Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

The Patriots are a dynasty. The four year run of the 90s Cowboys wasn't.

bachslunch wrote:Well sure, Johnson had a whole lot to do with that dynasty -- I'd say almost as much as Walsh did with the 'Niners dynasty. But if credit is being given above to DeBartolo for the latter, Jones deserves as much credit for the former. Which is to say not a whole lot in either case beyond making a good hire and opening up a checkbook.

No argument with the DeBartolo-Jones linking, yet DeBartolo is the football equivalent of George Steinbrenner in the sense of cost being no object. DeBartolo had the good sense to stay out of personnel decisions, yet he ended up suspended/pushed out (effectively for life) by the NFL, mirroring Steinbrenner, who was TWICE suspended. The latter ban was supposed to be "for life" but lasted less than three years. Steinbrenner is still on the outside looking in when it comes to HOF, primarily because of that idea that it doesn't take a whole lot of skill to open up a checkbook.

The argument that "this person should be in the HOF because that person is in" reminds me of the argument that fans of former Brown WR Gary Collins make about his HOF chances. His numbers are very similar to Lynn Swann's, with each having won MVP honors in a title game (Collins pre-SB). Plus, Collins played in four NFL championship games (albeit the latter two were in the SB era) and was the Browns' regular punter for six seasons. Even though I'm a Browns fan, I'm not convinced he belongs, yet I know that plenty of others who don't feel that Swann does either.

BD Sullivan wrote:

bachslunch wrote:Well sure, Johnson had a whole lot to do with that dynasty -- I'd say almost as much as Walsh did with the 'Niners dynasty. But if credit is being given above to DeBartolo for the latter, Jones deserves as much credit for the former. Which is to say not a whole lot in either case beyond making a good hire and opening up a checkbook.

No argument with the DeBartolo-Jones linking, yet DeBartolo is the football equivalent of George Steinbrenner in the sense of cost being no object. DeBartolo had the good sense to stay out of personnel decisions, yet he ended up suspended/pushed out (effectively for life) by the NFL, mirroring Steinbrenner, who was TWICE suspended. The latter ban was supposed to be "for life" but lasted less than three years. Steinbrenner is still on the outside looking in when it comes to HOF, primarily because of that idea that it doesn't take a whole lot of skill to open up a checkbook.

The argument that "this person should be in the HOF because that person is in" reminds me of the argument that fans of former Brown WR Gary Collins make about his HOF chances. His numbers are very similar to Lynn Swann's, with each having won MVP honors in a title game (Collins pre-SB). Plus, Collins played in four NFL championship games (albeit the latter two were in the SB era) and was the Browns' regular punter for six seasons. Even though I'm a Browns fan, I'm not convinced he belongs, yet I know that plenty of others who don't feel that Swann does either.

My thinking is that Jones is much more worthy of the HoF than DeBartolo because he has the added committee work and the revenue generating model for merchandise on his resume that DeBartolo lacks. I can see the argument that this makes him HoF worthy to some reasonable extent. I don't see him as equivalent to the best owners enshrined (Halas, Reeves, Hunt, Bell) but can see a case for him being a middle tier owner member with folks like Marshall, the Rooneys, the Maras, Davis, and Wilson -- probably towards the lower end, but in that vicinity. DeBartolo and Bidwill to me constitute the mistake end of the enshrined owners.

Jones does have negatives such as serving as his own often ineffective GM, but folks like Davis and Marshall have blemishes as well.

Should say that I can definitely see HoF cases for Robert Kraft (who looks kind of like Jones without the more obvious negatives), Bud Adams (whose case looks about as viable as Wilson's), and possibly Art Modell (some committee work positives, though he has a lot of negatives even beyond the franchise move). No idea what Pat Bowlen has done to deserve consideration, though.

bachslunch wrote: No idea what Pat Bowlen has done to deserve consideration, though.

He was able to use the Browns move as a weapon in getting a new stadium.

bachslunch wrote:Couple questions:

1. Was under the impression Jerry Jones had done a good bit of committee work in addition to creating the product revenue model he's best known for. Still wouldn't make him the best owner in, of course -- though he'll beat Bidwill and DeBartolo handily enough.

2. How good a HoF selection was Art Rooney? Maybe he did all kind of significant stuff I don't know about. I'm happy to be convinced.

