Rack the Hall of fame voters for finally Putting Wehrli in

Mike the Lab Rat · Post by **Mike the Lab Rat** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 11:52 pm

Scuttlebutt in the local (western NY) papers is that Andre Reed's nomination got dropped largely because of Thurman Thomas being in the same group. The voters apparently aren't keen on electing two guys from the same team & era at the same time. I don't have a problem with that. Thurman should get in before Reed, and IMNSHO, Reed should get in only after Tasker.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:42 am

Every major sport's HOF has turned into an absolute joke.

If your entrance into the Hall of Fame is so conditional upon if/when another player gets in, then you probably don't belong.

Mississippi Neck · Post by **Mississippi Neck** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:28 am

Sirfindafold wrote:
Mississippi Neck wrote:Irvin's leadership.....

You're a fuckin' jerkoff.

When you stray from your scripted reply, you're weak

DamnTheCowboys · Post by **DamnTheCowboys** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 4:07 am

Mississippi Neck wrote:

Fuck the numbers. Dude was, with Aikman and Smith, the heart and soul of a team that won 3 Super Bowls, appeared in 4 NFC title games, and won 6 Division titles. And all three will be in the Hall one day.

Maybe thats what the Hall of Fame is looking for, guys who perform their best when the most is on the line. That would include Swann and Irvin.

Look at the three Super Bowls he was in, and he was only a major factor in one. You could even make the case that the go to guy in the Cowboy offense in the 90s was Novacek on third downs as opposed to Irvin. Whereas in the Redskins offense, on third down they had no tight end, and everyone knew the ball was going to Monk, but he caught it anyway. In 1984 the Redskins had no other receivers or tight ends, yet he caught 106 passes.

On the subject of Swann.....how many 1,000 yard seasons. Zero. His highest total was 880, which is Yancey Thigpen in an off year. His highest reception total in a season was 61. What a joke that he is in the Hall . Lynn Swann SUCKS.

Whatever. ..this has gotten old. It has to be hard to sleep at night if you're Irvin, knowing you are the defining integer for why the NFL Hall of Fame officially is a joke now.

Tom In VA · Post by **Tom In VA** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:05 am

DamnTheCowboys wrote:Whereas in the Redskins offense, on third down they had no tight end, and everyone knew the ball was going to Monk, but he caught it anyway. In 1984 the Redskins had no other receivers or tight ends, yet he caught 106 passes.

Yo I think Monk got screwed too, but I wouldn't go THAT far. 'Skins had the money when it came to wide receivers AND tight ends. Guys that could block AND be clutch when it came to receptions.

Clint Didier, Doc Walker, Donnie Warren, etc.. etc...

Of course you had the smurfs as well.

Qbert · Post by **Qbert** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:15 am

...wasn't it mentioned above/earlier that the QB for the majority of his career was THEEEEESMAN?????

c'mon....Monk put up THOSE Numbers with Thiesman.

think about it.

He ended his Career as the League's Leading Receiver.

he has "BLING" as well.

rozy · Post by **rozy** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:41 pm

Qbert wrote:...wasn't it mentioned above/earlier that the QB for the majority of his career was THEEEEESMAN?????

c'mon....Monk put up THOSE Numbers with Thiesman.

think about it.

He ended his Career as the League's Leading Receiver.

he has "BLING" as well.

And yet, during the prime of his career, he wasn't even the best receiver on his team. In 7 seasons Clark was simply far better. Noone here seems to want to touch that one. Why do I bring that up? It comes straight from the mouths of the Hall of Fame voters. How can they put a guy in the Hall of Fame who wasn't even the best receiver on his own team? McClain said he would gladly vote for Monk if anyone can ever come up with just an even decent answer to that question. Someone come up with one and I'll be sure to pass it on to him. The only decent thing I can come up with would be along the lines of a Lou Gehrig Babe Ruth argument. The problem is, Clark is no Babe Ruth.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:59 pm

One can make a case that Clark was the better receiver, but I don't believe he was actually the far better player for 7 seasons, as it has been sold.

