Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Your 15 2014 Hall of Fame Finalists


tazinib1
 Share

Recommended Posts

Marvin Harrison 13 years played < Andre Reed 16 years played

Marvin Harrison 1,102 receptions > Andre Reed 951 receptions

Marvin Harrison 14,580 yards > Andre Reed 13,198 yards

Marvin Harrison 128 TD > Andre Reed 88 TD

Marvin Harrison 76.7 yards per game > Andre Reed 56.4 yards per game

 

Marvin Harrison's best season: 143 receptions 1,722 yards 11 TD

Andre Reed's best season: 90 receptions 1,303 yards 8 TD

 

I saw both these guys play, and it's not even close. Marvin was the much better player.

 

If you had your choice of these two players, most would take Harrison. Isn't that what the HOF is about? If there is a better WR than you up for nomination, shouldn't they get in ahead of you? Marvin has more receptions that ANY OTHER WR in history other than Jerry Rice. He played hurt. He went over the middle. His routes were flawless. He wasn't an imposing physical presence like Randy Moss or Calvin Johnson, but he put up those kinds of numbers.

 

I think it's a travesty he didn't get in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when Reed retired he was 3rd all time in yards

 

Exactly, if we're going to use the stats of each WR when they retire to say "they're better than these other guys from a decade or more ago" then those guys will never get in. See Art Monk (finally made) and Tim Brown.

 

Harrison will get in in the next few years. CH and other Colts fans will need to understand that. Its not a travesty, it is the way HOF selection goes (anybody who's followed it would know that).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, the question isn't whether or not Harrison is more deserving than Reed. The question is whether or not Reed had a Hall of Fame career. I personally never thought of him at that level, but he was close enough I suppose. Harrison will get in. If Reed didn't soon, he wasn't going to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do understand how the process works. I think Andre Reed is a borderline HOF receiver. I definitely don't think he deserved to get in ahead of Marvin Harrison because "time was running out." Marvin is a slam dunk HOFer. It's five years later and I don't think any wide receiver has passed any of Marvin's records in the meantime.

Edited by CaptainHook
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do understand how the process works. I think Andre Reed is a borderline HOF receiver. I definitely don't think he deserved to get in ahead of Marvin Harrison because "time was running out." Marvin is a slam dunk HOFer. It's five years later and I don't think any wide receiver has passed any of Marvin's records in the meantime.

 

With all due respect, I'm not entirely sure that you understand what goes on behind the scenes. When guys start to get close to falling off the ballot, their discussion changes. The discussion changes from "who is the most deserving?" to "is the player deserving, period?" After they meet and go to war discussing said player, and it is decided that the player is worthy of the HOF, and there is another player at his position that has more future opportunities, that player most likely gets bumped. It is all part of the discussion. It isn't a percentage like baseball. There has been a long list of players, particularly at the WR position, that have had to wait in line.

 

I do think part of it is that you're slightly overvaluing Harrison while slightly undervaluing Reed. It would take a guy to be in the conversation for the best ever to trump the process of getting in at the WR position, and I don't think Harrison is there. I also do think he is pretty clearly behind TO and Moss, and that may make it cloudy for Harrison for a while if he doesn't get in before they're eligible, but I think he will. The herd ahead of him is thinning pretty quickly.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I think of Andre Reed, I think of a Pro Bowl type WR, not a Hall of Fame WR. Nothing against the guy, he just never struck me as somebody that opponents feared, in the same way that they did guys like Rice, Harrison, Moss, Owens (or even Brown, for that matter). I always thought of him as the best WR on a very good Bills offense/team.

 

However, when you look at Reed's numbers, he probably deserves to be there... He's in the top 15 (top 13 actually) in all three stats (TD's, yards, and catches) for his position, all time. Add in the fact that he played on a Bills team that made it to four SB's, and yeah... I think he should be in the HOF.

