HOF or NOT?

YouTube · Post by **Philaflava** » Fri Jan 23, 2009 5:08 pm

Pick the player you'd vote into the HOF if you were only given one vote and had to choose from the list.

jazzmatazz23 · Post by **jazzmatazz23** » Fri Jan 23, 2009 5:27 pm

I voted for Torry Holt. For a 5 year stretch he was a the 4th best wideout in the NFL behind moss, harrison and owens.

MaskedTerror # 2 · Post by **MaskedTerror # 2** » Fri Jan 23, 2009 5:34 pm

mine and dstraw's vote is gone.

I can't vote now. What happened to democracy? Do over.

YouTube · Post by **Philaflava** » Fri Jan 23, 2009 5:43 pm

MaskedTerror # 2 wrote:mine and dstraw's vote is gone.

I can't vote now. What happened to democracy? Do over.

Sorry I realized it wasn't a good move to put a TE in the group, especially one who is more valuable.

Write-in vote?

Dwight Strawberry · Post by **Dwight Strawberry** » Fri Jan 23, 2009 5:54 pm

Since Tony G. is off the board.

I write in 1 vote for Yatil Green

eternalreflection · Post by **eternalreflection** » Fri Jan 23, 2009 5:58 pm

HoFers
Holt
Bruce

Close but not quite
J Smith
Fryar
R Smith

I think the Holt is a near lock to get in, Bruce should but may not, the rest are fringe players that probably don't belong and won't get in

Rice
Moss
Harrison
Owens
Holt
Bruce
Carter

only so many WRs from the era can get in

Reason · Post by **Reason** » Fri Jan 23, 2009 6:02 pm

^^
my boy (mike francesa) said holt should get in and bruce is borderline too

i got curious b/c i remembered bruce to be a yac freak and generally highly prolific wr, before and during and after kurt warner.

bruce's career stats and bruce's best career year? >>>>>>>>> holt

just statistically. i know what holt's reputation was during the warner years.

eternalreflection · Post by **eternalreflection** » Fri Jan 23, 2009 6:09 pm

Reason wrote: bruce's career stats and bruce's best career year? >>>>>>>>> holt

um Bruce has played 4extra years, so his career stats are better so far

best season

119/1781/13 vs 117/1696/12 isn't a massive gap, basically a push

Reason · Post by **Reason** » Fri Jan 23, 2009 6:45 pm

eternalreflection wrote:
Reason wrote: bruce's career stats and bruce's best career year? >>>>>>>>> holt
um Bruce has played 4extra years, so his career stats are better so far

best season

119/1781/13 vs 117/1696/12 isn't a massive gap, basically a push

my bad i thought bruce had one freak 130 catch year or something...

but those career years prove a point...that bruce was always superior in yac, and if rice got in partially b/c he was a yac god, bruce should at least get consideration

also, playing four more years is a plus, not a negative. if holt plays as many seasons as bruce when their careers are both over, i still think it's closer than people give bruce credit for.

Gregg Popabitch1 · Post by **Gregg Popabitch1** » Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:09 pm

Holt is a shoe in.

difference b/w Holt and Bruce is that Holt has been to 7 pro bowls and has been an All Pro once. Bruce has been to 4 pro bowls and never been an All Pro.

eternalreflection · Post by **eternalreflection** » Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:15 pm

also, playing four more years is a plus, not a negative. if holt plays as many seasons as bruce when their careers are both over, i still think it's closer than people give bruce credit for.

lol of course it is a plus, but you were the guy comparing a 36yr old to a 32yr old and comparing raw career #s

Holt is a shoe in.

difference b/w Holt and Bruce is that Holt has been to 7 pro bowls and has been an All Pro once. Bruce has been to 4 pro bowls and never been an All Pro.

yeah but the voters are idiots but mostly towards the Oline/Defense so WR wise the probowl votes aren't too bad of a measure, and well Bruce's 95 is a monster, just happened at the same time as 5 other monster seasons all in the NFC

an-also · Post by **an-also** » Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:18 pm

Holt was top 3 receiver for years

Trub320 · Post by **Trub320** » Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:23 pm

Jimmy Smith was a hell of a receiver at jacksonville. Him and Mccardell > Holt, Bruce. Irving Fryer was very good too.
Bruce and Holt get in not sure of the rest but everyone is deserving except Rod smith.

Prophecy · Post by **Prophecy** » Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:39 pm

Trub320 wrote:Jimmy Smith was a hell of a receiver at jacksonville. Him and Mccardell > Holt, Bruce. Irving Fryer was very good too.
Bruce and Holt get in not sure of the rest but everyone is deserving except Rod smith.

Smith is one of the most under appreciated players i have seen in my life time. If he played in a bigger market he would be held in a lot higher regard.

Also it should be noted that the numbers he put up was basically in 11 seasons as a serious infection after an appendectomy that almost killed him coupled with a broken leg his rookie season took away pretty much took away his first two seasons.

jamrage · Post by **jamrage** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:38 am

Prophecy wrote:
Trub320 wrote:Jimmy Smith was a hell of a receiver at jacksonville. Him and Mccardell > Holt, Bruce. Irving Fryer was very good too.
Bruce and Holt get in not sure of the rest but everyone is deserving except Rod smith.
Smith is one of the most under appreciated players i have seen in my life time. If he played in a bigger market he would be held in a lot higher regard.

