PDA

View Full Version : My final choices for the Hall of Fame class of 2005


Doomsday101
12-30-2004, 11:33 AM
Dr. Z: In a little more than a month we'll be sitting down to select six enshrinees for the Hall of Fame Class of 2005. I have just filled out a preliminary ballot to reduce the 25 semifinalists to 15 finalists who will go into the meeting in Jacksonville. Two Seniors candidates are automatic entrants -- Bennie Friedman and Fritz Pollard, both from an era none of us witnessed, and it'll be interesting to see if the Seniors Committee can sell both of these players to a roomful of blank faces.
I can't predict the outcome. Things always happen that surprise and disappoint me. I was pretty upset when the results of the preliminary ballot came in, reducing the original 90 to the 25 semifinalists, and a lot of my guys didn't make it. But these things always bug me. I can give you an idea of how I voted, though, for the 13 modern candidates to make the finals, and then we can argue. By positions:
QUARTERBACKS
The original list had seven names. Four were eliminated, among them Phil Simms and Ken Anderson. Surviving were Dan Marino and Steve Young. I voted for both to move to the final round. If they don't get voted into the Hall, it would be an upset. The last survivor was Ken Stabler. Not only will he not get my vote, but I'll be on my feet as a spokesman for the negative party. Inconsistency is what I've got against the Snake. At times, very surprising inconsistency.
RUNNING BACKS
All three were cut ... Roger Craig, Gerald Riggs, Herschel Walker. I hadn't voted for any of them.
WIDEOUTS
From a hefty group of 11, only two advanced, Michael Irvin and Art Monk. I had voted for Irvin, as well as Henry Ellard, whom I knew didn't stand a chance, but I was in his corner anyway. When it came time for this current vote, I agonized for a while. Irvin certainly is deserving, but there are a bunch of linemen I like better. So I left him off. Ditto Monk, and he will reach the final room, as he always does, and eat up about 20 minutes of debating time. He had great numbers -- as far as passes caught -- and he was a very valuable component to Joe Gibbs' offense, and so forth, but I just like other people better.
TIGHT ENDS
Zero of three advanced. I had voted for Todd Christensen, and also lobbied on his behalf. I really can't understand any negative feeling here. He caught a million balls in an era in which receivers -- and especially tight ends -- got mugged coming off the line. Now they get a free release and go waltzing into open space, catch their 10-yard hook and get hailed as heroes.
OFFENSIVE LINEMEN
I had voted for four, out of the mob of 15, to move from the prelims to the semi windup -- Leon Gray, Russ Grimm, Kent Hull and Bob Kuechenberg. I figured Gray and Hull were longshots, and they were, so long that they didn't make it. Kooch and Grimm advanced, along with Joe Jacoby and Gary Zimmerman. So by now you can figure out how I'll go on this. Right, Grimm and Kooch, for whom I've been working hard, to no avail, for what seems like at least a decade. But in thinking it through, I threw in a vote for Jacoby as well.
What the hell. Big Joe, fine player, proud warrior, why not?
DEFENSIVE LINEMEN
A popular category. Six of the 12 preliminary candidates advanced. I had also voted for six -- Curly Culp (didn't make it), Richard Dent (made it), L.C. Greenwood (made it), Claude Humphrey (made it), Joe Klecko (didn't make it, which hurt deeply because he was one of the most deserving candidates out there) and Chris Doleman (made it, and don't forget that he was omitted entirely at first. It took some lobbying to get him included in the prelims as a write-in).
Two whom I didn't vote for are on this current ballot, Fred Dean and Charles Haley. Trimming this roster was, for me, a very tough task. Finally the three guys who got my vote were Dent, Greenwood and Humphrey. You might argue that L.C. was not in the class of some of the others, but I was for him because he always raised the standard of his performance to meet the higher stakes involved.
LINEBACKERS
Only three of 12 made it, and I didn't do well here at all. My favorite of the whole bunch, Sam Mills, was a flunk. My second favorite, Harry Carson, advanced. This might be the year in which the selectors will be so ashamed for stiffing Carson for all these years, they'll finally let him in. Four more guys got my vote, Kevin Greene (flunk), Clay Matthews (flunk) plus two who made it, Derrick Thomas and Randy Gradishar. I voted to advance Gradishar and Carson. The decision to leave Thomas off was as tough as the Irvin decision. My reasoning was that we're talking about a great sack specialist, rather than a great all around linebacker.
DEFENSIVE BACKS
Only two of eight advanced, Lester Hayes and Roger Wehrli. The latter pick was a real surprise, because I didn't think people remembered how good this old Cardinal was. Yeah, I had voted for him, and then I did it again. But although I've been in Lester's corner for years, I figured this year that I had one other vote to give to a DB, and it went to Albert Lewis. My feeling is that he ranks with Mike Haynes and Deion Sanders as the best of this era. Others obviously didn't agree because he didn't advance, which shocked me. How can they be so blind?
PUNTER/KICKER
Nick Lowery (K) and Ray Guy (P) proposed. Guy advanced, without the endorsement of yours truly. I'll trot out the usual arguments. More than half of today's punters have higher lifetime averages. His net was poor because he'd hit the middle of the end zone, rather than the coffin corner (Peter King once did a work-up on his net average, and it stunk). What he's got going for him was that he once hit that freakin' gondola about 15 miles in the air, plus John Madden sings his praises every five minutes. And I guess that's enough for some of the airheads who cast votes.
COACHES

