Questions to be answered by the next person to post in the thread

[Perfxion 0]

Since he broke a rule that would ban him from baseball. I do not think so. But maybe someday they will add him ala Shoe-less Joe when he is long dead and also when Selig and whoever was before him are both dead to prevent protest. Might be the same for Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens.

 

Q: Do you think any players from the "steroid era" get into the Hall? Because the way TV and radio puts it, just about everyone is on some kind of performance enhancers and thus "ruining" the game?

 

Q2: If Steroids are as deadly as it seems in the WWE, and with so many baseball players over the years on the juice, why aren't there as many deaths if any from baseball players as they are wrestlers?

[TheOriginalOrangeGoblin 0]

Since he broke a rule that would ban him from baseball. I do not think so. But maybe someday they will add him ala Shoe-less Joe when he is long dead and also when Selig and whoever was before him are both dead to prevent protest. Might be the same for Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens.

 

Q: Do you think any players from the "steroid era" get into the Hall? Because the way TV and radio puts it, just about everyone is on some kind of performance enhancers and thus "ruining" the game?

 

Q2: If Steroids are as deadly as it seems in the WWE, and with so many baseball players over the years on the juice, why aren't there as many deaths if any from baseball players as they are wrestlers?

I think guys like Ken Griffey Jr., A-Rod and Frank Thomas still get in easily. The only, previously Hall of Fame bound, guys that I think will be hurt are McGwire, Sosa, Bonds and Clemens.

 

And a lot of the wrestler deaths owe just as much, if not more, to painkillers as steroids.

 

If there was a hall of fame vote for every active player in baseball who do you think would be the most unanimous selection at this point in time?

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

Probably A-Rod.

 

There's considerably more factors in wrestling deaths: More time on the road (as opposed to say, 3 or 4 nights in the same city at a time), painkillers as mentioned, I'd think recreational drug use is higher, probably more booze, and a harder job physically. Individually, none of those are too damning, but a combination of them?

[TheDevilAndGodAreRagingInsideMe 0]

I would be shocked if A-Rod, Jeter, Mo Rivera, Randy Johnson, Greg Maddux, Kid Griffey, and Mike Piazza recieved less than 95% of the vote on their first ballot. Rivera especially, now that the way for closers has been paved by Sutter and Gossage, whose vote totals were only in the 80%'s.

 

I really hope MLB and the Hall stick to their guns on the Rose issue, also. All-time hit king or not, the guy a) broke the cardinal rule in baseball that hangs in every clubhouse, b) arrogantly signed his own lifetime ban agreement, assuming they would let him back within a year, and c) denied, denied, denied for 20 years until he finally admitted that he did it...when his book came out. He's a lowlife in my opinion. Sorry, Pete, you blew it on your own.

 

Shoeless Joe is in the same boat. His stats don't seem to show that he threw the 1919 Series, but he did take a few thousand bucks from the mobsters organizing the thing, whether he could read or not.

[Guest Beastalentier]

I was a big supporter of Pete Rose for the longest time, but this legendary player is pond scum. Character is a criterion.

[TheDevilAndGodAreRagingInsideMe 0]

He's only sorry because he got caught - and it cost him everything.

[Mike wanna be 0]

It's the Baseball HoF, not the "Baseball players with good morals" HoF.

[CanadianChris 0]

He'll never get in. I don't think he should, either. He compromised the integrity of the game.

 

Next: Rank the top 5 QBs of all time.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Q: Do you think any players from the "steroid era" get into the Hall? Because the way TV and radio puts it, just about everyone is on some kind of performance enhancers and thus "ruining" the game?

 

I think most of the players who have the numbers will get in eventually, including McGwire, Bonds and Clemens. As time passes, the character of players becomes obscured and the argument rests further and further on their statistics. So many professional athletes have taken some kind of drug that it becomes silly to punish a few.

 

Q2: If Steroids are as deadly as it seems in the WWE, and with so many baseball players over the years on the juice, why aren't there as many deaths if any from baseball players as they are wrestlers?

 

Wrestling's big problem is that the common drug concoction includes or included painkillers and recreational drugs. Baseball had a recreational drug problem in the 80s, but not to the same extent as professional wrestling.

 

To answer the HOF voting question, I think Greg Maddux would draw the highest percentage. No steroid whispers, 347 career wins, if not Maddux then you might as well not have a Hall vote.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Next: Rank the top 5 QBs of all time.

 

You couldn't have asked a more controversial question. We had a whole multi-page trhead about just this a season or two ago. Seems like it comes up every year, actually. But..

 

1. Joe Montana

2. Dan Marino

3. John Elway

4. Brett Favre

5. Tom Brady

 

Last season solidified Brady into the #5 slot for me, by the way. I might've put Peyton, Bart Starr, or Unitas there before. Basically, I put my rankings based on how much of an impact they have had on their team, with how many games they won and championships, TD passes, etc..

