Hall of Fame: Cowboys of 70s still screwed?

[ScribePharisee]

http://www.star-telegram.com/sports/columnists/ray_buck/story/1215025.html

Not bad arguments here.

 

[outofplace]

Lost me when he tried to argue that Cliff Harris was comparable to Ronnie Lott.

Comparing Pearson to Swann makes some sense, except Swann doesn't really belong, either. Compound one mistake with another similar mistake? No thanks.

Did he even have one comment from somebody outside the Cowboys' organization? Perhaps that would have lent a tiny bit of credibility. Not saying none of these guys belongs, but the arguments really aren't particularly good.

 

[Simon_Cowbell]

Lost me when he tried to argue that Cliff Harris was comparable to Ronnie Lott.

Comparing Pearson to Swann makes some sense, except Swann doesn't really belong, either. Compound one mistake with another similar mistake? No thanks.

Did he even have one comment from somebody outside the Cowboys' organization? Perhaps that would have lent a tiny bit of credibility. Not saying none of these guys belongs, but the arguments really aren't particularly good.

Agreed.

But Swann, based on it being a Hall of FAME, not REGULAR-SEASON GREATNESS, certainly belongs.

 

[ScribePharisee]

If Swann was a mistake, well, you can't retract a bust.

It's a Steelers thing. Always has been.
And their measure of 70s success passed the Cowboys just before getting to the top. The ratio of Steelers to Cowboys doesn't reflect 1-2 in the decade.

 

[D-Backs Hack]

Cliff Harris will get in someday, I'm sure. But equating him with Ronnie Lott? Please.

I appreciate the dynamic Harris brought to the Dallas defense, but he wasn't the only NFL free safety doing the things he did, and Larry Wilson and Ken Houston (who are HOFers) were among those who did them better. I would have taken Mike Wagner, who outplayed Harris in SBs X and XIII, over him.

In my mind, Harris has always been overrated. If there was a Hall of Fame for trash talk, sure, he would have been in years ago. And he got a lot of notoriety for that alone.

On the whole, I'm surprised there are not more of the 1970s Cowboys in Canton. Pearson, Martin and Jones are deserving.

 

[ScribePharisee]

If Swann was a mistake, well, you can't retract a bust.

It's a Steelers thing. Always has been.
And their measure of 70s success passed the Cowboys just before getting to the top. The ratio of Steelers to Cowboys doesn't reflect 1-2 in the decade.

 

[93Devil]

Football history could have been changed if he did not slap Gerela on the head.

Not saying Dallas wins if he keeps his mouth shut, but why do you need to motivate the other team like that?

 

[outofplace]

If Swann was a mistake, well, you can't retract a bust.

It's a Steelers thing. Always has been.
And their measure of 70s success passed the Cowboys just before getting to the top. The ratio of Steelers to Cowboys doesn't reflect 1-2 in the decade.

Players should not get into the Hall of Fame just because their teams had a certain level of success. It is an individual honor, not a team one. The Cowboys of the '70s do not automatically get an allotment of spots just because they were a notch below the Steelers for the decade.

How many of this decades Patriots are going to get in? Do the voters have to give them four or five spots just because they won three Super Bowls, regardless of individual credentials? I guess the Steelers should be guaranteed a two or three spots at least among the guys who were on their two championship teams this decade, too. ::)

You can't retract a bust, but that doesn't mean you have to make a similar mistake. I'm not saying Pearson doesn't belong, but the argument that he compares to Swann isn't good enough.

And the arguments presented for Harris were both terrible. He does not come close to Ronnie Lott and he did not revolutionize his position. As Joe Rossi pointed out, there were other free safeties doing what Harris did so trying to use that argument to make his case is disingenuous at best. There are arguments to be made for some of the guys on this list. Unfortunately, the article above didn't make them particularly well.

 

[Starman]

The main argument for Chuck Howley is he played great in a losing game. ::) ::)

 

[ScribePharisee]

If Swann was a mistake, well, you can't retract a bust.

It's a Steelers thing. Always has been.
And their measure of 70s success passed the Cowboys just before getting to the top. The ratio of Steelers to Cowboys doesn't reflect 1-2 in the decade.

Players should not get into the Hall of Fame just because their teams had a certain level of success. It is an individual honor, not a team one. The Cowboys of the '70s do not automatically get an allotment of spots just because they were a notch below the Cowboys for the decade.

