Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Chico23231;809195]I think the year Moss set the record for 23 TD catches in a season, the same year TO lead the league in drops. Maybe im a year off. Dominance does not equal one trick pony. Moss is a huge prick, but imo TO was/is a locker room cancer which is way worse. Like I said, you can easily argue TO 2nd greatest all time, Id prefer Moss all day long. And yeah, Id probably take Moss over Steve Largent.[/quote]

You mean the same Moss that gave up on the Vikings (the infamous time he walked out of the field before the game was over during a Redskins/Vikes game) and didn't even try with the Raiders? I'm not going to deny Moss' abilities, but come on he was no saint. I think Moss got really lucky to land with a team like the Pats. But he was a bit of a one-trick pony, of course I would take that trick any time (you could just fling a bomb downfield to Moss and he would beat any receiver to catch it). But TO could do more, as it is seen by his YAC stats.

In the end, both TO and Moss are very good receivers. If you take out their attitudes...I would lean slightly towards TO. But, their numbers are pretty similar, and it seems silly to make one out much better than the other:


----Gm--|--Rec--|--Yds----|-Y/G-|-Avg--|-Lg-|-YAC-|-1Dw-|-TD
TO: 219-|-1078--|-15934---|-72.8-|-14.8-|-98-|-5.3-|-742-|-153
RM: 202-|-954---|-14858---|-73.6-|-15.6-|-82-|-3.9-|-682-|-153

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Ruhskins;809198]You mean the same Moss that gave up on the Vikings (the infamous time he walked out of the field before the game was over during a Redskins/Vikes game) and didn't even try with the Raiders? I'm not going to deny Moss' abilities, but come on he was no saint. I think Moss got really lucky to land with a team like the Pats. But he was a bit of a one-trick pony, of course I would take that trick any time (you could just fling a bomb downfield to Moss and he would beat any receiver to catch it). But TO could do more, as it is seen by his YAC stats.

In the end, both TO and Moss are very good receivers. If you take out their attitudes...I would lean slightly towards TO. But, their numbers are pretty similar, and [B]it seems silly to make one out much better than the other[/B]:


----Gm--|--Rec--|--Yds----|-Y/G-|-Avg--|-Lg-|-YAC-|-1Dw-|-TD
TO: 219-|-1078--|-15934---|-72.8-|-14.8-|-98-|-5.3-|-742-|-153
RM: 202-|-954---|-14858---|-73.6-|-15.6-|-82-|-3.9-|-682-|-153[/quote]



No it must be done to satisfy the Football Gods

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Chico23231;809202]No it must be done to satisfy the Football Gods[/quote]

:lol:

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=freddyg12;809180]That's certainly not my point, or at least I would state it differently. Not saying don't let him in the hall cause he's a prick. I would "dock him" on job performance. His job performance, which for ally players includes interviews, teammate relationships & sideline conduct, was harmful to his teams.

Rather than debate "character" just look at what the guy did for his teams. He made plays but he also tore a couple teams apart.[/quote]

His job performance is judged by what he did on the field and nothing else. Like I said; tons of pricks in the Hall of Fame. Tons of guys who didn't have the best relationships with their teammates, didn't handle themselves the best way in interviews, weren't boy scouts on or off the field.

I mean maybe that's the way it should be, but that's not the way it is, And there's plenty of guys without outstanding character who don't make it while total jerks do.

The Hall of Fame and it's voting process are nutty. Should he be first ballot based on his numbers? Yes. Should he be based on his overall impact on football teams? Probably not. But the voting process is so frakked up that it's hard to guess what they'll be thinking.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

Without a Doubt!!!

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Mattyk;808933][url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/06/29/t-o-should-be-a-first-ballot-hall-of-famer-but/]T.O. should be a first-ballot Hall of Famer, but . . . . | ProFootballTalk[/url]

I think he should be without a doubt, his numbers are undeniable, what do you think?[/quote]

[url=http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Alex-Marvez-Terrell-Owens-strange-career-takes-bizarre-turn-with-knee-injury-062711]Terrell Owens' strange career takes perhaps its final turn with knee injury - NFL News | FOX Sports on MSN[/url]

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

There's no question he's first ballot HOF. For the better part of his career he was no worse than the third best WR in the game and a convincing argument can be made that he was the best-better than Moss and Harrison. He put up monster numbers in spite of mostly mediocre QBs (after Steve Young) that he played with.

I wouldn't want him mentoring young WR on teamwork but he's an all time great.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

First ballot, IMO, No. Within 1-2 years afterwards, definitely. First ballot is a special honor, with no SBs and being a less than stellar teammate, I'd make him wait. No question he was a dominant WR in his era and deserves to be in the HoF.

Rice as unquestioned WR GOAT...definitely debateable. He played with not only two HoF QBs, but was caoched by one of the most innovative minds to ever walk the sideline. Here are some others that deserve to be in that conversation:

Charley Taylor
Randy Moss
and yes...Don Hutson.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Mattyk;809050]If I was a team that was close and needed a big time WR to get over the top, I'd take him for a one year rental only.[/quote]

Matty, you think he should be a hall of famer, yet you'd only take him for a "one year rental" & that's only if the team is close to winning it all.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

Freddy,

I am in the same boat as Matty. I think TO should be a shoe-in for the HOF, but the HOF is a full career consideration. TO is older now and not at the same level as maybe 2-4 years ago. That's why you take him for a year.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=hooskins;809409]Freddy,

I am in the same boat as Matty. I think TO should be a shoe-in for the HOF, but the HOF is a full career consideration. TO is older now and not at the same level as maybe 2-4 years ago. That's why you take him for a year.[/quote]

He may be totally done now. My question was "in his prime" would you take him, not now. I would hope we all at least agree that the skins shouldn't even talk to rosenhaus about him!

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

Last year I wanted him. I won't lie. Granted, I was a little less...knowledgable about things, I suppose. But yeah, I still wanted him. T.O, Moss, Armstrong and Cooley? You kidding me? Shhoooooot, if T.O were healthy I'd take that line-up now.

...This is why I will never and should never be a GM.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=freddyg12;809406]Matty, you think he should be a hall of famer, yet you'd only take him for a "one year rental" & that's only if the team is close to winning it all.[/quote]

You're talking about two different things.

Based on his production, he's a clear cut HOF'er.

Based on what we know about his behavior, I would only want him as a rented gun on an established team with strong leadership.

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=NLC1054;809419]Last year I wanted him. I won't lie. Granted, I was a little less...knowledgable about things, I suppose. But yeah, I still wanted him. T.O, Moss, Armstrong and Cooley? You kidding me? Shhoooooot, if T.O were healthy I'd take that line-up now.

...This is why I will never and should never be a GM.[/quote]

If your trying to build a team the last thing you need is TO or say like a Hanyesworth, oh wait...

Re: Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?
 

[quote=Mattyk;809420]You're talking about two different things.

Based on his production, he's a clear cut HOF'er.

Based on what we know about his behavior, I would only want him as a rented gun on an established team with strong leadership.[/quote]

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I don't think so, and that's my point, he should be judged by his impact on his teams, which includes both great plays & shenanigans on & off the field. You can't separate his production from his behavior. While some here have said the hall is not based on "character" I agree, but it can be based on something simple like helping your team win. I would argue he countered all of his positives equally or more so w/negatives in that area. [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]This will be an interesting one for Hall voters. They've shown that a player's [I]personal[/I] problems off the field have not kept them out of the hall, but have they ever dealt w/a player who's conduct on & off field was so detrimental to his team?[/FONT][/COLOR]