That comeback on Sunday night was absolutely ridiculous. As soon as Atlanta punted, I knew the Patriots were going to tie the game. Just like I knew New England was going to score as soon as they won the overtime coin toss. But I'm not here to talk about one of the most remarkable comebacks in sports history. Mainly because a lot has happened since then.
One of the other big things to come out of Super Bowl Weekend was the reaction to the Hall of Fame vote. Mainly the reaction (or, in his case, overreaction) to Terrell Owens not getting in. Personally, I'm not surprised he didn't make it. I didn't think he would. And I'm not disappointed he didn't make it, either. Do I think he's a Hall of Famer? Probably. But was he one of the five best candidates among this year's finalists? No.
What the non-election of TO has done, though, is lead to some legitimate criticism/discussion about the Football Hall of Fame voting process. And I think that's a good thing. Because the voting for the Football Hall of Fame is way too ambiguous, and some of the calls about cronyism or favoritism don't seem that unfounded. I'd like to see a process that's much more transparent. That would eliminate so much of the guessing that comes with the election every year.
Before they started introducing the Hall of Fame class during the NFL Honors (which I think is a really nice touch), they announced the class at a press conference on the Saturday afternoon before the Super Bowl. During that press conference, they revealed who made the cut from 15 to 10, then, since they almost always elect five, we thus also know who made the cut from 10 to five. They don't do that anymore. Why not? That would be a start.
Another thing I'd like to see is vote totals. In baseball, guys need 75 percent of the vote in order to be elected. That vote total is always made public (and starting next year, so will each voter's ballot). All we know about the Football Hall of Fame vote is that you need 80 percent once you make the final five. But seeing as the final five always get the required 80 percent, why is that even a requirement? Just do the vote at 10 and the five guys that get the most get in.
Evidently, there are 46 players all-time that have been voted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame unanimously. Not surprisingly, Brett Favre was the last. I don't know about you, but I'd love to know who the other 45 are. I'd assume that all of those unanimous selections were in their first year of eligibility (if I had to guess, I'd say Jerry Rice is another, just like Peyton Manning and Tom Brady will be once they're eligible). Maybe that's the football equivalent of first-ballot induction in baseball.
Then there's the class size. How did they arbitrarily settle on a class of five? There are 32 teams in the NFL, and they all have 22 starters, which means there are more than 700 starters in the NFL each season. So, that's less than the "top 1 percent" that's supposed to represent Hall of Famers. And, of course, you have to throw in all of those other worthy players who haven't been inducted yet, but remain on the ballot for each successive election.
I think five is too low a number. They could easily increase that number to seven, or even six, and not dilute the quality of the class one bit. That would also free up some of the congestion on the ballot and prevent them from having those years where they do some "housekeeping" by electing only players that have been waiting a while.
Speaking of waiting a while, the number of Hall of Fame locks that have retired recently is very high. Ray Lewis, a slam dunk first-ballot candidate, Randy Moss and Brian Urlacher all become eligible next year. Then Tony Gonzalez in 2019, Ed Reed, Troy Polamalu and Reggie Wayne in 2020, and another lethal threesome (Peyton Manning, Charles Woodson and Champ Bailey) in 2021. If they all get elected on the first ballot, that limits the number of spots for carryover candidates. That would be less of a problem if the class size was even one person larger.
There's also the issue of the electorate itself. There are only 46 selectors and that group, by and large, remains the same year after year. They're the only ones who decide who gets into the Hall of Fame, so favorites and personal biases almost certainly come into play (whether it's deliberate or not really doesn't matter). If they didn't have a good relationship with a particular player, they have the power to keep him out.
A lot of people think that's why it took so long for Charles Haley to be selected, and that's probably working against Terrell Owens, too. Likewise, despite the fact that there were no punters in the Hall of Fame and he was the best one ever, it took how long for Ray Guy to finally make it (and it wasn't until he was the senior candidate that he finally did)? Punter isn't the only position that's grossly underrepresented, either. There was such a backlog of wide receivers that's finally getting somewhat sorted out, but pretty soon they're gonna have four safeties (Brian Dawkins, John Lynch, Ed Reed and Troy Polamalu) that are all deserving.
The selection committee is almost too exclusive. I'd like to see some additional members. I don't necessarily think they need to include current Hall of Famers like some other people do, but it absolutely needs to be more than just the current group. Or, if you want to keep that selection group the same size (which may be more manageable for an in-person meeting), have term limits. That way there'll be some new blood each year instead of just the same people being the only ones voting over and over again.
Getting into the Hall of Fame is supposed to be hard. Especially since everyone has their own opinions on what makes a Hall of Famer and different views on how one guy stacks up to another. That's why it's such an honor to be elected. But that doesn't mean the election process is perfect. In fact, it's very flawed. And taking a look at the process might not be that bad an idea.
Not to discredit the work done by the selection committee, which spends hours going over the candidates every year on the day before the Super Bowl and picks what they believe is the best class. I bet they wouldn't mind an improved process either, though. Maybe that would lead to less scrutiny. And maybe then we'll be talking about who did make the Hall of Fame rather than who didn't.
No comments:
Post a Comment