Four proposed, one advances -- Don Coryell, and I'll vote for him again. I believe Jimmy Johnson is a worthy candidate because of his expertise in personnel as well as X's and O's, but I feel that the more recent arrivals have to wait their turn. In the next world I'll be able to get Clark Shaughnessy in. All he did was devise the play-calling and terminology, and a lot of the strategy, used today. In this world, I've given up on his chances.
CONTRIBUTORS
In the case of Eddie DeBartolo, that's a literal designation, because he forked over plenty. But Eddie didn't advance, thank God. Neither did eight of the other 11, none of whom got my vote. Art Modell, Ralph Wilson and George Young are in the semis. I voted to advance George, feeling guilty that I didn't vote for him the first time, but there's a secret part of me that would like to see Modell reach the floor debate, because that will set off fireworks galore. And since they've cut down on the battling in the NBA, my blood lust needs an outlet. The Selection Committee meeting is as good a place as any.

lurkercowboy
12-30-2004, 01:38 PM
LC Greenwood needs to start working on his acceptance speech.

Doomsday101
12-30-2004, 01:40 PM
LC Greenwood needs to start working on his acceptance speech.

I agree, never a cared for the Steelers back then for obvious reason but always had a respect for them as well as guys like LC Greenwood.

ABQCOWBOY
12-30-2004, 01:46 PM
Who's the author of this?

Never mind, it's Dr. Z.

Doomsday101
12-30-2004, 01:50 PM
Who's the author of this?

Never mind, it's Dr. Z.

I was suprised that he said he voted for Irvin, I would love to see Mike make it. Irvin would be the 1st of the 90's team but certainly not the last.

jterrell
12-30-2004, 01:53 PM
I am just hoping all of Irvin's ESPN ties get him in.
If not then I hope the taliban's next target is ...

Doomsday101
12-30-2004, 01:58 PM
I am just hoping all of Irvin's ESPN ties get him in.
If not then I hope the taliban's next target is ...

I just hope some of the off the field problems does not come back to haunt Irvin as it did Bob Hayes

Yakuza Rich
12-30-2004, 02:02 PM
I’m starting to feel that Z is getting too much pressure from Redskins fans & supporters to put Art Monk in the HOF.

Monk being in the HOF would be a joke. He averaged 13.5 yards per catch which in today’s NFL is like a receiver averaging about 10 yards a catch. Not exactly a great threat. On top of that, he had 68 receiving TD’s, which is awful for how long he played. Not to mention his biggest stat in favor of him was receptions, something that he led the NFL in only once.

I know I have my Cowboys bias, but Monk isn’t even in the same galaxy as Michael Irvin when it comes to receiving.

