NFL Future HOF Rookies- Senior Set Additions

JasP24

Alright guys, I've had this on the backburner for awhile, and I think now is the right time for our annual Senior set additions/subtractions. I assume that January/February is probably going to be the month we request new MODERN add/subtracts every year following the season. Makes sense to get the Senior set knocked out first, since we will not have any new information to add to what we already know of the Senior candidates this year. We already have the finalists, and we won't know next years semifinalists until next July/August.

Anyway, here is a list of players that have been a Senior SEMI-finalist in the past 5 years:

John Hadl- 2 times (2006, 2008)
Dick Lebeau- 2 times (2004, 2006)

All the rest only once:
John Brodie- 2008
Marshall Goldberg-2008
Emmitt Thomas-2008
Al Wistert-2008
Pete Retzlaff-2006
Ed Sprinkle- 2006
Dick Anderson-2004

Of course Goldberg and Thomas were chosen as the final 2 this year.

I would like to put all of these guys to a vote here and anyone getting a majority YES I will request to be added to the set. If anyone has a "write in" candidate, post here as well for voting. I will keep a running tally of the votes.

Lastly, if there is anyone currently on the set you do not think belongs, please post that nomination here. Same as above. If we get a majority that wants a player removed, I will submit the request for that also. Of course, the final decision will be decided by the poll PSA will send out to the actual registered collectors of the set. I prefer getting initial feedback here as we can usually determine how the vote is going to go based on our collective football knowledge.

I'll get the voting started.......

YES to adding................
John Hadl-1
Dick Lebeau-1
Emmitt Thomas-1
Marshall Goldberg-1

NO to the rest......

I also do not feel anyone already on the set deserves to be removed, so no nominations from me.

We'll run this for about a week and go from there.

Jason

shagrotn77

I am actually going to cast a vote for no one. There's a couple reasons. The first is that the senior selections are always such a crapshoot, that really we have no idea who they're going to pick. I would vote for Thomas and Goldberg, but they probably wouldn't be added to the Senior set until it's time to add one or both of them to the HOF rookies set. And, more importantly, if one or both of Thomas and Goldberg fail to get elected to the HOF next year, I doubt they'll ever get another chance. It's now or never for both of them. There's just too many more deserving players lined up behind them.

JasP24

<< <i>I am actually going to cast a vote for no one. There's a couple reasons. The first is that the senior selections are always such a crapshoot, that really we have no idea who they're going to pick. I would vote for Thomas and Goldberg, but they probably wouldn't be added to the Senior set until it's time to add one or both of them to the HOF rookies set. And, more importantly, if one or both of Thomas and Goldberg fail to get elected to the HOF next year, I doubt they'll ever get another chance. It's now or never for both of them. There's just too many more deserving players lined up behind them. >>



I agree it's a crapshoot, but having the Senior Registry set, I would like to see it as close to reality as possible. The final and semifinal lists tell us who the senior committee voters are valuing. The only reason Goldberg and Thomas were chosen is because of the 5 guys they sent to Canton this year to pick them. 4 of the 5 were the same group that selected Benny Freidman and Fritz Pollard a few years ago. Call them the 70 and over club and their goal each time it is their turn in Canton to put in the oldest possible players.

Good points on Goldberg and Thomas, although if I made the request next week, they would be added in early to mid-Jan. If elected to the HOF in Feb, I am assuming based on my conversation with Cosetta that if the players are listed on the Modern or Senior future HOF sets, they will be immediately switched over from these sets to the HOF RC set. No hassle, no poll, no waiting since we will have already taken care of it when having them added to the future HOF sets.

My only other issue would be should Bob Hayes be removed as he was recently a Senior candidate who was not elected? Trying to figure out some sort of consistency with our selections.

Jason

gregm13

My vote is:

Hadl - very underrated. He was one of the top AFL QBs and also had several decent years in the NFL
LeBeau - great DB - I believe he is 4th or 5th all time in interceptions (much more deserving than Thomas). Not to mention the work he has done w/ Pitt's defense in recent years (another great signer through the mail)
Wistert (great guy - I've corresponded with him a couple of times). He was a hell of a tackle on a team that won at least 2 world championships (I'm sure Jason will correct me)
Anderson (I'm partial to anyone who wore aqua and orange)

Regards,

Greg M.

