Hall of Fame Announcement Thread***Allen IN-2013 class Post #9***

[KJJ]

Originally Posted by percyhoward

Whoa, stop right there. That is not an opinion. Read this next sentence.

That's a list of *all* the HOF-eligible players from 1966-1997 for the teams with the most Super Bowl wins of that era who have 5 Pro Bowls (or an All-Decade Team selection), were A.P. 1st Team All-Pro, have a Super Bowl ring, and are not in the Hall of Fame.

They're eligible but are you going to tell me they all should be in the HOF? Like I said 8 of those players aren't even in the Cowboys ROH.

[percyhoward]

Originally Posted by KJJ

They're eligible but are you going to tell me they all should be in the HOF?

The other five most successful teams of that era, combined, have a total of 14 such players. The Cowboys alone have 13.

49ers 6 in, 3 out (Haley, Craig, B. Young)
Packers 11 in, 4 out (Kramer, Gillingham, Jackson, Butler)
Redskins 4 in, 2 out (Butz, Jacoby)
Raiders 11 in, 3 out (Stabler, Hayes, Christensen)
Steelers 9 in, 2 out (Greenwood, Shell)
Cowboys 12 in, 13 out (Andrie, Green, Haley, Harris, Howley, Jordan, Martin, Neely, Newton, Niland, Novacek, Pearson, Woodson)

Do you see a disparity?

[KJJ]

Originally Posted by percyhoward

The other five most successful teams of that era, combined, have a total of 14 such players. The Cowboys alone have 13.

49ers 6 in, 3 out (Haley, Craig, B. Young)
Packers 11 in, 4 out (Kramer, Gillingham, Jackson, Butler)
Redskins 4 in, 2 out (Butz, Jacoby)
Raiders 11 in, 3 out (Stabler, Hayes, Christensen)
Steelers 9 in, 2 out (Greenwood, Shell)
Cowboys 12 in, 13 out (Andrie, Green, Haley, Harris, Howley, Jordan, Martin, Neely, Newton, Niland, Novacek, Pearson, Woodson)

Do you see a disparity?

There's a disparity because the Cowboys have had a lot of very good players through the years which is why the organization has been to a record 8 SB's. You didn't answer the question do you think all 13 players who are eligible should be in the Hall of Fame?

[Chocolate Lab]

Can KJJ's trainer throw in the towel for him?

[KJJ]

Originally Posted by Chocolate Lab

Can KJJ's trainer throw in the towel for him?

Care to add something to the topic or did you come here just to take a slap at me? Let's hear your side of the argument if you even have one.

[percyhoward]

Originally Posted by KJJ

There's a disparity because the Cowboys have had a lot of very good players through the years which is why the organization has been to a record 8 SB's.

The point is that the Hall of Fame should reflect this. After all, the standards for induction are supposed to be the same for all players. To hold a player to a higher standard because he was a Cowboy is the very definition of bias.

Originally Posted by KJJ

You didn't answer the question do you think all 13 players who are eligible should be in the Hall of Fame?

Now, separate from the question of bias, you're just asking me my opinion of the 13 players. Fine. I'll even add two more and rank them.
1. Howley
2. Harris
3. Martin
4. Pearson
5. Woodson
6. Haley
7. Everson Walls
8. Jordan
9. Green
10. Don Perkins
11. Niland
12. Neely
13. Novacek
14. Andrie
15. Newton

I'd put 1-7 in.

And even then, I'd be leaving off...

* a finalist for the HOF at #8
* a 5-time Pro Bowler (at both CB and S) and 2-time 1st team AP All-Pro at #9
* a 6-time Pro Bowler and 1-time 1st team AP All-Pro at #10
*a 6-time Pro Bowler and 2-time 1st team AP All-Pro at #11.

[KJJ]

Originally Posted by percyhoward

The point is that the Hall of Fame should reflect this. After all, the standards for induction are supposed to be the same for all players. To hold a player to a higher standard because he was a Cowboy is the very definition of bias.

The point I keep trying to drive home is there is no set standard for induction it's something you've created from being so obsessed with stats and comparisons. There isn't a certain number of pro bowls/all pro teams or any other achievement that a player must reach to be voted into the HOF. Part of the achievements you have to look at when judging a player is the number of championships they were apart of. There's players in the Hall of Fame that wouldn't be there if it wasn't for being part of championships like Troy Aikman.

Joe Namath wouldn't be in the HOF if it wasn't for his guarantee of winning one of the most important games in NFL history. You don't think the Cowboys coming up short to the Packers in the 60's and the Steelers in the 70's had anything to do with those teams having more players in the HOF than the Cowboys? You don't think the committee takes into account the number of championships a player was apart of? How do you think Lynn Swann and several other Steelers got voted in?

Originally Posted by percyhoward

Now, separate from the question of bias, you're just asking me my opinion of the 13 players. Fine. I'll even add two more and rank them.
1. Howley
2. Harris
3. Martin
4. Pearson
5. Woodson
6. Haley
7. Everson Walls
8. Jordan
9. Green
10. Don Perkins
11. Niland
12. Neely
13. Novacek
14. Andrie
15. Newton

I'd put 1-7 in.

And even then, I'd be leaving off...

* a finalist for the HOF at #8
* a 5-time Pro Bowler (at both CB and S) and 2-time 1st team AP All-Pro at #9
* a 6-time Pro Bowler and 1-time 1st team AP All-Pro at #10
*a 6-time Pro Bowler and 2-time 1st team AP All-Pro at #11.

Only one of the 15 players you listed had a slam dunk Hall of Fame career and that's Charles Haley. The only reason he's being denied induction is because he created some enemies within the committee. His HOF omission has absolutely nothing to do with him playing for the Cowboys it has to do with him as a person. If it had something to do with him being a Cowboy then Larry Allen wouldn't have just been voted in on the first ballot. Charles Haley contributed greatly to 2 teams winning 5 championships. He impacted the 90's Cowboys more than Larry Allen because he was part of all 3 of their SB wins while Allen was only part of one championship.

I'll keep repeating it it's not a bias against a team that keeps a deserving player out of the HOF it's a bias against a player that keeps them out. Of the 7 players you would put in the Hall of Fame 3 aren't even in the Cowboys ROH. If you feel Martin, Woodson and Walls are deserving of Hall of Fame inductions then why haven't the Cowboys honored them with ROH inductions? Other than Charles Haley Pearson, Howley and possibly Jordan are the only players in my opinion that had careers worthy of HOF consideration.

[burmafrd]

Originally Posted by KJJ

The point I keep trying to drive home is there is no set standard for induction it's something you've created from being so obsessed with stats and comparisons. There isn't a certain number of pro bowls/all pro teams or any other achievement that a player must reach to be voted into the HOF. Part of the achievements you have to look at when judging a player is the number of championships they were apart of. There's players in the Hall of Fame that wouldn't be there if it wasn't for being part of championships like Troy Aikman.

[View Full Quote]Joe Namath wouldn't be in the HOF if it wasn't for his guarantee of winning one of the most important games in NFL history. You don't think the Cowboys coming up short to the Packers in the 60's and the Steelers in the 70's had anything to do with those teams having more players in the HOF than the Cowboys? You don't think the committee takes into account the number of championships a player was apart of? How do you think Lynn Swann and several other Steelers got voted in?




Only one of the 15 players you listed had a slam dunk Hall of Fame career and that's Charles Haley. The only reason he's being denied induction is because he created some enemies within the committee. His HOF omission has absolutely nothing to do with him playing for the Cowboys it has to do with him as a person. If it had something to do with him being a Cowboy then Larry Allen wouldn't have just been voted in on the first ballot. Charles Haley contributed greatly to 2 teams winning 5 championships. He impacted the 90's Cowboys more than Larry Allen because he was part of all 3 of their SB wins while Allen was only part of one championship.

I'll keep repeating it it's not a bias against a team that keeps a deserving player out of the HOF it's a bias against a player that keeps them out. Of the 7 players you would put in the Hall of Fame 3 aren't even in the Cowboys ROH. If you feel Martin, Woodson and Walls are deserving of Hall of Fame inductions then why haven't the Cowboys honored them with ROH inductions? Other than Charles Haley Pearson, Howley and possibly Jordan are the only players in my opinion that had careers worthy of HOF consideration.

OK why not Harvey Martin?

[percyhoward]

Originally Posted by KJJ

There is no set standard for induction.

Right, that's why there are players on the outside with better credentials than some of those on the inside.

It doesn't explain why so many of them come from the same team, however.

Originally Posted by KJJ

You don't think the Cowboys coming up short to the Packers in the 60's and the Steelers in the 70's had anything to do with those teams having more players in the HOF than the Cowboys?

You're forgetting that all 13 of these Cowboys have rings, and five have multiple rings.

We're not talking about the 70s Vikings or the 90s Bills here.

[percyhoward]

Originally Posted by KJJ

If you feel Martin, Woodson and Walls are deserving of Hall of Fame inductions then why haven't the Cowboys honored them with ROH inductions?

I wasn't consulted. Were you?

[percyhoward]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

OK why not Harvey Martin?

Martin, like Howley, seems to have been completely forgotten.

