Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

JeffreyMiller wrote:Otis Taylor
Alex Karras
Tom Sestak
Ralph Hay
lavvie Dilweg

This. I really hope Taylor makes it.

I have to admit John mentioning Slater as a lock made me dare to pipe dream - I'd love to see Al Nesser, Tony Latone, and Glenn Presnell.

TanksAndSpartans wrote:I have to admit John mentioning Slater as a lock made me dare to pipe dream - I'd love to see Al Nesser, Tony Latone, and Glenn Presnell.

Why Presnell?

I think maybe we fall into the "skill position" thing...just like we say the HOF voters do. None of us have seen much of these players, all we know is via reading and research...but I don't get Presnell... how did he stand out?

Now had you said Ox Emerson I would have gotten it...but if we think 1-time All-pros (as a rule) are HOF-worthy then it will be a crowed place

Presnell was in one of the early HoVG classes. His testimonials are decent. Clark Hinkle who wasn't a teammate and didn't play against him until he got to the NFL wrote a letter for him to get into the HoF. He spent some time outside the league playing for the Tanks and Spartans and was probably one of the best players in the game during those years and that does count as professional football in my opinion. Its just one game, but when the Tanks played the Bears, Presnell outrushed Grange and Nagurski combined. He unfortunately played in the shadow of Dutch Clark, but the one year Clark skipped ('33), Chris Willis had Presnell in the retro-mvp race. His unofficial interception numbers are excellent and can be used to argue he was one of the better defensive players in the league at his position, in my opinion.

John, you mentioned Emerson, I do prefer him to Presnell, but he was already mentioned by others. The 3 players I mention as a pipe dream (A. Nesser, Latone, Presnell) in my previous post are my Group 2 players because I figured the Group 1 players were already discussed and that it was pointless to mention my Group 3 players. My list (order may change depending on the day) grouped by the odds I assign them:

Group 1 = seems to have a shot based on what I'm reading (John, using what you are reporting as one of my main sources)
Group 2 = long shot, not mentioned recently but may have been mentioned on Talk of Fame or been in the mix for the HoF in the 60s
Group 3 = Not a chance in hell

1 Lavvie Dilweg (Group 1)
2 Duke Slater (Group 1)
3 Ox Emerson (Group 1)
4 Al Nesser (Group 2)
5 Tony Latone (Group 2)
6 Verne Lewelenn (Group 1)
7 Al Wistert (Group 1)
8 Bob Nash (Group 3)
9 Glenn Presnell (Group 2)
10 Ralph Waldsmith (Group 3)
11 Norb Sacksteder (Group 3)
12 Pete Calac (Group 3)
13 Frank Nesser (Group 3)
14 Al Mahrt (Group 3)
15 Cub Buck (Group 3)
16 Homer Davidson (Group 3)
17 Ted Nesser (Group 3)
18 George Christensen (Group 3)

Contributors: Jack Cusack, Peggy Parratt (both in Group 3)

As much as I think a makeup class is a good idea, and a lot of the names mentioned in this thread are definitely worthy, my fear is that years down the road these inductees might be viewed as "second class" HOFers.

"Oh, so an so got in that year they let all the old timers in. He must not be as great as the senior candidates who got in through 'proper channels'".

ChrisBabcock wrote:As much as I think a makeup class is a good idea, and a lot of the names mentioned in this thread are definitely worthy, my fear is that years down the road these inductees might be viewed as "second class" HOFers.

"Oh, so an so got in that year they let all the old timers in. He must not be as great as the senior candidates who got in through 'proper channels'".

I'll still take it for pre-WWII players. If not for this, I don't think they would ever get a look.

bachslunch wrote:I think this is a wonderful idea, and I’m so glad the HoF is seriously considering this. A class of 17 separate from the usual number of inductees would really go a long way towards clearing out the Senior backlog.

I agree that it could be a wonderful idea, but I think it could also backfire in a Frankie Frisch/Baseball HOF kind of way...where we get 17 of Jerry Jones's closest friends inducted into Canton.

If I were in charge, I would have focused on giving the 20s a hard look since its 2020, then in 2030, they could do the same thing for the 30s, then the 40s and that's it. The 50s forward I think the senior process is fine. Arguably, the 30s and 40s aren't that bad (Emerson and Wistert should eventually get in via the normal senior process). You don't need 17 that way, I think its more like 3-6 (Dilweg, Slater, Lewellen, Latone, Youngstrom, Al Nesser)

TanksAndSpartans wrote:If I were in charge, I would have focused on giving the 20s a hard look since its 2020, then in 2030, they could do the same thing for the 30s, then the 40s and that's it. The 50s forward I think the senior process is fine. Arguably, the 30s and 40s aren't that bad (Emerson and Wistert should eventually get in via the normal senior process). You don't need 17 that way, I think its more like 3-6 (Dilweg, Slater, Lewellen, Latone, Youngstrom, Al Nesser)

I wouldn't get your hopes up for a big class of pre-WWII players. There will likely be a few, but there will be more modern players, or what we consider modern players. I'd bet there may be only 1 or possibly 2 from the 20s maybe a couple from 30s and 40s.

JohnTurney wrote:I wouldn't get your hopes up for a big class of pre-WWII players. There will likely be a few, but there will be more modern players, or what we consider modern players. I'd bet there may be only 1 or possibly 2 from the 20s maybe a couple from 30s and 40s.

Thanks John - I figured as much. Makes sense to celebrate 100 years by having a makeup class mostly made up of players from the last 60 years