How sad is that.. $45 for an 8, 9's were $9 all of 2 weeks ago.
I would buy it, but it's going to be the last card I add. Or maybe I'll wait until CC and Randall are in. I should check my 78 rack rips too. If I got a Dean, I didn't even notice.
Was thinking about this today and thought I would peruse my database for the weakest HOF'ers..Fred Dean most definitely is NOT...HOF selections are a lot like PSA grading..Subjective..What one guy sees as dominant, another guy sees as not dominant...I definitely think they can improve the voting process, and have made moves the last few years to do just that. But here is a list of the weakest players currently residing in Canton. I will follow that with the strongest candidates who are NOT in the HOF. I am going to use 1st Team All-Pro selections as the top factor. All-Pro's are a better indicator than Pro Bowls, but even those are subjective.
The following HOFers were NEVER ONCE selected as a 1st Team All-Pro (tops at their position):
Wayne Millner, WR...0 PB (Played before Pro Bowls began) Alex Wojciechowicz, OC...0 PB (Played before Pro Bowls began) Dante Lavelli, WR...3 PB (4 of his seasons were Pre-Pro Bowl era) John Henry Johnson, RB...4 PB Jackie Smith, TE...5 PB Tommy McDonald, WR...6 PB Mike McCormack, OT...6 PB Jackie Slater, OT...7 PB Elvin Bethea, DE...8 PB Harry Carson, MLB...9 PB Mel Renfro, CB...10 PB Tom Mack, OG...11 PB
The next list are the players with at least FOUR 1st Team All-Pro selections who are HOF eligible but have not been elected, number of Pro Bowls listed 2nd:
These last 3 earned the majority of AP and PB as members of the AFL, which in many instances is regarded as a subpar league..I don;t agree, but the numbers tell the story...
Jim Tyrer, OT...6 AP (5 were AFL), 9 PB (7 were AFL) Johnny Robinson, FS...6 AP (5 were AFL), 7 PB (6 were AFL) Dave Grayson, CB...4 AP (all 4 were AFL), 6 PB (as 6 were AFL)
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I agree that football HOF voting needs improvement. That is abundantly clear when a player like Cris Carter gets passed over when he's finally eligible for Canton. I think baseball does it best right now, hockey is somewhere in the middle, and basketball is by far the worst. Read this about basketball HOF elections and try not to get a headache:
Because the Hall—in contrast to the Pro Football Hall of Fame and the Baseball Hall of Fame—honors not only American professionals but also international professionals and American and international amateurs, it employs four screening committees to identify prospective nominees: one each for American candidates, female candidates, international candidates, and veterans candidates (players, coaches, or referees who have been retired at least 35 years prior to their being nominated).
Individuals who receive at least five votes from a seven-member screening committee in a given year advance to an Honors Committee, composed of 12 members who vote on each candidate and rotating groups of 12 specialists (one group for female candidates, one group for international candidates, and one group for American and veterans candidates); any individual receiving at least 18 affirmative votes (75 per cent of all votes cast) from the Honors Committee is approved for induction into the Hall of Fame. Advancement to the Honors Committee is generally pro forma, although the Hall's Board of Trustees may remove any candidate who "has damaged the integrity of the game of basketball" [1] from consideration.
To be considered for induction by a screening committee, a player must be fully retired from play for at least five years, while a coach or referee must be fully retired for at least five years or have been active full time in his/her respective craft on the professional, collegiate, of high school level for at least 25 years. No temporal criterion is enforced for the election of contributors, who must have made a "significant contribution to the game of basketball". Unlike the Baseball Hall of Fame, sportswriters and commentators (such as HOFer Chick Hearn) in the Basketball Hall of Fame are full-fledged members.
Controversy has arisen over many aspects of the Hall's voting procedures including the anonymity of the voters. The other major sports' Halls of Fame make the debate transparent and sportswriters and other voters openly debate their choices. Springfield has also been widely criticized for its tendency to enshrine active collegiate coaches and relatively obscure players while there are notable omissions.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
Baseball does it the best???WOW..I don't even want to go there..lol
Start a list of marginal baseball HOFers and you'd be typing all day...The only thing I like about baseball is they have many voters, but honestly probably too many. I like the football process the best. Changes I would make:
1. Do away with the 4 player minimum, although I like limiting the max numbers, it keeps things interesting when you have 10 strong candidates and you know only half of them get in...Makes it feel more exclusive...
2. Increase the number of voters to 100...50 writers, 25 former coaches/GMs, 25 current HOFers...They need a better sampling, some of the voters are idiots..
3. Presentations...This is where I really dislike how baseball does it...Keep the annual football HOF meeting as is, with the exception of the presentors...Have someone, or a group of guys who work for the HOF make the case for each player rather than one of the voters...If the voter making the case doesn't think the guy is HOF caliber, he pitches the guy weak..If the voter thinks he is, he's going to try and push and prod the other voters to agree with him and take it personal if they don't..Have a NON-voter make the player presentations...
4. Change the date of the meeting..Day before the Super Bowl? Most of the writers/voters have higher priorites that weekend..Make it during the offseason in the downtime between the Super Bowl and the Draft.
Look, this is a HOF, in the grand scheme it really isn't all that important. BUT, it is becoming a pretty big deal in the public eye...10 years ago, all you would hear is a couple of stories about who was elected and then the induction ceremony speech in August...Now it is a heavily debated and covered event. Mainly because the NFL's popularity is growing out of this world...Just like they have done with the NFL Combine and the NFL Draft, make it an all day event...
There isn't a voting process in the world that's perfect. Votes are opinions, and someone is almost always going to be on the losing end.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Baseball does it the best???WOW..I don't even want to go there..lol >>
Yes. Baseball does it best. NOW that is. The previous incarnation of the Veteran's Committe was an abomination. The current version doesn't quite work either since they've elected zero players over the past 6 years, but at least they're not letting bums like Mazeroski in any more. I think baseball currently does it best because they only elect truly deserving players in small classes and there are NEVER any surprises. Look at the voting totals from the previous years and you'll be able to predict with a high degree of accuracy who will get in. Football is so much more of a crapshoot. I mean I bet there isn't a person alive who predicted this year's class.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
<< <i>The one last night ended at $51. If no one wants it, I'll probably just throw it on the bay.
Dave >>
Sorry Dave, I wasn't putting down your price. Just thinking out loud. Price is fair considering the timing and I hope you sell it. It's the same issue I have with the Tippett and Zimmerman now. I couldn't give away my PSA 8 Zimmerman's and now I'll toss a couple on ebay and get $20 for them, which is just as crazy.
<< <i>Baseball does it the best???WOW..I don't even want to go there..lol >>
Yes. Baseball does it best. NOW that is. The previous incarnation of the Veteran's Committe was an abomination. The current version doesn't quite work either since they've elected zero players over the past 6 years, but at least they're not letting bums like Mazeroski in any more. I think baseball currently does it best because they only elect truly deserving players in small classes and there are NEVER any surprises. Look at the voting totals from the previous years and you'll be able to predict with a high degree of accuracy who will get in. Football is so much more of a crapshoot. I mean I bet there isn't a person alive who predicted this year's class. >>
Is that what we want? Only the lock, stock, and barrel first ballot type HOFers? Look at how many DESERVING players that baseball NOW keeps OUT of the HOF....
To me there is a fine line between being too inclusive and too exclusive..I think the football HOF tows, and has towed that line the best..Baseball changed their own standards, making their current list of HOFers laughable...They let everyone in before, but now no one is worthy? Way too many voters, and way too impersonal...You've got guys sending in votes who've probably never heard of guys on the ballot..Other voters don't even vote!!! Look at this year who got votes:
Mazeroski is in, as are Tony Perez, George Kelly, Jim Bottomley, John Montgomery Ward, Freddie Lindstrom, Enos Slaughter, Hough Duffy, Tommy McCarthy, Rick Ferrell, Ray Schalk, Rube Marquard, Herb Pennock, Catfish Hunter...(I could go on)
Andre Dawson, Jim Rice and Bert Blyleven are not...
Nough said....Baseball's HOF is a farce...
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
JP, agree to disagree, because I stand by what I wrote.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
<< <i>JP, agree to disagree, because I stand by what I wrote. >>
Hey, we're no different than the voters or the PSA graders..Opinions, Opinions..lol
Art,
Only the Grange is officially posted and it didn't bump...Based on the fact that it was showing and not "still being processed", I assumed it would not...
I do believe the 15 cards that are "missing" and not listed in my submissions right now are waiting for new holders/flips..
The other subs probably won't be officially posted until next week sometime...I will be sure to post results..
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
- I'm in no hurry to be the first kid on the block with a graded Fred Dean or Andre Tippett rookie card.
- IMO All-Pro selections are just as subjective as HOF voting, in some cases. Are'nt the same jerkoff sports writers who vote for all-pro selections the same who make HOF selections.
- Reflecting back on the Super Bowl that was one of the better ones I have seen. IMO that was the greatest upset in super bowl history. I watched super bowl III on NFL network last month and that was a snooze fest compared to Giants/Pats. Also IMO Manning to Tyree was the greatest play in super bowl history.
Although I surely will bow to your knowledge on FB jason....I think andy has correctly pinned the tail on the donkey. For the most part all 4 major sports do a decent job electing worthy members to their HOF. Many of the baseball fans that saw Mazeroski play say he was the best fielding 2nd baseman ever. It is 1/2 of the game....as Most FB players are either offense or defense....1/2 the game. HOf worthy?? maybe not compared to the arrons and the ruths. The beauty of baseball voting: all the players mentioned all had their day.....but will never last long on the ballots.....you are dropped forever if you recieve less that a minimum each year. Maybe local writers were bias and vote for the home town boy. But all have no chance of ever getting elected. The hof players that make up the veterans committe although superstrict...has not elected a bad candidate in a while. Gossage was absolutely no surprise in his induction this year to anyone.....and yet this years FB election (especially senior nminees) were a surprise to most of us. The uncertainty does add to the excitement I feel every year.....Baseball is more of a game of stats...A carear batting avg. over .300, 300 wins, 500 hrs, 3000 hits......all are excellent guidlines to go by. But FB....is so many tackles, interceptions...ect a measure?
Collecting PSA... FB,BK,HK,and BB HOF RC sets 1948-76 Topps FB Sets FB & BB HOF Player sets 1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
This new submission status system is going to take some getting used to...
I sent in a raw 2 card sub on the 5 day $13 special at the end of the month. It was logged in on the 5th and today it listed the cards with a cert# but it does not list the grades? I tried looking up the cert# and they are not in the system.
Yeah, it's been changing almost by the hour Bill...lol
I guess they are working out the kinks...
Jay, like Andy said, we'll have to agree to disagree on the baseball hall of fame...There are aspects I like about both sports and things I dislike about both processes...There are guys in EVERY SPORTS HOF that are marginal guys...And others who are NOT elected but seemingly very worthy...Personally I'll take the football process, where they at least all meet and discuss the merits of each candidate rather than just having guys blindly send in votes...In both cases, its writers/media people doing the voting and too many in both sports know less than even your average fan...To me that's the biggest issue...In both sports you have guys voting that don't know what a HOFer looks like...Involve former player/coaches/GMs...
Just my opinion of course..I actually like the fact that the Football HOF can retro-actively put deserving players in the HOF...Unfortunately for many deserving baseball guys, doesn't look like they'll ever get that chance...Like you say, its almost a given as to who is going in based on the percentages from the year before...One or two guys a year, and you already know exactly who they are going to be? Sounds boring and predictable to me...
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
gabbs the huff is awesome. I will have a bid in on it for sure. Too many big dogs out there...probably won't win it. Back to the HOF voters. I know the local sportswriter who votes for the BB HOF. He is a total idiot. He lets his 'personal' feelings on the guy involved into his descision. I do agree with jason on many points...esp on the round table discussion. Anyone who ever sat on a jury knows the process. For sure BK is the most broken of the hofs.....they are willing to elect a high school girls coach from timbucktu over a 3x nba winner with 10 rings. PLEASE!!! There has been a big outcry to revise the BB senior and BK voting....hopefully that will carry over to FB.
Collecting PSA... FB,BK,HK,and BB HOF RC sets 1948-76 Topps FB Sets FB & BB HOF Player sets 1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
<< <i>gabbs the huff is awesome. I will have a bid in on it for sure. Too many big dogs out there...probably won't win it. Back to the HOF voters. I know the local sportswriter who votes for the BB HOF. He is a total idiot. He lets his 'personal' feelings on the guy involved into his descision. I do agree with jason on many points...esp on the round table discussion. Anyone who ever sat on a jury knows the process. For sure BK is the most broken of the hofs.....they are willing to elect a high school girls coach from timbucktu over a 3x nba winner with 10 rings. PLEASE!!! There has been a big outcry to revise the BB senior and BK voting....hopefully that will carry over to FB. >>
There was an outcry over this years senior selections in football..And it ended up with only 1 of the 2 getting in...IMO, football HOF needs to fix that ASAP...Have 5 guys go to Canton to pick from a group that only 9 voted on??
Way too small of a sampling..All it takes is a couple of old fogies in the 5 and guys like Marshall Goldberg get picked over guys like Chuck Howley and Mick Tingelhoff...
I mean at least they are puttin seniors candidates in, unlike baseball which turned off the open valve and isn;t putting anyone in...
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Gabbs, I think the scan has been too enhanced on the Namath 7 to say with any accuracy whether or not it's a 7.5 candidate.
P.S. - I hate when sellers do that
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
<< <i>Gabbs, I think the scan has been too enhanced on the Namath 7 to say with any accuracy whether or not it's a 7.5 candidate.
P.S. - I hate when sellers do that >>
Yikes! I'd have to agree 100% there. That scan almost burned my eyes it's so bright! All four corners do look touched to varying degrees in the scan. However, it is already in a PSA 7 holder so it's not like it's raw and being enhanced and overgraded by the seller. I'd take it. lol
I saw that Huff a couple days ago too. Nice card. Since 8's are $175, I wonder what a 9 will get. Thing that I don't understand is that 59 topps seems to be the absolute easiest of the 50s stuff to still find raw in high grade. Whenever I see 59's in a guys box or book at a show, they ineveitably are the nicest of the cards they have. Card stock that much better or did people stop flipping them and putting them in their bike spokes in 1959?
Gabbs as the seller of the Namath you can see another scan of it on these very same pages of this thread - about 4,5 pages back. You can scroll back and find a larger scan of it. The card deserves a 7 based on the corners, which are more evident from the back and why I added a scan of the back to not DECEIVE any potential buyers. Iam not sure what 7.5's look like yet, but it has the centering for it, better than some 8's and overall it is a very nice looking card. I am only selling it to fund my baseball HOF collection, since I cannot afford to do both at once. Though I wish there was as many people that were into that set as they are into the football HOF... Maybe I picked the wrong one... :-)
<< <i>Gabbs, I think the scan has been too enhanced on the Namath 7 to say with any accuracy whether or not it's a 7.5 candidate.
P.S. - I hate when sellers do that >>
As for Shag, you know what I hate, when people make accusations that aren't true. I am far from dishonest. The card is scanned at the same settings I scan everything else, which is the default out of the box configuration. The only things I do after the fact is shrink the picture since it comes out at about 1.5MB and hit the auto correct color button in Microsoft picture, maybe that is the problem and Iam just clueless with the scanner? This could very well be the case. Every family picture, card, or whatever I scan comes very dull, almost washed out, without hitting the auto color correct button. If that were indicative of how the card/pic looked than so be it, however, it's not. With that said, any recommended scanner settings would be appreciated (PM'ing them is fine too I have an HP 4000 series scanner). BTW, the other card I am selling currently was handled the same exact way, as were all my other previous auctions this month, maybe because the yellow is bright it is affected differently? Like I said any suggestions would be appreciated.
BTW, You live in Branchburg, NJ right? Not too far from me in Randolph, if you are out and about you are more than welcome to come by and look at the card in person. It really is a beautiful card and I have no doubt you would agree.
- Chris
Edit to add page # of my previous scans Pg148 of this thread
<< <i>I subscribe to their theory as well (best place to find PSA 10's are in in PSA 9 holders Jason >>
I do not consider myself a great grader, so I am wondering what you guys thing of this Fouts. I am considering sending this in for review, it looks like an absolute blazer to me, but any input from you guys is appreciated. Thanks!
I'm not accusing you of doing anything shady. The fact of the matter is that the scan is practically glowing. Uninentional or not, it's hard to get a good read on a card when the scan is that bright. Nothing personal man.
Shag
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
Understood... My apologies for being a little jumpy. With all of the jackals out there on EBay I just didn't want to be lumped in as 'one of them'. My questions about scan settings were serious though. I wouldn't want to deter someone from trusting in / purchasing one of my auctions because I am an idiot with the scanner.
No problem Chris. I PM'ed you some info. on scan settings. I don't know how helpful it'll be since my scanner does practically everything for me, but worth a look I suppose. One thing I forgot to mention is never to use the "auto correct" option. It totally overdoes it. Could make Rosie O'Donnell lool like Jessica Alba...maybe
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
Chris - I've got a 5610 HP scanner. I hate it. I like the software to scan but the color comes out wrong (see the scan of my Namath a few pages back). That said, your scan did burn my eyes. lol It is very bright.
You may want to just turn down the contrast a little bit. I have some saved settings on mine that worked out ok. It still looks a little washed out, regardless of what I do. My old HP scanner was much better. HP PSC-950
Envoy - Thanks!!! I play with the contrast and based on Shag's PM I think my dpi is set to high as well. Before the HP I had a Microtek. It was a cheap scanner, no bells and whistles, but overall it was much easier to manage.
I am going to work on it this afternoon and look to post a new scan of the Namath on my auction.
I don't "enhance" my scans at all, and I think they come out great...I have an HP-2004 version..
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Hey guys... How is this for the scan? I lowered, the contrast, dpi, used black construction paper for the background and no auto color correct. Hopefully, this one doesn't hurt your eyes Josh...
Very good scan...Presents well IMO...The card definitely has PSA 8 worthy centering..Too bad about the couple of weak corners..I think you will get "high end" PSA 7 price..Its nicer than the average PSA 7 of the card.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Jason - Glad you like the scan. I feel much better about the auction with it there.
Sorry for the distraction guys, now back to the cards. Anyone get any more word about their poppage yet? I am dying to see what the it takes to get the .5 bump.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
Yeah. I know. I was an underbidder. It was one of the nicest 8's I've seen, and I put in a bid that reflected it. Someone else felt it was worth more than I did though.
<< <i>I watched super bowl III on NFL network last month and that was a snooze fest compared to Giants/Pats. Also IMO Manning to Tyree was the greatest play in super bowl history. >>
...and so does Steve Sabol.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
<< <i>I watched super bowl III on NFL network last month and that was a snooze fest compared to Giants/Pats. Also IMO Manning to Tyree was the greatest play in super bowl history. >>
...and so does Steve Sabol. >>
Greatest PLAY of all-time? I do agree with that...There have been a couple of better catches, there have been a couple of better scrambles..But to have BOTH of those events all wrapped into one play? Yep, I think overall it is the greatest Super Bowl play of all-time as well...
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Actually, here's a factoid that may interest Cris Carter. Here are his strongest competitors for entry into the Pro Football Hall of Fame's class of 2009, with first-time-eligible players noted by asterisk.
6. *Bill Romanowski, LB -- Denver, Oakland, Philadelphia
7. Bob Kuechenberg, G -- Miami
8. Richard Dent, DE -- Chicago, Tennessee, Indianapolis, Philadelphia
My dark horse: Randle, whose 137.5 career sacks tie Dent's -- and came from the interior line, a much more difficult spot to consistently get to the passer. To me, Randle defined the classic 4-3 pass-rush tackle that every team running the four-man front is looking for today, a Tasmanian Devil with a motor that never quit. It's rare for a tackle to lead the league in sacks, but that's what Randle did in 1997, with 15.5.
It would be fitting for Carter and Randle -- the two most talkative men in that Minnesota locker room for years -- to go into the Hall at the same time.
My personal tote board of favorites next year, as one of the 44 Hall voters, in order: Bruce Smith, Rod Woodson, Derrick Thomas, Cris Carter, Shannon Sharpe, Bob Kuechenberg, Richard Dent, John Randle.
I think, as long as we're doing some postscripts on the Hall of Fame -- which, as I've found out from doing sports-talk radio and TV stuff over the years, you can never talk enough about -- there's a couple of things I tried to tell a crestfallen Cris Carter after he did not become the 64th person to enter the Hall in his first year of eligibility.
a. Only three receivers have ever made it in their first year up for election.
b. Some of the greatest names in history haven't made it in year one. Alan Page made it in his second year, Bill Walsh in his fourth, Pete Rozelle in his eighth.
c. There's simply a big backlog to get in, and to jump the line ahead of guys who've been close for six years (Gary Zimmerman) and eight years (Art Monk) is obviously very hard. Zimmerman is one of five two-time all-decade players in NFL history. How'd he have to wait this long?
I've had some people say to me: Well, Darrell Green wasn't much better, if at all, at his position than Carter was at his. How'd Green make it in his first year? Two reasons. I'm sure some of the 40 electors in the room nine days ago thought Green was better at corner than Carter was at wide receiver. And among the 15 modern-era candidates, Green was the only cornerback eligible. Carter had Monk and Andre Reed to contend with at wide receiver.
I'm pretty sure that if Carter had been the only receiver finalist and Green had, say, Rod Woodson and Lester Hayes as competition at cornerback, it's doubtful Green would have made it as a rookie. (It's true Emmitt Thomas, the old Chiefs' corner, was elected last week as well, but he went in via the Seniors route. Seniors, two per year, are elected or not on a separate yay or nay vote, and the 15 modern-era candidates compete against themselves for entry.
d. I said this on HBO the other day: After the Hall debate for entry was finished on Feb. 2 in Phoenix, I would have voted yes on 11 of the 15 modern-era candidates. The way the system works, we whittle the list down in secret ballot from 15 to 10, then from 10 to five, and then the top five vote-getters are voted on, individually, yes or no. So just because I voted for five finalists when it got down to the end, doesn't mean I think only five men in the class were qualified for entry.
I got strange looks at HBO for Carter not getting in. How do you think folks in Kansas City would look at me for Derrick Thomas -- who had more sacks in the '90s than anyone, who had more forced fumbles (45) than anyone since it was a recorded stat -- not getting in ... again? In other words, I like Cris Carter and I like his candidacy, and I definitely feel he was one of the five most deserving candidates for entry this year. But it's not exactly a crime against humanity that he didn't get in the Hall of Fame on his first go-round.
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
Peter King (aka Norm Peterson) is usually a pretty knowledgeable guy, but the fact that he thinks Bill Romanowksi has a shot to get elected on his first ballot - or at all - is laughable. And Carter's first ballot snubbing wasn't a crime against humanity, but it was total horse manure. This whole we can't elect multiple players from the same position thing stinks. Put the best players in. Period.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
I'll be a bidder, but only if it slips low..You always have to add that buyer's fee into the total cost!!!
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Peter King (aka Norm Peterson) is usually a pretty knowledgeable guy, but the fact that he thinks Bill Romanowksi has a shot to get elected on his first ballot - or at all - is laughable. And Carter's first ballot snubbing wasn't a crime against humanity, but it was total horse manure. This whole we can't elect multiple players from the same position thing stinks. Put the best players in. Period. >>
I agree. Any Hall of Fame that doesn't include Carter and/or Derrick Thomas is a joke. The two of them dominated at their positions. Not looking at stats alone, just going by 'eye appeal', these two should be in...
Comments
Dave
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
I would buy it, but it's going to be the last card I add. Or maybe I'll wait until CC and Randall are in. I should check my 78 rack rips too. If I got a Dean, I didn't even notice.
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
Dave
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
The following HOFers were NEVER ONCE selected as a 1st Team All-Pro (tops at their position):
Wayne Millner, WR...0 PB (Played before Pro Bowls began)
Alex Wojciechowicz, OC...0 PB (Played before Pro Bowls began)
Dante Lavelli, WR...3 PB (4 of his seasons were Pre-Pro Bowl era)
John Henry Johnson, RB...4 PB
Jackie Smith, TE...5 PB
Tommy McDonald, WR...6 PB
Mike McCormack, OT...6 PB
Jackie Slater, OT...7 PB
Elvin Bethea, DE...8 PB
Harry Carson, MLB...9 PB
Mel Renfro, CB...10 PB
Tom Mack, OG...11 PB
The next list are the players with at least FOUR 1st Team All-Pro selections who are HOF eligible but have not been elected, number of Pro Bowls listed 2nd:
Randall McDaniel, OG...7 AP, 12 PB
Dermontti Dawson, OC...6 AP, 7 PB
Chuck Howley, OLB...5 AP, 6 PB
Mick Tingelhoff, OC...5 AP, 6 PB
Dick Stanfel, OG...5 AP, 5 PB
Del Shofner, WR...5 AP, 5 PB
LeRoy Butler, SS...4 AP, 4 PB
Jerry Kramer, OG...4 AP, 3 PB
These last 3 earned the majority of AP and PB as members of the AFL, which in many instances is regarded as a subpar league..I don;t agree, but the numbers tell the story...
Jim Tyrer, OT...6 AP (5 were AFL), 9 PB (7 were AFL)
Johnny Robinson, FS...6 AP (5 were AFL), 7 PB (6 were AFL)
Dave Grayson, CB...4 AP (all 4 were AFL), 6 PB (as 6 were AFL)
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Because the Hall—in contrast to the Pro Football Hall of Fame and the Baseball Hall of Fame—honors not only American professionals but also international professionals and American and international amateurs, it employs four screening committees to identify prospective nominees: one each for American candidates, female candidates, international candidates, and veterans candidates (players, coaches, or referees who have been retired at least 35 years prior to their being nominated).
Individuals who receive at least five votes from a seven-member screening committee in a given year advance to an Honors Committee, composed of 12 members who vote on each candidate and rotating groups of 12 specialists (one group for female candidates, one group for international candidates, and one group for American and veterans candidates); any individual receiving at least 18 affirmative votes (75 per cent of all votes cast) from the Honors Committee is approved for induction into the Hall of Fame. Advancement to the Honors Committee is generally pro forma, although the Hall's Board of Trustees may remove any candidate who "has damaged the integrity of the game of basketball" [1] from consideration.
To be considered for induction by a screening committee, a player must be fully retired from play for at least five years, while a coach or referee must be fully retired for at least five years or have been active full time in his/her respective craft on the professional, collegiate, of high school level for at least 25 years. No temporal criterion is enforced for the election of contributors, who must have made a "significant contribution to the game of basketball". Unlike the Baseball Hall of Fame, sportswriters and commentators (such as HOFer Chick Hearn) in the Basketball Hall of Fame are full-fledged members.
Controversy has arisen over many aspects of the Hall's voting procedures including the anonymity of the voters. The other major sports' Halls of Fame make the debate transparent and sportswriters and other voters openly debate their choices. Springfield has also been widely criticized for its tendency to enshrine active collegiate coaches and relatively obscure players while there are notable omissions.
Start a list of marginal baseball HOFers and you'd be typing all day...The only thing I like about baseball is they have many voters, but honestly probably too many. I like the football process the best. Changes I would make:
1. Do away with the 4 player minimum, although I like limiting the max numbers, it keeps things interesting when you have 10 strong candidates and you know only half of them get in...Makes it feel more exclusive...
2. Increase the number of voters to 100...50 writers, 25 former coaches/GMs, 25 current HOFers...They need a better sampling, some of the voters are idiots..
3. Presentations...This is where I really dislike how baseball does it...Keep the annual football HOF meeting as is, with the exception of the presentors...Have someone, or a group of guys who work for the HOF make the case for each player rather than one of the voters...If the voter making the case doesn't think the guy is HOF caliber, he pitches the guy weak..If the voter thinks he is, he's going to try and push and prod the other voters to agree with him and take it personal if they don't..Have a NON-voter make the player presentations...
4. Change the date of the meeting..Day before the Super Bowl? Most of the writers/voters have higher priorites that weekend..Make it during the offseason in the downtime between the Super Bowl and the Draft.
Look, this is a HOF, in the grand scheme it really isn't all that important. BUT, it is becoming a pretty big deal in the public eye...10 years ago, all you would hear is a couple of stories about who was elected and then the induction ceremony speech in August...Now it is a heavily debated and covered event. Mainly because the NFL's popularity is growing out of this world...Just like they have done with the NFL Combine and the NFL Draft, make it an all day event...
