I wouldn't hold my breath on any more punters any time soon, but maybe.
Barber may fall just short with no rings. He could have played another couple of years and cemented his legacy as a HOF career. Without those last thousands of yards (depending on how many years), he might just be shy of getting in.
Eli is very likely, but needs a strong finish to his career to cement it.
As for Simms, he is a tough case. His numbers are actually better than some high profile HOF QBs, but he played in a different era. When compared to his contemporaries (Montana, Elway, Marino, etc.) he does fall short; probably way short.
Banks simply doesn't have the longevity at the highest level. He had a few years as one of the top 5 LBs in the game and then dropped off that level.
Eli is very likely, but needs a strong finish to his career to cement it.
As for Simms, he is a tough case. His numbers are actually better than some high profile HOF QBs, but he played in a different era. When compared to his contemporaries (Montana, Elway, Marino, etc.) he does fall short; probably way short.
Banks simply doesn't have the longevity at the highest level. He had a few years as one of the top 5 LBs in the game and then dropped off that level.
As for Simms you just picked 3 of the best QB's in history as his contemporaries...dig a little deeper on guys who are already in.
Banks? At what point in his career exactly did his game drop off in your opinion? The way that you phrased it, it looks like by his third year. Are you serious?
but Banks only made one. All of the linebackers of the modern era (LT, Singletary, Tippet, Ricky Jackson, Carson, Derrick Thomas, Lambert, Brooks, Hendricks, Ham, Lanier) made it 5+ times...and many of them made it 9 or 10 times. Whatever the reasons, it seems Banks was't perceived as being that level of player during his playing days.
I don't think it is even close. The opinion on him outside of NY differs so greatly than the NY media. I don't think quarterbacks winning the SB is a big deal to writers anymore. His contemporaries will be too much for him to overcome with voters as well. Just stat records and season MVP wise.
maybe an honor at the stadium for his contribution to the team in righting the Giants ship, but his record as a GM was not so consistently amazing that it warrants HOF status.
He drafted LT and Simms but also Derek Brown, Dave Brown and Jarrod Bunch in the first rounds.
he finishes the last few seasons of his career with better numbers. Eli is much better than what his current stats reflect, and I think finally we'll have an offensive system that will be more QB-friendly. I guarantee he will not have another 18+ int season.
And because he has 2 Super Bowl wins and 2 Super Bowl MVP's, Eli doesn't need to have superb numbers to get in. He'll make it if he finishes with "above average" passing stats.
My point about Simms in comparison to his contemporaries was exactly what you highlighted. He is better than a number of HOF QBs from other eras. But, in a direct comparison to guys in his era he was unfortunate to have played with a few of the all time greats and at the end of his career against Aikman, as well. He was certainly a very good QB. But, he was never the best of his time, which knocks him down a peg. Plus, the fact that he wasn't the starting QB for the 2nd SB seems to hurt him as well, although I don't think it should.
As for Banks, he had a stretch of a few years when he was absolutely dominant. His last year or two in NY and then his time elsewhere, he was still a good LB. But, he wasn't dominant or among the top handful in the league. If he sustained his greatness for longer, he would go to the HOF.
of getting into the HOF as any of us on this thread.
You talk a lot of crap for knowing very little about the game.
Did you want to quiz me or something Andrew?
Look...Simms and Banks were great Giants, but they were only good NFL players at their respective positions. Both made a couple of pro bowls and I don't think were ever All-Pros. HOF basically means you were a dominant player in the period you played.
already has more yards and TDs than Simms and a bunch of other guys who are IN the HOF, like Namath and Griese. He is already ahead of Kurt Warner who everyone thinks is going in. Plus he has the 2 SB MVPs.
He's averaged 3927 yards per season and 25 TDs per season over 9 years. If he does even that well for another 5 years, his totals would be: 54,980 yards and 356 TDs
That alone might do it. Add in at least 2 SB MVPs, and I'm guessing he gets in. Maybe not on the first ballot, but he gets in. And if he wins another title, it won't matter at all what his numbers were or what the rest of the league may have felt about him. He'll be a first ballot.
As for Simms, a case could be made, but I think if it were gonna happen, it would have happened already.
And I would bet my mortgage that his candidacy is heavily debated. He hasn't won a playoff game here besides 07 and 11. He missed the playoffs 4 of 5 years, and let's be frank, this team is far from a lock to end that streak. He is a very good coach, but I am not sure how he is a lock. If you put a gun to my head, I would say Yes if this is his last year. If the Giants continue to slide and he coaches 2 or 3 more years, the case becomes worse and worse.
You haters are never going to give up. He's a lock and it's not even close. There are 12 coaches who have won more than 1 SB. 3 (Belichik, Coughlin and Shanahan) aren't eligible yet. Of the remaining 10, 7 are in the HOF. Only Seifert, Flores and Jimmy Johnson. Johnson was a semifinalist this year. Belichik is a lock.
The common thread with Seifert, Flores and Johnson is that they all crashed and burned with their second opportunities. Coughlin had success with Jax and then won multiple times with the Giants. He's a lock for the HOF.
Too often we all get caught up in numbers and stats. That's not what the HOF is all about.
HOF is about dominance during one's career: it's for the best of the best, the players and coaches and leaders who influenced the game the most during their tenures.
Neither Carl Banks nor Phil Simms falls into that category. I don't think George Young does either, but I can see why some would think so.
Of current Giants, only Eli and TC will gain consideration: the former because he shined in two super bowls and the latter because of a consistent string of quality seasons with two organizations that were in bad shape when he came on board.
But that said, I think only TC will get the nod.
Unless Eli gets a third ring - then he'll be considered a dominant player during his career. But I don't think that's going to happen.
Barber may fall just short with no rings. He could have played another couple of years and cemented his legacy as a HOF career. Without those last thousands of yards (depending on how many years), he might just be shy of getting in.
As for Simms, he is a tough case. His numbers are actually better than some high profile HOF QBs, but he played in a different era. When compared to his contemporaries (Montana, Elway, Marino, etc.) he does fall short; probably way short.
Banks simply doesn't have the longevity at the highest level. He had a few years as one of the top 5 LBs in the game and then dropped off that level.
As for Simms, he is a tough case. His numbers are actually better than some high profile HOF QBs, but he played in a different era. When compared to his contemporaries (Montana, Elway, Marino, etc.) he does fall short; probably way short.
Banks simply doesn't have the longevity at the highest level. He had a few years as one of the top 5 LBs in the game and then dropped off that level.
As for Simms you just picked 3 of the best QB's in history as his contemporaries...dig a little deeper on guys who are already in.
Banks? At what point in his career exactly did his game drop off in your opinion? The way that you phrased it, it looks like by his third year. Are you serious?
He drafted LT and Simms but also Derek Brown, Dave Brown and Jarrod Bunch in the first rounds.
And because he has 2 Super Bowl wins and 2 Super Bowl MVP's, Eli doesn't need to have superb numbers to get in. He'll make it if he finishes with "above average" passing stats.
As for Banks, he had a stretch of a few years when he was absolutely dominant. His last year or two in NY and then his time elsewhere, he was still a good LB. But, he wasn't dominant or among the top handful in the league. If he sustained his greatness for longer, he would go to the HOF.
Quote:
of getting into the HOF as any of us on this thread.
You talk a lot of crap for knowing very little about the game.
Did you want to quiz me or something Andrew?
Look...Simms and Banks were great Giants, but they were only good NFL players at their respective positions. Both made a couple of pro bowls and I don't think were ever All-Pros. HOF basically means you were a dominant player in the period you played.
He's averaged 3927 yards per season and 25 TDs per season over 9 years. If he does even that well for another 5 years, his totals would be: 54,980 yards and 356 TDs
That alone might do it. Add in at least 2 SB MVPs, and I'm guessing he gets in. Maybe not on the first ballot, but he gets in. And if he wins another title, it won't matter at all what his numbers were or what the rest of the league may have felt about him. He'll be a first ballot.
As for Simms, a case could be made, but I think if it were gonna happen, it would have happened already.
The common thread with Seifert, Flores and Johnson is that they all crashed and burned with their second opportunities. Coughlin had success with Jax and then won multiple times with the Giants. He's a lock for the HOF.
HOF is about dominance during one's career: it's for the best of the best, the players and coaches and leaders who influenced the game the most during their tenures.
Neither Carl Banks nor Phil Simms falls into that category. I don't think George Young does either, but I can see why some would think so.
Of current Giants, only Eli and TC will gain consideration: the former because he shined in two super bowls and the latter because of a consistent string of quality seasons with two organizations that were in bad shape when he came on board.
But that said, I think only TC will get the nod.
Unless Eli gets a third ring - then he'll be considered a dominant player during his career. But I don't think that's going to happen.
I also think T.C. will be the next Giants inductee.