Makeup class of 17

[Bryan]

And if Layne had no titles under his belt, instead of the 2 outright and 1 he heavily contributed to, it's unlikely he'd be in Canton. The strongest part of his argument are titles, some intangibles, and possibly some film study aspects (I haven't seen anything written about him on the last of these), not his stats.

IIRC when Layne retired he had the most passing yards in NFL history, and he was 2nd in QB rushing yards behind Tobin Rote. Yeah, his efficiency stats are terrible looking at it from a post-1978 perspective, but there is also some 'meat on the bone' so to speak regarding Layne's stats.

The only films I have of Layne are his Lions days; I don't have anything when he was with Pittsburgh. He does stand out on film as a playmaker.

The 50-51 Lions didn't give Layne great protection, and he does well in completing passes while taking a beating. His running is a big part of his game. It seemed like a lot of his runs weren't scrambles but rather designed QB sweeps and sneaks. In a few of the games he's kicking FGs (and making nearly all of them). I don't want to mimic the historic scouting report, but his passes don't look like Van Brocklin's...he's not throwing frozen ropes. But on film Layne is always doing something. I can't really describe it other than to say Layne 'influenced' games more than the statsheet showed. To steal Facenda's line about Tarkenton, "...like all Layne teams, the Lions could score...". Layne did a great job doing whatever it took to put points on the scoreboard. Even in 1950 and 1951 the Lions were among the league leaders in points scored. The Steelers offense improved immensely after acquiring Layne, too. I think that is Layne's best statistical 'argument'.

[bachslunch]

And if Layne had no titles under his belt, instead of the 2 outright and 1 he heavily contributed to, it's unlikely he'd be in Canton. The strongest part of his argument are titles, some intangibles, and possibly some film study aspects (I haven't seen anything written about him on the last of these), not his stats.

IIRC when Layne retired he had the most passing yards in NFL history, and he was 2nd in QB rushing yards behind Tobin Rote. Yeah, his efficiency stats are terrible looking at it from a post-1978 perspective, but there is also some 'meat on the bone' so to speak regarding Layne's stats.

The only films I have of Layne are his Lions days; I don't have anything when he was with Pittsburgh. He does stand out on film as a playmaker.

The 50-51 Lions didn't give Layne great protection, and he does well in completing passes while taking a beating. His running is a big part of his game. It seemed like a lot of his runs weren't scrambles but rather designed QB sweeps and sneaks. In a few of the games he's kicking FGs (and making nearly all of them). I don't want to mimic the historic scouting report, but his passes don't look like Van Brocklin's...he's not throwing frozen ropes. But on film Layne is always doing something. I can't really describe it other than to say Layne 'influenced' games more than the statsheet showed. To steal Facenda's line about Tarkenton, "...like all Layne teams, the Lions could score...". Layne did a great job doing whatever it took to put points on the scoreboard. Even in 1950 and 1951 the Lions were among the league leaders in points scored. The Steelers offense improved immensely after acquiring Layne, too. I think that is Layne's best statistical 'argument'.

Thanks, Bryan. Much appreciated and very informative.

[rewing84]

https://www.profootballhof.com/one-time ... next-year/

[bachslunch]

https://www.profootballhof.com/one-time ... next-year/

Thanks for posting, rewing84.

Looks like there will indeed be a final class of 20 for this year. For the non-regular candidates, there will be a preliminary group of 20 Seniors, 10 Contributors, and 8 Coaches, which will then be narrowed to 10, 3, and 2. This will all be done by what’s described as a “Blue Ribbon Panel.” The final slate will be voted on as a single unit, yes or no, on the standard “Selection Saturday.”

My guess is that it will be very hard not to elect the slate of 10/3/2, which is a good thing. It’s also possible we may see nominees on the slate who will otherwise have a hard time getting in — not sure what that means, if anything.

[bachslunch]

First reaction is that it’s going to be really tough to come up with 10 Contributors and 8 Coaches who are deserving for the preliminary group. Should be really easy to draw up a list of 20 deserving Seniors, though.

Anybody want to guess who will make up the preliminary group? Might take a crack at it later.

[Rupert Patrick]

First reaction is that it’s going to be really tough to come up with 10 Contributors and 8 Coaches who are deserving for the preliminary group. Should be really easy to draw up a list of 20 deserving Seniors, though.

Anybody want to guess who will make up the preliminary group? Might take a crack at it later.

For Contributor, I think Steve Sabol is a slam dunk. Ed Sabol might have started NFL Films, but Steve Sabol was the always the heart (and for about 40 years, the face) of NFL Films.

[bachslunch]

Eight coaches? Maybe:

*Buddy Parker
*Clark Shaughnessy
Tom Flores
George Seifert
Don Coryell
Jimmy Johnson
Dan Reeves
Mike Shanahan

Ten contributors? Maybe:

*Art McNally
*George Young
*Steve Sabol
Carroll Rosenbloom
Bucko Kilroy
Art Modell
Ralph Hay
Clint Murchison
Robert Kraft
Jack Kent Cooke

The ones I’d choose are starred.

[rewing84]

https://www.profootballhof.com/one-time ... next-year/

Thanks for posting, rewing84.

Looks like there will indeed be a final class of 20 for this year. For the non-regular candidates, there will be a preliminary group of 20 Seniors, 10 Contributors, and 8 Coaches, which will then be narrowed to 10, 3, and 2. This will all be done by what’s described as a “Blue Ribbon Panel.” The final slate will be voted on as a single unit, yes or no, on the standard “Selection Saturday.”

My guess is that it will be very hard not to elect the slate of 10/3/2, which is a good thing. It’s also possible we may see nominees on the slate who will otherwise have a hard time getting in — not sure what that means, if anything.

Not a problem Bachs lunch

[JohnTurney]

The voting for the group is an interesting twist. My understanding is that the first couple of classes had to be unanimous but only one old-time voter told me that. Anyway, if there are some bad names on list, I guess in theory the whole lot could be voted down. I doubt 10 or so voters would have the balls to vote down a class recommended by a Blue ribbon panel



Good quote, "Hall of Fame president David Baker, "We can’t have everybody in there that fans want, and I assure you that I get that mail and I get those phone calls. . . It’s not the hall of very, very good. It’s the Hall of Fame, and it should be hard to make it into.”

[JohnTurney]

I will add that the voting in as a group would allow (in theory) someone like a Paul Tagliabue to get in because to kill his nomination would be to kill the whole group. Not saying this was designed that way but it's clever if it was.

Also, here is another possible "lock", of course no one is a lock, but let's say the cards are stacked to really help: Ken Riley. Dick LeBeau is on the Blue Ribbon committee and he has the gravitas to push Riley through. He will surely use the "All-Pros and Pro Bowls are popularity contests and don't mean anything" argument for Riley. He will ride the 1 All-Pro, 2 2nd team All-Pros and 65 picks in HOF, I am betting. Of course, no one will be there to stand up to that or give him the Proscout data of never being "blue" or even "red" from 1975-on.

LeBeau coached Riley in Cincy----and that will be a big boost...