There isn't a voting process in the world that's perfect. Votes are opinions, and someone is almost always going to be on the losing end.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Baseball does it the best???WOW..I don't even want to go there..lol >>
Yes. Baseball does it best. NOW that is. The previous incarnation of the Veteran's Committe was an abomination. The current version doesn't quite work either since they've elected zero players over the past 6 years, but at least they're not letting bums like Mazeroski in any more. I think baseball currently does it best because they only elect truly deserving players in small classes and there are NEVER any surprises. Look at the voting totals from the previous years and you'll be able to predict with a high degree of accuracy who will get in. Football is so much more of a crapshoot. I mean I bet there isn't a person alive who predicted this year's class.
<< <i>The one last night ended at $51. If no one wants it, I'll probably just throw it on the bay.
Dave >>
Sorry Dave, I wasn't putting down your price. Just thinking out loud. Price is fair considering the timing and I hope you sell it. It's the same issue I have with the Tippett and Zimmerman now. I couldn't give away my PSA 8 Zimmerman's and now I'll toss a couple on ebay and get $20 for them, which is just as crazy.
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
<< <i>
<< <i>Baseball does it the best???WOW..I don't even want to go there..lol >>
Yes. Baseball does it best. NOW that is. The previous incarnation of the Veteran's Committe was an abomination. The current version doesn't quite work either since they've elected zero players over the past 6 years, but at least they're not letting bums like Mazeroski in any more. I think baseball currently does it best because they only elect truly deserving players in small classes and there are NEVER any surprises. Look at the voting totals from the previous years and you'll be able to predict with a high degree of accuracy who will get in. Football is so much more of a crapshoot. I mean I bet there isn't a person alive who predicted this year's class. >>
Is that what we want? Only the lock, stock, and barrel first ballot type HOFers? Look at how many DESERVING players that baseball NOW keeps OUT of the HOF....
To me there is a fine line between being too inclusive and too exclusive..I think the football HOF tows, and has towed that line the best..Baseball changed their own standards, making their current list of HOFers laughable...They let everyone in before, but now no one is worthy? Way too many voters, and way too impersonal...You've got guys sending in votes who've probably never heard of guys on the ballot..Other voters don't even vote!!! Look at this year who got votes:
Beck, Rod 2 0.4%
Fryman, Travis 2 0.4%
Nen, Robb 2 0.4%
Dunston, Shawon 1 0.2%
Finley, Chuck 1 0.2%
Justice, David 1 0.2%
Knoblauch, Chuck 1 0.2%
Stottlemyre, Todd 1 0.2%
TODD FRIGGIN STOTTLEMYRE is HOF worthy????LOLOLOL
Mazeroski is in, as are Tony Perez, George Kelly, Jim Bottomley, John Montgomery Ward, Freddie Lindstrom, Enos Slaughter, Hough Duffy, Tommy McCarthy, Rick Ferrell, Ray Schalk, Rube Marquard, Herb Pennock, Catfish Hunter...(I could go on)
Andre Dawson, Jim Rice and Bert Blyleven are not...
Nough said....Baseball's HOF is a farce...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>JP, agree to disagree, because I stand by what I wrote. >>
Hey, we're no different than the voters or the PSA graders..Opinions, Opinions..lol
Art,
Only the Grange is officially posted and it didn't bump...Based on the fact that it was showing and not "still being processed", I assumed it would not...
I do believe the 15 cards that are "missing" and not listed in my submissions right now are waiting for new holders/flips
The other subs probably won't be officially posted until next week sometime...I will be sure to post results..
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
- I'm in no hurry to be the first kid on the block with a graded Fred Dean or Andre Tippett rookie card.
- IMO All-Pro selections are just as subjective as HOF voting, in some cases. Are'nt the same jerkoff sports writers who vote for all-pro selections the same who make HOF selections.
- Reflecting back on the Super Bowl that was one of the better ones I have seen. IMO that was the greatest upset in super bowl history.
I watched super bowl III on NFL network last month and that was a snooze fest compared to Giants/Pats.
Also IMO Manning to Tyree was the greatest play in super bowl history.
Guess I'll let the market determine the price.
Dave
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
I sent in a raw 2 card sub on the 5 day $13 special at the end of the month. It was logged in on the 5th and today it listed the cards with a cert# but it does not list the grades? I tried looking up the cert# and they are not in the system.
Just a heads up to all.
Could it be a 7.5 for 7 price !!!???
hard to tell from the scan.
The lower left corner looks soft?
Top bottom centering? Esp. upper left??
But what a great looking card!!!
Namath Rookie card
What do you guys think??
Gabbs
I guess they are working out the kinks...
Jay, like Andy said, we'll have to agree to disagree on the baseball hall of fame...There are aspects I like about both sports and things I dislike about both processes...There are guys in EVERY SPORTS HOF that are marginal guys...And others who are NOT elected but seemingly very worthy...Personally I'll take the football process, where they at least all meet and discuss the merits of each candidate rather than just having guys blindly send in votes...In both cases, its writers/media people doing the voting and too many in both sports know less than even your average fan...To me that's the biggest issue...In both sports you have guys voting that don't know what a HOFer looks like...Involve former player/coaches/GMs...
Just my opinion of course..I actually like the fact that the Football HOF can retro-actively put deserving players in the HOF...Unfortunately for many deserving baseball guys, doesn't look like they'll ever get that chance...Like you say, its almost a given as to who is going in based on the percentages from the year before...One or two guys a year, and you already know exactly who they are going to be? Sounds boring and predictable to me...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Holy crap, look at the scan on this beauty!!!
Sam Huff rookie card
WOW !!!
Gabbs
the huff is awesome. I will have a bid in on it for sure. Too many big dogs out there...probably won't win it.
Back to the HOF voters. I know the local sportswriter who votes for the BB HOF. He is a total idiot. He lets his 'personal' feelings on the guy involved into his descision.
I do agree with jason on many points...esp on the round table discussion. Anyone who ever sat on a jury knows the process.
For sure BK is the most broken of the hofs.....they are willing to elect a high school girls coach from timbucktu over a 3x nba winner with 10 rings. PLEASE!!!
