R. Rich Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 Yes... Certainly a more complete WR...Nothing against Swann, but Andre was a more complete Wide Out, and probably broke about a thousand more Tackles than Swann did in his career... It's just my opinion, I know...And I think Irvin, Reed, and Monk should all get in...I think this exclusion by position (especially at WR), etc. is getting rediculous... I also think the whole process is getting a bit rediculous...Down here on Charlotte Radio they were debating the Thurman Thomas issue...The concensus they came to was Hall Of Famer...yes...1st Ballot (they said Aikman and White were shoe in 1st Ballot)...probably not...It's just a complete joke that this is even being debated about TT, even by out-of-town idiots who obviously don't have the smarts to pull up his freaking Bio and read it...I've said it here before, 4 consecutive years leading the NFL in Yards from Scrimmage...No one did it before him...No one has done it since...8th ALL TIME in Yards from scrimmage...Think about that, 8th ALL TIME!...NFL MVP in 91...One of only three running backs (Barry Sanders and Emmitt Smith) to rush for over 1,000 yards in 8 consecutive seasons and one of only three running backs (Walter Payton and Marcus Allen) to have over 400 receptions and 10,000 yards rushing...Not a shoe in 1st Ballot Hall Of Famer??? You have got to be kidding me... I'm getting sick of the whole deal to be honest...Any writer who does not Vote for Thurman on this Ballot should have their Voting rights revoked on the spot...Period...End of story... 562963[/snapback] Not to rain on your parade, but didn't Curtis Martin also rush for 1,000 yards in 8 consecutive seasons? I'm not 100% sure, but I thought he did.
Arkady Renko Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 Not to rain on your parade, but didn't Curtis Martin also rush for 1,000 yards in 8 consecutive seasons? I'm not 100% sure, but I thought he did. 562964[/snapback] He certainly did. But I would put Martin in the Hall of Fame too.
HopsGuy Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 I remember King making an issue of whether the other team "game-planned" for the guy. Thurman? Of course. From 90-93, if you stopped Thurman, you might win the game. If you didn't? Bad things. You simply had to set your defense to stop #34, it was that simple. Thurman gets a bad rap that he wasn't the flashiest (Sanders), nor the most prolific (Smith), nor had the most rings (Smith again), of his era. Then there's the (incorrect) story about the helmet. That said, he should get his ticket to Canton punched this year. Andre? Maybe not so much. Then again, if you did try to shut down #83, #80, #82, #84 (or #88) and #34 were going to get you. It's different for WRs. I'm a little on the fence for Andre. He was the best receiver on one of the best offenses in history. His play made people start talking about RAC (run after catch) yards. Jerry Rice was once asked, "How does it feel to be the best receiver in football?" and he answered "You should ask Andre Reed." Though a ludicrous statement, still a validation that his peers felt he was an elite player. Okay, I've talked myself into it.
Spun Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 I remember King making an issue of whether the other team "game-planned" for the guy. Thurman? Of course. From 90-93, if you stopped Thurman, you might win the game. If you didn't? Bad things. You simply had to set your defense to stop #34, it was that simple. Thurman gets a bad rap that he wasn't the flashiest (Sanders), nor the most prolific (Smith), nor had the most rings (Smith again), of his era. Then there's the (incorrect) story about the helmet. That said, he should get his ticket to Canton punched this year. 563020[/snapback] I strongly agree. The opinion was replayed over and again that the key to stopping the Bills was stopping Thurman Thomas. This perspective was voiced by opposing coaches, players, the media and fans alike. Thurman should go in 1st ballot, no doubt about it.
