The Snake finally makes the HoF

Mott the Hoople

Mott the Hoople

Sweet Jane
The late great Ken Stabler finally made the hall of fame. It's a mark of the east coast bias and the cluelessness of sports writer that Stabler wasn't elected, while he was still alive, a long time ago. I remember watching him play and that man knew more ways to win a game than Doan's has pills. You could not judge Stabler on statistic alone. He had those intangibles that simply won games. If you want to go by statistics though, Stabler put up more numbers and won more championships than his Alabama alum Joe Namath who was a elected on his first year of eligibility. I'm sure Alabama and Raider fans are pleased but have mixed emotions on the slight of it taking so long.

Good news for Buckeye fans. Orlando Pace made it in his first year of eligibility. He's the best offensive lineman I've ever seen play for the Buckeyes and he played a major roll in the Rams "Greatest show on turf" era.

This also portends good news for Bengal fans as both Ken Anderson and Ken Riley should both be locks to be selected by the veterans committee. Anderson was the original west coast QB, has 4 NFL passing titles and a MVP award and every QB from that era who is even close to Anderson's stats is already in the HoF. With Riley...how could a db who played 14 years with 65 interceptions not be n the HoF?
 
Stabler was one of the greatest instinctive QBs I have seen play. I agree that he was overdue for the HoF.

Super nice guy too. And he never meet a party he didn't like.
 
Agreed that it was long overdue that he be inducted into the Hall of Fame. In fact, he was a great bar bet of mine because people would swear that he already was in the Hall of Fame and couldn't believe me when I showed that he wasn't.

As to why he wasn't inducted? Is there an east coast bias? Maybe. I actually think there is an anti Raider bias. There is always going to be debate as to who got in and who didn't (more about who didn't). In the end, while you can always say "so and so should have gotten in", it is very rare for me to disagree with those that do get in.

The only one that I have disagreed with is Tim Brown. I think he is a great player, I just don't think he had a HOF career. Yeah, he put up a lot of stats, but I think it was more a testament to how long he played than sheer dominance. I don't ever think of him as being a dominant player.

Two people I think who should definitely be in and aren't are Sterling Sharpe and Terrell Davis. Sterling Sharpe was hands down one of the most dominant receivers when he played and had his career not been cut short by injury there is no telling where he would be. Same with Terrell Davis. To me the mark of a Hall of Famer is did you dominate when you played.
 
Well I think you're right that Sharpe and Davis get short shrift cause their careers we're short.

Dominance is one thing but there are other aspects of an HoF career. Stabler wasn't a dominant QB. He didn't put up gaudy stats, he wasn't the fastest, didn't have the strongest arm, wasn't the most accurate passer....the SOB just had an uncanny knack for winning.

So some other aspects to consider for an HoF career are performance, stats, winning, championships, influence on the game and personality....cause lets face it....Neon Deon Sanders and Broadway Joe Namath are in the HoF for their personalities as they didn't have HoF careers. If Joe Namath had not won SB III no way would he be in the HoF. I still can't understand how a hot dog piece of fluff that couldn't even tackle like Sanders made the HoF. Unlike baseball and other sports, in the NFL acting like a clown matters I guess. It blows my mind that Deon made it in his first year of eligibillty but Ken Riley, a consummate professional, who was a better cover CB than Deon and a far, far, far better tackler (they didn't call him "The Rattler" for nothing) is going to have to wait for the veterans committee mainly cause he wasn't a hot dog.
 
Namuth's TD/INT ratio was atrocious. He basically had two statistically dominant years (1968, 1971), and was significant for becoming the first 4000 yard passer in a season. Otherwise, that 1971 season stands as the only All-Pro season of his.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Well I think you're right that Sharpe and Davis get short shrift cause their careers we're short.

Dominance is one thing but there are other aspects of an HoF career. Stabler wasn't a dominant QB. He didn't put up gaudy stats, he wasn't the fastest, didn't have the strongest arm, wasn't the most accurate passer....the SOB just had an uncanny knack for winning.

So some other aspects to consider for an HoF career are performance, stats, winning, championships, influence on the game and personality....cause lets face it....Neon Deon Sanders and Broadway Joe Namath are in the HoF for their personalities as they didn't have HoF careers. If Joe Namath had not won SB III no way would he be in the HoF. I still can't understand how a hot dog piece of fluff that couldn't even tackle like Sanders made the HoF. Unlike baseball and other sports, in the NFL acting like a clown matters I guess. It blows my mind that Deon made it in his first year of eligibillty but Ken Riley, a consummate professional, who was a better cover CB than Deon and a far, far, far better tackler (they didn't call him "The Rattler" for nothing) is going to have to wait for the veterans committee mainly cause he wasn't a hot dog.
Click to expand...

I agree that Namath isn't a HOF but I disagree on Sanders. He was a shut down cornerback in every sense of the word. I will take the word of NFL QBs that said they wouldn't even look his way. He had an amazing ability to make the receiver appear open and goad the QB into throwing the ball and with his speed could close ground quickly. Couple that with his return skills and he is hands down a HOF player.

I do agree there are many factors in the NFL. For instance you can't compare receivers today to receivers 30 years ago when they literally got mugged. Same with QBs
 
iabt.png
 
Eno L. Camino said:
Namuth's TD/INT ratio was atrocious. He basically had two statistically dominant years (1968, 1971), and was significant for becoming the first 4000 yard passer in a season. Otherwise, that 1971 season stands as the only All-Pro season of his.
Click to expand...

Be fair Namath played in the deadball era before the liberalized the holding rules and permitted DB's to virtually mug receivers from the line of scrimmage. For that era Namaths TD/Int ratio was quite respectable. You are essentially correct. Namath had about three or four really good years.
 
I Love America said:
I agree that Namath isn't a HOF but I disagree on Sanders. He was a shut down cornerback in every sense of the word. I will take the word of NFL QBs that said they wouldn't even look his way. He had an amazing ability to make the receiver appear open and goad the QB into throwing the ball and with his speed could close ground quickly. Couple that with his return skills and he is hands down a HOF player.

I do agree there are many factors in the NFL. For instance you can't compare receivers today to receivers 30 years ago when they literally got mugged. Same with QBs
Click to expand...
OK...I will give that on Sanders but I'll also say that Riley was a better shut down corner than Sanders and he could actually tackle and there are probably 3 to six other CB's who were better than Sanders who are not in the HoF.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Be fair Namath played in the deadball era before the liberalized the holding rules and permitted DB's to virtually mug receivers from the line of scrimmage. For that era Namaths TD/Int ratio was quite respectable. You are essentially correct. Namath had about three or four really good years.
Click to expand...

You have to remember the animosity between the NFL and the AFL. It was only the 3rd Super Bowl when Nammath guaranteed the win. The "upstart" AFL was thought to be completely inferior to the older NFL. And the previous years scores defended that notion. The NFL had won by 20 points in the first two Super Bowls. The cocky upstart team with a cocky, upstart QB grabbed a lot of people's attention and put the AFL on the map.

Not gaudy numbers, but he was a super star in the beginning.
 
WinterBorn said:
You have to remember the animosity between the NFL and the AFL. It was only the 3rd Super Bowl when Nammath guaranteed the win. The "upstart" AFL was thought to be completely inferior to the older NFL. And the previous years scores defended that notion. The NFL had won by 20 points in the first two Super Bowls. The cocky upstart team with a cocky, upstart QB grabbed a lot of people's attention and put the AFL on the map.

Not gaudy numbers, but he was a super star in the beginning.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone would deny that, I just don't think it was Hall of Fame worthy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top