They complimented each other very well.

Clark joined the 'Skins in '85, and he and Monk were teammates for 8 seasons.

1985
Clark: 72 catches, 926 yds, 12.9 per catch, 5 TD's
Monk: 91 catches, 1226 yds, 13.5 per catch 2 TD's

-Slight advantage Monk.

1986
Clark: 74 catches, 1265 yds, 17.1 per catch, 7 TD's
Monk: 73 catches, 1068 yds, 14.6 per catch, 4 TD's

-Slight advantage Clark

1987
Clark: 56 catches, 1066 yds, 19.0 per catch, 7 TD's
Monk: 38 catches, 483 yds, 12.7 per catch, 6 TD's

-Clear advantage Clark (Monk missed 7 games due to injury)

1988
Clark: 59 catches, 892 yds, 15.1 per catch, 7 TD's
Monk: 72 catches, 946 yds, 13.1 per catch, 5 TD's

-Call it even

1989
Clark: 79 catches, 1229 yds, 15.6 per catch, 9 TD's
Monk: 86 catches, 1186 yds, 13.8 per catch, 8 TD's

-I'd call that even too

1990
Clark: 75 catches, 1112 yds, 14.8 per catch, 8 TD's
Monk: 68 catches, 770 yds, 11.3 per catch, 5 TD's

-Clear advantage Clark

1991
Clark:70 catches, 1340 yds, 19.1 per catch, 10 TD's
Monk: 71 catches, 1049 yds, 14.8 per catch, 8 TD's

-Advantage Clark

1992
Clark: 64 catches, 912 yds, 14.2 per catch, 5 TD's
Monk: 46 catches, 644 yds, 14.0 per catch, 3 TD's

-Advantage Clark

Five out of eight years Clark was probably the better player.
Two years they were about equals.
One year Monk was probably better.

Clark was a helluva player -- 4 pro bowls.
G. Clark was a dangerous deep ball threat, and Monk's possession skillz were a perfect compliment to that.

Clark obviously didn't have quite the longevity in his favor -- 11 seasons to Monk's 16.

I've always said I thought Monk should have made it in within the first few yrs of being eligible, but I DO understand the case against him.

I don't think his exclusion is the ultimate travesty that some say it is.

Was Art Monk really a GREAT player .... ?

3 pro bowls.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:04 pm

If doing what Art Monk did was so fucking easy, why is it that nobody in the history of the game had 940 receptions before him?

And why is it that even now, only 5 men have bettered that mark?

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:07 pm

Qbert wrote:...wasn't it mentioned above/earlier that the QB for the majority of his career was THEEEEESMAN?????

c'mon....Monk put up THOSE Numbers with Thiesman.

He also had Stan Humphries, Mark Rypien, Doug Williams and Jay Schroeder pitching the rock to him. But hey, those were all elite QBs right?

Mississippi Neck · Post by **Mississippi Neck** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:15 pm

DamnTheCowboys wrote:Whatever. ..this has gotten old. It has to be hard to sleep at night if you're Irvin, knowing you are the defining integer for why the NFL Hall of Fame officially is a joke now.

Do you really think that after all the shit Irvin has pulled in his life that making the Hall of Fame is something he'll lose sleep over...really?

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:17 pm

Isaac Bruce will likely pass 940 next season.

K. McCardell can get there if he can put together two 40 catch seasons.

Hall of Famers ... ?

Bruce has an outside chance, IMO.
McCardell, no way.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:40 pm

poptart wrote:Isaac Bruce will likely pass 940 next season.

K. McCardell can get there if he can put together two 40 catch seasons.

Hall of Famers ... ?

Bruce has an outside chance, IMO.
McCardell, no way.

McCardell is 37 and had a whopping 36 catches last year. No chance for him.

As for Bruce, he's got a legit chance of passing Monk. And a very legit shot at the HoF.

