Is Bledsoe a Hall Of Famer?

[alpha]

Bledsoe has a very unimpressive TO ratio himself. If you stick Bledsoe in the same era as Fouts, this would not be a discussion. Bledsoe would not have put up the same kind of numbers he has thus far. That's only the truth of it Nors.

In the end, I stick by what I said earlier. I think Bledsoe has to win championships to get it.

You may wanna do a lil research before posting next time. Bledsoe is among the most efficient QBs ever. More so than even Manning and Marino.

 

[Nors]

Let's analyze what I said shall we, not what you claim I said. Oh, I realize you won't even read all of this much less try to comprehend it, but I'm really just doing this to humor those who already know how full of it you are.



I defy you to show me the word "deserving" or any sysnonym of it in that sentence. I defy you to show me the words "Hall of Fame" or any inference to it (the HOF) in that sentence.

You see Skippy, what you are claiming I said, wasn't said. There isn't even a semblence of it there. The only player I have referenced to in this entire thread as it pertains to the Hall of Fame is Drew Bledsoe. Not Lynn Swann. Not Joe Namath. When I talked about those players I said they "impacted" the game in a way Drew had not. I realize you must be thoroughly confused now, so let me be helpful.

First of all it was a complete sentence so it should be easily understood. I'm sure most did. It was in English so that should have helped. Let's break the sentence down point by point and see if it helps you out.


1. Co-subjects being (Lynn) Swann and (Joe) Namath. Subjects are what the sentence is about. Also called nouns. In this case they are "proper" nouns because they are people.

2. The verb or action for that statement is "had." This is the past participle of "have." It means to possess. You might understand it better as "own." As in, I "own" you in these debates because you take stances that you can't defend.

3. The word "a" is an indirect obect. It means something is indistinct.

4. "Bigger" is an adjective that has to do with a quanitfiable comparison. A synonym would be "greater" or "larger."

5. "Impact" seems to be the word that has you totally confused. In this case "impact" is the object of the sentence. I am using it to mean "influence." I'll clear this up for you.

6. "On the game" is a prepositional phrase that ends with the object being "game." In this case we are talking about the game of football. This is the second area where you are apparently really confused. I'll clear that up as well.



I just translated my sentence for you. I broke it down word for word and gave you meanings and purpose for the use of those words. I did it in plain and proper English with complete phrases. There is nothing hidden with the possible sole exception of what the sentence is a part of. So, let's get that out of the way so nothing is left to question. It is a comparison to the subject of the thread meaning Drew Bledsoe and his candidacy for the Hall of Fame.




So, in a nutshell I said that 2 players from a bygone era had more influence on the game of football than Drew Bledsoe.

Now, where you are really confused seems to be the relationship between the game of football and the Hall of Fame. You see, I said "on the game" meaning football. Football could go on without the Hall of Fame. There would be no Hall of Fame without the game. They aren't even co-dependant. If you need me to explain co-dependency to you, just ask. I'm good at Teddy Bear analogies.

In other words, in this statement that you are hung up on I have not even mentioned the Hall of Fame, so it is impossible for me to have said anyone "deserves" to be in it. There's no relation. You made the leap, I didn't push you over the cliff.

You with me so far? Probably not, but we need to go on.

"Influence" on the game. I am maintaining that Lynn Swann and Joe Namath had a bigger "influence" on the game. Remember, the game is not the Hall of Fame. Influence, how can we define influence? Actually it isn't hard at all.

Let's start with Joe Namath because he played the same position as the "control." Oh sorry, you probably need that defined too. The control is the constant in the equation. Bledsoe is the control because he is being compared (by you incidently) to both Namath and Swann.

What did Namath do for the game of football? The answer is Super Bowl III which changed the face of American football forever. Now, is this "influence?" Yes, this is influence. Bigger impact on the game? Yes, it is a pretty big impact on the game. It directly affected the AFL - NFL merger. If you do not realize how big that was then you really do not know what you are talking about. Without what Namath did in that game the merger never happens. If the merger doesnt happen the Super Bowl would eventually cease to exist. I think it is safe to say the Super Bowl has "influence."

Remember I drew a comparison where you felt I made a definitive statement about worthiness and that we are talking about 2 different subjects. Me, the game of football, and you, the Hall of Fame.

So, on one comparison I showed greater "impact" at an equal position.

Now let's get to Mr. Swann. How to show that a WR had a bigger impact or greater influence than a QB. Impossible you say? Au contraire mon frere. It can be done.

First of all, Mr. Swann has won 4 Super Bowl rings. Influence, impact? Oh, at least that. You see, in the real world this does matter to most. Is it the be all proof? Nope. But it is bigger impact, which is what I claimed.

But now, the coup de gras of this mock opera. The true way to judge impact or influence on the game. When legendary players who follow talk about how the players of the past impacted them.

Jerry Rice, the greatest WR of all time, on Lynn Swann.



So, Lynn Swann impacted the life of the greatest WR to ever lace them up.
Uh, we call that "impact" in the real world.
[/size][/font][/color][/size][/font]

Swann made a few acrobatic catches. Was nothing more than an above average WR on a great team. Period.

