For those who don't think Drew makes the HOF

[Hostile]

I don't think George belongs in the HoF. He had more average or below average seasons then he had great seaons, and he was never as feared as the "Great" ones like Emmitt, Barry, or OJ.

Bettis is closer to being a HoF then George, but it's close. He's not a shoe-in, IMO. Or at least he shouldn't be.

That's exactly the problem. People will argue him for the same reason they are arguing Bledsoe, yardage numbers.

Impact matters more.

 

[Bobo]

There's no way Eddie George should ever sniff the HOF. Even if you don't count his year in Dallas, you're looking at a pedestrian career at best.

Pedestrian's rack up 10,000 yards? Eddie in his prime was one of the best of his time. Now if you just saw him the last few years, then your opinion of him won't be very high. But he was a beast against very tough AFCC opponents who stacked the box every game. I don't think he's HOF though, he simply wasn't good enough for a long enough period of time.

As for Bledsoe, even if he gets 50,000 yards, I don't think that stat is good enough to get him in. It's not pedestrian to rack up that many yards, but I don't think he made enough difference to be a stand out player that deserves the HOF. Hey Testeverde is close to 50,000 yards..... :

 

[Danny White]

That's exactly the problem. People will argue him for the same reason they are arguing Bledsoe, yardage numbers.

Impact matters more.

If Eddie would have come into Dallas and had put up a great season or two, put the offense on his shoulders and led us to the playoffs or better, then I think the fans should have/would have made strong arguments for him.

The HOF is so subjective, you need people making cases for "your guys" or else, more often than not, they have no chance. That's probably where the "bouncing around the league" effect takes its biggest toll on a player's legacy... no one team or set of fans to champion his cause.

I appreciate your "objectivity" on this issue, but I think one of the official roles of "fans" is to stand up for their team and its players. Obviously Bledsoe hasn't earned that right yet from many fans, and that's completely understandable. Hopefully in time he'll earn that right, and then I expect that if he does, Cowboy fans across the board will defend him as one of our own.

 

[joseephuss]

Pedestrian's rack up 10,000 yards? Eddie in his prime was one of the best of his time. Now if you just saw him the last few years, then your opinion of him won't be very high. But he was a beast against very tough AFCC opponents who stacked the box every game. I don't think he's HOF though, he simply wasn't good enough for a long enough period of time.

As for Bledsoe, even if he gets 50,000 yards, I don't think that stat is good enough to get him in. It's not pedestrian to rack up that many yards, but I don't think he made enough difference to be a stand out player that deserves the HOF. Hey Testeverde is close to 50,000 yards..... :

Good points. Steve McNair has roughly half that yardage and has had more of an impact. I don't think he is Hall worthy either. It takes a good combination of both.

 

[Bobo]

Good points. Steve McNair has roughly half that yardage and has had more of an impact. I don't think he is Hall worthy either. It takes a good combination of both.

I agree about Steve. I'm both a Cowboys and Titans fan (hey the Titans moved in next door, so I had to be an instant fan), and I've always been Eddie and Steve fans. Eddie should have no shot really, but Steve could if he plays a few more years and at a very high level....and will probably need to win at least one SB too. Won't be easy. He does have the fact that only like 2 or 3 other QB's have rushed for 3,000+ yards while throwing for 25,000+, but it'll take more than that.

 

[jay cee]

I truly don't see how anyone can rate him average. It's rpetty clear that is a stats only opinion.

I consider it taking away from him because I don't buy it for 1 minute.

So are you saying that Aikman was great from '97-2000? What do you base that on?

The team was playing poorly, and he was putting up pretty average numbers.

If you say he was great because he had the team playing at a high level from '92-96, I will never argue with that opinion, I totally agree.

But you can't make that claim from '97-2000, because the team was not playing at a high level.

You may not buy it, but IMO, you can't honestly refute it.

 

[dbair1967]

So are you saying that Aikman was great from '97-2000? What do you base that on?

The team was playing poorly, and he was putting up pretty average numbers.

If you say he was great because he had the team playing at a high level from '92-96, I will never argue with that opinion, I totally agree.

But you can't make that claim from '97-2000, because the team was not playing at a high level.

You may not buy it, but IMO, you can't honestly refute it.

man, you know I bet a bunch of QB's would have put up all world numbers with talent like Deion Sanders, Billy Davis, Eric Bjornson and Stepfret Williams running routes and (trying) to catch balls



David

 

[dbair1967]

Pedestrian's rack up 10,000 yards? Eddie in his prime was one of the best of his time. Now if you just saw him the last few years, then your opinion of him won't be very high. But he was a beast against very tough AFCC opponents who stacked the box every game. I don't think he's HOF though, he simply wasn't good enough for a long enough period of time.

