Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

The Vikings' HoF club is now complete. Thank god Mick was inducted while he's still alive. What a brutal injustice it was to not induct him during his first 15 years of eligibility. The only other Bud-era Viking that one could make a case for is Jim Marshall but the argument for him isn't nearly as clean cut as the guys that have now been inducted.

The only other Bud-era Viking that one could make a case for is Jim Marshall but the argument for him isn't nearly as clean cut as the guys that have now been inducted.

Only 2 Pro Bowls over a 20 year career definitely hurts his case.

I'm happy for Tingelhoff. I've believed he should have went in a long, long time ago.

However, out of curiosity, was anyone else here very annoyed that they spelled his name 'Tinglehoff" during the NFL awards presentation? I mean, come on, Man. Have some respect.

paulksandiego wrote:I'm happy for Tingelhoff. I've believed he should have went in a long, long time ago.

However, out of curiosity, was anyone else here very annoyed that they spelled his name 'Tinglehoff" during the NFL awards presentation? I mean, come on, Man. Have some respect.

I missed that but it certainly is annoying, embarrassing and insulting. I don't think Mick will lose any sleep over it, though.

ChrisBabcock wrote:

The only other Bud-era Viking that one could make a case for is Jim Marshall but the argument for him isn't nearly as clean cut as the guys that have now been inducted.

Only 2 Pro Bowls over a 20 year career definitely hurts his case.

Exactly. What he does have working in his favor, though, is his incredible longevity and the fact that he was a key member of the Purple People Eaters, one of the greatest defenses in NFL history for an extended period. He truly is a borderline case.

I hope they don't push Marshall, and by "they" I mean any of the voters or the Vikings. If you play 20 years you ought to be an 1st team All-pro at least once. Although there are a couple of guys in who never were 1st team All-pro, it does not mean there should be another.

I admire Marshall's leadership, his free spirit, his toughness . . . but at some point there has to be some standards.

JohnTurney wrote:I hope they don't push Marshall, and by "they" I mean any of the voters or the Vikings. If you play 20 years you ought to be an 1st team All-pro at least once. Although there are a couple of guys in who never were 1st team All-pro, it does not mean there should be another.

I admire Marshall's leadership, his free spirit, his toughness . . . but at some point there has to be some standards.

Agreed fully. Marshall has utterly no business in the Hall of Fame. Besides, if the Vikings want someone to push as a deserving snub, they only need to wait another couple years before Joey Browner falls into the Senior pool.

Quite a bit of HoF related stuff from Peter King's most recent MMQB column. An excerpt -

"I marked an X next to Bettis, Haley, Seau and Shields. Now I was stuck. Dungy and Pace were worthy, in my mind. But as I winnowed, I found myself in a three-way mental tie for the fifth X: Brown, Greene and Harrison. Greene’s the fourth-leading sacker in the NFL dating back to 1960, with smart stats unearthed by relentless football-lover John Turney. Only Bruce Smith, Reggie White and Deacon Jones have more than Greene’s 160, and he twice led the NFL in sacks after the age of 32. A tremendously underappreciated player. I entered the day solidly in Greene’s corner, and nothing changed. Now the receivers … I liked Brown, a lot. My eyes told me Harrison was a slightly better receiver, more elusive, a precise route-runner who made beautiful music with Peyton Manning for so long. Slightly better. But Brown had a cast of mostly also-rans throwing to him in his career, caught just eight fewer balls than Harrison and had one big edge over most great receivers: his return ability. Brown had 4,555 return yards; Harrison didn’t return kicks or punts (he had just 21), so I factored that in too."

http://mmqb.si.com/2015/02/02/super-bow ... eahawks/3/

Also I thought this relating to Darren Sharper from his Twitter page was interesting -

"Sharper1: Re the many who have questioned Darren Sharper as a candidate for the Pro Football Hall of Fame class of 2016, a few thoughts:>>"

"Sharper2: The 46 HoF voters are asked to consider only on-field factors for ex-players. That is what I do. He may be shy …>"

"Sharper3: …of qualifications, but he is certainly a candidate. 2000s all-decade player. 6th all-time w/63 INTs (Reed: 64). He’s a candidate."

"Sharper4: We would be shirking our duties if we did not consider him. What has happened since should not be factored in."

"The bylaws of the Pro Football Hall of Fame forbid the 46 voters from considering players’ off-field lives."

"If I said, “I will not consider Sharper for induction because he has been accused of multiple rapes,” I would resign from the committee."

"RT @pfmflan: Should bylaws be changed to account for off field matters? … No. Then there’d be different set of rules for first 53 classes."

https://twitter.com/si_peterking

Guess we can expect Tyrer to be one of the seniors next year then . . .

No, that's good to say publicly and all and I agree that only "on the field" should matter (side note: then why don't they put in the actual best on the field players?) but let's be realistic. Even if Sharper's case was strong enough there's no chance they'd put him until and unless he was cleared of all charges.