Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

TanksAndSpartans wrote:

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

Yeah, my feeling is that many if not most voters think their job is to get as many players from their team in. It's about their team and not about the Hall. Not all voters are like that, but most are. I think they are already scheming ways to get "their guy" in, to grab a piece of this bounty for the, lets call it, the Portland Storm or the San Antonio Wings (names changed to protect the 'innocent'.

That said, I am not sure all the names listed are HOF worthy, either. It's a difficult balance. And if there are at least 4-5 from Pre-WWII I would be glad. We have to remember it's not about us and our interests either. We also need to ask if the Hall if less because player A is not in, not 'there seems to be too few players from this era or that era not in the Hall so let's put them in">

I think there are some pre WWII players mentioned that have credentials (namely All-Pros, championships) that others from their era have and those are where I'd start. That's just me.

I don't know if the PFHOF would induct someone who is deceased for a long time and (maybe) doesn't have any living descendents or relatives. I believe that the Baseball Hall of Fame has inducted such kind of former players, but if it is a separate ceremony I don't visualize someone like that in the same ceremony with a Peyton Manning, per example.

John, I’m sure you didn’t want to totally duplicate your post from PFJ, but I read it and it was very good. So I hate to quibble with you now, but I don't think the “Hall is less because player A is not in” is any more the right criteria given the number of players already in than "can't tell the history of the game without him". The horse is kind of out of the barn in terms of it not being a "small" Hall, so I don’t want to over complicate this, but given a start date in the 60s, its practically human nature that players from the 20s, who less people remember/advocate for, are underrepresented. Some just got the short end of the stick and given what you mention about voters, is it surprising a team like the Pottsville Maroons is under-represented? They aren’t anyone’s team My interests are going to be the same no matter what they do, so that’s not my motivation, I just thought it would be fair to recognize the earlier players in a slightly better proportion to the later players. PFC was published before Friedman and Pollard got in and they mention that you couldn't even field a team of 11 with HoFers from the 20s. And if there's a logical reason that Thorpe is the only player in the Hall who had his best years prior to the 20s, I haven't heard it yet.

Teo, I would hope having a living relative wouldn't matter - I didn't even consider that. I recall a relative of Lavvie Dilweg advocated for him - hopefully they could always find someone to accept the award. Speaking of Dilweg, a quick Google search turned up this:

http://www.profootballresearchers.org/L ... _Sheet.pdf

I don’t get how the Senior committee skips him year after year.

TanksAndSpartans wrote: Teo, I would hope having a living relative wouldn't matter - I didn't even consider that. I recall a relative of Lavvie Dilweg advocated for him - hopefully they could always find someone to accept the award. Speaking of Dilweg, a quick Google search turned up this:

http://www.profootballresearchers.org/L ... _Sheet.pdf

I don’t get how the Senior committee skips him year after year.

Dilweg's son is still alive and well.

JohnTurney wrote:

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.

Yup. I’ll be very happy if they elect Dilweg, Wistert, Slater, and Speedie, ecstatic if they add Emerson and Lewellen, happily shocked if they add in Riley Matheson and George Christensen. Those are my top pre-50s snubs, anyway.

I think the first four are the most likely to make it in, maybe adding Emerson. But we’ll see.

Ken Crippen wrote:

TanksAndSpartans wrote: Teo, I would hope having a living relative wouldn't matter - I didn't even consider that. I recall a relative of Lavvie Dilweg advocated for him - hopefully they could always find someone to accept the award. Speaking of Dilweg, a quick Google search turned up this:

http://www.profootballresearchers.org/L ... _Sheet.pdf

I don’t get how the Senior committee skips him year after year.

Dilweg's son is still alive and well.

Yes, I know, we met him in 2012 in NFL Films, and Leverne's grandson Anthony was a QB for the Packers nearly 30 years ago. I hope that finally Dilweg gets inducted, I agree that he is the most deserving player from the 20s and 30s not in.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2 ... inductees/


Hall of Fame Class of 2020 tentatively set to include 20 inductees
Posted by Charean Williams on July 1, 2019, 10:00 PM EDT



It already was known that the Pro Football Hall of Fame would have a Centennial Class for 2020. What wasn’t known was how many.

