Professional Football Researchers Association Forum
PFRA is a nonprofit organization dedicated to the history of professional football. Formed in 1979, PFRA members include many of the game's foremost historians and writers.
Hail Casares wrote:At some point the rubber needs to meet the road with production and awards etc in reality.
I disagree the best analysis comes from players who played with or against them. There can be bias there as well. Just as anywhere. (
.
I agree that there can be bias in testimonials. But there also can be objectivity as well. It is a case-by-case basis. I also think a "all of the above" approach is the best—honors, stats, testimonial, rings, any intangibles that are relevant .. . all of it.
Do all voters do that? I think many do, maybe most of them. No one is going to go juts by of one OLmen says.
But in Young's case---the testimonial, IMO put him over the top. What was clear here is that Young > Sapp, Kennedy, etc. and the testimonials show that. IMO, at least me---the eye test said it as well.
JohnTurney wrote:
But in Young's case---the testimonial, IMO put him over the top. What was clear here is that Young > Sapp, Kennedy, etc. and the testimonials show that. IMO, at least me---the eye test said it as well.
This is a joke.
Bryant's induction is insanely weak.
The one thing put Young over the top is spurious at best and laughable at worst.
Well, whoever it was that was giving those testimonials, it clearly wasn't the experts who actually evaluated Young AT THE TIME HE WAS PLAYING and who only included him on their all-pro teams, first or second team, once or twice in his 14-year career. Unless it's a case of these folks believing that all of the DTs from that era who are already in the HOF, plus Young, plus all the DTs from that era who were better than Young and who aren't yet in, that they are also Hall of Famers, which is a whole bunch of people.
JohnTurney wrote:
But in Young's case---the testimonial, IMO put him over the top. What was clear here is that Young > Sapp, Kennedy, etc. and the testimonials show that. IMO, at least me---the eye test said it as well.
This is a joke.
Bryant's induction is insanely weak.
The one thing put Young over the top is spurious at best and laughable at worst.
Okay, I am out of this one. Anytime someone goes to "joke" and "laughable" it's time for me to get out of convo. Plain disrespectful.
JohnTurney wrote:
But in Young's case---the testimonial, IMO put him over the top. What was clear here is that Young > Sapp, Kennedy, etc. and the testimonials show that. IMO, at least me---the eye test said it as well.
This is a joke.
Bryant's induction is insanely weak.
The one thing put Young over the top is spurious at best and laughable at worst.
Okay, I am out of this one. Anytime someone goes to "joke" and "laughable" it's time for me to get out of convo. Plain disrespectful.
You haven't addressed anything with any item of substance. You're just providing quotes from OL about a guy who made 4PB's 20+ years ago as though I couldn't just Google Warren Sapp and find a litany of players discussing how great he was(In literally 10 seconds I found comments by Ogden, Faneca and teammate Derrick Brooks..pretty good players IIRC.....) + he has trophies in the case and awards and completely obliterate your Young>Sapp idea.
Hail Casares wrote:
You haven't addressed anything with any item of substance. You're just providing quotes from OL about a guy who made 4PB's 20+ years ago as though I couldn't just Google Warren Sapp and find a litany of players discussing how great he was(In literally 10 seconds I found comments by Ogden, Faneca and teammate Derrick Brooks..pretty good players IIRC.....) + he has trophies in the case and awards and completely obliterate your Young>Sapp idea.
Yeah, you're right. I lack substance and just provide "quotes" from NFL players who know the difference between the two.
But when you throw in "joke" and that verbiage... no need to go further. Sorry. I'll just stay obliterated.
Hail Casares wrote:
You haven't addressed anything with any item of substance. You're just providing quotes from OL about a guy who made 4PB's 20+ years ago as though I couldn't just Google Warren Sapp and find a litany of players discussing how great he was(In literally 10 seconds I found comments by Ogden, Faneca and teammate Derrick Brooks..pretty good players IIRC.....) + he has trophies in the case and awards and completely obliterates your Young>Sapp idea.
Yeah, you're right. I lack substance and just provide "quotes" from NFL players who know the difference between the two.
But when you throw in "joke" and that verbiage... no need to go further. Sorry. I'll just stay obliterated.
...and you've been shown that these quotes mean virtually nothing because we can find them about anyone...and my quotes about Sapp would disprove your entire point about Young.
Frankly, your hissy fit in here and complete inability to respond to anything Andy, Bryan, or myself with anything substantive to counter the "quotes reasoning" sort of proves our point that you have no leg to stand on...and you know it.
Hail Casares wrote:
Frankly, your hissy fit in here and complete inability to respond to anything Andy, Bryan, or myself with anything substantive to counter the "quotes reasoning" sort of proves our point that you have no leg to stand on...and you know it.
JohnTurney wrote:
But in Young's case---the testimonial, IMO put him over the top. What was clear here is that Young > Sapp, Kennedy, etc. and the testimonials show that. IMO, at least me---the eye test said it as well.
This is a joke.
Bryant's induction is insanely weak.
The one thing put Young over the top is spurious at best and laughable at worst.
Okay, I am out of this one. Anytime someone goes to "joke" and "laughable" it's time for me to get out of convo. Plain disrespectful.
Probably for the best. The "pros vs. joes" logic just really doesn't hold up any stronger than someone who never played or coached...but especially played at that level. I can't imagine going up to Schlereth, Tobek, Timmerman, Roaf (who is in the HOF) or whomever vouched for Young on that panel and essentially telling them their opinion is full of bunk and laughable because I watched so-n-so player on my TV screen or in the stands at best, and know better compared to you who actually was down there in the trenches going up against the likes of Sapp, Randle, Perry, let alone Young himself. That would be an interesting conversation. I'm sure it would go swell for the average online yahoo where the best flex in your arsenal is "but this sportswriter at the time said..."
Last edited by Ness on Wed Feb 16, 2022 9:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
There will always be bias. Whether it is from players, coaches, media, etc. Also, everyone also has their own criteria for ranking players. My criteria may not be the same as John, Andy, etc. However, that does not invalidate anyone's opinion. We can have respectful debate without tearing anyone else down.
Now, if anyone says Dilweg is not the most deserving of induction:
