Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

JWL wrote:

JohnH19 wrote:I generally don't pay much attention to the Canton or Nays and the Who's Better threads so the less of them there are the better.

I'm tired of the media created obsession with the HoF and hearing the much overused term "future hall of famer".

I am not quite there yet, but I may someday join you in the Hall of Fame Fatigue Club.

I draw a line between senseless babble regarding contemporary players with unfinished careers and legitimate discussion of worthy candidates eligible for induction.

Also, while discussions on Hall of Fame worthiness may seem old hat to many of us it is a great way to get newcomers and dabblers more interested in the finer points of the history of our game.

Just two days ago I was talking to the plumber installing my hot water heater.
He mentioned how Art Shell was the first black head coach in the NFL. I inserted "modern" and explained a little about Fritz Pollard. By the time he was done he knew about Fritz and had a passing interest in the Akron Pros and the APFA. I even gave Marcus our web site address.
I doubt he'll ever post here but I wouldn''t be surprised if he stopped by for a read now and then.

I like the separate threads. And I like the discussions, though I completely understand those who get tired of it.

I'm a lawyer, and in college I studied linguistics. In both fields, we take results and analyze them to try and understand the process that led to them, and to predict what will happen in the future. So things like the Hall of Fame selection process fall right within those same kinds of fields of study.

It's similar to the AP All Pro selection process. You can almost program a computer to give you the First Team All Pro QB and RBs. There's virtually no imagination to their selections at all. The QB with the most wins, unless a QB with fewer wins set a record. The rushing yardage leader, unless he's been First Team for a couple of years, then it's somebody else's "turn".

Ken Crippen wrote:

ChrisBabcock wrote:Ken... How about this?... Have a fourth category at the main forum screen called "Historical Player Discussion" or something like that? With each sub-forum within being a different player. It seems like specific player discussion would be easier to find that way.

I probably wouldn't have a fourth category, since discussion of the players is still "Football Talk." However, I might be able to create a sub-forum under "Football Talk" where we would have individual threads for each player. Of course, that is assuming we have enough interest from everyone to do something like that here. Sound like a good compromise?

That sounds like a good idea to me. How does everyone else feel?

Shrevedude wrote:

Ken Crippen wrote:

ChrisBabcock wrote:Ken... How about this?... Have a fourth category at the main forum screen called "Historical Player Discussion" or something like that? With each sub-forum within being a different player. It seems like specific player discussion would be easier to find that way.

I probably wouldn't have a fourth category, since discussion of the players is still "Football Talk." However, I might be able to create a sub-forum under "Football Talk" where we would have individual threads for each player. Of course, that is assuming we have enough interest from everyone to do something like that here. Sound like a good compromise?

That sounds like a good idea to me. How does everyone else feel?

I like that idea.

Sure, a sub-forum under Football Talk but be a great idea. Folks can ignore it if they choose to. Inside could be threads to discuss individual players, past and present.

Ken Crippen wrote: I probably wouldn't have a fourth category, since discussion of the players is still "Football Talk." However, I might be able to create a sub-forum under "Football Talk" where we would have individual threads for each player. Of course, that is assuming we have enough interest from everyone to do something like that here. Sound like a good compromise?

Would it take the form of a folder pinned to the top of the forum?
What would this item be called?
Should it have sub-folders, perhaps divided by position? Or alphabetically?

Since I'm the guy who started this thread, that sounds fine to me.

The new subforum has been added and I moved some of the more recent threads to this subforum. I was not going to go through all 71 pages of the archives to get every thread. Therefore, you have two options:
1) Bump up a thread that you want in the new subforum.
2) Create a new thread in the subforum.

What about some HOVG discussion? Can that be in the subforum too?

TanksAndSpartans wrote:What about some HOVG discussion? Can that be in the subforum too?

It can be for HOVG and HOF discussion. I will change the name of the forum.