Quote:
Originally Posted by NastyEllEssWon
now that brings up another question....should players that produced year after year after year, broke records but never won the big show be in the HOF.....like marino????
|
This will always be an issue when discussing HOF entries. They said the same thing about A-Rod (pre-steroid scandal) because he's had such a remarkable career but no WS rings.
It's a mixed opinion.
IMO, a hall of famer is someone who changed the game for either their team and/or sport. Lawrence Taylor is a perfect example... offenses changed strategies when they were facing him and he STILL had a remarkable career, though his performance was probably due to coke rage
. Even if you took his 'stats' out, he was still a dominant presence on the field for his team, and against the opposition. If Big Ben had another concussion that forces him to quit lets say this year, he will without a doubt be in the HOF because he led the Steelers to multiple titles without the Marino/Favre career statistics. Though, Marino is a good exception because he had such a stellar career. Lindros was a beast, and IMO he deserves to be in the HOF, but I picture him to be the type to get into the HOF when hes in his 60's
So, to answer your question Nasty, I think championships are a bonus to being inducted into the HOF, but there are those select few players that had such an outstanding career that they will get in there with or without championships.