Before my time... Drew Pearson snub?

Based on what he was in the NFL during that time he should be in. Not sure why he isn’t and many feel the same.

#s from the '70s always look low nowadays for WRs. It was a completely different game.

He made huge plays in big games. Great hands. Clutch.

but probably affected by what could be seen as a lack of stats, even for the era : only a pair of 1000 yard seasons, less than 50 TDs, etc.

he excelled in an era when DBs were licensed to assault receivers anywhere an the field as long as the ball wasn’t in the air.

but he's a champion. Many a gold jacket wearing HOF'r with no ring would trade.

... probably made more clutch receptions than both of them.

Between the three, I would have selected Cliff Branch. If Harold Carmichael is a Hall of Famer, so is Amani Toomer (kind of kidding)

After 35 years, it would seem to suggest the consensus is he was a very good but not great player. I'm ok with that high standard. I remember him being clutch, big plays, great hands.

Absolutely.

DP inspired by him ... Drew was that dude in his time.

teams. Pearson for sure.

I’d say no. Good, not great. Like Theisman, from South River.

but as JonC references, his stats don't blow you away. He was, however, a 3x All Pro, while Lynn Swann, who's stats are far less, is a one-time all pro (understanding that his play in the biggest moments carries a lot of weight).

There certainly is an argument for his inclusion.

In comment 14780754 JonC said:

Quote:

After 35 years, it would seem to suggest the consensus is he was a very good but not great player. I'm ok with that high standard. I remember him being clutch, big plays, great hands.

I agree. Good player but never struck me as a HOF player. Again seeing him live is one thing, looking at stats later is another. In his time, versus his peers, he was a good WR. I agree with no HOF call

I hated the Cowboys, and was very conflicted because I loved watching Dorsett and Pearson. They were both so smooth and money.

.

every freaking time the Cowboys needed a big play or they were in a tight spot, the ball went to Pearson. He should get in as should Cliff Branch.

Carmichael totally deserves to be in the Hall.

Got to remember, they were playing 14 game seasons in an era when teams ran the ball a lot more than they do today so 60 catches and 1000 yards was an amazing season. 50 catches and 850-900 yards usually put a receiver in the top 5 in yardage and receptions. For example, in 1977, the last year with a 14 game schedule, Pearson led the league in receiving yardage with 870. (Jimmy Robinson led the Giants that year with 422 yards- yes, you read that correctly)

Big fan of him, before I hated cowboys in 80's
liked them in 70's (before my gman love started in late 70's)
Drew was clutch as heck and a real top WR
But not special RICE is the GOAT drew would be similar to a better version of toomer nothing stands out but more than gets job done

drew, dorsett, the manster randy white, theismann, raymond chester and burgess owens to name some
back in the late 70's was at fairleigh dickinson in trumbull CT
players would hang out with u for hours in dorm, just chilling
I used to bust their chops if my streets and smith football mag would say bad stuff about them, but since they were good, not much bad would be said.

he was right before the time of the real size speed guys coming into league probably 6 ft 185 and did a 4.65

When drew pushed off
that was the best viking team of the 70's
Not saying they would have beat pitt this time . they aged alot in 1 yr in 1976 when raiders blew them out
1975 defense was still nasty

In comment 14780897 HomerJones45 said:

Quote:

every freaking time the Cowboys needed a big play or they were in a tight spot, the ball went to Pearson. He should get in as should Cliff Branch. Carmichael totally deserves to be in the Hall. Got to remember, they were playing 14 game seasons in an era when teams ran the ball a lot more than they do today so 60 catches and 1000 yards was an amazing season. 50 catches and 850-900 yards usually put a receiver in the top 5 in yardage and receptions. For example, in 1977, the last year with a 14 game schedule, Pearson led the league in receiving yardage with 870. (Jimmy Robinson led the Giants that year with 422 yards- yes, you read that correctly)

Good post/comments.

Pearson was very good. I can see the case both ways with him though.

but this is my favorite moment of his.
Drew Pearson Philly - ( New Window )

remember him as the GM of the New York Hitmen.

That Pearson meant more to his team or impacted the game more than banks and Bavaro did here. Pearson was terrific, but it’s going to bother me if and when he gets in giants players who won MORE Super Bowls, don’t.M

Banks was also voted to the all decade team.

In comment 14780754 JonC said:

Quote:

After 35 years, it would seem to suggest the consensus is he was a very good but not great player. I'm ok with that high standard. I remember him being clutch, big plays, great hands.

I do agree about the high standard thing. Problem is there are dozens of players in canton that don’t sniff that high standard. That’s why I get annoyed when players like Pearson or banks or Oates, Marshall or Bavaro don’t get a whiff.

In comment 14780703 NY-Fan said:

Quote:

Based on what he was in the NFL during that time he should be in. Not sure why he isn’t and many feel the same.

Yup this is how I feel too.

When it comes to HOFers I think of how they were in their era, and not compared to other eras. Rules, playing surfaces equipment etc change and players should only be compared to their own era.

That being the case, Drew was one of if not the best WR of his era and I remember him being pretty damn dominant at his position. Clutch, great hands, always seemed to rise to the occasion and just made big play after big play.

He should be in IMO.

I don't think so. Very good player but no

In comment 14781054 djm said:

Quote:

That Pearson meant more to his team or impacted the game more than banks and Bavaro did here. Pearson was terrific, but it’s going to bother me if and when he gets in giants players who won MORE Super Bowls, don’t.M Banks was also voted to the all decade team.

Or Eli...

But I'd compare Pearson to Victor Cruz.

Both UDFA. Similar players/skill sets with similar impact on their teams.

but at the same time i'm not sure why he threw a party, and video taped himself during the announcement of the inductees.

he's a fricken Cowboy, no Giants fan should be losing sleep over this. Carl Banks deserves to be in before him

But he barely broke 1,000 yards twice, NEVER broke 10TD/year.

He is NOT a Hall of Famer.

In comment 14781667 x meadowlander said:

Quote:

But he barely broke 1,000 yards twice, NEVER broke 10TD/year. He is NOT a Hall of Famer.

I don't think it's fair to compare him to what WR's numbers look like today. It was a different game in his era. 14 games for one thing plus it was more a running based game and D's were pretty much able to maul WR's.

Based on what he did in his era he should get in IMO. He was one of if not the best WR then.