Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

I admit to being a bit of a homer, but I am still not convinced that Slater was a better player than Swede Youngstrom, who played guard for the Buffalo All-Americans/Bisons and later the Frankford Yellow Jackets. Both were 3-time first-team all-pro, but Youngstrom anchored the All-Americans' team that brought home back-to-back 9-1 seasons (1920 and '21), and also played for the champion Yellow Jackets in 1926.

I certainly wouldn't have a problem with Youngstrom - I think Slater was likely jipped on some postseason honors though, the possibility race came into play is believable given the times. His honors profile would be a bit better if that's the case. Can't we have both Slater and Youngstrom?

I won't mention anyone I've previously mentioned, but what about Gus Sonnenberg? Post season honors solid, won a title with Providence and a pro wrestler Or Jim McMillen - Bears were in the mix every year and he earned postseason honors every year he played.

The 20s All-Decade team isn't great, so using it as an aid to id 2020 makeup candidates is more compounding an error than correcting one in my opinion unless they really want one candidate and just pick off Dilweg, that works, but here's what an old Bob Carroll article about the HoF 20s team, pretty much explains how it likely wound up to be what it is:

-selectors leaned heavily on men already enshrined in the Hall of Fame

-the scary part is that it looks like they didn't do much original research

-four men are probably in the wrong decade. Michalske, Hubbard, and Kiesling all spent more years playing in the 1930s than in the 1920s
-Mike and Walt are there because they were short on guards

-they shoved Ol' Jim into the '20s. That's nice for Jim, but it's hardly fair to a dozen or more backs who played better football during this era.

-By far the most striking feature about this roster is the number of coaching greats it holds. Count 'em: Guy Chamberlin, George Halas, Steve Owen, Jimmy Conzelman, Curly Lambeau all won NFL championships; Paddy Driscoll, Hunk Anderson, Walt Kiesling, and George Trafton were famous assistant coaches, and the first three had success in short stints as headmen. Even Thorpe, Nevers, and Henry were head NFL coaches. The natural question: were these all great players who became great coaches, or were some great coaches who were only remembered as great players?

TanksAndSpartans wrote:I certainly wouldn't have a problem with Youngstrom - I think Slater was likely jipped on some postseason honors though, the possibility race came into play is believable given the times. His honors profile would be a bit better if that's the case. Can't we have both Slater and Youngstrom?

Would be nice, but I don't think they're both going in cause ol' Swede isn't even in the conversation. I think what worked against Slater in the days he played might be playing to his advantage now, but it's all speculative. Since there is no film to go on, all we have are the season-end honor listings, along with any anecdotal info from players who played with or against these guys, or accounts from reporters watching the games …

Oh well, nice that we have the HOVG, huh?

Agree about Slater, but my feeling is mostly they might be getting something right for the wrong reasons.

Actually, the HoVG classes have been pretty thin on pre-film candidates too

Time will tell, but I am getting the feeling that most of the 10 seniors will be more "modern" with All-Decade guys getting extra push. Aside from Slater, and this is my speculation, but Drew Pearson may be closest to a lock as one can get. Probably Gradishar, too (though not All-Decade). But getting feeling it could be 6-7 moderns and 3-4 the kind of guys we as a forum have been pushing. I was hoping at least a 50-50 split...but here's hoping

BD Sullivan wrote: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.

Correct on all said above.

Over at the Baseball Think Factory website is an ongoing alternative to the BBHoF called the Hall of Merit, which has members in theory (and pretty much in practice) chosen on a purely statistical basis. It includes players who spent most or all of their careers in the Negro Leagues. Buck O’Neill isn’t among them there, either. There’s a good bit of overlap between the two “honors societies,” though Andy Cooper, Ray Dandridge, Leon Day, Judy Johnson, Hilton Smith, and Ben Taylor are not in the HoM and Home Run Johnson, Dick Lundy, Dobie Moore, Alejandro Oms, Dick Redding, and Quincy Trouppe, are not in the HoF.

EDIT: initial website consulted for NgL players in the HoF was incorrect. Errors in post fixed to reflect this.

JohnTurney wrote:Time will tell, but I am getting the feeling that most of the 10 seniors will be more "modern" with All-Decade guys getting extra push. Aside from Slater, and this is my speculation, but Drew Pearson may be closest to a lock as one can get. Probably Gradishar, too (though not All-Decade). But getting feeling it could be 6-7 moderns and 3-4 the kind of guys we as a forum have been pushing. I was hoping at least a 50-50 split...but here's hoping

I unfortunately think that this is what is going to happen. A token guy or two pre-1950 (to make it look like they are looking at the history of the game), then load it up with modern players.

to be honest i wouldnt mind more modern era guys

rewing84 wrote:to be honest i wouldnt mind more modern era guys

Will say that regardless of what happens, there likely will be 10 guys inducted from a pool of Senior candidates considered varying degrees of viable. My hope is that they will be the best choices, especially among the oldest options. But clearing out a chunk of Seniors instead of one or two is not the worst thing.

How many candidates were finalists in multiple years?