2014 Fall of Fame Voting

jsinger121 · Jan 10, 2014

I agree with you on Dungy. He has no business being in the hall of fame. I mean if he doesn't win that Super Bowl over Chicago or if New England wins that AFC Championship he is another Marty Schottenheimer.

Kenny F'ing Powers · Jan 10, 2014

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
Football hall of fame finalists are announced, from PFT:
The group of first-timers includes linebacker Derrick Brooks, wide receiver Marvin Harrison and tackle Walter Jones, along with coach Tony Dungy.
The rest of the finalists include nine of last year’s 10 finalists who did not make the cut: Wide receivers Andre Reed and Tim Brown, running back Jerome Bettis, guard Will Shields, defensive ends Michael Strahan and Charles Haley, linebacker Kevin Greene and cornerback Aeneas Williams, along with owners Ed DeBartolo Jr.

I am starting this thread particularly to start complaining about Tony Dungy being elected to the hall of fame.

Tony had a three year career in the NFL, winning a Super Bowl with the Steelers in the 70s. He lead the league in INT in 1978 with 6 INTs. For his playing career alone he should not sniff the hall of fame.

The argument for Dungy will be his coaching career. Tony was Head Coach in Tampa Bay from 1996 to 2001 and in Indy from 2002 to 2008. Tony Dungy was head coach for 208 NFL games with 139 wins (67%) (I believe those numbers include playoffs). He won a Super Bowl in Indy and was voted the 2nd team coach of the decade on the 2000's NFL all decade team.

Tony Dungy also made the playoffs as coach in 11 of his 13 seasons as a NFL head coach. In 6 of those 13 seasons his team was one and done in the playoffs. He made it to 3 conference championship games and one Superbowl.

Those are all of the facts and measurable stuff. However, they are going to vote in Tony Dungy because he is a nice guy and easily accessible to the press. I know it doesn't matter but Tony Dungy kills me. I despise him. The smugness, the holier then though quotes, toeing the line between religious beliefs and outright bigotry.

I just don't think this guy was a hall of fame coach but more a guy that benefited from having a generational talent as his QB. Tony Dungy to me will always be the guy that often had the best team on paper but could not finish in Indy and good teams in Tampa Bay that could not get over the hump. I think the most damming thing about him is that TB won their Super Bowl the season after Tony Dungy left.

But none of it matters, he texts with Pete King. He will be a hall of famer. Bullshit.

If you ever meet him, ask him how his son James is. That'll teach him.

For what it's worth, he was also the first African-American head coach to win a Superbowl. The fact that people don't discuss it that much is probably a sign of progress, but it's still historic and might be worth noting.

Super Nomario · Jan 10, 2014

Dungy's 9th all-time in games over .500 (70). His record is comparable to John Madden and George Allen, who are both in. Marty Schottenheimer's (74) the only eligible guy more than 60 games over .500 who's not in. I'm not sure that's the right criteria for evaluating head coaches, but I don't think his (projected) election is an outrage or anything.

wnyghost · Jan 10, 2014

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
I think a great comp for Tony Dungy is George Seifert.

Seifert coached 11 seasons, had a .65% winning percentage and won two super bowls. Seifert only made the playoffs 7 times compared to Dungy's 11. But Seifert coached in 15 playoffs games compared to Dungys 19.

Seifert was by and large a coach of good teams that you could argue were as successful or more successful then Dungy's teams. But Seifert does not sniff the hall of fame.

I am not a Dungy fan but this just isn't a good comparison.

Tony Dungy was 54-42 .556 win % with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers lead by Trent Dilfer, Shawn King and Brad Johnson. Siefert was 16-32 .333 win % with the Panthers. Siefert started out with a stacked team with more than just a great QB.

