Who is more of a Hall of Fame lock?

[Zaxor]

Interesting read - we tend to forget the old timers, really moreso in football than in other sports.

One thing also to consider about Hutson is that not only did he rack up numbers durng the watered down competition during the war years, but there were still teams that didn't throw the ball a lot in those days, so his competition for league leader and all-pro WR spots was limited.

true but at that time the ball was rounder making it harder to throw and all the rules in todays game is for the advantage of the offense especially the passing game...back in the day they literally could mug a WR before the ball was thrown.

they both were great but Hutson is the G.O.A.T in my mind... He had no peers up until Rice and they had to change the rules to do it.

 

[BouncingCheese]

Both.

Darrell was one of the toughest players i've ever seen. Especially since he was a little guy, he was really fiesty. That put him at a disadvantage, but nontheless both are 100 percent locks... it would really be embarassing if Green didn't get in on the first ballot because Deon obviously will.

 

[Zaxor]

You make a compelling argument.... I'm not saying I agree, but that is kind of eye opening.

Sorry to mislead friend... but I did not write the article... I got it from stone cold football facts.... again sorry:

But I do agree with it

 

[Stautner]

true but at that time the ball was rounder making it harder to throw and all the rules in todays game is for the advantage of the offense especially the passing game...back in the day they literally could mug a WR before the ball was thrown.

they both were great but Hutson is the G.O.A.T in my mind... He had no peers up until Rice and they had to change the rules to do it.

The reality is there is no way to compare guys of such vastly different eras like that - it's like trying to compare Ruth to Bonds.

The first step always has to be determining criteria.

If it's purely who was the more physically gifted and capable athlete, Rice wins easily, just as Bonds wins easily over Ruth. Today' athletes are just bigger and stronger and faster - that's really not disputable.

But if it's who was more dominant in his era, then Hutson and Ruth are your guys.

The reality is that neither criteria is really a certain measuring stick, and there really isn't a way to come up with a hybrid formula.

 

[Zaxor]

The reality is there is no way to compare guys of such vastly different eras like that - it's like trying to compare Ruth to Bonds.

The first step always has to be determining criteria.

If it's purely who was the more physically gifted and capable athlete, Rice wins easily, just as Bonds wins easily over Ruth. Today' athletes are just bigger and stronger and faster - that's really not disputable.

But if it's who was more dominant in his era, then Hutson and Ruth are your guys.

The reality is that neither criteria is really a certain measuring stick, and there really isn't a way to come up with a hybrid formula.

I agree 100% friend... there really is no way to even completely and fairly compare players in the same era let alone past to present...because all the variables involved.

So rightly or wrongly I do look at that very criteria and again you are correct in my mind the G.O.A.T of baseball is George Herman "Babe" Ruth and the G.O.A.T WR is Hutson... but that is just one mans opinion and by no means the only or the right one... I am just that kinda nut I guess.. I think as far as G.O.A.T QB if you go by passing it is Slinging Sammy Baugh if you go by Championships it is Otto Graham just because of the dominance.

 

[joseephuss]

I agree 100% friend... there really is no way to even completely and fairly compare players in the same era let alone past to present...because all the variables involved.

So rightly or wrongly I do look at that very criteria and again you are correct in my mind the G.O.A.T of baseball is George Herman "Babe" Ruth and the G.O.A.T WR is Hutson... but that is just one mans opinion and by no means the only or the right one... I am just that kinda nut I guess.. I think as far as G.O.A.T QB if you go by passing it is Slinging Sammy Baugh if you go by Championships it is Otto Graham just because of the dominance.

If you put Don Hutson, Babe Ruth, Dim Brown and Chamberlain in todays era, I don't think they fair as well. I think they still do well because they are just good players, but I don't think their achievements would be as dramatic. Those four guys just dominated their eras. In some years it was not even close. In many ways they were ahead of their times. We have seen that before. George Mikan dominated his era, but there was no way he could match up with Chamberlain.

If you put Barry Bonds, Jerry Rice and Michael Jordan back in previous eras I think they would do very well just like they did in the recent eras. There were also dominant in their eras, but the split between them and the next tier of players was not near as great. Their contemporaries matched them pretty well.

 

[jterrell]

Both will be first ballot.

yup!

no doubts for either.

deion was the better corner but green is an icon for being good, playing forever, and being a great guy.

 

[firehawk350]

Just an interesting stat I read, but Sammy Baugh is the only player in history to throw 4 TD passes and grab 4 INTs in the same game.

But then again, that goes to show you how watered down the competition was back then. Most of the better all-around athletes played baseball and back then, a professional athlete wasn't nearly as lucrative as it is today, so who knows how many athletes (after getting their full-ride) went the business world route?

 

[Kangaroo]

When I think of HOF players I always look at what they did in there era of football case in point Drew Bledsoe racked up thousand of yards and surpassed a lot of HOF QB's along the way

But I do not consider him a HOF QB and never will he came in during an era of rules built to make the passing game thrive. Yes he put up tons of yards but his other #'s are not HOF worthy even in his current era.

 

[Doomsday101]

Just an interesting stat I read, but Sammy Baugh is the only player in history to throw 4 TD passes and grab 4 INTs in the same game.

