I like the guy so I won’t argue, hopeless in this crowd anyways and I get it.
His stats are better than some of the QB's already in the HoF. If that doesn't qualify him then the whole idea is dumb.
I like the guy so I won’t argue, hopeless in this crowd anyways and I get it.
I like Bennett immensely, but if the article is accurate and Brees and Manning didn't make it in, you have to think it isn't changing for Bennett...I like the guy so I won’t argue, hopeless in this crowd anyways and I get it.
Without looking it up, I think Joe had 25 touchdowns and 25 interceptions at Notre Dame.By the way, this isn't a new argument...one of my favorite QBs of all time, Joe Montana, who won 4 Super Bowls - 100% of those he played in - is also not eligible due to the All-American criteria. As Montana has gotten older, this argument has come around more than once that the rule should be changed...if him, Brees, and Manning didn't cause a change, you can just about be certain that Bennett isn't going to be the reason for change...
Not saying it is right, just making an observation...
Definitely didn't have the same last two years as Bennett, no question. Just making an observation that this isn't a new argument for QBs that didn't make the All-American grade that are not in the CFBHOF. There are a number of All-American QBs who are not in the CFBHOF as well...Without looking it up, I think Joe had 25 touchdowns and 25 interceptions at Notre Dame.
I don't dislike Bennett, but don't you think that a lot of what's wrong with the world we're living in today is because some of the standards being lowered?He absolutely deserves a chance to be voted on for the CFHOF. I don’t care what changes or exceptions they have to make to do so. They lower physical requirements for females in the military, law enforcement, and fire departments. They make exceptions for minorities on college entrance requirements and allow them to jump those more qualified. The CFHOF requirements weren’t expecting a former walk-on to lead a team to back to back NCs while posting those kind of numbers……including a 4th quarter, come from behind playoff victory.
If they keep him out, it will add to the drama of the movie they make about him.
Oh, for sure. I’m not for lowering the standards as much as I am for getting rid of the ridiculous ones that keep deserving players out. We have guys that are eligible that 10 years from now we couldn’t even remember. But an Eli Manning can’t be considered? Since the rules were made prior to the playoffs or even BCS era, how about we add ‘a player who played in a championship game’ as a qualifying criteria?…or ‘set records’ or ‘contributed above and beyond’. It just seems like some that are qualified are less deserving than some that aren’t. Fifty or 100 years from now, those touring the CFHOF should be able to learn of the SB story.I don't dislike Bennett, but don't you think that a lot of what's wrong with the world we're living in today is because some of the standards being lowered?
By the way, this isn't a new argument...one of my favorite QBs of all time, Joe Montana, who won 4 Super Bowls - 100% of those he played in - is also not eligible due to the All-American criteria. As Montana has gotten older, this argument has come around more than once that the rule should be changed...if him, Brees, and Manning didn't cause a change, you can just about be certain that Bennett isn't going to be the reason for change...
Not saying it is right, just making an observation...
I don't know if I would call it a special club as much as it's a very narrow and outdated criteria...but like all of these types of organizations, ones where someone else decides your place in them, they are political and closed...the best athletes who play for the love of the game could probably not care less if they are in them...the fans care way more...just like this thread...Which is why the HoF is bogus. Unless you're a member of the "special club" you don't get in no matter how good you turned out to be.
I don't know if I would call it a special club as much as it's a very narrow and outdated criteria...but like all of these types of organizations, ones where someone else decides your place in them, they are political and closed...the best athletes who play for the love to the game could probably not care less if they are in them...the fans care way more...just like this thread...
I understand...there are a lot of these clubs in life that I'll never be a part of...I'm a CPA. I have very little room for "subjective" judgements. They turn out to be RONG! most of the time. Throw in "special clubs" and you will always get an "Adverse Opinion" from me.
Only club that matters to me, is mine.I understand...there are a lot of these clubs in life that I'll never be a part of...
Only club that matters to me, is mine.
The Heisman is supposed to be an individual award. Unfortunately most of those receiving it or even consideration do so because they have a great team around them. That team makes average players look great.HOF or Heisman are both equally bogus honors! This is because they are not actually representative of
on-field effort but they are someone’s opinion of on field effort.
I can’t think of anything more bogus in sports!
Couldn't agree more. I don't know Stetson but I bet he thinks the same way. He doesn't strike me as someone who does it for the money and fame. He does it because he loves the game and what it means. I could be wrong...Only club that matters to me, is mine.