wudu
08-18-2010, 04:09 PM
So today I was reading Pro Football Weekly's article on the Hall of Fame enshrinement of Floyd Little and for some reason one of the first sentences of the article struck me.
"But before a pair of Lombardi Trophies were resting in Denver and the orange No. 7 became one of the more iconic jerseys in football history, Floyd Little was the face of the Broncos. "
Face of the franchise? Interesting concept. The phrase is one of those phrases that feels like it should be official and printed in caps, then followed by a colon. Face of the Franchise:
Kind of like Legend of the Game. So if FOF was going to have something like Face of the Franchise for each team, what would it look like? Well, first off what does being the face of the franchise mean?
For the Broncos, its obviously John Elway, as the article said. Why? Is it the hair? The super bowls? Is the Fotf always the best player a franchise has ever had? Maybe, but maybe not. If you were to think about the New York Jets, Joe Namath is probably the face of that franchise, but there are still people to this day who say he doesn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. He's certainly the most popular and iconic. And he had great hair, too. Most importantly, perhaps, was his high profile success.
I can already sense I'm getting off into a whimsical rant, but I feel like this idea might be a cool inclusion to a future version of FOF. And it actually could be included with (maybe) very little extra coding. I mean, FOF currently has a calculation that determines the value of a player's accomplishments: Hall of Fame Points. Maybe HOF points can be used with Popularity as a multiplier, then divided amongst teams a player has played for to give a semi-hidden statistic, and each franchise can have a little banner for their particular FOTF, much like the Legend of the Game window.
Example: Lets say for argument's sake Joe Perry would have been the 49ers Fotf in the 1960s and 70s. He was like second behind Jim Brown for all time rushing, spent most of his career in SF and was pretty popular in his day. Twenty season later, Joe Montana comes to town and wins multiple championships and is named all-pro multiple times and is vaulted into the "greatest of all time" conversation when he leaves the team. He spends two years with KC then retires, has his HOF points compiled separately for SF and KC, multiplied by his player popularity. In SF, he has more than enough 49er HOF points to pass Joe Perry. In KC, he doesn't contribute enough to the franchise to pass lets say, Len Dawson. Taking the example further, ten years later Jerry Rice retires. His accomplishments as a whole might end up to be more than Joe Montana, but because Rice left the 49ers and divided his career between multiple teams and was arguably less popular, he cannot become the face of any franchise.
Another ridiculous example: Lets again assume Joe Namath is the FOTC for the Jets. Using more raw data lets say he accomplished 5000 HOF pts in his career due to his Superbowl victory, his stats and all-pro selections. But his Popularity is 95 because of the hair. Years later, Mark Gastineau comes along, breaks the single season sack record, ends up with something like 100 career sacks and goes to 5 pro bowls and has 3 all pro selections. Lets say this gives him 6000 HOF pts. Even though he may have accomplished more statistically in his career, he's known as a surly bastard with a terrible mullet and plays on the d-line, so his popularity is at around 60. My proposed equation would be a simple something like this:
Joe Namath: 5000 * .95 = 4750
Mark Gastineau: 6000 * .60 = 3600
Namath remains Fotf by virtue of his hair.
Wow, this started out as a simple suggestion and turned into a monster post that likely no one will read. But if brain dumps like this didn't happen my mind would be very constipated.
"But before a pair of Lombardi Trophies were resting in Denver and the orange No. 7 became one of the more iconic jerseys in football history, Floyd Little was the face of the Broncos. "
Face of the franchise? Interesting concept. The phrase is one of those phrases that feels like it should be official and printed in caps, then followed by a colon. Face of the Franchise:
Kind of like Legend of the Game. So if FOF was going to have something like Face of the Franchise for each team, what would it look like? Well, first off what does being the face of the franchise mean?
For the Broncos, its obviously John Elway, as the article said. Why? Is it the hair? The super bowls? Is the Fotf always the best player a franchise has ever had? Maybe, but maybe not. If you were to think about the New York Jets, Joe Namath is probably the face of that franchise, but there are still people to this day who say he doesn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. He's certainly the most popular and iconic. And he had great hair, too. Most importantly, perhaps, was his high profile success.
I can already sense I'm getting off into a whimsical rant, but I feel like this idea might be a cool inclusion to a future version of FOF. And it actually could be included with (maybe) very little extra coding. I mean, FOF currently has a calculation that determines the value of a player's accomplishments: Hall of Fame Points. Maybe HOF points can be used with Popularity as a multiplier, then divided amongst teams a player has played for to give a semi-hidden statistic, and each franchise can have a little banner for their particular FOTF, much like the Legend of the Game window.
Example: Lets say for argument's sake Joe Perry would have been the 49ers Fotf in the 1960s and 70s. He was like second behind Jim Brown for all time rushing, spent most of his career in SF and was pretty popular in his day. Twenty season later, Joe Montana comes to town and wins multiple championships and is named all-pro multiple times and is vaulted into the "greatest of all time" conversation when he leaves the team. He spends two years with KC then retires, has his HOF points compiled separately for SF and KC, multiplied by his player popularity. In SF, he has more than enough 49er HOF points to pass Joe Perry. In KC, he doesn't contribute enough to the franchise to pass lets say, Len Dawson. Taking the example further, ten years later Jerry Rice retires. His accomplishments as a whole might end up to be more than Joe Montana, but because Rice left the 49ers and divided his career between multiple teams and was arguably less popular, he cannot become the face of any franchise.
Another ridiculous example: Lets again assume Joe Namath is the FOTC for the Jets. Using more raw data lets say he accomplished 5000 HOF pts in his career due to his Superbowl victory, his stats and all-pro selections. But his Popularity is 95 because of the hair. Years later, Mark Gastineau comes along, breaks the single season sack record, ends up with something like 100 career sacks and goes to 5 pro bowls and has 3 all pro selections. Lets say this gives him 6000 HOF pts. Even though he may have accomplished more statistically in his career, he's known as a surly bastard with a terrible mullet and plays on the d-line, so his popularity is at around 60. My proposed equation would be a simple something like this:
Joe Namath: 5000 * .95 = 4750
Mark Gastineau: 6000 * .60 = 3600
Namath remains Fotf by virtue of his hair.
Wow, this started out as a simple suggestion and turned into a monster post that likely no one will read. But if brain dumps like this didn't happen my mind would be very constipated.