dave mcbride Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/L/LittFl00.htm You've gotta be kidding me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 puzzled me as well. Gilchrist was five times the running back he ever was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el Tigre Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 Little had a much longer career right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 Because the selection committee is made up of a bunch of idiots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 8, 2010 Author Share Posted February 8, 2010 Little had a much longer career right? Steve Freeman had a longer career than Little, and no one's championing him for the HOF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 It is funny. When someone mentions the name Floyd Little, I have this hazy recollection that he was a very good back from when I was a kid. When I just looked at his stats, I was very surprised. I thought that there would have been much more production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Jack Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?...89&hl=floyd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CountDorkula Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 The HOF is a joke now a days, for evey sport. To many people get in. They need to created a "Sports Hall of Fame", a step above for all sports where only the elite of all sports get in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el Tigre Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 It is funny. When someone mentions the name Floyd Little, I have this hazy recollection that he was a very good back from when I was a kid. When I just looked at his stats, I was very surprised. I thought that there would have been much more production. Same here. I remember him as a big time,high profile player. Apparently my memory is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el Tigre Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 Steve Freeman had a longer career than Little, and no one's championing him for the HOF. I was just comparing Little's career to Gilchrist because the other poster had done so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsMagic1 Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 Seems to me with rushing , recieving and KR and PR 's he must have had over 10,000 yards total. The guy did almost everything as I do remember him from my younger days. Bowlegged as could be and tough to knock down for a little guy. I don't have a problem with him making it but do agree Cookie should be in it also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 Little had a much longer career right? Gilchrist had a total of six years and was all pro, first team in four of them. his rushing average appears to be close to 3.9 yards over that time. His entire nfl career covered six years, which should be enough for consideration. I think the only way we could justify him not being selected was that he played in the AFL. Now if he and Saban had kissed and made up in the year of superbowl 1, and the Bills, with Gilchrist, had played the packers and won.....hell.....there would be a wing of the hall of fame devoted to them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 8, 2010 Author Share Posted February 8, 2010 Seems to me with rushing , recieving and KR and PR 's he must have had over 10,000 yards total. The guy did almost everything as I do remember him from my younger days. Bowlegged as could be and tough to knock down for a little guy. I don't have a problem with him making it but do agree Cookie should be in it also. I don't put much stock in kick return yards unless the player is Devin Hester or Gale Sayers (i.e., guys who could actually score on KO returns). With regard to garden variety kick returners like Little, *someone* has to return the kicks, and ordinary guys are almost always going to get 20+ yards a return. Those numbers add up, especially for bad teams like the Broncos which lost a lot more than they won when Little was on the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beebe's Kid Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 HOF voting is terrible. I was hearing things like "too many WR's in the class" That is horseshit. If they were the best players in the class they should be in the HOF. Reed should be in. I think he and Chris Carter deserved 100x more than a couple of the guys in this class. They were dominant at their positions, it is not really their fault they were on the same ballot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todzilla Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 I live out in Denver and people here revere Little in a very similar way that Bills fans do Gilchrist. I am too young to have watched either play. Just passing on the fact that he is a hero to Bronco fans and there are alot of people here saying "it's about time" for Floyd getting in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernMan Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 I asked the same question when it was first announced. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?showtopic=107789 Getting wayyyyyyyy off topic here, but, it's really the offseason now......so those who don't care to hear a rant, you can now tune out. The Floyed Little HOF pick ain't nothing compared to the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame choices, where the electors bend over backwards to vote in any urban doo-wop vocal combo, any early bluesman (who influenced future rockers, but didn't actually perform Rock & Roll) gospel singer, or just about anyone else Eric Clapton or his peers mentioned as a sidenote in some Guitar Player magazine interview. Guess which of these lists gives acts that are in the Hall of Fame and which one doesn't. The selection process is more of a friggin' joke that the NFL's. List 1: Pat Benatar Genesis Chicago Boston The Doobie Brothers Rush The Moody Blues Peter Frampton Cheap Trick Jethro Tull Alice Cooper Yes Emerson, Lake & Palmer List 2: Little Anthony & The Imperials The Ventures Grandmaster Flash Isaac Hayes The Staple Singers Frankie Lyman & The Teenagers The Impressions The Righteous Brothers Dinah Washington Bessie Smith Ma Rainey You'd think whomever is voting would at least know the definition of Rock & Roll. Yeah, I understand that the second list has several on it whose blues or gospel roots influenced future rockers, BUT THEY WEREN"T ROCKERS themselves. Nowhere will you find Bessie Smith defined as a Rock & Roll singer - which would have been impossible, since she died nearly 20 years before Rock & Roll was born! If influential people are the criteria, why don't they just induct John Lennon's Aunt Mimi for crissakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 8, 2010 Author Share Posted February 8, 2010 I asked the same question when it was first announced. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?showtopic=107789 Getting wayyyyyyyy off topic here, but, it's really the offseason now......so those who don't care to hear a rant, you can now tune out. The Floyed Little HOF pick ain't nothing compared to the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame choices, where the electors bend over backwards to vote in any urban doo-wop vocal combo, any early bluesman (who influenced future rockers, but didn't actually perform Rock & Roll) gospel singer, or just about anyone else Eric Clapton or his peers mentioned as a sidenote in some Guitar Player magazine interview. Guess which of these lists gives acts that are in the Hall of Fame and which one doesn't. The selection process is more of a friggin' joke that the NFL's. List 1: Pat Benatar Genesis Chicago Boston The Doobie Brothers Rush The Moody Blues Peter Frampton Cheap Trick Jethro Tull Alice Cooper Yes Emerson, Lake & Palmer List 2: Little Anthony & The Imperials The Ventures Grandmaster Flash Isaac Hayes The Staple Singers Frankie Lyman & The Teenagers The Impressions The Righteous Brothers Dinah Washington Bessie Smith Ma Rainey You'd think whomever is voting would at least know the definition of Rock & Roll. Yeah, I understand that the second list has several on it whose blues or gospel roots influenced future rockers, BUT THEY WEREN"T ROCKERS themselves. Nowhere will you find Bessie Smith defined as a Rock & Roll singer - which would have been impossible, since she died nearly 20 years before Rock & Roll was born! If influential people are the criteria, why don't they just induct John Lennon's Aunt Mimi for crissakes. Oddly enough, I prefer most everyone on the second list to everyone on the first list. (I like Cheap Trick and a few Alice Cooper songs circa 1970-71, and I think that the Righteous Bros and Dinah Washington are pretty enhh.) Anyway, "Juvenile Delinquent" by Frankie Lyman and most anything by the Ventures is pretty much pure rock and roll. (I'd put "New York New York" by Grandmaster Flash in that same category for its spirit alone.) It ain't necessarily *rock* music, but it sure is rock and roll (there's a difference). And it's called the rock and roll hall of fame, not the hard rock or progressive rock hall of fame. I don't think that ELP or Rush or Genesis has ever played a rock and roll song in their entire careers. And Ma Rainey, the Staples Singers, and Bessie Smith all had amazing moments too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 I live out in Denver and people here revere Little in a very similar way that Bills fans do Gilchrist. I am too young to have watched either play. Just passing on the fact that he is a hero to Bronco fans and there are alot of people here saying "it's about time" for Floyd getting in. I'm sure there are. Cowboys fans still complain about Drew Pearson not being in. Ditto for Charles Haley's former teammates on the NFL Network's broadcast the other day. Little was a very good running back, but he was nowhere close to being the best of his era. I'll say it again: if he's worthy of enshrinement, then I have about 10 more names to add to the Seniors Committee's list for next year... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 8, 2010 Author Share Posted February 8, 2010 I'm sure there are. Cowboys fans still complain about Drew Pearson not being in. Ditto for Charles Haley's former teammates on the NFL Network's broadcast the other day. Little was a very good running back, but he was nowhere close to being the best of his era. I'll say it again: if he's worthy of enshrinement, then I have about 10 more names to add to the Seniors Committee's list for next year... Despite the fact that he was completely insane, Charles Haley is entirely deserving of the HOF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 Despite the fact that he was completely insane, Charles Haley is entirely deserving of the HOF. Moreso than Randle or Dent? The reaction to this year's vote was amusing to watch, via the Twitter feeds of several voters and various other NFL beat writers. Denver's ticked that Shannon Sharpe didn't get in, too. Oakland can't believe that Reed made the top 10 and Tim Brown didn't. And, of course, the same people who bitched about the previous disrespect shown to Cris Carter are even more vociferous this time around. Good place as any to toss in Jeff MacGregor's take on the process: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/...tory?id=4897379 In the interest only of peacekeeping, and whether your favorite got in or not, here's the thing we all need to remember: There is neither rhyme nor reason for any choice. Everyone arguing about numbers and metrics and yardsticks needs to understand that we make the yardsticks, too. The numbers mean nothing if there's no algorithm by which they can be made meaningful. Football is not a statistics-driven game. It's about storytelling, not science. Which is the art of the human, and therefore completely subjective. The only question worth asking about any candidate is, "Did he stir the imagination?" A little less pomposity and ponderous institutional self-regard -- it sounded this year as if Dick LeBeau or Rickey Jackson had reshuffled the credit derivative disaster or discovered a cure for the common cold -- would go a long way to reminding us that it's all supposed to be fun. And that football, no matter how America seeks to inflate it, is just a game. Until the selection process has some agreed-upon criteria -- which it does not, nor will it ever -- it's all just an expression of popularity and force of personality and pigskin voodoo and magical thinking and arguments made a posteriori. Invariably, in cases like this someone involved in the process will say, "Well, we've made everyone unhappy, so we must be doing something right." No, my friend, I'm afraid it just means you've made everyone unhappy. Which conjunctivitis or bankruptcy do quite effectively, too. "Unhappy" is not the universal outcome of, or synonym for, disinterest or fairness or impartiality you seem to think it is, Mr. Wrongheaded Excuse Maker Guy. Nope. Sometimes unhappy is just the result of your awful, awful, awful decision-making. Awful. The only thing worse than the actual voting, and the obsessed and obsessive coverage of the actual voting, is the international Internet message-board debate that now accompanies it. Which is only just now dying down and can best be summed up as "I know you are, but what am I?" Here's a tip: Joe Namath isn't in the Hall of Fame because he had better numbers than other players. He's in the Hall of Fame because he had better Fame than other players. Hall of Fame. Again, guys, not the Hall of Long-Horizon Regression Analysis. Hall of Fame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts