Rico Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 I just heard Sean Salisbury say that the Bus is a 1st-ballot HOF lock... and I didn't like it. He may have more yards than TT, and I know he's got a ring now, but he's yet another player who IMO was never the best at his position in any year. He was always good, but, unlike Thurman, he was never great... there were always at least 3-4 RBs every year who were better than the Bus, he just played longer & was more durable than the others... which is fine & well, but I say Thurmal is better & more deserving.
Kultarr Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 They should kick Joe Montana out so Tedy Bruschi can get put in early.
JAMIEBUF12 Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 They should kick Joe Montana out so Tedy Bruschi can get put in early. 596022[/snapback] TEDDY IS GONNA BE A SPECIAL ONE................he will be inducted to the hall of fame whilst he is still playing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!just like marcia brady doing the coin toss when he is still a active player
smokinandjokin Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 I don't want this to sound like blasphemy, but in my humble opinion, if Jim Kelly was a first-ballot HOFer as a QB, then Thurman Thomas should have been first-ballot as a RB. It is hogwash when the voting media makes up their own rules, and says things like, "If you're a first-ballot HOFer, then you should define your position, like Jim Brown and Walter Payton." I think that's what hurt Thurman, because he was unlike any RB in the league. He could run, but he was an extreme weapon in the passing game also. When Marshall Faulk was putting up HUGE numbers with the Rams in 1998-2001, they consistently flashed stats where Faulk was chasing Thurman's records, or Faulk had just passed Thurman for a record. It made me appreciate just how good Thurman was. You could make the case that Thurmal was more important to the success of that early-90's offense than Jimbo. That's not dissing Kelly, that's just saying what a stud TT was.
BuffalOhio Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 Thurman will already be in the HOF by the time Bettis is eligible. Not to worry.
Lofton80 Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 Depends on who else is eligible that year. A lot of behind the scenes stuff goes on as well. TT was hurt by 2 Senior candidates along with Aikman and White being locks. I have a hunch the committee compared Thurman to White and Aikman and decided to shelve him for a year. Yesterday, a Tampa Bay writer wrote the committee decided to close up unfinished business by adding two seniors and finally voting Harry Carson. Also added committee felt Moon would have broken Marino's records if he didn't "have" to play in Canada so long. My take is Houston sportswriter John McClain presented him and he has a lot of pull much like Felser did for Buffalo. Once he added the possiblility of the numbers he could have put up if Moon was a full time NFL player, the voters all bought it. My other issue with the voting is all the chatter before hand that TT should not go in on the first ballot as he was not a Jim Brown. I read it twice last week before the voting even took place so I imagine it was someone's agenda before the meeting. Peter King said it on WGR last week and the St. Louis writer said the same thing verbatim in the linked article. If Jim Brown is their standard, then Bettis is not first ballot material either.
Kultarr Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 Thurman deserved to go, no doubt. He was the Michael Jordan of the NFL for his time. Of course, with "logical" guys like Peter King making up the rules along the way, what should anyone expect? Harry Carson is to Thurman Thomas as Zach Thomas is to Brett Favre.
Rico Posted February 6, 2006 Author Posted February 6, 2006 Harry Carson is to Thurman Thomas as Zach Thomas is to Brett Favre. 596229[/snapback] No way. 3 of those 4 will be in the HOF...Carson, TT, & (holding my nose)Favre were true warriors, Zach is a pussyboy.
Guest BackInDaDay Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 Neither guys are 1st ballot guys, but Thomas is by far a more gifted RB and complete offensive player. Look at it this way, knowing what you already know about both players, who would you chose as your RB? For me, it's not even close.
Buftex Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 Thurman should have been voted in first ballot. I saw his association with 4 Super Bowl losses, his "lost helmet", and SB 28 head in hands routine cited as reasons that Thurman didn't belong in the HOF. Yet, the same genious' put Warren Moon in on his first year. Moon put up phenominal numbers in a gimmick offense, true, and likely belongs in the HOF. However, he is associated with some of the most monumental collapeses in NFL history, and contributed heavily to most of those collapses. I think Moon got in at Thurman's expense. Few would have protested if Thurman had been voted in (most analysts I heard during the week agreed that Thurman was in, Moon was not), but Moon was a PC vote. I also can't help but think that the recent "black on black" comments that Donovan McNabb made, had some effect on this vote. I fear that Marv and Kelly getting in so easily is going to make it a bit harder for other 90's Bills players to get in. Bruce Smith will get in on his first chance, but Thurman, Andre Reed, Steve Tasker (all HOF locks IMO), and Cornelius Bennett may have to wait a lot longer. A**holes like Rick Reilly have written about how the 90's Bills were not all that special, and questioned the Levy and Kelly inductions. As the media falls more in love with itself, guys like Reilly become more important. All are looking for an angle to set themeselves apart from everyone else.
Kultarr Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 No way. 3 of those 4 will be in the HOF...Carson, TT, & (holding my nose)Favre were true warriors, Zach is a pussyboy. 596238[/snapback] Well, I couldn't say Bruschi or London Fletcher, obviously. Thomas, Bruschi, and Fletcher are all decent middle linebackers. Thomas got to a few Pro Bowls and Bruschi got a few Super Bowl rings and lots of "good loving" by the media. But, as football players, none of them hold a candle to Ray Lewis in his prime, for example. Harry Carson just happened to be an above average LB on a great defense in New York. How many Super Bowls did Carson carry his team to victory in? How many teams game planned around Harry Carson and didn't worry about LT or Carl Banks, etc.? Brad Van Pelt was an above average LB too. With Carson, I just think if he played for a bad team like the Cardinals, Bucs, or Falcons of the day, very few fans would remember him at all.
Guest BackInDaDay Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Well, I couldn't say Bruschi or London Fletcher, obviously. Thomas, Bruschi, and Fletcher are all decent middle linebackers. Thomas got to a few Pro Bowls and Bruschi got a few Super Bowl rings and lots of "good loving" by the media. But, as football players, none of them hold a candle to Ray Lewis in his prime, for example. Harry Carson just happened to be an above average LB on a great defense in New York. How many Super Bowls did Carson carry his team to victory in? How many teams game planned around Harry Carson and didn't worry about LT or Carl Banks, etc.? Brad Van Pelt was an above average LB too. With Carson, I just think if he played for a bad team like the Cardinals, Bucs, or Falcons of the day, very few fans would remember him at all. 596968[/snapback] Do ou remember Mike Lucci of the Lions? He was contemporary of Butkus and Nitzke. A strong, steady inside LB, who gave you everything he had. I've got no problem with putting players like these in the HOF.
KOKBILLS Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 They should kick Joe Montana out so Tedy Bruschi can get put in early. 596022[/snapback]
KOKBILLS Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Depends on who else is eligible that year. A lot of behind the scenes stuff goes on as well. TT was hurt by 2 Senior candidates along with Aikman and White being locks. I have a hunch the committee compared Thurman to White and Aikman and decided to shelve him for a year. Yesterday, a Tampa Bay writer wrote the committee decided to close up unfinished business by adding two seniors and finally voting Harry Carson. Also added committee felt Moon would have broken Marino's records if he didn't "have" to play in Canada so long. My take is Houston sportswriter John McClain presented him and he has a lot of pull much like Felser did for Buffalo. Once he added the possiblility of the numbers he could have put up if Moon was a full time NFL player, the voters all bought it. My other issue with the voting is all the chatter before hand that TT should not go in on the first ballot as he was not a Jim Brown. I read it twice last week before the voting even took place so I imagine it was someone's agenda before the meeting. Peter King said it on WGR last week and the St. Louis writer said the same thing verbatim in the linked article. If Jim Brown is their standard, then Bettis is not first ballot material either. 596223[/snapback] Well then...I guess Jerry Rice should be the standard at WR, and there will never be another Wide Out in the HOF again... This whole deal is a complete joke...If TT is not a 1st Ballot HOF'er they should just skip the 1st Ballot...The fact that Carson and those other 2 are going in ahead of Thurman in a Year he was eligible is just a travishammockery...Well...That's what I think...
