Seniors

[rewing84]

One other player I will add and just thought of is Joe Fortunato even though he was a 1950s all decade selection his best years were in the 60's

[SeahawkFever]

Many don't remember that Scott started his pro career with the CFL' BC Lions in 1969 as a wide receiver. And in his final NFL season in 1978 he had 7 interceptions while playing for Washington. I think Scott and Dick Anderson are HOF worthy, but it seems that they have been cancelling each other in the Seniors ballot.

I could totally see why Jake Scott and Dick Anderson could've cancelled each other out in the minds of some voters.

The best accolades received by either one are Scott's Super Bowl MVP, and Anderson's Defensive Player of the Year and All Decade Team selection.

If a player hypothetically had 49 interceptions (which Scott ended up getting), a Super Bowl MVP, a DPOY, and an all -decade team selection, then that player may have made it to Canton by now.

I will agree with that 100% that makes perfect sense

And now what do you know, one of those safeties made it through the first cut, and the other did not.

[SeahawkFever]

, Jackson as said up top had the most receptions, receiving yards, and receiving touchdowns in the 1970's

can expand that from 1969-81 -- #1 in rec, yds, TDs, 5th in YPC a 13-year span

and he has a case and you make it strong.

having seen him a lot ... something was lacking, dropped more than you'd want. It's not talked about. Yes, QBs were iffy ...

The strongest case is the compiled #s.

As I mentioned above, it's the debate of who has best "case" on paper and who were the best football players. Meador better case than Cromwell but no question who was better football player --- Cromwell. Larry Brooks, to those who saw him play, was elite - but they don't have strong "cases" on paper and will never get in HOF, and prob. shouldn't.

Jackson has a shot ... but when I think of the Rams teams of his era, he fits with the good ones ... McCutcheon, Robertson, Reynolds --- guys like that, not with the Cromwells, Brooks' and Youngbloods. The final three were just different when you saw them but one of of these had a strong HOF case.

And what do you know, Meador made the first cut and Cromwell did not.

[JohnTurney]

Meador better case than Cromwell but no question who was better football player --- Cromwell.

And what do you know, Meador made the first cut and Cromwell did not.

Yeah, exactly. He has more Pro Bowls and INTs. Meador has a shot at the final 9, I'd guess.

[SeahawkFever]

Meador better case than Cromwell but no question who was better football player --- Cromwell.

And what do you know, Meador made the first cut and Cromwell did not.

Yeah, exactly. He has more Pro Bowls and INTs. Meador has a shot at the final 9, I'd guess.

He has more pro bowls, but if the voting was split between AFC and NFC in the 80’s, Cromwell could have finished with a similar number of accolades perhaps.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but earlier, you said that Cromwell was a really good tackler if I’m not mistaken. If so, that’s something that won’t appear on a stat sheet.

Different sport, but the sportswriter Bill Simmons once said regarding basketball: “As the years pass, your basketball reference page becomes your legacy for those who didn’t watch you play.”

Well the same may happen with NFL players and pro football reference.

Especially for a player as far back as Meador where there’s basically no full games of him playing that are archived, just about all the footage is NFL Films highlights.

[JohnTurney]

He has more pro bowls, but if the voting was split between AFC and NFC in the 80’s, Cromwell could have finished with a similar number of accolades perhaps.

that's something that is not discussed enough. I the 1960s there were East and West Pro Bowls in NFL and AFL (AFL All-Star game) so the numbers get skewed in the 1960s.

Essentially it would be like having separate NFC and AFC Pro Bowls, if almost doubles the number of Pro Bowls

Also, I cannot get anyone to get interested in looking at Pro Bowls made by replacement ... Some guys with 7 were voted to 4 and someone else made 6 and was voted to 6.

And since 1975 there are "starters" -- guys voted as started as opposed to being backups, like the 3rd and 4th WRs or 3rd tackle.

But while people here and members of PFRA get it, talk to some media people and their eyes glaze over.

[rewing84]

Meador better case than Cromwell but no question who was better football player --- Cromwell.

And what do you know, Meador made the first cut and Cromwell did not.

Yeah, exactly. He has more Pro Bowls and INTs. Meador has a shot at the final 9, I'd guess.

Meador make my final 9 that i can tell you

[SeahawkFever]

, Jackson as said up top had the most receptions, receiving yards, and receiving touchdowns in the 1970's

can expand that from 1969-81 -- #1 in rec, yds, TDs, 5th in YPC a 13-year span

and he has a case and you make it strong.

having seen him a lot ... something was lacking, dropped more than you'd want. It's not talked about. Yes, QBs were iffy ...

The strongest case is the compiled #s.

As I mentioned above, it's the debate of who has best "case" on paper and who were the best football players. Meador better case than Cromwell but no question who was better football player --- Cromwell. Larry Brooks, to those who saw him play, was elite - but they don't have strong "cases" on paper and will never get in HOF, and prob. shouldn't.

Jackson has a shot ... but when I think of the Rams teams of his era, he fits with the good ones ... McCutcheon, Robertson, Reynolds --- guys like that, not with the Cromwells, Brooks' and Youngbloods. The final three were just different when you saw them but one of of these had a strong HOF case.

A few more notes about Harold Jackson after having looked at the recently released target data from 1978-1991.

I see what you would be talking about regarding drops. Harold Jackson's catch percentages were below average for his time (46.8% in 1978, 53.6% in 1979, and 52.2% in 1980; 50.9% combined over those three seasons, which is lower than the league's completion percentage of 53-56% in those years).

Admittedly not every pass that isn't a reception was a drop by the receiver that was targeted, but if a receiver drops more, then that would lead to a hit to his catch percentages.

That said, even with drops, and other bad throws or plays that didn't generate yardage where he was targeted factored in, in his first three New England years, Harold Jackson averaged 9.4 yards per target in 1978, 12.1 in 1979, and 11 in 1980; for an average of 10.8 per target over 1978-1980.

His 1978 yardage per target ranked 12th in the league out of the 61 players that were targeted at least 64 times, his 1979 total was the most of anyone with 64 targets or more (more than anyone with 43 or more in fact), and his 1980 total ranks third out of the 78 players with at least 64 targets; his teammate Stanley Morgan being one of the two that averaged more.

I crunched the numbers for 1978-1980, and in that three year span, Jackson, who was targeted 230 times, had more yards per target than anyone who was targeted even 95 times over that three year span, and his catch percentage of 50.8%, while below the middle relative to the league as a whole, was in the middle of the 36 targets who were targeted as much as he was, and was still above Lynn Swann, Harold Carmichael, Drew Pearson, and Cliff Branch. Those guys all had more targets, but still.

Also, I recall seeing Jackson listed in the top ten of FTN Fantasy's receiver statistic in all three of those seasons, and their metric found him to rank first in 1979, and if they valued efficiency, I could see why they arrived at those totals.

After seeing how Jackson and his peers fared on a per target basis during his New England years, I am now intrigued to see how receivers did on a per target basis in the years before. Hopefully the people at FTN Fantasy and PFR can obtain, tabulate, and digitize the play by play data necessary to calculate yards per target for the league.

In particular, the receiver who I would most want to see yardage per target for is Paul Warfield in the early 70's, but I doubt they'd be able to get that far back.