Terry Bradshaw Does Not Deserve To Be in the NFL Hall of Fame

[polamalubeast]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/417960-forget-namath-discussion-terry-bradshaw-does-not-deserve-to-be-in-hof

Terry Bradshaw Does Not Deserve To Be in the NFL Hall of Fame
By Josh Dhani (Senior Writer) on July 09, 2010 1,065
reads
97
comments
1
like

Ronald Martinez/Getty Images Okay, forget about the Joe Namath discussion of him being in the Hall of Fame. It was a different kind of era and him winning Super Bowl III changed NFL History. I changed my mind about him. It's hard to see guys throw for 4,000 yards in twelve games.

At least Namath has thrown for 4,000 yards. At least he never had a season of six touchdowns and 24 interceptions.

In my opinion, Bradshaw is just overrated. Really overrated. Sure, he won some Super Bowls, but remember, he had a Hall of Fame running back, two Hall of Fame receivers, and a Hall of Fame defense.

And with those Hall of Fame receivers, all Bradshaw could do was produce a 70.9 quarterback rating. I have never seen a quarterback do that bad with so many targets.

What did Namath have? He just had two helpful guys on offense in Matt Snell and Don Maynard.

Bradshaw had everything a quarterback would dream for.

And yet, he did terrible. Here are his career statistics: 51.9 completion percentage, 27,989 yards, 212 touchdowns, 210 interceptions, and a 70.9 quarterback rating. He is lucky he barely got over the hump over more touchdowns than interceptions ratio.

Now tell me this, are these stats Hall of Fame worthy when you have a Hall of Fame running back, two HOF receivers, and a HOF defense?

Year Team G Att Com Pct Yards TD Int Rate
Pittsburgh Steelers season">1970 Pittsburgh Steelers 13 218 83 38.1 1410 6 24 30.4
1971 Pittsburgh Steelers 14 373 203 54.4 2259 13 22 59.7
1972 Pittsburgh Steelers 14 308 147 47.7 1887 12 12 64.1
1973 Pittsburgh Steelers 10 180 89 49.4 1183 10 15 54.5
1974 Pittsburgh Steelers 8 148 67 45.3 785 7 8 55.2
1975 Pittsburgh Steelers 14 286 165 57.7 2055 18 9 88.0
1976 Pittsburgh Steelers 10 192 92 47.9 1177 10 9 65.4
1977 Pittsburgh Steelers 14 314 162 51.6 2523 17 19 71.4
1978 Pittsburgh Steelers 16 368 207 56.3 2915 28 20 84.7
1979 Pittsburgh Steelers 16 472 259 54.9 3724 26 25 77.0
1980 Pittsburgh Steelers 15 424 218 51.4 3339 24 22 75.0
1981 Pittsburgh Steelers 14 370 201 54.3 2887 22 14 83.9
1982 Pittsburgh Steelers 9 240 127 52.9 1768 17 11 81.4
1983 Pittsburgh Steelers 1 8 5 62.5 77 2 0 133.9
Career Totals
168 3901 2025 51.9 27989 212 210 70.9


Answer that for me. If you can say he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, then by God, put Boomer Esiason, Randall Cunningham and Ken Stabler in there already.

[Chidi29]

What te author doesn't realize is how those career stats are skewed because he, and the team, was still bad for a couple years after he was drafted. He was drafted in 1970; it's not like he came straight into the team that was created by the mid-70's.

The seasonal breakdown shows that.

[steeldevil]

IDK maybe because he won 4 super bowls? He was clutch and played great in the big game. Yes he made a lot of mistakes, but he was a gunslinger and thats what they do. Does Brett Favre not deserve to get in either?

[fansince'76]

Another fantasy football nerd who was probably born a good decade or so after Bradshaw retired. Next. :coffee:

Correction: a good decade-and-a-half after Bradshaw retired. Even better.


About Me

Josh Dhani

13-year old blogger known widely across the Internet. He also published a book called The Kwame Brown Chronicles featuring some awesome bloggers like Trey Kerby, Graham Brunell, Jonathan Mathis, and Nick Gelso.

[LLT]

Wow...what a completely uneducated article. There was a numbnuts at the old site who tried to use stats alone to "prove" that Mwelde Moore should be our feature back. That is pretty much what this writer just did.

