Not every Redskin is a HOFer

[dgreen]

I'm a Redskins fan. I love Redskins fans. I love this message board. However, I'm continually amazed at many poster's inability to see players for what they were. Everyone who ever wore a Skins uniform does not need to be propped up above Joe Montana, Jim Brown, and Jerry Rice.

This nonsense is usually seen in questions about which Redskins should be in the HOF. I've seen questions about Doug Williams, Stephen Davis, Ernest Byner, Gerald Riggs, and even Chris Cooley. Seriously, 99% of the players mentioned for the HOF are totally mind-boggling.

Please stop. It's embarrassing. I encourage everyone to take a look at the current HOFers and learn about what they did and who they were.

Sorry, just had to get that off my chest. Like I said, I love this board. However, some of the stuff I read here is amazing. I believe the more knowledgeable our fans become about the game (and not just the Skins), the better off we'll all be.

Leave the crappy analysis and inflated egos to the Cowgirls fans. That is all. Carry on.

[E-Dog Night]

I've seen questions about Doug Williams, Stephen Davis, Ernest Byner, Gerald Riggs, and even Chris Cooley.

Could you provide links to support this ststement? I'm on here every few days and all I see is a push for Art Monk, who should have been in the HOF the very moment he was eligible. One could make a case for Joe Jacoby as well. The ones you mentioned will never make it and that's never been disputed as far as I have seen.

I call BS on you until you can back up your statement with links. And one person saying "Cooley will be in the Hall someday" doesn't count.

[bubba9497]

I'm a Redskins fan. I love Redskins fans. I love this message board. However, I'm continually amazed at many poster's inability to see players for what they were. Everyone who ever wore a Skins uniform does not need to be propped up above Joe Montana, Jim Brown, and Jerry Rice.

This nonsense is usually seen in questions about which Redskins should be in the HOF. I've seen questions about Doug Williams, Stephen Davis, Ernest Byner, Gerald Riggs, and even Chris Cooley. Seriously, 99% of the players mentioned for the HOF are totally mind-boggling.

Please stop. It's embarrassing. I encourage everyone to take a look at the current HOFers and learn about what they did and who they were.

Sorry, just had to get that off my chest. Like I said, I love this board. However, some of the stuff I read here is amazing. I believe the more knowledgeable our fans become about the game (and not just the Skins), the better off we'll all be.

Leave the crappy analysis and inflated egos to the Cowgirls fans. That is all. Carry on.

Outside of Monk, Jacoby, Grimm, and Green (sometimes Clark)... few if any former Redskins are mentioned as HOF worthy, and only Monk is debated regularly here. I'm not sure where your point of contention comes from.... but I never have heard or read any Skins fans harping for any other former Skins, except those few mentioned

[SkinsGuy]

We have a right to be angry cause the Redskins were one of the best, most dominant teams in the 80s/early 90s with 4 SB appearances winning 3 of them.

They were dominant in a time of the NFC East that had Landry/Johnson's Cowboys, Parcells Giants, and Buddy Ryan's Eagles.

Yet for all thier stellar play, only ONE player from that era is in the HoF (John Riggins).

Joe Gibbs is in the HoF as well but, player wise, it's a travesty that others like Art Monk or at least one or two of the Hogs aren't in Canton yet.

[skinfan2k]

Could you provide links to support this ststement? I'm on here every few days and all I see is a push for Art Monk, who should have been in the HOF the very moment he was eligible. One could make a case for Joe Jacoby as well. The ones you mentioned will never make it and that's never been disputed as far as I have seen.

I call BS on you until you can back up your statement with links. And one person saying "Cooley will be in the Hall someday" doesn't count.

got to agree with E-dog here, i have not seen any threads invovling the names u metioned.. there were threads on who might make the HOF onthe current redskins roster but thats it?

[dgreen]

Could you provide links to support this ststement? I'm on here every few days and all I see is a push for Art Monk, who should have been in the HOF the very moment he was eligible. One could make a case for Joe Jacoby as well. The ones you mentioned will never make it and that's never been disputed as far as I have seen.

I call BS on you until you can back up your statement with links. And one person saying "Cooley will be in the Hall someday" doesn't count.

A) I'll admit I might be exaggerating a bit in an effort to clarify my point. My main point is that a lot of people here tend to view Redskins as greater than they ever were. There is a lot of great, logical discussion about some player, but there is also a lot of crap spewed.

I'm not going to look for links to threads.

C) There was a thread asking whether the following (I may be forgetting a couple) would go into the HOF as Redskins: Doug Williams, George Rogers, Gerald Riggs, Ernest Byner, and Bruce Smith. Myself and a couple others pointed out that most of them have absolutely no shot at the HOF, while others thought they would.

