HOF Candidates

[53Fan]

I'm having a hard time thinking of an AFL player who made it but didn't play at least one year in the NFL. :confused:

[MTK]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

I'm having a hard time thinking of an AFL player who made it but didn't play at least one year in the NFL. :confused:

The answer is...

Billy Shaw - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I never heard of him either

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

The answer is...

Billy Shaw - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I never heard of him either

He was drafted by the Cowgirls and the Bills and chose to play with the Bills. Never would have guessed it.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

The answer is...

Billy Shaw - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I never heard of him either

Outstanding question! I enjoy football history. Thanks Matty!

BTW if Shaw turned down the Cowpies, he had good taste.

[MTK]

Show me a sport that hasn't been tainted by performance enhancing drugs at some point. Yet for some reason the purists act like baseball is supposed to be so above this.

I was at the baseball Hall of Fame over the weekend and overheard a guy talking to his son about how Rafael Palmeiro cheated and took steroids, and he was talking with such disgust. It would be wise if the voters just accepted the steroid era and voted in the guys that were the best players during the time. To shut them all out when it was pretty obvious what was going on at the time is insane and hypocrisy at it's best.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Show me a sport that hasn't been tainted by performance enhancing drugs at some point. Yet for some reason the purists act like baseball is supposed to be so above this.

I was at the baseball Hall of Fame over the weekend and overheard a guy talking to his son about how Rafael Palmeiro cheated and took steroids, and he was talking with such disgust. It would be wise if the voters just accepted the steroid era and voted in the guys that were the best players during the time. To shut them all out when it was pretty obvious what was going on at the time is insane and hypocrisy at it's best.

Good point Matty, why is no one screaming for the heads of players from the 80's,70's, and 60's?.......there were steroids back then but I guess that was ok.You know Reggie Jackson must have been on something.
Better yet lets look at Lyle Alzzado or John Matuzack(sp) both admitted (after) that they had used steriods and that it help lead directly to their early deaths.

[irish]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Show me a sport that hasn't been tainted by performance enhancing drugs at some point. Yet for some reason the purists act like baseball is supposed to be so above this.

I was at the baseball Hall of Fame over the weekend and overheard a guy talking to his son about how Rafael Palmeiro cheated and took steroids, and he was talking with such disgust. It would be wise if the voters just accepted the steroid era and voted in the guys that were the best players during the time. To shut them all out when it was pretty obvious what was going on at the time is insane and hypocrisy at it's best.

I totally agree. As much as people like to dis baseball I think this purist attitude comes from the hold that baseball has on the national sports psyche that no other sport has. For a lot of people baseball is the first sport a lot of kids play and the Dad & kid at a ballgame is a fond memory in a lot of minds. Baseball may not have the passionate following that football has but it does have deep happy memories for lots of sports fans in the USA.

I think the MLB record book should have a preamble that adresses the fact that at some point the ball was dead, then it was lively, then the pitchers mound was lowered, then most parks had astroturf, then players in large numbers took PEDs and each of these changes had an impact on the game and the records. When looking at this book please keep these facts in mind.

[an23dy]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Show me a sport that hasn't been tainted by performance enhancing drugs at some point. Yet for some reason the purists act like baseball is supposed to be so above this.

I was at the baseball Hall of Fame over the weekend and overheard a guy talking to his son about how Rafael Palmeiro cheated and took steroids, and he was talking with such disgust. It would be wise if the voters just accepted the steroid era and voted in the guys that were the best players during the time. To shut them all out when it was pretty obvious what was going on at the time is insane and hypocrisy at it's best.

I think we should put the responsibility on the players. These guys are grown men, they should know right and wrong and what is illegal and cheating. It doesn't matter if the people on top don't have strict testing policies. It's like if the teacher leaves the room are you going to cheat? It's not like you're gonna get caught, but you're giving yourself an unfair advantage against the people around you. It takes away from the other people that worked hard and it's selfish. Think if you were the best player or for the test example you knew the most about the material, then all these guys cheat and you get bumped down to an F or bumped out of the Hall of Fame because of it. I think it's never too late to do the right thing and not allow these guys to be rewarded for cheating.

[SmootSmack]

I think it's more so because records and stats mean more in baseball than in football. So these players going after records in baseball are more scrutinized. I mean everyone knows Dimaggio's 56 game hit streak. But off the top of your head can you say who has the NFL record for consecutive games with a reception or what that record is?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I think it's more so because records and stats mean more in baseball than in football. So these players going after records in baseball are more scrutinized. I mean everyone knows Dimaggio's 56 game hit streak. But off the top of your head can you say who has the NFL record for consecutive games with a reception or what that record is?

It's Rice, and I think the record is over 100 games.

But yeah, that's a good point, whatever number it is has no significant meaning in football without significant context.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

It's Rice, and I think the record is over 100 games.

But yeah, that's a good point, whatever number it is has no significant meaning in football without significant context.

It's like 275, I'm not even sure. Smart move choosing Rice for a question about a receiving record. LOL

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

It's like 275, I'm not even sure. Smart move choosing Rice for a question about a receiving record. LOL

Ha. I happened to watch the Raiders game in 2004 where Rice didn't catch a pass. Dude was pissed.

I'm also eating rice currently, so the memory didn't need much to be jogged.

[GTripp0012]

He didn't catch a pass in week four, 1985. The next time he didn't catch a pass was week two, 2004.

By my count, that's 284 consecutive games with a catch.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

He didn't catch a pass in week four, 1985. The next time he didn't catch a pass was week two, 2004.

By my count, that's 284 consecutive games with a catch.

Are you factoring in games missed? I think he missed almost the entire 1996 or 1997 season

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Are you factoring in games missed? I think he missed almost the entire 1996 or 1997 season

I only counted games played. 303 total, 4 before the streak, 15 after.

So 284, unless I'm missing something.

Jerry Rice Gamelogs and Game Logs - Pro-Football-Reference.com

-EDIT- Yes, it was 16 games post streak. I was counting the game that broke the streak in that.

283, then.