Brian Dawkins - HOF?

Mizzougrad96 · Apr 24, 2012

Deion was a game-changer though... If he was covering someone, the quarterback did not throw to that receiver. It didn't matter if it was Jerry Rice... I don't know if I've ever seen quarterbacks avoid a DB like they did with Deion in the 1990s.

Yeah, he couldn't tackle for shit, but you make the slightest mistake on a pass and that's a pick-6.

93Devil · Apr 24, 2012

I cannot remember the case against Krause. Can anyone else?

Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!! · Apr 24, 2012

Michael_ Gee said:

Ragu, you could be right, but it should be noted the voters who kept Krause out are mostly no longer with us. The committee changes, and recognition of big-play ability is one of the ways it has changed. Hell, Deion Sanders, who could not or would not tackle, the most fundamental defensive skill of all, waltzed right in on the first ballot.
Click to expand...

Plus the game changed..
When Krause played passing was whole 'nother ball game. Rules favored defenses and receivers could be mugged without a flag.

The reverse is now true with the rules now slanted toward offense ... The fact a guy like Polamalu, Reed and Dawkins excel really bolsters their case as HOF locks.

The Big Ragu · Apr 24, 2012

Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!! said:

Michael_ Gee said:

Ragu, you could be right, but it should be noted the voters who kept Krause out are mostly no longer with us. The committee changes, and recognition of big-play ability is one of the ways it has changed. Hell, Deion Sanders, who could not or would not tackle, the most fundamental defensive skill of all, waltzed right in on the first ballot.
Click to expand...

Plus the game changed..
When Krause played passing was whole 'nother ball game. Rules favored defenses and receivers could be mugged without a flag.

The reverse is now true with the rules now slanted toward offense ... The fact a guy like Polamalu, Reed and Dawkins excel really bolsters their case as HOF locks.
Click to expand...

Krause was a centerfield type free safety. He wasn't mugging anyone. Did he benefit from his corners being allowed to be more physical? Possibly. But does that really explain it? He was an exceptional athlete, from what I understand, who could have played multiple sports and multiple positions.

Plus, and this is likely much more of a factor than what you mentioned; he played in an era when they threw much less than they do now making his stats that much more impressive.

I believe the criticism on him is that he wasn't physical. Was a weak tackler, perhaps. Although Bud Grant said otherwise. He said that they played him in centerfield and he wasn't out there to tackle, and when he needed to make a tackle in the open field he was capable enough.

cyclingwriter · Apr 24, 2012

The Big Ragu said:

Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!! said:

Michael_ Gee said:

Ragu, you could be right, but it should be noted the voters who kept Krause out are mostly no longer with us. The committee changes, and recognition of big-play ability is one of the ways it has changed. Hell, Deion Sanders, who could not or would not tackle, the most fundamental defensive skill of all, waltzed right in on the first ballot.
Click to expand...

Plus the game changed..
When Krause played passing was whole 'nother ball game. Rules favored defenses and receivers could be mugged without a flag.

The reverse is now true with the rules now slanted toward offense ... The fact a guy like Polamalu, Reed and Dawkins excel really bolsters their case as HOF locks.
Click to expand...

Krause was a centerfield type free safety. He wasn't mugging anyone. Did he benefit from his corners being allowed to be more physical? Possibly. But does that really explain it? He was an exceptional athlete, from what I understand, who could have played multiple sports and multiple positions.

Plus, and this is likely much more of a factor than what you mentioned; he played in an era when they threw much less than they do now making his stats that much more impressive.

I believe the criticism on him is that he wasn't physical. Was a weak tackler, perhaps. Although Bud Grant said otherwise. He said that they played him in centerfield and he wasn't out there to tackle, and when he needed to make a tackle in the open field he was capable enough.
Click to expand...

Krause was accused of not being a good tackler as compared to his contemporaries like Willie Wood, Larry Wilson and Ken Houston. There also was a feeling that his career interceptions mark was tainted because he played so long as compared to Tunnell ( about five more seasons and 60 more games) and the fact that he played "centerfield" and did little else.

In some ways, he resembles Sharper. A guy who was very good, but for some reason his numbers make him look better. He has 63 ints and 13 return touchdowns, but I never heard anyone say "wow, you have to be afraid of Sharper."

I assume this was the same thing with Krause.

Also, I have heard he was caught up in a "the vikings shit the bed so much in the Super Bowl that the players couldn't have been that great after all." I know it has been a factor for Tinglehoff and probably a reason guys like Eller and Yary waited so long to get in the HOF.

Log in or Sign up

Brian Dawkins - HOF?

Mizzougrad96 Active Member

93Devil Well-Known Member

Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!! Well-Known Member

The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

cyclingwriter Active Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Brian Dawkins - HOF?

Mizzougrad96 Active Member

93Devil Well-Known Member

Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!! Well-Known Member

The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

cyclingwriter Active Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches