Whyjerry
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 16,087
- Reaction score
- 24,947
Yep. A Beta.
-
Read the latest Dallas Cowboys News!Dallas Cowboys Newswire
Pearson vs. Swann vs. Carmichael: Objective look
- Thread starter StarOfGlory
- Start date
Yep. A Beta.
buybuydandavis
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 23,775
- Reaction score
- 20,849
I lean heavily on All Pro and whether a player was leading the league in relevant stats. Were you the best for some period of time? Not just an also ran for a long time.
Carmichael is less than Pearson. Never made All Pro. The most comparable guy to Pearson is Cliff Branch, who I'd give the push to over Pearson. And Branch didn't make it in either. They should both be in.
The problem for both of them was how short their period of dominance was.
And it's a farce to have Swann over Pearson and Branch. While they were All Pros, Swann wasn't. He only made it when they had dropped off in 1978, and their best years were just better than Swann's. It's not even close.
buybuydandavis
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 23,775
- Reaction score
- 20,849
I'd say Branch, and he's a contemporary.
Runwildboys
Confused about stuff
- Messages
- 50,400
- Reaction score
- 94,383
He also has 3 more TDs in 2 fewer years, so I don't understand how he was "less impactful" than Pearson.
DandyDon52
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 21,424
- Reaction score
- 15,466
Exactly, plus Swann I think out preformed pearson in the 2 SB games with Pitt. Swan always had a big play that led to a score , usually and good catch,
and his team wound up winning.
Being on a team that won 4 SB's also helps him and others on that team get in.
Add to that the fact that Drew has been whining about not getting in for 15 years, does not help him with voters.
I think if he had kept his mouth shut on the topic, he might be in by now.
Also the nfl is kinda cheap about the hall of fame, and only add a few players each year, and only what 2 each time from that era.
If they put more money into it they could do more players.
Each player added has to have a spot and a bust etc in the museum, it takes money for all that, and what happens when building is full?
I have said it before, fans need to start their own online hall of fame site, which would be a lot cheaper, and could include all the players that
deserve to be in there. So anyone willing to donate cash to start one??
glimmerman
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 30,028
- Reaction score
- 29,895
Bruce has way better stats.
buybuydandavis
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 23,775
- Reaction score
- 20,849
In a different era. Can't compare receiving gross yards across eras. That's why I look at All Pro and league leading stats. Who was actually the best in their time?
Bruce never made All Pro. Only led the league in one stat for one year.
Both Pearson and Branch made All Pro 3 times. They were the best in the league for a chunk of time. And Branch in particular had the stats to prove it.
You can make a case for Bruce in terms of being a top guy longer.
Rayman70
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 33,351
- Reaction score
- 31,835
cliff and drew should be in the hall,period. Anyone who claims otherwise doesn't grasp the concept of what the HOF ought to mean. Its not the HALL OF STATS...its the hall of FAME.
Rayman70
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 33,351
- Reaction score
- 31,835
EXACTLY! Its the HALL OF FAME. Not the HALL OF STATS. Fame, meaning they were Famous for how they did what they did and YES, style points and context should count HUGE. Drew and Cliff Branch did what they did at a time where its was a running league, 3 yards and a cloud of dust. That's what makes this so stunning that they both got left out. Cliff Harris deserved it..good for him! He played at a high level for a long time and again, at a time where it was a running league..so int's were harder to come by. You really had to be a student of the game back in the day, to get those turnovers. KUDOS TO HIM. THE HALL GOT THAT 1 RIGHT. Drew and Branch got screwed. I wanna know who the hell voted to not elect them.
buybuydandavis
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 23,775
- Reaction score
- 20,849
This Pro Football Reference HOF rating page is handy. Links to the players, and some summary stats.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/hof/hofm_WR.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/hof/hofm_WR.htm
rags747
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 7,598
- Reaction score
- 8,105
Sadly enough I remember that day, not sure what that says!
rnr_honeybadger
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 11,386
- Reaction score
- 17,206
So will OBJ go into the HOF because he made a one handed catch?
MichaelValentino
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 283
- Reaction score
- 436
The HoF voters have not only done an injustice to Drew Pearson, but their leaving Cliff Branch out of Canton is just as wrong. During a 15-year stretch (early 60s - mid 70s), Branch was one of the four most accomplished and feared deep threats in the game (Lance Alworth, Bob Hayes, Paul Warfield) and of the other three, only Hayes was faster.
As others have said, Pearson is hurt by the fact Pittsburgh beat Dallas in two SBs. And in those two wins, Swann was stellar.
Although L.C. Greenwood had a monster game in SB X (four sacks) and Jack Lambert played like a wild man in the 2nd half (Cliff Harris set him off like a Roman candle by patting Roy Gerela on the head after a missed FG late in the 2nd quarter), it was Swann who shone most in Miami that day.
And, it was Harris who tried to intimidate Swann in the media before the game, after Swann was concussed in the AFCCG vs the Raiders. All Swann did was make one spectacular catch after another, setting a then SB record for receiving yards.
I love Drew Pearson, but the truth is undeniable: had Dallas and Pittsburgh traded their #88's before kick-off, the Cowboys would have won SB X. Swann's acrobatic catches were responsible for 14 Pittsburgh points in a four-point win. Drew, great as he was, could not have soared high to make those two amazing catches vs Mark Washington, who actually had very good coverage.
In SB XIII, the most spectacular play was Swann soaring over Harris in the back of the end zone to catch the clinching TD. Had it been Pearson, that would have been an incomplete pass out of the back of the end zone. And Swann capped off his SB career with a deep TD vs Rod Perry of the Rams the following year. I can't stand the Steelers, but in their last three SBs, Swann was their best offensive threat.
With championships comes national media recognition, and one more SB win would have been large enough to overcome the anti-Dallas bias in the HoF voting. If the Cowboys had won either SB X or XIII, guys like Drew and Harvey Martin would be in Canton already.
Obviously, the voters remember what Swann did in the SB. Pearson's career stats/accomplishments were at least the equal of Swann's, and actually, even better. But on the biggest stage, Swann shone brighter, and being on a four-time champion, he became a lock for Canton.
Unless Drew gets in next year, I think it's unlikely he will get in. Sadly, the window appears to be closing shut on Harvey Martin and the Cowboys' most deserving player not yet in, Chuck Howley.
tyke1doe
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 53,661
- Reaction score
- 32,039
What part of memorable catches, Super Bowl and dynasty did you NOT get?
efh313
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 900
- Reaction score
- 1,085
Great post!
OmerV
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 25,916
- Reaction score
- 22,440
I think this is pretty fair. I've said this before, but the reality with Swann is, in my mind, that much of what got the attention of HOF voters was the 2 Super Bowl wins against the Cowboys where he had huge games and several acrobatic highlight reel catches. We all know the ones - those catches are still being shown today. Being part of 4 SB winning teams also helped. Otherwise his career was good, but not great, and not very long.
Carmichael actually started off as a TE, but after his rookie year was moved to WR. I remember him as a great player. The one thing he was lacking and that I think cost him in the eyes of HOF voters all these years was the high profile playoff success.
For Cowboy fans who were old enough to watch Pearson, he was more than just the stats. He was the clutch guy, the tough take a hit over the middle guy. Roger's go to guy when the Cowboys backs were against the wall. I think, unfortunately, voters may not be as tuned into all that as Cowboy fans are and were.
LACowboysFan1
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 11,092
- Reaction score
- 7,201
First of all, to Harris being in - IT'S ABOUT FREAKING TIME!
He left football with many good years left to make money, when he played NFL players, even allowing for the much lower costs of everything in the 1970's, didn't get the massive salaries great players do today. If he'd stayed a few more years, would seem to be no question he'd have had another couple of Pro Bowl/All Pro seasons, and would made the HOF much sooner, maybe even the first year of eligibility. I've campaigned for him to make the HOF for years, good feeling to know now the voters agree.
