Kurt Warner first ballot or not?

[JohnTurney]

Is he worthy of the extra cachet of being a first ballot QB?

[Bryan]

I don't think he should be first ballot if we are going to award merit to those "first ballot inductees" versus others who were eligible for several years. I also wasn't enthused about Steve Young and Marcus Allen being "automatic locks" for the HOF. I do think Warner should be in Canton, so it wouldn't upset me if he got in on his first try.

[Reaser]

I don't care about the first ballot thing, should just put the most deserving players in each year. If it works out where someone is one of the best choices on their first ballot then great, otherwise they'll get in eventually. There's guys I'de put in in front of Warner so I guess I'd say no, not first ballot. Though yes HOF, so if he gets in it's not a bad choice, there would just be better players still waiting.

[26554]

No. The highs of his career were as high as pretty much any QB that can be named, but it doesn't erase the roughly five season period of his career where he was largely injured or a backup. Overall, he has enough to get in but, with Favre up next year, I'd wait until 2017 to put him in.

[Gary Najman]

If he had won the Super Bowl with the Cardinals there would be no question that he should enter this year, but I think he deserves in the long time based that he came fom nowhere and took two teams that had a string of losing/no playoffs seasons to the Super Bowl. His career is unique than of other quarterbacks, but when he was at it best, he was the best QB in the league.

[Ronfitch]

I don't care about the first ballot thing, should just put the most deserving players in each year. If it works out where someone is one of the best choices on their first ballot then great, otherwise they'll get in eventually. There's guys I'de put in in front of Warner so I guess I'd say no, not first ballot. Though yes HOF, so if he gets in it's not a bad choice, there would just be better players still waiting.

I am with Matt on this.

For me, it keeps coming back to, "Did he have ENOUGH elite seasons?" For this particular year of players, I don't see it happening.

But since it is sportswriters who vote, his story (and, we are told, whoever presents on his behalf behind the closed door) will play a big role. ALL of the sportswriters in the room know Warner's story. A lot of people who don't even follow football know his story (at least the theme, if not the facts).

And for my alma mater, it would be huge (and the Hy-Vee in Cedar Falls, Iowa).

[Veeshik_ya]

Hall of Fame worthy? Yes. First Ballot worthy? Maybe not.

My issue with Warner has nothing to do with the usual reasons bandied about, e.g., short career, big middle career slump. It's that he didn't play his best in championship games.

People often mention his record Super Bowl yardage. Big deal. More volume nonsense. That's only impressive if you choose to forget what put him on the map in the first place: the return of big strike passing. After years of west coast conservatism, Warner comes in moves down the field in three quick-release laser strikes. We hadn't seen it in years.

Not going to list the stats here, but he was noticeably less effective in Championship games and Super Bowls.

He was lucky to even make the Super Bowl he won. He had possibly the worst game of his career in the 1999 NFC Championship game, then struggled again in the Super Bowl. Compare those two games to any other game he played in 1999 and they look pretty bad by comparison. (Giving him his due, he did make the two big throws that won those games.)

In the 2001 NFC Champions game, Faulk carried the Rams to victory in the second half. And, of course, Warner's pick to Harrison killed the Cardinals in the later Super Bowl.

He just didn't play his best in the biggest games. He was a point producing machine, but struggled to put points on the board in the three Super Bowls and threw more picks.

But he did get them there, and had rare talent. And his story matters, in my opinion.

[26554]

I don't care about the first ballot thing, should just put the most deserving players in each year. If it works out where someone is one of the best choices on their first ballot then great, otherwise they'll get in eventually. There's guys I'de put in in front of Warner so I guess I'd say no, not first ballot. Though yes HOF, so if he gets in it's not a bad choice, there would just be better players still waiting.

I am with Matt on this.

For me, it keeps coming back to, "Did he have ENOUGH elite seasons?" For this particular year of players, I don't see it happening.

But since it is sportswriters who vote, his story (and, we are told, whoever presents on his behalf behind the closed door) will play a big role. ALL of the sportswriters in the room know Warner's story. A lot of people who don't even follow football know his story (at least the theme, if not the facts).

And for my alma mater, it would be huge (and the Hy-Vee in Cedar Falls, Iowa).

Why say "since it it sportswriters"? I doubt that his "stranger than fiction" story would get any less play if ex-players, coaches and GMs had a say in the vote.

[Rupert Patrick]

Not going to list the stats here, but he was noticeably less effective in Championship games and Super Bowls.

He was lucky to even make the Super Bowl he won. He had possibly the worst game of his career in the 1999 NFC Championship game, then struggled again in the Super Bowl. Compare those two games to any other game he played in 1999 and they look pretty bad by comparison. (Giving him his due, he did make the two big throws that won those games.)

In the 2001 NFC Champions game, Faulk carried the Rams to victory in the second half. And, of course, Warner's pick to Harrison killed the Cardinals in the later Super Bowl.

He just didn't play his best in the biggest games. He was a point producing machine, but struggled to put points on the board in the three Super Bowls and threw more picks.

But he did get them there, and had rare talent. And his story matters, in my opinion.

It is interesting to note that the top three marks for most passing yards in a Super Bowl belong to Kurt Warner, Kurt Warner and Kurt Warner. I say he gets in on the first try.

[Ronfitch]

I don't care about the first ballot thing, should just put the most deserving players in each year. If it works out where someone is one of the best choices on their first ballot then great, otherwise they'll get in eventually. There's guys I'de put in in front of Warner so I guess I'd say no, not first ballot. Though yes HOF, so if he gets in it's not a bad choice, there would just be better players still waiting.

I am with Matt on this.

For me, it keeps coming back to, "Did he have ENOUGH elite seasons?" For this particular year of players, I don't see it happening.

But since it is sportswriters who vote, his story (and, we are told, whoever presents on his behalf behind the closed door) will play a big role. ALL of the sportswriters in the room know Warner's story. A lot of people who don't even follow football know his story (at least the theme, if not the facts).

And for my alma mater, it would be huge (and the Hy-Vee in Cedar Falls, Iowa).

Why say "since it it sportswriters"? I doubt that his "stranger than fiction" story would get any less play if ex-players, coaches and GMs had a say in the vote.

Because I would think sportwriters - being writers - may appreciate the story arc more and be more familiar with similar non-sports stories (or even less well-known sports stories). No slight intended.