Dungy was an excellent coach. HOF? I don't know.

coremiller · Jan 10, 2014

I'm a 49ers fan, so I'm biased, but FWIW Seifert was extremely underrated as a coach. He had the misfortune to follow Walsh, and he had great players, so he never got credit for anything, but in his 8 seasons with the 49ers he a) won at least 10 games every single year and averaged more than 12 wins per year, winning at least 13 games in half his seasons, b) won two Super Bowls, and c) and made the NFC Championship game five out of eight years. And Seifert was a fantastic assistant coach as well, coaching the 81 secondary that started 3 rookies and won the title and coordinating the defense on the great 84 team. That's a fantastic record. If your argument is "Dungy's record is no better than Seifert's", that's not going to be very compelling.

It's also not true that the Colts had terrible defenses under Dungy. Their DVOA finishes were 16, 13, 19, 5, 25 (ironically, the year they won the Super Bowl), 2, 11.

Dungy is a slam dunk hall of famer as far as coaches go. He has the winning record, he has the Tampa-2 innovation, he has success with multiple franchises (and rebuilding Tampa when they had been the laughingstock of the league for decades was a real achievement). That he's kind of a sanctimonious do-gooder doesn't change that.

Besides Dungy, Marvin Harrison, Walter Jones, and Derrick Brooks should be in shoo-ins. The last spot is a tough one, but Strahan is probably the leading contender.

Kenny F'ing Powers · Jan 10, 2014

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
Dungy gets credited for building a dominate defense in Tampa Bay and for developing the Tampa-2 defense but the reasons most cited for why the Colts didn't win more championships with Manning are Manning's crappy playoff performances and the Colts inability to build a productive defense. I have a hard time reconciling the credit Dungy gets for the Tampa Bay defense of the late 90s/early 2000s with his inability to develop a defense in Indianapolis. I think that speaks volumes to his ability as a coach.

I agree with your overall analysis. As Patriots fans, we know firsthand how perception about coaches/QB/defense adversely affect the overall impression of an individual. Your point is valid. If he was such a defensive guru, there is a disconnect between his great Tampa defense and his shitty Colts defense. It lends credence to the idea that his success could have largely been driven by the players. Of course, that is true for all coaches.

Let's also not forget that, at the time, Dungy was considered a bust in Tampa. His offense always stunk, and the excuse that he couldn't win with that offense went out the window when the Buccaneers won the fucking Superbowl the very next year under Gruden.

He seemed to do a good job of not fucking things up, and...well...I guess that's something. He inherited a stacked Tampa defense. Brooks, Sapp, and Lynch, were all just coming into their own. Hardy Nickerson was a perennial pro-bowler. He made some good picks on guys like Ronder Barber. He came into Tampa just as they started their run of defensive dominance, and I'm not sure how much of it really had to do with Dungy. He left a defensive juggernaut and went to an offensive powerhouse that was installed by Jim Mora in Indianapolis. For almost his entire tenure as a Colt, he essentially left the offensive scheme (and a lot of personnel) alone and tried to tinker with the defense. For the most part, he didn't succeed.

He also owns a 9-10 post season record.

I think that Dungy could be the poster-boy for "right place, right time". He seems like a nice guy, but never once did I think that Dungy was one of the best coaches in the league. In fact, I always considered Dungy in the same tier that I put guys like Andy Reid, and I don't consider Reid a hall of fame coach either.

Then again, everyone gets in the fucking football HoF. And, as you noted, he gets credit for "creating" the Tampa-2. Of course, that's not really true as it was essentially the same base scheme run by the Steelers in the 70's (which Dungy even admits), but perception is reality. And I suppose he was smart enough to realize he had a HoF linebacker in Brooks, so he should get credit for maximizing his strengths.

Either way...I'm also against Dungy being in the HoF.

TheYaz67 · Jan 10, 2014

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
Football hall of fame finalists are announced, from PFT:

The group of first-timers includes linebacker Derrick Brooks, wide receiver Marvin Harrison

I wonder in the post-Aaron Hernandez world we live in, if Harrison will get in due to his still unresolved involvement with some shootings a few years ago....

http://diaryofahollywoodstreetking.com/the-curious-case-of-marvin-harrison/

Morgan's Magic Snowplow · Jan 10, 2014

Not to get all V&N here, but you guys are talking around the issue: Dungy's credentials make him a borderline (but not terrible by any means) HoF candidate but what will push him over the line is that he's the first black coach to win a Super Bowl.

