playing all his stats are going to look impressive, but I think we'll all agree on the fact that this putz shouldn't be a HOF. Looking at stats only, how do you keep him out. Still on the issue of stats, Art Monk's stats sure look impressive, but he is still on the outside looking in. And those of you who keep throwing around all the pro-bowl games a player is in, please get real. That is popularity not merit. Ruben Brown played in how many? Don't think he'll ever be considered for HOF, but he was popular. 594992[/snapback] Art Monk is a WR. Ruben Brown is a Guard. That means neither of them is a quarterback. Anyone playing either of those positions, with a few obvious exceptions, is going to have a long wait for the call. Drew is going to get alot of consideration for Canton - much of it based on his stats - BECAUSE HE IS A QUARTERBACK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Art Monk is a WR. Ruben Brown is a Guard. That means neither of them is a quarterback. Anyone playing either of those positions, with a few obvious exceptions, is going to have a long wait for the call. Drew is going to get alot of consideration for Canton - much of it based on his stats - BECAUSE HE IS A QUARTERBACK. 595005[/snapback] Unfortunately you are correct. Another instance of "look, something SHINY, I want it!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts