<< <i> I've consistently maintained that he's best judged against his peers, like Largent, Lofton and Newsome, the same way Jim Taylor is more properly judged against Jim Brown or John Henry Johnson than Earl Campbell or Jerome Bettis. Carter vs. Monk is wholly artificial, borne solely out of the voters obdurate refusal to grant Monk his richly earned status in a timely fashion.
I like Carter and feel he deserves enshrinement. As does Brown, and as do a lot of other overlooked guys from the past and upcoming ones in the future, but Monk is long, long overdue. >>
Ok fair enough...I will compare him ONLY to those player who played from 1980-1995 (art Monk's playing years)...IMO, The best way to do this is by judging 1st team All-Pro selections...This takes away the fan balloting and also provides a glimpse into how these WRs were viewed AT THE TIME, since these selections are made immediately following each and every season.
Here's the breakdown of ALL WRs chosen as 1st team All-Pros from 1980-1995 ONLY. This means they were the TOP TWO, and in a few cases(ties) THREE WRs from each year 1980-1995:
Jerry Rice-9 selections James Lofton-4 selections Sterling Sharpe-3 selections Steve Largent-2 selections Roy Green-2 selections Mike Quick-2 selections
Art Monk was chosen ONCE in his career as being the one of the BEST at his position..Here are all the other WRs chosen ONCE between 1980-1995: Alfred Jenkins, Wes Chandler, Dwight Clark, Louis Lipps, Al Toon, Gary Clark, Charlie Joiner, John Jefferson, Henry Ellard, Andre Rison, Micheal Irvin, Haywood Jeffries, Cris Carter, Herman Moore..
CLEARLY, Jerry Rice and James Lofton were consider the top 2 WRs of the Art Monk (1980-1995) era..I base this on the stats, the All-Pros and Pro Bowl selections..All 3 also played in multiple Super Bowls..James Lofton was selected on his FIFTH TRY into the HOF...Yet he was widely considered far more dominant than Art Monk was...Monk has waited 7 years so far..So how does this equal being "very, very overlooked"?
As i've said, I think Monk is deserving, but to this point, others have proven MORE deserving. Sooner or later, Monk will get his call and to me he's right on schedule. I'm trying to look at this objectively..I'm not a Redskins fan, so I don't have the rose colored glasses on..I'm also not an Art Monk hater..I'm a fan of the game, and a fan of the history of the game. Art Monk has a place in it, but it is no where near as pronounced as some Redskins/monk fans make it out to be.
GDM67, i love debating football issues, especially with someone as knowledgable as yourself..This debate belongs perfectly in this thread and I appreciate the banter. You feel strongly of your beliefs and there's nothing wrong with that. Like I said, just trying to give a more objective look after all the stories coming out about how Monk has been "filibustered" or whatever. I just don't buy it based on all the information I see about his true place in the game during his playing years...He's a marginal candidate..He's not Jerry Rice, Barry Sanders, Dan Marino good...
Jason >>
Thanks for all the interesting stats. For those who want Monk in two years ago...then you might have to consider Sharpe as well. Even though I am a huge packer fan i dont think he fully measures up. Maybe Monk is in the same status here. Sharpe had some pretty strong years and set the standard of the back to back 100 catch WR but then he got hurt and had to retire. Maybe if that doesnt happen he would be in already. Getting to play a few more years with Favre might have pushed him up near Rice and Irvin. I think Sharpe was more a factor in a game than Monk ever was. Def's always game planned to take Sharpe away, remember the pack had just a little of a running attack. There almost always was only a marginal reciver across from him. Yet he was rarely taken out of a game by the def.
Packers Fan for Life Collecting: Brett Favre Master Set Favre Ticket Stubs Favre TD Reciever Autos Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set Football HOF Rc's
<< <i>Again, this is by no means intended to be The One Stat Which Ends All Discussions. It’s just a quick way of capturing the number and quality of a player’s outstanding seasons. One thing I like about it is that it distinguishes between different levels of leading the league. Brett Favre led the league in passing TDs in 1995 and Dan Marino led the league in 1984, but Favre had only 16 more TD passes than the #10 guy, while Marino had 16 more TD tosses than the #2 guy and 29 more than the #10 guy. If you count them as being the same thing, you’re losing information. Likewise, Terrell Davis finished 2nd in rushing yards in 1996, but only 15 yards behind the leader. Had he gotten another 16 yards during the season, it really would not have changed anything about how impressive or how valuable his performance was, but in many debates during the coming decades, it would have changed that performance from a “top five performance” to a “league leading performance.” >>
This is a nice breakdown. However, it doesnt take into account changes in the game of football. What was the break down for Manning when he broke Marino's record. League is much more pass driven since then it was in the 80's. Just think of the vast degree of separation between Don Hutsons yearly numbers and almost the total of the next 5 ends put together. This might be the best way of picking out players that helped revolutionize a postion or a change in game play approach. Though as long as you keep the comparaison to players and their stats during the same years I like it. I just dont think you can compare numbers a decade a part as simply.
Packers Fan for Life Collecting: Brett Favre Master Set Favre Ticket Stubs Favre TD Reciever Autos Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set Football HOF Rc's
This is only for players 1970-present..And it actually does take into account the changes within the league..As it compares players ONLY to their peers...
The "baseline" he uses is the ranking in that particular stat..Meaning baseline #10 is the 10th ranked guy in that stat for that season, say receiving yards..If the 10th ranked guy had 1,000 yards and Michael Irvin had 1,200 yards, then Irvin gets 200 points...If in 1975, the 10th ranked guy had 800 yards and Harold Carmicheal had 1,000, Carmicheal gets the same 200 points...
So the numbers for each player are how much he went above and beyond what either the #10 or #5 ranked guy at that stat did for EACH particular season..Then they are added up to show the dominance...It levels the playing field rather than saying passing era, running era, etc...
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.
it was more about the comparason of Marino in 84 to Favre in 95. In the 90's a +20 TD season was considered the norm for Qb's. In 84 a 20+ TD season was that normal across the league for Qb's. my intrepretation is that Marino is pretty much responsible for the change league wide, along with the west coast, to a more pass dominanted league. Thats why it would be interesting to look at Mannings numbers when he broke Marino's record with 49 TD passes following this stat's approach and see how much the league has changed.
In baseball in the 80's a 30+ HR season was great. Now its almost the norm for power hitters. A great season is now 40-50+ HRs a season.
Packers Fan for Life Collecting: Brett Favre Master Set Favre Ticket Stubs Favre TD Reciever Autos Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set Football HOF Rc's
<< <i>it was more about the comparason of Marino in 84 to Favre in 95. In the 90's a +20 TD season was considered the norm for Qb's. In 84 a 20+ TD season was that normal across the league for Qb's. my intrepretation is that Marino is pretty much responsible for the change league wide, along with the west coast, to a more pass dominanted league. Thats why it would be interesting to look at Mannings numbers when he broke Marino's record with 49 TD passes following this stat's approach and see how much the league has changed.
>>
Well, that's easy...lol
Manning had 10 TD passes more than the #2 ranked guy, 27 more than the #10 ranked guy in 2004. So not quite as dominant as Marino, but pretty darn close...
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.
Interesting, but does it take into account differences between teams' offenses? It seems receivers who play for run-happy teams are penalized and receivers who play for pass-happy teams are rewarded. Just, for example, using stats from pro-football-reference.com, in 1973, these players had these stats (league rank in parentheses):
Harold Jackson: 40 receptions (not in top ten), 874 yards (3rd), 13 TDs (1st)
Paul Warfield: 29 receptions (not in top ten), 514 yards (not in top ten), 11 TDs (2nd)
Jackson's Rams under Chuck Knox threw the ball a total 271 times. Warfield's Dolphins of the Csonka, Kiick, and Morris era, threw the ball 256 times. Carmichael's Eagles threw the ball 479 times.
If you put Harold Jackson's numbers in the context of the Eagles' passing offense, you get:
Harold Jackson: 71 receptions, 1342 yards, 14 TDs
If you put Warfield's numbers in the context of the Eagles' passing offense, you get:
Paul Warfield: 59 receptions, 993 yards, 15 TDs.
The question is then, how much of Carmichael's dominance are attributable to his greatness and how much is attributable to the offense in which he played?
No it doesn't take that into account. Those ranking are purely performance only. The below ranking do somewhat, as they judge a player ONLY by the pct. of yards he gained for his team..Problem with this is that it only ranks guy who started in 1978 or later...None of the older guys are factored in..Also, it doesn't compare them to their peers within each season..It spans multiple seasons..Mostly it shows with guys were the ''go to'' guys..
---Here is the plan: for every year of a receiver’s career, compute the percentage of his team’s receiving yards that he accounted for. Then average together his 6 best seasons according to that metric, or average together all his seasons if he’s played fewer than six. For example, here are Randy Moss’ best six:
The average of those numbers is 33.8, so that’s Moss’ rating.
I am a big fan of rating players by the average of their best N seasons. It’s not scientific, but it generally feels right to me in terms of weighting short brilliant careers with long merely-good ones. If you rate based on totals, you’re going to favor the latter over the former by crediting guys for compiling raw numbers at the end of their career even if those numbers weren’t of much value. If you rate based on averages, you end up penalizing guys for hanging around past their primes. In short, I think an 600-yard season by a 37-year-old wide receiver shouldn’t count for him (because 600-yard seasons grow on trees) nor against him (because 600-yard seasons are at least as good as zero-yard seasons).
In my system, a guy can hang around as long as he wants and it won’t hurt him. But it won’t help him either, unless he does something truly valuable. The only advantage of having a long career is that it gives you more opportunities to generate valuable seasons. Why six seasons instead of four or seven or 10? No particular reason. It just seemed right.
OK, here are the top 30:
Player Rating YdRnk ====================================== 1. Michael Irvin 38.3 5 2. Jimmy Smith 36.7 7 3. Jerry Rice 35.5 1 4. Herman Moore 35.2 13 5. Tim Brown 34.8 8 6. James Lofton 34.5 12 7. Marvin Harrison 34.3 2 8. Randy Moss 33.8 4 9. Rod Smith 33.7 9 10. Sterling Sharpe 33.5 15 11. Henry Ellard 33.2 11 12. Terrell Owens 32.6 10 13. Joey Galloway 32.3 37 14. Eric Moulds 32.1 18 15. Isaac Bruce 31.7 6 16. Keyshawn Johnson 31.6 27 17. Joe Horn 31.3 16 18. Torry Holt 31.1 3 19. Hines Ward 31.0 40 20. Cris Carter 31.0 14 21. Anthony Miller 30.9 28 22. Andre Johnson 30.8 62 23. Eric Martin 30.6 51 24. Brian Blades 30.6 55 25. Art Monk 30.6 19 26. Muhsin Muhammad 30.4 34 27. Anquan Boldin 30.4 20 28. Andre Reed 30.3 25 29. Andre Rison 30.3 22 30. Chad Johnson 30.3 26
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.
