|
|
Tuesday, May 19th, 2009
| |
11:38 pm - A trivial question - answered
|
About a week ago, I asked what the following dates were:
* 6 September 1880
* 10 July 1884
* 21 July 1884
* 1 June 1899
* 29 June 1899
* 29 May 1902
* 3 July 1902
* 5 June 2003
* 8 July 2009 (Assumed)
The answer is ( Read more... )
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| Tuesday, May 12th, 2009
| |
10:10 pm - A trivia question
|
What are the following dates:- 6 September 1880
- 10 July 1884
- 21 July 1884
- 1 June 1899
- 29 June 1899
- 29 May 1902
- 3 July 1902
- 5 June 2003
- 8 July 2009 (Assumed)
|
|
(6 comments | comment on this)
|
| Tuesday, April 21st, 2009
| |
10:18 am - Pure Genius...
|
From a competition to design a t-shirt based on Neil Gaiman's work (more details here), a brewer's badge for Shoggoth's Old (Very) Peculiar
|
|
(5 comments | comment on this)
|
| Monday, September 15th, 2008
| |
8:08 pm - House
|
|
| Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008
| |
8:55 pm - Today, I received...
|
|
| Saturday, August 30th, 2008
| |
5:44 pm - Giggage
|
So, for all you ardent music fans out there, that are in or near Reading, Very Short Pier are playing the Bar Risa (Jongleurs comedy club place on Friar street, by McDonalds) tomorrow night - doors at 7pm, 3 quid to get in, we're on from about 8:30
We also have a gig at the Cellar Bar in Bracknell (in the South Hill Arts Centre) on Tuesday 16th September. Doors around 8, not sure when we're actually on, and a fiver to blag your way in
Hope to see some of you there...
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| Tuesday, August 19th, 2008
| |
8:53 am - So...
|
...while I was out to lunch yesterday, I spotted a couple of these new Traffic Enforcement cars near by Trafalgar square. Little smart cars with what looks like a camera of some sort on a pole, sticking out of the roof, decaled up with CCTV and the little traffic enforcement signs. I didn't really take much notice of them until we walked back past them, having eaten, and they were still sat in the same place.
On a double yellow line.
How ironic.
It was suggested that I took a photo, but I decided not to, so you will have to take my word for it.
However, on my way back to Paddington that evening, I saw the following on Spring Street
Clicky
Clicky
Click
|
|
(1 comment | comment on this)
|
| Friday, July 25th, 2008
| |
12:34 am - Pimping
|
So, the band (www.veryshortpier.com) wot I am in are playing a gig, on radio, this Saturday (which, erm, means tomorrow, really)
You can listen via the magic of the interwebarnets, by going to http://www.spinfm.co.uk/, and clicking the 'Listen Now' link. We're on Alan & Kim's LiveLoft, 16:00 to 19:00. We should be on in the first hour or so
Give it a listen - you might even enjoy it :)
|
|
(3 comments | comment on this)
|
| Friday, April 25th, 2008
| |
5:22 pm - Lootaz
|
|
| Tuesday, June 19th, 2007
| |
9:41 pm - Dark Angels
|
So, I'm running a small campaign featuring my Dark Angels, fighting off Dan's orkses. In order to write up the army lists for this little adventure, I decided to just get all of my dark angels out, cost them out, and then assemble lists from these building blocks (rather than, for example, trying to fit models into different configurations).
Um, anyway, while I had everything out, I decided to take a few piccies and show them off to you fine people.
( Pretty, pretty piccies )
|
|
(5 comments | comment on this)
|
| Friday, June 8th, 2007
| |
2:15 pm - Storm of Vengeance
|
Okay, mostly for Dan, Stu, Rob, here are my quick thoughts on timings for a Piscina V campaign weekend:
Game 1 - 750 points Friday 7-8 pm
Game 2 - 500 points Friday 8-9 pm
Game 3 - 750 points Friday 9-10 pm
Game 4 - 1500 points Saturday 10 am-12 pm
Game 5 - 500 points Saturday 1-2 pm
Game 6 - 1000 points Saturday 2-3:30 pm
Game 7 - 1500 points Saturday 4-6 pm
Game 8 - 1500 points Saturday 8-10 pm
Game 9 - 1500 points Sunday
This gives us quite a lot of flex, though with the last three games all being at least full-sized, if not bigger, I'd worry a little if we had two to get through on Sunday. I'd like the last game, in particular, to be bigger than 1500 (it's the final assault on Koth Ridge), but I'm not sure how viable that is when we're limited to 6' of boards. We can either try to sort something interesting out, or just admit we're limited.