According to the writer....players like
Jeff Garcia at 88.3 ...
Daunte Culpepper at 88.0 ....
Trent Green at 86.1...
Mark Brunell at 85.2...
Brad Johnson at 84.117

belong in the HOF instead of:

George Blanda at 60.6...
Sammy Baugh at 72.21...
Bob Griese at 77.1
Johnny Unitas at 78.20
John Elway at 79.9
and Bart Starr at 80.47


Just to show how skewed the authors perception is: NO ONE would put Kurt Warner in their top five QB's of all time....yet he retired with the highest passer rating of all time at 97.2

The writer (as already stated) is probably too young to realize that Bradshaw was the first QB to win more than two Super bowls...and was elected into the HOF in the climate of having won TWICE as many as any other QB in history. It was AFTER Bradshaws time that Joe Montana won 4...Troy Aikman won three...and Tom Brady cheated his way to 3 championships.

In a nutshell...the writer is a dumb-ass.

[GoSlash27]

Football was a different game back in Bradshaw's day; they didn't coddle QBs like they do now. Also that little matter of 4 superbowl rings.
Was there anyone in the history of the league who could throw a football as far and accurately as Terry Bradshaw? Let's go to the tape...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2U1Xtci4PBw
/author is useless

[Steelersfan]

"""""" In my opinion, Bradshaw is just overrated. Really overrated. Sure, he won some Super Bowls, but remember, he had a Hall of Fame running back, two Hall of Fame receivers, and a Hall of Fame defense. """"""


Do the Steelers have two hall of fame receivers without Bradshaw ??? A receiver needs a QB, good enough, to get them the ball for them to be HOF worthy, don't they ???

And what does a hall of fame defense have to do with Bradshaw being enshrined in the HOF ? Or a HOF running back, for that matter ?

How many QB's throughout history were good enough to win 4 Super bowls ???


I guess there's no way to put an age restrictions on blogging with the grown-ups huh ???

[zulater]

Maybe next week he can tell us how overrated Chuck Noll was?:doh:

[solardave]

QUOTE=zulater;23308]Maybe next week he can tell us how overrated Chuck Noll was?:doh:[/QUOTE]

Yeah really. Lambert was a pussy, Joe Greene was a wimp!!!!!!(Of course I wouldn't say that to their faces).:grin:

[GoSlash27]

Also forgot the matter of the '76 season. Can anyone argue that the loss of Bradshaw *personally* that year didn't screw us?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--IKFr14cy0

[Devilsdancefloor]

what a numbnuts!

[Butch]

As the great Chuck Noll once said..."Stats are for losers."

Let's see now Swann doesn't deserve it because he had Stallworth, Bradshaw, Franco and a Stellar Defense. Stallworth doesn't deserve it because he had Swann, Bradshaw and a stellar Defense. Franco doesn't deserve it because...Same old Bull Shit that was started with that Asshole Peter King.

Hey Petie and crew they were all great and happened to play on the same team. WOW to bad your hatered for great teams has blinded you to the greatness of players like L.C. Greenwood, Dermonti Dawson and many others.

[steelerdude15]

Let's also NOT FORGET that the NFL was different then it is today. First off, you could beat the living hell out of the WR. There was no illegal contact and things like that. They didn't call as many penalties as they do today. What this "writer" forgets is that we ran the ball majority of the time. Why not use the weapons we had. Lastly.... TERRY AND CHUCK CALLED THEIR OWN PLAYS!!!! I would those weapons in an efficient manner, just like they did.

[El-Gonzo Jackson]

Another fantasy football nerd who was probably born a good decade or so after Bradshaw retired. Next. :coffee:

Correction: a good decade-and-a-half after Bradshaw retired. Even better.

Let me get this straight. The author is 13 years old. He isnt old enough to get into a movie that is rated A14, yet somebody on this board actually cares that he wrote a blog. :doh:

[PalmerSteel]

i just read the title and chuckled. figured it was some joke. thanks for the laugh.

[BPS3akaWirels3]

LOLOLOL.. No freaking clue..

[The Duke]

Bleacher report, 13 year old boy....

yeah,should not be on this forum honestly

[HometownGal]

Fixed that for ya Gary. :heh:


About Me

Josh Dhani

13-year old blogger known widely across the Internet. He also published books called "Dumbassery 101", "Still Breastfeeding at 13" and "I'm A Football Expert Because I Said So".

