Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

It is Dick Stanfel and Ken Stabler.

Stabler seemed predictable. Stanfel is a surprise, didn't think they would choose him, again.

Reaser wrote:Stabler seemed predictable. Stanfel is a surprise, didn't think they would choose him, again.

Agreed. Stanfel was one of our reports. We didn't really see anything worthy of him being nominated again. I have talked to some of the selectors and they didn't feel strongly about Stanfel, either. Not sure where this came from.

Stanfel should have not been snubbed a few years ago. which is one issue I have with the process, had he gotten in earlier, another equally worthy player could be getting his shot now.

Who else was considered this year?

JohnTurney wrote:Stanfel should have not been snubbed a few years ago. which is one issue I have with the process, had he gotten in earlier, another equally worthy player could be getting his shot now.

I don't even think it's about whether he was snubbed or whether one thinks he's a HOF'er or not.

It's that with seniors it's a pretty straight forward yes/no, they just voted 'no' a couple years ago so now there's only two outcomes since there's not anything that changed re: Stanfel's career.

If he gets in: Voters are flimsy and don't know what they're doing. Plus then they would have wasted a senior spot a couple years ago that could have been used on someone else.

If he doesn't get in: Voters are consistent and would then have wasted two senior slots recently, and while consistent would still be a huge flaw in the process/they don't know what they're doing.

but what seems odd is that with he and Stabler passing away, both may have been brought to forefront . .. and not sure that's the way to look at things.

JohnTurney wrote:but what seems odd is that with he and Stabler passing away, both may have been brought to forefront . .. and not sure that's the way to look at things.

It shouldn't be but that's what made Stabler so predictable (many educated guessed that would happen) ...

Stanfel it's different, him passing away wasn't needed for him to be nominated since he was already nominated recently.

I view their nominations separately. Process wise one was the 'easy'/lazy choice and the other was an incompetent choice.
(not about Stabler/Stanfel, but about the process, for extra clarity.)

JohnTurney wrote:but what seems odd is that with he and Stabler passing away, both may have been brought to forefront . .. and not sure that's the way to look at things.

I agree. Dying should not change your worthiness for consideration.

Oh, ick. Just when you think they're finally getting it right, too. Looks like the dummy days all over again.

They've turned down Stanfel twice and there's nothing to suggest he'll be elected this time around. He does have the postseason honors at 5/5/50s but his career is short and he doesn't grade out all that well in film study according to Ken's website. Meanwhile Stabler isn't even the best QB not in (that would be Ken Anderson) and is at about the same level as Joe Theismann and Charlie Conerly, not to mention the questions mentioned in an earlier thread.

Meanwhile they've wasted two senior slots on Stanfel and may waste a third. Ridiculous.

They've got the regular candidates down pat, but the Seniors continue to be a problem.