This shows receiving yardage PER team passing attempt..So this most definitely takes running team/passing team into account...And definitely shows exactly what ive been saying about Michael Irvin..His dominance was FAR ahead of Art Monk on the field...And maybe helps the case i will be building 4 years from now that Jimmy Smith belongs in the HOF...
Player Years AvYd AvTmAtt Yd/TmAtt ======================================================== Michael Irvin 1991-1995 1419 482 2.95 Jerry Rice 1991-1995 1451 536 2.71 Marvin Harrison 1999-2003 1519 567 2.68 Randy Moss 1999-2003 1412 532 2.66 Jimmy Smith 1997-2001 1346 516 2.61 James Lofton 1980-1984 1175 465 2.53 Torry Holt 2000-2004 1474 591 2.49 Herman Moore 1992-1996 1211 489 2.48 Tim Brown 1993-1997 1269 518 2.45 Chad Johnson 2002-2006 1319 542 2.44 Harold Jackson 1972-1976 795 327 2.43 Rod Smith 1997-2001 1273 528 2.41 Cliff Branch 1974-1978 869 361 2.41 Hines Ward 2001-2005 1095 455 2.41 Terrell Owens 2000-2004 1293 543 2.38 Joe Horn 2000-2004 1258 535 2.35 Henry Ellard 1987-1991 1188 509 2.34 Steve Largent 1983-1987 1101 476 2.31 Sterling Sharpe 1989-1993 1245 542 2.30 Stanley Morgan 1978-1982 885 389 2.27 Ken Burrough 1975-1979 837 375 2.23 Andre Reed 1988-1992 1050 476 2.20 Eric Moulds 1998-2002 1176 538 2.19 Cris Collinsworth 1982-1986 994 455 2.18 Drew Pearson 1974-1978 860 394 2.18 Drew Hill 1985-1989 1070 494 2.17 Cris Carter 1996-2000 1152 532 2.17 Laveranues Coles 2002-2006 1072 497 2.16 Art Monk 1982-1986 972 451 2.15
--
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, did you just get a new copy of Excel or something?
This is the kind of thing I do with fantasy players just before draft day. I have workbook upon workbook figuring the averages, increase or decrease per year...min, max, median, avg... in the end, I have metrics for everything, though it usually is meaningless to everyone else. But I hide that by saying it's top secret research.
At any rate, I love the "Gray Ink" scale. Nice job as always. Oh and I was always kind of borderline on Jimmy Smith, but seeing those numbers, it makes it tougher to argue.
After thinking about how is deserving and who isn't..Got me thinking who everyone feels are the "weakest" members of the HOF..Not to say any of them are undeserving, but these are the guys who serve as "rallying calls" for the supposedly overlooked players..Who in many cases are actually better than some of the guys currently in the HOF...
Who are your weakest modern player at each position? Here's mine:
QB-George Blanda RB-John Henry Johnson WR-Charlie Joiner TE-Charlie Sanders OL-Mike McCormack DL-Dan Hampton LB-Dave Wilcox DB-Lem Barney
Compare those to some of the guys NOT in the HOF:
QB-Ken Stabler RB-Terrell Davis WR-Art Monk TE-Todd Christiansen OL-Bob Kuechenberg DL-Richard Dent LB-Derrick Thomas DB-Lester Hayes
Seniors:
OL-Mick Tinglehoff, Jerry Kramer DL-Claude Humphrey, LC Greenwood LB-Nobis, Hanburger, Howley DB-Cliff Harris, Jack Butler
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.
What a laugher that Hampton is in , he wasn't even the best player on his own Defensive line ( Richard Dent ). Great List, I tried to find someone to take Lem Barney off that list, but after you take a look at the list Roger Wehrli Ronnie Lott Mike Haynes Mel Blount Willie Brown Paul Krause Mel Renfro Larry Wilson Dick Lane Willie Wood Yale Lary Jimmie Johnson Herb Adderley Ken Houston Jack Christianson Emlen Tunnell I guess if I had to pick one and I think there all well deserving. I would have to vote Jimmie Johnson. Wow it has to be one of the stongest position in the Hall.
I just go some of my best grades from PSA , just thought I would share. This is one of my better subs in awhile. 1 60087651 1964 TOPPS 90 BOBBY BELL N/A 8 2 60087652 1956 TOPPS 47 BILL GEORGE N/A 7 3 60087653 1963 TOPPS 155 LARRY WILSON N/A 7 4 60087654 1949 LEAF 26 SAM BAUGH N/A 7 5 60087655 1952 BOWMAN LARGE 88 BILLY STONE N/A Not Holdered, Did not meet Minimum Size Requirements 6 60087656 1952 BOWMAN LARGE 76 HERMAN CLARK N/A Not Holdered, Did not meet Minimum Size Requirements 7 60087657 1952 BOWMAN LARGE 89 GEORGE TALIAFERRO N/A 8 8 60087658 1952 BOWMAN LARGE 122 JIMMY PHELAN N/A 7 9 60087659 1948 BOWMAN 95 GEORGE McAFEE N/A 7 10 60087660 1965 PHILADELPHIA 105 CARL ELLER N/A 8 10 60087661 1965 PHILADELPHIA 105 CARL ELLER N/A 9 11 60087662 1965 PHILADELPHIA 53 MEL RENFRO N/A 7 12 60087663 1964 PHILADELPHIA 161 JIM JOHNSON N/A 8 13 60087664 1967 PHILADELPHIA 43 LEROY KELLY N/A 8 14 60087665 1955 TOPPS ALL-AMER. 100 FATS HENRY N/A 8 15 60087666 1972 TOPPS 104 RON YARY N/A 8 16 60087667 1962 TOPPS 151 BILL KILMER N/A 8 17 60087668 1960 TOPPS 56 FOREST GREGG N/A 8 18 60087669 1952 BOWMAN SMALL 57 WAYNE MILLNER N/A 8
You know what's funny about that Baugh, when I bought the card I thought it was a 48. It was a last minute bid and I rushed to get my bid in on the card. Even thru all that it did turn out to be a very nice card. I'm not looking to sell any of the cards, but I won't turn my back on a good offer . Millner and Leroy Kelly are Sold.
Funny, I did the same thing about four years ago with a 49 Leaf Baugh.
I think one thing to keep in mind is the difference in statistical relevance between baseball and football. Football is a complex sum of interrelated team parts, offensively and defensively, attempting to WIN games. Baseball actions are clearly defineable as to their relative impact on games, and they are largely individualistic. So much goes in to what happens on a football field, and what causes a team to win, that stats do not tell the story of a player's impact. I also think this is particularly true of the WR position, since with teams that win consistently over the years the runnin game is used to "run out the win." Kind of the opposite of the fact that 100 yard rushing games are usually a good indicator of which team wins the game. WR's on bad teams can have much better stats, especially in the old days when players stayed on teams for a bigger chunk of their career. Art Monk was always on teams that won most of their games, won Superbowls, and his receving stats do not exist in a vacuum. His teams won often, and he was a very large part of that. If he had played on bad teams and had more opportunities to catch balls whgen the team was behind in the fourth quarter, he would seem "more dominant" to a stat person. Monk was a contributer to winning, and that is the whole point of Pro sports. I don't care to debate who Monk is better than and who he is not - but he certainly earned the right to receive the recognition as a Hall of Famer.
I am buying and trading for RC's of Wilt Chamberlain, George Mikan, Bill Russell, Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, and Bob Cousy! Don't waste your time and fees listing on ebay before getting in touch me by PM or at gregmo32@aol.com !
Gregmo, I'm not basing my opinions of Monk strictly on the stats...I've watched a TON of his games..And while he was a very good WR, and yes HOF deserving, he shouldn't be rushed/pushed in over guys who are more deserving. They don't just let in 20 guys every year to the HOF...Its a process meant to limit who gets in...
That being said, I believe that the vacuum exists among Art Monk fans...They have placed him on a pedestal that is higher than what he actual deserves. He is a borderline HOFer, not a first ballot lock worthy guy...He just wasn't...What did he do ON THE FIELD that distinguished him from other WRs during his era? What makes him better than Gary Clark, his own teammate? I've watched many of the games and I'm sorry but Clark was better than Monk in ALOT of ways. The only reason Monk's name comes up in the HOF vote and Clark doesn't is becuase Monk played in the NFL longer and accumulated more stats...
Comparisons are the name of the game when deciding who is a HOFer and who isn't...What other information do you have that helps you decide this? He made a good catch? HOFer?? or he played on winning teams? HOFer? If thats the case EVERYONE would be in the HOF.
Monk's biggest strength was his consistency, not his dominance. He was a tough, reliable, dependable guy who made the catches when they needed to be made. Did the dirty work over the middle, blocked on running plays and rarely missed a game. Would he have caught as many passes as he did if the Skins didn't have defenses playing #1 stop the run, and #2 stop Gary Clark and Ricky Sanders? Watch some of the old games, heck even the Super Bowls and count how many times Art Monk was double covered. Not that many...Definitely less than Gary Clark, who caught almost as many passes as Monk did..Sometimes more, for more yards and more TDs...
He will eventually get in because of his STATS and because he played on a team that won Championships and was dominant for a long period that is VERY un-represented in the HOF...But he is going to have to wait until there is a spot for him. He shouldn't go in over guys who are more deserving..Micheal Irvin was one of them, Derrick Thomas is another...
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 was ready to bid on a Henry Jordan 1961 Topps rookie last night. I was guessing it would go for around $150 after talking with Jason. So I set my snipe at $190. $260 it closed for. WOW! I am getting in over my head.
<< <i>Would someone please provide a link to a site that lists the All-Pro 1st Team selections by year? For some reason, I am having a hard time finding it.
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>I was ready to bid on a Henry Jordan 1961 Topps rookie last night. I was guessing it would go for around $150 after talking with Jason. So I set my snipe at $190. $260 it closed for. WOW! I am getting in over my head. >>
Well, I knew it wouldn't go UNDER $150, no chance...They've sold anywhere between $180-$250 in the past year...But we are in a new area..What you were paying LAST year for these HOFers is NOT what you are going to have to pay this year in most cases...
They are still terribly undervalued. 8 years from now you'll be wishing you paid $260.00...lol...Because when I started collecting these 8 years ago, I was paying probably 20-25% of what these cards are going for now...If you want to see the ceiling, look at baseball HOF RCs...