Dumb fuck. :jerkit:

[salamander]

lolz.

I guess his mommy let him use the computer.

[Godfather]

Did this guy compare Bradshaw's numbers to other quarterbacks of his era?

Next he'll tell us Sammy Sosa was a better power hitter than Harmon Killebrew.

[X-Terminator]

And just when a sensible Bleacher Report article comes out, along comes another one to show once again why Bleacher Report should never be taken seriously by anyone. It's a complete joke.

Hey kid...better log off now. I think I hear your daddy coming...

[zulater]

It's one thing to question Lynn Swann's Hall of Fame credentials. While I agree with Swann's induction I can also see the argument against. But questioniong Bradshaw's inclusion is just plain stupid. Stats don't define Terry, wins do. The Vikings, Cowboys and Raiders of that era were also littered with multiple Hall of Famers on both sides of the line of scrimmage, but those three great near dynasties combined together won only three Super bowls compared to the Steelers four. In fact much of what defines those Steelers teams and their players is who they had to overcome. Terry bested the likes of Stabler, Staubach, Tarkenton to help get those wins and that is why he was a first ballot Hall of famer!

[SteelerFanInStl]

Let me get this straight. The author is 13 years old. He isnt old enough to get into a movie that is rated A14, yet somebody on this board actually cares that he wrote a blog. :doh:

agreed

[st33lersguy]

Part of Bradshaw's "poor" stats was the fact that the recievers could get jammed anywhere on the field, his early struggles, the fact that he was playing in a 14 game season, and the steelers generally ran the ball
Whast this guy doesn't remember is that in 1978 Bradshaw was NFL and superbowl MVP
Most important Bradshaw stepped up in the superbowl when he had to
Superbowl IX, Vikings score TD, make it 9-6 steelers in the 4th quarter, Bradshaw ices the game by engineering a long TD march ending with a TD pass to then TE Larry Brown
Superbowl X, steelers up 15-10, heaves a TD bomb just before taking a hit that would knock him out of the game
Superbowl XIII, Bradshaw throws for 300+ yards and 4 TDs, in a 35-31 victory
Superbowl XIV, steelers down 19-17 at the start of the 4th quarter, Bradshaw heaves TD bomb to Stallworth and another bomb to Stallworth that sets up TD. Gets over 300 yards.

In the Superbowl XIV highlight video, John Facenda said "great teams aren't always great, they're just great when they have to be". These words apply to clutch players aswell

[SteelCityMan786]

I have question for the writter, can you name me another Quarterback to win 4 Rings as a starter other then Joe Montana?

[steelpride12]

Just a joke. I knew it was the second I saw the writer and his info.

[polamalubeast]

In the Superbowl XIV highlight video, John Facenda said "great teams aren't always great, they're just great when they have to be". These words apply to clutch players aswell



Really agree with her!

We can say that Roethlisberger is like her!

I thought that Santonio Holmes was like her too.

4 TD in four playoff games and 8 TD in his last 7 games against the Ravens, is one of the reasons I was so not happy to have lost!

And Woodley is like her too!

Eight sacks in four playoff games!...

[tube517]

Yawn.

[CanadianSteel]

Ya that was a wasted 2 mins of my life I will never get back..... Terry was clutch still and to this day threw one of the best deep balls I have ever seen. The Leauge has changed so much and patsy QB's like Brady and Warner would have lasted like 3 years max back in the 70's.

Terry is still the man and belongs in the Hall for his clutch QB performances alone in the SuperBowls. He had greta talent around him yes but he also was great when he had to be or they dont win.

Feel like I am arguing with myself here... :>D

[BigNastyDefense]

This kid's balls probably haven't even dropped yet. He has never had to shave a day in his life. Hell, he isn't even a freshman in high school yet.

Terry Bradshaw is one of the few QB's who played in two eras.

He played in an era where defenses were basically allowed to hit QB's late and mug receivers at any point on the field. An era where few teams threw the ball often, only to supplement the running game.

Then, after the Steelers had won two Super Bowls, the NFL changed the rules some. The pass interference rule and the no contact after 5 yards rule was instituted. After that, Bradshaw's stats started to get better.

Also, if Bradshaw was such an overrated QB, then why did it take us to long to win a Super Bowl after he left? I mean, if he had nothing to do with the success the Steelers had, replacing him shouldn't have been so hard.

