HOF-Bound players (Be prepared, it's Pete Prisco)

[Mr. S]

Not defensive PLAYER, I say Sapp is the most dominant defensive LINEMAN in the last twenty years.

Reggie White and Warren Sapp set the standard along the line over the last two decades i say.

~Bang

I would think Michael Strahan and Julius Peppers would have something to say about that. I don't think Sapp even set a standard at all, he was a really good DT is all. The Raiders try to make him a 3-4 DE and he didn't do as well, then they moved him back to 4-3 DT and he did much better this past season.

Reggie White and Bruce Smith probably set the standard for the d-line in the 90s, and Strahan bridged that into this decade when Smith was on the decline. Peppers is the prototypical ideal DE of this decade and barring injury has many more years ahead.

[Henry]

I would think Michael Strahan and Julius Peppers would have something to say about that. I don't think Sapp even set a standard at all, he was a really good DT is all. The Raiders try to make him a 3-4 DE and he didn't do as well, then they moved him back to 4-3 DT and he did much better this past season.

Reggie White and Bruce Smith probably set the standard for the d-line in the 90s, and Strahan bridged that into this decade when Smith was on the decline. Peppers is the prototypical ideal DE of this decade and barring injury has many more years ahead.

Sapp was an amazing DL in his prime. Better than Strahan or Peppers, IMHO.

Oakland has turned into The Abyss Into Which Players Go To Dissappear, but that doesn't mean Sapp wasn't absolutely dominant for a decade before going there. I mean, we wouldn't say Randy Moss just a 'really good' player in Minnesota because he didn't play well in Oakland, would we? Sapp was that dominant when he was in Tampa.

Besides, from what I can tell, you hold DEs in higher regard than DTs. Are there no domiant DTs out there you can mention in place of Sapp, or are all top linemen coincidentally DEs?

[SkinsFTW]

And I'm the only one who thinks the HOF is a complete JOKE???????

[Heidenreich]

Sapp was an amazing DL in his prime. Better than Strahan or Peppers, IMHO.

Oakland has turned into The Abyss Into Which Players Go To Dissappear, but that doesn't mean Sapp wasn't absolutely dominant for a decade before going there. I mean, we wouldn't say Randy Moss just a 'really good' player in Minnesota because he didn't play well in Oakland, would we? Sapp was that dominant when he was in Tampa.

But this is a what have you done for me lately world now, Henry. Since Sapp didn't light it up the last couple of years, his past means nothing. That is how a lot of people think these days.....

Those Packer/Tampa games in the late nineties were classics every time. Sapp brought it for every game, and was an anchor on that stellar Tampa Bay defense. There is no doubt in my mind that Warren Sapp is a hall of famer.

I'd have no problem with Zach Thomas getting in, Jason Taylor is definitely a HOFamer. Torry Holt has been one of the top receivers this decade, he should get in too.

[radagast5]

Warren Sapp is the most dominant defensive lineman in the last twenty years, arguably the best since Reggie White came up. He was so feared in his prime that he was often triple teamed, and it didn't matter. He's an absolute mauler, and NO one in the NFL could block him one on one. In fact, if he went one on one with any guard right now, i'd be hard pressed to bet against him.

~Bang

I agree with most of what you say. If Sapp wasn't the most dominant DL in that time span, he was on the short list, though Strahan was awfully effective for 5-6 years there, too.

Like Superman, everyone has their kryptonite and there *was* one OL who could block Sapp and in fact out-and-out abused Sapp in the few occasions they played one another, and that was Larry Allen. Sapp frequently commented that Allen was by far the strongest man he'd ever faced.

[dfbovey]

I don't feel slighted by no Redskins being mentioned amongst the current players.

Samuels is solid, but not a Hall of Fame guy at this point. He's not particularly dominating an any aspect of the game. He's just solid. He's the type of guy who will need to have a very long career and rack up alot of pro bowls (and be aided by a winning team) to get any consideration.

Portis has had some good seasons, but has a way to go to crack the top ten in any major category in his career... and his playoff showings haven't been impressive at all. Portis will need to get back on his 1,500 yard 14+ TD seasons and do something in the playoffs of note to be considered.

Players on teams that have been as bad as the Redskins in recent years, will have a hard time getting votes for the Pro Bowl, let alone the Hall of Fame.

[SnyderMustGo]

I find this interesting.

The one thing that the Art Monk travesty has taught me is that being very good for a very long time isn't enough. Nor is being on a winning team. A player has to make an impact on the league, be the best at his position, and basically be very well known player (fame). By those metrics, I would agree that Sapp is a lock. He was the best at his position for a several year, made a very big impact on the league, and was at one time one of the most recognizable NFL players.

By those metrics, I don't think Rod Smith, Bruce or Holt gets in. They have been very good players like Monk. They put up big numbers. But none of them was ever dominant and considered the best at their position. Nor do I think they are recognizable for their impact.

I think this gets tricky when you get to o-lineman. I can see how you can label an o-lineman as the best at his position. That's the easy part. But how do you tell if an o-lineman has an impact on the league or has 'fame'? Hell if I know.

[DOOG]

I don't feel slighted by no Redskins being mentioned amongst the current players.

Samuels is solid, but not a Hall of Fame guy at this point. He's not particularly dominating an any aspect of the game. He's just solid. He's the type of guy who will need to have a very long career and rack up alot of pro bowls (and be aided by a winning team) to get any consideration.

Portis has had some good seasons, but has a way to go to crack the top ten in any major category in his career... and his playoff showings haven't been impressive at all. Portis will need to get back on his 1,500 yard 14+ TD seasons and do something in the playoffs of note to be considered.

Players on teams that have been as bad as the Redskins in recent years, will have a hard time getting votes for the Pro Bowl, let alone the Hall of Fame.

B-I-N-G-O!:applause: :logo:

[Peregrine]

The two I had to laugh at were both LT and Adam Vinateiri not being locks. Im sorry, but when it comes to kickers in this generation, AV has been by far the best. Winning superbowl and AFC championships will lock up someone for the HOF.

And LT not having proven himself yet? Hes been the best back in football for as many years as I can remember. I dont see how there can even be a question. If he never played another game im still sure he would get in.

[Henry]

The two I had to laugh at were both LT and Adam Vinateiri not being locks. Im sorry, but when it comes to kickers in this generation, AV has been by far the best. Winning superbowl and AFC championships will lock up someone for the HOF.

And LT not having proven himself yet? Hes been the best back in football for as many years as I can remember. I dont see how there can even be a question. If he never played another game im still sure he would get in.

Well, special teams guys are never locks, no matter how good they are.

But I agree with you about LT, though to be fair Prisco did say 'it's basically just a formality.'

Then again, he's got Bailey in already after eight seasons, which I think is a gross overestimation.