Who would you take out of the Hall of Fame?

[Man_Of_Steel]

Gayle Sayers

I know this may be a questionable pick. I have my reasons though. Sayers was unquestionably a great player, but there have been many great players (particularly RB's) that have not been admitted into The Hall for various reasons. The reason Sayers should not be in The Hall is because he simply did not have a long enough career and was injured far too often. Explain to me why Sayers is in The Hall while Terrell Davis is not. Roll the stats please.

Sayers............................... Rushing .............................Receiving
Year Team ....Games ..No..... Yds.... Avg.... TD .....No.... Yds.... Avg... TD
1965 Chicago ...14 ....166 .....867 ....5.2 ....14 ...... 29 ....507 ....17.5 ...6
1966 Chicago ...14 ....229 ....1231 ...5.4 .....8 ........34 ....447 ....13.1 ...2
1967 Chicago ...13 ....186 .....880 ....4.7 .....7........ 16 ....126 ....7.9 ....1
1968 Chicago ....9 ....138 .....856 .....6.2 .....2 ...... 15 ....117 .....7.8 ....0
1969 Chicago ...14 ....236 ....1032 ....4.4 ....8 ........17 ....116 .....6.8 ...0
1970 Chicago ....2 .....23 .......52 .....2.3 .....0 ........1 .....-6 ......-6 .....0
1971 Chicago ....2 .....13 .......38 .....2.9 .....0 ....... 0 ......0 ......-- ......0
Career ..........68 .....991 ...4956 ....5 .......39 .....112 ...1307 ....11.7... 9

Davis............................... Rushing .............................Receiving
1995 Denver ....14 ....237 ....1,117 ...4.7..... 7 .......49 ....367..... 7.5..... 1
1996 Denver ....16.... 345 ....1,538 ...4.5.... 13....... 36... 310 .....8.6 .....2
1997 Denver ....15 ....369 ....1,750... 4.7 ....15 ......42 ....287..... 6.8 .....0
1998 Denver ....16.... 392.... 2,008 ...5.1 ....21 ......25.... 217 .....8.7 .....2
1999 Denver .....4...... 67 .....211 .....3.1.... 2 .........3 .....26 ......8.7.... 0
2000 Denver .....5 ......78 .....282..... 3.6 ....2 ........2 ......4 ........2.0.... 0
2001 Denver ....11 ....167 .....701 .....4.2 ....0 .......12 .....69 ......5.8 .....0
Career ............81 ...1655.... 7607.... 4.6 ...60 ......169....1280.... 7.6 ....5

Davis- 7607 career rushing yards, 8887 total yards
Sayers- 4956 career rushing yards, 6263 total yards

Davis has played in more career games, Davis played in 72.3% of his teams games compared to Gayers playing in 69.4% of his teams games, 21 more rushing TDs, as well as more receptions.

I would have no problem with Sayers being in The Hall if Davis were in as well, but Sayers being in and Davis not being in shows an astonishing lack of consistency in the requirements to be in The Hall. The main problem is that sports writers are the only people who vote on it, Hello large media market biases. Besides that though, it needs to be determined whether The Hall requires being very good over a long period of time, amazing over a short period, or both, because having a little bit of each leaves many players being left out who have the same, if not better stats than others that are in.

Gale Sayers was one of the best talents the league had seen, Mario Lemieux the greatest hockey player of all time faced many injuries, that dosent take away from what he did on the ice just as you cant take away what Sayers did.

[Mr. Stiller]

I have a real problem with the duo of Stallworth/Swann being in the Hall.

They were both drafted in 74 and operated as a duo for 9 seasons on the greatest Championship side in the 70's.

As a duo they had a combined for 635 catches for 10766 yards and 95 TD's from 1974 - 1982 in 224 games.

Monk/Clark in comparison over 8 seasons had 1090 catches 16114 yards and 99 TD's from 1985-1992 in 243 games.

If Monk/Clark were in I would have no problem with the Steeler duo being in simply because of their Superbowl exploits which is effectively the case.

BTW Michael Irvin thoroughly deserves too be in the Hall, he was amazing. I hate him but he deserved too get in. Not ahead of Monk but definately in.

Interesting stat lines

Clark 167 games 699 Receptions 10856 yards 65TD's 2 Rings
Irvin 159 games 750 Receptions 11904 yards 65TD's 3 Rings

If Gary Clark does not play in the USFL in 1984 he would be right up there with Michael Irvin

The NFL wasn't primarily a passing game, or didn't use it near as much until halfway through Stallworth/Swann's career. They put those #'s up Pre-pass happy NFL.

