GA_Eagle

They get this done: Super Bowl Champs. Book It.

A couple of things. -He's giving an interview. He answered honestly how he felt. Its not like he walked up to a podium and started calling folks out. What he said wasn't revolutionary or anything new. -He did something stupid for sure, but its not like he stole the car or hurt anyone. He didn't get his car registered or insured. Big woop. Also, I take a gun in may car sometimes, depending on where I'm going. Another big woop. My bigger issue with Coffee is taking the money and running. If you really believe its poison you give it all back. Sure he didn't return and therefore missed out on a lot of money in the long run, but he made a lot of money too for very little production

There are an awful lot of bad Beatles songs. Lots of filler in some of those albums. Prolly Revolution 9

A ring. I would say thats far less important to any player that's not a QB. They might help a little for sure, but unless its a QB I'm not gonna say that its all that important. Brooks has a nice thing over Thomas though. His defense was dominant throughout much of his career and he was the unofficial leader of it, so it would actually help his case. I just don't think the first ballot is for him due to a number of factors. He plays a position that doesn't get flashy stats. Its almost like putting a FB in in the first ballot. Its not likely in this era. And for him there is something else, other guys play "his position" in that there are a bunch of different types of linebackers and many of them DO get flashy stats, even if they are middle linebackers or play in 3-4, and he'll probably get measure against them, which is too bad since its really a completely different type of player. There is already a long line of worthy players in front of him, as well which certainly doesn't help. I'd say he has an outside shot at the first ballot, but a definite shot of getting in sooner or later.

More like it. Neither of these numbers makes a player transcendent though. Even when viewed together. I want first ballot guys to be in the best ever argument, especially at a position other than QB where they let everyone in right away. Is Brooks in your best ever arguments?

Huh? He either is or isn't a first ballot guy. I never said he shouldn't be in the hall. But I agree with Bruschi that the first ballot isn't a likely spot for him. If there are more deserving in front of him then he isn't a first ballot guy. He will be compared to his predecessors at the position. Its not avoidable. He will be compared to those others who are eligible. not avoidable. He will be compared to all other members of the hall to determine how eligible he is. not avoidable. I dunno where you are going with the no other LB after LT comment. that doesn't even make sense. Tim Brown hasn't made it to the hall yet, he obviously isn't a first ballot guy. I dunno where that's relevant to your argument since it just proves that great players don't always make it on their first try. I got some beter ones than that though. Cris Carter and Dermontti Dawson didn't make it their first try. Then guys like Madden, Ogden, Sapp, Roaf, Will Sheilds will all be eligible by the time Brooks is to create a bigger logjam. Reference to the sacks: it certainly doesn't help his first ballot case. Where are his prestigious numbers? Ammassed tackle totals. Great. Gimme something else to make him a first balloter.

sure is slow for NFL news these days. I want the NFL to get back to business.

Don't forget about all other eligible players. Here are this year's finalists: hannon Sharpe – Tight End – 1990-99, 2002-03 Denver Broncos, 2000-01 Baltimore Ravens<--2011 Inductee Jerome Bettis– Running Back – 1993-95 Los Angeles/St. Louis Rams, 1996-2005 Pittsburgh Steelers Tim Brown – Wide Receiver/Kick Returner – 1988-2003 Los Angeles/Oakland Raiders, 2004 Tampa Bay Buccaneers Cris Carter – Wide Receiver – 1987-89 Philadelphia Eagles, 1990-2001 Minnesota Vikings, 2002 Miami Dolphins Dermontti Dawson– Center – 1988-2000 Pittsburgh Steelers Richard Dent – Defensive End – 1983-1993, 1995 Chicago Bears, 1994 San Francisco 49ers, 1996 Indianapolis Colts, 1997 Philadelphia Eagles<--2011 inductee Chris Doleman– Defensive End/Linebacker – 1985-1993, 1999 Minnesota Vikings, 1994-95 Atlanta Falcons, 1996-98 San Francisco 49ers Marshall Faulk – Running Back – 1994-98 Indianapolis Colts, 1999-2005 St. Louis Rams<--2011 inductee Charles Haley – Defensive End/Linebacker – 1986-1991, 1999 San Francisco 49ers, 1992-96 Dallas Cowboys *Chris Hanburger– Linebacker – 1965-1978 Washington Redskins<--2011 inductee Cortez Kennedy– Defensive Tackle – 1990-2000 Seattle Seahawks Curtis Martin – Running Back – 1995-97 New England Patriots, 1998-2005 New York Jets Andre Reed – Wide Receiver – 1985-1999 Buffalo Bills, 2000 Washington Redskins *Les Richter – Linebacker – 1954-1962 Los Angeles Rams<--2011 inductee Willie Roaf– Tackle – 1993-2001 New Orleans Saints, 2002-05 Kansas City Chiefs Ed Sabol– Founder/President/Chairman – 1964-1995 NFL Films<--2011 inductee Deion Sanders – Cornerback/Kick Returner/Punt Returner – 1989-1993 Atlanta Falcons, 1994 San Francisco 49ers, 1995-99 Dallas Cowboys, 2000 Washington Redskins, 2004-05 Baltimore Ravens<--2011 inductee try and figure out who will still be around when Brooks is eligible, not to mention the ones who will be new between now and then.

