Canton Class of 2008 preliminary list released

Gradishar went to seven Pro Bowls, was first-team NFL All-Pro (which is better than a Pro Bowl berth, honestly) five times, all-rookie in 1974, and was the NFL Defensive Player of the Year in 1978.

And here's really why he should be in: More than 2,000 tackles in a 10-year career. 200 tackles per year average. And there were a couple years where he was at 250 or more (286 in 1978), just ridiculous numbers. In the strike-shortened nine-game season of 1982, he had 151 tackles -- his second-to-last season in the league, and he was on a nearly 300-tackle pace. He had 20 career INTs and who knows how many forced fumbles/recoveries.

Without even looking, I'd bet his numbers stack up very well against just about any linebacker in the Hall right now. Harry Carson and all his bitching? Hey, I think Carson should be in, but I'll bet his stats are no better than Gradishar's. Gradishar has a beef at least as big as Carson's was; he should have been in before Carson. And there are others at other positions (hello, Michael Irvin; you should be in, but your wait should have been longer) who certainly shouldn't have gotten in before Gradishar.

He should be in. No question. Certainly before any other Bronco gets in (Sharpe, Davis, Zimmerman, etc.). But he'll continue to get screwed on this because he didn't play for the Steelers in that era, nor did he play in a major media market.

 

Agreed, if he makes it in, suddenly backs like Priest Holmes and quarterbacks like Kurt Warner would have an argument, too.

 

All due respect to the guy, no statistic is more fucked up in the NFL than tackles. The teams keep it themselves and the numbers are just all over the place.

 

Gradishar vs. Harry Carson? Carson has an advantage in that debate:


Broncos win XII, Gradishar might already be in. Not saying that's right, but it certainly would have helped. And to be honest, it seems to be getting more difficult for any linebacker to be elected. Lot of Very Good ones out there, but do they stack up to the likes of Nitschke, Butkus, and Taylor?

[Edit: stupidity...]

 

If that's the standard, there shouldn't be any more LBs selected ... ever.

 

Yeah, Carson has rings. Agreed. And he should be in. And he is. So should Gradishar. And pro stats are not exactly like a high school coach keeping track -- if Gradishar's numbers were really that exaggerated, then why all the All-Pro/postseason accolades from people who should know better?

Gradishar was a mainstay (I don't think he missed a game in 10 seasons) on a team that was almost always competitive, made the playoffs a couple times, won an AFC title based solely on its defense, then lost a Super Bowl, etc. And if his tackle stats are exaggerated, then I suppose everyone else's are, too. Dammit (edit), I hate this argument. He'll never get in, and I can't believe how many people refute his level of impact and talent. He's probably the second-best Bronco ever -- a team that's gone to six Super Bowls and has remained competitive almost constantly over the past 30 years has one Hall of Famer. Sure, Sharpe will get in -- he might even be first-ballot, and I'll be happy about that. But he shouldn't be in before Gradishar.

I'll go away now and wait for my thoughts to get booted like a Ray Guy punt.

 

My guess is that Tom Nehlen will be the Bronco after Sharpe to reach the Hall.

 

Hey, you are entitled to your opinion. But obscene tackling stats don't always mean much. That's all.

 

Gradishar, 13 career INTs. Carson, 11.

Gradishar first-team NFL All-Pro, five times. Carson, 2.

Gradishar, 13 career fumble recoveries. Carson, 14.

Gradishar, one-time defensive player of year. Carson, 0 times.

Gradishar, no Super Bowl rings. Carson, 1.

None of those stats are tackles. But if those are Hall of Fame stats for Carson -- with all his threats to revoke his name from the ballot, unlike Gradishar, who hasn't complained nearly as vehemently, if at all -- then they are Hall of Fame stats for Gradishar.

 

All much more useful to the discussion than often over-inflated tackle totals.

 

Using I know-what-I-saw test, Gradishar was superior to Carson in his day. Didn't Carson play longer to compile his stats too?

And lets be honest ... Carson was near the end of the line by the time the Giants won the Super Bowl, it's not as if he was in his prime.

 

While we're talking linebackers, I'm amazed that Wilber Marshall doesn't get more consideration. Besides LT, I'm not sure I can think of any OLB of that era I'd rather have on my team.

Yea, he played 12 years and made only three Pro Bowls. I also believe he only made All-Pro once. But he was absolutely brutal on the field, a pure intimidator. And for as reckless as he played the game, he was also durable as hell, hardly missing any time the first nine years of his career.

His career stats are pretty strong:

45 sacks
23 interceptions
16 fumble recoveries
4 defensive TDs
2 Super Bowl rings