HoF Senior/Veteran Nominee Candidates

[JohnH19]

Gary Cuozzo and Milt Plum (kidding!)

What — no Ryan Leaf or Jim Ninowski?

Plum is by far the best of the four. I also thought of Ninowski as being similar to Cuozzo.

[BD Sullivan]

Gary Cuozzo and Milt Plum (kidding!)

What — no Ryan Leaf or Jim Ninowski?

Plum is by far the best of the four. I also thought of Ninowski as being similar to Cuozzo.

Cuozzo had got to be the worst player ever to TWICE be worth giving up a first round pick for (the Saints and Vikings(2)), not to mention the Cardinals giving up John Gilliam (along with a #2 and #4 )

[Bryan]

I don’t like Mike Curtis for the HoF because his honors are short (2/3/none) and he doesn’t grade out all that well at Ken Crippen’s site in admittedly a small sample size. There are a lot of OLBs from the period not in I’d like to see get in first: Howley, Baughan, Fortunato, Forester, Grantham, and Stratton at the very least, not to mention MLBs/ILBs like Gradishar and Bergey.

Curtis is unique in that he earned 1st All Pro honors as both an OLB and a MLB. As you said, his honors are short and relatedly he doesn't have the sustained excellence of a Howley or a Hanburger. Curtis played from 65-78, but didn't become a full-time starter until 68. The meat of Curtis' HOF resume is 68-71. From 72-78 Curtis played for 3 teams. He did make the PB in 1974, but that spot probably should have gone to rookie Jack Lambert. There are a few other LBs I'd like to see get in before Curtis.

[BD Sullivan]

He also has an iconic moment that people make a big deal about--his was the 1971 clotheslining of the fan (at the 2-minute mark) trying to run away with the ball:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfS3M92S2EU

[rewing84]

I don’t like Mike Curtis for the HoF because his honors are short (2/3/none) and he doesn’t grade out all that well at Ken Crippen’s site in admittedly a small sample size. There are a lot of OLBs from the period not in I’d like to see get in first: Howley, Baughan, Fortunato, Forester, Grantham, and Stratton at the very least, not to mention MLBs/ILBs like Gradishar and Bergey.

No need to rehash the problem with Ken Riley’s HoF argument — John summarized it well. I think he has no case at all beyond a ton of career INTs, amassed because he played forever and got thrown on more often.

agreed on riley i think parrish has the better case overall would you agree bachs