I don't think Rooney belongs. He owned arguably the worst team in the NFL until his sons took over the operation. One reason his teams were so bad was that, every time he lost at the track, he'd cut a player or two to lower the amount he had to pay in salaries. At times, the Pittsburgh roster was ten under the limit because he couldn't afford to pay any more players.

rhickok1109 wrote:I don't think Rooney belongs. He owned arguably the worst team in the NFL until his sons took over the operation. One reason his teams were so bad was that, every time he lost at the track, he'd cut a player or two to lower the amount he had to pay in salaries. At times, the Pittsburgh roster was ten under the limit because he couldn't afford to pay any more players.

I think the best argument for Rooney was that he took a financial risk and invested in the NFL at a time when it wasn't a money-making operation, and he 'stayed the course' and kept ownership of his team for a very long time. Is that enough to warrant enshrinement? I don't think so.

Its interesting to see which owners got selected to the HOF over the years. I wasn't all that impressed with Eddie DeBartolo's resume, but at least his team's success was undeniable. Some of the other HOF owners have even less of a case than DeBartolo (or Jones):

Bert Bell - probably in the HOF because he served as commissioner, but he was also owner of Eagles and part-owner of Steelers. I don't really see anything that warrants enshrinement, much like the Tagliabue nomination.

Charles Bidwill - no reason to be in the HOF

Al Davis - I think Davis is clear HOFer. Such a great story, his teams were competitive for decades. Unique in his modern era 'hands on' ownership.

Halas - HOFer

Hunt - HOFer

Lambeau - HOFer

Tim Mara - I think he should be in. Invested in a big city market when the NFL was mainly a small town operation. His Giants teams were an elite team.

Wellington Mara - on the fence with Wellington. I guess everyone liked him. His Giants teams were sometimes good, sometimes bad. Nothing transcendent IMO.

GP Marshall - such a polarizing figure. Redskins were an elite team in 30's-40's, lack of integration hurt them in 50's and 60's. A big mover and shaker, a period of sustained success followed by a period of sustained failure. A questionable choice, IMO.

Dan Reeves - one of my favorite HOF choices. The Rams were usually a very good team, but had a drought from 1956-1966. Is credited with developing first NFL scouting operation, yet traded away many talented players. The front office was usually beset by bickering and dysfunction. Bonus points for moving to LA and integrating his team, but I can't really tell why he was enshrined.

Art Rooney - no

Dan Rooney - I would guess he and Al Davis are the most deserving of the post-1950 NFL owners. HOFer.

Tex Schramm - yeah, not an owner, but I think he gets the HOF nod for the Cowboys incredible run from 1966-1985, and deservedly so.

Ralph Wilson - I guess Wilson undertook financial risk with the AFL, but I cannot really see a reason for Wilson to be in the HOF. Bills had long periods of losing. The most notable thing of Wilson IMO was that he quietly floated money to other AFL owners so that they could meet payroll. Seemed like a great guy, but not really a HOFer.

rhickok1109 wrote:

bachslunch wrote:Couple questions:

1. Was under the impression Jerry Jones had done a good bit of committee work in addition to creating the product revenue model he's best known for. Still wouldn't make him the best owner in, of course -- though he'll beat Bidwill and DeBartolo handily enough.

2. How good a HoF selection was Art Rooney? Maybe he did all kind of significant stuff I don't know about. I'm happy to be convinced.

I don't think Rooney belongs. He owned arguably the worst team in the NFL until his sons took over the operation. One reason his teams were so bad was that, every time he lost at the track, he'd cut a player or two to lower the amount he had to pay in salaries. At times, the Pittsburgh roster was ten under the limit because he couldn't afford to pay any more players.

Art Rooney made some mistakes as owner, but the NFL wasn't exactly dripping with cash in that era. Transferring more of the decision making to family was the right move, and that helped turn the Steelers into a storied franchise. Countless stories of Rooney helping players over the years when he could have cut and run. Even helped the NHL Penguins get started by keeping a couple of the original investors on board. The remarkable success since 1972 has not been contingent on one head coach, or one QB, and it all goes back to Art Rooney.

Al Davis obviously would been qualified to enter the HOF long before he was actually elected. Being an SOB in any sport has kept more than a few people either on the outside looking in or cooling their heels for plenty of years.

Speaking of HOF worthiness of owners... How's this for an outside the box potential supersenior candidate?:... Ralph Hay

ChrisBabcock wrote:Speaking of HOF worthiness of owners... How's this for an outside the box potential supersenior candidate?:... Ralph Hay

It's 'funny' that the PFHOF renamed an award after Ralph Hay (Ralph Hay Pioneer Award) when they haven't elected him to the HOF.