HOF Class of 2016

[Jeremy Crowhurst]

These are people that need 'presentations' on players to be convinced of who to vote for and to learn about the players they're voting on - the most known players in football history. To think that they're able to plan what's allegedly "fair" when it comes to who goes in when, is a bit much.

I'll never understand this. I hope that we'll hear that this year it was, "Okay, Favre? Show of hands? All right, next?" But I'm pretty sure it will be, "He was drafted by Atlanta in the second round of..." Don't forget to tell us if he broke any records along the way. The voters might need to hear that.

[Reaser]

I'll never understand this. I hope that we'll hear that this year it was, "Okay, Favre? Show of hands? All right, next?" But I'm pretty sure it will be, "He was drafted by Atlanta in the second round of..." Don't forget to tell us if he broke any records along the way. The voters might need to hear that.

I've never understood it, either. They did say the Favre presentation was only 6 (or 9) seconds, which makes sense.

But even when it's not the Favre obvious choice, I don't get it? Why do they need to be told random anecdotes ("T.O. being selfish was a good thing because Jerry Rice told me he was the same way" - HOF selector) as if these things should sway their vote one way or the other? Even worse is the common stuff, like your example of broken records.

Never made sense to me. Seems like if one was given the responsibility of being a HOF voter, they would take it serious enough to know - again, these are the most known players to begin with - the players careers and really should know who they're voting for and why. A five minute speech shouldn't blow them away and have them go: "I didn't know any of that, now I'm voting for him." ... Especially when we hear about things with no context or historical inaccurate claims made by the presenters that DO change their fellow voters minds, and get or help get certain players elected.

[conace21]

A few tidbits I recall reading in years past.
Peter King, who does have a decent amount of knowledge on the history of the game, admits to being convinced to change his mind on Art Monk by his presenter.

Don Shula's presenter (Edwin Pope?) began his presentation by saying something along the lines of "If anyone here needs to know why Don Shula belongs in the Hall, he doesn't deserve to be in this room."

Dr. Z wrote that Stabler's presenter said "He was very cooparative with the media." (which should have no bearing on his worthiness for Canton.) Z was promptly on his feet recalling the Bob Padecky incident.
I wonder if Dr. Z knows how the HOF voting went. His mind is supposed to be as sharp as ever, (like Joe Kennedy's was throughout the 1960's.) Maybe it's better that he doesn't know...He was an adamant opponent of Stabler and Eddie D.

[JohnTurney]

I'll never understand this. I hope that we'll hear that this year it was, "Okay, Favre? Show of hands? All right, next?" But I'm pretty sure it will be, "He was drafted by Atlanta in the second round of..." Don't forget to tell us if he broke any records along the way. The voters might need to hear that.

Favres presentation was six seconds long.

[Ness]

A few tidbits I recall reading in years past.
Peter King, who does have a decent amount of knowledge on the history of the game, admits to being convinced to change his mind on Art Monk by his presenter.

Don Shula's presenter (Edwin Pope?) began his presentation by saying something along the lines of "If anyone here needs to know why Don Shula belongs in the Hall, he doesn't deserve to be in this room."

Dr. Z wrote that Stabler's presenter said "He was very cooparative with the media." (which should have no bearing on his worthiness for Canton.) Z was promptly on his feet recalling the Bob Padecky incident.
I wonder if Dr. Z knows how the HOF voting went. His mind is supposed to be as sharp as ever, (like Joe Kennedy's was throughout the 1960's.) Maybe it's better that he doesn't know...He was an adamant opponent of Stabler and Eddie D.

I'm so glad Dr. Z isn't involved anymore. I remember him on NFL Network essentially saying he would never vote Stabler in the HOF and that's that. Just seemed like a jackass about the entire thing.

[JohnH19]

HOF Class of 2016: DeBartolo, Dungy, Favre, Greene, Harrison, Pace, Stabler & Stanfel

My thoughts on the selections are as follows:

Dungy yes. What more could he have accomplished? Win more Super Bowls, I guess, but he won more than Bud, Marv and George.

Favre duh. I don't agree with Jeremy's comment that Brett was a jerk toward the end of his career. His Vikings teammates loved him. One Jets player made negative comments about him. That's not enough evidence for me.

Greene yes
Harrison yes
Pace yes

Stabler no. When Kenny was hot he was as good as anyone ever was but he wasn't always hot. I watched him his whole career and he only had two truly great years, in 1974 and 1976. The several very good seasons he had don't qualify him for the HoF.

Stanfel no. That opinion is only based on what I've read here.

Owens will get in someday but he deserves to wait.

[7DnBrnc53]

Here's an excellent blog entry about Dungy's induction:

https://dubsism.wordpress.com/2016/02/0 ... ment-28027

[nicefellow31]

Here's an excellent blog entry about Dungy's induction:

https://dubsism.wordpress.com/2016/02/0 ... ment-28027

Link won't open for me but I think it's a stretch to say Dungy's induction is due to political correctness if that's the blogger's true opinion. If that was the case wouldn't he had made it on his 1st year of eligibility?

[bachslunch]

Link won't open for me but I think it's a stretch to say Dungy's induction is due to political correctness if that's the blogger's true opinion. If that was the case wouldn't he had made it on his 1st year of eligibility?

That's essentially what he's saying. Wasn't a big fan of what I read there. YMMV.

[Bryan]

Re race and Dungy: he languished for 14 years as an assistant before getting his chance as head coach at a time when blacks were almost never hired as such, so one could faIrly argue that his career was negatively impacted.

Kind of an odd way to put it..."languished". Dungy retired from the NFL after a short career, spent one year in college as position coach, then was hired by Chuck Noll to be an assistant on the Steelers staff. At the time he was by far the youngest assistant coach in the league. Within three years, he was elevated to DC. The Steelers defense under Dungy was inconsistent. He moved to KC as a DB coach, then made a name for himself as the Vikings DC in the early 90's. His 4 years in Minnesota vaulted him to become the HC at Tampa Bay at age 41. Belichick was 39 when he got the Cleveland job. Andy Reid was 41...John Fox 47...Tom Coughlin 49. Lombardi was 46. Do you think Dungy had to wait overly long to become a HC? If so, at what point of his assistant career would it have been logical for him to become a HC?

I think Dungy is a questionable candidate...I 'probably' wouldn't have voted for him, but he is not undeserving (if that makes sense). I don't think there is any way he gets in without that Super Bowl win...he'd probably be lumped into the Marty Schottenheimer/Chuck Knox group. I always thought of Dungy as being like Knox...he was always under criticism for being too conservative despite winning consistently. I remember in both Tampa and Indy there was a perception that Dungy was holding the team back. Kind of funny now that he is in the HOF. I give Dungy credit for turning around the Tampa franchise...and he did improve the Colts defense FWIW. I don't know how much "innovation credit" we should give him, but he was at least smart enough to hang on to his 1977 Bud Carson playbook.