Back to Bledsoe - pushing 200 posts lively debate. He's right there. A few very good seasons or a Super Bowl he's in.

 

[TruBlueCowboy]

You folks can throw out all the numbers you want, but popular perception matters most in those HOF votes. If he fails with the Cowboys, then he's go down as another Vinny Testaverde or Dave Kreig. Great numbers, but not a HOFer. It's unfair but he has to go far with the Cowboys, probably Super Bowl far, to prove to the voters he is worthy of it.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

You may wanna do a lil research before posting next time. Bledsoe is among the most efficient QBs ever. More so than even Manning and Marino.

Sounds as if you have already done research on your own. Please, inlighten me on what you constitute as efficient and exactly how you relate it to this discussion.

 

[Doomsday101]

I don't know if Bledsoe will make it to the HOF and really don't think it is overly important at this stage. I will say for Drew to have a shot at the HOF I think he has to have a ring and post some outstanding numbers along the way to add to what he has already accomplished. Without the ring I think the odds become slim. I will say I don't think it should be this way because as most know getting the ring is a team accomplishment but I know it plays a part with the people who are voting for the HOF candidates

 

[Hostile]

Swann made a few acrobatic catches. Was nothing more than an above average WR on a great team. Period.

Back to Bledsoe - pushing 200 posts lively debate. He's right there. A few very good seasons or a Super Bowl he's in.

Which is exactly what I said from the beginning if you bothered to read.

His numbers will get him serious consideration, but numbers aren't always enough. To be given a real shot he needs to make a bigger impact than he has thus far.

I don't care what your opinion on Swann's legitimacy is. I don't think he deserves it either. You're the one who transposed that assumption onto me. Don't deny it because it is true you cannot find me saying the words that "Swann deserves to be in the Hall of Fame." They do not exist except in your imagination.

You clear on that yet? If not, let me help you even more. I do not think Lynn Swann is a legit Hall of Famer and never have. I liked him and still do. Doesn't change my opinion.

I said he has had a bigger impact on the game so far, and I'm sorry but that is just a fact. I outlined how he has done this for you. Ignore it, debate it, accept it, I could care less, but get your facts straight before you point a finger.

 

[silverbear]

Which is exactly what I said from the beginning if you bothered to read.

His numbers will get him serious consideration, but numbers aren't always enough.

And now he's a Cowboy, and we all know how the HOF hates Cowboys...

 

[Kangaroo]

Sounds as if you have already done research on your own. Please, inlighten me on what you constitute as efficient and exactly how you relate it to this discussion.

ABC I can answer that question Bledsoe stats other than total yards suck so peopel pull out all stops. Before you bang on me about yards Jeff george has more yards than Aikman and he is not a HOF it is more than just yards.

No Bledsoe is not HOF worthy


http://img.***BLOCKED***/albums/v328/hejtmane/stat.jpg

 

[alpha]

Sounds as if you have already done research on your own. Please, inlighten me on what you constitute as efficient and exactly how you relate it to this discussion.

In an earlier post in this thread (on the same page as your quote above in fact) I said, "Bledsoe’s thrown 181 INTs in 6,049 career attempts (before '05). That’s just one interception every 33.4 pass attempts. That’s pretty darn good by NFL standards. In fact, he’s better than Peyton Manning (1 interception every 32.3 pass attempts) and Dan Marino (1 every 33.2 attempts) in this category."

Now some casual fans like to include fumbles in this category, but again, it's all relative. Since this is a team sport you have to consider the supporting cast. Bledsoe has led the league in sacks the last three years. Aikman and Manning aren't/weren't sacked less because they're any more mobile, no more than Vick is among the league leaders in sacks or Dante leading the league in fumbles due to a lack of mobility. QB's fumbling the ball has more to do with protection than having an iron grip or track star speed and agility.

 

[alpha]

ABC I can answer that question Bledsoe stats other than total yards suck so peopel pull out all stops. Before you bang on me about yards Jeff george has more yards than Aikman and he is not a HOF it is more than just yards.

No Bledsoe is not HOF worthy


http://img.***BLOCKED***/albums/v328/hejtmane/stat.jpg

If HOF eligibility were based on stats Lynn Swann, Joe Nammath and many others wouldn't be there now.

Stats lie. None more than the mysterious QB passer rating. Based on this stat alone, Brian Griese was the best QB in the NFL in 2000, Neil Lomax really is the 10th best QB of all time and John Elway was just another average QB, who ended his career with a saggy rating of 79.9 (even though he had the most career wins by a quarterback and a record 41 fourth-quarter game-saving drives).

You can learn a lot looking at stats, but they're hardly an absolute. That's only one piece of the pie. Intangibles don't show up on a stat sheet. Think big picture. Gotta look past the numbers.

 

[joseephuss]

This is an interesting thread.

I see a bunch of posts about "IF" Bledsoe has some more good years or "IF" he wins a Superbowl, that he may get in. To me, when you have to attach "IF", then you already have answered the question that Bledsoe is not Hall of Fame worthy.

Favre will be in the Hall based on what he has already done, not what he may do the rest of his career.