PatPatPatSack Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Thurman should have been voted in first ballot. I saw his association with 4 Super Bowl losses, his "lost helmet", and SB 28 head in hands routine cited as reasons that Thurman didn't belong in the HOF. Yet, the same genious' put Warren Moon in on his first year. Moon put up phenominal numbers in a gimmick offense, true, and likely belongs in the HOF. However, he is associated with some of the most monumental collapeses in NFL history, and contributed heavily to most of those collapses. I think Moon got in at Thurman's expense. Few would have protested if Thurman had been voted in (most analysts I heard during the week agreed that Thurman was in, Moon was not), but Moon was a PC vote. I also can't help but think that the recent "black on black" comments that Donovan McNabb made, had some effect on this vote. I fear that Marv and Kelly getting in so easily is going to make it a bit harder for other 90's Bills players to get in. Bruce Smith will get in on his first chance, but Thurman, Andre Reed, Steve Tasker (all HOF locks IMO), and Cornelius Bennett may have to wait a lot longer. A**holes like Rick Reilly have written about how the 90's Bills were not all that special, and questioned the Levy and Kelly inductions. As the media falls more in love with itself, guys like Reilly become more important. All are looking for an angle to set themeselves apart from everyone else. 596252[/snapback] The point that is lost is, under these new "first ballot rules" what in the world is Warren Moon doing in there at all? James Harris is in the NFL, what's warren doing in the CFL? I think Flutie's numbers in the CFL should be considered too. That should make him a lock too. Think back to Warren Moon. Did we EVER fear him? I always was excited to play him. Cause I thought he was junk. And he proved it in the greatest COLLAPSE of all time. I don't feel like lookin, but James Harris is not in the HOF is he?
Kultarr Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Do ou remember Mike Lucci of the Lions? He was contemporary of Butkus and Nitzke. A strong, steady inside LB, who gave you everything he had. I've got no problem with putting players like these in the HOF. 597025[/snapback] You missed the point. The point is putting players of lesser talent in before players of greater talent because of their proximity to Super Bowl victories or whatever it is that is the new unofficial standard. Would we put Deion Branch in the HoF over Steve Largent because Branch made some plays in Super Bowls and Largent did not? Or, to use players of the moment, Tiki Barber or Eli Manning over Steve Smith because Barber played for the Giants? It's just ridiculous. Thurman Thomas belongs in the HoF and was one of the most dominant players in the history of the NFL. Whether he had played in nationally-viewed "Loservilles" like Buffalo, Arizona, or Detriot or nationally-viewed "Great Cities" like New York or Beantown. Whether he won 1 Super Bowl or lost 4. And for an encore, they'll snub Bruce Smith for "playing too long."
