Michael Irvin

BYH, voice of reason.

 

Duh! I said SABR 4 Kids!!!!

 

Relevancy, shmelevancy. It doesn't matter if the rules say off-the-field issues don't matter (which I assume was your point), do you honestly think the voters don't take that into account?

 

Good thing you're not a voter, I can say that honestly.

 

he should be in at least for his ability to party like a rock star and still go out and make the big catch.

 

Whatever. My point being, Irvin is not a slam dunk Hall of Famer. His numbers (except for the rings) just aren't there. If you're a borderline HOF candidate, try not to give voters an extra reason not to vote for you.

 

Ellis, have you gotten Willie Gault on the ballot yet?

 

But it's not except for the rings. Rings count and he led the team to three Super Bowl wins.

He's definitely a Hall of Famer. Take away the off-the-field and nobody thinks he's not in. And the rules say ... take away the off-the-field.

Anyone who doesn't vote him in has lost their credibility to vote.

That's one of the main reasons I don't care about any halls of fame. It looks like I do by writing this, but I don't. All halls are jokes. So many "journalists" constantly hold up their MLB vote as a reason why they are a god and can make up their own criteria.

Any hall with at least one person in who doesn't belong or one not in who does belong, is a sham. And that's every hall.

 

Irvin and Monk should both get in (I'm damned surprised Monk isn't already). Irvin, numbers aside, was a dominant receiver, probably second only to Jerry Rice in the early part of his career. Yes, he was better than Andre Reed, I have no doubt about that. Strong hands, fast and able to smoke crack with the best of them.

I hate him as a broadcaster, but damn if he wasn't one of the most dangerous receivers in the league for a relatively long time. His TD numbers are real low for an elite receiver, but I think Emmitt Smith had a lot to do with that.

 

Bingo. Hammer, nail, head. Ditto with all the HOF's. If you're lucky enough, honored enough, to be given a vote, you damn well better be sure you stick to the guidelines of the voting process or else your privilege - not your right - should be removed, like a 5 year old should have his toy taken away from him if he can't play nicely.

The burden here is not on Irvin to ratchet down his current behavior. It's on the NFL HOF voters to DO THEIR F'ING JOBS CORRECTLY. The bylines are clear. Follow them, or lose your vote. It's precisely Miller's et. al.'s type of pettiness that has caused more and more sports fans and readers to become disaffected with sports journalists.

Thanks a lot, Ira. Your f*ckups have hurt MY credibility. That's when it becomes personal for me.

I hope Goodell goes over who is on the HOF voter list and thinks about making some changes. This isn't college, and these guys aren't on tenure. The Commish would be well-served to remind them of that, because continued HOF voting abuses of power hurt the league's image and, thus, the NFL's bottom line. That's the Commish's department. If Ira Miller decides to play God and thus decides to omit what millions of football fans know and saw with their own eyes, that seriously hurts the NFL's image and devalues the product. That's a no-no.

No journalist is going to stand in the way of the NFL's bottom line. I think we all understand that one pretty well. Goodell has made a lot of strong 'statements' in his short tenure, and a HOF voting shakeup wouldn't surprise me in the least.

 

OK. By your logic, Troy Brown should be in the Hall of Fame. He led the Patriots to three Super Bowl wins.

But you're right. Irvin was the unquestioned leader of those teams. Fuck Troy Aikman and Emmitt Smith.

God, I hate when people make matter-of-fact statements like this. Say it with me: "Not a clear-cut Hall of Famer. Receiving numbers don't lie." To argue that anyone who honestly believes a borderline candidate falls on the other side of the line should lose their vote is sheer lunacy.

 

Actually Ellis, I think Troy Brown should be in the Hall of Fame no questions asked. I saw him do too many things to win too many games for one of history's top teams to feel otherwise.
Irvin should also be in, Monk, too. Gang, football and baseball are different. Citing statistics to make a point about a player's ability, even at a position that creates stats like WR, is not the most valid argument possible. The game's too chaotic and fluid for that.