Problem areas are probably starting on Friday, though those timings could all stand to go back an hour (finishing at 11 isn't unreasonable), and maybe that Game 4 kicking off on time. I've tried to allow time for feeding, but that isn't set in stone.
On the whole, it seems pretty good to me, though there is the possibility there for a couple of late finishes, particularly on the Friday.
Thoughts?
|
|
(5 comments | comment on this)
|
| Sunday, April 22nd, 2007
| |
10:28 pm - Draft talk
|
Okay, let's talk about the niners draft needs and prospects.
First of all, let's mention some assumptions. First, that you're basically only talking day one for starters, and starters are all we're interested in. Also, this is a two/three year view - not what is wanted this year to compete ("Playoffs? Playoffs?").
So, with that in mind, what are the niners choices? We've got the 11th pick in the first, 10th pick in the second, and the 12th and 34th pick in the third. Also of interest is that we have four picks in the fourth (5, 11, 25 & 36), so moving up to get another pick in the third is not beyond the realms of possibility. Having said that, more depth is always good, so keeping all the fourth-rounders and hoping one of them hits as a starter isn't unreasonable.
Finally, what are our needs? Well, we're set at QB (no matter what his faults, Alex is getting at least a couple more years), RB, FB, TE and most of the way across the offensive line. WR is a big, big hole. We could also do with some depth at RB, particularly in the way of a 3rd down style back to spell Frank. Depth along the line would be nice (Larry Allen ain't getting any younger), but with a move from smaller to bigger along the line, that may be a difficult thing to find lower down.
The defense is murkier, though. The back four are reasonably set, but we may be looking at CB (Harris is a 12 year vet, and is going to be slowing down in the next two or three years). The front seven, on the other hand, is way less certain. We are transitioning to a 3-4 (as we tried last year, but gave up about halfway through the year), and the only position that seems to be set is OLB. Young needs a replacement at DE, looking at spelling him this year, through to an outright replacement in the next couple of years. We picked up the Ravens' backup NT in free agency, but another body there is going to be essential. These may be the same person, but it doesn't seem likely. Finally, our middle linebackers aren't really suited to the 3-4 (come to that, they aren't really suited to a 4-3, or possibly even the sport of football), so that's a pretty big hole. However, 3-4 ILBs are pretty one-dimensional, so a one-dimensional player is easier to find outside of the first round.
Okay, now we have a basic rundown, how can we fill these holes? Well, the most difficult hole is the defensive line. There are only so many big guys around, and everybody wants them. This has to be our main focus, and it looks like there may even be some choice this year, with a lot of big guys looking the part (Branch, Carriker, Okoye). Placed 11th, this looks like a good spot.
Second round has a lot of options. Either CB or WR would be good, though an ILB would be an option. Basically, between the three picks in the second and third, we need those three positions. The four picks in the fourth are looking good for line depth, both offensive and defensive, as well as that backup running back. I'd expect us to take another WR here, as well.
We end up with a 5th and a 6th, but I don't expect a lot of fireworks here. I really do expect a little trading with those third and fourth round picks, probably ending up with us taking one less player overall.
Final analysis? Maybe one player on defense that can help us this year, but filling a few holes for 2008 would be nice
|
|
(comment on this)
|
| Wednesday, February 7th, 2007
| |
10:57 pm - Tattoos
|
Recently, on the warhammer forums (www.warhammer.org.uk), someone posted requesting Dark Angels art so he could get a tattoo done. Obviously, some people needed to weigh in, saying don't get a tattoo done, followed by others, suggesting people mind their own business. Below is the response from the first poster telling everyone else never to get a tattoo
Thanks for the advice. Obviously I feel differently. One of my friends had to have his tattoos removed after he got married and had children - otherwise on the beach he had to keep his clothes on. I appreciate that his tattoos would not have looked as nice as professional ones, after all they were done in prison, with ink pushed into the skin with a needle. Still a very stupid thing to do, as you have to live with them for the rest of your life.