[CantStop85]

And just when a sensible Bleacher Report article comes out, along comes another one to show once again why Bleacher Report should never be taken seriously by anyone. It's a complete joke.

Hey kid...better log off now. I think I hear your daddy coming...

Hey now...some of us over at Bleacher Report actually write legitimate articles...it's just the retards who get all the attention. :chuckle:

[BigNastyDefense]

Hey now...some of us over at Bleacher Report actually write legitimate articles...it's just the retards who get all the attention. :chuckle:

Well yeah, the Bengal fans can't string more than a few words together before it becomes a bunch a gibberish. :chuckle:

[steeldevil]

This kid's balls probably haven't even dropped yet. He has never had to shave a day in his life. Hell, he isn't even a freshman in high school yet.

Terry Bradshaw is one of the few QB's who played in two eras.

He played in an era where defenses were basically allowed to hit QB's late and mug receivers at any point on the field. An era where few teams threw the ball often, only to supplement the running game.

Then, after the Steelers had won two Super Bowls, the NFL changed the rules some. The pass interference rule and the no contact after 5 yards rule was instituted. After that, Bradshaw's stats started to get better.

Also, if Bradshaw was such an overrated QB, then why did it take us to long to win a Super Bowl after he left? I mean, if he had nothing to do with the success the Steelers had, replacing him shouldn't have been so hard.

That is a very good point that I didnt think about. Nice post.

[CantStop85]

Well yeah, the Bengal fans can't string more than a few words together before it becomes a bunch a gibberish. :chuckle:

Shut up man, you don't know what you're talking abou...trained elephant had drain coke shed carson palmer how even fan raven jump lazy cat run book glasses.

[solardave]

QUOTE=CantStop85;23444]Shut up man, you don't know what you're talking abou...trained elephant had drain coke shed carson palmer how even fan raven jump lazy cat run book glasses.[/QUOTE]

Looks like some of the emails I get selling Viagra.:rofl2:

[solardave]

This kid is still breast feeding and using a pacifier. He does have most of the credentials (based on what we see today) to be a sports writer.

1) Never played the game.
2) He's an idiot.
3) He hates any successful team. (expecially the Steelers)
4) Couldn't find his ass with both hands!!!
5) Speculation here but he probably thinks Tom Brady is the greatest ever and he is NOT GAY!!!
6) And last he's a future douchebag!!!!

[stillers4me]

This kid is still breast feeding and using a pacifier. He does have most of the credentials (based on what we see today) to be a sports writer.

1) Never played the game.
2) He's an idiot.
3) He hates any successful team. (expecially the Steelers)
4) Couldn't find his ass with both hands!!!
5) Speculation here but he probably thinks Tom Brady is the greatest ever and he is NOT GAY!!!
6) And last he's a future douchebag!!!!

&) The only film he's ever seen on Terry Bradsaw is Failure to Launch.

[solardave]

&) The only film he's ever seen on Terry Bradsaw is Failure to Launch.

Now that's funny. And Scarey at the same time.

[silver & black]

Since I'm an old dog that watched Bradshaw's entire career... and watched him step up in close games against my team to take the win, I'm not even going to bother reading through this thread. I'll just say here and now; Terry Bradshaw most definitely deserves to be/should be in the Hall Of Fame. Four rings, tough as nails, clutch... nuff said.

[solardave]

Since I'm an old dog that watched Bradshaw's entire career... and watched him step up in close games against my team to take the win, I'm not even going to bother reading through this thread. I'll just say here and now; Terry Bradshaw most definitely deserves to be/should be in the Hall Of Fame. Four rings, tough as nails, clutch... nuff said.

From one old dog to another so does Stabler.

[memphissteelergirl]

A four time SB quarterback does not belong in the Hall of Fame.....riiiiiight! :wtf:

[SteelMember]

Hey Kid, Stick it up your blog.

[Akagi]

From one old dog to another so does Stabler.

I was just about to write the same thing.

Take Favre's toughness and gunslinger attitude, and P Manning's cool precision and luck, and you have Brad's best seasons.

[SteelerSal]

I wonder if this kid knows just how much feedback he is getting from his article. I didn't and wont go and read all the comments over at BR, but I'm sure there are plenty.
This kid will probably have a bright future in journalism because he already has a head start on BS.