Also it should be noted that the numbers he put up was basically in 11 seasons as a serious infection after an appendectomy that almost killed him coupled with a broken leg his rookie season took away pretty much took away his first two seasons.

Totally agree. He was a top 3-5 receiver for about a decade.

The shit of it is he didn't have his first 1000 yard receiving season until he was 27! In 9 of the next 10 seasons he had over a 1000 yards a season and had over 100 catches in a season twice. The only reason he didn't go 10 seasons in a row is that he only played in 12 games in '03. He had 5 Pro Bowl appearances as well. He was never a top 2 guy which is why he was never an All Pro, but he was a 2nd team All Pro a couple of times.

I'd easily take Holt and Bruce over Smith and McCardell though.

Holt is an absolute lock, and he's still playing.

Bruce should probably go in, but he's been hurt several times in his career.

Rod Smith and Irving Fryar are out.

A__TRAIN · Post by **A__TRAIN** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:15 am

voted rod smith because that guy was crazy consistent. But i wish picked Bruce now.

Prophecy · Post by **Prophecy** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:42 am

jamrage wrote:
Prophecy wrote:
Trub320 wrote:Jimmy Smith was a hell of a receiver at jacksonville. Him and Mccardell > Holt, Bruce. Irving Fryer was very good too.
Bruce and Holt get in not sure of the rest but everyone is deserving except Rod smith.
Smith is one of the most under appreciated players i have seen in my life time. If he played in a bigger market he would be held in a lot higher regard.

Also it should be noted that the numbers he put up was basically in 11 seasons as a serious infection after an appendectomy that almost killed him coupled with a broken leg his rookie season took away pretty much took away his first two seasons.
Totally agree. He was a top 3-5 receiver for about a decade.

The shit of it is he didn't have his first 1000 yard receiving season until he was 27! In 9 of the next 10 seasons he had over a 1000 yards a season and had over 100 catches in a season twice. The only reason he didn't go 10 seasons in a row is that he only played in 12 games in '03. He had 5 Pro Bowl appearances as well. He was never a top 2 guy which is why he was never an All Pro, but he was a 2nd team All Pro a couple of times.

I'd easily take Holt and Bruce over Smith and McCardell though.

Holt is an absolute lock, and he's still playing.

Bruce should probably go in, but he's been hurt several times in his career.

Rod Smith and Irving Fryar are out.

I think Smith and McCardell would have put up similar numbers in that offense. Faulk was who you had to stop and drew most of the attention while the other two had fragile Freddy Taylor.

Holt is my pick off this list though.

MaskedTerror # 2 · Post by **MaskedTerror # 2** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 9:44 am

I don't know. Best show on turf was what it was due to those two receivers and Faulk. So, I don't think Smith and McArdell would do the same thing. Fuck that.

Not taking away from Smith though. I believe along with all that other shit in his career, he also had a crippling coke habit. Which, for me, means they had to work even harder.

This also enhances the way I look at Rev. Fryar. Who was all pro twice and five time pro bowler.

I was also thinking he was hampered by a peripatetic career. Caught TDs fro 19 different passes. Maybe played slightly too long (getting into the same company as guys with huge numbers and watering down his average). But, if you look at it, career numbers are very close if not better than Mike Irvin. Around the same as Holt as well.

Would it were that I didn't burn my vote on Tony Gonzalez (basically a home run first ballot), I would go with Fryar.

MaskedTerror # 2 · Post by **MaskedTerror # 2** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 9:50 am

Also should be noted that Fryar is currently in the top 15 for Receptions/Rec Yards/Rec TDs. Not sure what he was when he retired. But probably better.

But yeah, NFL HOF is super easy to get into. Just like Andre Reed, he's hampered with no rings.

Gregg Popabitch1 · Post by **Gregg Popabitch1** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 10:33 am

i can't believe osmeone fronted on freddy taylor in this thread. yeh he's been hurt but so was faulk. you can easily say fragile marshall faulk as well. taylor wasn't as dope as marshall but dude was still great in his own right. in any other market but jax, taylor is a household name.

Joe Pesci · Post by **Joe Pesci** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:19 pm

Isaac Bruce

Prophecy · Post by **Prophecy** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:29 pm

Gregg Popabitch wrote:i can't believe osmeone fronted on freddy taylor in this thread. yeh he's been hurt but so was faulk. you can easily say fragile marshall faulk as well. taylor wasn't as dope as marshall but dude was still great in his own right. in any other market but jax, taylor is a household name.

I agree that Taylor was a beast when healthy but my main point is Faulk was the real focal point of that offense he was a bigger threat than Taylor due to him excelling in the passing game as well (something Fred isn't nearly as effective at). Teams had to put their main focus on Faulk which really opened things up for bruce and holt. Smith and McCardell were the passing game for the jaguars and didn't have that elite receiving threat out of the backfield.

DzzNutz · Post by **DzzNutz** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:50 pm

Tory "Big Game" Holt....