The Class is Good, the 2018 version

[conace21]

I agree on Young. He was the best quarterback in the league from 1992-1994 and top 3-4 until 1998.

[Bryan]

Why wouldn't Steve Young be first ballot? He was arguably the best quarterback of the 1990's, and consistently had a quality year from 1991 to 1998. Won a Super Bowl where he had the best QB performance ever. Two time league MVP, and Super Bowl MVP. Only QB other than Sammy Baugh to hold a record six passing titles. Absolutely deserved to be first ballot.

At the time, I thought Young didn't have the longevity or postseason success of the other elite QBs, and I also thought that Young kind of stepped into a great situation and just kept the ball rolling. He was a starter in SF for 8 years and 1 more year in Tampa. That wasn't really 'first-ballot' to me, especially when guys like Fran Tarkenton had to wait a few years to get in. Looking back on it now, I appreciate the efficiency numbers that Young put up...at some point you just have to ask "what more could the guy do?". His career was kind of like Staubach's...a late start, but able to have immediate success with a good team.

I don't remember if he was first ballot or not, but another guy I didn't get was Marcus Allen.

[JohnTurney]

Why wouldn't Steve Young be first ballot? He was arguably the best quarterback of the 1990's, and consistently had a quality year from 1991 to 1998. Won a Super Bowl where he had the best QB performance ever. Two time league MVP, and Super Bowl MVP. Only QB other than Sammy Baugh to hold a record six passing titles. Absolutely deserved to be first ballot.

I think he was a case of all those things you list...and thanks, I think I was reasonably aware of them. He also had some seasons that were not the stuff of first-ballot. So, overall, it's not like I have a huge problem with him being first ballot, but when one looks closer, he was like Ken Stabler in some ways. Lots of good and some bad. YOung lost an awful lot of big games.

So, I disagree with your "absolutely". I think it was borderline at best. He was a stat king.

[JohnTurney]

I don't remember if he was first ballot or not, but another guy I didn't get was Marcus Allen.

He was first-ballot and one of those with some great, great seasons and a Super Bowl MVP, a rushing title, etc... and some other years that leave him well short of Emmitt, DIckerson ,etc.

[JohnTurney]

At the time, I thought Young didn't have the longevity or postseason success of the other elite QBs, and I also thought that Young kind of stepped into a great situation and just kept the ball rolling. He was a starter in SF for 8 years and 1 more year in Tampa. That wasn't really 'first-ballot' to me, especially when guys like Fran Tarkenton had to wait a few years to get in.

.

And I can see a debate about it, and that there is no right or wrong answer other than this: Young is a slam-dunk first-ballot guy.

I can see the case for first ballots, if you like stats and the NFL passer rating, he passes the eye test with his exciting running. But he didn't get it done lots of time. And I like him, he was ahead of me at BYU, was a hero to me in a lot of ways then. Couldn't be a better guy. But if I am being honest, I have to look at the poor years and years as a backup and ask if that is the stuff of 1st ballot.

[Ness]

Why wouldn't Steve Young be first ballot? He was arguably the best quarterback of the 1990's, and consistently had a quality year from 1991 to 1998. Won a Super Bowl where he had the best QB performance ever. Two time league MVP, and Super Bowl MVP. Only QB other than Sammy Baugh to hold a record six passing titles. Absolutely deserved to be first ballot.

I think he was a case of all those things you list...and thanks, I think I was reasonably aware of them. He also had some seasons that were not the stuff of first-ballot. So, overall, it's not like I have a huge problem with him being first ballot, but when one looks closer, he was like Ken Stabler in some ways. Lots of good and some bad. YOung lost an awful lot of big games.

So, I disagree with your "absolutely". I think it was borderline at best. He was a stat king.

Hmmm interesting. By this logic I'm guessing you don't think Drew Brees is a slam dunk first ballot HOF guy then? Had one post season run where he got a Super Bowl. Every other playoff run has been met with failure. Not even making it back to the NFC Championship game, and that's when the Saints actually make the playoffs (although that is more on Sean Payton's inability to built a decent defense). Also never league MVP. He is the modern day "stat" king though. What do you think of Marino getting in first ballot?

Not sure what seasons, at least with the 49ers you're talking about where Steve didn't have a quality season. I don't know what you mean by HOF season, but essentially every year he was a starter for the 49ers he led the league in passer rating. I'm not a huge fan of passer rating, but when you lead the league six times out of eight years as a starter (not counting 1999 as he only played 3 games before retiring) that's pretty HOF material to me. The two years he didn't lead he was still over 92.0 which for the time period is great. Ken Stabler never led the league in one or two categories like Steve Young did. He was league MVP once, but not twice. Also never Super Bowl MVP with a dominating performance like Steve. Stabler also completely bottomed out in Houston, and then New Orleans. I think that hurt his legacy. Although he should have went into the HOF much sooner.

