- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is Brandon Marshall a Hall of Famer?
Posted on 12/16/15 at 11:33 pm to TooFyeToFly
Posted on 12/16/15 at 11:33 pm to TooFyeToFly
Players should be judged against their peers not against guys who didn't have the same nutritional, technological, etc advantages that today's athletes benefit from. There are HS athletes who can't even get on the field for college teams who have better measurables than elite athletes from the 60s. Could they have dominated in the 60s? Naw they would have been just average back then just like they are now.
0
Posted on 12/16/15 at 11:33 pm to xenythx
quote:
It's been really hard for WRs to get into the Hall lately. The list of guys in front of Brandon Marshall to get in is probably too long for Marshall to get in.
This is a valid point. It doesn't mean that Marshall isn't qualified, but he'll probably have a hard time getting in before these guys.
Posted on 12/16/15 at 11:36 pm to TooFyeToFly
quote:
The receivers that played in the 1960s, 1970s, etc. should not be rewarded for this disparity.
Whether or not you think they SHOULD BE rewarded is a completely different argument that I would have with you at another time. The fact is that they have already been rewarded.
Posted on 12/16/15 at 11:41 pm to GeauxPack81
quote:
We can't just start putting in modern day athletes cause they are better though. I think the hall of fame is more determined based on how dominant were you compared to the players of your time period
Well, based off of this thinking, you really don't think that Brandon Marshall belongs in the Hall of Fame? Because, even compared to receivers of the modern NFL, his numbers seem elite to me.
Man, I get your logic, although I don't necessarily agree with it. I was just responding to Boomshockalocka's question of whether modern receivers would put up elite stats in the old NFL. Which I think has a very obvious answer.
This post was edited on 12/16/15 at 11:44 pm
Posted on 12/16/15 at 11:44 pm to GeauxPack81
quote:
I think the hall of fame is more determined based on how dominant were you compared to the players of your time period.... When I think of Brandon Marshall I just think he was a very good player who had a good career.
pretty much how I see him.
Marshall has been a boss this year but there is a chance that this is his last season where he puts up monster numbers.
what he's done so far this year will be hard to even match his current total next year. Another year with Fitzpatrick likely at the helm and I think we'll see a drop off.
and then if their QB situation just totally bombs... who knows?
I just think it will be harder to maintain the type of production he's had. Maybe not so much b/c he's getting older but I'd just be surprised if the his situation with the Jets continues to be gravy. The Jets have had some rotten luck for years and I doubt that Ryan Fitzpatrick will change that in the next few years as the QB. Although Marshall and Decker maybe the most underrated WR tandem in the league.
Posted on 12/16/15 at 11:50 pm to TooFyeToFly
Idk, that's why I asked the question. I tend to think that he wouldn't get in, while my friend disagrees. I just never think of him when I think of the top 2-3 WRs in the league (assuming that HOFers were all at one point one of the top players at their position).
Let's say on average 2 WRs get in every 3 years. I'm just making that number up, but I can't imagine it's too far off. Then you have all the guys that the poster previously mentioned that I think definitely get in before him. You are looking at about 15 years till he is even an option. Plus I would think that others would be coming up behind him with just as good or better careers like Antonio Brown, AJ Green, Dez Bryant, Demarius Thomas and Julio Jones.
Let's say on average 2 WRs get in every 3 years. I'm just making that number up, but I can't imagine it's too far off. Then you have all the guys that the poster previously mentioned that I think definitely get in before him. You are looking at about 15 years till he is even an option. Plus I would think that others would be coming up behind him with just as good or better careers like Antonio Brown, AJ Green, Dez Bryant, Demarius Thomas and Julio Jones.
This post was edited on 12/16/15 at 11:55 pm
Posted on 12/16/15 at 11:57 pm to GeauxPack81
quote:
Let's say on average 2 WRs get in every 3 years. I'm just making that number up, but I can't imagine it's too far off. Then you have all the guys that the poster previously mentioned that I think definitely get in before him. You are looking at about 15 years till he is even an option. Plus I would think that others would be coming up behind him with just as good or better careers like Antonio Brown and Julio Jones.
I do think that there's a valid point to this. I guess it depends on how you think the NFL will base their criteria; however, I do believe that the players mentioned on the first page (Moss, TO, Harrison, Holt, etc.) will make it into the Hall of Fame within five years. I think it's important to distinguish between first ballot Hall of Famer and Hall of Famer in general. Because, quite frankly, I think all of the guys on that list will eventually get in. The Hall of Fame is, as you pointed out, relevant to the times.
This post was edited on 12/16/15 at 11:58 pm
Posted on 12/17/15 at 12:07 am to GeauxPack81
I say no. I would assume a whole lot of numbers are garbage time fantasy numbers. Look at Largents career numbers 8 1k 819 rec 13 100 TD he wouldn't get in now garbage time.