Edit: To make clear, I don't really have a problem with this. John Madden's credentials were basically borderline and other factors helped him around the edges. Same with Marv Levy. Nor am I trying to disparage Dungy as an AA candidate - he was a very good coach with some impressive accomplishments, just not a long enough track record to make him a slam dunk for the HoF without some other factors working in his favor.

Kenny F'ing Powers · Jan 10, 2014

Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
Not to get all V&N here, but you guys are talking around the issue: Dungy's credentials make him a fringe (but not terrible by any means) HoF candidate but what will push him over the line is that he's the first black coach to win a Super Bowl.

I mentioned it several posts up thread.

Mooch · Jan 10, 2014

coremiller said:
Dungy is a slam dunk hall of famer as far as coaches go. He has the winning record, he has the Tampa-2 innovation,

The "Tampa 2" innovation is simply a two-deep zone with a middle linebacker dropping back into a three-deep look. It pre-dates Dungy by at least 15 years. If I recall correctly, this was a Chuck Noll invention.

Morgan's Magic Snowplow · Jan 10, 2014

Kenny F'ing Powers said:
I mentioned it several posts up thread.

Ahhh...so you did. Anyway, that's gotta be a huge factor.

Kenny F'ing Powers · Jan 10, 2014

Mooch said:
The "Tampa 2" innovation is simply a two-deep zone with a middle linebacker dropping back into a three-deep look. It pre-dates Dungy by at least 15 years. If I recall correctly, this was a Chuck Noll invention.

Just like I predated your post by 15 minutes:

Kenny F'ing Powers said:
Then again, everyone gets in the fucking football HoF. And, as you noted, he gets credit for "creating" the Tampa-2. Of course, that's not really true as it was essentially the same base scheme run by the Steelers in the 70's (which Dungy even admits), but perception is reality. And I suppose he was smart enough to realize he had a HoF linebacker in Brooks, so he should get credit for maximizing his strengths.

Either way...I'm also against Dungy being in the HoF.

Al Zarilla · Jan 10, 2014

Kenny F'ing Powers said:
Then again, everyone gets in the fucking football HoF.

Except Tim Brown.

coremiller · Jan 10, 2014

Mooch said:
The "Tampa 2" innovation is simply a two-deep zone with a middle linebacker dropping back into a three-deep look. It pre-dates Dungy by at least 15 years. If I recall correctly, this was a Chuck Noll invention.

A lot of the basic principles are the same, but the Steelers' D and the Tampa 2 were designed to defend against completely different offensive attacks. The Steelers were primarily a run-stopping defense because in the 1970s teams didn't throw very much. the 1974 Steelers faced 34 runs per game and 24 passes per game; the 2004 Colts faced 28 runs per game and 35 passes per game. Traditionally the 4-3 was the better run-stopping defense than the 3-4 because you have more beef on the line of scrimmage. Dungy's version of the Tampa 2 was exactly the opposite -- it was designed to stop deep passing attacks and dared teams to run straight ahead, and it focused on finding smaller but faster players (especially at defensive end). The innovation was not the coverage principles per se, it was running a similar scheme with a different kind of personnel and using it to do different things.

Kenny F'ing Powers · Jan 10, 2014

coremiller said:
A lot of the basic principles are the same, but the Steelers' D and the Tampa 2 were designed to defend against completely different offensive attacks. The Steelers were primarily a run-stopping defense because in the 1970s teams didn't throw very much. the 1974 Steelers faced 34 runs per game and 24 passes per game; the 2004 Colts faced 28 runs per game and 35 passes per game. Traditionally the 4-3 was the better run-stopping defense than the 3-4 because you have more beef on the line of scrimmage. Dungy's version of the Tampa 2 was exactly the opposite -- it was designed to stop deep passing attacks and dared teams to run straight ahead, and it focused on finding smaller but faster players (especially at defensive end). The innovation was not the coverage principles per se, it was running a similar scheme with a different kind of personnel and using it to do different things.

I'm not sure I agree with your assumptions. The reason the "Tampa-2" exploded in Pittsburgh was because of Jack Lambert. The scheme is completely reliant on having an athletic Swiss army knife at middle linebacker. We've seen teams flop at installing the Tampa-2 because they didn't have the play maker in the middle of the field. Yes, the Steeler's were more focused on the run because of the time they played, but that doesn't mean that the strength of the tampa-2 (stopping the deep passes) wasn't still it's strength.

Steeler's Defense; Passing Yards Per Attempt
1974: 5.5 YPA (2nd best)
1975: 5.5 YPA (2nd best)
1976: 5.8 YPA (3rd best)

The reason that smaller/faster players work better today is because they're generally the ones that can get up field to disrupt the QB before more complex routes can break down the middle of the field in the Tampa-2. That wasn't true in the 70's, even more so when you have the front 4 that the Steeler's had. They still were fantastic at getting pressure. There was very little "innovation" by Dungy. The Steeler's needed a great middle linebacker and a front 4 that could pressure without blitzing. Dungy needed the same thing, it just so happens that the size of the players that could accomplish those things in the 90's had changed.

mauf · Jan 10, 2014

Dungy had a decent six-year run in Tampa (54-42) and coached one of the three best QBs in league history during his prime years -- that's it.

Madden's W% in Oakland was better than Dungy's in Indy, over a longer time period (10 years vs 7), and without the benefit of a transcendent player like Manning. Madden's short career made him a borderline candidate; as someone said upthread, ancillary factors put him over the top.

Saying that Tony Dungy belongs in Canton because his numbers are similar to George Allen's is similar to saying John Franco belongs in Cooperstown because his numbers compare favorably to Bruce Sutter's.

Brooks and Harrison should be no-brainers, though I suspect Harrison won't make it on the first ballot. Brown should be a no-brainer also; I'm curious what the argument against him is. I think Bettis and Strahan are worthy also, but those are closer calls.

soxfan121 · Jan 10, 2014

Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
Not to get all V&N here, but you guys are talking around the issue: Dungy's credentials make him a borderline (but not terrible by any means) HoF candidate but what will push him over the line is that he's the first black coach to win a Super Bowl.

Edit: To make clear, I don't really have a problem with this. John Madden's credentials were basically borderline and other factors helped him around the edges. Same with Marv Levy. Nor am I trying to disparage Dungy as an AA candidate - he was a very good coach with some impressive accomplishments, just not a long enough track record to make him a slam dunk for the HoF without some other factors working in his favor.

Doug Williams is getting disrespected. He has to buy a ticket to Canton and Dungy should have to as well.

The first black coach in the HOF should be more than just black - he should have a winning playoff record or a couple Super Bowls or an exceptionally long career or something noteworthy or great that isn't his race.

Spacemans Bong · Jan 10, 2014

coremiller said:
I'm a 49ers fan, so I'm biased, but FWIW Seifert was extremely underrated as a coach. He had the misfortune to follow Walsh, and he had great players, so he never got credit for anything, but in his 8 seasons with the 49ers he a) won at least 10 games every single year and averaged more than 12 wins per year, winning at least 13 games in half his seasons, b) won two Super Bowls, and c) and made the NFC Championship game five out of eight years. And Seifert was a fantastic assistant coach as well, coaching the 81 secondary that started 3 rookies and won the title and coordinating the defense on the great 84 team. That's a fantastic record. If your argument is "Dungy's record is no better than Seifert's", that's not going to be very compelling.

It's also not true that the Colts had terrible defenses under Dungy. Their DVOA finishes were 16, 13, 19, 5, 25 (ironically, the year they won the Super Bowl), 2, 11.

