Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Panther in each of next 4 HOF classes?

Santee_Panther

By Santee_Panther,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

SCO96 Veteran

SCO96

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, joemac said:

I may be in the minority here, but I'm not so sure Sam Mills is a Hall of Fame worthy player.  Was he an amazing, emotional leader?  Absolutely.  Was he one of the greatest LBs of all time while on the field?  Ehhhhhh.....IDK about that.  Love the guy, love his message, just not sure if hes one of the greatest ever. 

I don't think the following statement from Bill Parcells pertains to everybody because of the the unglamorous nature of some positions (punter, o-lineman, and even kicker), but I do think it has a strong element of truth for most players "Can you tell the history of the NFL (and I'll add the era in which they played) without mentioning that player?" If the answer is yes, then I can see why a player can be excluded from the Hall of Fame, even if he is a very good player. I think Sam Mills falls into the latter category. If he got in I wouldn't have any objections, but I wouldn't howl in protest if he wasn't enshrined either.

Remember, it's the Hall of Fame, and not the Hall of Statistics. Some players in the Hall appear to have mediocre stats compared to modern day players, and sometimes their contemporaries. But, their impact on the NFL game is substantial; and you literally cannot tell the story of the league during the era/decade in which they played that they played without mentioning them. 

Some feel the Hall of Fame is becoming watered down with too many inductees and at times I can see their point. If there is a dispute about them being a candidate, then that alone may answer the question if they really deserve to be there. At the same time, I agree that some players waited too long to get in, and some deserving players are still being excluded. I'm glad that I don't have too vote on these things.

 

Edited by SCO96
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted
Just now, SCO96 said:

I don't think the following statement from Bill Parcells pertains to everybody because of the the unglamorous nature of some positions (punter, o-lineman, and even kicker), but I do think it has a strong element of truth for most players "Can you tell the history of the NFL (and I'll add the era in which they played) without mentioning that player?" If the answer is yes, then I can see why a player can be excluded from the Hall of Fame, even if he is a very good player. I think Sam Mills falls into the latter category. If he got in I wouldn't have any objections, but I wouldn't howl in protest if he wasn't enshrined either.

Remember, it's the Hall of Fame, and not the Hall of Statistics. Some players in the Hall appear to have mediocre stats compared to modern day players, and sometimes their contemporaries. But, their impact on the NFL game is substantial; and you literally cannot tell the story of the league during the era/decade in which they played that they played without mentioning them. 

Some feel the Hall of Fame is becoming watered down with too many inductees and at times I can see their point. If their is a dispute about them being a candidate, then that alone may answer the question if they really deserve to be there. At the same time, I agree that some players waited too long to get in, and some deserving players are still being excluded. I'm glad that I don't have too vote on these things.

 

about to hit a weird window when in comes to QBs/WRs IMO.  Statically, there are just going to be so many with comparable numbers to Hall of Famers. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SCO96 Veteran

SCO96

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Santee_Panther said:

Of course not Panthers related, but Eli will be an interesting QB case. 

Agreed. I'd have no problem if Eli Manning was enshrined in Canon. The dude beat the most dominant Quarterback/HC duo in NFL history....TWICE. And, both times he did it with by leading game winning drives in the 4th quarter to put the Patriots away. Furthermore, he put up big game performances in NFC title games to get them there by beating the Packers in Lambeau the first time and the 49ers in San Francisco the 2nd time.

You cannot tell the history of the NFL without mentioning Eli Manning. He's like Lynn Swann, he played his best in the biggest games. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • Dave Gettleman's Shorts
      TIME TO SPECULATE

      By Dave Gettleman's Shorts · Posted

      adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...