Matt Ryan: Hall of Famer?

There is a clear diving line on Staffford and Ryan. Ryan is a four-time Pro Bowler, Stafford once; Ryan was a first-team All-Pro once; Stafford zero. Ryan has an MVP, Stafford doesnt. Ryan made it to a Super Bowl, Stafford has no playoff wins.

Also, despite only a year difference of playing time, Ryan has a 7,000-yard and 60 TD advantage

 

See? Much better argument.

 

Seeing Eli Manning was as high as he was on career lists made me look some stuff up. And I learned that Joe Montana has fewer career yards passing than Carson Palmer and Kerry Fucking Collins.

I know it’s a QB league now, but the day they passed him, those guys should have called Montana and apologized.

 

Stafford is the Dave Krieg of his era? Except Krieg went to a school with a better football history.

 

I'm with Gee on Big Ben. He's a HOF, but I don't see him going in his first year of eligibility. To strong of a class and his character issues will bite him.

Shit, He'll probably go in with the same class as Matty Ice.

 

Eli was 40 for 74 for 560 3 TD. 1 Int in 2 Super Bowl wins against the best dynasty in he Super Bowl era. I’ve been a Giants fan for 50+ years and Eli has not been a great QB, but he’s been a very good one for a long long time. He should have retired 2 years ago. He’s a Hall of Famer for not only winning 2 SB MVPs but the 2011 playoff wins by the Giants May have been the single best playoff run in history, all on the road They won the Wild card game convincingly. In what is one of the coldest games in NFL history the Giants won in Green Bay against Favre. They won the conference championship game in OT and beat an undefeated Patriots team. Eli wasn’t just a game manager in that run.

 

You can't talk about class strength until you know who else retires the same year he does. And the character issues won't matter -- the Pro Football Hall of Fame explicitly says that on-the-field is the only thing that matters. It's why people get all up in arms about Darren Sharper when he advances on the cutdown lists and Peter King talks about him as a player being worthy.

 

That’s moronic of him to even bother arguing. What a dumb hill to die on.

 

The position may be more important, but that doesn't mean the players are better or, put another way, are more worthy of the hall of fame.

 

The position is more important because the rules have been consistently changed to make it so. Since everybody passes way more than even 2o years ago (Brady led the league with 28 TD passes in 2002), let alone 40, so career compilation stats are correspondingly less significant. The rules changes, starting with holding decriminalization and the Blount Rule in 1978, are the NFL offensive equivalent of baseball's PED era. So you passed for 4000 yards? Brady Anderson once hit 50 home runs. I think the recent emphasis on QB win-loss record is silly, but I also recognize it as a flawed but understandable effort to find a new way to measure quarterbacks given the devaluation (using the word in the inflationary economic sense) of traditional passing stats.

 

Actually, it does mean they are more worthy. If you accept the premise that quarterbacks play a larger role in the success of their teams now than they did in the past, then they are worth more. It stands to reason they should make up a larger percentage of the players going into the Hall of Fame than they used to as well.

 

His argument is really pretty simple. For whatever reason, everyone loves to twist the shit out of what Peter King says on anything.

The voting rules specifically state that off-field character issues are not to be considered, so he says he won't consider them. That's it.

Somehow that has morphed into "Peter King says Sharper should be in the Hall and doesn't care that he raped women!" He doesn't even say that Sharper is worthy of the hall -- he says he's worthy of discussion. Which he clearly is, if off-the-field stuff is not to be considered.