Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

dude, seriously. brunell was a consistant starter for 8 seasons, the rest of the time he was a backup. read what im saying 15+ YEARS AS A CONSISTANT STARTER, A CAREER STARTING QB. not a guy who started a few years then bounced around for 8 seasons. and if you havent notived, manning and brady have played for 15 years yet. no aikmen didnt play 15 years but was a career starter. as i said, unitas was a good qb but his last four seasons playing mop up duty brought his rating way down. this argument, which you dont seem to be getting the hang of, is not the point of this thread. so if you want to keep arguing this point, then go somewhere else.

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

dave kreig was not a 15 year starter. you keep missing that point. i mean a consistent starter like brady, manning, favre, tarkenton aikmen. he may have started 175 games but thats out of 288 potential games over an 18 career. and unitas started in an era when teams were run first also. also the last 6 seasons unitas played were very forgettable as he no longer was the starter and his poor ratings from those years brought down his overall rating. what i really said was that generally if a qb has a poor rating its because he was a poor qb. get over this dude.

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

thanks dolemite, at least someone in here can see through the massive cloud of hype surrounding deion sanders.

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

see now you're so far removed from my original comment about qb rating that i will have say it again. i said if romo or rodgers or flacco were to play 15+ years as a starter and finish with a better qb rating than manning or brady, i would agree that they were better qb's.

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

and you can tout the all-pro award all you want. i still dont care what a bunch of reporters think. they may give out the mvp but they get that wrong also from time to time. its a popularity contest. i can think of at least two times manning won the mvp and was outperformed by someone else. deion was a media darling. he was in all kinds of commercials, dancing and talking about himself in third person. they crammed him down our throats for 5 years. of course the media would give him the award. the media loved him. that still doesnt make him one of the best all time. he was a good man cover guy, notorious for taking too many chances and avoiding physcal play. he ran back a comdined 10 kicks for TD's but more often than not, only managed a couple yards per try. he didnt help on run support, played crap zone coverage and was an even worse WR (so dont even play that card, there are fullbacks with more receptions than him).

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

actually gannon isnt even who i meant to say, i meant to say jeff george. but to kook's points, i did say 15+ years as a starter. gannon was only a true starter for 4 seasons.

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

oh no i replied about gannon. you didnt see it, go back and look for it. i also love how you declare things to be fact. "fact, its common knowlegde". the fact is that the all-pro has a first team and second team. thats the only fact there. 200 is an exaggeration, yes, but still 25 positions and 4 players per, potentially.

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

technically 4 players from each position can make the all-pro team as there are two teams and often multiple players chosen at each spot for both teams. and the pro bowl is by no means a measure of how good a player is. yes its an honor but look at the busters who make the pro bowl every year simply because they are fan favorites. and as i said, reporters are the ones who chose the all-pro team. and while reporters also chose the mvp, at least that award only goes to one player per year for their accomplishments. now if a panel of players, coaches and owners were to chose the all-pro with the media, i would say it has some meaning. but you're saying the media know whats right, c'mon, how many things are they wrong about on a regular basis. these are the same sports writers and analysts who said jamarcus russell should be the number 1 pick.

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

well the mvp is given to one player not 200 so that would be difference number 1...... also all-pro can mean second team all-pro. glad you ignored your chance to google it. but what does the mvp have to do with anything anyway? did sanders win an mvp while we were arguing?

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

oh and i forgot to mention that the all-pro teams are chosen by sports writers. not players, not coaches, not owners, not fans but sports writers.

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

so sanders won an award for one good year that he had, that 35 other players have also one (15 of whom are not in the HOF) and he was awarded another award 6 times that is also given to roughly 200 players per year. thats the argument we're going with?

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

i do know quite a bit actually. did you know its given to not one player at each position but often two and thats just the first team all-pro. the second team all-pro is the runner/runners up at each position. so actually, its potentially given to 4 players per year at each position. since both of you refuse to research the topic, it's making it quite easy to argue with you.

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

i did read all of it. you said DPOY and 6 time all pro was enough for you to give him the nod. i just told you the facts of that award. as for the all-pro award, who really cares? its not even an official NFL award on top of the fact that its awarded to what, 100 players per year?

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

DPOY doesnt get you into the HOF either. it just means you had one good year. from 1971 to 1999, out of all the players who won DPOY 15 are not in the HOF. I stopped at 99 because after that, all the winners are not yet eligible for the HOF. thats more than half. so does the DPOY still count as a qualifier for the HOF?

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

and how many seasons did gannon start in the nfl? because part of what i said was if those players finished 15+ seasons as a STARTER and had better ratings than manning or similar guys, then i would say they were better.

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

its the same thing over and over. "i'm right because i say i'm right and because other people agree with me". an opinion doesn't become fact until you prove it to be correct and you continue to fail at doing so. i already countered your point about shutdown corners not getting tackles because the receivers dont get thrown to or because they're too busy covering WR to tackle RB's. remember? the point i made about Revis racking up 230 tackles in 4 seasons? he's a shutdown corner who gets tackles. point made. and even if tackling is only 25% of a DB's game, should a guy who's only good at 75% of his job get to be recognized as one of the best all time? so unless you're willing to acknowledge the FACTS of my argument and stop touting your opinion as fact, then go away. i'm done arguing with you.

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

your overall point, just the same as everyone else's, is that shining in one half of his game outweighs a glaring hole in the other half of his game and that simply isn't so. i am of the belief that to get into the HOF, you should shine in all aspects of your game. that's what makes you the best, and being the best is what the HOF is all about. being good at one half your job while sucking at the other half should not get you into the HOF. that is the bottom line of this debate. what kills me is that most everyone seems to agree that he did suck at one half of his game. everyone seems to think that because he was fast and ran in some punts for TD's he should be in the HOF. thats like saying rich gannon should be in the hall because he had a huge arm. yeah he was good at one part of his game but not so good at the rest.

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

you still keep trying to make me believe i am wrong with no facts to support your argument. i posted my opinion on this thread supported by tangible facts. your job is to convince me that i am wrong using facts to show me my error. all you're doing is yelling about how wrong i am and that i'm stupid because i wont agree with you. there is no logic in your approach. if you could show me where sanders was a great tackler who could play the run as well as the pass, and who helped out all over the field, i would believe you and say you were right. but you can't, because he wasn't.

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

i would argue that you can, in large part determine tackling ability by the amount of tackles. i do understand that a CB is focused on the WR but it's also his job to watch the play unfold and to know where the ball is. being focused on the WR is no excuse for allowing a RB to run in a long TD. everyone seems to agree that revis is a great shutdown corner correct? well he has posted 230 tackles in 4 seasons, thats nearly half the amount sanders posted in his career. so revis would be a shutdown corner who is also a great tackler.

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

im not sure what you call it makes a difference. what i had said is that qb rating is the most accurate stat by which performance can be judged. show me a game where a qb put up a sub 50 rating but still had a good game. or season for that matter. generally speaking, if a qb has a poor rating it's because he is a poor qb.

Posted Thursday January 27, 2011, About: Deion Sanders should NOT be in the Hall of Fame.

as i said before, if tackling isnt a huge part of a DB's job then howcome most all the best DB's in history and in present are better tacklers or have more tackles than sanders?