Bradshaw just said on The Ticket with Norm...

[ghettogandhi]

IF it werent for all the rampant STEROID USE by the 70's STEELeRS there wouldnt be as many in the HOF AS their currently is.

 

[AbeBeta]

Then how do you explain the omission of Rayfield Wright, Cliff Harris, Lee Roy Jordan, Bob Hayes, Drew Pearson, etc? Those guys all deserve to go in.

Respectfully Windward -- how would you know how these guys compared to others in their generation? You never saw these guys play.

Both Pearson and Haynes had stats that were good --but not great. Haynes especially was pretty mediocre for more than half of his career. Pearson had a more consistent career but he led the league in a receiving category only once in his career. from 74-77 he was very good, often in the top 5 for various receiving categories - but that was pretty much it for him.

Every team has good players that are among that teams' finest. Just because someone was our teams best doesn't mean he deserves to be in the hall. Hell, Drew Pearson isn't even good enough to be in the Ring of Honor.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

In Korea you only got Yellow Tomatoes on your whoppers...just one of those local supply things I guess.

What was cool though is they had a BK Winabego that would go down to the gates to get all the drunk soldiers heading back for the night to by their food LOL.

oh man, me after a BK, chicken sandwich, on a military base overseas...

uke:

 

[Ashwynn]

Seems to me with pple like this saying that, you cant say "perceived" bias anymore. Its pretty blatant and obvious to everyone but the old guard trying to keep the boys out.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Bradshaw = blooming idiot.

 

[Ratmatt]

Respectfully Windward -- how would you know how these guys compared to others in their generation? You never saw these guys play.

Both Pearson and Haynes had stats that were good --but not great. Haynes especially was pretty mediocre for more than half of his career. Pearson had a more consistent career but he led the league in a receiving category only once in his career. from 74-77 he was very good, often in the top 5 for various receiving categories - but that was pretty much it for him.

Every team has good players that are among that teams' finest. Just because someone was our teams best doesn't mean he deserves to be in the hall. Hell, Drew Pearson isn't even good enough to be in the Ring of Honor.

Respectfully abersonc--That has to be the most ridiculous post I've ever read on here.Pearson,Wright and Harris are the only 3 players on the all-decade team of the 70's that are not in the hall of fame.There are quite a few players that played for Dallas that were not only the best that played for them,but some of the best that ever played.

 

[windward]

Respectfully Windward -- how would you know how these guys compared to others in their generation? You never saw these guys play.

Both Pearson and Haynes had stats that were good --but not great. Haynes especially was pretty mediocre for more than half of his career. Pearson had a more consistent career but he led the league in a receiving category only once in his career. from 74-77 he was very good, often in the top 5 for various receiving categories - but that was pretty much it for him.

Every team has good players that are among that teams' finest. Just because someone was our teams best doesn't mean he deserves to be in the hall. Hell, Drew Pearson isn't even good enough to be in the Ring of Honor.

I may be too young to have had the privilege of watching these guys play in thier prime. But I do know my history of the Cowboys. Hayes revolutionized the wide receiver position in the 1960s. For that alone, he deserves to go.

As far as Pearson goes let's compare his career stats with HOFer Lynn Swann
Pearson's
Catches Yards YPC TD
489 7822 16.0 48
In 11 seasons (1973-83) Pearson averaged roughly 44 catches for roughly 710 yards
Swann's
336 5462 16.3 51 |
Swann in 9 (1974-82) averaged roughly 37 catches for 607 yards.

If a contemporary like Swann is inductable, then so is Pearson.

Also, Pearson was in the top ten in receiving yardage in 74,75 76 , 77, 79.
The man deserves to go in.

 

[trickblue]

Respectfully Windward -- how would you know how these guys compared to others in their generation? You never saw these guys play.

Both Pearson and Haynes had stats that were good --but not great. Haynes especially was pretty mediocre for more than half of his career. Pearson had a more consistent career but he led the league in a receiving category only once in his career. from 74-77 he was very good, often in the top 5 for various receiving categories - but that was pretty much it for him.

Every team has good players that are among that teams' finest. Just because someone was our teams best doesn't mean he deserves to be in the hall. Hell, Drew Pearson isn't even good enough to be in the Ring of Honor.

Respectfully... who's "Haynes"?

 

[windward]

Respectfully Windward -- how would you know how these guys compared to others in their generation? You never saw these guys play.

Both Pearson and Haynes had stats that were good --but not great. Haynes especially was pretty mediocre for more than half of his career. Pearson had a more consistent career but he led the league in a receiving category only once in his career. from 74-77 he was very good, often in the top 5 for various receiving categories - but that was pretty much it for him.

Every team has good players that are among that teams' finest. Just because someone was our teams best doesn't mean he deserves to be in the hall. Hell, Drew Pearson isn't even good enough to be in the Ring of Honor.

As an additional note on Hayes, he played 10 seasons for the Cowboys (65-74), from 1965-71 he was in the top ten in receiving yards six times in seven years. The year he didn't ,1969, he was close to the top ten and would have made it had he not missed four games. Seven good seasons out of ten is hardly"pretty mediocre for more than half his career"

Receivers stats have to be taken within the context of the time the receivers competed in. Taking that into account Hayes is more than deserving.