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>Would someone please provide a link to a site that lists the All-Pro 1st Team selections by year? For some reason, I am having a hard time finding it.
Thats an interesting site. I noticed that John Elway was never once a 1st team AP all-pro. Yet he was a lock first ballot HOFer and the QB for the NFL all ninetys team. Favre had 3 MVPS and 3 1st place AP All-Pros and he is Elways backup on the NFL team of the ninetys. So who voted for the NFL team of the ninetys then? Just a question as I dont know but know at least Jason does.
Its also interesting to look at the WRs. I dont recall Monk being on the list but Sterling Sharpe was 3 to 4 times, yet the is a hard core group preaching for his election but no-one preach for sharpe (me included).
Packers Fan for Life Collecting: Brett Favre Master Set Favre Ticket Stubs Favre TD Reciever Autos Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set Football HOF Rc's
<< <i>Would someone please provide a link to a site that lists the All-Pro 1st Team selections by year? For some reason, I am having a hard time finding it.
Thats an interesting site. I noticed that John Elway was never once a 1st team AP all-pro. Yet he was a lock first ballot HOFer and the QB for the NFL all ninetys team. Favre had 3 MVPS and 3 1st place AP All-Pros and he is Elways backup on the NFL team of the ninetys. So who voted for the NFL team of the ninetys then? Just a question as I dont know but know at least Jason does.
Its also interesting to look at the WRs. I dont recall Monk being on the list but Sterling Sharpe was 3 to 4 times, yet the is a hard core group preaching for his election but no-one preach for sharpe (me included). >>
The All-Decade teams are chosen by the Pro Football Hall of Fame Selection Committee at the conclusion of each decade...
I've also mentioned Sharpe numerous times when debating Art Monks merits..Honestly I think Sharpe was the more dominant player, but didnt play long enough to accumulate the stats for the HOF. My preference is for dominance over longevity...Just because a guy playes forever I dont personally think that makes him a HOFer...Just lucky enough to never be seriously injured...
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 with you on Sharpe. But there is seems to be a lot of stock put in on all of these team selections. Yet there is very little agreement/consistentancy among them. So which one is the most accurate then.
Packers Fan for Life Collecting: Brett Favre Master Set Favre Ticket Stubs Favre TD Reciever Autos Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set Football HOF Rc's
<< <i>I agree with you on Sharpe. But there is seems to be a lot of stock put in on all of these team selections. Yet there is very little agreement/consistentancy among them. So which one is the most accurate then. >>
The All-Pro selections, at least the ones that seem to carry the most merit are the AP selections which are shown in that link I posted. Those are chosen by 26 AP writers every year...
Most of which are probably part of the HOF Selection committee..Which is 40 writers...They are what they are...Somebody has to be #1..I don't really know of any that I significantly disagree with.
If I had to choose Elway or Favre from 1990-1999, I would take Elway..I would venture to guess Elway had way better stats and more Super Bowls than Favre over that time period..
Favre was also named to Team of the 1990s as the 2nd Team QB...
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.
All categories considered, Farve had better stats in my opinion. However, had Elway played in more wide open offenses, his likely would have been better. Can't go wrong with either of them though.
Was trying to find the vote counts for the All-Decade team to see how close it was between Elway and Favre, but I dont think they release that info. They do it for the All-Pro teams though.
I did find this article from Nov. 2000 when the teams were announced::::
Barry Sanders, Jerry Rice, Bruce Matthews, Bruce Smith and Reggie White were unanimous selections to the NFL All-Decade team for the 1990s, announced by the league Tuesday.
Sanders, who retired following the 1998 season, was the first running back to rush for 1,500 yards in four straight seasons -- including 2,053 in 1997 when he was the co-MVP of the league. He won four rushing titles with Detroit (1990, 1994, 1996-97).
Rice led receivers with 860 catches, 12,078 yards receiving and 103 touchdowns for San Francisco.
Matthews, a guard who played in the last Super Bowl with Tennessee, started all 160 games for the Oilers in the '90s and was selected to 10 Pro Bowls.
Smith and White were the decade's premier defensive ends. Smith led the league with 1131/2 sacks for Buffalo, two more than White, who starred for Philadelphia and Green Bay.
Smith, who signed this off-season with Washington, went to four Super Bowls with the Bills and was the 1990 and 1996 defensive player of the year.
White, who came out of retirement last week to sign with the Carolina Panthers, was the 1998 defensive player of the year.
John Elway of Denver is the first-team quarterback.
Deion Sanders and Mel Gray are the only players selected at two positions. Sanders is a first-team cornerback and punt returner, while Gray made the second team as both a kick and punt returner.
Safety Ronnie Lott, who will be inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame on Saturday, Morten Andersen, Gary Anderson, Sean Landeta, Rice, White and Smith are making their second appearances on an All-Decade team.
All were chosen for the 1980s team.
Andersen and Anderson are kickers, Landeta a punter.
Emmitt Smith is the other first-team running back and Cris Carter was chosen as the second receiver. William Roaf and Gary Zimmerman are the tackles; Randall McDaniel, the other guard; Dermontti Dawson is the centre and Shannon Sharpe was picked at tight end.
On defence, Cortez Kennedy and John Randle are the tackles; Kevin Greene, Junior Seau and Derrick Thomas, who died after a January car accident, were chosen at linebacker.
Rod Woodson is the other cornerback; Steve At-water and LeRoy Butler are the safeties.
Darren Bennett is the first-team punter.
The first-team coach is Bill Parcells, who won one Super Bowl with the Giants and lost another with New England during the '90s. Marv Levy is the second-team coach for leading the Bills to four Super Bowls, despite not winning any.
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.
Favre more att's, comp, yards, tds, ints, maybe rating Elway more yards per attmpt. and maybe higher comp % (but thats tight with out doing the numbers) same for the rating
92 he played in 15 games but only started 13 and played only a significant amount of time in another.
Elway sat a few games late in a few seasons to rest for playoffs.
I think favre has the edge in numbers though. Elway has the edge in SB wins (2) plus one was head to head. Which the Pack defense lost for them.
Packers Fan for Life Collecting: Brett Favre Master Set Favre Ticket Stubs Favre TD Reciever Autos Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set Football HOF Rc's
<< <i>yards actually go to Elway by roughly 200. But Elway played in 7 more games. Favre had 55 more TD's in 7 fewer games. >>
That (the 55 more TD's in seven fewer games) says it all about who belongs on the first team for the 1990's. That and say winning three straight MVP awards. Favre still put up great numbers while playing many games in terrible weather too.
Elways stat's are impressive for his last 6 years of his career. Prior to that he put up some very average passing numbers considering all the rule changes that were in place to make the passing game work. Not knocking Elway here as he obviously had a HOF career, but his first 10 years in the NFL aren't that special judging by his passing records only. Kind of like Bradshaw's first 6 years in the NFL too. Both were still winners however.
<< <i> Not knocking Elway here as he obviously had a HOF career, but his first 10 years in the NFL aren't that special judging by his passing records only. Kind of like Bradshaw's first 6 years in the NFL too. Both were still winners however. >>
Those two men are very analagous. Early struggles, embarrassingly so at times (each guy lined up underthe guard on at least one occasion), followed by a later-career blossoming into a championship level player.
I'm not interested in starting the Monk thing again, but since someone brought up the All Decade Teams.
Those are the same men I judge him against. Not Irvin, not Sharpe, not Lenny Moore.
<< <i> Not knocking Elway here as he obviously had a HOF career, but his first 10 years in the NFL aren't that special judging by his passing records only. Kind of like Bradshaw's first 6 years in the NFL too. Both were still winners however. >>
Those two men are very analagous. Early struggles, embarrassingly so at times (each guy lined up underthe guard on at least one occasion), followed by a later-career blossoming into a championship level player.
I'm not interested in starting the Monk thing again, but since someone brought up the All Decade Teams.
Those are the same men I judge him against. Not Irvin, not Sharpe, not Lenny Moore. >>
I thought i already did that???lol
Rice vs. Monk..Obviously no comparison...
Lofton vs. Monk..I showed in a previous post that Lofton was VASTLY more dominant, but also had to wait 5 years to get into the HOF..Monk, so far, has waited 7..
Largent vs. Monk...The big difference here is TD receptions 100 for largent, 68 for Monk...And Monk played in 24 more games...Also YPC for largent is 16.0, Monk is 13.5...Largent had 120 less catches, but 350 more yards...in 24 fewer career games...Largent was top 10 in receptions 9 times, receiving yardage 8 times...Monk was in the top 10 receptions 4 times and in receiving yards 3 times...Largent was selected to 7 Pro Bowls to Monk's 3...Honestly the ONLY place I see Monk as having any advantage is that he played on winning teams and Largent played for an expansion team. And if that is what you think puts Monk above the rest, then his teammate Gary Clark deserves to be in...
So to me, all 3 of those guys were better than Monk, and all 3 are current/future HOFers..Monk has been a finalist for 7 years and will eventually get in. I don't think the HOF Selection Committee always "gets it right" but in Monk's case they are spot on. He's gotten the respect of making the final 15 every year, but he's not so great that he should go in over other more deserving candidates. He needs to wait his turn just like other marginal/borderline HOFers. But he will get in, and deserves to eventually.
I think our only disagreement here is that you believe Monk to be the most overlooked/snubbed candidate ever...And I think he's right on track for getting in when he should..If Jerry Rice doesn't get in first ballot, THEN you can pull the snub card..lol
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.
favre superbowls win and second appearance were 10 and 9 years ago. Those are late blooming. Elway had early super bowls but didnt win until his last two years.
Packers Fan for Life Collecting: Brett Favre Master Set Favre Ticket Stubs Favre TD Reciever Autos Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set Football HOF Rc's
Honestly, I think Elway got the 1st Team vote because he had recently retired coming off back-to-back Super Bowl wins..After a long storied career, which he had many struggles, lost a couple of Super Bowls, etc. You have to rememebr, its not a computer program that picks these teams or HOFers...Its media guys, who 1st and foremost fall in love with a story before they fall in love with a player.
In their prime, personally, I would take Favre over Elway...And i've got to believe the votes between them had to be close..And in close races, media guys like to go with the feel-good story.
