NFL Off Topic

[kehlis]

Re: NFL Off Topic

We're missing "no pun intended" in the last few posts.

[TracerBullet]

Re: NFL Off Topic

I think we're all crying over spilled milk here. T.O. will be in the HOF within 5-6 years IMO. This is just the committee having spite and wanting to make him sweat it out. Is it a shame that he has to wait? Not really, i mean as great as a talent as he was the man was a major headache. Look at it this way, If Bill Belichick was willing to have a "locker room disturbance" like Randy Moss on the Patriots and not Terrell Owens well, that tells you all you need to know.

That being said, Owens was in the top 3 WRs i've ever seen in my life and will be a HOFer.

This is the same rhetoric that usually makes baseball's HOF voting a joke too. It's just as stupid and childish as his antics.

[LowerWolf]

Re: NFL Off Topic

The same offseason where we "couldn't wait" to get rid of T.O., we also ditched starting QB Jeff Garcia and starting RB (and locker room leader) Garrison Hearst.

Thanks to Terry Donahue, we had massive cap issues. Dennis Erickson was the coach and everyone could see the franchise was sinking, including T.O. So he intended to void his contract to become a FA, but his agent messed up and missed the deadline. We acquiesed and traded him when it was clear he wanted to play for a winner instead of a rebuilding team.

T.O. and Mooch didn't get along (and still don't), and he threw Garcia under the bus a couple of times. But he also showed up each and every game and busted his butt on the field. And let's not forget, in addition to all the receptions, TDs and yards, he was one of the best blocking WRs in NFL history.

T.O., along with Rice and Moss, are the three best WRs I've ever seen. Rice was a first-ballot HOFer. I bet Moss gets in next year. It's a joke that T.O. has to wait.

[wco81]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Eh I know who TO is if he never gets in.

HoF just making itself more irrelevant with these votes.

If you're a young black player, you better behave so the white reporters will validate your career?

[Dog]

Re: NFL Off Topic

If we are going to leave out of the HoF a deserving player because of 'character issues', should we then allow players in that sucked, but were great locker room guys?

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Moral of the story: If you're a great player that has the numbers to definitely get in the HOF, you have to be nice to the Media to get in on first try. If you're an *** towards them, be prepared to wait.

[roadman]

Re: NFL Off Topic

I don't know if anyone has seen this article by Pete Doughtery or not, but here are some excerpts from an article he wrote about TO's HOF status, both sides of the story.

A point of clarification, the Hall’s bylaws state that voters should consider only what a player does on the field for their candidacy. So arrests, convictions, drug issues, etc., are not a factor.

But the bylaws allow for taking into account how a player’s behavior on the sidelines and in the locker room affects his team’s performance, for better or worse.

And Owens’ history isn’t pretty. He had a gift for alienating quarterbacks and dividing locker rooms with his public complaints. He was uncommonly difficult to work with.

Owens played his first eight years in the NFL for the 49ers, but at the height of his career the sides divorced, and they traded him to Philadelphia in 2004.

In 2005, Owens’ second season with the Eagles, coach Andy Reid kicked him off the team after seven games for conduct detrimental. He’d publicly criticized quarterback Donovan McNabb and was pushing publicly for a new contract even though he was only 1½ years into the seven-year deal he’d signed when he joined the team. Owens was on pace to catch 107 passes for 1,744 yards, yet Reid dumped him.

And in March 2009, the Cowboys released him despite his averages of 78 catches for 1,196 yards in his three seasons there.

Hall voters pledge not to discuss details of who said what during the selection meeting — it’s a necessary rule to foster candor. But suffice it to say, some of the opinions relayed from credible sources who worked with Owens were damning. One Hall of Famer, former Bills, Panthers and Colts GM Bill Polian, even went on the public record in 2016 with his objection.

“The Hall of Fame ought to be for people who make their teams better,” Polian said, “not for those who disrupt them and make them worse.”

These things can’t simply be dismissed.

So that’s what you’re left to weigh. The stats against the rest.

Now, in the end there’s no middle ground for a voter. It’s either yes or no.

And I say yes.

Though it always ended badly, it wasn’t always bad. In his 231 regular-season and playoff games, his teams’ winning percentage was .556, and his teams went to the playoffs eight times.

Most importantly, he was a player defenses had to game plan around, and he was that for a long time. His talent was immense. I know whenever the Packers played an Owens team once he’d become a true No. 1 receiver in 1999, he was the guy they wanted to keep from beating them.

