Why isn't Ken Stabler in the HoF?

[BringBackThatOleTimeBoys]

1st of all, congratulations to Ray Guy....his induction was long overdue.

Secondly, I'm not a Raider's fan, but still recognize for about twenty years, they won 80% of their games - they had great players. This year the Broncos scored more points in one season than any offence. If you list great offences, they would include the Raiders in the 70's.

Stabler is in the 70's all decade team. Ask me the best QBs of the 70's and my answer is Staubach, Griese, Bradshaw, Stabler, Tarkenton. Maybe add Archie Manning and Ken Anderson, but The Snake is definitely on the short list.

Do I have a bias to Stabler? OK, I'm left-handed, but seriously the two things a QB does that makes a name for him is win playoff games and win games inside the final two minutes - The Snake excelled at those things. For the same reason, that's why my mind says Peyton Manning is the best QB of our time, but my heart says Tom Brady - snatching victory from defeat.

 

[Tabascocat]

He shouldn't be. He is just below the line but will never get in.

For his career, he has 194 TD's and 222 INT's with only 27,938 yds passing over 15 seasons.

He also had a great receiving core during his prime. I think if he had more success in Houston, like he did in Oakland, he would be in. I like "The Snake" too but he just came up a bit short for the Hall IMO.

 

[KB1122]

Because the Hall of Fame voters favor longevity over excellence, IMO. If you are Curtis Martin, and you have a long career of solid seasons, and you're friendly to reporters, you get in ahead of Terrell Davis or Sterling Sharpe, even if no one at the time would have traded them for you.

 

[joseephuss]

Because the Hall of Fame voters favor longevity over excellence, IMO. If you are Curtis Martin, and you have a long career of solid seasons, and you're friendly to reporters, you get in ahead of Terrell Davis or Sterling Sharpe, even if no one at the time would have traded them for you.

That doesn't make sense. Stabler played 15 years and had 3793 pass attempts in his career. That is very comparable to what the other guys of the 70s did if not more. He ranks 52nd all time in pass attempts right now and when he retired he was in the top 15. Stabler definitely has longevity.

In my opinion a Hall of Famer should have both excellence and some longevity. They should have a combination of a few great years along with some good years. To be the best of the best, they should contribute for a significant amount of time.

 

[BringBackThatOleTimeBoys]

That doesn't make sense. Stabler played 15 years and had 3793 pass attempts in his career. That is very comparable to what the other guys of the 70s did if not more. He ranks 52nd all time in pass attempts right now and when he retired he was in the top 15. Stabler definitely has longevity.

In my opinion a Hall of Famer should have both excellence and some longevity. They should have a combination of a few great years along with some good years. To be the best of the best, they should contribute for a significant amount of time.

This is what confuses me: Why is he one of the top 70's passers (all but him in the HoF), on the all decade team? If he's not HoF, then he should not be on those. I respect those that say Stabler is not quite HoF, but the other recognitions plus that recent thread ranking him #15 all time QB is quite a tease. This is probably a similar argument Ed Werder has made for Landry era Cowboys.

 

[joseephuss]

I don't get it, either. Stabler is a HoFer in my opinion.

I also don't get how Don Shula was the first team head coach for the 1970's all-decade team over Chuck Knoll and Tom Landry.

 

[burmafrd]

I don't get it, either. Stabler is a HoFer in my opinion.

I also don't get how Don Shula was the first team head coach for the 1970's all-decade team over Chuck Knoll and Tom Landry.

you could make the same argument about Jim Plunkett as well

 

[joseephuss]

you could make the same argument about Jim Plunkett as well

I don't think you can. He was horrible for the majority of his career. Even when he was good he wasn't great. Stabler has Plunkett beat in every major statistical category. I don't think Plunkett was a major factor in the Raiders Super Bowl winning seasons.

 

[RS12]

Stats pre 1980 are negatively skewed because of the pass defense rules which makes Staubachs stats more impressive.

 

[joseephuss]

Stats pre 1980 are negatively skewed because of the pass defense rules which makes Staubachs stats more impressive.

Sure and we are comparing contemporaries who played most of their careers in the 70s. Stabler compares very well with other guys in the 70s who are in the HoF like Bob Griese. Plunkett really doesn't.