As it stands now, the maximum number of inductees in a year is eight. In conjunction with the NFL’s 100th anniversary celebration, the Pro Football Hall of Fame tentatively has approved a class of 20 for next year, Hall of Fame president and CEO David Baker revealed Monday.

It would allow players, coaches and contributors who have fallen through the cracks a spot in Canton.

The operating board has approved five modern-era candidates — the same as normal — plus 10 seniors, three contributors and two coaches for the Class of 2020. The full board still must approve the plan during their meeting Aug. 2.

“It is extremely elite company, and it’s not the Hall of very, very good. It’s the Hall of Fame, and so it should be difficult to make it,” Baker said on SiriusXM NFL Radio. “But there’s a lot of guys through the years [who have slipped through the cracks]. We have several guys who are on all-decade teams who aren’t in the Hall of Fame, so this is an opportunity with the Centennial coming up. What we’ve looked at potentially and has been approved, at least in concept, by our operating board . . . is that potentially we would have 20 Hall of Famers enshrined for the year 2020.

“This year we have eight, so this would be quite a few guys, but it would be the five normal modern-era players elected from 15 finalists and then 10 seniors, three contributors and two [coaches]. But again, I want to stress that that’s got to be something that’s passed by our board on Friday, Aug. 2.”

The seven first-team all-decade players in the senior pool would have their best shot at earning election. Only one of those, former Cowboys safety Cliff Harris, has ever made it on the list of finalists, according to Rick Gosselin of the Talk of Fame.

Former coach Don Coryell, a finalist for six consecutive years, also likely would have a great chance at finally earning his due.

for rest clink link

5 moderns
10 seniors
2 coaches
3 contributers

____________

3 contributors?
George Young
Art McNally
are the two I'd put money on..
and I'd guess Sabol, too.

John, thanks for posting. Not as good as 17 extra inductees, but still better than usual.

Agreed that the three Contributors given this are likely to be George Young, Art McNally, and Steve Sabol. They’re the three most deserving from that pool unless you seriously consider Ralph Hay, which they might not. The best owner candidate on general principles is probably Robert Kraft, but the recent baggage he has acquired may be an issue. There’s also folks like Paul Tagliabue, Bucko Kilroy (who is also on an all decade team as a player, and a real dark horse possibility here), and lesser owners like Carroll Rosenbloom, Clint Murchison, Art Modell, and Jack Kent Cooke, none of whom I’m too excited about — though one of these might sneak in.

Aside from Clark Shaughnessy and Buddy Parker, I’m not bowled over by the options in the coaching category. Guys like Tom Flores, Jimmy Johnson, George Seifert, and Don Coryell might jump to the head of the line, though. Coryell, Seifert, and Johnson would be okay with me, at least.

Ten Seniors is sure better than two, though more would be great. Agreed that most of the slots will probably go to All Decade guys, especially first team players for those years they differentiated. That would be good news for guys like Lavvie Dilweg, Ox Emerson, Al Wistert, and Mac Speedie. Maybe not so much for Duke Slater, since he isn’t on one, though he may have an inside track, as John mentioned — sure hope so. Probably also good news for folks like Cliff Harris, Del Shofner, Alex Karras, Drew Pearson, and (sorry to say) Jim Covert. That’s ten right there. I’d be okay with all except Covert, though there are higher priority options I’d prefer.

We’ll see what happens.

Baseball did this in 2006 with respect to people from the Negro Leagues. They elected 17 new members, with the rumor being that it was done to shut up all the people complaining about how the Negro Leagues were being ignored. In the 13 years since, no other Negro Leaguers have been elected, I think.

Yet even after that election, people with only a passing knowledge of the Negro League's went apes*** because Buck O'Neill wasn't elected. Apparently, the fact that O'Neill had been a prominent voice on Ken Burns' documentary on baseball history and an incredibly nice guy was worthy of induction in their mind, so these people trashed the voters--who were mostly SABR people that had been researching the Negro Leagues for decades.