Courtesy of the Pro Football Hall of Fame
The 2014 Pro Football Hall of Fame Class consists of:
LB Derrick Brooks, WR Andre Reed, CB Aeneas Williams, T Walter Jones, and DE Michael Strahan, along with senior candidates Claude Humphrey and Ray Guy, the first punter to be elected.
Brooks and Jones were first ballot elections to the Hall of Fame, while Humphrey was a two-time senior candidate, after being a finalist three times. Guy was a first year senior candidate.
Reed’s induction got him in before Marvin Harrison and a collection of wide receivers whose eligibility will be coming soon. Their stats now outpace Reed, though the Bills wideout put up what were great numbers in his day.
Jones’ selection put him in over Kansas City guard Will Shields, among the most decorated offensive linemen of his time.
With NFL Network passing on a Hall of Fame announcement segment this year in favor of more overhyping pregame of the Super Bowl, rumors started swirling around 5 p.m. central time about who was going to make the final class. Comments started coming in on various Hall of Fame posts on this site at about the same time.
The final five to be cut were Charles Haley, Jerome Bettis, Kevin Greene, Marvin Harrison, Will Shields. Unscientifically, reaction on Twitter seems to be that Haley was the biggest snub, followed by Bettis.
For what it’s worth, Andy predicted four of the five modern-era candidates to make the Hall, missing only on Walter Jones. He predicted Shields would get the call. Tony got three. He also picked Shields over Jones and also picked Tony Dungy instead of Aeneas Williams.
What are your thoughts on the class of 2014? And, though I think this was a pretty strong class, there always is someone who got a raw deal. Vote here on who you think received the biggest snub from the HOF voters.
Loading ...
Like I said on the other page, the 1992 Bills now have 7 HoFers counting Levy and Wilson, while the 1992 Cowboys have 3. Sure, that’s an accurate depiction of reality. Bang up job, voters. Bang up job.
@Rasputin, who else would you put in from the Cowboys and who would you drop from the Bills?
I’ll grant you Haley, who I think will probably make it next year. Other than that, not seeing a lot of HOF talent on the ’92 Cowboys roster. Really solid, not great roster of talent–or at least not long enough careers of being great. Jimmy Johnson might get a shot at some point, but his career was so short, and lacked so much in Miami. Woodson seems like a long shot at this point. As much as it scares me, at some point even Jerry Jones might be able to buy a seat at the table as a contributor.
From the Bills, Kelly, Thomas, Reed, Smith all seem like solid picks. Reed might be considered borderline, but it’s been clear for years he would eventually make it. Who is the other player in? Levy and Wilson…could have the annual debate of coaches/contributors vs. players, but other than that debate, they seem like solid picks?
How many 49ers tean of 1980s decade are in? Even SB teams are not always full of HOFers and Bills did get to four straight SBs Haley not getting elected nothing against Cowboys but lack of all pro pro bowl teams and more players with sacks not to worry he is getting in soon
Missing Haley is a disappointment, but overall strong class and history making with Guy selection also clears long standing candidate on ballot with Reed and continued positive progress on resolving WR logjam
I see Harrison and Haley as strongest returning candidates for 2015 no other top WR or DL on 2015 ballot
Pete Prisco already complaining about results says process needs to be changed so there is more work and not debate?? WTF? What is he thinking and what changes would make it better and why?
Tony, Charles Haley, Darren Woodson, and Jimmy Johnson all deserve the HoF. From offense guys like Jay Novacek (5 Pro Bowls, 1 1st team All Pro selection; best receiving stats of any TE in the league over the first half of the decade), Nate Newton (6 Pro Bowls, 2 first team All Pros), Mark Stepnoski (5 Pro Bowls with 2 different teams; All Decade); Erik Williams (4 Pro Bowls, 2 first team All Pros; only OT to consistently whip Reggie White) all at least deserve some consideration. There’s a general consensus that the 90s Cowboys had one of the greatest offensive lines of all time, and yet the only one in Canton is Larry Allen, who didn’t show up until after they had already won 2 Super Bowls.
The 80s 49ers’s success was more scheme based than the 90s Cowboys’ was, though SF has 5 HoFers from that decade, not counting Steve Young. Haley would have increased that total too.
I’m not saying those Bills don’t deserve induction at some point, I’m just highlighting a skew that’s getting worse. I would have inducted Brown over Reed. I’d love for someone to explain why Reed is somehow more deserving. Brown has better stats across the board despite playing on an inferior team. It’s not even close. Reed looked good to me but not overly dominant, but in fairness maybe that’s because when I watched the Bills the Cowboys were typically slaughtering them. I’d induct Jimmy Johnson over Marv Levy any day. Johnson pulled off possibly the most impressive turnaround job in modern NFL history. Levy dominated an inferior conference for a few years but never won a Super Bowl. Snark aside, why isn’t Jerry Jones as Canton worthy as Ralph Wilson?
Guessing here that Harrison and Dungy supporters, including Colts fans are upset and calling for Congressional inquiry
Agreed with Paul about Marvin Harrison and Charles Haley being strongest returning candidates for election. Jerome Bettis’ HOF stock is going down. Voters are probably looking into his career yards per rush average and his 9 seasons of 3.8 or less. He will get it based on his career stats, but will take him time.
Rasputin: Your count for the Bills appears to include Lofton, who is in the hall mostly because of his years in Green Bay. If you are going to count him (and he was on 3 of the 4 Super Bowl teams), you need to count Deion Sanders and Larry Allen for the Cowboys who were both on the Cowboys ’95 championship team and made bigger contributions to the Cowboys than Lofton made to the Bills. If you assume that Jerry Jones and Charles Haley will eventually get in, then the count is 7 / 7. Not absurd.
As for this class, I think there are two big take aways. 1) The electors solved the receiver backlog through horsetrading. Carter first, then Reed. Brown’s day will come soon. As will Harrison’s. But the fact Reed (likely the least “worthy,” but certainly not “unworthy”) got in before the other two indicates to me that this was decided last year. 2) They got it right. So many people complain about the process, but the electors, who have a very hard job, generally do a great job. This year’s class is top notch. As I said in the other thread, Williams has been criminally underappreciated. It is great to see the selectors give him his due (similar to Cortez Kennedy before him).
In fact, I think the selectors have done such a good job, that I don’t see any major snubs left. Shields will get in, but a short wait was probably consistent with his qualifications. Same with Haley. Harrison could very easily be next year’s Strahan (i.e., a returning lock). I think congrats are truly in order.
Looking ahead for one second, has anyone else noticed that the Greatest Show on Turf are coming in one giant pack. Next year brings Torry Holt (a personal favorite), Isaac Bruce, Orlando Pace, and Kurt Warner! (Not to mention, Edgerin James a Marshall Faulk clone who was effectively traded for him during the 1999 draft). I think we could be in for some very interesting debates regarding Warner. To my mind, a HOF QB should not have a four year “hole” in the middle of his career, but I know a lot of people are going to disagree. Good times ahead.
Oh, and the other Bills HoFer is Lofton, who ranked #2 in receiving yards for them that year. Jimmy Johnson never had a losing season at Miami, and made the playoffs 3 out of 4 years. That’s a heck of a lot better than Levy did in his stint at Kansas City.
I really like this class and it’s hard to say any of these are undeserving.
Brooks, Jones and Strahan were the three locks, in my opinion. Their election was no surprise to me at all. It’s good to see the voters are taking care of the offensive lineman logjam.
The same thing goes with the wide receiver logjam of Andre Reed. After two years of gridlock in 2011 and 2012, this is the second straight year a wide out has been elected. I support his election, though I’m not sure I would’ve picked him over Harrison or Brown. This reminds me of in 2008 when Art Monk was elected over Carter because of how much longer he waited.
I’m very pleased to learn about Williams being elected. I thought he had an outside shot and was very deserving of such an honor and a little bit on the underrated side. Good for him.
As far as the seniors go, I would’ve picked others over Humphrey, but I do think he’s a better selection than both Curley Culp and Dave Robinson. However, how come Humphrey gets elected in 2014 after being denied in 2009 while Stanfel was shot down a second time in 2012?
Most importantly, congratulations, finally, to Ray Guy. I wasn’t sure if the committee would actually do it, with there seeming to be some angst against people at special teams position, though I disagree. I think Guy’s election opens the door for Morten Andersen, though he may have to wait. Guy should’ve been in years ago if you ask me and I have been a proponent for a long time. He is perhaps the greatest punter who ever lived and if anybody thought drafting him in the first round was a mistake back in 1973, it’s hard to think the same thing now.
Tremendous class and congratulations to all seven.
Getting to four straight SBs is pretty impressive achievement for Levy and only took 50 years for Wilson to get in as founding owner of AFL. Hard for coaches and contibutors to get in without long waits in many cases, Johnson will get in, Jones perhaps and if can ever win another SB. Many teams have great players like the 1990s cowboys you list but without large career numbers plus several all pro and pro bowl teams there is a long list of many players deserving not just from Cowboys. Reed has solid career numbers was key to Bills success and 5th all time in playoff receptions. Brown did not advance into final 10 due to both Reed and Harrison plus many other more deserving finalists
Rasputin: Ralph Wilson is more worthy than Jerry Jones because the AFL might not have survived without him! Without the AFL, football as we know it might not exist.
Jerry will certainly get his due in time. He has been a very influential owner. But of course, Jerry hasn’t exactly been an football-guy who worked for the benefit of the whole league the way guys like Halas, Marshall, Hunt, Wilson, Rooney, Mara and even Davis (in his own perverse way) did. In fact, of the modern owners, the most deserving is likely Kraft who seems to get much of the credit for avoiding a disasterous work stoppage during the last labor negotiations.
