Originally posted by TorchslasherPlease, will they just let Art Monk in the Hall of Fame! I don't care if the numbers/stats don't support the nomination, I'm passionate dammit and that should be enough for the voters.
If John Madden can get in, Art Monk should be in.
If Madden can get in? Really? Madden is an NFL icon, not just for coaching, but for his broadcasting and the fact that 'Madden' basically defines the football gaming industry. I thought he was in already, frankly.
"Oh, gosh, you know, I'm not much on speeches, but it's so gratifying to leave you wallowing in the mess you've made. You're screwed, thank you, bye."
Originally posted by Big BadMadden is an NFL icon, not just for coaching, but for his broadcasting and the fact that 'Madden' basically defines the football gaming industry. I thought he was in already, frankly.
But the broadcasting and the gaming don't count for the HOF. I think that the HOF only looks at his coaching record. The fact that Madden has such a high rate of victory is what got him in, I think.
If they did go by his affect on the game in those other areas, you're right that Madden should have been in long ago.
Originally posted by Dr. ZIt was raised that Madden has had such a profound influence on the NFL through his video game. I don't see what that has to do with anything. I said, 'What about the Bob Kuechenberg video game?' And there is that quesiton out there about wheter Al Davis was really the puppet master in Oakland. But Madden does have the highest winning percentage of any coach, which has to be taken into account. I voted for him.
(edited by EddieBurkett on 6.2.06 0200) Indiana! Indiana!
Originally posted by geemoneyThe local media around here is gonna be upset that the Thurminator didn't get in.....
Give him time. I don't doubt that he or Irvin will get in, but this year was just too strong a field. Maybe next year or the year after.
Ok, I was all set to riff on the whole "too strong a field, wait til next year". Then I checked wikipedia. It seems the board must elect between 3 and 6 new enshrinees each year. So, there goes my argument. So, I guess rules are rules, but I find that an incredibly stupid way of doing business. If you have 10 guys like Dick Butkus, you only let 6 in? On the flip side, if you have 3 marginal guys, you tell them "Come on in!"? I know, these scenarios may never play out this way, but if they did, shouldn't you allow your rules to take this into account?
I think you're underestimating the worth of draft picks. The Pats acquired Moss for a 4th rounder, they got three good years out of him, and still managed to trade him for a 3rd rounder. That's how I want my franchise to run.