On the other hand the [bip] liked them. People with tattoos were first into the gas chambers and their skins used to make lampshades.
Now, apart from the gratuitous nazis reference (which the forum auto-censored), thus killing the thread deader than godwin, I couldn't help feeling he'd drawn the wrong life lesson from this little experience.
Specifically, rather than inveighing against all tattoos, wouldn't he be better off advising strangers on the internet not to get sent to jail since, apart from everything else that can go wrong, you also get really, really bad tattoos.
|
|
(3 comments | comment on this)
|
| Thursday, January 25th, 2007
| |
6:56 pm
|
|
| Tuesday, December 12th, 2006
| |
9:11 pm - Lost and the Damned Army list
|
|
| Monday, November 27th, 2006
| |
12:20 am - Um
|
I just came second at the UKGT...
...okay, technically just the qualifiers but, still, second :)
|
|
(3 comments | comment on this)
|
| Tuesday, October 24th, 2006
| |
5:18 pm - Warfare
|
200o points!
Who's coming?
http://www.readingwargames.co.uk/
18th & 19th November
A tenner
I'm sending off for tickets tomorrow (assuming I remember) - if you want one, let me know in a comment here, or some other method I'm likely to see. I probably won't do it until around four or so, so you have time to give me an answer.
PS - I'm taking orkses
|
|
(5 comments | comment on this)
|
| Wednesday, October 18th, 2006
| |
3:15 pm - Bwah-ha!
|
|
| Friday, October 13th, 2006
| |
5:22 pm - Football related musings
|
So, recently on Football Outsiders, there was a discussion about whether or not Randy Moss was deserving of the Hall of Fame. My gut reactions was "No", though opinion on the boards seemed to be fairly divided. However, my next thought was, if Randy Moss isn't good enough, who is? Imagine my surprise when I realised that, past a couple of very obvious choices, I didn't really know where my cut-off point lies.
This, then, is a bit of discussion and analysis about what a receiver is going to have to do to get into the Hall of Fame.
Let's start with the current occupants (in date order)
Elroy (Crazylegs) Hirsch (also HB) 1946-1956
Dante Lavelli 1946-1956
Pete Pihos 1947-1955
Tom Fears 1948-1956
Raymond Berry 1955-1967
Tommy McDonald 1957-1968
Bobby Mitchell (also HB) 1958-1968
Don Maynard 1958, 1960-1973
Lance Alworth 1962-1972
Charley Taylor (also HB) 1964-1975, 1977
Paul Warfield 1964-1977
Fred Biletnikoff 1965-1978
Charlie Joiner 1969-1986
John Stallworth 1974-1987
Lynn Swann 1974-1982
Steve Largent 1976-1989
James Lofton 1978-1993
Now, apart from Crazylegs, I don't know any of the names before Don Maynard. Alworth is probably the first of the real "passing-era" receivers, and Largent and Lofton are the only ones that played the majority of their careers under the more passer-friendly league rules (particularly the 10 yard chuck being moved back to five yards). Lynn Swann is probably the only one I'd argue against being in the hall, as he's basically getting in based on his performances in the SuperBowl (which were very good).
Okay, so now we know roughly where we are in terms of what it currently takes to get into the Hall. We also know that Art Monk has been making it to the final round, but not getting the requisite votes to get in, and that Michael Irvin failed on his first (and so far only) attempt.