D) I threw the Cooley thing in there because his name was mentioned in a thread today about current Skins with a good chance and making the HOF. Stephen Davis and HOF were mentioned in the same sentence in a thread earlier this week, maybe yesterday.

E) Maybe I'm just too much of a newbie here and don't understand that some are joking around. I hope so.

[dgreen]

Outside of Monk, Jacoby, Grimm, and Green (sometimes Clark)... few if any former Redskins are mentioned as HOF worthy, and only Monk is debated regularly here. I'm not sure where your point of contention comes from.... but I never have heard or read any Skins fans harping for any other former Skins, except those few mentioned

I agree other names aren't mentioned often. But, even mentioning some of them once is amazing. Then again, I remember seeing something completely off the wall and noticed the poster was like 16 years old. Maybe I'm just too critical of youngins.

[ntotoro]

A) I'll admit I might be exaggerating a bit in an effort to clarify my point.

In other words, the only point you have is you enjoy seeing your words in print.

[chronicdesi]

Only person that is really mentioned as a HOF are d. green and monk. I've seen a lot of posts with so and so going to the pro bowl, but every fan has hope to see certain players break out. It's just natural to root hard for your home team. It doesn't make you a homer necessarily, most of the people in this forum have legitimate well thought out posts to back up their statements...

[dgreen]

In other words, the only point you have is you enjoy seeing your words in print.

No. If you had simply read the next sentence, you would know what my point is. But, I assume you prefer to simply splice and dice and insult. :applause:

[ouvan59]

A) I'll admit I might be exaggerating a bit in an effort to clarify my point. My main point is that a lot of people here tend to view Redskins as greater than they ever were. There is a lot of great, logical discussion about some player, but there is also a lot of crap spewed.

I'm not going to look for links to threads.

C) There was a thread asking whether the following (I may be forgetting a couple) would go into the HOF as Redskins: Doug Williams, George Rogers, Gerald Riggs, Ernest Byner, and Bruce Smith. Myself and a couple others pointed out that most of them have absolutely no shot at the HOF, while others thought they would.

D) I threw the Cooley thing in there because his name was mentioned in a thread today about current Skins with a good chance and making the HOF. Stephen Davis and HOF were mentioned in the same sentence in a thread earlier this week, maybe yesterday.

E) Maybe I'm just too much of a newbie here and don't understand that some are joking around. I hope so.

Do you think that it might have been more appropriate to put your post in one of the threads that are actually talking about it instead of starting a whole new one since you have already acknowledged that you know the threads are out there? And if you will notice in those threads that the overwhelming majority of responses shot down those players as being HOF worthy.

[dfbovey]

No. If you had simply read the next sentence, you would know what my point is. But, I assume you prefer to simply splice and dice and insult. :applause:

Pretty weak point if you have to exaggerate and delude the truth to make it.

[skinfan2k]

Pretty weak point if you have to exaggerate and delude the truth to make it.

def... post-padder :mad:

[Henry]

Well, here's the thing.

There are currently two Redskin teams, the 1987 and the 1991 squads, that are not represented in the Hall of Fame by a single player. Not one. How many two-time Superbowl Champion teams can make that claim?

So what is sillier, the possibilty that a few Redskins from that era are HOFers, or the fact that none of them currently are?

[dgreen]

Do you think that it might have been more appropriate to put your post in one of the threads that are actually talking about it instead of starting a whole new one since you have already acknowledged that you know the threads are out there?

More appropriate? I don't know. If that's the board etiquette, then, sure, it would have been more appropriate to comment in several different threads than make one thread. But, don't tell me starting a new thread discussing Skins fans and their opinions is inappropriate when there are a handful of threads everyday on page 1 that are the same exact thing.

This thread (topic) is actually only pet peeve #2 about Extremeskinners. #1 is the constant complaining about what someone else said or didn't say about the Skins. Apparently, if someone in the media doesn't praise the Skins, we need a new thread about that and they should be shunned by society. But, maybe that's just me.

And if you will notice in those threads that the overwhelming majority of responses shot down those players as being HOF worthy.

Could be. I haven't noticed. I suppose when you disagree with something or think it's stupid, you tend to notice that more than the reasonable voices that agree with you. I'll keep my eyes open for that.

However, my only focus here isn't on the HOF. It's the attitude in general. I think the Deion Sanders vs. Darrell Green arguments are a great example.

[Grimm]

I think the thing that upsets most Redskin fans is the fact that alot of players here won multiple Super Bowls and only Riggins is represented among the Super Bowl teams, surely Monk and Green will get in eventually, but that still not much representation for a team that dominated through most of the 80's and early 90's and won 3 super bowls. My biggest beef is that fact that the Hogs get not HOF respect.

[BLEED-B&G]

I call BS on you until you can back up your statement with links. And one person saying "Cooley will be in the Hall someday" doesn't count.

