That would be like writing an article about the greatest Middle Linebacker of all time and listing a bunch of REALLY good MLBs and then getting to 12 and saying Dick Butkus. It's just not a credible article. _
I mostly agree. It seems ridiculous to not have Guy in the top 10, let alone the top five. However, what I posted above, that you claimed to have not read, is not ludicrous stuff. His ranking seems wacky, but what he wrote is not.
You do not want to know where he ranked Butkus. I know Murrell2878 has this same book. I will let him share that info if he so desires.
I was making an analogy. What he wrote assumes that you never saw the guy. His rankings are preposterous, just as if had ranked Butkus 12th. Obviously nobody in their right minds wouldn't just like nobody in their right minds would rank Guy 12th. Or lower than 1st :grin: He's yanking chains. _
I know you were making an analogy. I simply found it funny you mentioned Butkus. It seems you might be familiar with the book because the Butkus ranking was the most controversial one that Lahman made. I saw Guy punt live at the end of his career on roughly 10 occasions. In addition to that, I own several Raiders games from the 1970s. So I am not totally in the dark here. To me, punter is a tough position to differentiate great vs very good vs good unless you look at some stats. Guy's average does not appear to make him look great. The problem may be that he punted more often from a better line of scrimmage. The Raiders were almost always good during his career and many of his punts may have been of the non-special variety length-wise due to the fact the Raiders offense had gained some good yardage and the team was playing the field position game.
Had no idea about the Butkus thing, never heard of the book. If he ranked him lower than 2, then my thoughts on the book are confirmed. I tend to think punting is one of those positions where stats tell less of the story. Guys have had bigger legs, so gross average is skewed, and net average is a function of coverages, field position and hang time. To me it's mostly situational. Hard to argue with the All Pro selections (not pro bowl) during his career. The number 1 guy on that list Dave Jennings was a 2 time first team All Pro. Guy was 6 time first team and 2 time second team. Can't legitimately argue Jennings was not only a better punter than Guy but the number 1 of all time. It casts doubt on the entire article or maybe the motivation behind it. _
I see the argument against stats. In my post above, I was basically saying I think the line of scrimmage should be taken into account. However, that stat is not included anywhere in punters' statistical records. Without this data, context and true meaning can be lost. If the average line of scrimmage on Guy's punts was the 40 and the average line of scrimmage on Camarillo's punts was the 27, then it makes sense that Camarillo would have a higher average as he has more field to work with. However, this would also mean that Guy would probably have had more punts downed inside the 20. Sometimes it is easy to see. Landeta was clearly better than Joe Prokop. Stats were not needed. Was Mike Scifres better than Andy Lee in 2012? That is very difficult to answer. Statistics might be needed to answer that one.
Cornelius Bennett on twitter just announced that Andre Reed has made the HOF. I guess the inductees are told before the announcement is made to the general public. Jim Kelly and other former Bills are tweeting the same thing
I don't get Reed going in ahead of Harrison, but otherwise I have no issue with this class. Four of the best six finalists (imo) of the modern era got in, so that is good.
I don't think it's anything other than that Reed retired 8 years before Harrison did. I think the voters see the logjam at WR coming up, and are voting in people in chronological order (since it's hard to sort out subtle differences between them). I'm not saying it's reasonable, but I think it's easy to see why it's happening.
I agree with this. And I loved Harrison as a Syracuse alum, but Reed deserved to get in and they probably went with the older player. They are both HOFers and Harrison will get in next year. Curious whether any of his off field stuff after retiring factored in? _
Don't be surprised if the voters didn't elect Harrison because of the murder that he may or may have not been apart of. This could've very well played a role in their decision to keep Harrison out. Some people forget how unceremonious and quiet his early "retirement" was from the NFL and that's because his legal team didn't want anymore negative publicity on Marvin to damage his legal issues/image/legacy. Obviously Harrison didn't want that either because I'm sure he was thinking about his Hall chances down the line.
I think with football in particular it's hard to assess exactly how the off-field stuff factors in - just look at people like Ray Lewis and Lawrence Taylor. It certainly could have been an issue, but I still think the limit they put of 5 players per year getting in means that there is a lot of strategizing by voters of only "allowing" elite players to get in more quickly.
If the voters have some kind or order, then fine. I am not sure this is the best thing for them to do.
No doubt that the best players on the field rise to the top of the list. And I agree that Reed was years ahead of Harrison so makes sense for him to get in first if they're comparable talents which they were. What will be interesting to see will be when Ray Lewis gets inducted in 4 years and how much talk there will be surrounding the murder as part of his legacy and if that takes away from it. LT never allegedly killed anyone that we know of so his off the field stuff wouldn't impact him the way these other two guys legacies could be impacted. The media had remade Ray Lewis into this loveable figure so he'll probably be fine but Marvin I'm still questionable on.
they blew it again, the hall just keeps getting watered down. I knew he'd make it but he made it for the wrong reasons.
So what about Winston Hill???? This will be the only way he will ever get into the Hall of Fame. He should be in the HOF, but for some reason the old timer committee is not a huge fan of AFL players.