He once had 23 sacks in a 14-game season. A fact which the selection committee doesn't have to consider, because the league didn't think to make sacks an official stat until five years after that.

Martin averaged more sacks per game over his career than Bruce Smith or Lawrence Taylor.

Throw in that he was a 1st team AP All-Pro, Defensive Player of the Year, Super Bowl MVP, and a member of the All-Decade Team (selected by, yes, the Hall of Fame selection committee in 1980).

Martin's never been a semi-finalist, btw. He hasn't made it past the preliminary list.

[KJJ]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

OK why not Harvey Martin?

He's not in the Cowboys ROH so if he was HOF worthy wouldn't the Cowboys have honored him in the teams HOF? He was credited with 114 sacks and a 23 sack season in 1977 and was named Defensive player of the year but unfortunately the NFL didn't start recognizing sack totals until 1982. When the committee looks at his career they see a player who had one great season and several very good seasons.

He was an excellent player for the Cowboys and was named Co MVP along with Randy White in SB XII. The 2 SB losses to the Steelers didn't help his HOF chances. The Steelers dominated the 70's and it resulted in many of their players being voted into the HOF.

[KJJ]

Originally Posted by percyhoward

I wasn't consulted. Were you?

Why should we be consulted they didn't play for us. All 3 of them were very good players but obviously weren't considered special or they would be in the the Cowboys ROH. However I do think Woody has a good shot to be the next Cowboy player put in the ROH.

[KJJ]

Originally Posted by percyhoward

Right, that's why there are players on the outside with better credentials than some of those on the inside.

It doesn't explain why so many of them come from the same team, however.

Again you're just focusing on the numbers like you always do and are not taking championships into consideration. Some on the inside were part of teams that out played the Cowboys in championship games. There's an explanation and I've given them but you continue this theme there's a bias against the Cowboys even though you have 3 players who you would put in the HOF who aren't even in the Cowboys ROH. Are the Cowboys slighting these players or does your vantage point from your recliner make you a better judge of who should be in their ROH?

Originally Posted by percyhoward

You're forgetting that all 13 of these Cowboys have rings, and five have multiple rings.

You're forgetting that some of the players who have been inducted ahead of those 13 have more rings due to beating the Cowboys. Do you agree Haley is being denied induction due to the committees issues with him or do you want to continue this nonsense that it's because of a bias against the Cowboys?

Originally Posted by percyhoward

We're not talking about the 70s Vikings or the 90s Bills here.

We're talking about a team that lost 2 championships to the Packers in the 60's, 3 SB's during the 70's and a number of conference title games including 3 straight defeats in 80, 81 and 82. Some of the most memorable games in NFL history the Cowboys lost. They lost the Ice Bowl to Green Bay. They lost 2 memorable SB's to Pittsburgh and the 81 title game known for "The Catch." Instead of dancing around my questions provide an honest answer you don't think those championship losses helped contribute to several of the Cowboys being denied HOF inductions?

[percyhoward]

Originally Posted by KJJ

He's not in the Cowboys ROH so if he was HOF worthy wouldn't the Cowboys have honored him in the teams HOF?

That's not really how it has worked. The Ring of Honor reacts to what the Hall of Fame does, maybe more so than the other way around.

By your logic, Jordan, Harris, Wright, and Haley were not HOF worthy when they were first finalists for the HOF, since none of them were in the ROH at the time. They were only inducted into the ROH as a reaction to the fact that they had become HOF finalists.

What did Rayfield Wright do between 2004 and 2006 to become "Hall of Fame worthy?" The team realized they had erred by not having him in the ROH, and so he was quickly installed. Same with Harris. Same with Haley, and it took two times for him to be a finalist before the team reacted.

If you're under the impression that this team has an appreciation for its own history, just remember that there wasn't even a 50th Anniversary Team announced. Just a logo and all the merchandize that carried it.

Originally Posted by KJJ

He was credited with 114 sacks and a 23 sack season in 1977 and was named Defensive player of the year but unfortunately the NFL didn't start recognizing sack totals until 1982. When the committee looks at his career they see a player who had one great season and several very good seasons.

Slow down. Do you know who votes for the All-Decade Teams? The HOF selection committee.

When the HOF selection committee looked at Martin in 1980 they voted him to the All-Decade Team of the 70s. If, as you say, the committee has deemed Martin as not having "enough good seasons," then it's a later incarnation of the committee -- one much farther removed from his playing days -- that has decided this in retrospect, and against the earlier group's judgment.

Just like it's only in retrospect that Harris and Pearson (who also made that team in 1980) have been judged unworthy by later versions of the committee. Do you think that group of voters in 1980 was unaware that the Steelers had just won their 4th Super Bowl?