[LLT]

This kid's balls probably haven't even dropped yet.

According to "kid-stat" .....dropped balls are the #1 cause of fumble related turnovers. :der:

[Dino 6 Rings]

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
deeeeeeeep breath.....HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Another classic example of "how do I generate hits to my blog, I know, upset the Steelers fans by saying something completely outrageous about one of their legendary icons!

SERIOUSLY! EFFING COMEDY GOLD!


Championships prior to Terry = 0
Championship with Terry = 4
Championships between Terry's Retirement and Ben Roethlisberger over 21 years apart = 0

HA HA HA HA HA! Right, he's so not deserving of the Hall of Fame! HA! HA HA HA HA HA HA!

Hope you got the blog hits you needed to validate your existance on the Bleacherpuke Server.

[Dino 6 Rings]

Yeah, nothing like being a QB that beat fellow hall of famers 3 times in the Super Bowl. Staubach Twice, Tarkenton Once.

Yep, he shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame when considering at the time when he retired he basically owned every SB Passing record. Yep, he was "lucky"

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA! Man, I haven't laughed this hard since...Tim Lumber Young Man!

[Steely McSmash]

Honestly not bad for a 13 year old. He took a position and tried to support it with stats. He's dead wrong and I don't like being duped into reading the writings of tweens, but for 13, not bad at all.

[SMR]

Yeah, nothing like being a QB that beat fellow hall of famers 3 times in the Super Bowl. Staubach Twice, Tarkenton Once.

Yep, he shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame when considering at the time when he retired he basically owned every SB Passing record. Yep, he was "lucky"

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA! Man, I haven't laughed this hard since...Tim Lumber Young Man!

Tim Lumber, ROFL. I actually miss him for the comedy too!

[Indo]

*SIGH*

Was writing this blog part of your "English Composition for 7th Graders" Class?

I have so much to say about this that I'm just gonna click the little button at the top and go read another thread....

[st33lersguy]

I wonder if this kid knows just how much feedback he is getting from his article. I didn't and wont go and read all the comments over at BR, but I'm sure there are plenty.
This kid will probably have a bright future in journalism because he already has a head start on BS.


I read the top and oldest comment (goes oldest 1st) and that comment should have educated him enough

[HughC]

A few others have mentioned it, but it's worth repeating. Two completely different eras, making comparison of stats meaningless. Used to be you could hit an eligible receiver downfield all you wanted. Now you do so much as put your hand on his jersey more than two steps away from the line of scrimmage, that's an automatic pass interference penalty. Look at QB stats such as passing yards, QB rating, etc. and you will see the all-time leader lists are filled almost exclusively with current players, or at least guys that played in the 90's and later.

Another flaw is the 'at least Namath threw for 4,000 yards' argument. What the author failed to note was that (a) Namath did that only once, and (b) Namath was the only NFL player to ever do that at that time. Prior to 1979, when Dan Fouts threw for 4.082 yards, nobody else threw for 4,000 yards either. Per the author's own logic John Unitas, Sonny Jurgenson, Otto Graham and Sammy Baugh are all mediocre because they never threw for 4,000 yards either.

Because of the way the game has changed it is ridiculous to use stats to compare players of different eras. If you want to use stats to compare players, the best way to do so is to see how they ranked against their peers. Bradshaw was among the top ten in yards per pass attempt seven times; he was in the top for five five straight years and was best in the league in back-to back seasons. He led the league in passing touchdowns twice and was in the top ten eight times. The author rags on Bradshaw's QB rating but does not take into account what the QB rating typically was then; Bradshaw ranked in the top eight in QB rating six times.

Then of course there is also that matter of four rings, a 14-5 playoff record, and a 121-56 overall record as the starter.

Bottom line is that even if you discount the championships, stats actually back up the case for Bradshaw being in the Hall of Fame, rather than making a case against him.

[SMR]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/417960-forget-namath-discussion-terry-bradshaw-does-not-deserve-to-be-in-hof

Terry Bradshaw Does Not Deserve To Be in the NFL Hall of Fame
By Josh Dhani (Senior Writer) on July 09, 2010 1,065
reads
97
comments
1
like

Ronald Martinez/Getty Images Okay, forget about the Joe Namath discussion of him being in the Hall of Fame. It was a different kind of era and him winning Super Bowl III changed NFL History. I changed my mind about him. It's hard to see guys throw for 4,000 yards in twelve games.