JasP24

Al Wistert- Played RT and LG from 1943-1951 for the Eagles. This we pre-Pro Bowl, but he was selected as a 1st Team AP All-Pro 4 times, won 2 Championships as Greg pointed out and lost in another Championship game. Blocked for Steve Ven Buren who retired the All-Time leading rusher.

When I heard who the 5 senior guys were, I knew they were going to take at least one golden oldie. I posted as much on the HOF RC thread as well..I honestly thought it would be Wistert. Unfortunately, the 70 and over group probably won;t be back in Canton to select for at least 4-5 years and I'm not sure any of the other senior committee members are as high on Wistert. He would seem to be the top player remaining from the 40's era.

Jason

FavreFan1971

Emmitt Thomas does not deserve to be in the HOF. I am totally floored that he was a finalist.

Here are my yes votes

John Hadl-
Dick Lebeau
John Brodie-
Marshall Goldberg

JasP24

<< <i>Emmitt Thomas does not deserve to be in the HOF. I am totally floored that he was a finalist.

>>



I agree..And I feel the same about Marshall Goldberg..Sorry, but I just don;t see anything with either of them that screams HOFer. I hope neither gets the votes as it will be a vote of confidence for the Seniors who are TRULY deserving who again got overlooked. I voted to add them because it just seems strange to me that we have a future HOF set that doesn't contain the 2 guys who are finalists this year.

Jason

Davalillo

Hadl-no
LeBeau-no
Brodie-yes
Goldberg-no
Thomas-no
Wistert-no
Retzlaff-no
Sprinkle-no
Anderson-no

MAD

Lebeau - Yes

JasP24

JasP24

One we forgot...
Drew Pearson--WR

This was his last year as a modern, next year he becomes a senior candidate.

I don;t know why he isn't in already, but I've got to think he will be a strong Senior candidate. One vote from me.

Jason

shagrotn77

If we're going to put Pearson if, then I would suggest we also include this 'mystery' receiver from the same era

Pearson (1973-1983)
156 Games 489 Receptions 7,822 Yards 48 TDs 3 Pro Bowls

Mystery Man (1968-1983)
208 Games 579 Receptions 10,372 Yards 76 TDs 5 Pro Bowls

Another suggestion is to boot Swann out of the HOF and put Pearson in instead

gregm13

<< <i>If we're going to put Pearson if, then I would suggest we also include this 'mystery' receiver from the same era

Pearson (1973-1983)
156 Games 489 Receptions 7,822 Yards 48 TDs 3 Pro Bowls

Mystery Man (1968-1983)
208 Games 579 Receptions 10,372 Yards 76 TDs 5 Pro Bowls

Another suggestion is to boot Swann out of the HOF and put Pearson in instead >>



Carmichael?

Greg M.

JasP24

Please no...not Harold Jackson again...lol

Thats like saying Irving Fryar should be a HOFer since Michael Irvin is...

Jason

SooperDave

My vote is:
Hadl-Yes
Lebeau-Yes
Pearson-Yes

jay0791

andy has a good point...agree with that

lebeau-yes
hadl-yes
anderson-yes

all others no

vjsteele4

my votes are for the following:
Lebeau---yes
Hadl-------yes
Anderson-yes

BillsGridironGreats

I'd add:

Wisert
Hadl
Lebeau
Anderson

JasP24

Running tally.....TOTAL Voters thru Dec 6, 11:20 AM : 10

Dick Lebeau-8
John Hadl-7
Dick Anderson-4
John Brodie-2
Marshall Goldberg-2
Drew Pearson-2
Al Wistert-2
Emmitt Thomas-1

JasP24

I wanted to comment on Dick Anderson....

I think what happens this year with Emmitt Thomas will be very telling for Anderson's future HOF prospects. Honestly, I would have preferred to see Anderson as the Senior selection rather than Thomas as I think he is more deserving..BUT, if Thomas gets in do you think the Senior committee is going to go with another 70's era DB again anytime soon? On the positive side, voters could compare Anderson to Thomas and say well if Thomas is in, Anderson is deserving. This also applies to Cliff Harris, another Senior 70's era DB and most deserving of the 3 IMO...