In regards to Pearson vs. Swann vs. Carmichael, I have to remove the playoff and SB numbers, you can't have those numbers unless your TEAM makes it, Carmichael didn't play on a lot of good teams, wasn't all his fault they didn't, obviously.
The thing about to me Drew being over both of the others is what the Houston Chronical writer said in a story about Pearson, in noting what they were most known for - that he was CLUTCH.
Whenever Roger HAD to make a play, who was the target? Drew Pearson. And not just in the Hail Mary, it was in many other games. Swann had a few of those, but the most famous one - the catch over Randy Hughes in the SB, was largely luck - the ball was deflected but fell right on top of him, and besides that Hughes had a shoulder brace that prevented him from reaching over his head with that arm, if healthy it'd probably been intercepted or deflected way past Swann. But that's an aside.
It wasn't just that he was clutch, either. Watch Dorsett's 99 yard run, and who was the last blocker downfield? Pearson. Again, there are other plays where Drew was the blocker for a long reception, or blocked for other Dorsett runs. Don't recall Swann doing that very much, though admittedly I didn't watch many other Steelers games.
Add to that that Pearson is the ONLY other All 70's receiver NOT in the HOF, that alone is a crime and a travesty. If EVERY other receiver is in, how can you exclude Pearson? It's impossible to believe Pearson was on that team and yet all of the others were far enough ahead of him as a player to say they belong in the HOF and Pearson doesn't.
Though I do believe the voters didn't feel they should put in two players on the same team, who played about the same years, in the HOF the same year. Hopefully next year...
He left football with many good years left to make money, when he played NFL players, even allowing for the much lower costs of everything in the 1970's, didn't get the massive salaries great players do today. If he'd stayed a few more years, would seem to be no question he'd have had another couple of Pro Bowl/All Pro seasons, and would made the HOF much sooner, maybe even the first year of eligibility. I've campaigned for him to make the HOF for years, good feeling to know now the voters agree.
In regards to Pearson vs. Swann vs. Carmichael, I have to remove the playoff and SB numbers, you can't have those numbers unless your TEAM makes it, Carmichael didn't play on a lot of good teams, wasn't all his fault they didn't, obviously.
The thing about to me Drew being over both of the others is what the Houston Chronical writer said in a story about Pearson, in noting what they were most known for - that he was CLUTCH.
Whenever Roger HAD to make a play, who was the target? Drew Pearson. And not just in the Hail Mary, it was in many other games. Swann had a few of those, but the most famous one - the catch over Randy Hughes in the SB, was largely luck - the ball was deflected but fell right on top of him, and besides that Hughes had a shoulder brace that prevented him from reaching over his head with that arm, if healthy it'd probably been intercepted or deflected way past Swann. But that's an aside.
It wasn't just that he was clutch, either. Watch Dorsett's 99 yard run, and who was the last blocker downfield? Pearson. Again, there are other plays where Drew was the blocker for a long reception, or blocked for other Dorsett runs. Don't recall Swann doing that very much, though admittedly I didn't watch many other Steelers games.
Add to that that Pearson is the ONLY other All 70's receiver NOT in the HOF, that alone is a crime and a travesty. If EVERY other receiver is in, how can you exclude Pearson? It's impossible to believe Pearson was on that team and yet all of the others were far enough ahead of him as a player to say they belong in the HOF and Pearson doesn't.
Though I do believe the voters didn't feel they should put in two players on the same team, who played about the same years, in the HOF the same year. Hopefully next year...
BatteryPowered
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 225
- Reaction score
- 284
I think Drew deserves the HOF...but this is very flawed logic. Based on it, David Tyree should be in the HOF...he made the most iconic catch on the games biggest stage.
I also feel sorry for Drew over the emotional video. But let's be honest...he chose to have the cameras there and make it a celebration because he thought he might get in. He set himself up. Ironically, the sympathy for him it generated might be the thing that gets him in via the veterans committee.
cowboy_ron
You Can't Fix Stupid
- Messages
- 15,360
- Reaction score
- 24,303
I didn't say he deserved it over one play