Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Pete Rozelle was the NFL's commissioner basically all of the 1960's, 70's, and 80's. I wasn't born yet, but it's obvious those were years of huge growth for the league. The merger, the Super Bowl, Monday Night Football, soaring TV ratings...

Paul Tagliabue led the league for the 90's into the 2000's (I was around for these years), and he was inducted into the Hall of Fame this year. What would you credit him for? What got him into the Hall of Fame? Expanding the league to 32 teams? The new stadium boom?

Not being Roger Goodell?

No labour stoppages.

Was he Centennial class? I really disliked that whole thing.

Stonewalling any connection of football to CTE.

Same reason that Bowie Kuhn is in the Baseball HOF, which means I don't have the faintest idea what he's doing there. But I've pretty much given up on halls of fame, anyway. I just don't care who's in or out any more.

rhickok1109 wrote:Same reason that Bowie Kuhn is in the Baseball HOF, which means I don't have the faintest idea what he's doing there. But I've pretty much given up on halls of fame, anyway. I just don't care who's in or out any more.

Agreed. It's so watered down now.

I find it interesting how some fans react to their favorite player getting in or not getting in, as if the induction is somehow affirming their fandom.

Get chosen as Commissioner = Get into the HOF, at least that's how I see it. As I heard it Labor peace was largely the driver, whether you think that's sufficient enough is in the eye of the beholder, ironically we may be looking at the first truncated season since 1987 this year.

What is / was interesting / different about him was that he was the first non-Football guy. Yes Rozelle was a PR guy and not a Football guy in the way Bert Bell was but going back to USF he was always in Football.

I'd imagine - and I know it will distress many to hear it - that in 20 years we'll be hearing why Roger Goodell belongs in the Hall.

rhickok1109 wrote:Same reason that Bowie Kuhn is in the Baseball HOF, which means I don't have the faintest idea what he's doing there. But I've pretty much given up on halls of fame, anyway. I just don't care who's in or out any more.

That is how many people feel now. Many people get aggravated when their guy doesn't get in but your guy did get in and they perceive their guy to have been better than your guy. These people will usually declare the HOF is a joke.

There is a guy elsewhere on the internet who got mad when Eddie DeBartolo got in and then he totally gave up on the PFHOF when Jerry Jones was inducted.

The best part about caring who is in are the discussions about the players. Usually these discussions are fine here but they tend to get really annoying elsewhere these days. I don't engage as much now as I did in past years regarding HOF issues.

It is still great for the living members to be inducted because it means more money when signing autographs and stuff like that. It is also good for us for trivia purposes. "This Hall of Famer had three interceptions in . . . Who is he?"

I visited the Baseball Hall of Fame three times as a kid and once as an adult. I went to the PFHOF once as an adult. The plaques and busts were maybe the items I found least interesting. The old uniforms, balls, magazines, videos, etc were the interesting stuff.

JWL wrote:

rhickok1109 wrote:Same reason that Bowie Kuhn is in the Baseball HOF, which means I don't have the faintest idea what he's doing there. But I've pretty much given up on halls of fame, anyway. I just don't care who's in or out any more.

That is how many people feel now. Many people get aggravated when their guy doesn't get in but your guy did get in and they perceive their guy to have been better than your guy. These people will usually declare the HOF is a joke.

There is a guy elsewhere on the internet who got mad when Eddie DeBartolo got in and then he totally gave up on the PFHOF when Jerry Jones was inducted.

The best part about caring who is in are the discussions about the players. Usually these discussions are fine here but they tend to get really annoying elsewhere these days. I don't engage as much now as I did in past years regarding HOF issues.

It is still great for the living members to be inducted because it means more money when signing autographs and stuff like that. It is also good for us for trivia purposes. "This Hall of Famer had three interceptions in . . . Who is he?"

I visited the Baseball Hall of Fame three times as a kid and once as an adult. I went to the PFHOF once as an adult. The plaques and busts were maybe the items I found least interesting. The old uniforms, balls, magazines, videos, etc were the interesting stuff.

I don't quibble much about who should be in and who shouldn't be in. I do, of course, have some opinions but I reognize them as my opinions and I realize that, in most cases, it's rather subjective.

But I really don't like the way the whole process of nomination and election is set up and I especially don't like the current overemphasis on electing contributors. As far as I'm concerned, there are far too many contributors in already and the number is going to increase, at the expense of former players, for the foreseeable future.

I can foresee a time when every owner of any team and every GM of every championship team will be in Canton.