Tough call...He's borderline, and he played a position that for whatever reason doesn't get much respect from the voters..Ask Cliff Harris, Johnny Robinson, Steve At-Water, LeRoy Butler, Kenny Easley and Donnie Shell...Personally, I would want to see him make the Senior Semi-Finals again before giving him my vote for the set.

Jason

gregm13

<< <i>I wanted to comment on Dick Anderson....

I think what happens this year with Emmitt Thomas will be very telling for Anderson's future HOF prospects. Honestly, I would have preferred to see Anderson as the Senior selection rather than Thomas as I think he is more deserving..BUT, if Thomas gets in do you think the Senior committee is going to go with another 70's era DB again anytime soon? On the positive side, voters could compare Anderson to Thomas and say well if Thomas is in, Anderson is deserving. This also applies to Cliff Harris, another Senior 70's era DB and most deserving of the 3 IMO...

Tough call...He's borderline, and he played a position that for whatever reason doesn't get much respect from the voters..Ask Cliff Harris, Johnny Robinson, Steve At-Water, LeRoy Butler, Kenny Easley and Donnie Shell...Personally, I would want to see him make the Senior Semi-Finals again before giving him my vote for the set.

Jason >>



Jason,

You have a good point that you would like to see Dick Anderson make the senior finalist list before being included in the senior HOF list. On the flip side, it seems that many of the senior nominees over the past 5 or 6 years were of first time nominees. Therefore, just because a player hasn't made the Seniors semi-finals list doesn't mean that he won't be elected.

Regards,

Greg M.

JasP24

Greg, not sure who you are speaking of...

2007..Hickerson and Sanders were the finalists...Hickerson and Sanders were semifinalists in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007.

2006..Madden and Rayfield Wright were the finalists...Madden was a semifinalist in 2004, 2005, 2006. Wright was a senior semifinalist is 2005 and 2006, and was a modern finalist in 2004.

2005..Friedman and Fritz Pollard were the finalists...Both were semifinalists in 2004...

2004 was the first year the Senior committee started using a semifinal process.

This year, with Thomas and Goldberg were the exception rather than the rule. It was the first time a Senior candidate had been chosen as a finalist essentially out of the blue..And it wasn't one guy, it was both guys...Which tells me it's more of an issue with the 5 Senior selectors who met in Canton this year than anything else. Honestly, i would be shocked to ever see another year like this one, with TWO guys semingly selected out of the blue.

With the Registry Senior set, there is a fine line between being inclusive and exclusive. That set could easily get out of control and be 100+ players long...While we aren't HOF voters here, we can at least put our collective common sense to work and add/subtract guys who should/shouldnt be there. If Anderson gets the votes here, as with anyone else I will most definitely request the add to PSA. If they pass the PSA poll, I'm all for adding. But I hope we keep it exclusive rather than including every guy with a 1% chance..

Jason

shagrotn77

<< <i>Please no...not Harold Jackson again...lol >>



You got it. The man. The myth. The legend. Harold "Action" Jackson. I should start a fan club or something.

gregm13

<< <i>

<< <i>Please no...not Harold Jackson again...lol >>



You got it. The man. The myth. The legend. Harold "Action" Jackson. I should start a fan club or something. >>



Harold Jackson's numbers were impressive. 5x pro bowl, over 17 yards per catch and over 10k yards. Not too shabby.

Greg M.

gregm13

<< <i>Greg, not sure who you are speaking of...

2007..Hickerson and Sanders were the finalists...Hickerson and Sanders were semifinalists in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007.

2006..Madden and Rayfield Wright were the finalists...Madden was a semifinalist in 2004, 2005, 2006. Wright was a senior semifinalist is 2005 and 2006, and was a modern finalist in 2004.

2005..Friedman and Fritz Pollard were the finalists...Both were semifinalists in 2004...

2004 was the first year the Senior committee started using a semifinal process.

This year, with Thomas and Goldberg were the exception rather than the rule. It was the first time a Senior candidate had been chosen as a finalist essentially out of the blue..And it wasn't one guy, it was both guys...Which tells me it's more of an issue with the 5 Senior selectors who met in Canton this year than anything else. Honestly, i would be shocked to ever see another year like this one, with TWO guys semingly selected out of the blue.