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>so then too much stock shouldnt always be placed in the all decade selections then. >>
Depends what you are buying the stock in???lol
Who are we talking about that places too much stock in the all-decade teams? Its just like Pro Bowls, All-Pro selections, HOF selections..All come from voting procedures by the media, by the fans, by the players, etc...There are all matter of opinion, but they are combined opinions from many different sources. Is there any other way to determine who was better when comparing players vs. their peers? There is no computer program that takes the best stats and automatically places guys in ALl-Pro slots or Pro Bowls..The best thing about the All-Pros and Pro Bowls are that they are chosen at the conclusion of each season. To me, it would seem easier for guys who WATCHED these players in say 1972 who voted at the conclusion of that season to judge them better than you or I can 25 years later.
We all have our opinions, but when it comes to HOF, it is once again a vote..And all of the above selections and honors are going to play a part. Its not always about who had the most yards or most catches. Not always WHAT they did on the field, but HOW they did it is also taken into account. You watch, then you decide who you think was better. The voters are no different. The more you watch, the easier it is to compare them.
Because lets be honest, making these teams and making the HOF is all about comparisons...Was the guy good enough to be honored? All-Pros are judged vs. their peers from THAT season. HOFers are judged against all other players at that particular position in NFL history. The All-Pros, Pro Bowls, All-decades are just another way to make a fair comparison. NFL circa 1950 is 10000% different game than NFL circa 2006...Is there another way to compare them? Certainly can't with the stats...
My advice, watch the games, learn the old timers and you decide. Thats what I do...lol
Was actually watching some late 70's footage today re: Steve Largent...I wish I could find stats on number of drops for each season back in the 70's-80s. I would venture to guess that Largent dropped less than 1% of the passes he was thrown over his career. I forgot how sure handed that guy was, even when he was the ONLY weapon on a sad Seattle team. I know Monk was dependable, but were his hands anywhere close to Largents?
I need to watch more of Monk to find out..Maybe some of the Monk fans can comment, although if you aren't going to be objective don't bother..lol
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> I think our only disagreement here is that you believe Monk to be the most overlooked/snubbed candidate ever... >>
No, I believe him to be purposefully blocked by a small cabal of people who are intent on keeping him out, and who have left a clear trail of comments and actions that lend credence to that assertion.
For you, this is an abstract debate over stats which you've pursued in a lot of ways which are seemingly logical, but are, I believe, ultimately of questionable relevance. Like your comparisons of Monk and Irvin, Monk and Carter, your overreliance on things that are voted on as opposed to concrete accomplishments, and any number of other things I've argued with you about in this thread.
For me, this is a case of a real person being denied his proper respect and due by people who are not operating in an above board manner, something you've rejected out of hand, which is why I absented myself from further discussion a few days ago. We're talking about the same thing but in very different ways and we're so far apart that further discussion is essentially pointless.
I just wanted to call everyone's attention to the All 80's team list, because I thought it was interesting.
<< <i>Honestly, I think Elway got the 1st Team vote because he had recently retired coming off back-to-back Super Bowl wins..After a long storied career, which he had many struggles, lost a couple of Super Bowls, etc. You have to rememebr, its not a computer program that picks these teams or HOFers...Its media guys, who 1st and foremost fall in love with a story before they fall in love with a player.
In their prime, personally, I would take Favre over Elway...And i've got to believe the votes between them had to be close..And in close races, media guys like to go with the feel-good story.
Jason >>
Jason, I think you're absolutely correct with your reasoning here. Elway's early struggles in the three Super Bowl losses, his terrible relationship with Coach Reeves, then his brilliant career ending back to back SB wins surely moved a lot of writers to go with Elway as the QB of the 1990's.
In my opinion I would take both Favre and Steve Young ahead of Elway for the '90's QB, but what do I know....... .
What I found amazing when looking over some of those All-Pro Decade teams is on the 1990's team, the Packers John Anderson being selected at one of the TOP SIX best LB's for the decade. I'm a Packers fan and I live in Wisconsin, but frankly Anderson was maybe slightly above average at his position and a very steady player, but definately not in the top six. I watched him play 90% of all his pro games too. No hometown bias here. He really doesn't belong on that all-decade team.
<< <i> I think our only disagreement here is that you believe Monk to be the most overlooked/snubbed candidate ever... >>
No, I believe him to be purposefully blocked by a small cabal of people who are intent on keeping him out, and who have left a clear trail of comments and actions that lend credence to that assertion.
For you, this is an abstract debate over stats which you've pursued in a lot of ways which are seemingly logical, but are, I believe, ultimately of questionable relevance. Like your comparisons of Monk and Irvin, Monk and Carter, your overreliance on things that are voted on as opposed to concrete accomplishments, and any number of other things I've argued with you about in this thread.
For me, this is a case of a real person being denied his proper respect and due by people who are not operating in an above board manner, something you've rejected out of hand, which is why I absented myself from further discussion a few days ago. We're talking about the same thing but in very different ways and we're so far apart that further discussion is essentially pointless.
I just wanted to call everyone's attention to the All 80's team list, because I thought it was interesting. >>
I get your point. Its the same point alot of sportwriters, typically those in Washington, try to perpetuate...I think its hogwash (pun intended..lol...Just because more than a few voters/writers present an opposing position on a players HOF worthiness does not make it a conspiracy...There are MANY people, myself included, who do not think Monk is being purposely railroaded. He simply hasn't gained entrance yet. Alot of great players have waited. As I've said, James Lofton was easily as good if not better than Art Monk ON THE FIELD and he waited 5 years..
I've also touched on concreate "accomplishments"...Which ones have I missed mentioning?
Monk has gotten his fair due, period..He's been a finalist for 7 straight years. To me, that's a very respectable place to be for a borderline HOFer. No one in this debate has proven to me, nor has watching some of Monk's old game footage proven to me that he is somehow a first ballot, should have been in a long time ago guy who has gotten railroaded by a few voters who also don;t think he is/was a slam dunk. Was Lynn Swann railroaded? Was there a conspiracy to keep Stallworth out? What about Roger Wehrli, how come it took 15 shots before he finally got respected. Its in invalid argument, more so than comparing players from the exact same era. When Monk gets in, what will the storyline be? Peter King sways other voters??Dan Snyder pays off the committee?? I mean come on...
Maybe Monk shot JFK and that's why he hasn't gotten in yet...lol
Sorry, but it just kills me everytime I hear people say that Monk is the victim of a sinister plot to keep him out of the HOF...Its ridiculous, the game film says it all. Cris Carter, your next HOF WR!
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>Largent was incredible. I had the numbers somewhere on his drops during his career - I will try and find them. >>
Largent was one of the best ever. I think as time has gone on and as pass receiving numbers have increased a lot of his accomplishments have been overlooked. He was great for a solid 11 years or so. Not many players at any postion can actually claim that.
Wasn't Largent drafted by the Cowboys, then later cut in camp only to be picked up by the expansion Seahawks?
Before the 1990's stats explosion, I always thought the best WR's of all-time were:
Hutson Alworth Warfield Largent and of course Dorne Dibble........ just kidding...lol
<< <i>Largent was incredible. I had the numbers somewhere on his drops during his career - I will try and find them. >>
Largent was one of the best ever. I think as time has gone on and as pass receiving numbers have increased a lot of his accomplishments have been overlooked. He was great for a solid 11 years or so. Not many players at any postion can actually claim that.
Wasn't Largent drafted by the Cowboys, then later cut in camp only to be picked up by the expansion Seahawks?
Before the 1990's stats explosion, I always thought the best WR's of all-time were:
Hutson Alworth Warfield Largent and of course Dorne Dibble........ just kidding...lol >>
Throw Ray Berry on the list and you have my exact Pre-Rice top 5...I was watching Alworth today, and if I were drafting a team of the all-time greats in their prime....Just a starter at each position...Alworth and Rice are my 2 WR's...I can watch Alworth making those over the shoulder, in stride catches all day long..Especially in those powder blues!!lol
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've been following this thread daily but haven't posted yet. I've been focused on the HOF RC set for about 2.5 months now and finally broke the top 20 a couple days ago (my wife said that since I met my goal of making the top 20 I should sell off all the cards ). This set is a blast to collect and I've gotten to know some good people that are also collecting the set. I've gotten some help from several people, but I'd like to thank Jason P. for some really good leads as well as a couple nice cards. I've actually been watching the HOF RC set for over 3 years but kept telling myself it was too expensive. One thing I've learned for this set is that you sure have to be quick if you want to get the cards. I hope to do a lot more posting as time goes on, but for now I have this question for everyone:
Now that Peyton Manning has won the big game where does he rank on the All-Time QB list? IMHO I think he ends his career at a clear #1, although he may not be there yet.
I've been watching your set Mike, and you've made some amazing strides over the past month or 2. Flew right past me! Good luck with the rest of the set. It really is a lot of fun to collect.
"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."
Welcome Mike. I was just cursing your name a few days ago It seems like everything I bid on or attempt to bid on lately you are there! Nice work on your set.
Like many others I passed on cards over the past 3 years telling myself they were too expensive to only wish now that I could buy them at 3+ times the price...
I've been following this thread daily but haven't posted yet. I've been focused on the HOF RC set for about 2.5 months now and finally broke the top 20 a couple days ago (my wife said that since I met my goal of making the top 20 I should sell off all the cards ). This set is a blast to collect and I've gotten to know some good people that are also collecting the set. I've gotten some help from several people, but I'd like to thank Jason P. for some really good leads as well as a couple nice cards. I've actually been watching the HOF RC set for over 3 years but kept telling myself it was too expensive. One thing I've learned for this set is that you sure have to be quick if you want to get the cards. I hope to do a lot more posting as time goes on, but for now I have this question for everyone:
Now that Peyton Manning has won the big game where does he rank on the All-Time QB list? IMHO I think he ends his career at a clear #1, although he may not be there yet.
Mike. >>
No problem Mike...As I'm sure you've noticed by now, the HOF football guys kinda operate like a small town..Everybody knows everybody and most of us are always willing to help out a good neighbor. The neighborhood is only as good as the people who reside there, right...lol
Glad to have you aboard...And even though we are all in competition for the same cards, 99% of the time its all in good fun. If I know a card is for sale that I don't need and that someone else is looking for, I'd much rather one of us on the HOF set have it rather than a non-HOF collector..
As far as the QBs go, I've been watching a bunch of my old stuff this week as I mentioned previously, so my mind is fresh on all 5 of these guys...So here's my current top 5 QBs:
1- Johnny Unitas...Could do it all, and did it all..You just have to watch him play... 2- Joe Montana...More clutch-time plays than anyone else I can remember 3- Otto Graham...10 straight championship games is crazy...A great passer before the days of great passers 4- Dan Marino...His release and accuracy are still amazing to watch..Too bad he never won the big game 5- Peyton Manning..If he retired today, he's already 5th...The guy is sick, easily the best of the decade IMO. I know Tom Brady is Montana Jr. as being a clutch guy, but Manning makes some throws I dont remember seeing anyone ever make before..His story is still unwritten, and when it's all said and done, he very well could be #1 on my list...But, will be a long road to climb each of the 4 guys ahead of him..He's getting REAL close to Marino in my book, but Marino just did it so well for so long, with so many different supporting casts...I want to see Manning without Harrison...