Posted on 12/17/15 at 12:14 am to BeaverHunter
I see the emergence of fantasy football as irrelevant.
Also, Largent is in the Hall of Fame. I don't get the argument.
"Marshall became the first player in NFL history to have a 1,000 receiving yard season with four different teams (3 with Denver, 2 with Miami, 2 with Chicago and 1 with NYJ)."
That list of teams says it all, to me at least. For the record, Denver's QB was Kyle Orton for much of his time there.
Also, Largent is in the Hall of Fame. I don't get the argument.
"Marshall became the first player in NFL history to have a 1,000 receiving yard season with four different teams (3 with Denver, 2 with Miami, 2 with Chicago and 1 with NYJ)."
That list of teams says it all, to me at least. For the record, Denver's QB was Kyle Orton for much of his time there.
This post was edited on 12/17/15 at 12:22 am
Posted on 12/17/15 at 1:59 am to TooFyeToFly
It's not like they are going to stop putting people in the hall because of the rule changes
If so no one in the super bowl era would've ever made it since they Changed the rules to not allow straight mugging/tackling of WRs down field
If so no one in the super bowl era would've ever made it since they Changed the rules to not allow straight mugging/tackling of WRs down field
Posted on 12/17/15 at 5:35 am to TooFyeToFly
quote:
If anything, your point proves mine. The fact that NFL wide receivers weren't 6'4" and didn't run 4.5 40's in the 1960s is actually indicative of the modern era having athleticism that is FAR superior to that of the 1960s. The receivers that played in the 1960s, 1970s, etc. should not be rewarded for this disparity. Not to mention, the fact that you actually want to discredit modern players based off of this disparity is absolutely nonsensical.
I think you need to do a bit more research. WRs have always been the fastest guys and the ranks are full of former Olympians/track guys. Plus they weren't midgets or really small guys. They were the average height of the time. But just to give you some context..
Meet Harold Carmichael. Played mainly in the 70s and early 80s. Former track athlete. He is 6'8 and weighed 225 lbs. 4 time pro bowler.
To say that today's guys size would be a thing is a bit misguided..
Posted on 12/17/15 at 6:44 am to TooFyeToFly
quote:
"Marshall became the first player in NFL history to have a 1,000 receiving yard season with four different teams (3 with Denver, 2 with Miami, 2 with Chicago and 1 with NYJ)."
That list of teams says it all, to me at least. For the record, Denver's QB was Kyle Orton for much of his time there.
All it says to me is he got run out of town 3 times. Major issues. Cared more about his tv show while in Chicago than playing well.
Posted on 12/17/15 at 7:29 am to GeauxPack81
Yes.
Posted on 12/17/15 at 7:44 am to Chillini
quote:
All it says to me is he got run out of town 3 times. Major issues. Cared more about his tv show while in Chicago than playing well.
So far three mediocre NFL teams preferred to not have this "Hall of Famer" in his prime than keep him. Not free agency--they kicked his arse to the curb. How many other Hall of Famers can you say that about?
Posted on 12/17/15 at 7:46 am to SabiDojo
quote:
The fact that NFL wide receivers weren't 6'4" and didn't run 4.5 40's in the 1960s is actually indicative of the modern era having athleticism that is FAR superior to that of the 1960s
quote:
40 pages
Mattz, where you at?
Posted on 12/17/15 at 7:47 am to Chillini
quote:
All it says to me is he got run out of town 3 times. Major issues. Cared more about his tv show while in Chicago than playing well.
Come on, bro.
In relation to the Manning conversation, where people said Manning doesn't deserve it because at no point was he one of the best in the league, Marshall has always been one of the best in the league at his position.
Posted on 12/17/15 at 7:54 am to xenythx
quote:
Then you got fringe guys like ... Hines Ward.
Pretty sure he's in
Posted on 12/17/15 at 7:57 am to GeauxPack81
quote:
I think the hall of fame is more determined based on how dominant were you compared to the players of your time period....
Unless you're Eli Manning, in which case your career relative to your peers is irrelevant since you've won two SBs.
Posted on 12/17/15 at 8:01 am to GeauxPack81
No
Posted on 12/17/15 at 8:03 am to slackster
I should probably clarify that I fully believe Eli Manning is in the HOF, but I don't believe he deserves it.
I also fully believe Marshall will not make it into the HOF, but he does deserve it.
I think this conversation is interesting because you've got guys saying that today's WRs need to be compared to their peers rather than historical WRs, yet when you flip the conversation to basketball, guys like Dwight Howard are shite on because they pale in comparison to the historical big men.
I also fully believe Marshall will not make it into the HOF, but he does deserve it.
I think this conversation is interesting because you've got guys saying that today's WRs need to be compared to their peers rather than historical WRs, yet when you flip the conversation to basketball, guys like Dwight Howard are shite on because they pale in comparison to the historical big men.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News