How many of this decades Patriots are going to get in? Do the voters have to give them four or five spots just because they won three Super Bowls, regardless of individual credentials? I guess the Steelers should be guaranteed a two or three spots at least among the guys who were on their two championship teams this decade, too. ::)

You can't retract a bust, but that doesn't mean you have to make a similar mistake. I'm not saying Pearson doesn't belong, but the argument that he compares to Swann isn't good enough.

And the arguments presented for Harris were both terrible. He does not come close to Ronnie Lott and he did not revolutionize his position. As Joe Rossi pointed out, there were other free safeties doing what Harris did so trying to use that argument to make his case is disingenuous at best. There are arguments to be made for some of the guys on this list. Unfortunately, the article above didn't make them particularly well.

Just because the Cowboys were a notch below the Cowboys? Are you sure you're not just so fueled by arguing with me that you forgot a little edit there?

Pats getting in who played this decade? Tom Brady, Randy Moss, Ty Law, Teddy Bruschi. Wes Welker...I'll bet on all of them, eventually.

 

[93Devil]

Welker?

Moss and Welker have not won anything with NE, right?

Seau is in, though, but he earned his spot with another team.

 

[ScribePharisee]

Moss and Welker will make the Hall of Fame.
That's what I said.

 

[outofplace]

If Swann was a mistake, well, you can't retract a bust.

It's a Steelers thing. Always has been.
And their measure of 70s success passed the Cowboys just before getting to the top. The ratio of Steelers to Cowboys doesn't reflect 1-2 in the decade.

Players should not get into the Hall of Fame just because their teams had a certain level of success. It is an individual honor, not a team one. The Cowboys of the '70s do not automatically get an allotment of spots just because they were a notch below the Cowboys for the decade.

How many of this decades Patriots are going to get in? Do the voters have to give them four or five spots just because they won three Super Bowls, regardless of individual credentials? I guess the Steelers should be guaranteed a two or three spots at least among the guys who were on their two championship teams this decade, too. ::)

You can't retract a bust, but that doesn't mean you have to make a similar mistake. I'm not saying Pearson doesn't belong, but the argument that he compares to Swann isn't good enough.

And the arguments presented for Harris were both terrible. He does not come close to Ronnie Lott and he did not revolutionize his position. As Joe Rossi pointed out, there were other free safeties doing what Harris did so trying to use that argument to make his case is disingenuous at best. There are arguments to be made for some of the guys on this list. Unfortunately, the article above didn't make them particularly well.

Just because the Cowboys were a notch below the Cowboys? Are you sure you're not just so fueled by arguing with me that you forgot a little edit there?

Pats getting in who played this decade? Tom Brady, Randy Moss, Ty Law, Teddy Bruschi. Wes Welker...I'll bet on all of them, eventually.

Whoops. Thanks for pointing that out. Actually, there were so many flaws in the article you posted, I'm having trouble getting to them all.

I always enjoy Hall of Fame debates. Pointing out the holes in another one of your arguments is just a bonus. The fact that you would actually suggest Bruschi for the Hall of Fame proves just how clueless you really are.

Moss and Welker were not on the Super Bowl teams for the Patriots, so they really don't fit the argument no matter how desperate you are to shove them in there. Moss built up much of his resume elsewhere. Welker has had only two excellent seasons. He is a long way from the Hall of Fame.

Ty Law? Meh. Hall of Very Good.

 

[Inky_Wretch]

Welkah!?! One Pro Bowl appearance, two second-team All-Pro awards and he's a Hall of Famer?

He might be HoF material, eventually. But not after only five seasons. And not after only two good seasons.

 

[Simon_Cowbell]

The main argument for Chuck Howley is he played great in a losing game. ::) ::)

Never saw SB VI, huh?

He had a helluva case to be a repeat SB MVP.

 

[Simon_Cowbell]

Moss and Welker will make the Hall of Fame.
That's what I said.

Welker had all the juice taken out of him last year. What a daft assertion.

 

[Simon_Cowbell]

If Swann was a mistake, well, you can't retract a bust.

It's a Steelers thing. Always has been.
And their measure of 70s success passed the Cowboys just before getting to the top. The ratio of Steelers to Cowboys doesn't reflect 1-2 in the decade.

Players should not get into the Hall of Fame just because their teams had a certain level of success. It is an individual honor, not a team one. The Cowboys of the '70s do not automatically get an allotment of spots just because they were a notch below the Cowboys for the decade.