Lofton80 Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Look at Blowhard King's comments in SI. He voted along with the buddy system for Moon. His fellow writer wanted Moon and he bought the argument. He doesn't even mention Thurman Thomas in his column by the way. I think these are my quick-hit thoughts of the Hall of Fame voting: a. The guy I got ripped most for before the voting was Art Monk, because I don't support him. The guy I got ripped most for after the voting was Warren Moon, because so many of my peers think his yards are relatively meaningless and because he was a 3-7 playoff quarterback. I actually went into the meeting thinking I'd vote against Moon because he just didn't win enough and because his run-and-shoot yards, I felt, shouldn't carry much weight. But only four of his 17 years were in the strict run-and-shoot. And he compared quite favorably to Dan Fouts: they each started 15 years and Moon threw for 6,000 more yards, 37 more touchdowns and won 17 more games. Playoff appearances: Moon nine, Fouts four. And while winning five Grey Cups in a six-years CFL career isn't a huge factor, it's called the Pro Football Hall of Fame. In the end, his body of work overcame the very big factor of three playoff wins in 15 starting seasons. b. Moon's skin color did not enter the equation for me. c. One good friend said to me: "How'd you put in Moon?'' I said, "His numbers are better than Fouts.' Didn't you think Fouts was a first-ballot Hall of Famer?'' He said no, and I said, then we're going to have a problem on this one. The writer who presented Moon's case in the room, John McClain of the Houston Chronicle, did a very good job vaulting Moon over the line for me. d. Heard two media guys talking in the media center Sunday. Guy one: "Monk got screwed again. Ridiculous.'' Guy two: "I say it all the time -- if you screw guys in the press and don't talk to them and treat them like crap, it'll come back to haunt you.'' Absurd, absurd, absurd. No factor. In fact, Monk is admired for his dignity, soft-spokenness and class. e. For all of you who follow such things, I heard a "Hey, Peter'' Friday night at the hotel. I looked over and there was Joe Theismann. We've had a tad of a disagreement over Monk, and Theismann told Dan Patrick that I had too much control over the room. Totally silly, of course; I'm one of 39. Out of respect for Theismann's stature, I brought his main points about Monk into the room on Saturday morning. It did no good. Monk didn't make the cut from 15 to 10. f. I feel for Gary Zimmerman, the Minnesota and Denver left tackle. I think he's a Hall of Famer, and I will vote for him when we get rid of some of this backlog. But the way the system works, you vote for 10 of the original 15. Then the field is narrowed to 10. Then you vote for six of the 10. Then the field is narrowed to six. Then you vote yes or no, individually, on the six. With that field, it was hard for Zimmerman to get to 10, never mind six.
Lofton80 Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Now this is John McClain's article from the day before the voting. Tell me King who quotes it verbatim did not buy into his buddy's argument. I imagine if Dan Fouts played in the passing era and played into his 40's like Moon did the numbers would not be even close. Voters split on whether ex-Oiler should get a spot in Hall of Fame By JOHN MCCLAIN Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle DETROIT - Former Oilers quarterback Warren Moon, a member of Seattle's radio broadcast crew, is eligible for the Pro Football Hall of Fame for the first time. When the 39-member Hall of Fame selection committee meets Saturday morning, it will determine the Class of 2006 — a class that could have as many as six and as few as three. It'll be the toughest vote in history. Like Moon, Troy Aikman, Reggie White and Thurman Thomas — who starred at Willowridge High School — are eligible for the first time. Although Moon also played for the Vikings, Seahawks and Chiefs during a 17-year NFL career, no one is more qualified to judge him than Oilers' fans who celebrated and suffered with him during his 10 years in Houston. Moon is very deserving of being inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame on the first ballot, but it's going to be difficult. A survey of voters shows that Moon has backers and detractors. Hopefully, the voters will listen carefully to Saturday morning's presentation that will show — beyond a shadow of a doubt — that Moon should be part of this year's class that will be enshrined in Canton, Ohio, in August. The two biggest obstacles in Moon's path to Canton are voters who say he compiled phenomenal statistics in the run-and-shoot, and he couldn't win the big playoff game to reach the Super Bowl. Let's examine each. First, Moon was a starter for 15 of his 17 seasons. He only played in the run-and-shoot for four seasons (1990-93). Second, Moon didn't play in a Super Bowl. Dan Fouts never played in one, either, and he was a first-ballot inductee. Comparable