The Lions' Pride

Serious question.... What was the rule change that makes this block (shoulder to shoulder, helmet in front -- i.e. not back/blind side) now illegal?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPbraVljIrc

I think what you're missing here is HW was a team player. T.O., Moss - not so much.

Ward = McCardell????? You're smoking some good stuff.

Come on now. Don't let your jealousy of the steelers get in the way. I agree there are a couple guys that deserve it before Ward but half that list is laughable. People forgot that stats are not the only thing voters look at. Those 2 rings and a SB MVP look better than anyone on that list has. Also there is no argument that he is the best blocking receiver ever. Has anyone else seen a team motion a wide receiver to be the lead blocker on an inside run? Ward was a one of a kind WR and that makes it tough to compare him but I do agree that Brown and Carter should be in before Ward.

I am not a fan of the NFL in general but I do root for the Steelers. If what you mean by dirty is actually blocking and placing big blind side hits on players then you can call any player that does that "dirty."

If all WRs played like he did, rushing stats would go up a ton across the board.

Steeler Fan = ND Fan, thinks everyone is jealous of their team and every player they have belongs in the Hall of Fame or is a Five Star.

That's the problem with people debating this. If you strictly look at receiving stats then no Ward probably does not get in. Voters however look at much more including post season success where Ward has some nice hardware. That's why Swann Stallworth and Bradshaw are in the HOF.

Also, dont undervalue SB rings and Super Bowl MVPs. Players who have never won a Super Bowl have a heck of a time getting into the HOF. Cris Carter, if he won the SB, would be in the HOF already.

I think the SB MVP and the 1000 receptions are the two best arguements, but how do you put a guy who was a career number 2 in the HOF. He wasnt even the best recieve on his own team at any given time. The HOF should be reserved for the truely great, players that completely dominate which Ward never did.

warner3398 serious question: Who's your favorite pro team?

Even though I dislike the guy (obviously, based on my comments), I could see him getting into the Hall of Fame. I don't think you can compare Ward to wideouts per se and just look at numbers and catches. He is more of a possession receiver whose excelled at a very high level at non-catching traits like downfield blocking, etc. He was also very clutch, won lots of championships, etc. His role seemed to be a bit different than more traditional receivers, so it's tough to compare him based purely on statistics. It would be very rough for me, but I would probably vote for him just because he played his position in such a unique fashion at such a high level.

It is difficult. Especially since it's so hard to compare the passing attacks of today vs. the ones of old.

I don't put much stock into # of receptions, personally. There are tons of ways to get easy receptions.

And by the way, if you want to discuss consistency, don't just say list an average. Averages don't mean jacksquat when it comes to consistency - standard deviation and variance are what represent consistency. Theoretically, a player who gets 770 receptions in year one and 0 receptions in years 2-9 also has an average of 85.6 catches per year. I know it's nitpicking, but the average doesn't tell us anything about his consistency.

Need to be careful when talking about players from decades ago. The old-timers tend to be considered more heavily simply because of the perception of offenses nowadays. The offenses now are considered more high-power, air raid offenses than those times. It was easier for wide receivers to stand out in those days.

I'm not going to argue whether those earlier years were actually different or not, because I'm too lazy for now. Just wanted to say that receivers who played in the 2000's are going to be viewed much differently than the ones in the 70's and 80's.

How is that stat correct? Which Bills are in the HOF that were on all 4 SB teams?

Kelly, Smith, Thurman, oh and Lofton. Yeah that's wrong.

Dallas, Wash and NYG def. have more.