I just saw Paul’s response to me on the other thread; I guess it makes sense if the entire NFL Honors show is tape-delayed, but that just resulted in ALL the awards being leaked before the show went on the air. It’s like the NFL (and the Grammys that weren’t live on both coasts) think social media doesn’t exist.
Would Jones have gone in over Shields if the Seahawks weren’t in the Super Bowl this year?
Morgan Wick: Re Jones: Absolutely. Walter Jones along with Ogden will go down as the best tackles since Munoz. There is no one in the NFL today with half their talent.
Justin, I meant to mention Lofton in my previous post. I specifically mentioned the 1992 Cowboys/Bills, and neither Deion or Allen were on that team (or the 1993 team that also crushed the Bills in the Super Bowl) so there’s no reason to mention them. Lofton was a major contributor to the 1992 Bills though.
I don’t assume anything about future Cowboys inductions. I’m also not sure why Canton parity between the entire Cowboys 90s dynasty and the Bills’ run wouldn’t be considered absurd, though it would admittedly be less absurd than the current skew.
Paul, give me a break. Harrison wasn’t first ballot. Big deal. Dungy is a contributor who only won one Super Bowl. Both will obviously make it, probably very soon, and deserve to. It would be intellectually dishonest to try to spin away legitimate, well informed criticisms by equating them to knee jerk reactions by low information fans upset over their guy not getting in at his first crack.
As I mentioned on this board a few years ago the debate over Kurt Warner will be one of the most interesting ever for HOF voters. With “weaker” first year class in 2015 with Seau a lock only, plenty of room for 2014 final 10 not elected to be will positioned in 2015 especially Haley, Harrison and Shields each of whom will be best players from their respective positions on the finalist ballot
Oh just wait Colts fans are upset there was plenty of hype over both in recent weeks and many “experts” and predictions selecting Harrison. Not that I agree but it was clear many folks thought he was getting in
I just can’t see Haley as being Hall of Fame worthy. My guess is Harrison is probably going to get elected in 2015 and maybe Brown in 2016. The same goes for Shields, too. It depends if the voters like him or Pace better.
Yea pretty surprising from the so called media savy NFL to tape delay an awards showing knowing that in this instant news society word would out before airing, Oscars, Grammys, Golden Globes air live why not NFL as no need for post production before airing, makes no sense to me. Look for show to go live in future years as who wants to watch an awards show when they already know the winners?
Paul, taking the worst team in the league and winning 2 Super Bowls just a few years later and setting up the 3rd win is more impressive than simply making it 4 times from a weak conference, especially when the former soundly beat the latter in those two Super Bowls.
Apart from simply being one of several original AFL owners and presiding over team success, I’ve never heard specifics about Wilson’s weighty contributions. His PFHOF site entry actually leads off by crediting him with “reintroducing pro football to Western New York”. Well gee, Clint Murchison reintroduced football to Texas, a far more important football state, and presided over a record 20 consecutive winning seasons, including winning 5 conference championships and actually winning 2 Super Bowls. Jerry Jones’ various contributions to the league’s finances, the competition committee, the salary cap, etc. haven’t typically benefited the Cowboys, and he’s generally seen as someone who’s benefited the league. Since I hate parity I don’t always agree, but oh well. He did win 3 Super Bowls. Why would he need a 4th? To prove he could do it without Jimmy Johnson, who’s also not in the HoF? Meanwhile both Wilson and Levy are in Canton. This crap all got old for Cowboys fans a long time ago.
I never did see an argument for inducting Reed over Brown.
The mess that Jones has created with the Cowboys over the last 17 years has really hurt his case, again took Wilson 50 years to get as owners are few in HOF will take time for Jones and yes another SB would help. Levy helped rise Bills as well and i do not buy the weaker AFC argument anyway you look at it four SBs in role is impressive. Johnson has short coaching career with only three winning seasons in Dallas and the two SBs, so I can see why his path to HOF is going to take some time with such a short career.
I guess all those Buffalo HoFers explain why the Cowboys were lucky to squeak by them, and why the Bills sustained their fearsome dominance throughout the 1990s and 2000s under the masterful leadership of Ralph Wilson.
From supporters including voters, Reed was key member of Bills success, 5th all time in playoff receptions, strong career numbers and post season honors, his role with the Bills appears to have made the difference and his continued advancements ahead of Brown in recent years looks like HOF voters agree.
I suppose it’s possible the AFC wasn’t the inferior conference, and the NFC winning 12 consecutive Super Bowls was fluke.
I don’t know why they changed to announcing the class at the NFL Awards show. I liked watching the election show on NFL Network much better.
Bills also had success in early AFL and played role in keeping AFL alive and with merger. Again many multiple SB teams have less HOFers just look at 1980s 49ers. I agree Cowboys were better then Bills in 1990s and were team of 1990s decade but that alone is not meaning they should have more individual HOFers then other teams from decade including Bills
Yes NFC was better conference but what I meant was that Bills did not a cake walk each year through the AFC to the SB, some other quality teams from AFC in that era including Oilers (how many HOFers do they have?)
Paul, Brown’s teams weren’t usually in the playoffs, or I’m sure he would have had good volume stats too. He ranks 5th in career receptions, 6th in yards (2nd at retirement), and 7th in TDs (3rd at retirement), all well ahead of Reed.
You seem to be struggling to make up your mind whether team success should weigh significantly or not. You certainly disregarded it with the 90s Cowboys earlier.
Cowboys clearly had better overall team and quality depth, but not many sustained HOF quality careers
Combination of individual career stats, sustainedvcareer and individual awards plus team success and playoff numbers – all together provide strong case for Reed, lack of those same factors is why some of the 1990s Cowboys are not in. Reed over Brown is close call but again majority of HOF voters appear to agree and are making the same assessment given Reeds advancement over Brown in recent elections.
Meant to mention that Brown has 9 Pro Bowls to Reed’s 7. Neither really stood out to me as among the very elite of their era in the eyeball test; they’re both stat candidates, but Brown has way better stats.
Again, the 49ers were an aberration due to their scheme based success, but the Cowboys don’t have any more inductees from the 90s than they do from the 80s. Haley’s induction at least would have boosted both clubs versus the Bills.
BTW, it’s interesting that Haley, Deion, and Allen all played for both the 49ers and Cowboys.
Paul, Nate Newton went to 6 Pro bowls, Mark Stepnoski was All Decade, and Darren Woodson was the best player on the defense long enough to become the all time franchise tackle leader. That qualifies as sustained success in my book. Combined with their Super Bowl wins, I don’t see a legitimate case for excluding them from serious consideration.
Even Novacek dominated TE receiving stats for half a decade and made 5 Pro Bowls (was vital to moving the offense throughout the dynasty; they suffered when injury forced his retirement), his career totals being padded some with a few earlier seasons with the dismal Cardinals. He’s usually dismissed by people who compare him with the TEs of the late 90s and 00s, but Novacek missed that stat inflation and should be judged against a different era, keeping his championship contributions and eyeball test clutch talent in mind.
Many players with 5 or 6 Probowls and from great teams not in HOF as well as from numerous all decade teams even going back to 1950 s team, 1960s, through to 1990s including even ore deserving Cowboys Pearson and Harris. It is not always about an anti Cowboys bias just hard to pick limited number of HOFers each year and to separate very good or even great players from HOFers, plenty of teams including championship winners can make same strong cases for HOFers not just Cowboys
1980s Cowboys had two HOF players, 1990s has four with another soon in Haley
As to Brown versus Reed, again HOF is not just just about total career numbers as voters take into account many other factors including impact on team success and playoffs
Would Brown be in Canton already if the Raiders won Super Bowl XXXVII?
It often is about anti-Cowboys bias (I can and have made that larger argument before, based on a variety of overwhelming evidence including insider quotes), but I was just pointing out that your lack of sustained success argument didn’t fly for at least several of these players who deserve consideration. I don’t know that the 1992/1993 Cowboys (one of the greatest teams of all time) will even get to 4, much less 5, and I’m not sure why you’re confident about Haley getting in if he didn’t this time, but they SHOULD get to more than 5.
Regarding the 80s I was the talking about the 49ers, not the Cowboys, and the two Cowboys you mention had championship and individual success in the 70s.
They seem to ONLY be taking career playoff performance into account when elevating Reed over Brown, and assigning a lot of credit to boot considering the guy never won a Super Bowl. They seem to be discounting it with most of these Cowboys players who aren’t even getting a glance as semi-finalists.
Reed also put up some solid great career numbers, yes not as much as Brown but as I mentioned before election is more about just numbers.
Many great players took time to get in HOF so yes with Haley a repeated finalist and final ten (those players eventually get in) his short career and lack of all pro and top sack numbers has held him back but not for much longer.
I am very aware of the HOF process and voters that impacted the Cowboys in the 1970s and 1980s, but the committee has changed members in last several years and I doubt it is still as significant and not a factor in Haley’s case, the lack of career numbers, short career and few all pro hurt Haley same as they do for many players.
The Anti-cowboy bias clearly hurt Renfro, Wright, and for many years Hayes, and forced Pearson, Howley and Harris deep into the senior candidate pool where with many quality candidates, a flawed senior selection process, and perhaps lingering bias and Gosselin not helping isvhurting their cases.