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.
whats interesting is that Marino and Favre have put up huge numbers with no HOF help. This was GregM13's observation the other day. There is no talk around here for any of Favre Wr, TE's or Rb's to be in the HOF...same for Marino. Yet for Manning you have Harrison. Montana (Young)...Rice. Unitas...Berry...Mackey(?). One must surmize that all the success that Marino and Favre have had is mainly due to their talent above and beyond what they play(ed) with.
Packers Fan for Life Collecting: Brett Favre Master Set Favre Ticket Stubs Favre TD Reciever Autos Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set Football HOF Rc's
<< <i>whats interesting is that Marino and Favre have put up huge numbers with no HOF help >>
If Sterling Sharpe made the HOF one day, I wouldn't be at all upset. He was well on his way to a ticket to Canton when he got hurt, and the precedent was already set with Gale Sayers' induction. I'm not saying Sharpe was on Sayers' level, but I don't think he was far off either. I mean 3 straight 100 catch season??? Nice.
"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."
Comments
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>
<< <i>
I've consistently maintained that he's best judged against his peers, like Largent, Lofton and Newsome, the same way Jim Taylor is more properly judged against Jim Brown or John Henry Johnson than Earl Campbell or Jerome Bettis. Carter vs. Monk is wholly artificial, borne solely out of the voters obdurate refusal to grant Monk his richly earned status in a timely fashion.
I like Carter and feel he deserves enshrinement. As does Brown, and as do a lot of other overlooked guys from the past and upcoming ones in the future, but Monk is long, long overdue. >>
Ok fair enough...I will compare him ONLY to those player who played from 1980-1995 (art Monk's playing years)...IMO, The best way to do this is by judging 1st team All-Pro selections...This takes away the fan balloting and also provides a glimpse into how these WRs were viewed AT THE TIME, since these selections are made immediately following each and every season.
Here's the breakdown of ALL WRs chosen as 1st team All-Pros from 1980-1995 ONLY. This means they were the TOP TWO, and in a few cases(ties) THREE WRs from each year 1980-1995:
Jerry Rice-9 selections
James Lofton-4 selections
Sterling Sharpe-3 selections
Steve Largent-2 selections
Roy Green-2 selections
Mike Quick-2 selections
Art Monk was chosen ONCE in his career as being the one of the BEST at his position..Here are all the other WRs chosen ONCE between 1980-1995: Alfred Jenkins, Wes Chandler, Dwight Clark, Louis Lipps, Al Toon, Gary Clark, Charlie Joiner, John Jefferson, Henry Ellard, Andre Rison, Micheal Irvin, Haywood Jeffries, Cris Carter, Herman Moore..
CLEARLY, Jerry Rice and James Lofton were consider the top 2 WRs of the Art Monk (1980-1995) era..I base this on the stats, the All-Pros and Pro Bowl selections..All 3 also played in multiple Super Bowls..James Lofton was selected on his FIFTH TRY into the HOF...Yet he was widely considered far more dominant than Art Monk was...Monk has waited 7 years so far..So how does this equal being "very, very overlooked"?
As i've said, I think Monk is deserving, but to this point, others have proven MORE deserving. Sooner or later, Monk will get his call and to me he's right on schedule. I'm trying to look at this objectively..I'm not a Redskins fan, so I don't have the rose colored glasses on..I'm also not an Art Monk hater..I'm a fan of the game, and a fan of the history of the game. Art Monk has a place in it, but it is no where near as pronounced as some Redskins/monk fans make it out to be.
GDM67, i love debating football issues, especially with someone as knowledgable as yourself..This debate belongs perfectly in this thread and I appreciate the banter. You feel strongly of your beliefs and there's nothing wrong with that. Like I said, just trying to give a more objective look after all the stories coming out about how Monk has been "filibustered" or whatever. I just don't buy it based on all the information I see about his true place in the game during his playing years...He's a marginal candidate..He's not Jerry Rice, Barry Sanders, Dan Marino good...
Jason >>
Thanks for all the interesting stats. For those who want Monk in two years ago...then you might have to consider Sharpe as well. Even though I am a huge packer fan i dont think he fully measures up. Maybe Monk is in the same status here. Sharpe had some pretty strong years and set the standard of the back to back 100 catch WR but then he got hurt and had to retire. Maybe if that doesnt happen he would be in already. Getting to play a few more years with Favre might have pushed him up near Rice and Irvin. I think Sharpe was more a factor in a game than Monk ever was. Def's always game planned to take Sharpe away, remember the pack had just a little of a running attack. There almost always was only a marginal reciver across from him. Yet he was rarely taken out of a game by the def.
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
<< <i>Again, this is by no means intended to be The One Stat Which Ends All Discussions. It’s just a quick way of capturing the number and quality of a player’s outstanding seasons. One thing I like about it is that it distinguishes between different levels of leading the league. Brett Favre led the league in passing TDs in 1995 and Dan Marino led the league in 1984, but Favre had only 16 more TD passes than the #10 guy, while Marino had 16 more TD tosses than the #2 guy and 29 more than the #10 guy. If you count them as being the same thing, you’re losing information. Likewise, Terrell Davis finished 2nd in rushing yards in 1996, but only 15 yards behind the leader. Had he gotten another 16 yards during the season, it really would not have changed anything about how impressive or how valuable his performance was, but in many debates during the coming decades, it would have changed that performance from a “top five performance” to a “league leading performance.”
>>
This is a nice breakdown. However, it doesnt take into account changes in the game of football. What was the break down for Manning when he broke Marino's record. League is much more pass driven since then it was in the 80's. Just think of the vast degree of separation between Don Hutsons yearly numbers and almost the total of the next 5 ends put together. This might be the best way of picking out players that helped revolutionize a postion or a change in game play approach. Though as long as you keep the comparaison to players and their stats during the same years I like it. I just dont think you can compare numbers a decade a part as simply.
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
The "baseline" he uses is the ranking in that particular stat..Meaning baseline #10 is the 10th ranked guy in that stat for that season, say receiving yards..If the 10th ranked guy had 1,000 yards and Michael Irvin had 1,200 yards, then Irvin gets 200 points...If in 1975, the 10th ranked guy had 800 yards and Harold Carmicheal had 1,000, Carmicheal gets the same 200 points...
So the numbers for each player are how much he went above and beyond what either the #10 or #5 ranked guy at that stat did for EACH particular season..Then they are added up to show the dominance...It levels the playing field rather than saying passing era, running era, etc...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
In baseball in the 80's a 30+ HR season was great. Now its almost the norm for power hitters. A great season is now 40-50+ HRs a season.
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
<< <i>it was more about the comparason of Marino in 84 to Favre in 95. In the 90's a +20 TD season was considered the norm for Qb's. In 84 a 20+ TD season was that normal across the league for Qb's. my intrepretation is that Marino is pretty much responsible for the change league wide, along with the west coast, to a more pass dominanted league. Thats why it would be interesting to look at Mannings numbers when he broke Marino's record with 49 TD passes following this stat's approach and see how much the league has changed.
>>
Well, that's easy...lol
Manning had 10 TD passes more than the #2 ranked guy, 27 more than the #10 ranked guy in 2004. So not quite as dominant as Marino, but pretty darn close...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Harold Jackson: 40 receptions (not in top ten), 874 yards (3rd), 13 TDs (1st)
Paul Warfield: 29 receptions (not in top ten), 514 yards (not in top ten), 11 TDs (2nd)
Harold Carmichael: 67 receptions (1st), 1116 yards (1st), 9 TDs (4th).
Jackson's Rams under Chuck Knox threw the ball a total 271 times. Warfield's Dolphins of the Csonka, Kiick, and Morris era, threw the ball 256 times. Carmichael's Eagles threw the ball 479 times.
If you put Harold Jackson's numbers in the context of the Eagles' passing offense, you get:
Harold Jackson: 71 receptions, 1342 yards, 14 TDs
If you put Warfield's numbers in the context of the Eagles' passing offense, you get:
Paul Warfield: 59 receptions, 993 yards, 15 TDs.
The question is then, how much of Carmichael's dominance are attributable to his greatness and how much is attributable to the offense in which he played?
Thanks
Randy
No it doesn't take that into account. Those ranking are purely performance only. The below ranking do somewhat, as they judge a player ONLY by the pct. of yards he gained for his team..Problem with this is that it only ranks guy who started in 1978 or later...None of the older guys are factored in..Also, it doesn't compare them to their peers within each season..It spans multiple seasons..Mostly it shows with guys were the ''go to'' guys..
---Here is the plan: for every year of a receiver’s career, compute the percentage of his team’s receiving yards that he accounted for. Then average together his 6 best seasons according to that metric, or average together all his seasons if he’s played fewer than six. For example, here are Randy Moss’ best six:
Year PCT
============
2003 39.1
2000 35.8
2002 34.1
1999 32.7
2001 32.0
1998 29.2
The average of those numbers is 33.8, so that’s Moss’ rating.
I am a big fan of rating players by the average of their best N seasons. It’s not scientific, but it generally feels right to me in terms of weighting short brilliant careers with long merely-good ones. If you rate based on totals, you’re going to favor the latter over the former by crediting guys for compiling raw numbers at the end of their career even if those numbers weren’t of much value. If you rate based on averages, you end up penalizing guys for hanging around past their primes. In short, I think an 600-yard season by a 37-year-old wide receiver shouldn’t count for him (because 600-yard seasons grow on trees) nor against him (because 600-yard seasons are at least as good as zero-yard seasons).
In my system, a guy can hang around as long as he wants and it won’t hurt him. But it won’t help him either, unless he does something truly valuable. The only advantage of having a long career is that it gives you more opportunities to generate valuable seasons. Why six seasons instead of four or seven or 10? No particular reason. It just seemed right.
