Originally Posted by yourfavestoner
Some food for thought...
John from Jacksonville: You often mention that postseason play is one of your criteria for entry to the Hall of Fame. Is the postseason even more important for a coach?
Vic: It’s important. I don’t care if it’s for players or coaches, postseason performance, in my opinion, is a major measuring stick for evaluating players’ and coaches’ careers. There are exceptions, of course. Some guys play their whole careers for bad teams and don’t see much postseason action. Barry Sanders kind of fits into that category. For the guys who have played a lot of postseason games, however, I judge them in a big way on what they’ve done in the postseason. Take a guy who’s played the equivalent or near equivalent of a whole season in the postseason. Now compare his stats from the postseason to his regular seasons. I’ll use two guys – Michael Irvin and Lynn Swann – as examples, but there are a lot more of them I could use. Irvin’s and Swann’s postseasons are as good as their best regular seasons. In other words, when the light was shining brightest, the games were the biggest and the competition was the toughest, they played at their highest level. That, in my opinion, is a Hall of Famer. The same goes for coaches.
Eh, but the thing is that Swann's regular season numbers are soo average that it's not that amazing that his post-season play is "as good" or "better" than his regular season numbers.
Talking about WR's... as a Bronco fan, I'm wondering what people would think about Rod Smith and his chances of the HoF.