Next, how do we analyse who gets in? This is going to be a purely fact-based assessment, but I'll talk about some other things at the end. First of all, I wanted to narrow down how many people we were going to look at. To this end, I checked all the pro bowl rosters since 1980, and listed all the receivers that attended 3 or more pro bowls (not counting those who went as special teamers (Dante Hall, Michael Bates and Steve Tasker)). If you weren't rated good enough amongst your peers to make 3 pro bowls over your career, you're not good enough for the Hall, and I started at 1980, deciding that anyone before that has probably already been debated by wiser heads than mine (interestingly, Stallworth made 3 pro bowls, 2 of which were post-1980, so I think I got the right time frame).
The list of receivers that made 3 pro bowls since 1980.
Tim Brown (9)
Isaac Bruce (4)*
Cris Carter (8)
Wes Chandler (3)
Gary Clark (4)
Mark Clayton (5)
Cris Collinsworth (3)
Mark Duper (3)
Henry Ellard (3)
Irving Fryar (5)
Marvin Harrison (7)*
Torry Holt (4)*
Joe Horn (4)*
Michael Irvin (5)
Haywood Jeffires (3)
Chad Johnson (3)*
Keyshawn Johnson (3)*
Steve Largent (5)
James Lofton (7)
Anthony Miller (5)
Art Monk (3)
Herman Moore (4)
Stanley Morgan (3)
Randy Moss (5)*
Eric Moulds (3)*
Terrell Owens (5)*
Mike Quick (5)
Andre Reed (7)
Jerry Rice (13)
Andre Rison (5)
Sterling Sharpe (5)
Jimmy Smith (5)
Rod Smith (3)*
Al Toon (3)
Hines Ward (4)*
* denotes still active
35 guys in all, 11 of which are still active.
So, having winnowed out the no-hopers, the next thing was to get their career stats. I decided to stick with regular season stats only. Postseason stats are nice, but people really remember performances, more than stats, in the postseason, so we'll stick with just regular season stats.
| Name | Pro bowls | Games | Rec | Yards | TD | Y/R |
| Tim Brown | 9 | 255 | 1094 | 14934 | 100 | 13.65082267 |
| Isaac Bruce* | 4 | 172 | 835 | 12621 | 78 | 15.11497006 |
| Cris Carter | 8 | 234 | 1101 | 13899 | 130 | 12.6239782 |
| Wes Chandler | 3 | 150 | 559 | 8966 | 56 | 16.03935599 |
| Dwight Clark | 2 | 134 | 506 | 6750 | 48 | 13.33992095 |
| Gary Clark | 4 | 167 | 699 | 10856 | 65 | 15.53075823 |
| Mark Clayton | 5 | 158 | 582 | 8974 | 84 | 15.41924399 |
| Cris Collinsworth | 3 | 107 | 417 | 6698 | 36 | 16.06235012 |
| Mark Duper | 3 | 146 | 511 | 8869 | 59 | 17.35616438 |
| Henry Ellard | 3 | 228 | 814 | 13777 | 65 | 16.92506143 |
| Irving Fryar | 5 | 255 | 851 | 12785 | 84 | 15.02350176 |
| Marvin Harrison* | 7 | 159 | 959 | 12773 | 111 | 13.31908238 |
| Torry Holt* | 4 | 115 | 648 | 9859 | 58 | 15.21450617 |
| Joe Horn* | 4 | 147 | 558 | 8093 | 53 | 14.50358423 |
| Michael Irvin | 5 | 159 | 750 | 11904 | 65 | 15.872 |
| Haywood Jeffires | 3 | 132 | 535 | 6334 | 50 | 11.83925234 |
| Chad Johnson* | 3 | 80 | 397 | 5757 | 35 | 14.50125945 |
| Keyshawn Johnson* | 3 | 156 | 771 | 10129 | 62 | 13.13748379 |
| Steve Largent | 5 | 200 | 819 | 13089 | 100 | 15.98168498 |
| James Lofton | 7 | 233 | 764 | 14004 | 75 | 18.32984293 |
| Anthony Miller | 5 | 155 | 595 | 9148 | 63 | 15.37478992 |
| Art Monk | 3 | 224 | 940 | 12721 | 68 | 13.53297872 |
| Herman Moore | 4 | 149 | 670 | 9174 | 62 | 13.69253731 |
| Stanley Morgan | 3 | 196 | 557 | 10716 | 72 | 19.23877917 |
| Randy Moss* | 5 | 129 | 646 | 10283 | 100 | 15.91795666 |
| Eric Moulds* | 3 | 158 | 693 | 9321 | 49 | 13.45021645 |
| Terrell Owens* | 5 | 146 | 733 | 10767 | 102 | 14.68894952 |
| Mike Quick | 5 | 101 | 363 | 6464 | 61 | 17.80716253 |
| Andre Reed | 7 | 227 | 951 | 13198 | 87 | 13.87802313 |
| Jerry Rice | 13 | 303 | 1549 | 22895 | 197 | 14.78050355 |
| Andre Rison | 5 | 184 | 743 | 10305 | 84 | 13.86944818 |
| Sterling Sharpe | 5 | 112 | 595 | 8134 | 65 | 13.67058824 |
| Jimmy Smith | 5 | 179 | 862 | 12287 | 67 | 14.25406032 |
| Rod Smith* | 3 | 170 | 808 | 10971 | 65 | 13.5779703 |
| John Stallworth | 3 | 165 | 537 | 8723 | 63 | 16.24394786 |
| Lynn Swann | 3 | 115 | 336 | 5462 | 51 | 16.25595238 |
| John Taylor | 2 | 121 | 347 | 5598 | 43 | 16.13256484 |
| Al Toon | 3 | 107 | 517 | 6605 | 31 | 12.77562863 |
| Hines Ward* | 4 | 131 | 587 | 7178 | 53 | 12.22827939 |
That's a lot of numbers, right there. A couple of additionals - I've thrown Lynn Swann and John Stallworth's numbers in there, for comparison purposes. I've also broken my own rule on 3 pro bowls, and added Dwight Clark and John Taylor, because I'm a big ol' niners homer, and cos I'm curious about how far short they're gonna fall.
Well, the numbers are impressive, but how do we get from there to HoF-worthy or not? My personal feeling is that all of these numbers matter for a receiver (except games played). Number of Pro Bowls gives a good idea of how the receiver was regarded in their day, and gives a boost to players from earlier, less pass-happy, days. Receptions, yards and touchdowns are the things that players need to do to help their team. Obviously, some players are more possession type guys, where others are big-play machines, but both are valuable. Keeping the chains moving can mean just as much to a team as a shock 60 yard TD catch in a losing effort.
So, all we have to do is decide the proportions for each stat. I decided to try and balance them all as best possible. So, number of pro bowls got multiplied by 100, receptions were left alone, yards were divided by ten, and TDs multiplied by 10. All these were added together, and divided by 100, to get the results shown below (in order of HoF-Rating)
| Name | Pro bowls | Games | Rec | Yards | TD | Yards Per Reception | HoF Rating |
| Jerry Rice | 13 | 303 | 1549 | 22895 | 197 | 14.78050355 | 71.085 |
| Cris Carter | 8 | 234 | 1101 | 13899 | 130 | 12.6239782 | 45.909 |
| Tim Brown | 9 | 255 | 1094 | 14934 | 100 | 13.65082267 | 44.874 |
| Marvin Harrison* | 7 | 159 | 959 | 12773 | 111 | 13.31908238 | 40.463 |
| Andre Reed | 7 | 227 | 951 | 13198 | 87 | 13.87802313 | 38.408 |
| Steve Largent | 5 | 200 | 819 | 13089 | 100 | 15.98168498 | 36.279 |
| James Lofton | 7 | 233 | 764 | 14004 | 75 | 18.32984293 | 36.144 |
| Irving Fryar | 5 | 255 | 851 | 12785 | 84 | 15.02350176 | 34.695 |
| Terrell Owens* | 5 | 146 | 733 | 10767 | 102 | 14.68894952 | 33.297 |