Sandlot in any lower tier

I don't think its all that stupid. Thats the way the Hall works. Its not fair but what do you want? He's not a QB or a RB. He plays defense and not at a flashy position where he can amass stats like sacks or ints. His chances of being in the first ballot are diminished. Guys like Chris Hanburger have similar stats and all pro and pro bowl numbers and had to wait 20+ years after. He likely won't wait that long but it just shows that its a tough position to even make the hall at, let alone be a first ballot guy. I'm aware he was an all pro linebacker and he amassed a worthless stat like tackles, which is often misrepresented. At least two other guys were on a similar tackling pace in his era, though they didn't start as many games. Nor did they play for such a high profile defense with multiple other future hall of famers. He will be measured against all previous members of his position AND every other position, so I don't see how this a stupid argument. The commitee is going to say "How does he measure up against the best ever at his position?" if he is worthy then they are going to say "How does he measure up against ALL other first ballot guys?" "How does he measure up to currently eligible players?" etc etc etc. So looking at the track record of his position and trying to see what the committee looks for in a first ballot guy at his position is far from stupid, imo. He's not a member of the 20-20 club. This is a big knock since his claim to fame is being an all around linebacker. Yet he never reached the milestone that the best all around guys hope to get. He will be measured against guys like Ray Lewis even though Ray played in the middle, people will say "Now that's what a first ballot LB looks like." I don't really buy this "changing the game" argument. I think the Tampa 2 was a fad that couldn't work for everyone. He changed the way teams looked at LB for about 4 seasons and then they realized that the Tampa 2 was figured out except for a few very sharp defensive minds with the right talent on the team and that installing it was probably not worth it. Its not like he was the special player that helped 3-4 come into existence at the pro level (btw, Curley Culp isn't in the Hall.)

There are 2 first ballot 4-3 OLBers in the hall and Chuck Bednarik is just as well known for being a MLB as he is for playing SAM and center. The other is Jam Ham. I just don't see any way Brooks measures up to those two for football legacy. Its tough to get in as a 4-3 olb at all. I think there are 6 or 7 in the hall and some of them weren't strictly 4-3 guys or also played MLB, sometimes in their best years. Its also tough to bet a first ballot nod on defense.

hmmm. ok why not. sign me up.

really.

This isn't going to work.

I think you need to not be a 4-3 OLB to be a first ballot hofer. edit: sweet, I got negged for this.

Always thought this was a chill song. Like the take what comes message.

Hendrix/Beck

Reeses

Zappa Allman

not even a second thought with these two matches.

I can think of only one director I'd want to replace Nolan, and that is Aronofsky. He backed out of Wolverine recently for personal reasons, and I'm pretty disappointed by that. I would've liked to've seen what he did with that.

I think you're missing the point. Its not what you're saying, exactly, its how you say it. Believe me you're not the only one who runs into this, on both sides of the argument. Putting down others' opinions in a matter of fact way is off putting and it doesn't lend any credence to your argument back on point, we're splitting hairs on a lot of guitarists, here. You have to remember that most (all) of these guys are pretty damn talented. And they are, for the most part, attempting to appeal to as many people as possible. So even if technical prowess etc is greater for the less popular guitarist, popularity and appealing music defintely needs to count towards greatness, imo.

Hmmm. so now that we've got credentials and mudslinging out of the way, back to Knopfler vs Van Halen. I do tend to agree with Silentaway about Knopfler. It really is a tough call between the two, imo. Van Halen really is a guitar icon, and part of being the "greatest" imo opinion is appealing to the masses even if the majority of those people have never picked up a guitar for more than merely fiddling with it. Knopfler is a tough to sell to anyone who's only experience with him is the three radio hits that Dire Straits still has on classic rock stations.

went knopfler, mostly because I wanted to give a shout out to him, since I think he's awesome but I knew he didn't stand a chance vs Van Halen.

this.