HOF WRs - Will Rams Get Their's?

**AvengerRam** · #1 (**permalink**) -22-10-2004

There is a lot of talk today about the preliminary list of Hall of Fame finalists. Among those that are being described as shoe-ins is Michael Irvin.

That prompted me to look up some stats. Consider this:

WR No. 1: 819 receptions/13,863 yards/65 TDs
WR No. 2: 750 rececptions/11,904 yards/65 TDs
WR No. 3: 727 receptions/10,998 yards/69 TDs

Who are these three WRs?

Number 1 is Henry Ellard.

Number 2 is Michael Irvin.

Number 3 is Isaac Bruce.

This tells me two things. One, if Irvin is in, you could make a strong argument for Ellard, who has better career stats (and don't even get me started on Art Monk).

The second is, if Bruce continues playing like he is now for another year or two, he's clearly a first ballot Hall of Famer.

*RAMMAN68* · #2 (**permalink**) -22-10-2004

Nice one AV. I agree, Ellard should be in.

*xfactor28* · #3 (**permalink**) -22-10-2004

Bruce will be, Ellard should be.

*sbramfan* · #4 (**permalink**) -22-10-2004

Yeah, but stats don't tell the whole story. Irvin played in a bunch of Superbowls, and I can't really disagree that somehow that adds to your legacy. I never liked Michael Irvin, but he was a main factor in why his team made it to the SB.......still, Ellard was the man.

Man I was happy when Ellard and Flipper were flying around out there (like in '89). That was a good year.

**AvengerRam** · #5 (**permalink**) -22-10-2004

Well, by that criteria, Bruce has 2 Super Bowls on his resume and one game winning TD. I think he's getting to be pretty close to a lock.

**RamDez** · #6 (**permalink**) -22-10-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by sbramfan

Yeah, but stats don't tell the whole story. Irvin played in a bunch of Superbowls, and I can't really disagree that somehow that adds to your legacy. I never liked Michael Irvin, but he was a main factor in why his team made it to the SB.......still, Ellard was the man.

Man I was happy when Ellard and Flipper were flying around out there (like in '89). That was a good year.

Also, he is very high profile now and always on friggin tv

*Yodude* · #7 (**permalink**) -22-10-2004

Ellard should be in, and Bruce already is a lock, regardless of the superbowl appearances.

Anyone that has performed with the consistency that Bruce has shown in his career, especially with the turnstile at the QB position, should be considered a lock.

*sbramfan* · #8 (**permalink**) -22-10-2004

Bruce is a lock, as I'm sure Holt will be, barring injury....

But I don't know about Ellard. He played for some pretty bad Rams teams for most of his career.

For all intents and purposes, it's a popularity contest. Marino, Irvin, Young.....these guys will get in eventually, just not sure about our little man from Fresno State.

*Yodude* · #9 (**permalink**) -22-10-2004

Quote:

But I don't know about Ellard. He played for some pretty bad Rams teams for most of his career.

All the more reason he should be in, in my opinion. Theoretically, it should be harder to put up impressive stats playing for a bad team.

Unfortunately, you're right about the popularity contest aspect of the HOF.

#10 (**permalink**) -23-10-2004

Doesnt character count as well? To the best of my knowledge, neither bruce nor ellard has been busted with cocaine and hookers like irvin. Bruce is a lock, ellard would be in if he had played on higher profile winning teams and may yet make it.

ramming speed to all

general counsel

*Yodude* · #11 (**permalink**) -23-10-2004

Quote:

Doesnt character count as well? To the best of my knowledge, neither bruce nor ellard has been busted with cocaine and hookers like irvin. Bruce is a lock, ellard would be in if he had played on higher profile winning teams and may yet make it.

Excellent point GC!

That's exactly why a bum like Pete Rose doesn't belong in the HOF and never will.

*theodus69* · #12 (**permalink**) -23-10-2004

H.Ellard has always been a favorite of mine. Always tough and could take a hit over the middle! Unlike everyones Fav Jerry Rice at that time, Ellard was nails!Oh and the Pete Rose thing.Well I'm a Reds fan!(say no more) :tongue:

#13 (**permalink**) -23-10-2004

Unfortunately the rams don't employ a Page Ranking department for each of its coaches and players. Remember back in the day when all you had to do is dawn a burgundy and gold jersey (9rs) and you were then the "best ever" at your position? Debartolo employed such a Page Ranking department and it vaulted players into the stratosphere of over rated. Ted Popson for example was once called the "Best Ever" at his position after only a few weeks wearing the cheesy uniform. Bill Walsh today is thought of by many to have invented the forward pass and he was some kind of football genius for inventing what is now referred to as the west coast offense. He had his own PR department to anoint himself the "best ever" along with other nauseating accolades. Truth be known all Walsh did was throw a lot of short passes because his QB Greg Cook had a bad arm. Walsh acknowledges this in his book. Bud Grant who also dumped the ball off short had this to say of the almighty genius. Walsh new the value of having Page Ranking department, we were doing that long before Walsh ever got into the business. We were dumping off passes to foreman in the flat. So does it bother me that Walsh is considered the inventor of the WCO, No. If it represented dollars then it would bother me but it represents ego. I could live with more money but ego I don't need any more of". So unless we get a PR department were going to see an onslaught of over rated over hyped whiners enter the HOF on the backs of their wussy west coast offense and their Page Ranking department. Sure that Page Ranking department has dried up and blown away with the other rubbish that use to run the whiners but the damage done by the NFL, the whiners PR department and the media will last in most fans heads long enough that players like holt and Bruce may be forgotten. Yep if a QB like Montana can have a 91.0 lifetime rating on the backs of 3 yard slants and Jerry rice can be considered the best ever at catching those 3 yard dump offs then pro football has taken a turn for the worse.

*Yodude* · #14 (**permalink**) -23-10-2004

Quote:

Oh and the Pete Rose thing.Well I'm a Reds fan!(say no more)

He played for the Phillies too, blame it on that!

And yes...Ellard was nails! :smile:

**Nick** · #15 (**permalink**) -23-10-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

Consider this:

WR No. 1: 819 receptions/13,863 yards/65 TDs
WR No. 2: 750 rececptions/11,904 yards/65 TDs
WR No. 3: 727 receptions/10,998 yards/69 TDs

Who are these three WRs?

Number 1 is Henry Ellard.

Number 2 is Michael Irvin.

Number 3 is Isaac Bruce.

Also consider...

Michael Irvin, a five-time Pro Bowler, had 16 post-season appearances (12-4), including three Super Bowls (all of which were wins). The overall record of teams Irvin played on was 97-87 (.527). Irvin was among the league's top ten 19 times in his career.

Isaac Bruce, a four-time Pro Bowler, has eight post-season appearances (5-3), including two Super Bowls (one of which was a win). The overall record of teams Bruce played on is 86-80 (.518). Bruce was among the league's top ten 13 times in his career thus far.

Henry Ellard, a three-time Pro Bowler, had 10 post-season appearances (4-6), and no Super Bowl appearances. The overall record of teams Ellard played on was 127-143 (.470). Ellard was among the league's top ten 10 times in his career.

Not trying to make a statement on whether I think so-and-so belongs, but just trying to point out that it's based on more than just career receptions, yards, and TDs.