Dungy is a slam dunk hall of famer as far as coaches go. He has the winning record, he has the Tampa-2 innovation, he has success with multiple franchises (and rebuilding Tampa when they had been the laughingstock of the league for decades was a real achievement). That he's kind of a sanctimonious do-gooder doesn't change that.

Besides Dungy, Marvin Harrison, Walter Jones, and Derrick Brooks should be in shoo-ins. The last spot is a tough one, but Strahan is probably the leading contender.

I'm not really seeing why you think Dungy is a slam dunk Hall of Famer, provided you think Seifert isn't (or maybe you think he is).

Their coaching records seem to be a wash to you, but Seifert also has those three pre-HC Super Bowl rings, two as D-coordinator and one in a significant coaching role for a famous unit. He had a bunch of other elite teams that didn't get over the hump, top three NFL teams that didn't win for various reasons. It would seem to me that despite his bad run with the Panthers, Seifert has a pretty good case that he's as good/better. Dungy's main advantage is that he won or was successful with different organizations, while all of Seifert's achievements were with the 49ers.

coremiller · Jan 10, 2014

Spacemans Bong said:
I'm not really seeing why you think Dungy is a slam dunk Hall of Famer, provided you think Seifert isn't (or maybe you think he is).

Their coaching records seem to be a wash to you, but Seifert also has those three pre-HC Super Bowl rings, two as D-coordinator and one in a significant coaching role for a famous unit. He had a bunch of other elite teams that didn't get over the hump, top three NFL teams that didn't win for various reasons. It would seem to me that despite his bad run with the Panthers, Seifert has a pretty good case that he's as good/better. Dungy's main advantage is that he won or was successful with different organizations, while all of Seifert's achievements were with the 49ers.

Seifert's problem is longevity. He really had only 8 good seasons. His time with SF is quite similar to Dungy's time with Indy. But he's weighed down by the Carolina disaster, while Dungy turned around a Bucs franchise that had had 14 consecutive losing seasons before he got there. I don't think Seifert should be in the Hall, but I think he's a lot closer than most people do, and I think Dungy has a better case. And I seem to give Dungy more credit for the Tampa 2 being innovative than most people here.

Kliq · Jan 10, 2014

His time in Indy is a tremendously overrated coaching job. The offense was Peyton Manning, Tom Moore, and a great collection of weapons at the skill positions. I don't know how you can give Dungy credit for the offense when he had an elite coordinator and an all-time great QB. His defense of course, was often mediocre at best. Just look at what Jim Caldwell was able to do when Dungy stepped down. The Colts didn't miss a beat. No way is he a HoF coach.

tims4wins · Jan 10, 2014

I have no idea if the thread title is on purpose or not, but I love it

mascho · Feb 1, 2014

And these guys are in:

(Derrick Brooks, Ray Guy, Claude Humphrey, Andre Reed, Walter Jones, Aeneas Williams and Michael Strahan)

richgedman'sghost · Feb 1, 2014

mascho said:
And these guys are in:

(Derrick Brooks, Ray Guy, Claude Humphrey, Andre Reed, Walter Jones, Aeneas Williams and Michael Strahan)

Kinda ironic.. all this talk about Dungy being a "SLAM DUNK" for enshrinment and he did not make it. Very little talk about the guys who did make it. In general, the Hall of Fame discussion for baseball generates far more interest than Hall of Fame discussion of football. Why is this when football is generally regarded as the more popular sport? Is it because there are more statistics for baseball and thus it is easier to evaluate candidates? Real question, not being sarcastic.

IdiotKicker · Feb 2, 2014

richgedman'sghost said:
Is it because there are more statistics for baseball and thus it is easier to evaluate candidates?

I think this is a huge part of it. There's no one in baseball who really "reinvents" the game. It's more about who is able to execute the best with the way it is currently set up. Football is much more about players who make other teams completely change their strategy in order to compete against them, which is much more difficult to measure. Just look at a guy like Vince Wilfork. Doesn't rack up sacks or huge tackle numbers, but his impact on the game is obviously massive. Sure, you can use things like DVOA to quantify it somewhat, but measuring impact in football is still more art than science, whereas in baseball, we pretty much know exactly what a guy is worth, though obviously defensive statistics are still improving in quality.