As for Bledsoe, even if he gets 50,000 yards, I don't think that stat is good enough to get him in. It's not pedestrian to rack up that many yards, but I don't think he made enough difference to be a stand out player that deserves the HOF. Hey Testeverde is close to 50,000 yards..... :

throwing for 50,000 yds (if Bledsoe does) to me is alot more impressive than running for 10,000 when you average less than 4.0 yds per carry

David

 

[Hostile]

I appreciate your "objectivity" on this issue, but I think one of the official roles of "fans" is to stand up for their team and its players. Obviously Bledsoe hasn't earned that right yet from many fans, and that's completely understandable. Hopefully in time he'll earn that right, and then I expect that if he does, Cowboy fans across the board will defend him as one of our own.

I can appreciate it if you feel the need to defend our players. I don't feel that way and never have. It has nothing to do with Bledsoe being a retread, or a transplant or anything like that either. For me it is about staying consistent with my opinions and trying not to waver. I'd argue the exact same position if he were a Commander or an Eagle. That's just me.

 

[Hostile]

So are you saying that Aikman was great from '97-2000? What do you base that on?

The team was playing poorly, and he was putting up pretty average numbers.

If you say he was great because he had the team playing at a high level from '92-96, I will never argue with that opinion, I totally agree.

But you can't make that claim from '97-2000, because the team was not playing at a high level.

You may not buy it, but IMO, you can't honestly refute it.

I can honestly refute it. Will it do me any good? I highly doubt it.

I've never heard an NFL commentator, teamate, or competitor downplay Aikman's greatness even in those rough years.

I don't focus on stats. Never have, never will. His ability was still as good as any QB in the NFL but too many things conspired to yield less than stellar results. What things am I talking about?

Poor coaching

Injuries

Retirements of key components that were not replaced

Poor drafting

Salary cap hell

You can lay some of 97 to 2000 at Aikman's feet, but laying all of it there will never fly with me. He was still a very good QB in a very bad situation. I'm not saying he wasn't declining, but average? No sir, Troy Aikman was not average by any wild stretch of the imagination.

Oh yeah, earlier you mentioned his early years prior to the Super Bowls. If you couldn't tell even then that he was going to be great I don't know why we're even discussing this. It was obvious as anything I have ever seen that he was special.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

So are you saying that Aikman was great from '97-2000? What do you base that on?

The team was playing poorly, and he was putting up pretty average numbers.

If you say he was great because he had the team playing at a high level from '92-96, I will never argue with that opinion, I totally agree.

But you can't make that claim from '97-2000, because the team was not playing at a high level.

You may not buy it, but IMO, you can't honestly refute it.

To me, really only his last season was horrible. The 97 season, his QB ranking was only 78% but as I recall, that was the year that the influence of Jimmy kinda faded. That team, IMO, was coached by Switzer or not coached may be a better way to discribe that. Completion percentage really dropped in that 97 season, only 56.4%. That was lowest it ever was outside of his rookie year. Still in all, many on this board would have killed for stats like that a year ago.

I don't know, I don't think his performance was all that horrific his last 4 years. Not vintage but certainly acceptable from a Professional NFL QB IMO.

 

[Danny White]

I can appreciate it if you feel the need to defend our players. I don't feel that way and never have. It has nothing to do with Bledsoe being a retread, or a transplant or anything like that either. For me it is about staying consistent with my opinions and trying not to waver. I'd argue the exact same position if he were a Commander or an Eagle. That's just me.

That's cool and I respect that. I claim no such objectivity myself. :laugh2:

 

[Hostile]

That's cool and I respect that. I claim no such objectivity myself. :laugh2:

I try anyway. Not saying it is right or wrong, just how I was raised.

:wink2:

 

[alpha]

Impact is more important than stats, but how exactly that is defined is subjective.

Bledsoe was not just a volume stat QB, his efficiency compares favorably to HOFers such as Elway and Marino.

Another critic claimed Bledsoe wasn't ranked among the best when compared to his contemporaries. The reality is Drew has ranked among the top-5 in completions four times (1994-#1, 1996-#1, 1997-#2, 2002-#3), in yards five times (1994-#1, 1996-#3, 1997-#4, 2002-#2, 2005-#4) and in passing TDs four times (1994-#4, 1996-#3, 1997-#3, 2005-#4t). In fact, just last season ('05) Drew was #8 in pass attempts, yet still ranked #4 in passing yards and TDs.

Some critics want to point to his W/L record. As others have already pointed out, winning isn't the result of a single player's impact. Still, Drew has a winning career record. Now let's put that in context. Drew was thrown to the wolves as a rookie on a team that finished 2-14 before he arrived. He led that team to a Super Bowl. Drew was then traded to a 3-13 Buffalo team and played his way onto his 4th Pro Bowl in just his first year there. Now he's playing for a Dallas team that went 6-10 before his arrival. Anyone taking wagers he won't finish this season with a winning record?

Based on Drew's performance through the first five games (NFC Offensive Player of the Week, two time FedEx Air and Ground award winner, #3 passer rating, #3 passing TDs, #4 yards, etc.), it's rather apparent what Drew's capable of when surrounded by a half-way decent supporting cast, IMHO.