DallasFanatic · Post by **DallasFanatic** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:56 pm

BSmack wrote:... Doug Williams

Did you know Doug Williams was the first African American quarterback to play in the Superbowl?

Tom In VA · Post by **Tom In VA** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:28 pm

Need I remind you that we might be overlooking some important facts.

Monk, the threat that he was, MIGHT have drawn MORE coverage. Thereby leaving his contemporaries, Gary Clark (Who I'd like to see in Canton as well) able to put up big numbers.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:34 pm

DallasFanatic wrote:
BSmack wrote:... Doug Williams
Did you know Doug Williams was the first African American quarterback to play in the Superbowl?

I'm pretty sure he was also the first African American QB to QB a team in a Conference Championship game many years before.

Tom In VA · Post by **Tom In VA** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:07 pm

e wrote:
Tom In VA wrote:Need I remind you that we might be overlooking some important facts.

Monk, the threat that he was, MIGHT have drawn MORE coverage. Thereby leaving his contemporaries, Gary Clark (Who I'd like to see in Canton as well) able to put up big numbers.
so you're saying alvin harper should have gone in before michael irvin?

Raises an interesting point, does it not. Here's something I will emphatically stand by ......

Moose Johnson definitely should be in the HoF before Michael Irvin.

This guy not only lead the way for Emmit Smith but when he himself wasn't carrying the ball or catching the swing pass or shuttle pass as an outlet .... he was protecting Troy Aikman's dome which in turn provided Aikman enough time to find Irvin downfield.

Tom In VA · Post by **Tom In VA** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:23 pm

e wrote:
Tom In VA wrote:...protecting Troy Aikman's dome...
while johnston was one of the few cowboys i ever liked, are you sure you want to include this in his HOF resume?

You're a bad man e. Without him, it would have been MUCH MUCH WORST.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:11 pm

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:As much as I want to see Bills of that era in the HOF, I think that Steve Tasker should get in before/instead of Andre Reed.

What's the case for Tasker ... ?

I'm not dismissing him out of hand, but I'm just asking for you to state why you're jocking him.
Kick coverage specialist extraordinaire .... ?
Buffalo area cult hero.

I think it's a tough sell, when the league's all-time all-purpose yardage king will likely never get in.

Brian Mitchell -- Great player.

Nine 1,000 yd kickoff return seasons.
Nine 300 yd punt return seasons.
13 career returns for TD.

Also, hands down the greatest punter ever, Ray Guy, gets no love.

I wouldn't hold my breath on little Stevie Tasker ever making it in without a ticket.

Mike the Lab Rat · Post by **Mike the Lab Rat** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 10:29 pm

poptart wrote:
Mike the Lab Rat wrote:As much as I want to see Bills of that era in the HOF, I think that Steve Tasker should get in before/instead of Andre Reed.
What's the case for Tasker ... ?

I'm not dismissing him out of hand, but I'm just asking for you to state why you're jocking him.
Kick coverage specialist extraordinaire .... ?
Buffalo area cult hero.

Seven time Pro Bowler (87, 90-95), MVP of Pro Bowl in '93 (first special teams player to be named MVP of Pro Bowl)

Most Valuable Player award (1993 Pro Bowl)

In 2000 the NFL HOF voted him to the All-Time NFL Team.

Yeah, you'd expect guys like Jim Kelly and Marv Levy to push for Tasker for the HOF (which they do), since they were all Bills from that era, but the fact is that Tasker is considered one of the best, if not the best, special teams players in NFL history. It's not a "Buffalo area cult hero" thing....go online and check out opinions from sports writers, coaches, etc.

Mediocre announcer, however.

Tom In VA · Post by **Tom In VA** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:24 pm

mvscal wrote:
Derrick Thomas’ job was not to cover receivers and stuff the run.
That fishhack just did an excellent job of kicking his own ass. Those are basic job responsibilities for any linebacker.