At least Namath has thrown for 4,000 yards. At least he never had a season of six touchdowns and 24 interceptions.

In my opinion, Bradshaw is just overrated. Really overrated. Sure, he won some Super Bowls, but remember, he had a Hall of Fame running back, two Hall of Fame receivers, and a Hall of Fame defense.

And with those Hall of Fame receivers, all Bradshaw could do was produce a 70.9 quarterback rating. I have never seen a quarterback do that bad with so many targets.

What did Namath have? He just had two helpful guys on offense in Matt Snell and Don Maynard.

Bradshaw had everything a quarterback would dream for.

And yet, he did terrible. Here are his career statistics: 51.9 completion percentage, 27,989 yards, 212 touchdowns, 210 interceptions, and a 70.9 quarterback rating. He is lucky he barely got over the hump over more touchdowns than interceptions ratio.

Now tell me this, are these stats Hall of Fame worthy when you have a Hall of Fame running back, two HOF receivers, and a HOF defense?

Year Team G Att Com Pct Yards TD Int Rate
Pittsburgh Steelers season">1970 Pittsburgh Steelers 13 218 83 38.1 1410 6 24 30.4
1971 Pittsburgh Steelers 14 373 203 54.4 2259 13 22 59.7
1972 Pittsburgh Steelers 14 308 147 47.7 1887 12 12 64.1
1973 Pittsburgh Steelers 10 180 89 49.4 1183 10 15 54.5
1974 Pittsburgh Steelers 8 148 67 45.3 785 7 8 55.2
1975 Pittsburgh Steelers 14 286 165 57.7 2055 18 9 88.0
1976 Pittsburgh Steelers 10 192 92 47.9 1177 10 9 65.4
1977 Pittsburgh Steelers 14 314 162 51.6 2523 17 19 71.4
1978 Pittsburgh Steelers 16 368 207 56.3 2915 28 20 84.7
1979 Pittsburgh Steelers 16 472 259 54.9 3724 26 25 77.0
1980 Pittsburgh Steelers 15 424 218 51.4 3339 24 22 75.0
1981 Pittsburgh Steelers 14 370 201 54.3 2887 22 14 83.9
1982 Pittsburgh Steelers 9 240 127 52.9 1768 17 11 81.4
1983 Pittsburgh Steelers 1 8 5 62.5 77 2 0 133.9
Career Totals
168 3901 2025 51.9 27989 212 210 70.9


Answer that for me. If you can say he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, then by God, put Boomer Esiason, Randall Cunningham and Ken Stabler in there already.

One of the dumbest anti-steelers article ever. :der:

[polamalubeast]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/418295-the-oxy-moronic-train-of-thought-regarding-the-hall-of-fame

The Oxy-Moronic Train of Thought Regarding The Hall of Fame.


There is a building in Canton, Ohio. The name of this particular building is called the Pro Football Hall of Fame. It is a place where every kid that has ever strapped a helmet onto his head has had the dream of having a bronze bust of themselves in this building.

The reason for the Pro Football Hall of Fame is to honor the men that have made professional football what it is today, America's Past Time. (Sorry baseball, you lost that title LONG ago).

Recently, here on Bleacher Report, there have been writers that are calling into question the fact that there are men in the Hall of Fame, that do not deserve to be in there.

Now, my personal opinion is, there are people in there that do not deserve to be in there. However, my opinion does not matter, because I do not get a vote as to whom is in there.

Likewise, there are people that are not currently in the Hall of Fame that I believe should be. But, once again, my opinion does not matter, as I do not get a vote as to whom is in there.

If you have noticed, to this point, I have called the building, the HALL OF FAME. I did not call it the Hall of Stats, I called it, the Hall of Fame.

The reason for that is, simply put, there are many aspects to the game of football that CANNOT be measured. Can you measure heart? Can you measure determination? Can you measure courage? Leadership?

No, no, no, and no.

The two men that have been called into question are, Joe Namath of the New York Jets, and Terry Bradshaw , of the Pittsburgh Steelers.

Yes, it is true that these two men do not have the statistics of someone like Dan Marino or Peyton Manning. But, as I said, that is not what this is about.