 

Also, man, quarterbacking in the 70's sucked. Bradshaw and Tarkenton were the best in that era and they don't compare to the 80's/90's heyday at all.

[Guest Tzar Lysergic]

Fuck fucking Joe Montana.

 

Tom Brady is better than Joe Montana. I've said why I think so before, but I'll do it again for fun.

 

1. Brady is a superior athlete, physically, to Joe Montana. Not a hard argument to make given how the sport has changed.

2. Brady has played on worse teams than Joe Montana. How many HOF players on the Superbowl Niners? How many on the Superbowl Patriots?

3. In 13 full seasons as a starting QB, Montana threw for a little over 40,000 yards and 273 TDs. In 7, Brady is already over 26,000 yards and has thrown 197 TDs. A good season ahead of Montana's pace in yards and LIGHTYEARS ahead in TDs.

4. Montana never had a 4,000 yard season. Brady has already had 2.

5. Montana never really threw downfield consistently. If you want to blame the WC offense on that, then take into account that a SHITLOAD of those 40,000 yards and 273 TDs were created more by tremendous receivers and great coaching. According to the stats I'm looking at, Montana completed 8 passes over 40 yards, all with the Chiefs. Brady had 15 last season!

6. Montana won four superbowls. Brady already has three, and has played in four. Both have 2 SB MVP awards. I call that even where Superbowls are concerned. As dumb as this sounds on paper, Superbowl wins are really a pretty overrated stat when judging QBs. Are Terry Bradshaw or Jim Plunkett better QBs than Marino because of it? I don't think so. QB may be the most important position on the team, but a great running game and great defense (both of which the Niners had) mean just as much.

 

Don't believe me? Then why did Marino never win a SB?

 

In terms of how effective they were at their position, Brady has to be better than Montana, unless you're wanting to argue about "intangibles."

[TheOriginalOrangeGoblin 0]

Here's a question that could be fun:

 

Who will be considered the better player once they both retire: Kobe or LeBron?

[Red Baron 0]

LeBron. As much as good is Kobe is, Kobe is not a good team-mate at all.

 

 

What is your favourite mascot incident?

[King Kamala 0]

My favorite mascot incident is probably Randall Simon whacking one of the racing sausages at Miller Park with his bat a couple years back. That fight earlier this week between two college mascots where one mascot ripped off the "head" of the other was pretty insane too. Those guys were really going at it.

[CanadianChris 0]

Two come to mind:

 

1) Darryl Sutter ripping out the tongue of Harvey the Hound.

 

2) At the Churchill Bowl (Canadian university football semifinals) ten years ago, Ottawa was playing Waterloo. Waterloo had the ball near the end of the first half. The Waterloo QB threw a pass to a wide-open receiver...who ran into the Ottawa mascot, who had wandered onto the field. The mascot was flagged for pass interference , and Waterloo went on to score a TD on the possession.

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

Wasn't it MacT who ripped Harvey's tongue out?

[CanadianChris 0]

You're right. Still funny, though.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Fuck fucking Joe Montana.

 

Tom Brady is better than Joe Montana. I've said why I think so before, but I'll do it again for fun.

This is a good argument, but I'll give you that Brady might be better than Montana, and that history has been a better judge of Montana, however, just to play devil's advocate...

1. Brady is a superior athlete, physically, to Joe Montana. Not a hard argument to make given how the sport has changed.

Can't argue that.

2. Brady has played on worse teams than Joe Montana. How many HOF players on the Superbowl Niners? How many on the Superbowl Patriots?

This argument could be made for the 2001 Patriots, and maybe the 2002 Patriots (who didn't even make the playoffs). Montana played for the 79 Niners who went 2-14, and then in 1980 who went 6-10, and then promptly won the Super bowl next season in `81, his first full season as a starter.

 

3. In 13 full seasons as a starting QB, Montana threw for a little over 40,000 yards and 273 TDs. In 7, Brady is already over 26,000 yards and has thrown 197 TDs. A good season ahead of Montana's pace in yards and LIGHTYEARS ahead in TDs.

4. Montana never had a 4,000 yard season. Brady has already had 2.

5. Montana never really threw downfield consistently. If you want to blame the WC offense on that, then take into account that a SHITLOAD of those 40,000 yards and 273 TDs were created more by tremendous receivers and great coaching. According to the stats I'm looking at, Montana completed 8 passes over 40 yards, all with the Chiefs. Brady had 15 last season!