[Man_Of_Steel]

Ok I have to ask this question. If Terrell Owens wins 1-2 superbowls before he retires does he make the Hall of Fame? He brought teams like the 49ers and Eagles to the superbowl and playoffs also put up extreme numbers. I'm asking this because of Michael Irvin making it into the Hall of Fame.

TO winning a Superbowl would make him a lock however I dont think he needs to, hes been on an elite level for so long.

[BigDawg819]

Gayle Sayers

I know this may be a questionable pick. I have my reasons though. Sayers was unquestionably a great player, but there have been many great players (particularly RB's) that have not been admitted into The Hall for various reasons. The reason Sayers should not be in The Hall is because he simply did not have a long enough career and was injured far too often. Explain to me why Sayers is in The Hall while Terrell Davis is not. Roll the stats please.

Sayers............................... Rushing .............................Receiving
Year Team ....Games ..No..... Yds.... Avg.... TD .....No.... Yds.... Avg... TD
1965 Chicago ...14 ....166 .....867 ....5.2 ....14 ...... 29 ....507 ....17.5 ...6
1966 Chicago ...14 ....229 ....1231 ...5.4 .....8 ........34 ....447 ....13.1 ...2
1967 Chicago ...13 ....186 .....880 ....4.7 .....7........ 16 ....126 ....7.9 ....1
1968 Chicago ....9 ....138 .....856 .....6.2 .....2 ...... 15 ....117 .....7.8 ....0
1969 Chicago ...14 ....236 ....1032 ....4.4 ....8 ........17 ....116 .....6.8 ...0
1970 Chicago ....2 .....23 .......52 .....2.3 .....0 ........1 .....-6 ......-6 .....0
1971 Chicago ....2 .....13 .......38 .....2.9 .....0 ....... 0 ......0 ......-- ......0
Career ..........68 .....991 ...4956 ....5 .......39 .....112 ...1307 ....11.7... 9

Davis............................... Rushing .............................Receiving
1995 Denver ....14 ....237 ....1,117 ...4.7..... 7 .......49 ....367..... 7.5..... 1
1996 Denver ....16.... 345 ....1,538 ...4.5.... 13....... 36... 310 .....8.6 .....2
1997 Denver ....15 ....369 ....1,750... 4.7 ....15 ......42 ....287..... 6.8 .....0
1998 Denver ....16.... 392.... 2,008 ...5.1 ....21 ......25.... 217 .....8.7 .....2
1999 Denver .....4...... 67 .....211 .....3.1.... 2 .........3 .....26 ......8.7.... 0
2000 Denver .....5 ......78 .....282..... 3.6 ....2 ........2 ......4 ........2.0.... 0
2001 Denver ....11 ....167 .....701 .....4.2 ....0 .......12 .....69 ......5.8 .....0
Career ............81 ...1655.... 7607.... 4.6 ...60 ......169....1280.... 7.6 ....5

Davis- 7607 career rushing yards, 8887 total yards
Sayers- 4956 career rushing yards, 6263 total yards

Davis has played in more career games, Davis played in 72.3% of his teams games compared to Gayers playing in 69.4% of his teams games, 21 more rushing TDs, as well as more receptions.

I would have no problem with Sayers being in The Hall if Davis were in as well, but Sayers being in and Davis not being in shows an astonishing lack of consistency in the requirements to be in The Hall. The main problem is that sports writers are the only people who vote on it, Hello large media market biases. Besides that though, it needs to be determined whether The Hall requires being very good over a long period of time, amazing over a short period, or both, because having a little bit of each leaves many players being left out who have the same, if not better stats than others that are in.

Obviously you are not a student of the game. Gale Sayers may not have had a long career, but for what he did in his brief career was nothing short of outstanding. In his day he was the Barry Sanders or Reggie Bush of his time and at those times his exploits were unheard of my any man regardless of color. His impact on the game was astronomical and his numbers got him in and rightfully so.

[flave1969]

The NFL wasn't primarily a passing game, or didn't use it near as much until halfway through Stallworth/Swann's career. They put those #'s up Pre-pass happy NFL.

So did Charlie Joiner, Charley Taylor, Fred Biletnikoff and a whole host of others that put real perspective on where these guys belong.

[nfrillman]

Obviously you are not a student of the game. Gale Sayers may not have had a long career, but for what he did in his brief career was nothing short of outstanding. In his day he was the Barry Sanders or Reggie Bush of his time and at those times his exploits were unheard of my any man regardless of color. His impact on the game was astronomical and his numbers got him in and rightfully so.

