CB chart
Re: CB chart
I brought it up on the old forums every year that Tillman was getting and had previously been overlooked for honors (all-pro/pro bowl). It really costs him that media and the various voters didn't catch-on to how good he was until after his career was more than half over. Then, after he was finally noticed, injuries cost him likely 1-3 more seasons of honors -- in my opinion he likely would have earned them but even if not, still likely he would have got a/some 'name-recognition' (gift) pro bowl selection(s) that everyone else generally gets -- a chunk of Champ Bailey's, for example.
To me, it's the most disappointing lack-of-honors (more accurately: "lack-of-[deserving]-honors") for any player that can be shown on one of these charts.
CB's in general aren't a favorite of the PFHOF so he doesn't have a chance anyway. So I wouldn't argue he's a HOF'er, just that his career was so misjudged up to the late-career point that he became correctly judged that he had a severely underrated career. So underrated in fact, that he even has a "0" for years consensus all-pro on the chart above.
Other than the top of the list names -who are the clear HOF'ers and the type of players that should make-up the PFHOF, in my opinion- I would take him/his career over a majority of everyone else on the list. He really should be in the next set of players after them in my opinion, and closer to the top of the list than bottom.
To me, it's the most disappointing lack-of-honors (more accurately: "lack-of-[deserving]-honors") for any player that can be shown on one of these charts.
CB's in general aren't a favorite of the PFHOF so he doesn't have a chance anyway. So I wouldn't argue he's a HOF'er, just that his career was so misjudged up to the late-career point that he became correctly judged that he had a severely underrated career. So underrated in fact, that he even has a "0" for years consensus all-pro on the chart above.
Other than the top of the list names -who are the clear HOF'ers and the type of players that should make-up the PFHOF, in my opinion- I would take him/his career over a majority of everyone else on the list. He really should be in the next set of players after them in my opinion, and closer to the top of the list than bottom.
-
bachslunch
- Posts: 824
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 7:09 am
Re: CB chart
Just saw this now for some reason. Again, thanks for posting, John, very useful iseful. I have some of the info as being different (Law with only 5 pro bowls, Parrish with 3 and Riley with 1 first team all pro selection, for example). There are also no HoF CBs prior to Darrell Green listed — of them, I think Emmitt Thomas and Dick LeBeau are mistakes and the rest fine.
I don’t doubt that Ty Law will be elected (has been a finalist twice) and am fine with that; his 2/5/00s profile is a little light, but still respectable for a CB of the era. Am also sure that both Champ Bailey and Charles Woodson will get in when they become eligible, and if they’re not first ballot, they won’t wait around too long.
By honors, at least, Lemar Parrish (3/8/none) is every bit as deserving as these folks and the current inductees, plus he merits a good bit of kick return credit. I think he’s a no-brainer and am surprised he was never once a finalist. I’ve seen rumblings that he was more of a gambling style CB, but am unsure how accurate that is, though it wouldn’t affect my feelings on his HoF worth much. Among those not listed, am also supportive of Abe Woodson (5/5/none and an elite KR), Bobby Boyd (4/2/60s), and Dave Grayson (6/6/allAFL and very good KR) and wouldn’t be unhappy if Cornell Green (4/5/none) snuck in at some point. Among those listed other than Parrish, I’d be fine with Ronde Barber (3/5/00s) and won’t complain if Louis Wright (4/5/70s), Lester Hayes (4/5/80s), or Albert Lewis (2/4/none) got in someday; the last of these has thinner honors but reportedly looks excellent in film study (apparently at elite level in coverage per Dr. Z) and was a special teams monster with several blocked kicks to his credit. Everson Walls (3/4/none) was a finalist this year and has a good number of lifetime INTs, but I don’t support his candidacy between his so-so honors and reportedly less than stellar film study reputation.
The elephant in the room is Ken Riley, who has a boatload of career INTs (because he played forever) and almost non-existent honors (1/0/none). I just don’t get why people back him for the HoF, especially over his teammate Parrish. And if one is going to pick a dark-horse low-honors guy, am thinking it should be Lewis. How good was Riley, anyway? Has anyone seen film on him?
I don’t doubt that Ty Law will be elected (has been a finalist twice) and am fine with that; his 2/5/00s profile is a little light, but still respectable for a CB of the era. Am also sure that both Champ Bailey and Charles Woodson will get in when they become eligible, and if they’re not first ballot, they won’t wait around too long.