The biggest knock I can think of in regards to Young's career is that he had two terrible seasons in Tampa his first couple of seasons in the NFL. Of course, that franchise was awful when run by Hugh Cluverhouse. Before Steve got there and after he left until it was bought out by the Glazer family. With the 49ers, Steve did lose three NFC Championship games. Two at home, and one on the road. For I think once you have one ring though. you're gold. Young's statistical accomplishments in the 1990's in addition to the 1994 season I think he was as shoe-in.

Also, one last thing. I don't think anyone could have just stepped in and took over for Montana. Over the years we saw guys like Jeff Kemp, Mike Moroski, or Steve Bono take over. While they all looked solid in that system, they never looked "great".

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Probably not going to change your mind on this one.

[Ness]

At the time, I thought Young didn't have the longevity or postseason success of the other elite QBs, and I also thought that Young kind of stepped into a great situation and just kept the ball rolling. He was a starter in SF for 8 years and 1 more year in Tampa. That wasn't really 'first-ballot' to me, especially when guys like Fran Tarkenton had to wait a few years to get in.

.

And I can see a debate about it, and that there is no right or wrong answer other than this: Young is a slam-dunk first-ballot guy.

I can see the case for first ballots, if you like stats and the NFL passer rating, he passes the eye test with his exciting running. But he didn't get it done lots of time. And I like him, he was ahead of me at BYU, was a hero to me in a lot of ways then. Couldn't be a better guy. But if I am being honest, I have to look at the poor years and years as a backup and ask if that is the stuff of 1st ballot.

...You remember Joe Montana was in front of him right...?

[Bryan]

Also, one last thing. I don't think anyone could have just stepped in and took over for Montana. Over the years we saw guys like Jeff Kemp, Mike Moroski, or Steve Bono take over. While they all looked solid in that system, they never looked "great".

To me, Jeff Kemp & Mike Moroski are the definition of "anyone". Kemp had the best season of his career in his lone year with the Niners, and actually put up better stats than Montana in 1986.

Moroski started a grand total of 2 games with San Fran, and he didn't really step in a take over for Montana, he stepped in and took over for Kemp. So yeah, Steve Young was much better than third string Mike Moroski. The fact that the Niners actually won a road game with Moroski as the starter is notable, and Moroski threw for 332 yards in a losing cause the following week.

Steve Bono never stepped in and took over for Montana, either. His only starting stint with the Niners was in 1991 as a replacement for Steve Young. The Niners were 5-1 with Bono as the starter, and in one of the games Bono put up a 27-41-347-3 TDs 0 INTs statline against the #1 defense in the NFL (Saints). The Niners started the year 4-5 with Young as the starter, and Bono nearly rallied them into the postseason.

Young was obviously better than a collection of career backups and third-stringers, but I'm not sure anyone can argue that he inherited a pretty cushy situation in San Francisco (if that is indeed what you are arguing).

[JohnTurney]

...You remember Joe Montana was in front of him right...?

What do you think? You think I would not know that?

[JohnTurney]

Probably not going to change your mind on this one.

Nothing you post is anything that is not known. Young was a stat king. Passer rating thing, passer rating that. Drew Brees has nothing to do with this. And for all those stats and the 2 MVPs, he got just one Super Bowl and he had good defenses year after year, but facing the Cowboys and Packers he usually lost.

So, it's not about him being a worthy HOFer, he is. And, the committee voted him in on the first try. But a fair analysis of things raises the questions I ask. No, you are not going to change my mind, and why would you want to? Especially reciting things that are commonly known, like his MVPs or his stats. I think everyone on this site is familiar with those things, they even know he was a backup to Joe Montana. So there may not be a need to recite the obvious.

I am not trying to change your mind. That is not the purpose. The thread is there are players who are borderline 1st ballot HOFers who got in on the first ballot. A couple may have been this year, Slater, Allen and Steve Young are examples, in my opinion, of others. Certainly, you can disagree, the committee disagreed.

The point of this forum is to have discussions. I didn't mean it to get off into a discussion about Steve Young. However, since it did, there should be room for reasonable people to disagree. Young is hardly a slam-dunk lock like Montana or what Manning and Brady will be.

All that matters that this is not something I am throwing out to offend Young or 49er fans, but I think I have a little bit of knowledge on the HOF subject and based on that limited knowledge I have come to my own conclusion and that is it's fair to look at Young's bad seasons, his non-HOF seasons of which there were 7 and there were 8 great seasons that were of HOF quality. Throw in his decision to go to USFL and that is 8 HOF seasons and 8 that were not. That is enough to raise the question of first-ballot quality. Doesn't mean I am right. It does mean it is a reasonable position.