 

Does he deserve to get in ahead of Harrison? Well, it appears as though the voters place a whole lot of emphasis on timing, and not as much on who has the better numbers. Otherwise, there's no good reason for Reed to get in over Brown. Both had similar careers, in terms of length, but Brown beat Reed handily in pretty much every stat worth mentioning... almost 2K more yards, 150 more receptions, and 13 more scores (100 vs 87). The only difference (in Reed's favor) is that Reed played for a team that lost more Super Bowls.

 

If Brown had gotten in ahead of Harrison (and Reed), I could understand that. Reed getting in ahead of both Brown and Harrison makes little sense. Not to mention, if you're going to leave Brown out, there are probably a handful of guys on that list (at other positions) who deserve to get in before Reed... Kevin Greene is an obvious one that comes to mind.

 

As for Ray Guy, he's the best at his position, of all time. If owners and coaches can get in, I think punters should be able to as well. Or, at least ONE punter, who happens to be the best ever at his craft. I'm glad he's finally in, but I wasn't exactly losing sleep over the fact that he waited as long as he did. There have been (and still are) far greater omissions than him.

 

Greene, for example, is 3rd all-time in sacks. Nobody else in the top 10 (who is eligible) is not in the HOF, so why isn't Greene? I have no idea, but again, if Tim Brown isn't in, I don't think Reed should be (and Greene would then be more deserving than both of them, in my opinion).

 

Here is an interesting article, written by a HOF board member, that talks a little bit about the thought process behind some of the selections. Like I said earlier (and this writer sounds like he tends to agree), it seems like timing means more than numbers, at least in some cases....

 

http://www.kansascit...e-for-will.html

Edited by Gopher
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess what I'm saying about Reed is this. I'm not even sure he was a top-five WR, at any point in his career, of all active WR's. Top ten? Sure. Top three? No way. Top five? Hard to say.

 

So, it's easy to get all wrapped up in career numbers, but to me, that's only half of the story. The other half is how dominant was said player during the time in which they played. Reed was good. He was never great. Tim Brown was somewhere in between very good and great, but one could certainly make an argument that Kevin Greene was far more dominant than either one of them.

 

That's the part that I have trouble with... There are so many factors. Was the player dominant? How do their numbers compare? Did they win championships, make it to Pro Bowls, etc. Reed has most of those things going for him, except for the fact that he was never a top 2-3 guy at his position. I still think he probably deserves to get in, based on the whole body of work, but I would give Tim Brown the edge, when comparing the two. And, Kevin Greene has a better resume than either one of them, and arguably just about anybody else on this year's list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For example, 1988... Reed was second in receptions with 88, and 5th in receiving yards (1312). But, in terms of touchdowns, he was tied for 6th (with 5 other guys) with 9 scores. Guys ahead of him include Rice (21 TD's), Sharpe (12), Carter (11), and Anthony Miller and John Taylor (10 each). Mark Carrier had just as many scores (and more yards) than Reed. Art Monk and Gary Clark combined for over 2400 yards receiving that year. Anthony Miller, Webster Slaughter, and Tim McGee all broke 1200 yards.

 

So, in what was one of Reed's top 2 or 3 individual seasons, he certainly wasn't top-three, and I don't even think you can make a definitive case that he was a top-five WR. You can make an argument that he was, but you can make just as strong of one that he wasn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good points Gopher.

 

I was having drinks/dinner with some friends Saturday night, they kept checking their phones. I asked "what's up" we're waiting for the HOF announcements, we want to see it Bettis gets in." When the list was announced and he didn't they were outraged. Of course they are Steeler fans. They asked "How does Michael Strahan get in but not Bettis?" I simply responded, he was a better player and more deserving.

 

Of course they hardly recognized the names of any of the others who got the nod.

 

An interesting article on those who some consider were snubbed

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24427192/four-snubs-from-the-pro-football-hall-of-fame-class-of-2014

Edited by stevegrab
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only other years where Andre Reed was anywhere close to a top-five WR (in terms of numbers, anyway) were 1991 and 1994.