How many of this decades Patriots are going to get in? Do the voters have to give them four or five spots just because they won three Super Bowls, regardless of individual credentials? I guess the Steelers should be guaranteed a two or three spots at least among the guys who were on their two championship teams this decade, too. ::)

You can't retract a bust, but that doesn't mean you have to make a similar mistake. I'm not saying Pearson doesn't belong, but the argument that he compares to Swann isn't good enough.

And the arguments presented for Harris were both terrible. He does not come close to Ronnie Lott and he did not revolutionize his position. As Joe Rossi pointed out, there were other free safeties doing what Harris did so trying to use that argument to make his case is disingenuous at best. There are arguments to be made for some of the guys on this list. Unfortunately, the article above didn't make them particularly well.

Just because the Cowboys were a notch below the Cowboys? Are you sure you're not just so fueled by arguing with me that you forgot a little edit there?

Pats getting in who played this decade? Tom Brady, Randy Moss, Ty Law, Teddy Bruschi. Wes Welker...I'll bet on all of them, eventually.

Whoops. Thanks for pointing that out. Actually, there were so many flaws in the article you posted, I'm having trouble getting to them all.

I always enjoy Hall of Fame debates. Pointing out the holes in another one of your arguments is just a bonus. The fact that you would actually suggest Bruschi for the Hall of Fame proves just how clueless you really are.

Moss and Welker were not on the Super Bowl teams for the Patriots, so they really don't fit the argument no matter how desperate you are to shove them in there. Moss built up much of his resume elsewhere. Welker has had only two excellent seasons. He is a long way from the Hall of Fame.

Ty Law? Meh. Hall of Very Good.

Huge pick six in a SB helps Law a lot.

 

[Dignan]

Drew Pearson should be the first guy in from that list. Staubach's go-to guy and one of the top receivers of the 70s. Harris should also be in.

Chuck Howley? He played so well in that Super Bowl, he didn't even accept the award. There were 80 turnovers in that game, he happened to get three of them. Big deal.

 

[outofplace]

If Swann was a mistake, well, you can't retract a bust.

It's a Steelers thing. Always has been.
And their measure of 70s success passed the Cowboys just before getting to the top. The ratio of Steelers to Cowboys doesn't reflect 1-2 in the decade.

Players should not get into the Hall of Fame just because their teams had a certain level of success. It is an individual honor, not a team one. The Cowboys of the '70s do not automatically get an allotment of spots just because they were a notch below the Cowboys for the decade.

How many of this decades Patriots are going to get in? Do the voters have to give them four or five spots just because they won three Super Bowls, regardless of individual credentials? I guess the Steelers should be guaranteed a two or three spots at least among the guys who were on their two championship teams this decade, too. ::)

You can't retract a bust, but that doesn't mean you have to make a similar mistake. I'm not saying Pearson doesn't belong, but the argument that he compares to Swann isn't good enough.

And the arguments presented for Harris were both terrible. He does not come close to Ronnie Lott and he did not revolutionize his position. As Joe Rossi pointed out, there were other free safeties doing what Harris did so trying to use that argument to make his case is disingenuous at best. There are arguments to be made for some of the guys on this list. Unfortunately, the article above didn't make them particularly well.

Just because the Cowboys were a notch below the Cowboys? Are you sure you're not just so fueled by arguing with me that you forgot a little edit there?

Pats getting in who played this decade? Tom Brady, Randy Moss, Ty Law, Teddy Bruschi. Wes Welker...I'll bet on all of them, eventually.

Whoops. Thanks for pointing that out. Actually, there were so many flaws in the article you posted, I'm having trouble getting to them all.

I always enjoy Hall of Fame debates. Pointing out the holes in another one of your arguments is just a bonus. The fact that you would actually suggest Bruschi for the Hall of Fame proves just how clueless you really are.

Moss and Welker were not on the Super Bowl teams for the Patriots, so they really don't fit the argument no matter how desperate you are to shove them in there. Moss built up much of his resume elsewhere. Welker has had only two excellent seasons. He is a long way from the Hall of Fame.

Ty Law? Meh. Hall of Very Good.

Huge pick six in a SB helps Law a lot.

Larry Brown had two huge interceptions in Super Bowl XXX. One or two plays shouldn't elevate a player that much.

What bothers me is that Law is probably going to get some support from the voters due to the same ridiculous logic Scribe has been using on this thread, the idea that those Patriots teams need a certain number of representatives even if the individual players really don't belong.

 

[Pancamo]

Now that Petah King lives in Boston.....