SMU_Sox · Feb 2, 2014

I'm just glad Ray Guy finally got in. If you have an award named after you you should be in. Frankly I think special teams gets far too overlooked. Why not acknowledge that while they aren't the starting 22 they still play a huge part in the game and give them a slot per year if a player deserves merit? That's not a guaranteed slot.

richgedman'sghost · Feb 2, 2014

richgedman'sghost said:
Kinda ironic.. all this talk about Dungy being a "SLAM DUNK" for enshrinment and he did not make it. Very little talk about the guys who did make it. In general, the Hall of Fame discussion for baseball generates far more interest than Hall of Fame discussion of football. Why is this when football is generally regarded as the more popular sport? Is it because there are more statistics for baseball and thus it is easier to evaluate candidates? Real question, not being sarcastic.

PS.. To Mr. Ttits and Ass.. Are you having a celebratory party since Tony Dungy did not make it? You seemed most concerned about him possibly making it and not about the other candidates. What is your opinion of how the election turned out?

Deathofthebambino · Feb 2, 2014

I'm happily surprised by Aeneas Williams getting in. I think a lot of defensive guys like him get overlooked for one reason or another. I'm still legitimately pissed about Tim Brown not getting in, and if anyone has an explanation, I'd love to hear it. 5th all time in receptions, 6th in yards and 7th in receiving touchdowns. Andre Reed gets in and he's 11th, 13th and 12th respectively in the same categories. I have no idea how someone can pull the lever for Reed, but not do so for Brown. Brown should also get some credit for being an incredible kick returner. He took 3 punts to the house during his career and is fourth all time in total punt returns and 5th in punt return yards. He only had one full season as a kick returner, his rookie year, and he led the league in kick return average that year and scored a touchdown. Despite not racking up huge kick return yards, he's still 5th in NLF history in all purpose yards. It's a travesty that he's not in.

I think both guys suffered a bit in that they didn't regularly lead the league in these categories, during individual seasons, because there always seemed to be a Jerry Rice or a Chris Carter or Sterling Sharpe, or Terence Mathis or later on, guys like Randy Moss or Marvin Harrison. Year in year out, Brown was basically a top 5 receiver in the NFL for over a decade. He had 9 straight 1,000 yard seasons and 10 straight seasons with 75 receptions. Yes, he may have been a little behind guys like Moss, TO, Carter, Rice, etc. in each season, but for a career, he's right there with any of them, and certainly should have gotten in over Andre Reed. I really can't believe he got screwed again.

I think Strahan and Guy should have been on the first ballot, so I'm glad they got in, and have no real complaints with the other guys either.

Soxy · Feb 2, 2014

Yeah, Reed over Tim Brown is perplexing. Reed put up worse numbers than Brown did, and Brown didn't have the benefit of Jim Kelly throwing him passes and Thurman Thomas in the backfield for the majority of his career. I don't get that one.

Marvin Harrison not getting in is pretty bad, but the rumors are that the murder he's linked to is the reason why he didn't get in on the first ballot. He'll be put in eventually.

Al Zarilla · Feb 2, 2014

Re Tim Brown, could it possibly be prejudice from the writers with the Raiders thing? Like others have pointed out, statistically, he just has to be in.

2014 Fall of Fame Voting

T&A

@jsinger121

T&A

posts way less than 18% useful shit

Member

New Member

T&A

Member

posts way less than 18% useful shit

Member

Member

posts way less than 18% useful shit

Member

Member

posts way less than 18% useful shit

Member

Member

posts way less than 18% useful shit

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers

JAG

chapeau rose

Member

Member

PN23's replacement

Kane is Able

Well-Known Member

Member

queer eye for the next pats guy

Well-Known Member

Drive Carefully

Member

Member

T&A