Both Monk’s and Irvin’s primes were about the same amount of time. Irvin’s prime years were 1991 – 1998. Monk’s prime years were 1984-1991.

In Monk’s prime years, he had the following:

RECEPTIONS

1st in ’84

2nd in ’85

T9th in ’88

T3rd in ’89


YARDS PER CATCH

7th in ’91


RECEIVING TD’S

T9th in ’91


Here’s Irvin’s prime years:

RECEPTIONS

2nd in ’91

7th in ’92

3rd in ’93

5th in ’95


YARDS PER CATCH

4th in ’91

2nd in ’92

5th in ’93

6th in ’94

9th in ’95

t6th in ’96

6th in ’97


RECEIVING TD’S

T9th in ’91

T8th in ’92

T9th in ’93

T10th in ’95

T6th in ‘97


From a pure statistical standpoint, Irvin was better in his prime than Monk. He averaged more catches per season (83 vs. 76), had a better yards per catch average (15.55 vs. 13.39) and also had a better Completions per TD ratio (13.24 vs. 13.44).

One could argue that in Monk’s day they threw the ball less which is true. But, they also threw it for deeper for more yards per catch. Despite that, Irvin has Monk beat by an average of 2.16 yards per catch.

As far as the post season goes. Here’s a comparison of Irvin vs. Monk

IRVIN

87 catches, 1314 yards, 8 TD’s

15.1 yards per catch.

1 TD per 10.88 catches.

5.44 catches per game, 82.13 yards per game, 0.5 TD’s per game


MONK

69 catches, 1062 yards, 7 TD’s

15.39 yards per catch

1 TD per 9.86 catches

4.6 catches per game, 70.8 yards per game, 0.47 TD’s per game.

But, the HOF should be determined by how a player stacks up against his peers in his own era. As you can see, Irvin ranked up with his peers more often in the major categories than Monk ever did.


Rich…………………..
Monk played in only 4 less games during his prime compared to Irvin's prime. Monk missed time due to the strike years. Irvin missed time to injuries.

jimmy40
12-30-2004, 02:39 PM
I’m starting to feel that Z is getting too much pressure from Redskins fans & supporters to put Art Monk in the HOF.

Monk being in the HOF would be a joke. He averaged 13.5 yards per catch which in today’s NFL is like a receiver averaging about 10 yards a catch. Not exactly a great threat. On top of that, he had 68 receiving TD’s, which is awful for how long he played. Not to mention his biggest stat in favor of him was receptions, something that he led the NFL in only once.

I know I have my Cowboys bias, but Monk isn’t even in the same galaxy as Michael Irvin when it comes to receiving.

Both Monk’s and Irvin’s primes were about the same amount of time. Irvin’s prime years were 1991 – 1998. Monk’s prime years were 1984-1991.

In Monk’s prime years, he had the following:

RECEPTIONS

1st in ’84

2nd in ’85

T9th in ’88

T3rd in ’89


YARDS PER CATCH

7th in ’91


RECEIVING TD’S

T9th in ’91


Here’s Irvin’s prime years:

RECEPTIONS

2nd in ’91

7th in ’92

3rd in ’93

5th in ’95


YARDS PER CATCH

4th in ’91

2nd in ’92

5th in ’93

6th in ’94

9th in ’95

t6th in ’96

6th in ’97


RECEIVING TD’S

T9th in ’91

T8th in ’92

T9th in ’93

T10th in ’95

T6th in ‘97


From a pure statistical standpoint, Irvin was better in his prime than Monk. He averaged more catches per season (83 vs. 76), had a better yards per catch average (15.55 vs. 13.39) and also had a better Completions per TD ratio (13.24 vs. 13.44).

One could argue that in Monk’s day they threw the ball less which is true. But, they also threw it for deeper for more yards per catch. Despite that, Irvin has Monk beat by an average of 2.16 yards per catch.

As far as the post season goes. Here’s a comparison of Irvin vs. Monk

IRVIN

87 catches, 1314 yards, 8 TD’s

15.1 yards per catch.