With the Registry Senior set, there is a fine line between being inclusive and exclusive. That set could easily get out of control and be 100+ players long...While we aren't HOF voters here, we can at least put our collective common sense to work and add/subtract guys who should/shouldnt be there. If Anderson gets the votes here, as with anyone else I will most definitely request the add to PSA. If they pass the PSA poll, I'm all for adding. But I hope we keep it exclusive rather than including every guy with a 1% chance..

Jason >>



I thought that Friedman and Pollard were 1st time nominees. I was also under the impression that a few of the senior candiates were never finalists during their playing years (Galimore and Stanfel come to mind, but I'd have to research before making a definative statement).

Regards,

Greg M.

gregm13

Jason,

I was probably over exaggerating the point, but still feel that just because a player hasn't been nominated before doesn't mean that he won't be a finalist.

Regards,

Greg M.

JasP24

<< <i>Jason,

I was probably over exaggerating the point, but still feel that just because a player hasn't been nominated before doesn't mean that he won't be a finalist.

Regards,

Greg M. >>



Absoultely. As shown this year ANYTHING is possible. But the question is, how does that translate to the PSA Registry Senior HOF set? I want guys we think have the best chance. I base much of my decisions on how the actual HOF voters are voting rather than my personal choices. Kinda 75-25 on that. To each his own, as long as we don't let the set get out of control. Dick Anderson really isn't a good example to use, because many of us (myself included) would rank him fairly high on a list of all the senior possibles. He would have been higher than Goldberg AND Thomas on my list. Question is, where is the cut off? Where do we add or not add a guy to the Senior HOF set?

I don't have that answer, was just giving my point of view that I would like to see at least 2 semi-final appearances from the Senior committee before annointing someone who wouldn't be in my top 20-25 senior candidates.

Jason

gregm13

Jason,

Maybe the criteria for automatic inclusion is to be a 2x (or even 3x) modern (before moving to the senior list) or senior nominee. Such a criteria takes much of the subjectivity out of the process.

Regards,

Greg M.

gregm13

Jason,

What do you think about the modern HOF set? I was thinking that we should add:

Grimm (3 time finalist, semi-finalist this year)
Gradishar (1 time finalist, semi-finalist this year)
Dean (1 time finalist, semi-finalist this year)
Tippett (1 time finalist, semi-finalist this year)
Haley??? (probably too early for him)

Your thoughts?

Greg M.

gregm13

Has anyone else noticed that Gradishar looks bug eyed in his picture on the NFL HOF website...couldn't they have found a better picture??

Greg M.

JasP24

<< <i>Jason,

Maybe the criteria for automatic inclusion is to be a 2x (or even 3x) modern (before moving to the senior list) or senior nominee. Such a criteria takes much of the subjectivity out of the process.

Regards,

Greg M. >>



Agreed, that's somewhat what I am looking for. The problem is, the HOF committee just started the semi-final process in 2004, and they didn't start the 15 finalists until 1970 so it's hard to judge some of the older players who maybe came before that. Based on past Senior electees, its also safe to say that percentage wise, being a modern finalist is not a good indicator that they will be a senior electee.

41 Senior Finalists since 1972 when they started it..18 were previous finalist, and 23 were never a previous finalist. Even fewer were 2 or 3 time finalists as a modern guy.

The Senior committee's whole purpose is to find guys who have slipped through the cracks or have been overlooked. I do not think they factor anything that happened with the candidate in the modern vote into the equation. At least nothing I have seen tells us that.

But being a SENIOR Semi-finalist (which is a small sample since it only started in 2004) the odds are much better...6 of 8 Senior selections since then were on previous Senior semi-final lists...To me, that's a better indicator...The HOF voters are 40+ in number, the senior committe has 9 voters that select the group of semi-finalists, and then 5 of those are chosen to go to Canton and pick the final 2 from that list.

Jason

JasP24

<< <i>Jason,

What do you think about the modern HOF set? I was thinking that we should add:

Grimm (3 time finalist, semi-finalist this year)
Gradishar (1 time finalist, semi-finalist this year)
Dean (1 time finalist, semi-finalist this year)
Tippett (1 time finalist, semi-finalist this year)
Haley??? (probably too early for him)

Your thoughts?

