Senior Nominees

[BD Sullivan]

The fact that he couldn't get his book published through a reputable publishing house tends to put it in the line of self-publishing, whereby standards are negligible at best.

With all due respect, things have changed. There are excellent self-published books out there, and some old guard publishers have been left with egg on their face when a self-published book they didn't think had chance ends up being of quality, and sells.

While some people don't have standards, it comes down to the individual. John Maxymuk's recent self-published book on the Packers is one example of an excellent book with high standards by the author.

It obviously comes down to the author, but when the title of a book is "The mafia, football gambling, and Len Dawson," it's pretty much a given that this will be a hit job, no pun intended.

The whole conspiracy theory reminds me of the clown whose only purpose for coming on here a few years ago was to hype his book about how the NFL just casually fixed games. Of course, the most ridiculous "proof" he offered was that because Peyton Manning wasn't bursting with excitement before the Super Bowl game with New Orleans, that meant that the league had decreed that the Saints win the game.

[mwald]

It obviously comes down to the author, but when the title of a book is "The mafia, football gambling, and Len Dawson," it's pretty much a given that this will be a hit job, no pun intended.

The whole conspiracy theory reminds me of the clown whose only purpose for coming on here a few years ago was to hype his book about how the NFL just casually fixed games. Of course, the most ridiculous "proof" he offered was that because Peyton Manning wasn't bursting with excitement before the Super Bowl game with New Orleans, that meant that the league had decreed that the Saints win the game.

Well, I am in no way talking about this particular book. Rather, the idea that people think something self-published can't be great. Traditional media is dying. In some ways I'm not happy about it, but in other ways what's the big deal? The only thing constant in life is change. One either accepts the new forms or gets left behind like four-buckle overshoes.

Also, I occasionally get a vibe of "If it isn't published by a PFRA member, it can't be good." I like the folks here and the work they do, but people that have no desire to join this group can also put out great work.

And, why the need to categorize anything that *might* be considered negative or controversial as automatically untrue?

Rhetorical questions, not necessarily directed at you.

[Bryan]

Also, I occasionally get a vibe of "If it isn't published by a PFRA member, it can't be good." I like the folks here and the work they do, but people that have no desire to join this group can also put out great work.

And, why the need to categorize anything that *might* be considered negative or controversial as automatically untrue?

Rhetorical questions, not necessarily directed at you.

I have read several different PFRA member books...some are better than others, but the baseline is that they are all at least factually correct. In this new age of self-publishing, thats most definitely not the case. Perhaps Robert Grey Reynolds is the next Wells Twombly when it comes to football prose, but to say that Len Dawson "was often injured as a player" is a factually incorrect statement. If you are building your negative/controversial story on a false premise, then I assume the entire story is untrue.

[mwald]

I have read several different PFRA member books...some are better than others, but the baseline is that they are all at least factually correct.

If the inference here is that only self-published books contain factual errors whereas reputable publishing houses only put out accurate books, then you haven't done much reading (and I'm sure you have).

How many books on a subject are "great" or "definitive"? One out of 100? One out of 1,000?

If someone has the wherewithal and ambition to put their own book out there, I will start by giving them the benefit of the doubt.

[Bryan]

If the inference here is that only self-published books contain factual errors whereas reputable publishing houses only put out accurate books, then you haven't done much reading (and I'm sure you have).

That is not the inference. I trust what a PFRA member says about a topic regarding pro football history/pro football research...you know, the people who have dedicated their lives to pro football history/pro football research. I don't think that self-published books have the same journalistic standards as reputable publishing houses. I would take a self-published hack job with a grain of salt.

On a side note, I think its pathetic and cowardly to put out a book titled "The mafia, football gambling, and Len Dawson". Its just a tabloid cash grab, and the author has no qualm if he sullies several innocent people in the process. If the PFRA had a mission statement, I would guess that Robert Grey Reynolds' work would be diametrically opposed to that statement.

[mwald]

That is not the inference. I trust what a PFRA member says about a topic regarding pro football history/pro football research...you know, the people who have dedicated their lives to pro football history/pro football research. By the same token, if you think that self-published books have the same journalistic standards as reputable publishing houses, then you haven't done much reading either. I would take a self-published hack job with a grain of salt.

On a side note, I think its pathetic and cowardly to put out a book titled "The mafia, football gambling, and Len Dawson". Its just a tabloid cash grab, and the author has no qualm if he sullies several innocent people in the process. If the PFRA had a mission statement, I would guess that Robert Grey Reynolds' work would be diametrically opposed to that statement.

Yep, we'll have to agree to disagree.

I find the members of the PFRA to be neither smarter nor less smarter than the average person out there who is into football history, and self-published books to be of only slightly less quality than the average dreck put out there today by established publishers, although admittedly they don't look as pretty (the books ).

[Reaser]

True, but he was considered a close friend of Donald "Dice" Dawson

But Len Dawson wasn't a close friend of Donald Dawson, correct? Maybe I'm not understanding what you are getting at here.

Its like someone mentioning that Albert Einstein was a great physicist, and you reply with "True, but he was considered a Soviet sympathizer"...even though that claim was proven to be patently false years ago, and no new information has surfaced to make anyone think otherwise. Thats a terrible way to misconstrue history.

Agree with Bryan.

[Jeremy Crowhurst]

That is not the inference. I trust what a PFRA member says about a topic regarding pro football history/pro football research...you know, the people who have dedicated their lives to pro football history/pro football research. By the same token, if you think that self-published books have the same journalistic standards as reputable publishing houses, then you haven't done much reading either. I would take a self-published hack job with a grain of salt.

On a side note, I think its pathetic and cowardly to put out a book titled "The mafia, football gambling, and Len Dawson". Its just a tabloid cash grab, and the author has no qualm if he sullies several innocent people in the process. If the PFRA had a mission statement, I would guess that Robert Grey Reynolds' work would be diametrically opposed to that statement.

Yep, we'll have to agree to disagree.

I find the members of the PFRA to be neither smarter nor less smarter than the average person out there who is into football history, and self-published books to be of only slightly less quality than the average dreck put out there today by established publishers, although admittedly they don't look as pretty (the books ).

FWIW, in my view even the average dreck put out by established publishers is still quite a bit better than self-published books, taken as a whole. And if we're including works by established publishers that rise above the level of average dreck, then the gulf between them is very wide indeed. For every book put out by a PFRA member, there are a hundred where the reader is left thinking "thank the baby Jesus that no trees died to put out this piece of crap".

[bachslunch]

Hadn't expected the reactions on the latest part of this topic. Looks like there's no point in trying to talk about it further, though will say I find the issue interesting. Anyway, am bowing out of this discussion.

[JohnTurney]

cannot say exactly but you can figure it out . . . the two who were closest, after Stanfel and Stable were

a short-career guy, played in the secondary of a Pacific Northwest team and

a linebacker who was consensus all pro a lot who played in a Texas oil town.