 

In 1991, Reed had 81/1113/10. Other WR's (who put up as good or better numbers) included Rice (80/1206/14), Irvin (93/1523/8), Jefferies (100/1181/7), Drew Hill (90/1109/4), Clark (70/1340/10), Rison (81/976/12), Haynes (50/1122/11), and Clayton (70/1053/12). Add in the fact that Ellard and Monk were in the prime of their careers, and James Lofton was still playing at a high level, and I'm not sure Reed is top-five in that group.

 

In 1994, Reed was 6th in receptions with 90, behind Carter (122), Rice (112), Mathis (111), Ben Coates (96), and Sharpe (94). Tim Brown and the other Sharpe (Shannon) were right behind Reed, with 89 and 87, respectively. Rice, Ellard, Mathis, and Brown had more yards than Reed. And, just like in '88, Reed's 8 touchdowns paled in comparison to some of the others... Sharpe (18), Rice (13), Mathis/Moore/Pickens (11 each). Brown had 9 scores that year.

 

So, looking at what were Reed's three best seasons, by far, statistically, he's clearly a top-ten WR (of that era, not overall necessarily), but not necessarily top-five (of that era). Those are his BEST three years. The more I look at it, the more I'm convinced that Reed is a classic case of someone getting in based on overall (career) numbers, not so much because of how dominant they were when they played.

 

Edit: Granted, I'm making my "argument" based on numbers as well, and what I originally said about Reed (being not as dominant as others) had more to do with the "eye test," and what I remember from watching him (and his peers) play. And, keep in mind that I'm not anti-Reed, or anything of the sort. Like I said before, I think he probably deserves the nod, if for no other reason than his career numbers, combined with the fact that he played on what was perennialy a very good team.

 

More than anything, I just find it interesting to pick apart some of these numbers, and try to figure out why Player X got in before Player Y. Of course, unless they played the same position, it's usually pretty hard to compare the two.

Edited by Gopher
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With all due respect, I'm not entirely sure that you understand what goes on behind the scenes. When guys start to get close to falling off the ballot, their discussion changes. The discussion changes from "who is the most deserving?" to "is the player deserving, period?" After they meet and go to war discussing said player, and it is decided that the player is worthy of the HOF, and there is another player at his position that has more future opportunities, that player most likely gets bumped. It is all part of the discussion. It isn't a percentage like baseball. There has been a long list of players, particularly at the WR position, that have had to wait in line.

 

I do think part of it is that you're slightly overvaluing Harrison while slightly undervaluing Reed. It would take a guy to be in the conversation for the best ever to trump the process of getting in at the WR position, and I don't think Harrison is there. I also do think he is pretty clearly behind TO and Moss, and that may make it cloudy for Harrison for a while if he doesn't get in before they're eligible, but I think he will. The herd ahead of him is thinning pretty quickly.

 

I understand it perfectly well. I think the fact he was "running out of eligibility" is a terrible reason to make someone a HOFer.

 

I also agree wholeheartedly with Gophers above post. I'm not sure Andre Reed was a top 5 receiver at any point in his career. That makes him HOF? Some of his numbers can be attributed to playing for 16 years.

 

And if I was drafting a WR from Marvin's era, I would most definitely take him over Randy Moss and Terrell Owens. Why? He wasn't a cancer. He played his entire career for the team that drafted him, and for the most part, put up numbers that were better than, or equal to what they did.

 

If you're a receiver, and you've caught more passes than any other wideout in NFL history except one other guy (even 5 years after you retire), how in the hell are you not a slam dunk HOF WR?

 

You also have to remember, Marvin retired after 13 years, with offers on the table to renegotiate with the Colts and to play for other teams. Moss played 16 seasons. Owens played 15 years.

 

Yet Marvin is only 1,354 yards behind Owens. 712 yards behind Moss.

Marvin has 24 more catches than Owens. 120 more than Moss.

Moss has 28 more TD's. Owens 23 more.

Harrison averaged 76.7 yards per game. Owens 72.8 and Moss 70.1

Marvin won a Super Bowl.

Edited by CaptainHook
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information