Is Thomas Hall of Fame bound?

[Spider-Dan]

Being one win away from hoisting a Lombardi is more a credit on your resume than being one over time win from tying the '76 Bucs.

Again, that's funny, because I never hear anyone say that Shaun Alexander is better than LaDainian Tomlinson because Alexander made it to a Super Bowl (and lost) and Tomlinson didn't.  And I've certainly never, ever heard anyone talk about Marino's career and use the words "Super Bowl" as anything but an argument against him.

[Spider-Dan]

^^ Then you can say Zach had a great 5 year run, not a great career....Comparing Zach to Jason, doesn't fly either....Jason is running up the all time sack list 127.5 sacks 43 Forced fumbles,6 of those for Td's....Taylor has the stats,and the honor of Defensive player of the year,to add to the All Pros,and the Pro bowls on his HOF resume.

So JT had a "great 5 year run" too?  If missing the playoffs means that year doesn't count, why doesn't this affect JT?  Hell, if that's the standard, the Nnamdi Asomughas and Andre Johnsons of the world are going to have a rough time of it.

[bsfins]

I'm sorry if Facts are scratching your aqua and orange colored glasses Spider,re read what I posted....Or ignore and read what you want,you're doing it anyways!

Jason is running up the all time sack list 127.5 sacks 43 Forced fumbles,6 of those for Td's....Taylor has the stats,and the honor of Defensive player of the year,to add to the All Pros,and the Pro bowls on his HOF resume

Love how you completely changed your post from Chris Carter,Tim Brown to L.T. and Shaun  Alexander....

Again you guy's haven't convinced me of Didly....Of why Zach is the Best, of the Best to make it into the Hall of fame....

[Spider-Dan]

I'm sorry if Facts are scratching your aqua and orange colored glasses Spider,re read what I posted....Or ignore and read what you want,you're doing it anyways!

Zach has over twice as many tackles and INTs.  Big surprise; the DE/OLB gets more sacks than the ILB, who gets more tackles and INTs.

Zach also has 1 more Pro Bowl and 2 more First-Team All-Pro selections on his resume.

Love how you completely changed your post from Chris Carter,Tim Brown to L.T. and Shaun  Alexander....

I love how you didn't actually address either set of players, and how you completely discarded the "Zach only had 5 playoff years" argument when Andre Johnson and Nnamdi Asomugha were mentioned.

[bsfins]

^^ that's because I'm not arguing your hear say....., I'm arguing facts...
And Reasons people in the HOF committee are going to over look Zach Thomas....

Modified to add..I think Zach will make it to the Finals,in voting,I think too many "other factors" will hamper him....

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Again, that's funny, because I never hear anyone say that Shaun Alexander is better than LaDainian Tomlinson because Alexander made it to a Super Bowl (and lost) and Tomlinson didn't.  And I've certainly never, ever heard anyone talk about Marino's career and use the words "Super Bowl" as anything but an argument against him.

It is not a single factor.  One can make the HOF simply by being extremely good on a shitty team.  One can make the HOF by being one of the better players (but not the best player) on great team.  One can't make the HOF for being one of the better players on a crappy team. 

[Spider-Dan]

^^ that's because I'm not arguing your hear say....., I'm arguing facts...

Please explain how it is a "fact" that Zach only had a "great 5 year run" because he didn't make the playoffs in the other years, yet JT (who was on all those same teams) somehow built a vastly superior resume while also not making the playoffs?  Let me guess: was it his DPOY award that he won in a year when MIA missed the playoffs, finishing last in their division at 6-10?

Some consistency, please.

[Pappy13]

pro-football-reference.com

Ah, I see what you did.  1106 is his solo tackles.  He had 627 assists as well which is a total of 1733.

[Spider-Dan]

It is not a single factor.  One can make the HOF simply by being extremely good on a shitty team.  One can make the HOF by being one of the better players (but not the best player) on great team.  One can't make the HOF for being one of the better players on a crappy team.

That's fine, and agreed, but beside the point.

I have never heard anyone make the argument that simply appearing in the Super Bowl (but never winning) makes you more likely to become a Hall-of-Famer, or enhances your legacy in any way.  Making the Super Bowl (and losing) is almost exclusively used as a "Yeah, but..." to a player's career.  So any claims that Urlacher benefits from losing in the Super Bowl ring quite hollow.

[bsfins]

Again, that's funny, because I never hear anyone say that Shaun Alexander is better than LaDainian Tomlinson because Alexander made it to a Super Bowl (and lost) and Tomlinson didn't.  And I've certainly never, ever heard anyone talk about Marino's career and use the words "Super Bowl" as anything but an argument against him.

That's fine, and agreed, but beside the point.

