Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • glucklich
    Banned
    • Jun 2004
    • 4272

    #46
    Re: Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

    Originally posted by Erod
    Stats, stats, run-and-shoot stats.

    And get the "f" outta here with that CFL nonsense. Barely a pro sport.

    Can you name one great game the guy ever had? I remember Fouts against Miami and a number of others. I remember Elways and Aikman's great throws.

    I honestly don't remember a single play of significance in Moon's career. Not one. And I live in Texas so I saw most of his games on TV here.

    When you throw 40+ passes a game and Ernest Givens takes a five-yard slant 70 yards, you tend to look good.

    Again, not saying he wasn't a good QB. But he is NOT worthy of the Hall.

    Oh, and I'm not the only person that thinks this, unlike some of you seem to suggest.
    A yard is a yard regardless of what kind of offense is run...if anything the Run & Shoot made Warren Moon do most of the work, which he did. It was sensible to utilize the run and shoot since Moon was an adept passer. Also, Houston was not the only team to run the run & shoot but it worked best in Houston because of Warren Moon. He doesnt have to be better than Dan Marino or John Elway to make it into the HOF.

    Comment

    • coogrfan
      In Fritz We Trust
      • Jul 2002
      • 15645

      #47
      Re: Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

      One thought has struck me as I read through this thread. It seems to me that the more Oiler games you actually saw, the less inclined you are to believe Warren should have be in the Hall. I wonder why that is?

      Comment

      • t_mercer28
        Rookie
        • Aug 2004
        • 423

        #48
        Re: Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

        Originally posted by Erod
        It's not half-baked. I just want the HOF to be exclusive for the truly special players to play the game. Moon doesn't qualilfy in my book. To me, Boomer Esiason is as qualified as Moon.

        Unitas, Marino, Bradshaw, Staubach, Young, Montana, Elway, Kelly, and........Warren Moon? Really? Uh, no.
        Well, I guess Canton has their Hall of Fame, and you have yours
        Atlanta Falcons Atlanta Braves Los Angeles Lakers
        Florida State Seminoles

        Comment

        • fossen
          Bl*bfl*th z*p!
          • Jul 2002
          • 7098

          #49
          Re: Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

          Originally posted by Erod
          It's not half-baked. I just want the HOF to be exclusive for the truly special players to play the game. Moon doesn't qualilfy in my book. To me, Boomer Esiason is as qualified as Moon.

          Unitas, Marino, Bradshaw, Staubach, Young, Montana, Elway, Kelly, and........Warren Moon? Really? Uh, no.
          Yeah ... but can you back that up beyond "your book"?

          We're in front of the Hall Of Fame voters, and I drop his stats as I did in this thread. That's the case FOR Warren Moon ....

          Then you stand up up to make the case AGAINST Warren Moon ... and try to convince the voters with "Eh. He never really 'did it' for me."? That's your argument?

          That's the definition of half-baked, Erod. In fact, "half" is generous.

          Comment

          • glucklich
            Banned
            • Jun 2004
            • 4272

            #50
            Re: Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

            Originally posted by coogrfan
            One thought has struck me as I read through this thread. It seems to me that the more Oiler games you actually saw, the less inclined you are to believe Warren should have be in the Hall. I wonder why that is?

            Because those are also probably the people who remember the disappointments the most...couple that with this ridiculous over emphasis of winning rings and that probably explains a lot of what you describe.

            Comment

            • coogrfan
              In Fritz We Trust
              • Jul 2002
              • 15645

              #51
              Re: Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

              Originally posted by glucklich
              Because those are also probably the people who remember the disappointments the most...couple that with this ridiculous over emphasis of winning rings and that probably explains a lot of what you describe.
              That's one possible explanation. Here's another: perhaps the people who actually saw the guy play on a regular basis saw enough negatives (such as a propensity for turning the ball over and very little in the way of late-game magic) to offset the "wow factor" of Warren's career passing yardage numbers.

              Honestly, I don't know. But I do know that until a couple of weeks ago, the general consensus of opinion here in Houston was that Moon was a longshot at best to make it in his first year of eligibility.

              Comment

              • VanCitySportsGuy
                NYG_Meth
                • Feb 2003
                • 9351

                #52
                Re: Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

                This thread cracks me up.

                It's the Pro Football HoF and not the NFL HoF.

                He's the all-time leader in passing yards. Even if you take away his CFL stats, his numbers are still excellent.