If Reed had won a Super Bowl or something I could see calling that a wash with Brown’s superior career stats and making the decision a tossup, but he didn’t. Maybe the selectors saw something in Reed that they didn’t in Brown (same with Sapp/Strahan), but this is why I’d like a more transparent process so we could know who voted how and why. I suspect you’re right about it being his solid playoff performances and overall Bills’ success (albeit non SB winning), which would veer the questioning back toward key dynastic players like Newton, Stepnoski, and Woodson being passed over. I hope you’re right about Haley getting in. I’m not predicting either way. I don’t make HoF predictions. I just wish the Cowboys would come out on the positive side of some of these “surprises”.
If you follow the HOF trends, voting patterns and how players not elected stay on the finalist list proceeding into final 10 you will see how Haley is in very soon, two other DL were selected this year, probably also factoring in squeezing Haley out like Sapp did to Strahan last year. Voters clearly gave Sapp more credit for the two all decade teams over Strahan even though we can agree Sapp did not deserve both of those apparently enough voters credited it
Another factor for Woodson is anti safety bias in HOF voting, many all decade safeties are still not in HOF, same problem with TEs impacting Novacek, and look how hard it is for any OL to get in like Shields with 12 probowls!
I don’t see any anti-Cowboy bias from their 1990s dynasty. They were a superb team with no weaknesses and great depth and loaded with Pro Bowl talent, but really, outside of Charles Haley and Jimmy Johnson I don’t see any HOFers, just a great team with excellent depth and very good players. Erik Williams played at a HOF level until his car accident. Afterwards he wasn’t the same player and that has likely cost him a spot in Canton. The rest of the 1992/93 line could boast some very good players and as a unit were one of the greatest of all time. Individually I’d say Stepnoski, Newton deserve a preliminary HOF nomination but they were not in the same class as the likes of McDaniel, Dawson, Shields and of course Larry Allen.
We’ve also seen Rayfield Wright and Bob Hayes selected as Seniors in recent years. Haley has now reached the Top 10 in consecutive years. It’s only a matter of time for him and he’s clearly the best DL in next year’s Class now that Strahan and Sapp have been elected.
Junior Seau is my “lock” for 2015 and the next two defensive players on the shortlist from today’s vote appear to be Haley and Kevin Greene. At least one of those two will be in next year’s Class with Seau and the one that misses out is probably elected in 2016. It just takes time to clear the backlog as no more than 5 modern era candidates are elected and each year brings in a new wave of very worthy candidates.
In order to clear the WR jogjam they picked the guy who’s been waiting the longest. It’s worth noting that Harrison made the first cut down to 10 with Haley, Bettis, Greene and Shields. That bodes well for their chances in 2015. When you look at the 5 names to finish 6-10th last year, three of them were elected today (Strahan, Reed, Williams) alongside the two first ballot guys; Jones and Brooks.
Harrison, Shields and Haley for 2015 with Brown, Pace and Greene in 2016 would be my early projection. It also helps clear the backlog and allows more candidates to have their case heard. Bettis and Edge James will be an interesting battle and I also expect Warner to be elected sooner rather than later.
IMO Darren Woodson is past due for the HOF. He was one of the best tackling CB’s I’ve ever seen. By my eye very comparable to Derrick Brooks in style. Both were absolute rocks for their teams. I wish the voters would recognize the art and importance of tackling and not focus so much on sacks and interceptions. If they did Denver’s Steve Atwater would be in there a long time ago. Denver is another organization that could scratch their heads when it comes to a few of their players failing to make the HOF. Where’s Atwater? Rod Smith? Terrel Davis? Karl Mecklenburg? Randy Gradishar? Another great tackler waiting is John Lynch. When will he hear his name? I’m not big on a Bettis selection but like Reed his numbers will be hard to ignore but he’s likely to wait awhile too and that’s OK. :)
Correction!! Before someone pounces, Woodson was a Strong Safety . LOL IMO crucial to the Cowboy’s winning. Hmm, has the same profile as Donnie Shell opps. Their was another great player not in the HOF. I guess they figured they couldn’t put all of the Steelers in the HOF although they’ve done well so far. LOL
Harrison, Bettis, Shields, Haley, Seau. How’s that for your Class of 2015? Swap Haley for Dungy or Warner if you consider him more a linebacker than a DE (and thus in position competition with Seau).
I think Warner is more likely for 2017 with Favre eligible and a slam dunk for 2016. Most of this year’s 6-10 will likely make up the Class of 2015 with Seau.
About the WR logjam: So next year Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt become eligible, followed by Terrell Owens, then Chad Johnson, then Randy Moss.
Of that group, I’d say Moss is the only serious threat to get in first ballot; in fact the credentials of Bruce and Johnson seem decidedly inferior (though that’s mostly because I don’t remember Bruce’s career very well), and I wouldn’t be completely surprised if Johnson didn’t get in at all. I think 2016 will come down to Brown v. Holt (assuming Harrison gets in 2015), then 2017 becomes the loser of that battle v. Owens.
I don’t think any real Hall of Fame contenders are going to retire after this year (and if any did they’d be in for a long wait as it stands), so if that’s the case and Moss gets in first ballot, 2019 will only have to decide between the Brown/Holt/Owens loser, Bruce, and Johnson. Assuming the HOF voters have learned their lesson from the years of Reed/Carter/Brown, I like Brown’s chances to get into the HOF by the end of the decade. But, of course, that’s a big if.
Chad Johnson has no chance and Bruce/Holt are in for a long wait.
Agree Chad Johnson has no chance. Very good for a short burst, helped the Bengals turn the corner from laughingstock franchise, but not a HOFer.
Moss has all the numbers and talent, but HOFers are not suppose to quit on their teams. His Raiders years are going to be very big problem against his candidacy. He could be forced to wait a very long time if some of the selectors feel as I do that he wasted his talent.
Owens is another brutal case. He has all the numbers, but aren’t HOFers suppose to make their teams better? How can a HOFer be a serial team cancer? I can’t think of any precedent for a player like Owens.
Holt / Bruce were both great receivers. However, Bruce feels a little like Henry Ellard (a great receiver somehow forgotten), who has never gained any HOF momentum. I think Holt is HOF worthy, but he is going to have to wait since his career effectively fell off a cliff a few years too early.
Others that need to be considered: Hines Ward (1000 receptions with the typically run-oriented Steelers) and Derrick Mason (to me the stereotypical Hall of very good player but he did end up with nearly 1000 receptions). Also don’t forget Tony Gonzalez who will likely be considered with the WRs by many voters.
Of course, the real trouble starts when Andre Johnson, Calvin Johnson, Reggie Wayne, Larry Fitzgerald, Anquan Boldin, and Steve Smith all retire in the next 3-5 years.
wick I think you may have nailed the 2015 class as Haley was moved to DE by Cowboys won 3 SB there and last half of his career so I do not think HOF voters are going to see him as direct competition against Seau and both get in.
I’m really glad to see Aeneas Williams make it. A lot of good defensive backs will come onto the ballot in the next 5-6 years, between Ty Law (2015), Darren Sharper (2016), Brian Dawkins (2017), and Ronde Barber (2018); with Champ Bailey, Ed Reed, Charles Woodson, and Polamalu not far behind. I think this potential logjam will really hurt John Lynch’s chances and unfortunately, kill whatever chances were left for Atwater, Leroy Butler, and Darren Woodson.
If Randy Moss and Terrell Owens had different names they’d be first ballot HOFers. It is their reputation is keep them out first time.
Brad: I don’t know what you mean. Yes, if Moss and Owens had the same numbers, but instead were teammates like Hines Ward, Rod Smith, or Steve Smith, then yes, they would skate into the hall. But they weren’t. Moss gave up on multiple teams. And Owens crushed whatever chance Philadelphia had of making it back to the Super Bowl (not to mention his selfishness in San Fran and Dallas). Some could say these are “off-field” problems that shouldn’t impact their candidacy, but I don’t buy it. Both directly contributed to their teams losing games and potentially championships with their behavior. In short, their reputations were well deserved — unlike someone like Richard Sherman for instance. Owens and Moss (and Kurt Warner for different reasons) are very challenging HOF candidates. One needs to weight their positives and negatives and come to a conclusion about whether they belong in the HOF. I look forward to hearing the debate here and from the sports writers.
Moss and Owens both eventually get in. Yes, two of the most controversial players I can ever recall, but they are Hall of Famers.
I agree John Lynch is probably going to have to wait, but you never know. There seems to always be a surprise elected every year. This year I think it was Williams and also Reed. So, Lynch could possibly sneak in in 2015 or 2016.
For those who don’t know and missed my sarcasm earlier, Ralph Wilson has a 115-157 record over the last 17 years, including 2 playoff years (none this century). At least Jerry Jones has a .500 record in that span, and 6 playoff seasons (4 this century). In fact Wilson’s overall record (counting the AFL) is 376-436-8. Early AFL success is sort of like USFL success; worth noting, but not equivalent to NFL success. In the Super Bowl era Wilson really only had that one burst of almost glory from 1990-1993. In the 70s and 80s the Bills accomplished two things: jack and….
Tony P, you were sort of right though. Darren Woodson tackled like a LB (which he played in college), but had 4.35 speed and covered like a corner. The Cowboys would use him to cover slot receivers and elite TEs one on one in nickel situations where most teams use a corner, and he’d shut them down. Woodson was the prototype for dynamic safeties like Troy Polamalu and Ed Reed. I think Woodson may have been even more talented than they are, but safeties generally didn’t receive the same hype back then.
Woodson was the greatest safety of the 90s and him getting snubbed by the All Decade team and now not even pushed through as a semi-finalist is very much a relic of residual anti-Cowboys bias. He definitely belongs in the HoF. Making Carnell Lake(!) All Decade over him, or for that matter Ronnie Lott (who only made 2 Pro Bowls that decade), was indefensible. Darren Woodson definitely belongs in Canton.