Greg M. >>



Modern set is slightly different, as we are looking for near definites..We discussed this over on the other HOF RC thread and that was my thinking there as well...If a guy is a MODERN finalist 2-3 times I think we should strongly consider adding him. One time finalist? Not so much..But multiple times? They should be considered. Of the guys above:

Grimm---He's already on the set....
Gradishar--Only issue is that this is his last year as a modern candidate, next year he moves to the Senior side. I think he's an easy addition as a senior candidate..He would get my vote...
Dean and Tippett--One time as a finalist doesn't really say much to me...Both got close last year, and if either were to become a finalist again this year, I would vote to add.
Haley--He hasn't been a finalist yet...

A couple of others:

Ken Stabler- 3 time finalist (last in 2003)
Ken Anderson- 2 time finalist (last in 1998)

Jason

gregm13

I was thinking of Jacoby - not Grimm (I had a 1983 rookie pictured in my head, knowing that Gary Anderson has the only 1983 rookie in the modern set).

Greg M.

JasP24

<< <i>I was thinking of Jacoby - not Grimm (I had a 1983 rookie pictured in my head, knowing that Gary Anderson has the only 1983 rookie in the modern set).

Greg M. >>



Jacoby has never been a finalist either...There are literally hundreds of ''long shot'' type guys out there, if we starting adding them all that set would get out of control too.

On the other side of the fence, subtracting guys...When we put the set together, it was meant to be fluid, and evolving. At what point do guys become candidates for removal? How many years of not even making the semi-finals should we wait before putting a guy in that "long shot" category and removing him from the set? IMO, not removing guys who aren't even getting close year after year, is just as bad as adding every Tom, Dick and Harry who has any chance at all at making the HOF.

I'm trying to come up with a formula that would score players, or at least put them in tiers based on where they fall in the HOF voting totem pole, and maybe that will help with voting on and off...I've run a few equations, but so far nothing that makes good sense.

Jason

shagrotn77

What's the last year of modern candidate eligibility for Stabler and K. Anderson?

JasP24

Stabler's last chance as a modern candidate is 2009. Anderson 2011.

Jason

gregm13

<< <i>Stabler's last chance as a modern candidate is 2009. Anderson 2011.

Jason >>



Jason,

How about a formula that takes into account # of pro bowls, # of 1st team AP selections, # of times on a Super Bowl team, # of times as a semi-finalist, and # of times as a finalist. You can assign a different weight to each category.

Regards,

Greg M.

JasP24

<< <i>

<< <i>Stabler's last chance as a modern candidate is 2009. Anderson 2011.

Jason >>



Jason,

How about a formula that takes into account # of pro bowls, # of 1st team AP selections, # of times on a Super Bowl team, # of times as a semi-finalist, and # of times as a finalist. You can assign a different weight to each category.

Regards,

Greg M. >>



Greg, that's almost exactly what I already have!!! Great minds think alike I guess...

Here the variable I'm having issues with...How do you account for the difference in score for say someone like Bob Kuechenberg, who's been eligible for 20 years, a finalist 6 times vs. say Darrell Green who is in his first year? Obviously Kuech comes out with a much higher score, but to me that doesn;t make him a better or stronger candidate. I tried dividing the scores by number of years eligible, etc, but when you do that, it really drops those long time guys like Guy and Kuech to the same score level of someone I would consider not yet deserving...

Still working on it...lol

Jason

gregm13

Jason,

What you can do is assign a weighting based upon the year of eligility in which the player is eligible. For instance, a player who is a finalist in the first year of elibility is awarded 5 pts, year 2 to 6 4pts, 7 to 12 years 3 pts, 13 to 20 pts 2 pts, 21 to 25 years, 1 pt. Therefore, if a player is a finalist 3 times, in his 1st, 3rd and 4th year of eligibility, then he will be awarded:

Year 1 - 5 pts
Year 3 - 4 pts
Year 4 - 4 pts

This way, someone who is a finalist after let's say 20 years will only count for 1 point where being a finalist after your 2nd year will count for 4 pts.

Make sense?

Greg M.

JasP24

Greg, that's pretty close to what i was trying to run. Everyone is coming out really close in score except for the newer guys. I've restarted adjusting the stats higher (using 20's and 10's rather than 2's and 1's) to try and spread it out somehow, but to me the list I come up with looks invalid.

I've broken them down into tier's instead, as it look a little more realistic to me than trying to rate then 1,2,3,etc...Here's what I got from the modern candidates who are already on the Future-Modern Set:

Tier 1:
Cris Carter
Darrell Green (assuming they will both be finalists this year)

Tier 2:
Art Monk
Derrick Thomas
Gary Zimmerman

Tier 3:
Richard Dent
Russ Grimm
Ray Guy
Bob Kuechenberg

Tier 4:
Terrell Davis
Dermontti Dawson
Lester Hayes
Randall McDaniel
Andre Reed

Tier 5:
Steve At-Water
Leroy Butler

Does that look realistic? Tell me what you think...

Jason

gregm13

Jason,

I don't think that it looks unrealistic. I'd probably move Kuech and Davis up a notch, but overall fairly accurate.

Greg M.

JasP24

Kuech is hurt my having 20 years of eligibility and Terrell Davis because he hasn't been a finalist yet. If he were to make the final 15 this year, he would probably move to Tier 2...I listed them alphabetical in the tiers, not by score/rank...

Jason

FavreFan1971

>>



Tier 5:
Steve At-Water
Leroy Butler

Does that look realistic? Tell me what you think...

Jason >>



Come on, Butler has got to be higher. Yes I am bias.

JasP24

<< <i> >>



Tier 5:
Steve At-Water
Leroy Butler

Does that look realistic? Tell me what you think...

Jason >>



Come on, Butler has got to be higher. Yes I am bias. >>



All in the numbers...lol...He's never even been a semifinalist so obviously that hurts his score. I don't know why Safety's get so little respect..

There are 8 safeties in the HOF.

Ronnie Lott, Larry Wilson, Ken Houston and Emlen Tunnell went in on their first try.

Jack Christiensen took 7 years...Yale Lary 10 years..Willie Wood 13 years...Paul Krause 14 years...

I guess your either a 1st ballot lock or a longshot..Too bad for Butler and At-Water who can't even make the top 25...

Jason

mikescardcloset

Hi,

I'll actually vote for all of these guys

Dick Lebeau
John Hadl
Dick Anderson
John Brodie-
Marshall Goldberg (because he is a finalist this year)
Drew Pearson
Al Wistert-
Emmitt Thomas- (because he is a finalist this year)

as well as

Jake Scott

JasP24

BillsGridironGreats

Everyone see what the 1948 Leaf Conerly PSA 6 went for....

$2000!!

That was twice what the Nomenelli PSA 6 went for.

JasP24

POP report probably had alot to do with that...

Nomellini 6- Pop 12, 6 higher
Conerly 6- Pop 9, 1 higher

If wasn't even a HOF RC collector that won the Conerly...48 Leaf guy..

Jason

bcd33

I vote yes to Pearson and Anderson.

JasP24

Voting is now complete.........TOTAL Voters: 12

Dick Lebeau-9
John Hadl-8
Dick Anderson-6
Drew Pearson-4
John Brodie-3
Marshall Goldberg-3
Al Wistert-3
Emmitt Thomas-2
Jake Scott-1

The requests to add to the Senior Future HOF Football
set for 2008 are:

1964 Topps #159 John Hadl----------------- Grade Weight 2.0
1965 Philadelphia #64 Dick Lebeau---------Grade Weight 1.0
1969 Topps #59 Dick Anderson--------------Grade Weight 1.0

Anderson got 50% so I went ahead and requested it to PSA. A reminder...PSA will be sending out a poll to all of the actual set participants (there are a total of 22 of us) so please be sure to cast your vote YES or NO for each of these additions. PSA will add the cards in which the majority of collectors "officially" vote YES for.

I will kick off another poll for the modern set additions some time in early Feb. after the NFL season is over and we have new concreat information to base our voting on.

Thanks to all who participated,
Jason

Davemri

I didn't vote because I don't feel knowledgeable enough about these guys. I will vote yes for the additions to help you all out...

Dave