Joe Namath was the quarter back of the New York Jets in Super Bowl III. At that point, the NFL had been dominating the AFL, making many people wonder if there was even a reason to have a Super Bowl, simply because the AFL was not as good as the NFL.

At a press conference in the days leading up the the big game, Namath was so sick of hearing how the Colts were simply going to pound the Jets, that Namath made a guarantee that would change the world of sports.

Namath said that not only were the Jets going to win, but that he GUARANTEED that they were going to win.

See, unlike sports today, people didn't guarantee anything back in those days. Had the Colts defeated the Jets, it would have possibly been the end of the AFL. The Colts were favored to win the game by, somewhere between 15-17 points.

And Namath delivered. He led his Jets to the only Super Bowl in the history of the team, and he did it in a way, that made him running off the field, waving his one finger in the air, that is still used today in NFL videos.

Did he have the stats? No, but he changed the game of football by delivering on a guarantee.

Terry Bradshaw was the quarterback of the Pittsburgh Steelers during their days of dominance in the 70's. When Bradshaw was drafted with the first overall pick in the 1970 draft, the Steelers had not even won a playoff game to that point in their existence.

Bradshaw was the first, and one of only two men to ever be able to say that they started four Super Bowls, and won them all. The only other person that can say that, is Joe Montana.

Now, detractors will point to the facts that Bradshaw had the Steel Curtain on the other side of the ball, and that was one of the best defenses to ever play the game. They will then point to the fact that Franco Harris, Mike Webster, Lynn Swann and John Stallworth, are all members of the Hall of Fame.

The other side of that coin might be looked at like, would Harris, Webster, Swann and Stallworth all made it to the Hall of Fame, without Terry Bradshaw?

Bradshaw also holds the distinction of being able to say that, in every one of his Super Bowl victories, in the fourth quarter, with the game on the line, Bradshaw threw a touch down pass to either give the Steelers the lead, or to put the game away.

Did he have the stats? No, but when the game is on the line, he delivered, EVERYTIME.

To all of the people out there that only want to look at the numbers on the stat sheets, please remember one thing, the NFL was A LOT different in the 70's, than it is today.

Back then, corners were permitted to "bump" the receivers until the ball was in the air, not the five yards that they have today.

Defensive men were allowed to strike the quarter back for TWO FULL STEPS after the ball was out of his hands. Today, the QB's know that once the ball is out of their hands, they won't be touched.

Not only that, back then, you could swing at the head of the quarterback, right in front of the official, and he would not even THINK about throwing his flag. Today, they throw the flag if a defensive player bumps the legs of the quarterback after the ball is thrown.

Please remember, the stats all look wonderful, but the reality is, the game is not played on a piece of paper, it is played on a field. What happens on the field is considerably more important than anything you can read about on Monday morning.

If you don't believe that someone deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, I can respect that. But, you need to respect the fact that the sacrifices that they have made to be there is more than anything most ever came close to doing.

[Burghfan58]

That article gets the 0 credibility stamp. Gamer and a winner. That's all that needs said.

[fansince'76]

See, unlike sports today, people didn't guarantee anything back in those days. Had the Colts defeated the Jets, it would have possibly been the end of the AFL.The NFL/AFL merger was agreed upon in 1966. :rolleyes2:

[SMR]

lol, true!

[86WARD]

Overrated? lol...okay.

Bradshaw was lights out passing in 1978 and 1979 seasons for that era. An era not known for passing...hence all the low pass numbers...ACROSS THE LEAGUE. He was second in the league in '79 and I believe Top 3 in '78...maybe Top 5 at the worst? The rest of his career he was steady. Funny how this guy writes this article more than 30 years after the era Bradshaw played. Of course he wouldn't make the Hall by today's standards. Half the Hall wouldn't...lol.

The Hall of Fame is more than just numbers and that's what Joshie doesn't get. Bradshaw threw for over 3900 yards in '79 second only to Dan Fouts who threw for 4100.

[SteelerSal]

A Player's Statistics Must Be Measured In the Context of His Era

By Carl Ragsdale (Contributor)


Getty Images/Getty Images


When evaluating a football player, statistics are by far the most popular measure. While it has many flaws, the stat sheet does do a decent job of giving us an idea of how successful any one player is. The danger of statistics is that, taken alone, they can be the most misleading measure of a player's success.