| Isaac Bruce* | 4 | 172 | 835 | 12621 | 78 | 15.11497006 | 32.771 |
| Jimmy Smith | 5 | 179 | 862 | 12287 | 67 | 14.25406032 | 32.607 |
| Art Monk | 3 | 224 | 940 | 12721 | 68 | 13.53297872 | 31.921 |
| Randy Moss* | 5 | 129 | 646 | 10283 | 100 | 15.91795666 | 31.743 |
| Henry Ellard | 3 | 228 | 814 | 13777 | 65 | 16.92506143 | 31.417 |
| Andre Rison | 5 | 184 | 743 | 10305 | 84 | 13.86944818 | 31.135 |
| Michael Irvin | 5 | 159 | 750 | 11904 | 65 | 15.872 | 30.904 |
| Rod Smith* | 3 | 170 | 808 | 10971 | 65 | 13.5779703 | 28.551 |
| Gary Clark | 4 | 167 | 699 | 10856 | 65 | 15.53075823 | 28.346 |
| Mark Clayton | 5 | 158 | 582 | 8974 | 84 | 15.41924399 | 28.194 |
| Keyshawn Johnson* | 3 | 156 | 771 | 10129 | 62 | 13.13748379 | 27.039 |
| Stanley Morgan | 3 | 196 | 557 | 10716 | 72 | 19.23877917 | 26.486 |
| Anthony Miller | 5 | 155 | 595 | 9148 | 63 | 15.37478992 | 26.398 |
| Torry Holt* | 4 | 115 | 648 | 9859 | 58 | 15.21450617 | 26.139 |
| Herman Moore | 4 | 149 | 670 | 9174 | 62 | 13.69253731 | 26.074 |
| Sterling Sharpe | 5 | 112 | 595 | 8134 | 65 | 13.67058824 | 25.584 |
| Eric Moulds* | 3 | 158 | 693 | 9321 | 49 | 13.45021645 | 24.151 |
| John Stallworth | 3 | 165 | 537 | 8723 | 63 | 16.24394786 | 23.393 |
| Wes Chandler | 3 | 150 | 559 | 8966 | 56 | 16.03935599 | 23.156 |
| Joe Horn* | 4 | 147 | 558 | 8093 | 53 | 14.50358423 | 22.973 |
| Mark Duper | 3 | 146 | 511 | 8869 | 59 | 17.35616438 | 22.879 |
| Hines Ward* | 4 | 131 | 587 | 7178 | 53 | 12.22827939 | 22.348 |
| Mike Quick | 5 | 101 | 363 | 6464 | 61 | 17.80716253 | 21.194 |
| Haywood Jeffires | 3 | 132 | 535 | 6334 | 50 | 11.83925234 | 19.684 |
| Dwight Clark | 2 | 134 | 506 | 6750 | 48 | 13.33992095 | 18.61 |
| Al Toon | 3 | 107 | 517 | 6605 | 31 | 12.77562863 | 17.875 |
| Cris Collinsworth | 3 | 107 | 417 | 6698 | 36 | 16.06235012 | 17.468 |
| Lynn Swann | 3 | 115 | 336 | 5462 | 51 | 16.25595238 | 16.922 |
| Chad Johnson* | 3 | 80 | 397 | 5757 | 35 | 14.50125945 | 16.227 |
| John Taylor | 2 | 121 | 347 | 5598 | 43 | 16.13256484 | 15.368 |
Okay, so, anyone surprised by the name at the top? Didn't think so.
Looking down the list, Steve Largent and James Lofton, the two most recent HoF inductees are 6th and 7th respectively. This tells us that anyone falling below that line is at best a borderline case. If Irvin (at 16) or even Monk (at 12) get in, we have to re-evaluate, and start working out how to account for state of the game, but for the moment, I think we're safe to say that you're going to need a HoF rating of 36 to get in.
So, first of all, is there anyone above the line that definitely doesn't belong, or anyone below the line that definitely does? Above the line we have Jerry Rice, Cris Carter, Tim Brown, Marvin Harrison and Andre Reed. The top three are all no-doubt first-ballot HoFfers. Reed is definitely a dodgy case. He wasn't necessarily the best receiver on his team (playing with Lofton for most of his career), and possibly his stats benefitted from the K-Gun offense. However, I think that most would agree he's up for at least serious consideration.