1 TD per 10.88 catches.

5.44 catches per game, 82.13 yards per game, 0.5 TD’s per game


MONK

69 catches, 1062 yards, 7 TD’s

15.39 yards per catch

1 TD per 9.86 catches

4.6 catches per game, 70.8 yards per game, 0.47 TD’s per game.

But, the HOF should be determined by how a player stacks up against his peers in his own era. As you can see, Irvin ranked up with his peers more often in the major categories than Monk ever did.


Rich…………………..
Monk played in only 4 less games during his prime compared to Irvin's prime. Monk missed time due to the strike years. Irvin missed time to injuries.
Monk deserves to be in just as much as Ervin. In Washingtons heyday with Gibbs when they needed a big play in the passing game Monk was flat out money. How old were you in Monk's prime? 11-12?

Yakuza Rich
12-30-2004, 03:34 PM
Monk deserves to be in just as much as Ervin. In Washingtons heyday with Gibbs when they needed a big play in the passing game Monk was flat out money. How old were you in Monk's prime? 11-12?

After awhile you can’t deny the stats.

The Monk fanboys state that he was this invaluable “chain moving possession receiver” unlike Irvin. Pure bunk.

1) Irvin averaged more catches per game in his 8 year prime (5.38) than Monk did in his 8 year prime (5.04).

2) Irvin averaged 2.16 yards per catch than Monk. In Monk’s prime, the average yards per catch for receivers in the NFL was MORE than in Irvin’s prime. Thus, for Irvin to have a much higher yards per catch average, hurts Monk’s case.

3) The Cowboys in Irvin’s prime attempted LESS passes per year (490.25) than the Redskins did in Monk’s prime (521.63)


Catches for first down aren’t available for Monk and Irvin in their respective primes. But, to think that Monk moved the chains better than Irvin doesn’t pass the laugh test.

Irvin caught more per game, for more yards per catch and had less opportunity to catch passes as his team threw the ball less.

In their respective 8 year primes, Monk and Irvin finished in the top 10 in receptions 4 times a piece. But, Irvin blew him away in yards per catch, total receiving yards, and touchdowns. Three areas that I would take over “catches for first down any day.

In actuality, Irvin was the better “chain moving/money/possession receiver” than Monk was. Comparing the two as receivers is ridiculous.

Irvin should be considered for the HOF as a receiver much more than Monk. And IMHO, Bob Hayes should get in before Irvin does.


Rich……………….

The Great Number 8
12-30-2004, 04:17 PM
Couldn't agree more about Monk. I don't think he deserves to get in. While a model of consistency, most years he was never even the best receiver on his team. I hated Monk and those 8 yard out pattens for first downs, but Gary Clark on those deep routes scared the crap out of me. No doubt they went to Art on third down, but they always looked somewhere else if they needed a big play.

jamez25
12-30-2004, 06:13 PM
LC Greenwood needs to start working on his acceptance speech.
I think the only player not to get in from those Steeler teams is that buck-toothed lineman with the big-*** fro...enough already ! :mad:

Derinyar
12-30-2004, 09:10 PM
I just hope some of the off the field problems does not come back to haunt Irvin as it did Bob Hayes
Irvin probably isn't a 1st year HOF selection, but his job in the media should help him make it in the long run.

Theres only a few 1st ballot players from the boys in the 90's. Aikman and Emmitt are locks for 1st year. LA probably gets a first year. Other than that, unless you want to count Deion, theres not much left there.

Irving Cowboy
12-31-2004, 06:39 PM
I was suprised that he said he voted for Irvin, I would love to see Mike make it. Irvin would be the 1st of the 90's team but certainly not the last.
Didn't he say he voted for Irvin at first... then he said "Irvin certainly is deserving, but there are a bunch of linemen I like better. So I left him off."

Sounds like he didn't want to have to stump for Michael, at least not with Vinny DiTriani and Jerry Green around... jerks.

Fletch
12-31-2004, 07:01 PM
Do you think Deion will go into the Hall of Fame as a Dallas Cowboy or a San Francisco 49er?