OK, here are the top 30:
Player Rating YdRnk
======================================
1. Michael Irvin 38.3 5
2. Jimmy Smith 36.7 7
3. Jerry Rice 35.5 1
4. Herman Moore 35.2 13
5. Tim Brown 34.8 8
6. James Lofton 34.5 12
7. Marvin Harrison 34.3 2
8. Randy Moss 33.8 4
9. Rod Smith 33.7 9
10. Sterling Sharpe 33.5 15
11. Henry Ellard 33.2 11
12. Terrell Owens 32.6 10
13. Joey Galloway 32.3 37
14. Eric Moulds 32.1 18
15. Isaac Bruce 31.7 6
16. Keyshawn Johnson 31.6 27
17. Joe Horn 31.3 16
18. Torry Holt 31.1 3
19. Hines Ward 31.0 40
20. Cris Carter 31.0 14
21. Anthony Miller 30.9 28
22. Andre Johnson 30.8 62
23. Eric Martin 30.6 51
24. Brian Blades 30.6 55
25. Art Monk 30.6 19
26. Muhsin Muhammad 30.4 34
27. Anquan Boldin 30.4 20
28. Andre Reed 30.3 25
29. Andre Rison 30.3 22
30. Chad Johnson 30.3 26
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
This shows receiving yardage PER team passing attempt..So this most definitely takes running team/passing team into account...And definitely shows exactly what ive been saying about Michael Irvin..His dominance was FAR ahead of Art Monk on the field...And maybe helps the case i will be building 4 years from now that Jimmy Smith belongs in the HOF...
Player Years AvYd AvTmAtt Yd/TmAtt
========================================================
Michael Irvin 1991-1995 1419 482 2.95
Jerry Rice 1991-1995 1451 536 2.71
Marvin Harrison 1999-2003 1519 567 2.68
Randy Moss 1999-2003 1412 532 2.66
Jimmy Smith 1997-2001 1346 516 2.61
James Lofton 1980-1984 1175 465 2.53
Torry Holt 2000-2004 1474 591 2.49
Herman Moore 1992-1996 1211 489 2.48
Tim Brown 1993-1997 1269 518 2.45
Chad Johnson 2002-2006 1319 542 2.44
Harold Jackson 1972-1976 795 327 2.43
Rod Smith 1997-2001 1273 528 2.41
Cliff Branch 1974-1978 869 361 2.41
Hines Ward 2001-2005 1095 455 2.41
Terrell Owens 2000-2004 1293 543 2.38
Joe Horn 2000-2004 1258 535 2.35
Henry Ellard 1987-1991 1188 509 2.34
Steve Largent 1983-1987 1101 476 2.31
Sterling Sharpe 1989-1993 1245 542 2.30
Stanley Morgan 1978-1982 885 389 2.27
Ken Burrough 1975-1979 837 375 2.23
Andre Reed 1988-1992 1050 476 2.20
Eric Moulds 1998-2002 1176 538 2.19
Cris Collinsworth 1982-1986 994 455 2.18
Drew Pearson 1974-1978 860 394 2.18
Drew Hill 1985-1989 1070 494 2.17
Cris Carter 1996-2000 1152 532 2.17
Laveranues Coles 2002-2006 1072 497 2.16
Art Monk 1982-1986 972 451 2.15
--
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Jason, did you just get a new copy of Excel or something?
This is the kind of thing I do with fantasy players just before draft day. I have workbook upon workbook figuring the averages, increase or decrease per year...min, max, median, avg... in the end, I have metrics for everything, though it usually is meaningless to everyone else. But I hide that by saying it's top secret research.
At any rate, I love the "Gray Ink" scale. Nice job as always. Oh and I was always kind of borderline on Jimmy Smith, but seeing those numbers, it makes it tougher to argue.
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
Based on just the MODERN candidates from here:
Pro Football HOF
Who are your weakest modern player at each position? Here's mine:
QB-George Blanda
RB-John Henry Johnson
WR-Charlie Joiner
TE-Charlie Sanders
OL-Mike McCormack
DL-Dan Hampton
LB-Dave Wilcox
DB-Lem Barney
Compare those to some of the guys NOT in the HOF:
QB-Ken Stabler
RB-Terrell Davis
WR-Art Monk
TE-Todd Christiansen
OL-Bob Kuechenberg
DL-Richard Dent
LB-Derrick Thomas
DB-Lester Hayes
Seniors:
OL-Mick Tinglehoff, Jerry Kramer
DL-Claude Humphrey, LC Greenwood
LB-Nobis, Hanburger, Howley
DB-Cliff Harris, Jack Butler
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Roger Wehrli
Ronnie Lott
Mike Haynes
Mel Blount
Willie Brown
Paul Krause
Mel Renfro
Larry Wilson
Dick Lane
Willie Wood
Yale Lary
Jimmie Johnson
Herb Adderley
Ken Houston
Jack Christianson
Emlen Tunnell
I guess if I had to pick one and I think there all well deserving. I would have to vote Jimmie Johnson.
Wow it has to be one of the stongest position in the Hall.
I just go some of my best grades from PSA , just thought I would share. This is one of my better subs in awhile.
1 60087651 1964 TOPPS 90 BOBBY BELL N/A 8
2 60087652 1956 TOPPS 47 BILL GEORGE N/A 7
3 60087653 1963 TOPPS 155 LARRY WILSON N/A 7
4 60087654 1949 LEAF 26 SAM BAUGH N/A 7
5 60087655 1952 BOWMAN LARGE 88 BILLY STONE N/A Not Holdered, Did not meet Minimum Size Requirements
6 60087656 1952 BOWMAN LARGE 76 HERMAN CLARK N/A Not Holdered, Did not meet Minimum Size Requirements
7 60087657 1952 BOWMAN LARGE 89 GEORGE TALIAFERRO N/A 8
8 60087658 1952 BOWMAN LARGE 122 JIMMY PHELAN N/A 7
9 60087659 1948 BOWMAN 95 GEORGE McAFEE N/A 7
10 60087660 1965 PHILADELPHIA 105 CARL ELLER N/A 8
10 60087661 1965 PHILADELPHIA 105 CARL ELLER N/A 9
11 60087662 1965 PHILADELPHIA 53 MEL RENFRO N/A 7
12 60087663 1964 PHILADELPHIA 161 JIM JOHNSON N/A 8
13 60087664 1967 PHILADELPHIA 43 LEROY KELLY N/A 8
14 60087665 1955 TOPPS ALL-AMER. 100 FATS HENRY N/A 8
15 60087666 1972 TOPPS 104 RON YARY N/A 8
16 60087667 1962 TOPPS 151 BILL KILMER N/A 8
17 60087668 1960 TOPPS 56 FOREST GREGG N/A 8
18 60087669 1952 BOWMAN SMALL 57 WAYNE MILLNER N/A 8
Dave
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
I'm not looking to sell any of the cards, but I won't turn my back on a good offer . Millner and Leroy Kelly are Sold.
I think one thing to keep in mind is the difference in statistical relevance between baseball and football. Football is a complex sum of interrelated team parts, offensively and defensively, attempting to WIN games. Baseball actions are clearly defineable as to their relative impact on games, and they are largely individualistic. So much goes in to what happens on a football field, and what causes a team to win, that stats do not tell the story of a player's impact. I also think this is particularly true of the WR position, since with teams that win consistently over the years the runnin game is used to "run out the win." Kind of the opposite of the fact that 100 yard rushing games are usually a good indicator of which team wins the game. WR's on bad teams can have much better stats, especially in the old days when players stayed on teams for a bigger chunk of their career. Art Monk was always on teams that won most of their games, won Superbowls, and his receving stats do not exist in a vacuum. His teams won often, and he was a very large part of that. If he had played on bad teams and had more opportunities to catch balls whgen the team was behind in the fourth quarter, he would seem "more dominant" to a stat person. Monk was a contributer to winning, and that is the whole point of Pro sports. I don't care to debate who Monk is better than and who he is not - but he certainly earned the right to receive the recognition as a Hall of Famer.
Don't waste your time and fees listing on ebay before getting in touch me by PM or at gregmo32@aol.com !
That being said, I believe that the vacuum exists among Art Monk fans...They have placed him on a pedestal that is higher than what he actual deserves. He is a borderline HOFer, not a first ballot lock worthy guy...He just wasn't...What did he do ON THE FIELD that distinguished him from other WRs during his era? What makes him better than Gary Clark, his own teammate? I've watched many of the games and I'm sorry but Clark was better than Monk in ALOT of ways. The only reason Monk's name comes up in the HOF vote and Clark doesn't is becuase Monk played in the NFL longer and accumulated more stats...
Comparisons are the name of the game when deciding who is a HOFer and who isn't...What other information do you have that helps you decide this? He made a good catch? HOFer?? or he played on winning teams? HOFer? If thats the case EVERYONE would be in the HOF.
Monk's biggest strength was his consistency, not his dominance. He was a tough, reliable, dependable guy who made the catches when they needed to be made. Did the dirty work over the middle, blocked on running plays and rarely missed a game. Would he have caught as many passes as he did if the Skins didn't have defenses playing #1 stop the run, and #2 stop Gary Clark and Ricky Sanders? Watch some of the old games, heck even the Super Bowls and count how many times Art Monk was double covered. Not that many...Definitely less than Gary Clark, who caught almost as many passes as Monk did..Sometimes more, for more yards and more TDs...
He will eventually get in because of his STATS and because he played on a team that won Championships and was dominant for a long period that is VERY un-represented in the HOF...But he is going to have to wait until there is a spot for him. He shouldn't go in over guys who are more deserving..Micheal Irvin was one of them, Derrick Thomas is another...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Thanks in advance.
<< <i>Would someone please provide a link to a site that lists the All-Pro 1st Team selections by year? For some reason, I am having a hard time finding it.
Thanks in advance. >>
Here ya go:
AP 1st Team All Pro Selections
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>I was ready to bid on a Henry Jordan 1961 Topps rookie last night. I was guessing it would go for around $150 after talking with Jason. So I set my snipe at $190. $260 it closed for. WOW! I am getting in over my head. >>
Well, I knew it wouldn't go UNDER $150, no chance...They've sold anywhere between $180-$250 in the past year...But we are in a new area..What you were paying LAST year for these HOFers is NOT what you are going to have to pay this year in most cases...
They are still terribly undervalued. 8 years from now you'll be wishing you paid $260.00...lol...Because when I started collecting these 8 years ago, I was paying probably 20-25% of what these cards are going for now...If you want to see the ceiling, look at baseball HOF RCs...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>
<< <i>Would someone please provide a link to a site that lists the All-Pro 1st Team selections by year? For some reason, I am having a hard time finding it.
Thanks in advance. >>
Here ya go:
AP 1st Team All Pro Selections
Jason >>
Thats an interesting site. I noticed that John Elway was never once a 1st team AP all-pro. Yet he was a lock first ballot HOFer and the QB for the NFL all ninetys team. Favre had 3 MVPS and 3 1st place AP All-Pros and he is Elways backup on the NFL team of the ninetys. So who voted for the NFL team of the ninetys then? Just a question as I dont know but know at least Jason does.
