TTTBone wrote:2007: Terrell Davis, Jamal Anderson, Randall Cunningham, Eric Allen, Carnell Lake, Bruce Matthews, Ricky Watters and Tony Boselli
Wow, 2007 is a pretty weak group. Anderson, Cunningham and Lake are almost guaranteed not to make it. Allen is borderline along with Watters and Boselli. Terrell is interesting, but unlikely. Matthews is the only one I see getting on the first try. That might be the year for past finalists to really have a decent shot.
I agree that is a weak class. We've had the debate here before whether Terrell is a HOFamer, and I think the fact that we did have that debate, tells me he's not a first ballot guy. I don't seriously think Waters, Anderson or Lake will ever make it.Cunningham and Boselli, doubtful. Eric Allen and Matthews iare the only guys here I think have a legitimate shot, but definately not first ballot. A good year for the past guys to get in... but remember those guys who didn't get in from the class of 2006? Moon? Maybe Aikman?
Like I said it may take a few years. But Monk and Irvin will eventually be in.
Last edited by TTTBone on Wed Feb 09, 2005 6:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."
-Benjamin Franklin
Mitchell: "To me, the Patriots are not that good. ... We're the better team... A good team crushes that Patriot team. I'm telling you, they're not that good.'
Transmogrifier wrote:I don't believe Irvin is a hall of famer.
Even though out of the 17 WR's already in the Hall, only 3 WR's have more receptions and yardage than Irvin? But Irvin's not a hall of famer?
Are you sure you aren't a member of the Hall of Fame committee?
Wow, Troy AIkman's eligible next year. I bet the HOF voters are frothing at the mouth thinking "let's reject Bob Hayes, Rayfield Wright, Michael Irvin and Troy Aikman in consecutive years! Wippee!"
Transmogrifier wrote:I don't believe Irvin is a hall of famer.
Even though out of the 17 WR's already in the Hall, only 3 WR's have more receptions and yardage than Irvin? But Irvin's not a hall of famer?
Are you sure you aren't a member of the Hall of Fame committee?
Wow, Troy AIkman's eligible next year. I bet the HOF voters are frothing at the mouth thinking "let's reject Bob Hayes, Rayfield Wright, Michael Irvin and Troy Aikman in consecutive years! Wippee!"
Yes, the HoF committee isa group of secret Cowboy haters, scheming to screw over all those wearing the star on their helmet.
You know how absurd this sounds, right?
Brady: a "very mediocre QB" - no1cowboysfan
Mitchell: "To me, the Patriots are not that good. ... We're the better team... A good team crushes that Patriot team. I'm telling you, they're not that good.'
Transmogrifier wrote:I don't believe Irvin is a hall of famer.
Even though out of the 17 WR's already in the Hall, only 3 WR's have more receptions and yardage than Irvin? But Irvin's not a hall of famer?
Are you sure you aren't a member of the Hall of Fame committee?
Wow, Troy AIkman's eligible next year. I bet the HOF voters are frothing at the mouth thinking "let's reject Bob Hayes, Rayfield Wright, Michael Irvin and Troy Aikman in consecutive years! Wippee!"
Yes, the HoF committee isa group of secret Cowboy haters, scheming to screw over all those wearing the star on their helmet.
You know how absurd this sounds, right?
Ok, then. Explain to me why Bob Hayes never got in the Hall of Fame? Bob Hayes made defenses invent the zone defense because no one alive could cover him 1 on 1. Not only was he the fastest football player of his time, but alot of people said he was the fastest PERSON in the world at that time. But he doesn't deserve the hall of fame?
Can you explain to me how Irvin can have more yards and receptions than 14 other WR's that are already in the Hall of Fame, but Irvin doesn't deserve to be there?
Can you explain to me how a team like Dallas can appear in more Super Bowls than any other team in the league, win as many of those as any other team in the league, and have the best winning percentage all time of any team in the league, yet the Arizona/St Louis Cardinals has just as many legit hall of famers?
If you can explain all that to me in a logical manner than I will believe that there is no anti-cowboy bias in the HOF selection committee. Otherwise, it's absurd to think otherwise. I'm not the only person outraged at this crap. Dr. Z with CNNSI resigned his spot on the committee because he knew how much crap it was that Bob Hayes didn't get in last year.
It might only be me that thinks there's a pro-eagles conspiracy out there, but i'm not hte only one that thinks there's an anti-cowboy influence in the HOF selection committee. Look at the facts, it's obvious!
Transmogrifier wrote:I don't believe Irvin is a hall of famer.
Even though out of the 17 WR's already in the Hall, only 3 WR's have more receptions and yardage than Irvin? But Irvin's not a hall of famer?
Are you sure you aren't a member of the Hall of Fame committee?
Wow, Troy AIkman's eligible next year. I bet the HOF voters are frothing at the mouth thinking "let's reject Bob Hayes, Rayfield Wright, Michael Irvin and Troy Aikman in consecutive years! Wippee!"
Yes, the HoF committee isa group of secret Cowboy haters, scheming to screw over all those wearing the star on their helmet.
You know how absurd this sounds, right?