An important component of a player's statistics is the time in which he played in and what was typical of that time. Without this component, it becomes impossible to compare players of different eras, with rules so different that it is almost like playing a different game.

One exaggerated example of this mistake would be to compare the statistics of Dan Marino and Sammy Baugh. Both are Hall of Fame quarterbacks and two of the greatest ever. However, a statistical comparison would be ridiculously lopsided in favor of Marino because the era he played in allowed for passing statistics that would have been alien in Baugh's era.

This brings me to the point of my article. The flaw in judgement explained above has been used to argue that two quarterbacks, namely Joe Namath and Terry Bradshaw, should not be in the Hall of Fame. Here are their stats for reference:

Bradshaw: 168 games, 51.9 completion percentage, 27,989 passing yards, 212 passing touchdowns, 210 interceptions, 32 rushing touchdowns, 70.9 quarterback rating

Namath: 140 games, 50.1 completion percentage, 27,663 passing yards, 173 passing touchdowns, 220 interceptions, 7 rushing touchdowns, 65.5 quarterback rating

While those stats surely look unimpressive to the casual fan, it is important to remember that before the illegal contact rule took effect in 1978, those were solid statistics.

Here are some more things to think about before you scream about how bad Bradshaw and Namath's stats are:

-Of the top 65 quarterbacks all time in passer rating, only five played the majority of their careers before the illegal contact rule (started in 1978). All five of them are in the Hall of Fame.

-Notable quarterbacks that have a higher quarterback rating than Johnny Unitas: Aaron Brooks, Matt Cassel, Jeff George, Jason Campbell, and Brian Griese.

-A 4,000 yard season in today's NFL is old news. In the 1970's it was almost the equivalent of a 5,000 yard season today. (Fun fact: Namath had the NFL's first ever 4,000 yard season in 1967.)

To take another example, Johnny Unitas is considered by many to be the very greatest quarterback to ever play the game (Montana would have something to say about that, but that's for a different debate). Did anybody know that Unitas threw more interceptions than touchdowns EIGHT times in his 17 year career and had "only" a 78.2 quarterback rating? Should he even be in the Hall of Fame for that?

Now, if it took you more than one microsecond to scream "(expletive) YES" to the previous question, that's my hand coming through the computer screen to slap some sense into you. The point of that stat is that it was commonplace in the league at that time to throw more interceptions than touchdowns as even the greatest quarterback of that era did so several times.

Where is this going, you may ask? Well, Bradshaw and Namath's quarterback statistics were actually good for the time they played in, and that is without even accounting for the postseason accolades that Bradshaw accumulated and Namath's history altering guarantee.

I admit: I'm only 19 years old. I haven't had the chance to see the great players of the 1970's and 1960's play. What I do understand is the many rule changes that have happened since then:

-the Mel Blount rule
-the Ty Law rule
-the Tom Brady rule
-rules against hitting receivers in the helmets
-hitting defenseless receivers
-hitting quarterbacks in the head
-etc.

If you don't understand the impact that these rule changes have had on the game, you have no right to evaluate the player statistics of the past. It was much more difficult to throw the ball in the 1970's than it is in today's NFL, and you must account for that when comparing across different eras.

The rule changes aren't the only thing that have changed since the time Namath and Bradshaw played. Ever heard of this thing called the West Coast offense? Of course you have. One of the most popular and successful offensive schemes of all time, the West Coast offense was not around during the time these quarterbacks played.

This meant that quarterbacks weren't throwing three yard slants to their receiver and benefiting from lots of YAC, like many quarterbacks today do to inflate their stats. The quarterbacks of the past had to sling it down the field against tight coverage (no such thing as illegal contact), which results in more dangerous throws, much lower completion percentages, and more interceptions for all quarterbacks.

So, before you claim that a Hall of Fame quarterback is not Hall of Fame worthy, always remember the era that that particular quarterback played in before you go bashing sub par stats. Otherwise, I could blindly bash just about every HOF quarterback that played in the 1970's and before.

[SirHulka]

A wise comment from a young person. All excellent points. You can only really compare players of the same era. It's simply foolish to compare today's athlete to yesterday's. Example: Babe Ruth, for several years in a row, by himself out-homered every other TEAM in the majors. So to compare his 50+ homers a year to today's inflated stats is simply ludicrous. But some people will always try, I suppose.