If you are trying to figure out which modern players make it (and in Curtis Martin's case who doesn't) it really doesn't matter who makes it as a senior committee entrant.
The Senior Committee's nominees aren't guaranteed entry into the HOF. They have to get voted on just like everyone else. Curtis has as good if not a better chance to make the HOF than Lester Hayes or Willie Roaf (two players you listed as making the HOF).
On of the empty spots is reserved for a senior committee nominee. There is no way that 7 modern players can get elected this year. ---------------------------------------- Roaf was an 11 time pro bowler and a 9 time all-pro (6 times as first team). He made the all decade teams for the 1990s and the 2000s. He is also the most awarded player in Saints history. I know the big uglies don't get enough respect but if Roaf isn't a first ballot hall of famer I don't know who is. Curtis Martin will probably make the HOF but without the greenest of shades no one sees it happening this year. --------------------------------------- Martin compares more favorably with Hayes but Hayes has two SB rings. He also has the record for interceptions in one season (13) and was the defensive player of the year.
I have no problem w/ Curtis waiting a year or 2 but I will have a problem iof Bettis makes it in before him.
Lester Hayes does not own the single season interception record. Dick Night Train Lane does with 14 when he was a rookie with the LA Rams in 1952. I know how good Roaf was and Martin is as deserving as he is. I'm not saying 7 modern day players are going to make the HOF, but just because the senior candidate is nominated does not mean he will automatically make the Hall or that there will even be a senior nominee inducted that year.
I think the difference between Martin and Bettis is that Curtis proved himself on two different teams. And he ran for almost 1500 yards and made the Probowl in this rookie year. Martin was an incredible talent and deserves to go in before Bettis, even though Bettis was great too.
Feel free to blast Gary Myers' inbox with messages. Or tweet him every day until voting begins @garymyersNYDN. It's his job to make the case for Curtis Martin.
Sanders, Roaf and Faulk are locks to go in. Martin is probably 4th on the list and on the bubble, He is really hurt by so many great RBs up for vote the first time this year with Faulk and Bettis possibly diluting his votes. In almost any other year Martin is a sure 1st ballot invite. But I still think he gets in this year. there is something to be said for being a good guy not just talented. Martin is a good guy, with a good rep and loved by many sportswriters.
Then he was bad in 1994 and was not good in 1995, either. 1994: 319 att, 1025 yards, 3.2 avg, 3 rushing TDs 1995: 183 att, 637 yards, 3.5 avg, 3 rushing TDs Martin did not have a season like any of those until his final season of 2005.
I don't think he makes it this round but he's a lock for the hall. He was too quiet, not for me of course but his politeness and fly under the radar style will not get him in this time. Without a doubt, the coolest cat to play the position other than Walter Payton.
Interesting fact: Two top HOF committee executives said in an interview that stats are not the end all be all for deciding who belongs in the HOF or not. This was said to Rich Eisen some years ago. Football is not baseball.
He did make plays in the post season. I present facts. It is a fact that the TE completely missed a block that forced the sack on Manning. You blame Manning for that play. It is a fact that Amp Lee fumbled the ball at the goaline in the 96 Dallas game. It is a fact that Carter’s TD tied the game and then a second one got the Vikings back in it. The game ended up being a blowout because of the events that happened past that. Carter kept them in the game. Are TDs not important? Oh right.. you call them fantasy stats What more could Carter have done?!? He had 3 bad postseason games with the Vikings. That’s it. He didn’t command the attention of the defense, Emmitt did. There were plenty of other weapons as well in the passing game. It wasn’t a one man show. They had great years throwing to Carter and Moss. Yes, they were average QBs. The facts do support me, the excuses support you.[/quote] Cunningham never won the NFL MVP. Montana was the MVP in 1990 and Terrell Davis was the NFL MVP in 1998. Even if he did, so what? Brian Sipe once won the MVP. Does that make him a great QB in the seasons after? Brad Johnson was average in his Vikings years. Daunte Culpepper was an awful QB who threw the ball down field for Randy Moss. Moss has made every QB he’s ever played for better (prior to 2010). Jeff George was not a good QB. Same thing with Culpepper he was fortunate enough to play with Moss and Carter. What card am I playing? I’ve seen plenty of highlight films on Warfield to know he was a great receiver. He had blazing speed, great hands. He played in the pre-liberalization of the passing rules era. When he was with the Dolphins they ran the ball a majority of the time with Csonka, Kiick and Morris. Prior to that when he was with Cleveland they also ran the ball w/ Leroy Kelly so his numbers were never up near the top. But keep posting regular season numbers. Or you can just walk away with your tail between your legs and admit you are wrong. Data that you didn’t know when you looked at the box score or stats sheet. There are many different reasons why teams win or lose. Carter was not a main reason why the Vikings had postseason issues. I don’t blame everyone but Manning. But I’m not going to blame Carter for the defense or the poor running game or the poor QB play. Swann and Stallworth were two different type of receivers and neither were better than the other. From 78-82 they only threw the ball 4 more times / game and completed 3 more / game than they threw from 74-77. it’s not like they went from 15 atts / gm to 25 / gm. Yeah, it’s a wonder as to why Stallworth wouldn’t have put up big numbers from 83-87 w/ big time QBs such as cliff Stoudt or Mark Malone throwing to him Again, I provide you with factual data. Spin it as you like you just keep proving yourself wrong.