I didn’t think Harrison was first ballot, but have always considered him to be better than Moss and Owens, so I obviously don’t think they should be first ballot either. Wouldn’t surprise me if one or both are, but they don’t deserve it. They both had limitations in their game: Moss basically ran one route and Owens had way too many drops (led the NFL in drops at least one year). Neither was a good teammate, and neither won a Super Bowl. I’d probably make them wait 2-4 years while using the opportunity to induct deserving players who have been waiting a long time.
Assuming the 10 finalists who missed out return as finalists next year, who do we expect to be the 5 names to join them? Seau, Warner and Pace will be 3 of them. The other two I’m not sure.
Rasputin: Re Ralph Wilson: Owners do not go into the hall for winning. Nor should they unless like Paul Brown and Jerry Jones they were GMs as well as owners. They go into the hall for their contributions to the NFL and the game of football generally. Lamar Hunt won one Super Bowl and his Chiefs were mediocre for most of the Super Bowl era, but he is unquestionably the first or second most important owner in NFL history. He founded the AFL, kept it alive with his own fortune, and then continued to innovate until his death. Ralph Wilson was one of Hunt’s original AFL owners. He also apparently had a huge influence behind the seasons on the AFL and the merger that created the “modern” game of pro football. He also apparently bankrolled a few of the struggling AFL franchises to make sure the league didn’t collapse. Tons of articles were written around his induction explaining his contributions. There are also several really good books about this era that are good reads for anyone who cares about the history of the NFL.
Admittedly modern owners don’t have the same opportunities as Halas, Marshall, Hunt, and Wilson, but few of today’s guys have had anywhere near the same impact. Robert Kraft seems to be one. Jerry Jones might be another. But by and large, the modern owners don’t have much to do with the future and structure of the game.
I was specifically responding to a pro Wilson argument that attempted to diminish Jones in comparison for making a “mess” of his team over the past “17 years”. As for the AFL, I know why Lamar Hunt is properly enshrined. I have yet to hear many specifics about Wilson’s contributions, apart from simply being one of the original several team owners. Some hints about financially supporting the league and behind the scenes influence; all vague stuff. Again though, I’m not saying Wilson doesn’t belong in Canton, I’m just highlighting a major skew.
Most fans of teams have any number of players they can point to who could be or even should be inducted. I’ve seen the Broncos, the Raiders, the Cowboys, the Falcons and others all say the voters are biased against their teams. Some teams might have better presenters than others, but I’m not a huge believer in “anti-specific team bias.”
I do agree that Woodson merits a lot more consideration than he has gotten, but I attribute that more to the voters’ confusing inability to figure out how to deal with the safety position. There are a half-dozen safeties who warrant legit consideration, if not virtual lock status as Hall of Famers who have been virtually summarily dismissed by the voters. That’s far more confusing to me than why it has taken this long for voters to induct a punter.
The difference is Cowboys fans can actually point to evidence of an anti-Cowboys bias, based on facts on quotes. It’s real, and even honest non-Cowboys fans who have studied the issue enough to know what they’re talking about acknowledge it. Love them or hate them, they clearly aren’t a regular team. I would love for someone to explain why Lake and Lott were more deserving of All Decade status than Woodson. While it’s possible that particular unjust slight, viewed in a vacuum, could be due to reasons other than anti-Cowboys bias, there’s no reason to assume that, since the bias infamously reared its head several years later in the 2004 HoF voting fiasco. It may have diminished since then but unless it completely vanished almost overnight it’s reasonable to think it’s playing a role in Woodson receiving less consideration than inferior candidates.
Congratulations to all seven who were just elected. And I also say “excellent job” to the PFHoF voters, who unlike their BBHoF counterparts, got the job done well with minimal fuss and “look at me.”
Rasputin: here’s the issue as I see it in a nutshell. Being elected to the PFHoF is an individual’s award, not a team award. The upshot of that is sometimes you’ll see situations such as four ’70s St. Louis Cardinals being HoF-ers (and I think deservedly so) in Jackie Smith, Roger Wehrli, Larry Wilson, and Dan Dierdorf. And not every “dynasty” will have the same number of HoF members, nor will they always have more than “non dynasties.” Happens sometimes.
Justin said: “Owners do not go into the hall for winning … They go into the hall for their contributions to the NFL and the game of football generally. ”
I’ve seen this idea before, and I can definitely see the point. If one buys into this, though, there are very few owners who have any kind of HoF argument: George Halas, Lamar Hunt, Tim Mara, Al Davis, and George Preston Marshall are about it.
Rasputin, saw the list of ’90s Cowboys you put up. Here’s my thinking, for what’s it’s worth:
-sure, I can see the argument for Darren Woodson. And given how few safeties are in from the ’90s, I’m on board.
-Nate Newton is a tougher sell for me at 2/6/none, given that Richmond Webb at 2/7/90s and Tony Boselli at 3/5/90s and Chris Hinton at 2/7/none aren’t in and Roaf, Zimmerman, and Slater (who all played a good bit in 90s) are already in.
-Mark Stepnoski at 1/5/90s has competition as well from (of all things) Bills center Kent Hull at 2/3/none, and both Bruce Matthews and Dermontti Dawson have been elected. And the HoF is historically stingy with centers.
-Jay Novacek has plenty of competition at another position not deeply-represented with (among others) Ben Coates, Frank Wycheck, and Mark Bavaro.
The easiest sell for me is Woodson — much harder to say about the rest.
Those Cowboys teams had great depth of very, very good players. There’s no harm in saying that individually they only had a handful of Hall of Famers.
As Seattle showed last night, and history will eventually tell us how HOFers are on this team, a big factor was having great depth, especially a DL rotation which keeps everyone fresh. Dallas had that depth too thanks to some great drafting and of course the Walker trade. They were young, fast and hungry, just like Seattle last night.
It also helps having a starting QB plus 1st team All Pro CB earning peanuts which allows the Seahawks to spend cap space strengthening other areas of their roster. Other teams with QBs earning huge money don’t have that luxury.
Sure, bo, but the Cowboys also had their share of great players, some of whom I listed, and some of whom belong in Canton.
bachslunch, I know the HoF is ultimately an individual award, but championship success is widely cited by everyone who closely follows this process as an important factor, so when there’s a ridiculous skew, like the 1992 Bills having more than twice as many HoFers as the 1992 Cowboys, it should be a red flag that at the very least further examination is required. Inducting Haley, Woodson (whom I agree has the best case among the others I listed), and Jimmy Johnson would go a long way toward eliminating that skew. These guys also have strong individual cases.
“Mark Stepnoski at 1/5/90s has competition as well from (of all things) Bills center Kent Hull at 2/3/none, and both Bruce Matthews and Dermontti Dawson have been elected. And the HoF is historically stingy with centers.”
With Dawson and Matthews out of the way, hopefully we can at least agree that Stepnoski is the most deserving center from that era not yet in.
“Nate Newton is a tougher sell for me at 2/6/none, given that Richmond Webb at 2/7/90s and Tony Boselli at 3/5/90s and Chris Hinton at 2/7/none aren’t in and Roaf, Zimmerman, and Slater (who all played a good bit in 90s) are already in.”
Nate Newton is a case where under normal circumstances one would think being a key reason Dallas had what’s routinely called one of the greatest lines in history would serve as a tiebreaker of sorts. Offensive linemen don’t have many individual stats; they’re judged by the eyeball test, accolades, and contribution to team success. The Cowboys had one of the greatest power running games of all time. He’s apparently getting absolutely no credit for that or the 3 SB wins.
“Jay Novacek has plenty of competition at another position not deeply-represented with (among others) Ben Coates, Frank Wycheck, and Mark Bavaro.”
Novacek had a truncated career due to injury that caused him to miss out on the accelerated passing stat inflation of the mid to late 90s, but he’s too quickly dismissed. In his 6 years as a starter at Dallas (1990-1995) he had more receptions and made more Pro Bowls (5) than any other TE in the league. Basically he was the best TE in the NFL for a majority of the decade, not a trivial time span, and was a vital piece of a dynastic offense that won 3 Super Bowls.
As you say, the big problem is that TEs are underrepresented in the NFL. But there are 3 HoF TEs who played at least 7 years in the 1960s, another who played in the late 60s through most of the 70s, 3 more who played in the 1970s-1980s, and Sharpe, who played primarily in the 1990s. I could see more TEs being added to the more recent decades over time, through the senior route if nothing else, especially since the position was more important than it had been in earlier periods. It wouldn’t be unreasonable to induct Novacek and Coates to bring the 90s about up to where the 1960s are.
Figured that I had posted enough Saturday night during and following the announcement so took a break over the last few days. Picking up on several posted topics here are some follow-up thoughts:
Class of 2014 is a good group, strong set of candidates, and deserving selections. Brooks and Jones are solid 1st time selections and nice to see the unelected 2013 finalist fill the remaining slots. Glad that both senior candidates were elected, and think to some degree the history making selection of Ray Guy as the first punter and only 2nd pure kicker is not getting the media and public attention it deserves as ground breaking (but remain uncertain that it will result in much change in number of kickers and special team players to get elected).
As usual each year, get annoyed and frustrated with the press and public focus on who did not elected and the annual calls that the election process is wrong, flawed and needs to be fixed (and presenting no alternative ideas). As long as there are only 5 modern slots, and often at least 10 HOF worthy candidates, some are not going to get elected each year and no change to the election will change the fact that in most elections there simply is not enough slots for all deserving.
Beyond players will huge career numbers, awards, SBs, and deemed to be among the best of all time or their era, subjective judgements will always come into play with these elections (and the often do even with “numbers” players). Again I am not sure how any change to the election process including number of voters, term limits, including non-writers would resolve that issue or improve the process.
Opinions, views and decisions among 46 voters are going vary greatly and to get to 80% yes vote is a very high standard (as it should be). But if you look over the history of elections, and especially view them in a series, the HOF voters do a pretty good job of getting it right, at least over time, with those most deserving getting into final 15 and majority of them elected. At end of the day what we and others end up debate is the order, which makes for some interesting discussions but if you take a 3-5 year view of the elections for the most part those players all get elected.
But hey I guess I can be overly positive and optimist since I did get 6/7 predictions correct? (likely to stay in a good mood about HOF elections at least until the August announcement of the 2015 senior candidates!)
As to early views on 2015: Seau is the only lock and like 2014 this years finalists not elected (Harrison, Haley, Shields, Bettis, Green) are well positioned for election in 2015, and in my view in that order I presented. So my resulting early prediction (which I know is shared by others, so no real big surprises here) is:
Bettis
Haley
Harrison
Seau
Shield
As I have mentioned before Kurt Warner is a real wildcard here for 2015 as I have no idea as to how all the 46 HOF voters will view his qualifications and whether he can get 80% as a 1st time candidate. It may take the 2015 election meeting debate and discussion to start consideration for his qualifications, which could result in him taking a few more years of consideration by the voters before election. Another interesting point about Kurt Warner (who will be a 2015 finalist) that I have made in the past is that he will become the first modern era QB to be a HOF finalist since 2006, that is a streak of eight HOF elections without a QB even considered! In fact since 2006 a player at every other full time position has been elected, except QB. Pretty surprising given the value and importance of the QB in the modern era.
There is at least Junior Seau, Orlando Pace, Isaac Bruce, Kurt Warner and Kevin Mawae as first timers next year. All 5 could make the semi-final stage, but I doubt all 5 would make it through to the final on the first go. I think Mawae is the most likely to have to wait at the semi-final stage.
Tingelhoff and Kuechenberg were tied for third in senior balloting this past year. Are they next in line to get nominated, or can moods change?
I agree with Dr Phil that Seau, Pace, Bruce, and Warner will make final 15, not so sure about Mawae as centers often do not get respect from the voters. Certainly he has a strong case for election, just not so sure how far that will carry him in the 2015 elections as a 1st year candidate, especially with the other four on the ballot.
Also Edgerrin James (11th all time in rushing yards) is eligible for the first time in 2015 and is a strong contender for the final 15. And not only is Bruce (7th career rec) on the ballot in 2015, but so is his one time teammate Tory Holt (15th in career rec).
I can see all the non-elected 2014 finalists back in the final 15 next year. May be hard for Mawae to push into that level in year one. I see Shields as the next best OL and above Pace so although he will make final 15 will not get further for a few more years. Bruce and Holt to quickly get lost in the pile of WRs to come on the ballot over next few years.
After the last few frustrating years trying to prediction the senior nominees, I gave up even trying. Seems like each year there are 10-15 possible candidates and with the membership of the senior nominating committee so small (9 for preliminary votes, only 5 at selection meeting), and rotations of those 5 voters making the final selection, real hard to determine where the nominations will end up. So yes “moods” can change as the voters change each year. Certainly Tingelhoff and Kuechenberg are in that mix as strong candidates, but would doubt that two OL from the same era/decade would be selected as would guess on a defensive player to be included.
Ty Law will also be first-time eligible next year. He’s not a “first ballot” type either. So basically you’ve got one likely “first ballot lock” in Seau and seven deserving but likely not first-time HoF candidates in Pace, Bruce, Holt, Warner, Law, James, and Mawae.
Of the most recent finalists, I see seven very likely holdovers in Bettis, Brown, Dungy, Greene, Haley, Harrison, and Shields. At least one (or maybe all three) of Morton Andersen, John Lynch, and Eddie DeBartolo could drop off next time — and if all three drop off, all eight of the new first-timers mentioned above could become finalists. Who knows? It’ll be interesting to see what actually happens.
Agreed that the most likely non-Senior inductees next year will be Bettis, Seau, Shields, Brown, and Haley, with Harrison possibly replacing Brown and Greene possibly replacing Haley.
Seniors? Agreed with Paul here — your guess is as good as mine.
I have been wondering whether Haley is now in a logjam with Greene as both advanced to final 10 this year? Or perhaps it was more a case of Haley losing out to Strahan (and perhaps Humprey?) in the pass rushing DE grouping? Greene with 160 career sacks (3rd all time) and 2/4 profile certainly has his supporters. Either way, both Haley and Greene will remain the best DL on the modern ballot until Jason Taylor appears on the ballot in 2017, and with the interest in selecting more defensive players Haley and Greene should get in some order 2015-2016.
Another note after going with two classes each with only TWO modern candidates (2004 and 2005), HOF voters have recently favored larger classes with election of the maximum of five modern classes each of the last 7 years. Seems as if the HOF voters support the larger classes and recognition of the deep modern candidate pool. Also since 2006, the maximum 2 seniors have been elected in 6/9 elections. In recent years I have wondered whether they would not elect a full class of seven and what the response would be to that decision?
Paul, you expressed annoyance at vaguely described critics who don’t present alternative ideas to the candidates or process features they criticize, and then later listed some specific proposed alternative ideas, some of which I’ve discussed here, so I’m glad that I’m one of the exceptions to these nebulous critics you reference, and that your comments about them had nothing to do with my posting here. Of course I argued for alternative inductees too.
But you also go on to say you don’t know that the suggested reforms (e.g. term limits, transparency; though you didn’t mention the second one) would improve the process because it would still contain an element of subjectivity. Of course that’s true, but some of the decisions are so outlandish—inducting Sapp first ballot over guys like Will Shields and Michael Strahan, screwing over Cowboys like Renfro, Howley, Harris, and Pearson, some voting against Bob Lilly, etc.—that forcing selectors to admit they supported them and explain why would likely dissuade such bad moves. Even when such transparency wouldn’t alter their decisions, it would shed light on their rationales and might diffuse fan anger. Much of the hostility stems from the unaccountable nature of the process and the sometimes seemingly inexplicable results it produces. Fixing that would be an improvement in and of itself. People would continue to argue, but at least it would be an open debate, without much room for corrupt back room dealing, real or perceived.
Of course I meant that it’s true the process would still contain an element of subjectivity, not that the discussed reforms supposedly wouldn’t improve things.
My comment was directed at those among the press who are quick to criticize the voting process because in their view someone else should have been elected and state then that the procedures need to be changed, often without valid understanding of the current process or alternatives. This year it was Pete Prisco of CBS Sports who posted as soon as the announcement was made that the election system was seriously flawed and needed to be changed, for reasons unknown and without even taking one minute to acknowledge the deserving players who were selected. Apparently Prisco believes that there should be no presentations, debate or discussions, simply a vote and perhaps by a larger number of voters – sure seems like the process for voting for the Baseball HOF that has been under even more attacks in recent years for a flawed process.
I have no problem with having the voters reveal their ballots, my only point was not to go after the voters but instead direct such views directly at the HOF since it is their policies that do no allow voters to discuss their ballots or debates that occurred in the election room.
Frankly I have no major issues with any of these changes, but I highly doubt that any of them will stop the complaining about the voting results because of a few basic facts: each year there are more qualified candidates then open slots thus some deserving are not elected, and when evaluating candidates opinion and subjective views are always going to come into play with many candidates in determining which to elect and not. Again look at the baseball HOF voting process which is large and open and there still are major issues raised after each election and yet other calls for reform.
Just look at the one case you refer to: 2013 Sapp versus Strahan. I agree that Strahan was more deserving and that Sapp should not have been elected over him as a first year candidate. But in coming to that decision, subjective opinions come into play as they often do in these elections. Their qualifications are pretty close (Sapp 4/7/DPOY/SB/1990s/2000s; Strahan 4/7/DPOY/2SB/2000s) so I can see how some voters would choose Sapp over Strahan, with some mentioning his two all decade teams. Again I do not agree with that judgement but can see where it comes from and frankly see it much less of an issue then many other HOF election results.
As I wanted to mention that although voters are not allowed to discuss their ballot or the election meeting, many of them have publicly written about HOF candidates and their views on the process and results, including Paul Zimmerman and Peter King of SI, John McClain, Jim Trotter and Jarett Bell. That does not mean the process is completely open, but in recent years there has been much more public discussion about the HOF elections, even though many of the voters including these writers continue to be publicly attacked for their opinions and views, often by others in the press and public who are not even knowledgeable about the process and rules.
While it’s fair to point out that the HoF rule makers deserve criticism over process, I have a much lower opinion of the selectors’ choices over the years than you do, and have no problem criticizing them too, particularly when specific people (like Rick Gosselin) publicly make stupid comments.
Regarding Sapp/Strahan, if glancing at that brief row of facts is the extent of their analysis in the current system, then a transparent process would likely reduce poor decisions by forcing a deeper examination. First, specific voters would first have to publicize their rationales, which I suspect in and of itself would cause many to put more thought into it than they otherwise would. Second, they’d receive thoughtful feedback (amidst the typical low information noise that should be dismissed) in a more targeted way than they currently do, probably exposing them to thoughts and facts they hadn’t considered, possibly causing them adjust their opinions. For the record I think Will Shields has been a bigger snub than Strahan, but I understand the Sapp/Strahan comparison since they’re both defensive linemen. Third, whatever corrupt deal making and biases that exist would be significantly diminished under scrutiny. Sure, a guy with an agenda could simply lie about it, but it would be a lot harder to pull off than it is now, when a bloc of voters, dubbed “silent assassins” by some insiders, anonymous to the public, can simply sit quietly during discussion and vote “no”.
