|
Post by Joel on Jan 15, 2019 8:04:32 GMT -5
All i will say about these WR's, is that they pale in comparison to the numbers a fair few of the WR's are putting up now, and have for the last 5-7 seasons. These WR's may not seem like HOFers when Shelton, Battle, Grayvil, Sinclair retire... That may be the case, but nothing is guaranteed and it doesn't take away from what I always say. IMO, the definition of a HOFer is being in the elite class during your era. No doubt they are. I was a about to make a push for teddy as well
|
|
|
Post by ezlee2 on Jan 15, 2019 8:20:40 GMT -5
That may be the case, but nothing is guaranteed and it doesn't take away from what I always say. IMO, the definition of a HOFer is being in the elite class during your era. No doubt they are. I was a about to make a push for teddy as well Waiting...
|
|
|
Post by Nick on Jan 15, 2019 8:55:49 GMT -5
The gap from Perry to Teddy is light years. Guys like the DT Donald are surely more deserving. He is the Big Ben or Cam of DTs.
|
|
|
Post by Joel on Jan 15, 2019 9:02:01 GMT -5
OK, so what is it that defines a HOF QB? Rings, wins and some nice stats?
Right now in the RZB, we have only inducted 3, Roethlisberger, Newton and Perry. Both Perry and Big Ben have numbers that cant be compared against as a HOF player in my opinion, as they were just beyond everyone else, it was their league, 1 off generational talents. However, for me, Cam brings other guys into question. And I think 2 guys may still be worthy of making the HOF; Luck and Bridgewater.
So current HOF QBs have respectively an average of: Avg/a 7.99 avg/c 12.15 comp % 65.83 TD's 315.33 Ints 94.66 (so a TD/INT ratio of just better than 3:1) Coterie score 87.43
So how do Teddy and Andrew compare?? Avg/a Teddy: 7.78 Luck: 7.19 (both worse) Avg/c Teddy: 11.90 Luck: 11.08 (both worse) Comp % Tedyy: 65.3 Luck: 64.9 (both worse) TD's Teddy: 346 Luck: 313 (Teddy better/Luck worse) Ints Teddy: 184 Luck:122 (Teddy worse/Luck better) Coterie score Teddy: 75.8 Luck: 78.2 (both worse)
Both Luck and Bridgewater achieved a bowl win as well.
So on paper, YES, both Luck and Bridgewater look like worse QB's (in which they were). However Teddy has a better case IMO, as his stats are far closer to the precedent set by the other 3, and the main thing that I think holds teddy back are his high number of interceptions. I personally think these two should make it, as the only true reason their stats don't compare to the 3 HOF avg, is because Perry and Big Ben have bumped those numbers up to an unreachable target for so many other great QB's. Both Luck and Teddy are in the all time top ten for most of the meaningful stats, still, after being out of the league for 5 seasons now as well.
|
|
|
Post by ezlee2 on Jan 15, 2019 9:02:39 GMT -5
The gap from Perry to anyone is light years away. The gap from Big Ben, Cam and Teddy is marginal.
|
|
|
Post by Joel on Jan 15, 2019 9:05:22 GMT -5
The gap from Perry to Teddy is light years. Guys like the DT Donald are surely more deserving. He is the Big Ben or Cam of DTs. That's the issue though, the gap between Brady and Eli manning is 'Light years' as well. One a certain HOF, and the other will probably get in. You cant set the precedent on the Greatest to ever play in the league.
|
|
|
Post by Nick on Jan 15, 2019 10:20:11 GMT -5
The gap from Perry to Teddy is light years. Guys like the DT Donald are surely more deserving. He is the Big Ben or Cam of DTs. That's the issue though, the gap between Brady and Eli manning is 'Light years' as well. One a certain HOF, and the other will probably get in. You cant set the precedent on the Greatest to ever play in the league. As a selector you have freedom to think in whatever manner you want. I absolutely will consider a player with the greatest at his position in mind. The standards in the HOF should be extremely high. Just because the NFL makes mistakes doesn't mean we have to also. Teddy was an inconsistent player. A few good seasons doesn't cut it for me. His 94.8 rating reflects his good but not great career. If you think he is good enough, vote for him. I see better out there at other positions, in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by ManWithNoName on Jan 15, 2019 12:47:59 GMT -5
If we're setting guys like Ben and Perry as the bar then we might as well just make this the Steelers and Seahawks Hall of Fame because few guys can replicate the offenses of those two teams.
|
|
|
Post by ezlee2 on Jan 15, 2019 12:57:31 GMT -5
I also think getting the ring should hold more weight than it does.
|
|
|
Post by Bighouserulez on Jan 15, 2019 14:00:25 GMT -5
I mean i like Nick's thoughts as Perry and Ben and Rawls are all the GOATS. If we are really going to look at criteria like that i think we should be a lot tougher on the HOF.
If you ONLY want the best of each position in the HOF that is one thing. I am looking at the big picture of the league and i may be on a different page here.
If a guy is the best at his position when he plays that should warrant HOF numbers AKA Davidson.
If a guy is one of the mediocre guys that plays for a long time and puts up big stats do we reward that.
I am looking at each player that stands out in his career. The same guys may have some negatives if we get picky but is that what we want is only the absolute prefect guys getting in or the best of the best?
|
|
|
Post by ezlee2 on Jan 15, 2019 14:13:51 GMT -5
My take is the same. The players that were elite in their era warrant enshrinment, but only the super special players such as Perry, Rawls, Chamberlain, Moss, and Hoffman should make it on the first ballot. Your argument on Davison has swayed my opinion and I’m changing my vote from Samuels to him.
|
|
|
Post by Nick on Jan 15, 2019 14:17:22 GMT -5
I mean i like Nick's thoughts as Perry and Ben and Rawls are all the GOATS. If we are really going to look at criteria like that i think we should be a lot tougher on the HOF. If you ONLY want the best of each position in the HOF that is one thing. I am looking at the big picture of the league and i may be on a different page here. If a guy is the best at his position when he plays that should warrant HOF numbers AKA Davidson. If a guy is one of the mediocre guys that plays for a long time and puts up big stats do we reward that. I am looking at each player that stands out in his career. The same guys may have some negatives if we get picky but is that what we want is only the absolute prefect guys getting in or the best of the best? I think there is room for 2nd tier guys. Cam and Ben are 2nd tier. The first ballot guys are the real cream. Just not 3rd tier.
|
|
|
Post by Bighouserulez on Jan 15, 2019 14:28:00 GMT -5
OK so it sounds like you want to tighten it up a bit more and have only the 1% ers or so have a chance at the HOF. I was just trying to take the best players in the league when they played. I could not understand the backlash on Davidson and Teddy TBH. If you look outside in and glance at the numbers then both should be HOF players and i really could not vote Samuels in.
|
|
|
Post by ezlee2 on Jan 15, 2019 14:31:38 GMT -5
I think the HOF needs to mean something for sure, but I’m of the opinion that it’s more than just 1%ers that are worthy. I think you’re spot on Wes with how you’re approaching it.
|
|
|
Post by Nick on Jan 15, 2019 14:39:22 GMT -5
I think the nature of the beast is that it is absolutely fine to disagree, and absolutely fine to have different ideas about what the HOF should be about. It would be boring if we were all voting for the same players. When we do that, they enter the HOF. When we all come together, then you know you have the right guy.
|
|