Predicitons for the Pro Football Hall of Fame Class of 2016

[bachslunch]

it would be a slap in the face to Stabler to elect him after his death. They should have elected him while he was alive!

Exactly. As if they would feel guilty about not inducting him during his lifetime. How does passing away make you more Hall worthy?

Dunno -- but it worked for Ron Santo over at the Baseball Hall.

[Reaser]

From this seat, the opinion is to elect Steve Sabol as the "sole" contributor in a particular year -
even if it is a year to elect two.
Of all the prospective candidates, he should stand alone - head and shoulders above the rest.
In fact, his election should be as a regular enshrinee - without the contributor nonsense which is a late entry ploy
to generate revenue.

All of that, yes.

Also can't stand the games played when it comes to voting, whether team, position, who else has gone in recently, etc. There's literally no reason they shouldn't just elect the best x amount of candidates per year. Messing around with "well, we can only pick one (insert position)" and things like that has helped make a mess of the process. Pick the best players, put them in, in order of how good they are (subjective but when you have obvious HOF'ers and you're putting in borderline or worse guys, it lowers the bar and makes things a joke) ... That's the most frustrating part of it all.

"We have obvious HOF'ers there, but let's not put him in and instead put in borderline guys."

[Shrevedude]

by Shrevedude » Thu Aug 13, 2015 10:36 am The only knock on Kramer is that "there are already too many from that great Packers team." So what!
Deserving is deserving; anything else is a mockery of something with enough bad features already.

One thing I learned from Ken Crippen's website re Kramer that likely doesn't help his candidacy is that he was not an especially good pass blocker. He was, however, top-flight as a blocker on run plays and screen passes, which was especially important in Green Bay's offensive scheme. I still think he belongs in, but the pass blocking may have been an issue for voters who turned him down. See the film study report here:

http://kencrippen.com/Scouting-Reports/Kramer_Jerry.pdf

Thanks for mentioning this, Bachslunch. I was wondering why the voters kept turning down Kramer every year, and this makes sense. However, a couple of senior voters agreed with me in e-mails I sent them that Kramer is the biggest HOF snub of them all.

[oldecapecod11]

by bachslunch » Thu Aug 13, 2015 1:30 pm

ChrisBabcock wrote:
it would be a slap in the face to Stabler to elect him after his death. They should have elected him while he was alive!

Exactly. As if they would feel guilty about not inducting him during his lifetime. How does passing away make you more Hall worthy?


"Dunno -- but it worked for Ron Santo over at the Baseball Hall."
bachslunch


But... it would be an admission of guilt. "We shudda done it sooner."
And, like Scott Norwood and Bill Buckner, the whole world saw you blow it.
Right or wrong, you won't see Stabler this year.

[Reaser]

Kramer is the biggest HOF snub of them all.

He's not the best player not in the HOF. He may be the biggest snub though? The problem is in that he should have went in forever ago. Voted the best guard in the first 50 years of the league, seems automatic to me - so put him in within a reasonable time after he retires.

Now, if one was starting a HOF from scratch today and were ahistorical, he would be way down the list of best players, definitely more borderline than a lock (that he should have been at the time of his retirement). That's the problem with not putting in players when they should go in.

[SixtiesFan]

it would be a slap in the face to Stabler to elect him after his death. They should have elected him while he was alive!

Exactly. As if they would feel guilty about not inducting him during his lifetime. How does passing away make you more Hall worthy?

Speaking of Ken Stabler, I dragged out my copy of Zander Hollander's 1975 The Complete Handbook of Pro Football. It has a thumbnail sketch of the top players on each team. Of Ken Stabler, in part:

"Popular leader who inspired Raiders when he succeeded Daryle Lamonica early in 1973. 'The Raiders put out for Stabler in a way they never quite did for Lamonica,' says ex-Oakland defensive tackle Tom Keating.' Team took off flying when Stabler got job...Excellent play-caller and middle distance passer; strong, gutty runner on occasion."

[BD Sullivan]

Kramer is the biggest HOF snub of them all.

He's not the best player not in the HOF. He may be the biggest snub though? The problem is in that he should have went in forever ago. Voted the best guard in the first 50 years of the league, seems automatic to me - so put him in within a reasonable time after he retires.

Now, if one was starting a HOF from scratch today and were ahistorical, he would be way down the list of best players, definitely more borderline than a lock (that he should have been at the time of his retirement). That's the problem with not putting in players when they should go in.

Would Kramer even be in the conversation if he had never co-authored a book about the '67 Packers?

[oldecapecod11]

by BD Sullivan » Thu Aug 13, 2015 3:26 pm
---
Reaser wrote:

Shrevedude wrote:
Kramer is the biggest HOF snub of them all.

He's not the best player not in the HOF. He may be the biggest snub though? The problem is in that he should have went in forever ago. Voted the best guard in the first 50 years of the league, seems automatic to me - so put him in within a reasonable time after he retires.
Now, if one was starting a HOF from scratch today and were ahistorical, he would be way down the list of best players, definitely more borderline than a lock (that he should have been at the time of his retirement). That's the problem with not putting in players when they should go in.
---
"Would Kramer even be in the conversation if he had never co-authored a book about the '67 Packers?"

Of course he would.
After all, he threw the block seen 'round the world (and seen thousands of times.)

[SixtiesFan]

by BD Sullivan » Thu Aug 13, 2015 3:26 pm
---
Reaser wrote:

Shrevedude wrote:
Kramer is the biggest HOF snub of them all.

He's not the best player not in the HOF. He may be the biggest snub though? The problem is in that he should have went in forever ago. Voted the best guard in the first 50 years of the league, seems automatic to me - so put him in within a reasonable time after he retires.
Now, if one was starting a HOF from scratch today and were ahistorical, he would be way down the list of best players, definitely more borderline than a lock (that he should have been at the time of his retirement). That's the problem with not putting in players when they should go in.
---
"Would Kramer even be in the conversation if he had never co-authored a book about the '67 Packers?"

Of course he would.
After all, he threw the block seen 'round the world (and seen thousands of times.)

I read somewhere that the book actually works against Jerry Kramer. People think he "got too much attention" from the book. This is part of the "too many Packers are already in the HOF" argument used against Kramer.

Full disclosure, as you would gather from previous posts of mine I didn't like Lombardi that much and usually rooted against the Packers. Think how much fun that was. But I give them credit for being a great team. I think Jerry Kramer should be in the HOF.

[John Grasso]

Isn't it a Hall of FAME? Doesn't being famous count a little bit?
It isn't a Hall of Very Good, or Hall of Excellence or Hall of the Best Players in the NFL During Their Careers.

Kramer's block is one of the most Famous blocks in football history. That alone is worth his enshrinement.