By honors, at least, Lemar Parrish (3/8/none) is every bit as deserving as these folks and the current inductees, plus he merits a good bit of kick return credit. I think he’s a no-brainer and am surprised he was never once a finalist. I’ve seen rumblings that he was more of a gambling style CB, but am unsure how accurate that is, though it wouldn’t affect my feelings on his HoF worth much. Among those not listed, am also supportive of Abe Woodson (5/5/none and an elite KR), Bobby Boyd (4/2/60s), and Dave Grayson (6/6/allAFL and very good KR) and wouldn’t be unhappy if Cornell Green (4/5/none) snuck in at some point. Among those listed other than Parrish, I’d be fine with Ronde Barber (3/5/00s) and won’t complain if Louis Wright (4/5/70s), Lester Hayes (4/5/80s), or Albert Lewis (2/4/none) got in someday; the last of these has thinner honors but reportedly looks excellent in film study (apparently at elite level in coverage per Dr. Z) and was a special teams monster with several blocked kicks to his credit. Everson Walls (3/4/none) was a finalist this year and has a good number of lifetime INTs, but I don’t support his candidacy between his so-so honors and reportedly less than stellar film study reputation.
The elephant in the room is Ken Riley, who has a boatload of career INTs (because he played forever) and almost non-existent honors (1/0/none). I just don’t get why people back him for the HoF, especially over his teammate Parrish. And if one is going to pick a dark-horse low-honors guy, am thinking it should be Lewis. How good was Riley, anyway? Has anyone seen film on him?
Re: CB chart
This is sort of a back-handed compliment for Riley. Early in 1976, the Bengals played the Colts and Roger Carr had a huge day against Riley (6-198-3). Carr had two deep TD catches against Riley, and this was big news in NFL circles as Carr was kind of a non-entity and no WR could beat Riley deep. I thought it was interesting that Riley had such a strong reputation among the other NFL players even though he wasn't getting Pro Bowl/All-Pro honors.bachslunch wrote:The elephant in the room is Ken Riley, who has a boatload of career INTs (because he played forever) and almost non-existent honors (1/0/none). I just don’t get why people back him for the HoF, especially over his teammate Parrish. And if one is going to pick a dark-horse low-honors guy, am thinking it should be Lewis. How good was Riley, anyway? Has anyone seen film on him?
-
JohnTurney
- Posts: 2292
- Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 1:28 pm
Re: CB chart
Don Pierson, the long-time Bear writer, said Riley was the best cover corner he ever saw until Deion. Pierson was pretty level-headed guy. But then again in the Doleman versus Dent era, he said "Doleman couldn't hold Dent's jock". So there is that.Bryan wrote: This is sort of a back-handed compliment for Riley. Early in 1976, the Bengals played the Colts and Roger Carr had a huge day against Riley (6-198-3). Carr had two deep TD catches against Riley, and this was big news in NFL circles as Carr was kind of a non-entity and no WR could beat Riley deep. I thought it was interesting that Riley had such a strong reputation among the other NFL players even though he wasn't getting Pro Bowl/All-Pro honors.
IMO Doleman was the better player, quicker, neither one would get into the weight room, but of the two, Doleman did more. He had longer arms. Dent was kind of a weird build, didn't look pretty but did get job done, but I rate Doleman above Dent from what I saw. Doleman once got 4 sacks off Munoz. And got a bunch off Roaf one game, too, four I think, so he did get good games versus the best.
Re: CB chart
I think Parrish and Riley were the best CB combo of the 1970s. It was a bit of a safety's decade, but CBs still mattered. Buchanon and Ellis in GB were good two, but they only had two years and change together. Bengals defense had Bergey and Mike Reid, and they both split after a while. The rest were pedestrian.Bryan wrote:This is sort of a back-handed compliment for Riley. Early in 1976, the Bengals played the Colts and Roger Carr had a huge day against Riley (6-198-3). Carr had two deep TD catches against Riley, and this was big news in NFL circles as Carr was kind of a non-entity and no WR could beat Riley deep. I thought it was interesting that Riley had such a strong reputation among the other NFL players even though he wasn't getting Pro Bowl/All-Pro honors.bachslunch wrote:The elephant in the room is Ken Riley, who has a boatload of career INTs (because he played forever) and almost non-existent honors (1/0/none). I just don’t get why people back him for the HoF, especially over his teammate Parrish. And if one is going to pick a dark-horse low-honors guy, am thinking it should be Lewis. How good was Riley, anyway? Has anyone seen film on him?
I went through the gamebooks years ago and Parrish usually took the tougher receiver on the other team. There were a couple of exceptions. My guess is that Riley got thrown at more and picked off a few. Parrish had very low INT for the era for a few years, perhaps teams weren't trying. The defensive statistics against passes for the Bengals are pretty good over a period of time. A few people decided Riley was better, I guess. Riley has no HOF chance, but that was enough to screw up Parrish's chance.