I have never heard anyone make the argument that simply appearing in the Super Bowl (but never winning) makes you more likely to become a Hall-of-Famer, or enhances your legacy in any way.  Making the Super Bowl (and losing) is almost exclusively used as a "Yeah, but..." to a player's career.  So any claims that Urlacher benefits from losing in the Super Bowl ring quite hollow.

I'm not the one that needs consistency.(TWICE here say)...Obviously you don't understand Defensive player of the year.....He's better than Linebackers, Defensive backs,Defensive Lineman,Everyone on Defense in that conference....the BEST Player on Defense that year in that conference...


Whatever Spider...

[Pappy13]

You know what's so sad about this whole conversation,I'm a Dolphins fan,and watched just about every game from 2000 till this past year.

Now I see why you are having a hard time with this.  Go back and watch the games from '96 thru '99.  Zach was the man and Taylor was a nice DE but nothing more.  I've already said how things changed in 2000.

Here's some stats to help give you an idea.

Zach
1996 - 2 sacks, 3 INT's, 1 TD, 2 FF, 2 FR, 154 tackles. Defensive rookie of the year.  Pro-bowl alternate.
1997 - 1/2 sack, 1 INT, 2 FF, 128 tackles.
1998 - 2 sacks, 3 INT's, 2 TD's, 2 FF, 137 tackles.  First team All-pro.
1999 - 1 sacks, 1 INT, 1 FF, 133 tackles. First team All-pro.
2000 - Hurt and only played 11 games - 1.5 sacks, 1 INT, 1 FR, 99 tackles.

Taylor
1996 - Not in the NFL yet.
1997 - 5 sacks, 2 FF, 2 FR, 42 tackles
1998 - 9 sacks, 3 FF, 52 tackles
1999 - 2.5 sacks, 1 INT, 2 FR, 1 TD, 40 tackles
2000 - 14.5 sacks, 1 INT, 2 FF, 2 FR, 1 TD, 63 tackles.  First team All-pro.

So obviously if you started watching the Dolphins in '2000 you'd have a much different view of both players than someone who'd watched since '96.

[bsfins]

Pappy,I understand what your saying, I'm concerned that What we saw (and loved) in Zach's whole career,Others wont...Especially the HOF selectors,that Followed other teams....

Modified to add...I've never lived in Florida,So until I got the NFL Sunday ticket..I was lucky to see a couple of games....When Dan Marino Retired, I didn't have Cable,or internet...I was furious, the local news,just posted a picture of Dan,and said Future HOF QB Dan Marino retired to today....Zach wasn't a Blip on the News here,and he played for the Chiefs

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

That's fine, and agreed, but beside the point.

I have never heard anyone make the argument that simply appearing in the Super Bowl (but never winning) makes you more likely to become a Hall-of-Famer, or enhances your legacy in any way.  Making the Super Bowl (and losing) is almost exclusively used as a "Yeah, but..." to a player's career.  So any claims that Urlacher benefits from losing in the Super Bowl ring quite hollow.

LOSING the superbowl doesn't enhance your crediblity.  But WINNING the conf championship (particularly multiple times) means you weren't one of the better players on a crappy team, but one of the players on a very good team.

[Spider-Dan]

I'm not the one that needs consistency.(TWICE here say)...

Consistency?  You're the one claiming that you are only speaking of FACTS, yet you arbitrarily declare that Zach's non-playoff years simply don't count (while JT and others' do).

I happily admit that I take into account what I hear people say about players when I consider their HOF viability.  Unlike you, I'm not trying to pretend that HOF admittance is a purely empirical evaluation of straightforward FACTS; opinion is probably the single most important factor.  But if you want to wave the "I only speak of FACTS" banner, then you need to stand behind it, not duck out with unsupported (and contradictory) opinions like only-Zach's-playoff-years-count-on-his-resume.

Obviously you don't understand Defensive player of the year.....He's better than Linebackers, Defensive backs,Defensive Lineman,Everyone on Defense in that conference....the BEST Player on Defense that year in that conference...

But we didn't make the playoffs that year, so by your logic, it must not count.

Zach was the best player at his position in the league (first team All-Pro) for 3 years (02, 03, 06) in which we did not make the playoffs.  According to you, that completely invalidates those years, and only the 5 years that we did make the playoffs "count."  But only if you're Zach Thomas.

Like I said, some consistency, please.

[Spider-Dan]

LOSING the superbowl doesn't enhance your crediblity.  But WINNING the conf championship (particularly multiple times) means you weren't one of the better players on a crappy team, but one of the players on a very good team.

You're splitting hairs; every single team that loses a Super Bowl is necessarily a conference champion.  Saying that Super Bowl losers don't have enhanced legacies but conference champions do is a statement completely devoid of content.