Its also interesting to look at the WRs. I dont recall Monk being on the list but Sterling Sharpe was 3 to 4 times, yet the is a hard core group preaching for his election but no-one preach for sharpe (me included).
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Would someone please provide a link to a site that lists the All-Pro 1st Team selections by year? For some reason, I am having a hard time finding it.
Thanks in advance. >>
Here ya go:
AP 1st Team All Pro Selections
Jason >>
Thats an interesting site. I noticed that John Elway was never once a 1st team AP all-pro. Yet he was a lock first ballot HOFer and the QB for the NFL all ninetys team. Favre had 3 MVPS and 3 1st place AP All-Pros and he is Elways backup on the NFL team of the ninetys. So who voted for the NFL team of the ninetys then? Just a question as I dont know but know at least Jason does.
Its also interesting to look at the WRs. I dont recall Monk being on the list but Sterling Sharpe was 3 to 4 times, yet the is a hard core group preaching for his election but no-one preach for sharpe (me included). >>
The All-Decade teams are chosen by the Pro Football Hall of Fame Selection Committee at the conclusion of each decade...
I've also mentioned Sharpe numerous times when debating Art Monks merits..Honestly I think Sharpe was the more dominant player, but didnt play long enough to accumulate the stats for the HOF. My preference is for dominance over longevity...Just because a guy playes forever I dont personally think that makes him a HOFer...Just lucky enough to never be seriously injured...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
<< <i>I agree with you on Sharpe. But there is seems to be a lot of stock put in on all of these team selections. Yet there is very little agreement/consistentancy among them. So which one is the most accurate then. >>
The All-Pro selections, at least the ones that seem to carry the most merit are the AP selections which are shown in that link I posted. Those are chosen by 26 AP writers every year...
Most of which are probably part of the HOF Selection committee..Which is 40 writers...They are what they are...Somebody has to be #1..I don't really know of any that I significantly disagree with.
If I had to choose Elway or Favre from 1990-1999, I would take Elway..I would venture to guess Elway had way better stats and more Super Bowls than Favre over that time period..
Favre was also named to Team of the 1990s as the 2nd Team QB...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I did find this article from Nov. 2000 when the teams were announced::::
Barry Sanders, Jerry Rice, Bruce Matthews, Bruce Smith and Reggie White were unanimous selections to the NFL All-Decade team for the 1990s, announced by the league Tuesday.
Sanders, who retired following the 1998 season, was the first running back to rush for 1,500 yards in four straight seasons -- including 2,053 in 1997 when he was the co-MVP of the league. He won four rushing titles with Detroit (1990, 1994, 1996-97).
Rice led receivers with 860 catches, 12,078 yards receiving and 103 touchdowns for San Francisco.
Matthews, a guard who played in the last Super Bowl with Tennessee, started all 160 games for the Oilers in the '90s and was selected to 10 Pro Bowls.
Smith and White were the decade's premier defensive ends. Smith led the league with 1131/2 sacks for Buffalo, two more than White, who starred for Philadelphia and Green Bay.
Smith, who signed this off-season with Washington, went to four Super Bowls with the Bills and was the 1990 and 1996 defensive player of the year.
White, who came out of retirement last week to sign with the Carolina Panthers, was the 1998 defensive player of the year.
John Elway of Denver is the first-team quarterback.
Deion Sanders and Mel Gray are the only players selected at two positions. Sanders is a first-team cornerback and punt returner, while Gray made the second team as both a kick and punt returner.
Safety Ronnie Lott, who will be inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame on Saturday, Morten Andersen, Gary Anderson, Sean Landeta, Rice, White and Smith are making their second appearances on an All-Decade team.
All were chosen for the 1980s team.
Andersen and Anderson are kickers, Landeta a punter.
Emmitt Smith is the other first-team running back and Cris Carter was chosen as the second receiver. William Roaf and Gary Zimmerman are the tackles; Randall McDaniel, the other guard; Dermontti Dawson is the centre and Shannon Sharpe was picked at tight end.
On defence, Cortez Kennedy and John Randle are the tackles; Kevin Greene, Junior Seau and Derrick Thomas, who died after a January car accident, were chosen at linebacker.
Rod Woodson is the other cornerback; Steve At-water and LeRoy Butler are the safeties.
Darren Bennett is the first-team punter.
The first-team coach is Bill Parcells, who won one Super Bowl with the Giants and lost another with New England during the '90s. Marv Levy is the second-team coach for leading the Bills to four Super Bowls, despite not winning any.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Year AGE Team LG GP ATT CMP PCT YDS YPA TD INT SKD SKY RAT RAT
1990 30 DEN NFL 16 502 294 58.6 3526 7.02 15 14 43 311 78.5 101
1991 31 DEN NFL 16 451 242 53.7 3253 7.21 13 12 45 305 75.4 99
1992 32 DEN NFL 12 316 174 55.1 2242 7.09 10 17 36 272 65.7 87
1993 33 DEN NFL 16 551 348 63.2 4030 7.31 25 10 39 293 92.8 121
1994 34 DEN NFL 14 494 307 62.1 3490 7.06 16 10 46 303 85.7 109
1995 35 DEN NFL 16 542 316 58.3 3970 7.32 26 14 22 180 86.4 109
1996 36 DEN NFL 15 466 287 61.6 3328 7.14 26 14 26 194 89.2 116
1997 37 DEN NFL 16 502 280 55.8 3635 7.24 27 11 34 203 87.5 113
1998 38 DEN NFL 13 356 210 59.0 2806 7.88 22 10 18 135 93.0 119
Brett Favre's 90's Stats
Year AGE Team LG GP ATT CMP PCT YDS YPA TD INT SKD SKY RAT RAT
1991 22 ATL NFL
1992 23 GNB NFL 15 471 302 64.1 3227 6.85 18 13 34 208 85.3 113
1993 24 GNB NFL 16 522 318 60.9 3303 6.33 19 24 30 199 72.2 94
1994 25 GNB NFL 16 582 363 62.4 3882 6.67 33 14 31 188 90.7 116
1995 26 GNB NFL 16 570 359 63.0 4413 7.74 38 13 33 217 99.5 126
1996 27 GNB NFL 16 543 325 59.9 3899 7.18 39 13 40 241 95.8 125
1997 28 GNB NFL 16 513 304 59.3 3867 7.54 35 16 25 176 92.6 120
1998 29 GNB NFL 16 551 347 63.0 4212 7.64 31 23 38 223 87.8 112
1999 30 GNB NFL 16 595 341 57.3 4091 6.88 22 23 35 223 74.7 97
Favre more att's, comp, yards, tds, ints, maybe rating
Elway more yards per attmpt. and maybe higher comp % (but thats tight with out doing the numbers) same for the rating
92 he played in 15 games but only started 13 and played only a significant amount of time in another.
Elway sat a few games late in a few seasons to rest for playoffs.
I think favre has the edge in numbers though. Elway has the edge in SB wins (2) plus one was head to head. Which the Pack defense lost for them.
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
<< <i>yards actually go to Elway by roughly 200. But Elway played in 7 more games. Favre had 55 more TD's in 7 fewer games. >>
That (the 55 more TD's in seven fewer games) says it all about who belongs on the first team for the 1990's. That and say winning three straight MVP awards. Favre still put up great numbers while playing many games in terrible weather too.
Elways stat's are impressive for his last 6 years of his career. Prior to that he put up some very average passing numbers considering all the rule changes that were in place to make the passing game work. Not knocking Elway here as he obviously had a HOF career, but his first 10 years in the NFL aren't that special judging by his passing records only. Kind of like Bradshaw's first 6 years in the NFL too. Both were still winners however.
<< <i> Not knocking Elway here as he obviously had a HOF career, but his first 10 years in the NFL aren't that special judging by his passing records only. Kind of like Bradshaw's first 6 years in the NFL too. Both were still winners however. >>
Those two men are very analagous. Early struggles, embarrassingly so at times (each guy lined up underthe guard on at least one occasion), followed by a later-career blossoming into a championship level player.
I'm not interested in starting the Monk thing again, but since someone brought up the All Decade Teams.
Those are the same men I judge him against. Not Irvin, not Sharpe, not Lenny Moore.
<< <i>
<< <i> Not knocking Elway here as he obviously had a HOF career, but his first 10 years in the NFL aren't that special judging by his passing records only. Kind of like Bradshaw's first 6 years in the NFL too. Both were still winners however. >>
Those two men are very analagous. Early struggles, embarrassingly so at times (each guy lined up underthe guard on at least one occasion), followed by a later-career blossoming into a championship level player.
I'm not interested in starting the Monk thing again, but since someone brought up the All Decade Teams.
Those are the same men I judge him against. Not Irvin, not Sharpe, not Lenny Moore. >>
I thought i already did that???lol
Rice vs. Monk..Obviously no comparison...
Lofton vs. Monk..I showed in a previous post that Lofton was VASTLY more dominant, but also had to wait 5 years to get into the HOF..Monk, so far, has waited 7..
Largent vs. Monk...The big difference here is TD receptions 100 for largent, 68 for Monk...And Monk played in 24 more games...Also YPC for largent is 16.0, Monk is 13.5...Largent had 120 less catches, but 350 more yards...in 24 fewer career games...Largent was top 10 in receptions 9 times, receiving yardage 8 times...Monk was in the top 10 receptions 4 times and in receiving yards 3 times...Largent was selected to 7 Pro Bowls to Monk's 3...Honestly the ONLY place I see Monk as having any advantage is that he played on winning teams and Largent played for an expansion team. And if that is what you think puts Monk above the rest, then his teammate Gary Clark deserves to be in...
So to me, all 3 of those guys were better than Monk, and all 3 are current/future HOFers..Monk has been a finalist for 7 years and will eventually get in. I don't think the HOF Selection Committee always "gets it right" but in Monk's case they are spot on. He's gotten the respect of making the final 15 every year, but he's not so great that he should go in over other more deserving candidates. He needs to wait his turn just like other marginal/borderline HOFers. But he will get in, and deserves to eventually.