Harrison is more problematic. In many ways, he is the contemporary against which Moss is most likely to be argued. They are very different players, and Harrison has benefitted from Peyton far more than Moss has benefitted from his various (and multifarious) quarterbacks. However, as with Reed, Harrison is certainly a very strong HoF contender.
So, our basic methodology appears correct. Out of interest, Swann is a lowly 37th, only beating out Chad Johnson, who is only five years into his career, and John Taylor, who had to make a living off Jerry Rice's hand-me-downs. But, we did say at the beginning that Swann gets a huge bump for his postseason heroics, and stats are never the whole story for getting into the Hall. Stallworth ranks a more promising 27th, and certainly anyone below him is not getting any serious consideration for HoF status.
Given this method of rating the receivers, what can we expect in the near future? Well, the top three of Rice, Brown & Carter, as already noted, are all certainly going into the Hall, probably all as first-ballots. Reed may get in, helped by being a couple of years before the big three. Art Monk's snubbing so far looks reasonably justified. He actually made fewer pro bowls than his teammate, Gary Clark, though he was good (if not great) for a while longer than Clark.
Irving Fryar is just bubbling under, but may be hurt by his constant team-hopping, and lack of outstanding postseason success. Just bubbling over Irvin are a couple of names I wasn't expecting to see, in Henry Ellard and Andre Rison. Though I really don't think Rison is HoF material, I always like Ellard, and would probably seriously consider him as a selection.
The interesting thing after that is the number of currently playing, and just retired (Jimmy Smith) guys in that "bubbling under" section. Since the stats are based on career totals, those currently playing are liable to bubble up a little further, but what does it mean? Are there a number of really good receivers in the NFL at the moment, or do the current rules, and style, inflate currently playing receivers stats? At the moment, it's difficult to tell.
There really weren't many good receivers playing in the early to mid-80s, just Lofton and Largent, then a really, really big crowd of okay guys. This was followed by the holy trinity of Rice, Carter and Brown, not to mention Sterling Sharpe (cut short by injury) and Anthony Carter (ditto), so there is definitely precedent for great receivers coming along in bunches, and maybe Harrison, Owens, Moss is another such bunch. However, with the many changes in the rules in the last five years, I think it's likely that we are going to have to start adjusting post-2000 receiving numbers downwards, to get a true comparison with the pre-2000 numbers.
As an aside, pro-rating the HoF stat by games played gives some interesting things to watch. First off, Sterling Sharpe was definitely on course for the Hall, and probably to challenge a lot of Jerry's marks. It is probably forgotten a little how good he really was, and could have been. Mike Quick is also very high, but I know almost nothing about him. Of the current players, Harrison and Moss lead the way, with Terrell Owens in third, closely followed by Torry Holt. Chad Johnson is a little way back from that, and has the most left to do.
So, back to the original question: does Randy Moss have what it takes? He's currently bubbling under in 13th spot, though he does have time to add to his numbers. Using a HoF Rating of 36 as the magic number, he would need two more years of 2005 style numbers (60 catches, 1000 yards, 8 TDs). However, with the possibly stat inflation for having played post 2000, he would be best served with a third year at that level. That would leave him on 39 HoF points, just below the holy trinity, and looking to book his place in Canton.
I'd bet on Terrell getting his stats for a place in the Hall, but his off-the-field activities are going to weigh heavily against him come voting time. Michael Irvin is probably the one to watch here. If he gets in, it would be a monumental injustice for TO not to follow. Of the other current players, Torry Holt would be my strongest bet to make it into the Hall. Though aided by playing in the Martz offense, he was one of the players that made it work. Chad Johnson is off to a very good start, but has a long, long way to go. I don't think anyone else currently playing really stands a chance, though Isaac Bruce and Jimmy Smith will both bear consideration when they are eligible.
|
|
(4 comments | comment on this)
|
| Wednesday, October 11th, 2006
| |
6:49 pm - Alex...
|
...thinking about it, can you change my single booking up in Nottingham to a double, since that will give Rob somewhere to sleep
May as well not have en suite
|
|
(comment on this)
|
|
|
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
spikydavid's journal