3 seniors per year from 2023-2025, 9 total

Discuss candidates for the Pro Football Hall of Fame and the PFRA's Hall of Very Good
rewing84
Posts: 436
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:00 pm

Re: 3 seniors per year from 2023-2025, 9 total

Post by rewing84 »

good question about the packers brian to answer you im not sure of the order of deserving packers seniors if had my way it would be dilweg lewellen Howton Isbell Dowler Gillingham Forester Dale Sharpe
User avatar
Bryan
Posts: 2509
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 8:37 am

Re: 3 seniors per year from 2023-2025, 9 total

Post by Bryan »

Brian wolf wrote:Every team just about has multiple players that are deserving of election but the Packers seem to have some interesting cases ... Does Sharpe deserve to go in before Dilweg, Lewellen or Howton ?
I would be more comfortable putting in Sharpe over the other three, simply because I saw Sharpe play for his entire career. I can confidently say he was the 2nd best WR in the NFL (to Jerry Rice) for almost the entirety of his career. I have to rely on retroactive assessments of Dilweg, Lewellen & Howton.
Brian wolf
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2019 12:43 am

Re: 3 seniors per year from 2023-2025, 9 total

Post by Brian wolf »

It would also be interesting if the Senior Committee looks at past finalists who came so close to being elected, out of respect for voters from the past. When a player like Charlie Conerly or LC Greenwood becomes a finalist for five or more times, it shows alot of past support and deserves renewed consideration. A HC like Don Coryell was also a multiple finalist.
rewing84
Posts: 436
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:00 pm

Re: 3 seniors per year from 2023-2025, 9 total

Post by rewing84 »

Bryan wrote:
Brian wolf wrote:Every team just about has multiple players that are deserving of election but the Packers seem to have some interesting cases ... Does Sharpe deserve to go in before Dilweg, Lewellen or Howton ?
I would be more comfortable putting in Sharpe over the other three, simply because I saw Sharpe play for his entire career. I can confidently say he was the 2nd best WR in the NFL (to Jerry Rice) for almost the entirety of his career. I have to rely on retroactive assessments of Dilweg, Lewellen & Howton.

id be ok with sterling sharpe because like you i saw him play for his entire career and the part about him being the 2nd best wr i agree 110%
Andy Piascik
Posts: 155
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2014 11:32 pm

Re: 3 seniors per year from 2023-2025, 9 total

Post by Andy Piascik »

Brian, I think players who were finalists multiple times like Conerly and Greenwood should get the same consideration as every other Senior and no more. Why, for example, should Greenwood get more consideration than a more qualified candidate like Dilweg who has never been a finalist even once? Why should Conerly be given extra credit over a more qualified candidate like Barwegen? It's unfair and it's not right.

I'll repeat what I said recently in another thread: all candidates should be evaluated by what they did in their careers without gumming up the works with nonsense like all-decade teams, half-decade teams or whether they have previously been a finalist. The only exception I would stipulate is military service that delayed the start of or interrupted the careers of certain players by multiple years (Rymkus, Brito, Barwegen and Jim Ray Smith, to name four).

In a way, guys like Conerly, Greenwood, Kuechenberg and others missing out despite multiple times as finalists is exactly the way the systems is supposed to work. There are a lot of guys who come up just short of being Hall of Famers, which may be unfortunate for the individual but important for the integrity of the HOF.
User avatar
GameBeforeTheMoney
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2021 3:21 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: 3 seniors per year from 2023-2025, 9 total

Post by GameBeforeTheMoney »

Andy, I understand and respect your point, but I honestly think the all-decade teams are a good thing to consider -- especially pre-1960s. I'm not saying that they should be the only thing to consider, but I do think they have their place. In a lot of cases, we're evaluating players none of us have seen play. If we have seen them play, it's only from the small bits of film that are available. Current voters are in the same predicament. We can look at stats. A lot of us dig pretty deep in reading old newspapers, interviews, etc., but it does, IMO, help some to have the all-decade team to gauge what a credible group has concluded.
Podcast: https://Podcast.TheGameBeforeTheMoney.com

Website/Blog: https://TheGameBeforeTheMoney.com

Author's Name: Jackson Michael
User avatar
Ken Crippen
Site Moderator
Posts: 529
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2014 8:10 am
Location: Here
Contact:

Re: 3 seniors per year from 2023-2025, 9 total

Post by Ken Crippen »

GameBeforeTheMoney wrote:Andy, I understand and respect your point, but I honestly think the all-decade teams are a good thing to consider -- especially pre-1960s. I'm not saying that they should be the only thing to consider, but I do think they have their place. In a lot of cases, we're evaluating players none of us have seen play. If we have seen them play, it's only from the small bits of film that are available. Current voters are in the same predicament. We can look at stats. A lot of us dig pretty deep in reading old newspapers, interviews, etc., but it does, IMO, help some to have the all-decade team to gauge what a credible group has concluded.
There are some flaws in the all-decade teams, as I discuss in the following two articles:

All-Decade Team of the 1920s: https://www.si.com/nfl/talkoffame/nfl/r ... all-decade
All-Decade Team of the 1930s: https://www.si.com/nfl/talkoffame/nfl/1 ... ecade-team

Just my opinions.
Football Learning Academy: https://www.football-learning-academy.com
An online school teaching football history.

FLA Podcast: https://www.football-learning-academy.com/pages/podcast
Brian wolf
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2019 12:43 am

Re: 3 seniors per year from 2023-2025, 9 total

Post by Brian wolf »

Thats why I brought up the Mid-Decade teams devised and evaluated by PFJ. If the voters looked at these teams or the HOF could reevaluate the obviously flawed All-Decade selections, using the better organized and researched Mid-Decade teams for reference, better evaluations would be given, helping the overrall integrity of the process rather than getting team homerism from biased writers and voters.
User avatar
GameBeforeTheMoney
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2021 3:21 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: 3 seniors per year from 2023-2025, 9 total

Post by GameBeforeTheMoney »

Ken Crippen wrote:
GameBeforeTheMoney wrote:Andy, I understand and respect your point, but I honestly think the all-decade teams are a good thing to consider -- especially pre-1960s. I'm not saying that they should be the only thing to consider, but I do think they have their place. In a lot of cases, we're evaluating players none of us have seen play. If we have seen them play, it's only from the small bits of film that are available. Current voters are in the same predicament. We can look at stats. A lot of us dig pretty deep in reading old newspapers, interviews, etc., but it does, IMO, help some to have the all-decade team to gauge what a credible group has concluded.
There are some flaws in the all-decade teams, as I discuss in the following two articles:

All-Decade Team of the 1920s: https://www.si.com/nfl/talkoffame/nfl/r ... all-decade
All-Decade Team of the 1930s: https://www.si.com/nfl/talkoffame/nfl/1 ... ecade-team

Just my opinions.
Ken, I agree that they likely aren't going to be perfect -- but my point is there aren't going to be any subpar players on those lists, either. You brought up Wayne Millner, he's a HOFer. Was a big part of Washington winning the 37 Championship Game. Whether there may have been one or two perhaps more deserving players on the all-decade team is understandable, but you can trust that the all-decade team determines that he's in the upper echelon. So, if he wasn't in the HOF already, the all-decade team might be a good place to start the conversation. And again, I'm not saying to just go by the all-decade teams or that they're perfect, I'm just saying that they serve a purpose -- "Hey, let's at least discuss this guy who's on the all-decade team and not in the HOF. Does he belong? Why isn't he in yet?" You can at the very least rely on the fact that to make an all-decade team the player has to be at the very, very least above average, if not excellent. I just think the all-decade teams have a place in that it's agreed upon by knowledgeable people that those guys made an impact above many of their peers for at least a period of time.
Podcast: https://Podcast.TheGameBeforeTheMoney.com

Website/Blog: https://TheGameBeforeTheMoney.com

Author's Name: Jackson Michael
User avatar
GameBeforeTheMoney
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2021 3:21 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: 3 seniors per year from 2023-2025, 9 total

Post by GameBeforeTheMoney »

And same with those mid-decade teams. Knowledgeable people making those lists, you're not going to have mediocre players on that list. These things can serve as a starting point to at least discuss those players. Again, I'm not saying they're the only players that should be discussed, but you've got a solid starting point to say, "Hey, this guy deserves at least some consideration."
Podcast: https://Podcast.TheGameBeforeTheMoney.com

Website/Blog: https://TheGameBeforeTheMoney.com

Author's Name: Jackson Michael
Post Reply