I think our only disagreement here is that you believe Monk to be the most overlooked/snubbed candidate ever...And I think he's right on track for getting in when he should..If Jerry Rice doesn't get in first ballot, THEN you can pull the snub card..lol
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
In their prime, personally, I would take Favre over Elway...And i've got to believe the votes between them had to be close..And in close races, media guys like to go with the feel-good story.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
<< <i>so then too much stock shouldnt always be placed in the all decade selections then. >>
Depends what you are buying the stock in???lol
Who are we talking about that places too much stock in the all-decade teams? Its just like Pro Bowls, All-Pro selections, HOF selections..All come from voting procedures by the media, by the fans, by the players, etc...There are all matter of opinion, but they are combined opinions from many different sources. Is there any other way to determine who was better when comparing players vs. their peers? There is no computer program that takes the best stats and automatically places guys in ALl-Pro slots or Pro Bowls..The best thing about the All-Pros and Pro Bowls are that they are chosen at the conclusion of each season. To me, it would seem easier for guys who WATCHED these players in say 1972 who voted at the conclusion of that season to judge them better than you or I can 25 years later.
We all have our opinions, but when it comes to HOF, it is once again a vote..And all of the above selections and honors are going to play a part. Its not always about who had the most yards or most catches. Not always WHAT they did on the field, but HOW they did it is also taken into account. You watch, then you decide who you think was better. The voters are no different. The more you watch, the easier it is to compare them.
Because lets be honest, making these teams and making the HOF is all about comparisons...Was the guy good enough to be honored? All-Pros are judged vs. their peers from THAT season. HOFers are judged against all other players at that particular position in NFL history. The All-Pros, Pro Bowls, All-decades are just another way to make a fair comparison. NFL circa 1950 is 10000% different game than NFL circa 2006...Is there another way to compare them? Certainly can't with the stats...
My advice, watch the games, learn the old timers and you decide. Thats what I do...lol
Was actually watching some late 70's footage today re: Steve Largent...I wish I could find stats on number of drops for each season back in the 70's-80s. I would venture to guess that Largent dropped less than 1% of the passes he was thrown over his career. I forgot how sure handed that guy was, even when he was the ONLY weapon on a sad Seattle team. I know Monk was dependable, but were his hands anywhere close to Largents?
I need to watch more of Monk to find out..Maybe some of the Monk fans can comment, although if you aren't going to be objective don't bother..lol
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i> I think our only disagreement here is that you believe Monk to be the most overlooked/snubbed candidate ever... >>
No, I believe him to be purposefully blocked by a small cabal of people who are intent on keeping him out, and who have left a clear trail of comments and actions that lend credence to that assertion.
For you, this is an abstract debate over stats which you've pursued in a lot of ways which are seemingly logical, but are, I believe, ultimately of questionable relevance. Like your comparisons of Monk and Irvin, Monk and Carter, your overreliance on things that are voted on as opposed to concrete accomplishments, and any number of other things I've argued with you about in this thread.
For me, this is a case of a real person being denied his proper respect and due by people who are not operating in an above board manner, something you've rejected out of hand, which is why I absented myself from further discussion a few days ago. We're talking about the same thing but in very different ways and we're so far apart that further discussion is essentially pointless.
I just wanted to call everyone's attention to the All 80's team list, because I thought it was interesting.
<< <i>Honestly, I think Elway got the 1st Team vote because he had recently retired coming off back-to-back Super Bowl wins..After a long storied career, which he had many struggles, lost a couple of Super Bowls, etc. You have to rememebr, its not a computer program that picks these teams or HOFers...Its media guys, who 1st and foremost fall in love with a story before they fall in love with a player.
In their prime, personally, I would take Favre over Elway...And i've got to believe the votes between them had to be close..And in close races, media guys like to go with the feel-good story.
Jason >>
Jason,
I think you're absolutely correct with your reasoning here. Elway's early struggles in the three Super Bowl losses, his terrible relationship with Coach Reeves, then his brilliant career ending back to back SB wins surely moved a lot of writers to go with Elway as the QB of the 1990's.
In my opinion I would take both Favre and Steve Young ahead of Elway for the '90's QB, but what do I know....... .
What I found amazing when looking over some of those All-Pro Decade teams is on the 1990's team, the Packers John Anderson being selected at one of the TOP SIX best LB's for the decade. I'm a Packers fan and I live in Wisconsin, but frankly Anderson was maybe slightly above average at his position and a very steady player, but definately not in the top six. I watched him play 90% of all his pro games too. No hometown bias here. He really doesn't belong on that all-decade team.
Rich
<< <i>
<< <i> I think our only disagreement here is that you believe Monk to be the most overlooked/snubbed candidate ever... >>
No, I believe him to be purposefully blocked by a small cabal of people who are intent on keeping him out, and who have left a clear trail of comments and actions that lend credence to that assertion.
For you, this is an abstract debate over stats which you've pursued in a lot of ways which are seemingly logical, but are, I believe, ultimately of questionable relevance. Like your comparisons of Monk and Irvin, Monk and Carter, your overreliance on things that are voted on as opposed to concrete accomplishments, and any number of other things I've argued with you about in this thread.
For me, this is a case of a real person being denied his proper respect and due by people who are not operating in an above board manner, something you've rejected out of hand, which is why I absented myself from further discussion a few days ago. We're talking about the same thing but in very different ways and we're so far apart that further discussion is essentially pointless.
I just wanted to call everyone's attention to the All 80's team list, because I thought it was interesting. >>
I get your point. Its the same point alot of sportwriters, typically those in Washington, try to perpetuate...I think its hogwash (pun intended..lol...Just because more than a few voters/writers present an opposing position on a players HOF worthiness does not make it a conspiracy...There are MANY people, myself included, who do not think Monk is being purposely railroaded. He simply hasn't gained entrance yet. Alot of great players have waited. As I've said, James Lofton was easily as good if not better than Art Monk ON THE FIELD and he waited 5 years..
I've also touched on concreate "accomplishments"...Which ones have I missed mentioning?
Monk has gotten his fair due, period..He's been a finalist for 7 straight years. To me, that's a very respectable place to be for a borderline HOFer. No one in this debate has proven to me, nor has watching some of Monk's old game footage proven to me that he is somehow a first ballot, should have been in a long time ago guy who has gotten railroaded by a few voters who also don;t think he is/was a slam dunk. Was Lynn Swann railroaded? Was there a conspiracy to keep Stallworth out? What about Roger Wehrli, how come it took 15 shots before he finally got respected. Its in invalid argument, more so than comparing players from the exact same era. When Monk gets in, what will the storyline be? Peter King sways other voters??Dan Snyder pays off the committee?? I mean come on...
Maybe Monk shot JFK and that's why he hasn't gotten in yet...lol
Sorry, but it just kills me everytime I hear people say that Monk is the victim of a sinister plot to keep him out of the HOF...Its ridiculous, the game film says it all. Cris Carter, your next HOF WR!
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Largent was incredible. I had the numbers somewhere on his drops during his career - I will try and find them. >>
Largent was one of the best ever. I think as time has gone on and as pass receiving numbers have increased a lot of his accomplishments have been overlooked. He was great for a solid 11 years or so. Not many players at any postion can actually claim that.
Wasn't Largent drafted by the Cowboys, then later cut in camp only to be picked up by the expansion Seahawks?
Before the 1990's stats explosion, I always thought the best WR's of all-time were:
Hutson
Alworth
Warfield
Largent
and of course Dorne Dibble........ just kidding...lol
<< <i>
<< <i>Largent was incredible. I had the numbers somewhere on his drops during his career - I will try and find them. >>
Largent was one of the best ever. I think as time has gone on and as pass receiving numbers have increased a lot of his accomplishments have been overlooked. He was great for a solid 11 years or so. Not many players at any postion can actually claim that.
Wasn't Largent drafted by the Cowboys, then later cut in camp only to be picked up by the expansion Seahawks?
Before the 1990's stats explosion, I always thought the best WR's of all-time were:
Hutson
Alworth
Warfield
Largent
and of course Dorne Dibble........ just kidding...lol >>
Throw Ray Berry on the list and you have my exact Pre-Rice top 5...I was watching Alworth today, and if I were drafting a team of the all-time greats in their prime....Just a starter at each position...Alworth and Rice are my 2 WR's...I can watch Alworth making those over the shoulder, in stride catches all day long..Especially in those powder blues!!lol
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I've been following this thread daily but haven't posted yet. I've been focused on the HOF RC set for about 2.5 months now and finally broke the top 20 a couple days ago (my wife said that since I met my goal of making the top 20 I should sell off all the cards
Now that Peyton Manning has won the big game where does he rank on the All-Time QB list? IMHO I think he ends his career at a clear #1, although he may not be there yet.
Mike.
dave
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
dave
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
Like many others I passed on cards over the past 3 years telling myself they were too expensive to only wish now that I could buy them at 3+ times the price...
<< <i>Hi,
I've been following this thread daily but haven't posted yet. I've been focused on the HOF RC set for about 2.5 months now and finally broke the top 20 a couple days ago (my wife said that since I met my goal of making the top 20 I should sell off all the cards
Now that Peyton Manning has won the big game where does he rank on the All-Time QB list? IMHO I think he ends his career at a clear #1, although he may not be there yet.
Mike. >>
No problem Mike...As I'm sure you've noticed by now, the HOF football guys kinda operate like a small town..Everybody knows everybody and most of us are always willing to help out a good neighbor. The neighborhood is only as good as the people who reside there, right...lol
Glad to have you aboard...And even though we are all in competition for the same cards, 99% of the time its all in good fun. If I know a card is for sale that I don't need and that someone else is looking for, I'd much rather one of us on the HOF set have it rather than a non-HOF collector..
As far as the QBs go, I've been watching a bunch of my old stuff this week as I mentioned previously, so my mind is fresh on all 5 of these guys...So here's my current top 5 QBs:
1- Johnny Unitas...Could do it all, and did it all..You just have to watch him play...
2- Joe Montana...More clutch-time plays than anyone else I can remember
3- Otto Graham...10 straight championship games is crazy...A great passer before the days of great passers
4- Dan Marino...His release and accuracy are still amazing to watch..Too bad he never won the big game
5- Peyton Manning..If he retired today, he's already 5th...The guy is sick, easily the best of the decade IMO. I know Tom Brady is Montana Jr. as being a clutch guy, but Manning makes some throws I dont remember seeing anyone ever make before..His story is still unwritten, and when it's all said and done, he very well could be #1 on my list...But, will be a long road to climb each of the 4 guys ahead of him..He's getting REAL close to Marino in my book, but Marino just did it so well for so long, with so many different supporting casts...I want to see Manning without Harrison...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
<< <i>whats interesting is that Marino and Favre have put up huge numbers with no HOF help >>
If Sterling Sharpe made the HOF one day, I wouldn't be at all upset. He was well on his way to a ticket to Canton when he got hurt, and the precedent was already set with Gale Sayers' induction. I'm not saying Sharpe was on Sayers' level, but I don't think he was far off either. I mean 3 straight 100 catch season??? Nice.