So yes it is a “numbers” game – as in how many DBs should be in the Hall and representing one decade. For example there are 6 Qbs from the 1970s in the Hall, with perhaps one or two more getting in some day (for a max total of 8). I doubt one could make a strong argument that another 5 DBs from the 1970s deserve election (giving 13 total), perhaps 1 or 2 at the most (10 or 11), given that voters are not very kind to Safeties to begin with.

–please explain why lifetime INTs are such an incredibly important and meaningful stat. You’re hanging very hard onto this as something that trumps any other consideration for HoF DB worth, and I’d be interested to know why.

–if longevity were so incredibly important in a HoF argument, Ray Brown and Trey Junkin would be HoF-ers and Gale Sayers and Dwight Stephenson would not be. And no one would even be considering Terrell Davis. But there are clearly significant limits to this line of thinking.

–the reason why I’m pushing for Lemar Parrish over Ken Riley is that not everyone can get in the HoF. And as I’ve outlined above, Parrish seems to have a better HoF case. And there are a whole lot of worthy Senior DBs to consider. It’s not clear to me why Riley must be pushed to the head of the line here.

–I do view 1st team all-pro selections and to a somewhat lesser extent pro bowls as important in HoF consideration. They tell us what contemporary observers thought of the relative worth of players at non-skill positions at the time, with very few exceptions. We really don’t have good, reliable, meaningful numbers for o-linemen and defensive players. Really, it’s not so much a question of “numbers,” it’s a question of “which numbers to value, and how to weigh them.”

–you asked me to do some more research, and here’s some info for you. There are a lot of players who only went to one pro bowl in their career, including Ray Nitschke, Ray Brown, Tedy Bruschi, Carl Banks, Mike Vrabel, Duane Bickett, Dave Brown, Dave Waymer, Karl Kassulke, Tom Neville, Len Rohde, Leon Searcy, Korey Stringer, Barret Robbins, Ray Collins, Thurman McGraw, Dave Pear, Dan Currie, Keith Bulluck, Tim Harris, Lee Roy Caffey, Bob Skoronski (also, Dan Koppen and Jon Stinchcomb have only been once but are still active) — the list is in fact good-sized. Despite your assertion, there are no guarantees of going more than once to a pro bowl.

–the argument that I somehow had to have played football in order to have a right to offer up opinions on HoF worth makes utterly no sense — no more sense that the idea that a music critic has no right to review a clarinet recital unless he plays the instrument.

It appears that many people just look at the surface ie (Pro bowls, super bowl, all pro) which is easy to do.

If anybody would like to see Ken Riley numbers against the HOF Receivers over his 15 year career I will be happy to email them to you and then I would like to hear your thoughts.

Thanks for your comments. i know you view the Pro bowl as a great determining factor but to me it’s just a popularity contest, once you make it 1 time you will surely make it again. Just go back and do you research and look at the stats of several players.

I never said Parrish wasn’t deserving of consideration as well but to say longevity as well as numbers don’t matter is crazy.

Name another sport where you are in the top 5 in a particular stat and they are not considered one of the best.

Have you ever played football or any sport? If so you would know how hard it is to get an interception. Or play for 15 years professionally.

If just “longevity” and “consistency” and “professionalism” in combination were desirable HoF traits, long-snapper Trey Junkin and guard Ray Brown would be great HoF choices. But they have no business in.

You can assert whatever you like, but simply put, the argument comparing Lemar Parrish to Riley is indeed a very strong one. Parrish was a 1st team all pro 3 times, went to 9 pro bowls, and was also a first-rate kick returner, so I recommend you “stop overlooking the numbers.” Those numbers indeed don’t lie. During the time Parrish and Riley were CB teammates (1970 to 1977 inclusive), Riley had about half again as many interceptions (36) as Parrish did (25). Parrish also went to 6 pro bowls and was named a 1st team all pro by NEA in 1976 during this time while Riley’s numbers here are zero and zero. This evidence strongly suggests that QBs of the time avoided Parrish and threw against Riley, and also that contemporary observers considered Parrish the better player. And Riley did not do much kick returning — he was clearly not in Parrish’s league on this aspect of the game. And that’s why Parrish would be a decidedly better HoF choice than Riley.

Your argument that Riley “had to have the skills and ability to be in position to make the interception” conveniently ignores that numbers suggest he appears to have gotten thrown on more often than Parrish. And there’s normally a reason that this occurs — the CB being thrown on isn’t as good in coverage. And even if he was a better cornerback than the ones who played alongside Rod Woodson and Deion Sanders, that doesn’t necessarily mean Riley should be in the Hall of Fame. One can be a good player for a long time and still not necessarily be at Hall of Fame level.

And please explain how we know the pro bowl back then was a “popularity contest.” Not to mention all-pro teams. And please convince us with good specifics that lifetime INTs are so meaningful that they automatically should vault a player with this argument — and with nothing else — into the HoF.

So please stop overlooking the numbers. Numbers don’t lie! Ken Riley deserves to be in the HOF and anybody else that was the numbers to back them up.

As great as OJ Simpson was he only elevated his teams to a best record of 9-5 and one Playoff game in 11 years.