Originally posted by Sickaa:
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Originally posted by Sickaa:
Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
Remember that the HOF isn't the hall of good. Taylor's numbers and Willis's numbers are good but maybe not enough to convince the people that vote. Same with Dwight. He's known for 'The Catch' but his career numbers may not be enough for HOF.
They're in the 49er fans HOF.
Hall of fame should be for players who we're considered one of the best at their position for a period of time Imo. Not just because someone played for a long time.. That's just my view on it though.
whats the eligibility.. playing 1 year ?
Quality over quantity. 5 years or more should be good though.
I admit my idea of a HOF player is probably a little stricter than most. When I visited the HOF I saw a lot of players in there that I wouldn't have considered HOF players. Their stats might have been good enough but I just didn't consider them HOF material.
I think there are actually too many players in the HOF. If I have to look up a players stats and compare him to other players then he isn't a HOF. The key word here is Fame. If the name jumps out right away when you are asked who were the greatest QBs, RBs, LBs or whatever then they're HOF. Nobody is going to argue about Jim Brown or Barry Sanders. Same for Joe Montana andJohn Unitas. They were undeniably the best in their generation if you asked anyone that saw them play.
I know most people don't agree with the way I look at it, but I think the HOF should be reserved for the all time greats. Not just players who were good. I might include Willis because he was really good and dominant for about 5 years. Taylor was good and a valuable part of the team but he wasn't dominant. Part of that was playing with Rice who stole the show. Taylor had some great moments but I don't know if he had enough.