Can we set the bar a little higher here. If a guy was the 10th best at a stat for 20 years in a row, who really cares if he was never the leader or never even in the top 5 once. We are talking about the best of the best, not borderline HOF players.
its really pointless. Junc doesn't understand that the game is more than just boxscores and stat lines.
Cunningham never won the NFL MVP. Montana was the MVP in 1990 and Terrell Davis was the NFL MVP in 1998. Even if he did, so what? Brian Sipe once won the MVP. Does that make him a great QB in the seasons after? Brad Johnson was average in his Vikings years. Daunte Culpepper was an awful QB who threw the ball down field for Randy Moss. Moss has made every QB he’s ever played for better (prior to 2010). Jeff George was not a good QB. Same thing with Culpepper he was fortunate enough to play with Moss and Carter. What card am I playing? I’ve seen plenty of highlight films on Warfield to know he was a great receiver. He had blazing speed, great hands. He played in the pre-liberalization of the passing rules era. When he was with the Dolphins they ran the ball a majority of the time with Csonka, Kiick and Morris. Prior to that when he was with Cleveland they also ran the ball w/ Leroy Kelly so his numbers were never up near the top. But keep posting regular season numbers. Or you can just walk away with your tail between your legs and admit you are wrong. Data that you didn’t know when you looked at the box score or stats sheet. There are many different reasons why teams win or lose. Carter was not a main reason why the Vikings had postseason issues. I don’t blame everyone but Manning. But I’m not going to blame Carter for the defense or the poor running game or the poor QB play. Swann and Stallworth were two different type of receivers and neither were better than the other. From 78-82 they only threw the ball 4 more times / game and completed 3 more / game. it’s not like they went from 15 atts / gm to 25 / gm. Yeah, it’s a wonder as to why Stallworth wouldn’t have put up big numbers from 83-87 w/ big time QBs such as cliff Stoudt or Mark Malone throwing to him Again, I provide you with factual data. Spin it as you like you just keep proving yourself wrong.[/QUOTE] He did make plays, in blowout games. That looks great on the stat sheet. TDs are important as are recs and yards, he has great reg season #s. He belongs in the Hall, he is overrated though. He had two 100 yd games in postseason, how did he have only 3 bad postseason games? he was under 70 yds in 7 of his postseason games. he only put up #s in blowout games. So Irvin wasn't getting doubled? they were all focused on Emiitt? Come on Murrell. All those average QBs had success w/ and w/o Carter. He won 2 MVP awards just not the AP MVP, he had a ton of success w/o Cris Carter. Johnson was 15-8 as a starter, he threw 44 TDs and 27 INTs, he was not bad in Minny and he led them to the playoffs twice in his 3 seasons as a starter. Culpepepr was a poor man's Manning. Another great fantasy QB but couldn't get it done when it mattered- a bad combo w/ a WR who played the same way. I didn't say Warfield wasn't great but comparing him against his peers and Carter against his peers Carter comes out on top. I didn't compare their #s, that's not fair. I compared Warfield to his peers so the running team excuse doesn't fly. Obviously there are many different reasons why teams win and lose, we don't have access to the game tapes for those games. I remember watching him play in big games and always wondering why he disappeared. The #s show that, he only made plays in blowouts when the pressure was off. Pitt pass attempts by year: 74- 386 75- 337 76- 277 77- 341 78- 380 79- 492 80- 484 81- 461 82- 275(prorate to 16 games and it is 489) 83- 409 84- 443 85- 512 86- 491 87- 355(prorate to 16 games is 473) They threw it a heck of alot more late 70s/early 80s than they did in the early part and threw even more after Swann retired so why didn't Stallworth's #s go up? You continue to provide lame excuses, I am providing the actual facts.
Top 5-10 usually tells you who is elite. This is not a debate about whether Carter belongs in the Hall, it is about him being overrated by fanbtasy lovers like Murrell. The funny thing is you act like you have game tapes. All you do is make excuses. Don't you notice a pattern in your weak arguments for Peyton and Carter? I just want to know why w/ Manning you love to blame WRs but w/ Carter you love to blame the QBs? You even said " The QB is supposed to lead the team" so why does that apply to Brad Johnson and not Peyton Manning?