Spun Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 Monk won a Superbowl or two in his day. And the HOF is about stats and performances, not about Superbowls. Or at least it should be. CW 562697[/snapback] What about stats in Super Bowls? Irvin: XXVII 6 receptions 114 yards 2 touchdowns XXVIII 5 receptions 66 yards 0 touchdowns XXX 5 receptions 76 yards 0 touchdowns Reed: XXV 8 receptions 62 yards 0 touchdowns XXVI 5 receptions 34 yards 0 touchdowns XXVII 8 receptions 152 yards 0 touchdowns XXVIII 6 receptions 75 yards 0 touchdowns They both played their roles in the big games. Irvin didn't need to produce more as everything seemed to be working for the Cowboys especially Moose and the o-line clearing the way for Emmitt Smith, Aikman and well, the Bills and their turnovers. Reed has historically been singled out by some analysts as having been "taken out of the game" by the Giants. Reed's stats in XXVII are impressive but I seem to remember that a good portion of this came when the game was already decided. I do agree that when assessing one's career and their HOF worthiness, the Super Bowl(s) are secondary. But then again aren't the playoffs also secondary? Then shouldn't that make Warren Moon a little more worthy? Super Bowl Boxscores: http://www.superbowl.com/history/boxscores
dry martini Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 I strongly agree. The opinion was replayed over and again that the key to stopping the Bills was stopping Thurman Thomas. This perspective was voiced by opposing coaches, players, the media and fans alike. Thurman should go in 1st ballot, no doubt about it. 563036[/snapback] Agreed. Just ask Don Shula. Quick dump to TT anyone?
stuckincincy Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 Thomas was the quintessential "complete package". If he doesn't get voted in (I think White and probably Aikman are locks), then next year.
dry martini Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 as long as ESPN sets up a camera in TT's house on HoF Selection day, he's a shoe-in for the final spot.
sfladave Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 Reed had better stats than Lynn Swann-was he a better receiver?? 562927[/snapback] YES! Maybe cuz Irvin was a better(slightly) receiver than Reed. NO, Irvin was not slightly better, IMO. Reed's biggest stat to me was his YAC. I believe he led the league for years in that category. As another poster noted Reed had more catches and TDs in the 1st 12 years of both players. Overall I think Reed was the better receiver, but he was the quiet one of the 2. He didn't make a spectacle of himself like Mike "the MOUTH" Irvin did. Sometimes name and face recognition do make a difference, and I think that is definitely the case here.
Dan Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 The guys on NFL network said it last night... "the HOF is becoming a popularity contest just like the Pro Bowl. Nuff said." And I tend to agree with them. And that hurts all of the Bills players because none were the flashy, get in the press all the time kind of guys.
Lofton80 Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 Huh? Howie Long was a great football player. I have no doubt he belongs in the Hall of Fame. He was certainly better known for playing than the tv gig. He is not the even the main guy on the Fox pregame telative to Bradshaw and JB. Irvin was clearly the leader of the Cowboys during the SB run. The guy was automatic on third down and likely sacrificed some numbers in Dallas run oriented attack. He is not choirboy off the field but the guy was HOF caliber. TT is first ballot all the way.
JDG Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 Huh? Howie Long was a great football player. I have no doubt he belongs in the Hall of Fame. He was certainly better known for playing than the tv gig. He is not the even the main guy on the Fox pregame telative to Bradshaw and JB. Irvin was clearly the leader of the Cowboys during the SB run. The guy was automatic on third down and likely sacrificed some numbers in Dallas run oriented attack. He is not choirboy off the field but the guy was HOF caliber. TT is first ballot all the way. 563094[/snapback] Go-to-guy on Third Down? Funny, I thought that was some guy named Novacek.... And as for Irvin being "clearly the leader"???? Now this was a long time ago, and I sure knew a lot less about football then than I do no, so this could all be total BS, but my memory is that when the Bills played the Cowboys, I was worried about stopping Emmit Smith and Jay Novacek. Irvin didn't particularly scare me or worry me. I guess you could say the same thing about the Cowboys planning for Andre Reed and the Bills, though. So I guess that I put neither of these guys in the category of TO and Randy Moss. JDG
SDS Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 So, are people complaining about the actual Hall of Fame voters and their choices or are people complaining about talk shows and the opinions of NFL fans at large???
Alaska Darin Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 Maybe cuz Irvin was a better(slightly) receiver than Reed. Reed had better stats than Lynn Swann-was he a better receiver?? 562927[/snapback] Yes - and he was better than Irvin too.
Recommended Posts