To me, that’s a Hall of Famer, even if Owens inevitably sabotaged himself and his team, and even if it came quicker the older he grew. He was a difference maker.

As for the idea that some members of the committee are punishing his bad behavior by making him wait to get in, I’m not buying. From what I can tell based on the debate, plenty of them simply think teams were too eager to get rid of Owens for him to be a Hall of Famer no matter what his stats say.

That doesn’t mean some won’t change their minds. I have in my short time on the committee. Two years ago, at my first vote, I didn’t think Kurt Warner had enough great seasons to be a Hall of Famer. But the closer I looked over time, the more I came to think he’d done enough. So I gladly voted for him all the way through Saturday.

I don’t know if or when Owens will make it. I believe he should. But anyone who thinks this is a no-brainer isn’t thinking.

[dsallupinyaarea]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Moral of the story: If you're a great player that has the numbers to definitely get in the HOF, you have to be nice to the Media to get in on first try. If you're an *** towards them, be prepared to wait.

And that's what this boils down to. It's not about him being a bad teammate, there are plenty of ****ty teammates in the HOF. It's about the media not liking the way he treated them. It's petty and delegitimizes the whole process.

[Bmore Irish]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Any Given Sunday was on last night, so I watched since I hadn't seen it in a while. That movie was ahead of it's time. Even some of the more over-exaggerated parts don't seem too far off.

[wwharton]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Who's waiting that is more deserving? I think last year you could give it a pass since they put Marvin Harrison in and you're splitting hairs between him or TO. But this year they didn't even put a WR in and they got Terrell Davis in who had less seasons playing in the league than TO had 1,000+ yard seasons.

It's crazy to me. His antics weren't THAT bad IMO. I don't think you can fairly say they cost his teams wins. He was on plenty of good teams that won games in his career. Even in his time in Philly, which is the one situation that sticks out the most as far his antics go, he helped propel them to a Super Bowl appearance.

I don't know.. I'm sure he'll get in eventually though.

I want to put out the disclaimer again that my stance is that this measure is being used to split hairs, not determine his HOF worthiness like many are discussing.

Any waiting list at all brings in the "splitting of the hairs" part of the argument. And when you're looking at the waiting list, you're not just looking at WRs. People bring up TD's short career, leaving out that he was arguably the most important player on two superbowl teams during that short career. TO has zero rings, and for all of the (deserved) credit he gets for his performance in the SB the Eagles lost, he was hurt throughout the playoffs so didn't play a role in them reaching the game. So while his resume is indeed impressive, there is reason to think TD deserved consideration over him.

And again, I think he's a HOFer, I'm just thinking along the lines of how HOF voting tends to go. If it were up to me, they'd get rid of the yearly cap all together AND stop acting like being voted 1st ballot is some favor for the writers to grant. Let everyone in that's deserving every year.

But I don't believe TO not getting voted in is JUST about him not treating the writers better. He'll get in... not sure why it matters that it didn't happen the 1st and 2nd year he was eligible in this current system.

[wwharton]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Any Given Sunday was on last night, so I watched since I hadn't seen it in a while. That movie was ahead of it's time. Even some of the more over-exaggerated parts don't seem too far off.

I'm still trying to figure out where I can get a Willie Beaman jersey.

[mestevo]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Any Given Sunday was on last night, so I watched since I hadn't seen it in a while. That movie was ahead of it's time. Even some of the more over-exaggerated parts don't seem too far off.

I think of that movie when all the articles come out talking about the bonuses players missed by 1 kick or 1 yard every year.

[SPTO]

Re: NFL Off Topic

This is the same rhetoric that usually makes baseball's HOF voting a joke too. It's just as stupid and childish as his antics.

I 100% agree with you here but suffice it to say, it's an emotional thing for these guys sometimes.

[TripleCrown9]

Re: NFL Off Topic

I'm still trying to figure out where I can get a Willie Beaman jersey.

Hit up Russell Westbrook.

[l3ulvl]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Can someone please point my to the character clause that HOF voters must follow? Take your time as well I have no plans all day.

and if character is a quantifier, how come there isn't discussion about guys with lousy stats who were incredible locker room presences and aren't in the HoF?

who is the best teammate ever? regardless of stats, he should be in

2nd best teammate? nope, better at least have average stats