to Fouts Check out how Moon compares to Fouts: Both had 15 seasons as a starter. Moon had more yards (49,325 to 43,040), more touchdown passes (291 to 254), more regular-season victories (102 to 85), more playoff seasons (nine to four), more 3,000-yard seasons (nine to six), more Pro Bowls (nine to six) and the same number of playoff victories (three). Fouts was deserving, and Moon should be, too. But some voters just can't get beyond the fact that Moon didn't win more playoff games. Here's something they should consider: In playoff losses to Pittsburgh (26-23 in overtime) after the 1989 season, Denver (26-24) after the 1991 season, Buffalo (41-38 in overtime) after the 1992 season and Kansas City (28-20) after the 1993 season, Moon was remarkable. In those four games, the Oilers averaged 25 points. Moon completed 124 of 177 for 1,317 yards and 10 TDs with four interceptions. That's a 330-yard average despite trips to Denver and Buffalo. In each of those four games, the defense blew fourth-quarter leads. And you don't need to be reminded, of course, that the Oilers led Buffalo 35-3 midway through the third quarter. Here is more evidence that will be presented Saturday: Only three quarterbacks in history have led their teams to eight consecutive playoff appearances: Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana and Moon. In 15 seasons as a starter, Moon's teams made the playoffs nine times. As a starter, Moon had 12 straight seasons in which his teams didn't have a losing record. The only quarterbacks selected to play in nine Pro Bowls are John Elway, Dan Marino and Moon. During a 10-year stretch from 1986-1995, only Marino threw for more yards than Moon (37,410 to 36,130). During that period, Marino (254) and Jim Kelly (223) are the only ones with more touchdown passes than Moon (220). Moon had more playoff seasons (nine) than Kelly (six), Elway (five) and Marino (four). A worthy role model Also, when Moon was 39 years old, he threw for 4,228 yards and 33 touchdowns with Minnesota. When he was 41, he threw for 3,678 yards and 25 touchdowns with Seattle. Even though it's the Pro Football Hall of Fame, achievements in the Canadian Football League don't carry weight with the committee, so Moon's five Grey Cups in the CFL won't merit consideration. Quarterbacks like Steve McNair and Donovan McNabb said this week that Moon influenced their careers and opened doors for them. Moon showed coaches, general managers and owners that an African-American could excel at the most important position on the team, which made him a trailblazer for a generation of young black quarterbacks. Trailblazers, especially those who overcame so many obstacles to post some of the most impressive numbers in history, deserve to be immortalized in Canton.
Hirly5 Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 What is everyones thoughts on Jerome Bettis? A lot of media types are saying that he is a lock for the Hall of Fame now that he was apart of Super Bowl winning team. If Bettis gets in as a first ballot because he was apart of a Super Bowl team than the HOF is a joke. I think a lot of the problem with the Thurman's case was that there were alot of good canidates. In Peter King's article he mentions that Zimmerman will get his vote when some of the backlog is gone. Why is there a limit on how big a HOF class can be? If the guy is a HOFer, he is a HOFer. Thurman was on the edge of being a first ballot but maybe whoever argued his case wasn't convincing. I know in the Dr.Z article on SI.com, Dr.Z mentioned that he stood up and was in favor of him. The next few years are going to log jammed with new worthy canidates along with the guys that already deserve to be in. I think they need to increase the number of HOFers in a given class.
Guest BackInDaDay Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 You missed the point. The point is putting players of lesser talent in before players of greater talent because of their proximity to Super Bowl victories or whatever it is that is the new unofficial standard. Would we put Deion Branch in the HoF over Steve Largent because Branch made some plays in Super Bowls and Largent did not? Or, to use players of the moment, Tiki Barber or Eli Manning over Steve Smith because Barber played for the Giants? It's just ridiculous. No, I didn't, and I agree with your point. I used an unsung guy like Lucci amidst his high-profile contemporaries, Butkus and Nitzke, to help illustrate that point. Lucci may not have been in Butkus' class (similar to Carson/Taylor), but he certainly was every good an inside LB as Titletown's Nitzke. Thurman Thomas belongs in the HoF and was one of the most dominant players in the history of the NFL. You lost me here. He was a great all purpose back, but this is way over the top. And for an encore, they'll snub Bruce Smith for "playing too long." Not a chance, here's your dominant player! With all our great D talent, this was the player that coordinatoors had to account for each offensive play.
Recommended Posts