Come on man! How do his numbers not make him hall worthy?

Edited February 5, 201214 yr by bugatti

I agree wholeheartedly and I don't even like Chris Carter. He and Tim Brown are big worthy.

Hall worthy? He can't even get people to capitalize his first name. :sssh:

Hall worthy? He can't even get people to capitalize his first name. :sssh:

 

Frustration leads a man to do dire things, like forgetting proper grammar and such.

His numbers tell me he is a HOF'er. I'd rank them like this: Carter, Brown, Reed. 130TDs should be enough to justify his worthiness.

Absolute garbage that he's not in.

The other night Jimmy Kimmel was making phone of him talking about Brady and his weapon tree.

Absolute garbage that he's not in.

 

Come on man, all the guy ever did was catch touchdowns....

Hall worthy? He can't even get people to capitalize his first name. :sssh:

 

Or spell it correctly.

Or spell it correctly.

My first thought as well. :thumb:

 

I believe Charles Haley deserved it the most of those left out. Carter just behind him. Curtis Martin? Come on, man. He was a nice player for a decade, but I never viewed Martin as any type of transformational player. Just always above average. Not Hall worthy.

The whole HOF voting process for both football and baseball is a crock, IMO. Not only should these so-called "experts" voting record be made public, but as a matter of policy they should be made to explain their decision on each vote. No explanation - no vote. (Remember in school when it wasn't sufficient enough to just get the right answer...you had to show your work or justify your response, as well? Same thing here.) I think it's a shame they're allowed to hide behind this veil of secrecy.

 

And I'm sorry, saying that these sportswriters are the most qualified to make these types of decisions is bull. Joe Reedy from the Enquirer gets to vote. (And this is nothing about Joe personally.) But, according to his bio, he covered the Jets from 97-98, and the Jags in 99, before taking over as the beat writer for the Bengals in 2009. By covering those three teams, he personally saw Cris Carter play exactly once. And yet he (or anyone else in a similar situation) is automatically the most qualified to make a decision on HOF merits? Seriously?!?

Absolute garbage that he's not in.

 

So you're starting the boycott of the NFL, or do you want me to?

My first thought as well. :thumb:

 

I believe Charles Haley deserved it the most of those left out. Carter just behind him. Curtis Martin? Come on, man. He was a nice player for a decade, but I never viewed Martin as any type of transformational player. Just always above average. Not Hall worthy.

 

You can't be serious about Curtis Martin. He is one of the top all-time rushers, and had one of his best seasons right before he retired. Believe me, I know I am quite biased towards my favorite all-time player, but to act like he is undeserving of the Hall is a travesty.

I agree but I'd put Charles Haley+Tim Brown in before him.

It's actually a common theme I run across in conversation when discussing football. The lack of respect for a man who only trails Emmitt Smith, Walter Peyton, and Barry Sanders in terms of RB production absolutely astounds me. It's not like he played for an abnormal amount of years to work his way up the list. He was just incredibly consistent in his production. I was wrong by the way. It was actually his BEST overall season that took place at the age of 31, rushing for just under 1700 yards on the season and winning the rushing title. Not sure how many 31 year olds have achieved that.