I agree that subjectivity will always mean some disagreement, but establishing a dialogue between voters and outsiders would improve the process and reduce the frustrated speculation by at least letting fans know why one guy got in while another one didn’t.
The process is not broken. Of course, I disagree with the voters from time to time. I don’t understand how a player that retires as the all-time leader in receptions, one of the best receiving and blocking WRs in history, the unquestioned heart and soul of a three-time Super Bowl Championship team could take 8 years to get into the hall of fame. But in the end, Art Monk made it. From the long view (10 or more years), you realize that nearly all the locks or near locks get inducted. The debates we have are largely about the borderline guys.
Look, Will Shields has a ton of pro bowls (although they came in an era when pro bowl elections seemed to begat more pro bowl elections), but he was only a two time all pro. And both of those came while lining up next to Roaf. Guards are typically guards for a reason — most aren’t athletic enough to play tackle. That is not to say that guards are not worthy of the HOF, but when compared to amazing left tackles like Ogden, Jones, and Roaf, guards are going to normally take a back seat. And centers have it even worse! Dawson was unquestionably the best center of his generation (at least when Bruce Matthews was playing guard or tackle), and it took years for him to gain induction. Shields will make it, but it isn’t like he was a slamdunk, no brainer HOF. A few years wait is not surprising.
Regarding Sapp v. Strahan, let’s no forget that Sapp was a force of nature when he was young. He was an incredibly gifted, terror of a DT. His games against Green Bay and Favre were amazing. Was he helped by having great teammates? Sure. But he helped them too. Was his prime a bit short by HOF standards? Maybe. But there are a lot of HOFers who never reached his level of success / dominance. When compared to Strahan, it isn’t crazy that he got in first. For one thing, he (along with Brooks, Lynch, and Dungy) turned the biggest laughingstock franchise into a perennial playoff contender and super bowl champion. He also had the fortune of retiring first of the above group. Brooks was better, but Sapp is a very worthy HOFer.
Strahan on the other hand was an acquired taste. He was never as dominate as Sapp. Even in his 22.5 sack season, the Giants were only 7-9. Strahan went on a sacks tear near the end of the season, but his team lost 6 of its last 8 games. In fact, only at the end of his career (when he lost several pounds) did Strahan truly start dominating games and raising the level of his teammates’ play. If Strahan had played in San Diego instead of New York, his career would probably be remembered a lot like Leslie O’Neal’s. (For the record, I think O’Neal has been vastly undervalued and has a decedent HOF case). I mention all of this not to say that Strahan is unworthy of the HOF, but to instead say that I can understand how more voters favored Sapp over Strahan. Sapp had the higher peak (even if he peaked too early), but Strahan took care of himself and closed out his career in spectacular fashion (over shadowing a bit his the more pedestrian first half of his career … it took Strahan five years to to reach double digit sacks). It is not unlike debating whether Gale Sayers or Curtis Martin had the better career. Both are HOFers, but it is entirely subjective which one prefers (for the record, I’ll take Sayers).
In the end, the voters typically get it right. For example, from 2006-2009, only one player who made the final 15 more than once is not in the Hall of Fame: Bob Kuechenberg (who will eventually get elected through the seniors route). The same will be true for 2010-13 in a few years.
Finally, regarding Charles Haley, his wait has neither been unusual or undeserving. Yes, he has five Super Bowl rings, but then again he did play for the Niners and Cowboys. it isn’t like he took Tampa and Cincinnati from laughingstock to champions. His sack numbers also aren’t overwhelming. Footballperspective.com ranked his numbers as only the 31st best pass rusher since 1982. He’ll get in. The uproar is getting a bit loud, but his 12-year career, “only” 5 pro bowl selections (voted by his peers not the media), and no “all decade” teams make it completely understandable that he has had to wait to get in.
I almost addressed the “usually get it right” theme in my last post but figured I’d wait since it was already long enough. Of course they usually get it right. Most calls are easy. I guess we put the bar in different places. I don’t fall over myself with praise because they manage to eventually induct most of the shoo-ins and avoid inducting too many people who don’t belong at all. The standard is how well they handle the borderline calls, and there they too often screw up, sometimes spectacularly. The process is broken, as evidenced in part by the huge fan discord that posters on both sides of this debate acknowledge exists. People are feeling increasingly frustrated and alienated from an opaque process.
Justin, you didn’t say anything about the suggested reforms, and frankly there’s no reason why even people who like the current process shouldn’t support them. Regarding offensive linemen, I’ll just say that there’s little to no evidence Canton favors tackles over guards. Among the guys who primarily played since 1960, there are just as many guards as tackles in the HoF, 13-13, and several guards were first ballot. Regarding Haley, I’m not sure what Footballperspective “numbers” you’re referring to, but Haley’s case has always rested on his impact and eyeball test results more than his sack totals. His quick twitch explosiveness was devastating to offensive backfields, even if he often channeled the actual sacks on passing plays to other players. Frankly, having watched all three play and going by the eyeball test, I’d rather have Haley on my team than Sapp or Strahan. But I understand giving Strahan and Sapp precedence, given the importance placed on sacks at DE, longevity of elite play, and how Sapp was more of a leader on his team. My long running sour view of the HoF process has little to do with Haley.
I meant to add that people shouldn’t be reduced to reading speculations or attempts to rationalize committee decisions by random posters on message boards.
I actually counted 19 OTs or people with “T” as the first listed position among hybrids, 13 guards or people with “G” as first position, and 8 centers (had to guess on some, as they haven’t listed positions on some of the most recent inductees). For “first ballot” G (or G listed first), there’s Parker, Upshaw, Hannah, Allen, Matthews, while for “T” (or “T” listed first) there’s Jones, Ogden, Munoz, Slater, Gregg — it comes up even, actually — as well as centers Otto and Langer (Bednarick’s election predates 1970), so I’m agreeing with Rasputin here.
Tackles do outnumber guards counting as above, though there are different ways one can do the counting. When one looks at potential Senior “snubs,” there are notably more guards than tackles one might list: at the very least Barwegan, Stanfel, Putnam, Kramer, Budde, Sweeney, Gillingham, Niland, and Kuechenberg at guard vs. Tyrer, Schafrath, Hill, Kunz, and Neely at tackle (with Tyrer being a special case).
There could be something to the “tackles beating out the guards” perception here, depending on how one looks at things, but as Justin pointed out, that’s not necessarily a terrible injustice.
Re Will Shields, my thinking is that if Randall McDaniel at 8/12/90s had to wait until his 3rd eligible year and 2nd time as finalist to get in, it’s no crime that Shields at 2/12/00s has to wait a bit too. He’s getting in soon enough, I’d bet as early as next year.
The Baseball HOF voting is an open process with many voters discussing and posting their actual ballots, and debating the election before and then after the results. That has not stopped plenty of criticism of the collective results and individual ballots and certainly has not stopped all the debate and speculation publicly and on boards like this (nor from some voters submitting terrible ballots, so no fear of public shaming there). Again I have no problem with making the voting more open, but I doubt very much that it will calm the attacks by many on blogs and message boards directed at the voters and the results.
The bottom line is each year there are at least ten candidates, all of whom deserve election, but only five spots and when comparing players from different positions and eras, subjective decisions are going to be made. Shields is a HOFer, but his election has been delayed as a series of other equally or more qualified OL have appeared on the ballot over the last three years, plus HOF voters find it very hard to compare OL to many other position since supporting “numbers” for OL are hard to determine.
If you look over the history of HOF elections many great and clearly HOF deserving players have had to wait, in some cases several years for election. Again as I have posted before it is easy to see a player appear on the ballot for the first time and say he is a HOFer, but then fail to understand (or get frustrated) when they are not elected simply because there are only five slots available. Or wonder why players appear on the finalist list year after year indicating a level of support yet end up waiting several years for election.
I do think that the pro football HOF voting process has improved greatly in the last decade with more voters, greater diversity, new voters added, and some long standing voters leaving, thus breaking up some of the “old boys club” mentality that existed for so many years and the resulting bias, favoritism, and voting blocks that had developed. The fact that voters are expressing how deep and qualified the pool of candidates is, and their recent efforts to support all the final five candidates for election resulting in full classes of five modern candidates is also encouraging, as it was not too long ago that the so-called “silent assassins” would do their best work at the final stage of voting where 80% support of the final five is needed and the end result would be players who advanced from 100+ to 15 to 10 to 5 would only see their election denied with as few as two finalists elected.
I think 2015 may be the year Shields finally gets in. Pace is 3/7/All Decade 2000s. Shields is 2/12/All Decade 2000s. Perhaps winning Super Bowl 34 and protecting the Greatest Show on Turf may help Pace, whereas Shields never got there. However, with Dawson, Roaf, Allen, Ogden and Jones now taken care of, I think 2015 may be Shields’ year.
I also think Holt and Bruce may cancel each other out possibly and could have to wait a while. Holt 1/7/2000 All Decades Team may get in, but Bruce made just four Pro Bowls, not a single First Team All Pro and didn’t make an All Decade Team. His numbers suggest he is a worthy candidate, but why the lack of honors? He only made a Second Team All Pro in 1999 and I think this may hurt him going forward.
I agree about Shields as the HOF voters also tend to give priority to players of close or equal qualifications who have been on the ballot longer and already subject to detailed presentations and discussions.
Every few HOF elections we see a cycle of electing players who have been on the ballot for a number of previous years, those types of election tend to “clear the ballot” I am thinking that with Bettis (4x finalist, 2x final 10), Haley (5, 2x final 10) and Shields (3x) again finalists in 2015 next year will see all three of them elected, opening the ballot for 2016 and beyond.
