Is Thomas Hall of Fame bound?

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

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.

I realize it is spliting hairs.  But the fact is if the team you are on loses the superbowl, you are on a better team than one that misses the playoffs.  You seem to be missing that point.  Zach was the 2nd best defensive player on a crappy defense, that is different than being the 2nd best defensive player on a team that wins their conf.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

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.

Being voted all-pro does NOT mean you are the best player at your position (unless your position is QB) in the case of inside linebacker it means the AP views you as one of the two best players at the position.   

[Spider-Dan]

I realize it is spliting hairs.  But the fact is if the team you are on loses the superbowl, you are on a better team than one that misses the playoffs.  You seem to be missing that point.

No, I get that point; I simply think it's completely invalid.

Prior to 2006, nobody was saying, "That Peyton Manning... he sure has his teams in the playoffs every year!"  It was, "Manning is a choker who can't win the big games."  Hell, Zach's Dolphins made the playoffs 5 years in a row, and we're still having this discussion right now, precisely because nobody gives a damn about playoff appearances, or division titles, or conference championships, unless you are using it as a way to bash a player for not sealing the deal.

[Spider-Dan]

Being voted all-pro does NOT mean you are the best player at your position (unless your position is QB) in the case of inside linebacker it means the AP views you as one of the two best players at the position.

You're right; I thought All-Pro was using a 4-3 defense (which would mean that there is only 1 MLB) but it looks like they used a 3-4.  So instead of being the best player in the league, he was merely top 2.  I stand corrected.

[Tepop84]

You're right; I thought All-Pro was using a 4-3 defense (which would mean that there is only 1 MLB) but it looks like they used a 3-4.  So instead of being the best player in the league, he was merely top 2.  I stand corrected.

2 first team mlb and 2 2nd team, so 6 out of his 13 years he wasnt a top 4 nfl mlb.  not very good.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

2 first team mlb and 2 2nd team, so 6 out of his 13 years he wasnt a top 4 nfl mlb.  not very good.

Actually it is very good.  Zach Thomas was a very good player and deserves to be inducted into the "hall of the very good."  But alas, there is no "hall of the very good" there is a "hall of fame", Zach isn't quite to that level. 

[bsfins]

^ Exactly

Please list one stat that Makes Zach Thomas Stand out as the Best of the Best Linebackers to play the game.....Tackles? wasn't an official stat till 2001....

Spider you're trying to compare one player to one player.....

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.
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.

This is Bullshit...I never said it, Your implying and picked what I've said and tried to twist around....
....
What Has Zach Done that sets him apart form Brian Urlacher, Junior Seau, Ray Lewis.....The 3rd and 4th Best LB in an era aren't likely to make the HOF.....Other than His All PRO annd Pro bowls The All Decade team of the year 2000...Opps wait the 2000's all decade team included Ray Lewis,Brian Urlacher,Derrick Brooks,Joey Porter Zach Thomas, and Demarcus Ware.

Again, I think it depends less on what Zach has Done, but the people that are going to get in between the times he's eligible

[bsfins]

Last Post I'm even going to Bother...So Spider Can Twist this around how however he sees fit....It's a harsh reality, that Zachs Whole Career can be summed up this way....

Zach was an over-achiever with Good stats,but never Great stats on a under achieving team,that never won anything....

It's called perception.....

[Spider-Dan]

2 first team mlb and 2 2nd team, so 6 out of his 13 years he wasnt a top 4 nfl mlb.  not very good.

Junior Seau: 20 years in the league, 6 first team All-Pro, 2 second team.  12 out of his 20 years, not top 4 at his position.  Not very good.
Ray Lewis: 14 years in the league,  7 first team All-Pro, 2 second team.  5 out of his 14 years, not top 4 at his position.  Not very good.
Brian Urlacher: 10 years in the league,  4 first team All-Pro, 0 second team.  6 out of his 10 years, not top 4 at his position.  Not very good.

Emmitt Smith: 15 years in the league,  4 first team All-Pro, 1 second team.  10 out of his 15 years, not top 4 at his position.  Not very good.

Do you guys seriously realize how hard it is to be named first-team All-Pro?

[Tepop84]

Junior Seau: 20 years in the league, 6 first team All-Pro, 2 second team.  12 out of his 20 years, not top 4 at his position.  Not very good.

if seau had stopped after 13 years like zach, he would still have had 6 first team and 2 second team.  He was just so much better than zach that he was able to play for 7 more years.
Ray Lewis: 14 years in the league,  7 first team All-Pro, 2 second team.  5 out of his 14 years, not top 4 at his position.  Not very good.
it actually is really good to have 7 first team and 2 second team in 14 years.
Brian Urlacher: 10 years in the league,  4 first team All-Pro, 0 second team.  6 out of his 10 years, not top 4 at his position.  Not very good.
who cares about urlacher

Emmitt Smith: 15 years in the league,  4 first team All-Pro, 1 second team.  10 out of his 15 years, not top 4 at his position.  Not very good.
what place is he on the all time rushing yards chart.  to play 15 years when most rbs only play like 4. not to mention his team won how many super bowls.

Do you guys seriously realize how hard it is to be named first-team All-Pro?

your denseness is amazing.

[Spider-Dan]

This is Bullshit...I never said it, Your implying and picked what I've said and tried to twist around....

You: "[...] Zach hadn't sniffed the playoffs the last 7 years of  his career......"
Me: "Jason Taylor's playoff drought was just as long, and MIA made the playoffs the year after he was gone, too."
You: "Then you can say Zach had a great 5 year run, not a great career...." (direct quote)

Feel free to explain how that has been "twisted."

[bsmooth]

^^ Singletary,played on a defense that is arguably one of the best D's to ever suit up in the 85 Bears,Zach didn't...It also goes back to Daves point of the Best player on the team...

Or percieved to be the best. That defense, much like the Ravens defense Lewis have the lucky fortune to play with was stacked with very good players, making it a lot easier to make plays and look like a stud.
Does Lewis stand out anymore than Zach if he was on a lesser defense?

[Spider-Dan]

if seau had stopped after 13 years like zach, he would still have had 6 first team and 2 second team.

If Zach had stopped after 11, he still would have had 5 firsts and 2 seconds.  Why is this relevant?

[re: Ray Lewis]
it actually is really good to have 7 first team and 2 second team in 14 years.

That's funny, because during those same 11 years I just mentioned (Zach and Ray entered the league in the same year), Zach had the same 5 firsts and 2 seconds as Ray.  I guess if we had this discussion in 2007, you would have been just as skeptical of Ray Lewis, right?

[re: Emmitt]
what place is he on the all time rushing yards chart.  to play 15 years when most rbs only play like 4. not to mention his team won how many super bowls.

The same number as Kevin Faulk?

[Tepop84]

If Zach had stopped after 11, he still would have had 5 firsts and 2 seconds.  Why is this relevant?
That's funny, because during those same 11 years I just mentioned (Zach and Ray entered the league in the same year), Zach had the same 5 firsts and 2 seconds as Ray.  I guess if we had this discussion in 2007, you would have been just as skeptical of Ray Lewis, right?
The same number as Kevin Faulk?

awesome, comparing a special teamer to the starting running back. holy ignorance.

[Spider-Dan]

Listen, I'm not trying to compare Zach Thomas to Emmitt Smith.  But for you to say that Zach was "only" an All-Pro for 7 of his 13 years (as if that's some sort of insult) is a pathetic joke.  That's a far better ratio than most of the players in the HOF (and dramatically better than Jason Taylor, whom most of you seem to see as a shoo-in).