Hall of Fame

I tend to think that the Hall of Fame has been devalued of late.  I really only pay attention to pro football, but it seems whenever a player is very good, but not special, folks start hyping for "HOF" worthy.  In my opinion, it should be a rare event that all 5 slots are filled each year.

I am now of the age where I have some perspective of the players being elected.  ESPN basically lobbied for Michael Irvin, and it was sickening.  Brett Favre, please.  Favre was NEVER considered even one of the top two QBs playing during any year of his career!  He lost as many games with his gunslinger approach as he won.  I'll give you that he was really fun to watch, but he was never exceptional in the way that Manning, Brady, and even Rogers is now.

So what are appropriate criteria?  I would say there are two areas, excellence and impact.  To be considered for excellence, you would need to be the top player (or second) by consensus at your position for the majority of your career.  For any position - Punter to OLine  (I'm still unsure of long snapper!).

Litmus test:   Brady and Manning - no questions there.  Elway, Marino - obvious.  Emmitt, Barry Sanders, LT,  Prime Time and Charles Woodson,  Ray Lewis and LT , Reed and Palomalu.  No questions.  But McNabb?  Really?

I suggest the candidates be evaluated by position instead of by publicity.  The selectors should be forced to evaluate O-line and D-Line and Linebackers and wideouts for WHO WAS BEST, not just best known.

And Yes, Ray Guy should be in.

The other category is really "fame", or infamy.  Joe Namath was an above average QB, no more.  But the Hall would not be complete without him. Perhaps this is where Favre belongs, in this category.  But Pat Tillman does belong here.  And Lynn Swann.  Not the best, but the story needs to be told.

Just my two cents.

Ron