And with no large classes of 1st year election “locks” in the coming elections (lead only by Seau in 2015, Favre in 2016, and LT in 2017), plenty of slots will be open in 2015-2017 for many other players to be considered, including other strong 1st time candidates from 2015-2017 who will not be elected in their first year but are good candidates for subsequent elections.
bachslunch, I said I was talking about guys whose careers primarily took place since 1960 because it seems like guards may have increased in value since then. For the record, here’s my count. I even excluded Stan Jones since he primarily played DT in the 60s and made Canton for his play at guard in the 50s:
Mostly Played Since 1960 (year of eligibility)
Guards
1. Larry Allen (primarily guard; first ballot)
2. Joe DeLamielleure (13)
3. Russ Grimm (13)
4. John Hannah (first ballot)
5. Gene Hickerson (29)
6. Larry Little (8)
7. Tom Mack (16)
8. Bruce Matthews (primarily guard; first ballot)
9. Randall McDaniel (3)
10. Mike Munchak (3)
11. Jim Parker (counted as guard here because mostly played there in the 60s; also listed as guard on 75th NFL Ann. Team; first ballot)
12. Billy Shaw (25)
13. Gene Upshaw (first ballot)
Tackles
1. Bob Brown (26)
2. Dan Dierdorf (8)
3. Forrest Gregg (primarily tackle; first ballot)
4. Walter Jones (first ballot)
5. Ron Mix (3)
6. Anthony Munoz (first ballot)
7. Jonathan Ogden (first ballot)
8. Willie Roaf (2)
9. Art Shell (2)
10. Jackie Slater (first ballot)
11. Rayfield Wright (22)
12. Ron Yary (14)
13. Gary Zimmerman – (6)
That’s 5 first ballots for each side, and what seems like a roughly equal mix of wait times. Regarding Shields, its not so much that he’s had to wait per se, but who’s been getting in ahead of him.
Paul, you didn’t make any arguments AGAINST reforms. Again, no one’s claiming that all criticism would disappear, but there’s a strong likelihood that a transparent process would tamp it down, or at least channel much of it from frustrated outbursts into reasonable exchanges. It would also likely improve the decision making for the reasons given. I don’t sense that there’s anywhere near as much anger over the baseball HoF as the football HoF, though in fairness that may largely be due to football receiving so much more attention generally. Plus baseball has its own problems, from the legacy of the steroid era to the other process aspects I’ve seen criticized here and elsewhere.
That is because I really have no strong feelings for or against reforms, just that I doubt that any of the reform ideas floating around will really lead to less of a hot and often continuous debate each year over the elections.
Unlike the other major sports HOF, I do like the size of the football HOF selection committee and the day long face to face presentations and meeting – much more so then increasing to a huge number of voters and only having mail in voting process like baseball, or the much smaller and selected voting panels in basketball and hockey.
I have no issue with making the results and individual ballots from the football HOF election made public, but again I doubt it will resolve the many complaints and lack of satisfaction many fans would continue to – if they believe and support a favorite player no amount of logic or reason is going to change their view or temper their attitude.
When there are only five slots, and so many deserving candidates, supporters of those not elected are always going to be disappointed even to the point of anger – it happens every year after the election. Online debates are full of passion and opinion and often beyond any reason or logic that a voter may provide to explain or justify their ballot.
Take some time searching online following the most recent baseball HOF elections (or from recent years) and you will find plenty of debate and anger including over the process and voters, and not just over the steroid issue.
Football fans, including those posting here, are passionate about football so it makes sense that the passion will also spill over into the HOF elections and on this and other similar boards, giving us a pretty narrow view of only one type of HOF voting. If you search around online you can find the same passion from baseball fans.
As to Shields, generally speaking the collective HOF voters tend to place less “weight” on the OL then may other positions (wrongly so I would agree). So although they will support a qualified OL on the ballot, getting two elected in the same year is rare with only five modern slots (happened once twice since 1990). In fact electing two players at any same position is not that common. And there are so many qualified players at all positions.
So as Roaf, Allen, Ogden and Jones all appeared on the ballot in recent years, Shields was set aside as voters tended to consider those OL as more qualified plus other positions, including defensive players as concern has been raised that they are underrepresented in the HOF. And it can be really hard to compare the qualifications of an OL player equally to a “numbers” player like WR, RB, DL/LB (sacks) and DB (ints).
A lot of this debate centers around the importance, value and perceived prestige of a 1st year election, which in my view is overrated as it is more a factor of the depth and quality of the candidate pool and the limited number of slots each year, then the qualifications of the individual player. Plus the view that year of election is somehow placing a ranking of eligible players, with those elected in first year or soon are that much more qualified – a view I believe is misfounded. Shields is clearly a HOFer, but he has been caught in these various “numbers games” in recent years, but no doubt will get elected very soon.
Oh I’m familiar with the criticisms of the baseball HoF, but there’s not as much general noise about it, partly because there are a lot more football fans. It’s somewhat apples and oranges though given all the differences involved. Regarding football, It’s possible I have more faith in reason and logic than you do. I support keeping the current meeting/discussion process; I essentially just want to let fans in on it too, at least in terms of getting to hear every voter’s decisions and ultimate rationales. So many fans now have no idea why certain decisions are made, that letting them know directly from the horse’s mouth might defuse and/or inform a portion of the reaction, while simultaneously causing voters to put more thought into it. Regarding Shields, that “numbers game” you reference is why any position number “ceiling” should be bumped up in years when there are more than the usual amount of overwhelmingly qualified candidates, at the expense of a position whose eligible players should dictate less of a rush for. Aeneas Williams? Really?
I am not sure there really is an position number “ceiling”, just an interest from the voters in picking a mix or diversity of candidates from offense and defense, and range of positions each election.
In my view Haley or Shields would have been a better selection before then Aeneas Williams, but as a 4/8/90s candidate he makes for a strong candidate and I can see where support would come his way from many voters.
At least now he is off the ballot as a 2013 and 2014 final 10, leaving Haley and Bettis as only two year final 10 not yet elected, plus Shields, Harrison and Greene from 2014 final 10. Election of both Haley and Bettis looks very likely in 2015 along with Shields, Harrison and Seau, with Greene, Warner and perhaps Dungy as the 2015 “wildcards”.
That amounts to a ceiling for a given position, but it’s loose so I used scare quotes. I don’t even oppose positional diversity, but just think in some years the eligible candidates merit swelling a certain position more than usual.
I’m pretty late to the party here, but just wanted to say that I thought this was a great class! I got 6/7 right like Paul, only missing Williams (I had Shields).
For next year, I’d say Seau is a lock, Harrison and Shields look very likely, Greene or Haley will occupy a spot, and I will go out on a very slight limb to say Dungy gets #5. I think Pace
I also completely missed boknows34’s original post about the senior nomination results. Glad to hear Tingelhoff fell just short, and that Howley was right there as well. I find it a little strange that Mike Curtis has jumped over so many worthy linebackers, but he’s at least good enough to be in the conversation. Ken Riley though? That is a slap in the face to many other great DB’s that are waiting. Just to start, his teammate Lemar Parrish has a much better resume even if Riley appeared to get snubbed out of more than a few Pro Bowls.
Rasputin: As a Cowboys fan, you got to watch Aeneas Williams at least twice a year. As a result, I can’t believe you don’t think he was a more worthy HOFer than Shields (or at least in the same general class). He was a beast. And even though I am a Redskins fan, I’d argue that Aeneas Williams was the second best DB of his era (i.e., better than Darrell Green — a worthy first ballot guy). No shame in being better than everyone but Deion Sanders. 55 INTs. 9 TDs. Playing on teams where the opposing QB could simply ignore him for most of the game. Aeneas’s only “problem,” like so many great players, is that he played for some atrocious Cardinals teams. That doesn’t mean he was any less a HOFer. In fact, the elections of Aeneas Williams and Cortez Kennedy is the primary reason I think the election process has worked very well in the past five years or so. The best players are getting elected, perhaps not in the correct order, but over the long haul. Simply put, I disagree with the assertion that Shields was better than Williams. In fact, of the 15 modern era candidates elected while Shields has been eligible, their is exactly one who I believe was clearly inferior to Shields: Chris Doleman. Not exactly a travesty.
As an aside, I’ve always felt that Doleman’s sack numbers are a bit deceiving, and that he falls just short on the “eye ball” test. To me, Doleman never felt like a HOFer (same complaint about Richard Dent and Fred Dean). I guess compared to Reggie White and Bruce Smith, Doleman, Dent, and Dean probably do “fall short.” But that is probably not the correct standard to measure them by. I’d be interested in hearing from others. Am I just “off” on my assessment of DEs? Are Doleman, Dean, and Dent truly borderline guys or clear cut HOFers? Why are they so much better than say Leslie O’Neal, Simeon Rice (maybe Sapp has a point), or Pat Swilling?
I referred to this in an earlier post, but here is footballpersepctive’s break down of post-1982 pass rushers: http://www.footballperspective.com/the-greatest-pass-rushers-of-the-last-30-years/ it is a pretty interesting analysis.
As a Cowboys fan I don’t recall seeing Aeneas Williams as a problem, though maybe that was because Dallas went 17-4 against the Cardinals in the time he was there, and 12-0 from 1991-1996. That said, Troy Aikman apparently said he was the toughest CB he threw against apart from Deion Sanders. In fairness, that may be because they saw each other twice a year and their careers almost entirely overlapped, so they knew each other’s tendencies, but it’s still high praise. Williams was the best player on a bad team, and I’m not questioning his HoF worthiness, but I think Darrell Green and Rod Woodson were better. I also think a 12 time Pro Bowl guard who played a key role in maintaining an elite rushing attack while blocking for several different RBs in different schemes while never missing a game should be first ballot or close to it. I won’t rehash all the other guys I believe could have been bumped for Shields in recent years, as they’ve already been commented on extensively.
