2014 Pro Football Hall of Fame Finalists

I agree Bettis will get in, but I don't have a problem making him wait a few/several years.

 

It is stunning that Andre Reed only had four seasons over a thousand yards while playing in a pass first offense.

 

They weren't a pass-first offense. There was only one year that they threw it more than they ran. And a lot of their passes were to Thomas and other backs.

 

They also had James Lofton taking up some of those numbers.
Question: What did Tim Brown's receptions and yards mean?
Very little.

 

They mean he was for most of his career a very good player on a mediocre team.

Which has little to do with his Hall of Fame credentials.

You've brought up the "what do his numbers mean" thing before, and it's as ridiculous now as it was then.

What do they mean? They mean he made his team better. When he catches a pass, he gains yards, moves the chains and gets the team closer to scoring. What was he supposed to do? Drop the ball and give up because his team had no chance? Why does anyone even bother catching the ball for a crappy team (of course, his team was rarely really crappy, just usually around .500)?

Are you saying Brown's production didn't help at all? In his 16 seasons with them, the Raiders were 134-122 in the regular season (an average of 8.4-7.6) and made the playoffs six times, the AFC Championship Game three times and the Super Bowl once. Did Brown's numbers play a role in any of that? Yes. So that's what they meant.

The thing is, all of the numbers, catches, yards and TDs are significant. It's what they do.

 

Dude, at any time did you think Reed was one of the top 4-5 receivers in the league?

 

Jackson's going to be an interesting case. He's got 14,000-plus total yards, was the only good player on some really crappy Rams teams, and was a good receiver as well as rusher. He was also a durable back. Played 15 or 16 games in six out of eight seasons and had 275-plus touches all eight of them.
He's by no means a first-ballot guy, and far from a certainty, but he's definitely underrated because of the teams he played on. If he can have another good season or two and maybe help Atlanta get to a Super Bowl, he'll move up the HOF depth chart.

 

At what point was Brown one of the top five receivers in the league?
Yes, I watched those Raiders teams, King.
They didn't always suck.
They usually had a good nucleus of talent, and underperformed.
Brown went to the playoffs six times in 16 years in Los Angeles/Oakland.

 

IMO Brown is a borderline case at a position where more deserving players are already backed up, and the backup is only going to get worse. Moss and Owens are historically good, and they probably won't get in because the Hall of Fame voters have a collective stick up their collective ass. I say that despite the fact that I know, admire and like many of those same voters.

 

I would take Sterling Sharpe in a heartbeat over Brown.
Compare their numbers when they were contemporaries.
Then compare Sharpe's to Irvin's during the same span.

 

Sharpe was good, but his brief peak was skewed because his team had no running game.

 

Reed and Irvin don't have the crazy numbers that Rice and Carter do, but I don't think that diminishes how valuable they were as receivers...

Someone mentioned Sterling Sharpe and Herman Moore and Andre Rison were also receivers during that time frame that were just incredible for 4-5 years, but fell off the map quickly enough that they weren't able to put together HOF resumes.

I think voters would be more sympathetic to someone like Terrell Davis than they would a receiver who wasn't able to have longevity.