I know his exploits were amazing, but you cannot tell me that Terrell Davis' short career was nothing short of outstanding. I am basing this mostly on the fact I want a level of consistency in the rulings of The Hall. One player that dominated over a short stretch should not be allowed in if another player who also dominated over a short stretch is left out. If we are going to start talking about their impact on the game then I can see the argument, but from a statistical standpoint, he should not be in if Davis is not in.

As for the previous mention of Mario Lemiuex, that is a pretty weak comparison. Sure he had injury issues and obviously the Hodjkins thing, but he is still widely considered as one of the top 5 players of all time, top 10 in goals, top 10 in assists, top 10 in points, 2nd all time in points per game, and 2nd all time in goals per game. Those are statistical achievements that Sayers cannot come close to comparing to.

[Paul]

How do these Hall of Fame Threads alway end up with Skins fans complaining about the Monk vs. Irvin thing? Yes I agree Monk deserves to be in the HOF, but to use that to invalidate Irvin's induction is unfair. What does it have to do with anything? Two different careers and two different decades. And I don't feel the need to validate Irvin's place in the HOF, as I see it as pointless. But I will say if Irvin wasn't with us, I doubt the Boy's would have been as successful as they were in that dynasty era. He had the stats and TD's, but most importantly he had the voice. He was the leader and heart. Not Jimmy, Emmitt or Troy, It was Michael.

[flave1969]

How do these Hall of Fame Threads alway end up with Skins fans complaining about the Monk vs. Irvin thing? Yes I agree Monk deserves to be in the HOF, but to use that to invalidate Irvin's induction is unfair. What does it have to do with anything? Two different careers and two different decades. And I don't feel the need to validate Irvin's place in the HOF, as I see it as pointless. But I will say if Irvin wasn't with us, I doubt the Boy's would have been as successful as they were in that dynasty era. He had the stats and TD's, but most importantly he had the voice. He was the leader and heart. Not Jimmy, Emmitt or Troy, It was Michael.

I am a Redskins fan and agree that Irvin deserves too be in and this should not degenerate into the argument it always does.

I think it grates us because there is supposed too be a natural order of things in the process.

Every single receiver who broke the career record went into the Hall without fail. Others who were great in one aspect have gone in (Lofton for instance).
Stallworth/Swann are another example in basically for what they did in the Bowls, you cannot tell me their impact on the game was greater than that of Bob Hayes. Or that they were better than Harold Carmichael and Stanley Morgan as receivers.

You know in 1992 when Monk broke the record he was one of only 2 players in the whole history of the NFL with 800 plus catches. Now there are 17 (14 of whom played the entire 90's or beyond.

There were just 8 players with 10000 plus receiving yards, now it stands at 27 players.

Monk was faster to 500, 600, 700 and 800 receptions than every player in the Hall of Fame.

The danger is that he will be forgotten. It is now 11 years since he retired and the passing game of the 90's and 00's dilutes what the players of the 80's did.

[neko4]

Fritz Pollard says hi to Art

[bearsfan_51]

I don't think Monk or Irvin deserve to be in.

But I digress....honestly I would take out a lot of players, but I'm more stringent than most. Of the 5 inductees, the only one I agree with is Thurman Thomas. This is one of the weakest classes I would ever see.

As for the Gayle Sayers argument, as a Bears fan, I don't totally disagree with you. I think he gets in based on overwhelming ability as opposed to career stats, but I understand what you're saying.

[flave1969]

I don't think Monk or Irvin deserve to be in.

.

So was Largent the last deserving receiver to go in and who should be the next one?

[yourfavestoner]

I think Namath should be in simply for the fact that you can't tell the story of the NFL without him. He's an icon in terms of NFL history.

[doingthisinsteadofwork]

I think Al Davis deserved to be in for his past success with the Raiders in the 70s, but should be taken out for what he has done with the Raiders recently and for giving Art Shell a coaching job...twice.

Yeah your right that first time around when Shell had a winning record took them to the playoffs.Al shouldnt have hired him the first time.I guess him also bringing them to the SB a couple of years ago was terrible to.

[BigDawg819]

Yeah your right that first time around when Shell had a winning record took them to the playoffs.Al shouldnt have hired him the first time.I guess him also bringing them to the SB a couple of years ago was terrible to.

That was Bill Callahan who coached them in the Super Bowl against the Bucs' and it was basically Jon Gruden's team and offense.

[doingthisinsteadofwork]

That was Bill Callahan who coached them in the Super Bowl against the Bucs' and it was basically Jon Gruden's team and offense.

Yes but it was Al Davis who hired Gruden.