Your article is all about sacks, as I figured it might be. There’s more to pressure than sacks.
Actually I should say if we’re just talking about the 90s, I think Aeneas Williams may be up there with those other guys due to his scrappy nature, though it’s not like Will Shields wasn’t one of the greatest guards of his era.
Bachslunch – I saw your post on PFRA predicting the modern era Classes for the next 8 or 9 years. I was actually thinking about this topic a few days ago but only went as far as 2019 as we can only speculate when currently active players will be eligible beyond that date.
There are 5 more Classes until the end of the decade. I’d like to ask everyone to pick the next 25 Modern Era and 10 Senior Candidates to be selected for Canton.
That would take us until 2019 and only includes currently retired players. (Tony Gonzalez looks like the only realistic HOFer to hang em up this season). I’ll also assume P.Manning (only bad news on his neck in March will force him to retire), Champ Bailey, Charles Woodson and Ed Reed will all be back in 2014.
Future first-time eligibles:
2015: Junior Seau, Kurt Warner, Issac Bruce, Torry Holt, Orlando Pace, Edgerrin James, Ty Law, Kevin Mawae.
2016: Brett Favre, Terrell Owens, Alan Faneca, Darren Sharper.
2017: LaDainian Tomlinson, Jason Taylor, Brian Dawkins, Hines Ward.
2018: Ray Lewis, Randy Moss, Brian Urlacher, Steve Hutchinson, Richard Seymour, Ronde Barber.
2019: Tony Gonzalez.
Also who do you predict to be the 5 new finalists in 2015?
2015: Junior Seau, Charles Haley, Jerome Bettis, Marvin Harrison, Will Shields, Mick Tingelhoff, Mike Curtis
2016: Brett Favre, Kevin Green, Orlando Pace, Tim Brown, Tony Dungy, Bob Kuenchenberg, Johnny Robinson
2017: LaDainian Tomlinson, Jason Taylor, Kurt Warner, Eddie DeBartolo, Chuck Howley, Lester Hayes
2018: Ray Lewis, Alan Fanesa, Edgerrin James, M Anderson, Jerry Kramer, Cliff Branch
2019: Tony Gonzalez, Randy Moss, Kevin Mawae. Brian Urlacher, John Lynch, L.C. Greenwood, Eddie Meador
2015 new finalists: Junior Seau, Kurt Warner, Issac Bruce, Orlando Pace, Edgerrin James
Does anyone know where I can find information on the cut downs from 15 to 10 and 10 to 5 in years before 2009? I would like this information to update a spreadsheet that I’ve been working on. Thank you in advance.
justin I am so sure that information is readily available certainly not on HOF website, I have seen it included with election result announcement just last few years
Checking my notes 2009 is the first time I made note that the HOF included the results of the early rounds of voting from 15 to 10 to 5 in their announcement of the election results. If did back online for the news articles at the time of announcement you may find some listed.
Thanks, Paul, for the help and the confirmation regarding my own records.
My guesses for the next few classes:
2015: Junior Seau, Charles Haley, Marvin Harrison, Will Shields, Tony Dungy, Mick Tingelhoff, Johnny Robinson
2016: Brett Favre, Tim Brown, Kevin Greene, Jerome Bettis, Orlando Pace, Chuck Howley, Bob Kuechenburg
2017: LaDainian Tomlinson, Alan Faneca, Steve Atwater, Terrell Owens, Jimmy Johnson, LC Greenwood, Eddie Meador
2018: Ray Lewis, Randy Moss, Kevin Mawae, Brian Dawkins, Morten Andersen, Maxie Baughan, Ken Anderson
2019: Tony Gonzalez, John Lynch, Edgerrin James, Steve Wisniewski, Jason Taylor, Cliff Branch, Verne Lewellen
New Finalists Next Year: Junior Seau, Orlando Pace, Steve Atwater, Jimmy Johnson, Roger Craig
When do you see Brian Urlacher being voted in?
I think Urlacher will wait a few years, actually. He’s got a reputation for being overrated (he was the focus of exactly such articles, published if memory serves by Sports Illustrated). But I’m pretty confident he’ll be elected at some point.
Here’s my stab at predicting future HoF classes, originally posted over at the Pfraforum and slightly modified. Regular candidates only, as guessing on Seniors is a real crapshoot:
First, a list of first-time eligibles by retirement year with some reasonable level of case:
2015: Junior Seau, Ty Law, Kevin Mawae, Issac Bruce, Torry Holt, Orlando Pace, Edgerrin James, Kurt Warner.
2016: Brett Favre, Terrell Owens, Alan Faneca, Darren Sharper.
2017: LaDanian Tomlinson, Jason Taylor, Brian Dawkins, Hines Ward.
2018: Ray Lewis, Randy Moss, Steve Hutchinson, Richard Seymour, Brian Urlacher, Ronde Barber.
Just a guess, but wouldn’t totally be surprised to see:
2019: Tony Gonzalez, Charles Woodson, Dwight Freeney.
2020: Peyton Manning, Ed Reed, Champ Bailey. John Abraham.
2021: Reggie Wayne, Julius Peppers, Drew Brees, Troy Polamalu.
Doubt that players like Antonio Gates, Adrian Peterson, Kevin Williams, Jared Allen, Eli Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Andre Ware, Jason Witten, Patrick Willis, Joe Thomas, Tom Brady, Andre Johnson, or Larry Fitzgerald will have retired by then, but who knows?
If this is indeed what we’re looking at for retirements, assume five are voted in each year, factor in a few surprise possibilities in Ed Sabol, Steve Wisniewski, Terrell Davis, Steve Atwater, Karl Mecklenburg, Ron Wolf, Sam Mills, and Joe Jacoby, here’s my guess:
2015: Junior Seau, Will Shields, Jerome Bettis, Charles Haley, Marvin Harrison.
2016: Brett Favre, Orlando Pace, Tim Brown, Tony Dungy, Kevin Greene.
2017: LaDanian Tomlinson, Jason Taylor, Kurt Warner, Joe Jacoby, Morton Andersen.
2018: Ray Lewis, Steve Hutchinson, Edgerrin James, John Lynch, Karl Mecklenburg.
2019: Tony Gonzalez, Randy Moss, Ty Law, Steve Sabol, Zach Thomas.
2020: Peyton Manning, Ed Reed, Terrell Owens, Alan Faneca, Eddie DeBartolo.
2021: Drew Brees, Champ Bailey, Richard Seymour, Torry Holt, Kevin Mawae.
2022: Reggie Wayne, Julius Peppers, Charles Woodson, Sam Mills, Steve Wisniewski.
Thoughts:
-there could be a push to get any or all of Jacoby, Mecklenburg, Mills, Atwater, and Davis elected before their eligibility runs out (far as I can tell ’18, ’19, ’22, ’24, and ’26 respectively).
-given how things fall, am thinking Seau, Favre, Tomlinson, Taylor, Lewis, Hutchinson, Gonzalez, Manning, Reed, and Brees will likely be “first ballot.” Least sure of Hutchinson and Taylor.
-of the other retired or likely-retired, my guess is Atwater, Bruce, Sharper, Dawkins, Barber, Davis, Freeney, Abraham, Polamalu, and Urlacher get in later on. Maybe Ward too, but I’m less sure here.
So a player is 4/8 in his career, gets a Defensive Rookie of the Year, Defensive Player of the Year and an All Decade selection, yet somehow that player is overrated? I think there’s just too much there to leave him out.
“Andre Ware” said above.
Sorry, meant “DeMarcus Ware.” Andre Ware has about as good a chance of making the PFHoF as my neighbor’s cat.
I do not see Drew Brees retiring soon. His team is young ,but good. He has Jimmy Graham and Kenny Stills. Both can get better which is scary. Marques Colston is still a solid option. They need to use Darren Sproles more. Defense much improved with Rob Ryan coaching them. He is still a top 4 QB and by a decent margin. I agree with bachslunch , his( resume is on first ballot level). Here is a stat for those against Brian: There are only players with 4 first team APs, DROY and DPOY and all decade team: Joe Greene, Charles Woodson, Lawrence Taylor, and Jack Lambert. Depending on who is left on the ballot, Brian does have a chance of election on his first year of eligibility. T-Sizzle has a slight chance of making the Hall. If he plays another 2-3 years of 8+ sacks then he has a good shot. Depends on next years.
Not trying to cause any conservatory but I am also for Simeon Rice being elected. He was 2nd fastest to 100 career sacks when he did it, The Minster of Defense being 1st. His profile of 2/3/none is weak yes, but he had 8 years of double digit sacks,including 3 seasons of 15 or more. He was also on one of the best defenses ever and he has his figure prints in on it.
I think there is an outside chance of Simeon Rice getting in once the logjam dies down. For now, though, he’s probably going to wait a while.
Devin Hester should be in the Hall if he gets 2 more return TDs.
if they are both PRs then he would increase his chance. He increases the punt return record by a lot, he gets in.
With only one pure Kicker and one Punter in the HOF (and it took years and the seniors committee to get Guy in), I doubt that Hester is going to get in the HOF for quite some time, if ever. He is always going to face the questions about being a special team player who only touches the ball 4-5 times in most games. I agree he is one of the top returners of all time and a great player, but the all time punt and kick returners based on number of returns, average per return and TDs have never gotten far in the HOF election process.