Ok, then. Explain to me why Bob Hayes never got in the Hall of Fame? Bob Hayes made defenses invent the zone defense because no one alive could cover him 1 on 1. Not only was he the fastest football player of his time, but alot of people said he was the fastest PERSON in the world at that time. But he doesn't deserve the hall of fame?
Can you explain to me how Irvin can have more yards and receptions than 14 other WR's that are already in the Hall of Fame, but Irvin doesn't deserve to be there?
Can you explain to me how a team like Dallas can appear in more Super Bowls than any other team in the league, win as many of those as any other team in the league, and have the best winning percentage all time of any team in the league, yet the Arizona/St Louis Cardinals has just as many legit hall of famers?
If you can explain all that to me in a logical manner than I will believe that there is no anti-cowboy bias in the HOF selection committee. Otherwise, it's absurd to think otherwise. I'm not the only person outraged at this crap. Dr. Z with CNNSI resigned his spot on the committee because he knew how much crap it was that Bob Hayes didn't get in last year.
It might only be me that thinks there's a pro-eagles conspiracy out there, but i'm not hte only one that thinks there's an anti-cowboy influence in the HOF selection committee. Look at the facts, it's obvious!
Here's a logical reason... because a team effort wins SBs, while single player studs are often on teams with few SB wins?
Manning and C-Pepp are arguably (right, Trans?) the two best QBs in the league today, but neither has yet to see a Super Bowl. I am assuming if Manning retired in a couple years (unlikely) and kept up with his stats, but never went to a Super Bowl, he'd likely be a HOF'er. But that would negate your "need to win a SB to be a HOF'er" arguement.
Though I don't like the man, Irvin deserves to be in the HOF (despite what SOME think). But so does Monk. I highly doubt there is a anti-Cowboys conspiracy in the Hall, but yes, it is bad that Hayes isn't in. But there are others, I'm sure, that were deserving and fell through the cracks on every team (I'm not looking it up though).
A little Sig payback there? The thing is, I have the HoF committee on my side. And I'm sure his personality had something to do with it, for what it's worth.
Brady: a "very mediocre QB" - no1cowboysfan
Mitchell: "To me, the Patriots are not that good. ... We're the better team... A good team crushes that Patriot team. I'm telling you, they're not that good.'
Im not a big fan of bags rants -- and I think this "cowboy nonsense" is just that.
HOWEVER,
Irvin had the bigger impact on the nfl -- statistically I don't see how it is debateable. The only thing monk has on irvin is receptions, and as I showed, you can take about 130 off that, as they are more or less from just hanging on. So he is moderately better in a year to year situation than irvin in that department.
In any other department, irvin exceeds monk. Yards, td's are a wash. ypc is irvin.
The meat of irvin's career is undebateably superior to monk's. Irvin's thrid best year is as good as monk's best.
If he was kept out because of the off the field problems, that is one thing. But the pro football hall of fame is hardly a collection of pollyannas -- and it is a crummy reason to keep someone out.
If you think monk should be in, that is one thing -- and I don't have a preference either way to be honest. But for people who act like he is definite before Irvin? Absurd. Monk simply was not the game breaker irvin was, didn't have the individually great seasons irvin did, and did't win three superbowls in a row like irbvin did. Irvin was a big reason why those cowboy teams took an early lead, and they pounded with emmitt.
You want monk in? fine. But let's stop pretending he was better than irvin -- he wasn't. He was a better citizen than irvin. But by any objective football standard, he simply was not better.
The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball Brian Dawkins played in second grade.
eaglesrule wrote:persoanlity is the ONLY way this can be argued. Im not a big fan of bags rants -- and I think this "cowboy nonsense" is just that.
HOWEVER,
Irvin had the bigger impact on the nfl -- statistically I don't see how it is debateable. The only thing monk has on irvin is receptions, and as I showed, you can take about 130 off that, as they are more or less from just hanging on. So he is moderately better in a year to year situation than irvin in that department.
In any other department, irvin exceeds monk. Yards, td's are a wash. ypc is irvin.
The meat of irvin's career is undebateably superior to monk's. Irvin's thrid best year is as good as monk's best.
If he was kept out because of the off the field problems, that is one thing. But the pro football hall of fame is hardly a collection of pollyannas -- and it is a crummy reason to keep someone out.
If you think monk should be in, that is one thing -- and I don't have a preference either way to be honest. But for people who act like he is definite before Irvin? Absurd. Monk simply was not the game breaker irvin was, didn't have the individually great seasons irvin did, and did't win three superbowls in a row like irbvin did. Irvin was a big reason why those cowboy teams took an early lead, and they pounded with emmitt.
You want monk in? fine. But let's stop pretending he was better than irvin -- he wasn't. He was a better citizen than irvin. But by any objective football standard, he simply was not better.
Excellent post. Behavior is not supposed to affect the voters' decisions either. Like I've said, it's not the "Good Citizens of America Hall of Fame" it's the "PRO FOOTBALL Hall of Fame" and fact is that few WR's in the history of the game were as good as Irvin. I don't really see an argument at all that stands to keep Irvin out of the Hall.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by TTTBone » Wed Feb 09, 2005 6:39 pm 