I'm glad you guys said it because that was the first thing I thought when I read the post. And good point Henry. It's bad enough we have to argue with jerkoffs like King about who should be in the hall now we have to convince fellow fans...c'mon.

And even if someone says they think cooley is a possible future hall of famer who are you to say he won't be. All you can do is rebut and say why he isn't, if that's the case, do your thing.

[Donita35]

Rod Gardner for Canton. RG, RG, RG, RG. :laugh: :laugh: Just kidding.

I am not sure of all of your points DGreen, but I am aware that homerism, if you will, is alive and well on this message board. But that is how the cookie crumbles. :doh: Anywho, I personally get irritated at a lot of homerism but the HOF, especially in the case of Monk, is a legitimate argument. And if D Green is not a first time eligible sure in, then I say we go and get Peter King and whoever else did not vote for Green and we take all of their clothes off and leave them in Dupont Circle. :laugh: Just kidding.

[dgreen]

Well, here's the thing.

There are currently two Redskin teams, the 1987 and the 1991 squads, that are not represented in the Hall of Fame by a single player. Not one. How many two-time Superbowl Champion teams can make that claim?

So what is sillier, the possibilty that a few Redskins from that era are HOFers, or the fact that none of them currently are?

The HOF is about an individual. Taking successful teams and claiming there must be a HOFer from the roster is silly.

That 1987 team was probably one of the 5-10 weakest SB winners. The '91 team was dominant. But, aside from Monk and Green (and arguably Clark), they didn't have any single player that was consistently dominant. They were a true team. I'd argue they were one of the five best SB winners. But, that says nothing about any individual on the team.

This is exactly what makes Gibbs so great, IMO. He won without the greats. Even when he had one of the greats (Monk), Gibbs won despite being without his services for many postseason games.

Plus, Green will be a first-balloter unless the year is insanely stacked with talen, which I don't think it will be. So, there will be at least one player from those SB winners. And, I do believe Monk will eventually be in.

[bubba9497]

My List of HOF worthy Gibbs' Redskins not in the HOF yet

1. Art Monk (He broke all the team records of two former Redskin HOFer WR Mitchell & Taylor)

2. Green (not eligible yet)

3.(tie) Grimm & Jacoby... The leaders of probably the greatest OL in recent NFL history, Helped lead the way to several impressive offensives stats, and 4 superbowl apperances. Comparable to previous great OL in other decades Packers of the 60's, and Steelers of the 70's both of those teams have players from the OL in the HOF

Just outside HOF worthy

1. Joey T.

2. Gary Clark

3. Mark Mosely

4. Dexter Manley

5. Jeff Bostic

6. Dave Butz

7. Wilbur Marshall

[MrSilverMaC]

DGreen shouldn't have exagerated to make his point, but his points stand about stupid threads about obviously stupid things.

For a while every day I came here I could expect to see one or more of the following thread topics:

"Who would you rather have Portis or/Would you trade Portis for (insert name here)"

"Who is our biggest rival??"

"Should we sign (insert name of FA that is not needed or wanted)"

and even the occasional reggie bush thread.

Thread QC has been a big topic for a while since the merger. This dude may be a bit late with his thread, but his point is easy to see and it's valid.

[FBChick]

However, my only focus here isn't on the HOF. It's the attitude in general. I think the Deion Sanders vs. Darrell Green arguments are a great example.

I'm guessing you aren't much for messgae boards in general, are you? There's always going to be, well to be blunt, crazy people. Threads like this one aren't going to stop them, nor do they represent the majority.

Funny thing though.. If you pay attention, all the silly asinine threads and posts all seem to get done by the same handful of posters. Some of them do it just to rile up the rest of the posters... just like they got to you. Some of them do it, because they really are staring at the world in Burgandy and gold colored glasses, and I'm sorry to say... you aren't going to be able to get them off... EVER! Some are just bored with the off-season and letting their imaginations run wild.. they calm down once they get to see a few plays in pre-season games!

It's best just to ignore them.. skip the thread, or just read with a bit of amusement on your face.

Just realize it is a FAR cry from the majority of ES posters that get a little off the handle. So relax.. the world isn't going to end and we'll still have great threads going here on ES!

[bubba9497]

That 1987 team was probably one of the 5-10 weakest SB winners. The '91 team was dominant. But, aside from Monk and Green (and arguably Clark), they didn't have any single player that was consistently dominant. They were a true team. I'd argue they were one of the five best SB winners. But, that says nothing about any individual on the team.

:doh: What about Jacoby, and Grimm?

[s0crates]

There is another thread about this.

And I still think Mark Brunell has a chance. Seriously.

[ouvan59]

:doh: What about Jacoby, and Grimm?

No kidding. A very credible argument can be made that both deserve to be #1 on the HOF worthy list. I'm sorry but Joe Jacoby and Russ Grimm were great, great football players for an entire decade and four SB teams.