                I know you probably think the CFL is irrelevant to this discussion but it's not. John Clayton (a voter) appeared on the Team 1040 and said he took Moon's CFL stats into consideration. He also said several other voters he talked to also considered his CFL stats.

                Comment

                • SemperVictoria
                  Pro
                  • Jun 2004
                  • 605

                  #53
                  Re: Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

                  Originally posted by asianflow
                  This thread cracks me up.

                  It's the Pro Football HoF and not the NFL HoF.

                  He's the all-time leader in passing yards. Even if you take away his CFL stats, his numbers are still excellent.

                  I know you probably think the CFL is irrelevant to this discussion but it's not. John Clayton (a voter) appeared on the Team 1040 and said he took Moon's CFL stats into consideration. He also said several other voters he talked to also considered his CFL stats.

                  WTF? Why don't we then allow college stats--or how about high school? Because there's no way in hell you can compare the CFL to the NFL. So anyone who took Moon's CFL stats into consideration is an idiot--and actually provides a good argument against him being inducted so soon (if at all).

                  Comment

                  • coogrfan
                    In Fritz We Trust
                    • Jul 2002
                    • 15645

                    #54
                    Re: Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

                    Originally posted by asianflow
                    This thread cracks me up.

                    It's the Pro Football HoF and not the NFL HoF.

                    He's the all-time leader in passing yards. Even if you take away his CFL stats, his numbers are still excellent.

                    I know you probably think the CFL is irrelevant to this discussion but it's not. John Clayton (a voter) appeared on the Team 1040 and said he took Moon's CFL stats into consideration. He also said several other voters he talked to also considered his CFL stats.
                    Herschel Walker played pro football for 15 years, beginning in 1983 in the USFL with the NJ Generals and ending in '97 after a second tour of duty with the Cowboys. If you include his numbers from the USFL, Walker logged more all-purpose yardage (rushing, receiving, and kick returns) than any pro football player who ever lived.

                    If Canton was truly the "Pro Football HoF" as you and John Clayton apparently believe, why isn't there a special Herschel Walker wing of the HoF? The answer should be obvious:it's because Canton is all about celebrating the accomplishments of the NFL's greatest players.

                    Comment

                    • fossen
                      Bl*bfl*th z*p!
                      • Jul 2002
                      • 7098

                      #55
                      Re: Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

                      Originally posted by SemperVictoria
                      WTF? Why don't we then allow college stats--or how about high school?
                      You might want to check the definition of "Professional".

                      Comment

                      • dieselboy
                        --------------
                        • Dec 2002
                        • 18040

                        #56
                        Re: Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

                        Originally posted by SemperVictoria
                        WTF? Why don't we then allow college stats--or how about high school? Because there's no way in hell you can compare the CFL to the NFL. So anyone who took Moon's CFL stats into consideration is an idiot--and actually provides a good argument against him being inducted so soon (if at all).
                        Originally posted by fossen
                        You might want to check the definition of "Professional".
                        Work job.

                        Comment

                        • SemperVictoria
                          Pro
                          • Jun 2004
                          • 605

                          #57
                          Re: Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

                          Originally posted by fossen
                          You might want to check the definition of "Professional".


                          So the CFL is equal to the NFL? If not, why the hell allow those stats?

                          Comment

                          • VanCitySportsGuy
                            NYG_Meth
                            • Feb 2003
                            • 9351

                            #58
                            Re: Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

                            Originally posted by SemperVictoria
                            WTF? Why don't we then allow college stats--or how about high school?
                            Once again the key words are Pro Football Hall Of Fame.

                            If only NFL stats should be taken into consideration by the voters than the HoF should change its name.

                            Comment

                            • SemperVictoria
                              Pro
                              • Jun 2004
                              • 605

                              #59
                              Re: Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

                              Originally posted by asianflow
                              Once again the key words are Pro Football Hall Of Fame.

                              If only NFL stats should be taken into consideration by the voters than the HoF should change its name.

                              O.K. I'll repeat: Is the CFL equal to the NFL?

                              Comment

                              • fossen
                                Bl*bfl*th z*p!
                                • Jul 2002
                                • 7098

                                #60
                                Re: Warren Moon is not Hall worthy

                                Originally posted by SemperVictoria
                                O.K. I'll repeat: Is the CFL equal to the NFL?
                                Did anyone say they were?

                                Of course they're not equal. It's part of the equation, though.

                                Comment

                                Working...