Completely different era. Marino's records are being shattered left and right this day and age, and Marino had little competition in his era; and that's largely attributed to the fact he had no running game or defense (which is why, as you mention later, he never won a Super Bowl). The rules against the passing game are a hell of a lot easier these days, plus the defense played in Montana's heyday is infinitely harder than the bullshit New England runs up against in Brady's day. Miami? Buffalo? The Jets? The toughest opponents the Pats have had during their run are the Colts and Steelers, the former who only recently got a defense, and the latter who never mustered much resistance to the Patriots, particularly in the postseason. Montana played against the Ditka Bears, the first Gibbs-era Redskins, the Roger Staubach/Doomsday Defense Cowboys (and later an early version of the Aikman/Smith/Irvin Cowboys, albeit briefly), and the Bill Parcells/Bill Belichick Giants led by Lawrence Taylor. The NFC in the 80's was a total arms race, with the majority of the league left in the monsters' wake. You just simply can't compare the stats, even if you'll argue (and I'll largely agree with this on you) that Montana's stats are a product of the system. But, conversely, Brady's stats could be construed as a product of New England's system, the era he plays in, and his offensive line, which will most likely feature just as many HOFs as the Niners in the 80's.

In regards to your last point, I don't know nor care about how many times Montana threw downfield compared to Brady. That has nothing to do with how good a quarterback is, otherwise Jeff Blake would be one of the better quarterbacks ever, since that was all he could pretty much do. A more accurate barometer would be yards per completion. Even with the WC offense, Montana averaged 11.9 Y/C throughout his career, 12.0 with the Niners and 11.3 with the Chiefs. Brady, throughout his six seasons as a starter, has managed three seasons completing over 12 Y/C. Montana did it eight times, and we're keeping in mind the WC offense here; one could argue that Brady actually plays in an even more "dink and dunk" system than Montana did. That changed last season, though.

 

6. Montana won four superbowls. Brady already has three, and has played in four. Both have 2 SB MVP awards. I call that even where Superbowls are concerned. As dumb as this sounds on paper, Superbowl wins are really a pretty overrated stat when judging QBs. Are Terry Bradshaw or Jim Plunkett better QBs than Marino because of it? I don't think so. QB may be the most important position on the team, but a great running game and great defense (both of which the Niners had) mean just as much.

 

And it's entirely possible that Brady may never win another one ever again. I think Brady will eventually surpass Montana, but it's too early to judge at this point, much like you could say for the HOFs on the team, since I believe the Patriots will eventually come up with just as many HOFs. Randy Moss? Corey Dillon? Tedy Bruschi, Mike Vrabel, maybe even young guys like Ben Watson and Laurence Maroney, and certainly much of the offensive line.

[Jorge Gorgeous 0]

Bruschi? Vrabel? HOF? This man says no!

[Guest Vitamin X]

Okay, maybe that's a bit of a reach, but there are a good number of guyson the Pats who are HOF-bound outside of the obvious (Seau and Harrison).

[Guest Tzar Lysergic]

Speaking of the Hall of Fame, why the fuck are no punters in there?

[Guest Vitamin X]

Sean Landeta, Jeff Feagles, and Ray Guy should get in one of these days. Maybe. Who knows.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Speaking of the Hall of Fame, why the fuck are no punters in there?

How important is a specialist in the grand scheme of things?

[TheDevilAndGodAreRagingInsideMe 0]

I would figure that you are hall of fame worthy if you are considered one of the best ever at your position.

[Guest Tzar Lysergic]

How important is a specialist in the grand scheme of things?

 

Ask Scott Norwood.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Speaking of the Hall of Fame, why the fuck are no punters in there?

How important is a specialist in the grand scheme of things?

 

To put it in a perspective you might better understand, what's the value of a relief pitcher in baseball or a good bench in basketball? Extremely important, or as Agent put it, ask Scott Norwood.

 

Punting can win or lose a game. For reference, see the Green Bay Packers/Chicago Bears second game from this past season in Chicago. The punting turned what otherwise might have been just a close loss or whatever into an absolute blowout. Several other games, particularly defensively minded ones, are won entirely on special teams, and having a punter that can kill the ball when you have an ineffective offense (or are up against an amazing defense) is very helpful, and can be the difference in a game.

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

I would figure that you are hall of fame worthy if you are considered one of the best ever at your position.

 

Spot on. On that note, since I think "Who's the most deserving not in the Hall" was already asked, who's the least deserving player that is in? Any sport.

[CanadianChris 0]

The answer has to come from baseball. Al would probably have a better idea, but I would say Rabbit Maranville.

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

The answer has to come from baseball. Al would probably have a better idea, but I would say Rabbit Maranville.

Who?

 

Hey, that means it's a good answer.

[Slayer 0]

Speaking of the Hall of Fame, why the fuck are no punters in there?

Can you actually name a HOF quality punter?

 

I can barely name any actual HOF O-Linemen (who could easily compete with punters for anonymity), much less potential HOFers