 

[Doomsday101]

This is an interesting thread.

I see a bunch of posts about "IF" Bledsoe has some more good years or "IF" he wins a Superbowl, that he may get in. To me, when you have to attach "IF", then you already have answered the question that Bledsoe is not Hall of Fame worthy.

Favre will be in the Hall based on what he has already done, not what he may do the rest of his career.

Bledsoe career is not over yet either, people are getting way ahead of themselfs on this topic. If Drew walked away from the game right now then I would doubt he would be considered for it but I don't know if that will be the case 2 or 3 years from now.

 

[Nors]

Steve Young had all the same if's at age 33 too.


Story is not over. When it is I'll tell you.

 

[NorTex]

This is an interesting thread.

I see a bunch of posts about "IF" Bledsoe has some more good years or "IF" he wins a Superbowl, that he may get in. To me, when you have to attach "IF", then you already have answered the question that Bledsoe is not Hall of Fame worthy.

Favre will be in the Hall based on what he has already done, not what he may do the rest of his career.

Yes, Bledsoe is not currently HOF worthy. But either was Steve Young at basically the same age.

Remember Young was on his 3rd team with the 49ers and was a backup QB, who eventially won a SuperBowl.

Until Young won the SuperBowl, he was never HOF worthy.

 

[Doomsday101]

Steve Young had all the same if's at age 33 too.


Story is not over. When it is I'll tell you.

Very vaild point, Young got into the HOF based on a few season of great play on a great team. He did not do jack in Tampa and sat behind Montana for years so Youngs career is being based on a handful of successful seasons

 

[Nors]

In an earlier post in this thread (on the same page as your quote above in fact) I said, "Bledsoe’s thrown 181 INTs in 6,049 career attempts (before '05). That’s just one interception every 33.4 pass attempts. That’s pretty darn good by NFL standards. In fact, he’s better than Peyton Manning (1 interception every 32.3 pass attempts) and Dan Marino (1 every 33.2 attempts) in this category."

Now some casual fans like to include fumbles in this category, but again, it's all relative. Since this is a team sport you have to consider the supporting cast. Bledsoe has led the league in sacks the last three years. Aikman and Manning aren't/weren't sacked less because they're any more mobile, no more than Vick is among the league leaders in sacks or Dante leading the league in fumbles due to a lack of mobility. QB's fumbling the ball has more to do with protection than having an iron grip or track star speed and agility.

John Elway.

 

[Mike 1967]

I think that Brady's HUGE success in New England shot a huge hole in Bledsoe's chances of making the HOF.

If Brady had never come along, then there was a chance that Bledsoe could have made it to the HOF off of his past successes.

At this point, IMO, Bledsoe would have to take this team to a SB to have any chance for consideration.

As it stands right now, he and his past successes will always fall under the very long shadow of Brady's 3 SB's (and counting ?).

 

[alpha]

This is an interesting thread.

I see a bunch of posts about "IF" Bledsoe has some more good years or "IF" he wins a Superbowl, that he may get in. To me, when you have to attach "IF", then you already have answered the question that Bledsoe is not Hall of Fame worthy.

Favre will be in the Hall based on what he has already done, not what he may do the rest of his career.

Really? Would you put Brady in today? How 'bout Peyton? Dante, McNabb, Vick...? If you answered 'no' to any of the above, are you prepared to say, "if they can't get in now they never will."

Is it just me, or is it amusing to anyone else how many fans are ready to write the career obituary for a 33-year-old QB that was just awarded the NFC Offensive Player of the Week (amazing what a decent supporting cast can do for a QB)?

If a career journeyman QB (up to that point in his career anyway) like Rich Gannon can become league MVP at 40-years-old, anyone ready to write off Bledsoe's chances for the HOF today hasn't been paying attention.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

ABC I can answer that question Bledsoe stats other than total yards suck so peopel pull out all stops. Before you bang on me about yards Jeff george has more yards than Aikman and he is not a HOF it is more than just yards.

No Bledsoe is not HOF worthy


http://img.***BLOCKED***/albums/v328/hejtmane/stat.jpg

Hey Roo,

I agree. Bledsoe is not a HOF QB, at this time. I do not believe that QB rating is the end all/be all where QBs are concerned. However, I do believe that efficiantsy is pretty important. Aikman was the poster boy of this. Bledsoe, well, I don't see it. If you look at Bledsoe, two stats jump out at me that are not included in QB rating scores. One is sacks taken. The other is fumbles. Sacks can not be accuratly factored in because it's always a question of where the responsability lies. Is it the OL not blocking well? Is it the backs not picking up the blitz? Or, is it the QB not getting rid of the ball. I think it's probably a combination but I will say that in watching Bledsoe for these many years, I think you have to say that he is responsible for many of the sacks he has taken. For the record, he has been sacked 406 times, to date. That's roughly 33 or 34 sacks a season. He has also fumbled 105 times in his career. Neither of these two statistics suggest efficiant, to me.

I was surprised to see Alpha suggest that this player was efficiant to the point of Hall consideration. I just didn't see that.

 

[Hostile]

And now he's a Cowboy, and we all know how the HOF hates Cowboys...

True.