There has been a big outcry to revise the BB senior and BK voting....hopefully that will carry over to FB.
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
<< <i>gabbs
the huff is awesome. I will have a bid in on it for sure. Too many big dogs out there...probably won't win it.
Back to the HOF voters. I know the local sportswriter who votes for the BB HOF. He is a total idiot. He lets his 'personal' feelings on the guy involved into his descision.
I do agree with jason on many points...esp on the round table discussion. Anyone who ever sat on a jury knows the process.
For sure BK is the most broken of the hofs.....they are willing to elect a high school girls coach from timbucktu over a 3x nba winner with 10 rings. PLEASE!!!
There has been a big outcry to revise the BB senior and BK voting....hopefully that will carry over to FB. >>
There was an outcry over this years senior selections in football..And it ended up with only 1 of the 2 getting in...IMO, football HOF needs to fix that ASAP...Have 5 guys go to Canton to pick from a group that only 9 voted on??
Way too small of a sampling..All it takes is a couple of old fogies in the 5 and guys like Marshall Goldberg get picked over guys like Chuck Howley and Mick Tingelhoff...
I mean at least they are puttin seniors candidates in, unlike baseball which turned off the open valve and isn;t putting anyone in...
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
P.S. - I hate when sellers do that
<< <i>Gabbs, I think the scan has been too enhanced on the Namath 7 to say with any accuracy whether or not it's a 7.5 candidate.
P.S. - I hate when sellers do that
Yikes! I'd have to agree 100% there. That scan almost burned my eyes it's so bright! All four corners do look touched to varying degrees in the scan. However, it is already in a PSA 7 holder so it's not like it's raw and being enhanced and overgraded by the seller. I'd take it. lol
I saw that Huff a couple days ago too. Nice card. Since 8's are $175, I wonder what a 9 will get. Thing that I don't understand is that 59 topps seems to be the absolute easiest of the 50s stuff to still find raw in high grade. Whenever I see 59's in a guys box or book at a show, they ineveitably are the nicest of the cards they have. Card stock that much better or did people stop flipping them and putting them in their bike spokes in 1959?
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
Gabbs as the seller of the Namath you can see another scan of it on these very same pages of this thread - about 4,5 pages back. You can scroll back and find a larger scan of it. The card deserves a 7 based on the corners, which are more evident from the back and why I added a scan of the back to not DECEIVE any potential buyers. Iam not sure what 7.5's look like yet, but it has the centering for it, better than some 8's and overall it is a very nice looking card. I am only selling it to fund my baseball HOF collection, since I cannot afford to do both at once. Though I wish there was as many people that were into that set as they are into the football HOF... Maybe I picked the wrong one... :-)
<< <i>Gabbs, I think the scan has been too enhanced on the Namath 7 to say with any accuracy whether or not it's a 7.5 candidate.
P.S. - I hate when sellers do that
As for Shag, you know what I hate, when people make accusations that aren't true. I am far from dishonest. The card is scanned at the same settings I scan everything else, which is the default out of the box configuration. The only things I do after the fact is shrink the picture since it comes out at about 1.5MB and hit the auto correct color button in Microsoft picture, maybe that is the problem and Iam just clueless with the scanner? This could very well be the case. Every family picture, card, or whatever I scan comes very dull, almost washed out, without hitting the auto color correct button. If that were indicative of how the card/pic looked than so be it, however, it's not. With that said, any recommended scanner settings would be appreciated (PM'ing them is fine too I have an HP 4000 series scanner). BTW, the other card I am selling currently was handled the same exact way, as were all my other previous auctions this month, maybe because the yellow is bright it is affected differently? Like I said any suggestions would be appreciated.
BTW, You live in Branchburg, NJ right? Not too far from me in Randolph, if you are out and about you are more than welcome to come by and look at the card in person. It really is a beautiful card and I have no doubt you would agree.
- Chris
Edit to add page # of my previous scans Pg148 of this thread
<< <i>I subscribe to their theory as well (best place to find PSA 10's are in in PSA 9 holders
Jason >>
I do not consider myself a great grader, so I am wondering what you guys thing of this Fouts. I am considering sending this in for review, it looks like an absolute blazer to me, but any input from you guys is appreciated. Thanks!
Fouts PSA 9
I'm not accusing you of doing anything shady. The fact of the matter is that the scan is practically glowing. Uninentional or not, it's hard to get a good read on a card when the scan is that bright. Nothing personal man.
Shag
Shag,
Understood... My apologies for being a little jumpy. With all of the jackals out there on EBay I just didn't want to be lumped in as 'one of them'. My questions about scan settings were serious though. I wouldn't want to deter someone from trusting in / purchasing one of my auctions because I am an idiot with the scanner.
- Chris
You may want to just turn down the contrast a little bit. I have some saved settings on mine that worked out ok. It still looks a little washed out, regardless of what I do. My old HP scanner was much better. HP PSC-950
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
Envoy - Thanks!!! I play with the contrast and based on Shag's PM I think my dpi is set to high as well. Before the HP I had a Microtek. It was a cheap scanner, no bells and whistles, but overall it was much easier to manage.
I am going to work on it this afternoon and look to post a new scan of the Namath on my auction.
Joe
I don't "enhance" my scans at all, and I think they come out great...I have an HP-2004 version..
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Hey guys... How is this for the scan? I lowered, the contrast, dpi, used black construction paper for the background and no auto color correct. Hopefully, this one doesn't hurt your eyes Josh...
I'm looking for PSA 2 to 4 rookies of Starr and Hornung w/ great eye appeal for autograph purposes. Please let me know what you have.
Rgs,
Greg M.
References:
Onlychild, Ahmanfan, fabfrank, wufdude, jradke, Reese, Jasp, thenavarro
E-Bay id: greg_n_meg
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Jason - Glad you like the scan. I feel much better about the auction with it there.