But then again, that goes to show you how watered down the competition was back then. Most of the better all-around athletes played baseball and back then, a professional athlete wasn't nearly as lucrative as it is today, so who knows how many athletes (after getting their full-ride) went the business world route?

You have to remember those guys did not get the benefit of the same kind of workout regiment and conditioning or get dietary programs that today’s players get.

 

[stilltheguru]

Yep both are locks IMO.

Personally I liked Green better. He lasted longer and IMO was a better overall player. Deion MAY have been more athletically gifted but at the same time I think Green was better overall *cough* tackler *cough* and as I mentioned his longevity.

One other thing...I always liked how Green was more of a guy that just went out and did his job and let his actions speak for themselves as opposed to all the silly dancing and antics of Deion.

^Its called entertainment. Thats why Deion has alot more in his bank account than Darrell Green does. Whats wrong with being a good business man???????

And Deion did go out and do his job and he did it better than Darrell Green.

You know what, im not even gonna get worked up about this Deion stuff again. Some people will just never get it. I see that now.

 

[Zaxor]

If you put Don Hutson, Babe Ruth, Dim Brown and Chamberlain in todays era, I don't think they fair as well. I think they still do well because they are just good players, but I don't think their achievements would be as dramatic. Those four guys just dominated their eras. In some years it was not even close. In many ways they were ahead of their times. We have seen that before. George Mikan dominated his era, but there was no way he could match up with Chamberlain.

If you put Barry Bonds, Jerry Rice and Michael Jordan back in previous eras I think they would do very well just like they did in the recent eras. There were also dominant in their eras, but the split between them and the next tier of players was not near as great. Their contemporaries matched them pretty well.

Could be that you have the right of it or than again maybe not... I believe some people are just a "natural" at what they do and no matter how hard the other guy works at it the "natural" makes it look easy and always whips the hard worker where as 2 people of about the same ability the hard worker wins out... those "naturals" I believe are always said to be before their time because it always takes so long to catch up with them...but you will also notice there always has to be innovations to the game for them to be caught such as changing the ball, rules, training, diet, shoes, etc... JMHO

 

[jem88]

What?? Your post doesnt make much sense, can you clarify?

Actually it makes perfect sense. Read it again and pay attention to the word in the bold font.

 

[jem88]

I agree. I don't think there's any question. However, for a time, I do believe that Irvin was the best WR in the NFL, including Rice. Over the span of each players career, it is not debatable but for a specific time frame, I do believe Irvin was better then Rice.

This I agree with. From 1991-1993, I'd take Irvin. But there's absolutely no contest as to who the better WR was over the course of their respective careers. I hated Rice, but he was the best player to ever play his position.

 

[jem88]

I am in the minority, but you never know what time had in store for Irvin's career.

Well I guess you never know what time had in store for Danny White either. Maybe if he hadn't broken his wrist in 1986 and...... see how ridiculous this sounds?

 

[jem88]

Actually he was off to one of his best starts before he got hurt.

That's not true. He was having a hard time in Gailey's offence (for which I'll forever loath Gailey.) I believe he had something like 10 catches in first 3 games.

 

[joseephuss]

That's not true. He was having a hard time in Gailey's offence (for which I'll forever loath Gailey.) I believe he had something like 10 catches in first 3 games.

Gailey would take him out on some third downs situations. They weren't short yardage situations either. I never could grasp the Gailey offense. It is forever burned in my mind that he brought Ernie Mills in motion from the outside and once he got to the tackle spot the ball was snapped and Mills stayed in to block pass rushers. Good use of a small receiver.

 

[DWhite Fan]

Sanders and Green will go in on the first ballot no doubt. I would take Green over Sanders any day of the week. I hate the Commanders more than any other team, but when Green fetched Tony D. from behind in that Monday night game he earned my respect. Sanders was tooooooo much for himself.

I know most will disagree, but I think Lynn Swann was a better reciever than Jerry Rice. Lynn just didn't play long enough. I would take Irvin over Rice anytime. Irvin was the heart and soul of the 90's Cowboys.

 

[stilltheguru]

Sanders and Green will go in on the first ballot no doubt. I would take Green over Sanders any day of the week. I hate the Commanders more than any other team, but when Green fetched Tony D. from behind in that Monday night game he earned my respect. Sanders was tooooooo much for himself.

I know most will disagree, but I think Lynn Swann was a better reciever than Jerry Rice. Lynn just didn't play long enough. I would take Irvin over Rice anytime. Irvin was the heart and soul of the 90's Cowboys.

^^Another lost cause. Call me when one of his teammates says he was a selfish player since he was so much for himself. Just one teammate. Pleaseeeeeeeeeeee show me.

 

[ReturnToGlory]

No doubt Deion and Green are first ballot HOFers. If not, the Hall is a bigger joke than even I thought.

But in my mind Deion is the one and only shut down corner of this era, (except against Michael Irvin with Troy throwing to him, of course.) And we all know that Irvin used to own Green.

Just by stats/talent/tangibles alone, it's a no brainer to pick Rice and Sanders over Irvin and Emmitt, but which two would you pick if you had to go to battle on a football field? No doubt Irvin and Emmitt had the heart. Emmitt would get you the first down on 3rd and 1 and Irvin would get you the first down on 3rd and 8.

And everyone remembers what Irvin did in the NFC Championship game when we was double covered all game long in the mud in San Fran.