Maybe the writer was describing his duties within the Chiefs defensive scheme. Kind of like a "monster" or more aptly put a freelancer ... 'find the ball and go". If it's a pass, your job is the QB, if it's a run your job is the ball carrier. As opposed to more strict assignment like containment then pursuit.

It's not unheard of and as the writer loosely indicated was modeled after L.T.

Tom In VA · Post by **Tom In VA** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 12:30 am

Roger that coach. But how could he be "completely lost in coverage" when his coach said "Go after the QB, don't bother covering anyone". ?

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 1:52 am

mvscal wrote:
poptart wrote:Also, hands down the greatest punter ever, Ray Guy, gets no love.
Total, complete, 100% bullshit. The punter you've got right now is better than Guy.

Ray guy was named the punter on the NFL's 75th Anniversary Team.
But yeah, I'm pretty sure it was for no good reason.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 11:59 am

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:.........but the fact is that Tasker is considered one of the best, if not the best, special teams players in NFL history. It's not a "Buffalo area cult hero" thing....go online and check out opinions from sports writers, coaches, etc.

I read up on Tasker.
Great special teams player.

Appears the Hall electorate has pretty well decided that no special teams only players can get in.
Jan Stenerud is the ONLY exclusive special team player in the Hall.

There are, however, a number of players in the Hall who excelled on special teams, but they all also contributed largely on either offense or defense.

I wonder if Gary Anderson or Morten Andersen will get in.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 · Thu Feb 08, 2007 6:46 pm

RACK mvscal.

Derrick Thomas was a one dimensional player who gave up just any many big plays as he made. I feel bad that he died young, but that should NOT help him get into Canton. If you judge him solely on his career, it doesn't warrant induction. No sympathy voters need apply.

Stop with the Ray Guy shit too. He's a fucking punter. He participated in 5-6 plays/game. I don't care if he averaged 70 net yards per kick. He was a punter.

DamnTheCowboys · Post by **DamnTheCowboys** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 4:12 am

Since Gary Clark's name has been brought up, why is HE not a Hall of Fame candidate? That's what's classic here. Compare him to those Steeler receivers and Clark outranks them both

I mean, why isn't Clark's name even MENTIONED when it comes to eligibility? Furthermore, why are there only two Redskins from the period of three Super Bowl titles (Riggins and Gibbs) in the Hall of Fame? The Dolphins and their two wins in that period have far more inductees thanks to the '72s bumping their gums the last 35 years. Do the writers have something against America's Team- the Burgundy and Gold? Makes you wonder...

Tom In VA · Post by **Tom In VA** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 7:38 am

Personally I think it's the non-pc name.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:11 pm

Clark was a better player than Swann, and he was about equal to Stallworth.
None of the three belong in the Hall though, IMO.

orcinus · Post by **orcinus** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 3:24 pm

Agree with the toaster pastry. It's difficult to look at Swann's career without seeing those two or three circus catches in the playoffs and Super Bowl on an endless loop, though.

Consistent player who came up huge on the biggest stages.

I don't think he should be in the hall, but it doesn't keep me up at night seeing him in.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 4:57 pm

orcinus wrote:Agree with the toaster pastry. It's difficult to look at Swann's career without seeing those two or three circus catches in the playoffs and Super Bowl on an endless loop, though.

Consistent player who came up huge on the biggest stages.

And did so multiple times. With a team built around a power running game and in a time when it was still legal to touch a receiver.

Cornhusker · Post by **Cornhusker** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 5:32 pm

Just saw this thread today, back to Roger Wehrli.. as this thread kinda moved in a different direction.
I remember when he played for Mizzou and he was a pain in the ass to say the least.
I really admired him though...he was damn good. I remembered he was a hell'va punt returner and found this:

http://www.collegefootball.org/famersearch.php?id=90052

But I thought he played some offense too...I could be wrong, (probably am) but it seemed he played some running back?

Maybe...I'm just remembering his punt/kick-off returns as being so very deadly. I know I heard that guy's name on the radio broadcast waaaaaaay too much.