 

[jg1411]

Pro bowls for three teams (hopefully with Dallas this year) and playing time (limited) on two super bowl teams (hopefully with Dallas this year!)---Does this help or hurt his HOF chances?

 

[Doomsday101]

Pro bowls for three teams (hopefully with Dallas this year) and playing time (limited) on two super bowl teams (hopefully with Dallas this year!)---Does this help or hurt his HOF chances?

It can't hurt. I'll say this if Bledsoe were to hang them up today I doubt he would get in the HOF. I do agree with Drew when he says his playing days are not over yet. So there is still time for him to add to his credentials to have a shot at the HOF.

 

[jay cee]

man, you know I bet a bunch of QB's would have put up all world numbers with talent like Deion Sanders, Billy Davis, Eric Bjornson and Stepfret Williams running routes and (trying) to catch balls



David

That's exactly my point.

What player can be great great with poor talent around him. But people are saying that Bledsoe shouldn't make the HOF, because he did not win championships, or have a big enough impact on the game.

He did not have enough good players around him to win Superbowls.

And when the Patriots did get the supporting cast in there to win the superbowl, he got hurt and they went on that winning streak with Brady, so Bellichek rightly decide to keep Brady in there.

You guys don't have to buy it, and you can put up all the smileys you want, but none of you can honestly claim that Aikman played at a hall of fame level when the talent around him went down from '97 until the end of his career.

But you hold it against other qb's when they don't succeed with poor talent around them.

So I'm going to pull a Nor's and stamp my feet and shout it until you finally give up and admit that I am right.

Now (while picturing Sam Kinison) admit that I am right......

SAAAAY IIIIIIT. SAAAAAAAAAY IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT. SAAAAAAAAAAAAAY IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT.
OH.... OH..... OH......

 

[Hostile]

Impact is more important than stats, but how exactly that is defined is subjective.

Bledsoe was not just a volume stat QB, his efficiency compares favorably to HOFers such as Elway and Marino.

Another critic claimed Bledsoe wasn't ranked among the best when compared to his contemporaries. The reality is Drew has ranked among the top-5 in completions four times (1994-#1, 1996-#1, 1997-#2, 2002-#3), in yards five times (1994-#1, 1996-#3, 1997-#4, 2002-#2, 2005-#4) and in passing TDs four times (1994-#4, 1996-#3, 1997-#3, 2005-#4t). In fact, just last season ('05) Drew was #8 in pass attempts, yet still ranked #4 in passing yards and TDs.

Some critics want to point to his W/L record. As some have already pointed out, winning isn't the result of a single player's impact. Still, Drew has a winning career record. Now let's put that in context. Drew was thrown to the wolves as a rookie on a team that finished 2-14 before he arrived. He led that team to a Super Bowl. Drew was then traded to a 3-13 Buffalo team and played his way onto his 4th Pro Bowl in just his first year there. Now he's playing for a Dallas team that went 6-10 before his arrival. Anyone taking wagers he won't finish this season with a winning record?

Based on Drew's performance through the first five games (NFC Offensive Player of the Week, two time FedEx Air and Ground award winner, #3 passer rating, #3 passing TDs, #4 yards, etc.), it's rather apparent what Drew's capable of when surrounded by a half-way decent supporting cast, IMHO.

Good post, and I agree with much of this. I'm certainly not saying he's incapable. But he has not been spectacular as some have been. That is why I have been discussing impact.

I was the one who brought up his contemporaries. To compare them you went right ot stats. I'm simply not doing that. The QBs of his early years were legendary figures.

Marino

Elway

Young

Favre

Aikman

Kelly

To be in the top 5 of that era you'd have to tell me he is better than one of those guys. I don't see it.

Now in the latter part of his his career there is a new era of QB.

Manning

Brady

McNabb

Culpepper

Vick

Again, in comparison he's going to lag behind. That is no fault of his. He just happened to land in the NFL at a time when there are some QBs grabbing bigger headlines than he does.

Is it fair? I can't answer that. It's reality and it's about impact.

 

[Dallas31]

I would guess if he does not win a SB that he will in the HOF as a Patriot.


But if he wins 1 Super Bowl here as a Cowboy then I am not sure if he goes in a Cowboy or not. But 1 Super Bowl win guarentees he gets in.

If he wins 2 Super Bowls here in Dallas he goes into the HOF a Dallas Cowboy guarenteed. That would just p*ss off the Cowboy haters in the media.


Anyone else here think if he wins 1 Super Bowl here he might go into the HOF as a Cowboy.

Or if he wins 2 as a Cowboy he will be guarenteed to go in as a Cowboy.

I don't know if anyone else addressed this in this long thread, but football players don't go into the hall under any specific team. Some other sports do, but this is a common misconception about Pro Football HOF Inductees.

 

[Hostile]

Pro bowls for three teams (hopefully with Dallas this year) and playing time (limited) on two super bowl teams (hopefully with Dallas this year!)---Does this help or hurt his HOF chances?

You tell me. Jim Plunkett won 2 Super Bowls. Hurt or help his chances?