Sorry for the distraction guys, now back to the cards. Anyone get any more word about their poppage yet? I am dying to see what the it takes to get the .5 bump.
- Chris
Linky
Regards,
Greg M.
References:
Onlychild, Ahmanfan, fabfrank, wufdude, jradke, Reese, Jasp, thenavarro
E-Bay id: greg_n_meg
Tippett 9
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
Greg M.
References:
Onlychild, Ahmanfan, fabfrank, wufdude, jradke, Reese, Jasp, thenavarro
E-Bay id: greg_n_meg
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
------------
BOBBY ORR
THE BEST THERE WAS!
THE BEST THERE EVER WILL BE!
------------
<< <i>I watched super bowl III on NFL network last month and that was a snooze fest compared to Giants/Pats.
Also IMO Manning to Tyree was the greatest play in super bowl history. >>
<< <i>
<< <i>I watched super bowl III on NFL network last month and that was a snooze fest compared to Giants/Pats.
Also IMO Manning to Tyree was the greatest play in super bowl history. >>
Greatest PLAY of all-time? I do agree with that...There have been a couple of better catches, there have been a couple of better scrambles..But to have BOTH of those events all wrapped into one play? Yep, I think overall it is the greatest Super Bowl play of all-time as well...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Actually, here's a factoid that may interest Cris Carter. Here are his strongest competitors for entry into the Pro Football Hall of Fame's class of 2009, with first-time-eligible players noted by asterisk.
1. *Bruce Smith, DE -- Buffalo, Washington
2. *Rod Woodson, CB --Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Oakland
3. Derrick Thomas, LB -- Kansas City
4. *Shannon Sharpe, TE -- Denver, Baltimore
5. *John Randle, DT -- Minnesota, Seattle
6. *Bill Romanowski, LB -- Denver, Oakland, Philadelphia
7. Bob Kuechenberg, G -- Miami
8. Richard Dent, DE -- Chicago, Tennessee, Indianapolis, Philadelphia
My dark horse: Randle, whose 137.5 career sacks tie Dent's -- and came from the interior line, a much more difficult spot to consistently get to the passer. To me, Randle defined the classic 4-3 pass-rush tackle that every team running the four-man front is looking for today, a Tasmanian Devil with a motor that never quit. It's rare for a tackle to lead the league in sacks, but that's what Randle did in 1997, with 15.5.
It would be fitting for Carter and Randle -- the two most talkative men in that Minnesota locker room for years -- to go into the Hall at the same time.
My personal tote board of favorites next year, as one of the 44 Hall voters, in order: Bruce Smith, Rod Woodson, Derrick Thomas, Cris Carter, Shannon Sharpe, Bob Kuechenberg, Richard Dent, John Randle.
I think, as long as we're doing some postscripts on the Hall of Fame -- which, as I've found out from doing sports-talk radio and TV stuff over the years, you can never talk enough about -- there's a couple of things I tried to tell a crestfallen Cris Carter after he did not become the 64th person to enter the Hall in his first year of eligibility.
a. Only three receivers have ever made it in their first year up for election.
b. Some of the greatest names in history haven't made it in year one. Alan Page made it in his second year, Bill Walsh in his fourth, Pete Rozelle in his eighth.
c. There's simply a big backlog to get in, and to jump the line ahead of guys who've been close for six years (Gary Zimmerman) and eight years (Art Monk) is obviously very hard. Zimmerman is one of five two-time all-decade players in NFL history. How'd he have to wait this long?
I've had some people say to me: Well, Darrell Green wasn't much better, if at all, at his position than Carter was at his. How'd Green make it in his first year? Two reasons. I'm sure some of the 40 electors in the room nine days ago thought Green was better at corner than Carter was at wide receiver. And among the 15 modern-era candidates, Green was the only cornerback eligible. Carter had Monk and Andre Reed to contend with at wide receiver.
I'm pretty sure that if Carter had been the only receiver finalist and Green had, say, Rod Woodson and Lester Hayes as competition at cornerback, it's doubtful Green would have made it as a rookie. (It's true Emmitt Thomas, the old Chiefs' corner, was elected last week as well, but he went in via the Seniors route. Seniors, two per year, are elected or not on a separate yay or nay vote, and the 15 modern-era candidates compete against themselves for entry.
d. I said this on HBO the other day: After the Hall debate for entry was finished on Feb. 2 in Phoenix, I would have voted yes on 11 of the 15 modern-era candidates. The way the system works, we whittle the list down in secret ballot from 15 to 10, then from 10 to five, and then the top five vote-getters are voted on, individually, yes or no. So just because I voted for five finalists when it got down to the end, doesn't mean I think only five men in the class were qualified for entry.
I got strange looks at HBO for Carter not getting in. How do you think folks in Kansas City would look at me for Derrick Thomas -- who had more sacks in the '90s than anyone, who had more forced fumbles (45) than anyone since it was a recorded stat -- not getting in ... again? In other words, I like Cris Carter and I like his candidacy, and I definitely feel he was one of the five most deserving candidates for entry this year. But it's not exactly a crime against humanity that he didn't get in the Hall of Fame on his first go-round.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Hadl 9
<< <i>Anyone chasing the Hadl 9 in Mile High's auction? Seems pretty low with a couple days left:
Hadl 9 >>
I'll be a bidder, but only if it slips low..You always have to add that buyer's fee into the total cost!!!
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Peter King (aka Norm Peterson) is usually a pretty knowledgeable guy, but the fact that he thinks Bill Romanowksi has a shot to get elected on his first ballot - or at all - is laughable. And Carter's first ballot snubbing wasn't a crime against humanity, but it was total horse manure. This whole we can't elect multiple players from the same position thing stinks. Put the best players in. Period. >>
I agree. Any Hall of Fame that doesn't include Carter and/or Derrick Thomas is a joke. The two of them dominated at their positions. Not looking at stats alone, just going by 'eye appeal', these two should be in...