HawkShack.com

http://sea.247sports.com/Bolt/Kenny-Eas ... e-38616356

Pretty short article that I fully agree with. Best Safety ( maybe best Defensive player in the league while he played period) .

HumanCockroach wrote:http://sea.247sports.com/Bolt/Kenny-Easley-stands-as-Seahawks-best-Hall-of-Fame-candidate-38616356

Pretty short article that I fully agree with. Best Safety ( maybe best Defensive player in the league while he played period) .

The only reason he's not in, and probably will never get in, is that his career was a bit too short by about 3 or 4 years. But I agree wholeheartedly that he was the best safety and arguably the best defensive player of his era.

I guess, but IMHO being the very best defensive player for half a decade holds more water than others. I've heard a player like Kreig does not deserve consideration at all (like even a discussion) because he "held on to pad his stats ( which is laughable because he barely played his last 5 or 6 years) and isn't to be considered because he he was that second tier QB, which is fine by me, but Bettis to the best of my recollection is comparable, not sure if he ever was "the best back" while playing, held on several years past his prime, and was for the moat part a short yardage specialist.

Easley WAS the VERY best of his era, changed what was desired, how safeties were built, and what was expected. You ( general term here, not specifically you) can't argue in one hand that a player hanging on is "bad" and on the other claim a player that blazed the modern era SS position, didn't play long enough, despite him having more picks, tackles, FF's pro bowls, and all pros in his career than many safeties in the hall.

Do you doubt if JJ Watt were to have a career debilitating illness after next season that he would be denied? Personally I doubt it, I doubt that seriously. The man belongs in the hall.

Does he belong?
Without a doubt.

Will he get in? Maybe, and I hope so.
Unfortunately he played in front of us. Had he been in NY, it would have happened years ago.

Yep - Ronnie Lott - One of the greatest Defensive Backs of all time - has said on several occasions that Kenny Easley is the greatest Safety of all time.

HumanCockroach wrote:Do you doubt if JJ Watt were to have a career debilitating illness after next season that he would be denied? Personally I doubt it, I doubt that seriously. The man belongs in the hall.

That's a good question. If Watt's sudden demise was due to a particularly tragic disease, such as Lou Gehrig's, or a plane crash while volunteering work as a humanitarian like Roberto Clemete, then maybe 4 years would be good enough for him to get in. But if he blew out his knee while skiing or got in a motorcycle accident, I don't think so.

.

Ken was my favorite player and he hit like he was shot out of a gun. He was a HOF player but not a HOF career, just not long enough.

The HOF is littered with players that played a similar length . For example.

http://m.pfref.com/m?p=XXplayersXXSXXSayeGa00.htm&t=0

HumanCockroach wrote:The HOF is littered with players that played a similar length . For example.

http://m.pfref.com/m?p=XXplayersXXSXXSayeGa00.htm&t=0

There's a few with under 10 years, mostly from the 20's to the 60's, like Doak Walker and Steve Van Buren, when pro football was more of a hobby than it was a career as players had to take regular jobs in the offseason to make ends meet (George Blanda drove a beer truck), and there was Jimmy Brown, who played 9 years in the late 50-'s-60's. But there's not too many modern day HOF'ers with 7 year careers. Sayers career ended in 1971, and unless I missed someone, he was the last player inducted that had fewer than 10 years.

http://m.pfref.com/m?p=XXplayersXXCXXCampEa00.htm&t=0

There is actually several.

HumanCockroach wrote:http://m.pfref.com/m?p=XXplayersXXCXXCampEa00.htm&t=0

There is actually several.

Yea, I missed Earl Campbell. 8 years. And I see Dwight Stevenson (1980-87) at 8 years, Kellen Winslow at 9 years, and Leroy Selmon at 9 years. More than I thought. My bad, I just breezed through Wiki and missed several. At 7 years, Easley's career would still be the shortest (unless I screwed up again) of the modern era.

There are 264 members of the HOF, and the vast majority of them have 10+ year careers, so getting Easley in with just 7 is going to require a huge sell, especially given that he never played in a Super Bowl. Being a diehard Seahawk fan from the get go, I'd love to see him get in as I agree completely that he was the best safety in the game during his era. I just don't see it happening.

Fair enough RD, for me it has to do with "being the best" for a least several seasons, IMHO Easley was that, while guys like Bettis weren't, which is probably why the length of a career cut short is not my biggest reason for exclusion from the hall. I truly believe he belongs in Canton, and should be discussed in the greatest safeties if ALL time. The man IMHO was better than Lott, Polamalu, Reed, Woodsen, or any other contemporary that played before or after him. Truly a unique player that changed the type of play and players teams expected from that position.

HumanCockroach wrote:Fair enough RD, for me it has to do with "being the best" for a least several seasons, IMHO Easley was that, while guys like Bettis weren't, which is probably why the length of a career cut short is not my biggest reason for exclusion from the hall. I truly believe he belongs in Canton, and should be discussed in the greatest safeties if ALL time. The man IMHO was better than Lott, Polamalu, Reed, Woodsen, or any other contemporary that played before or after him. Truly a unique player that changed the type of play and players teams expected from that position.

I'm not going to argue with you about his credentials outside of his longevity. When opposing quarterbacks broke the huddle, the first thing they'd do would be to see where Easley was lining up. I never heard that said about a safety before. He could hit nearly as hard as Kam, cover nearly as much ground as Earl, and was a better ball hawk than both and better than those other safeties you mentioned.

Agreed about guys like Bettis. He was never the best at his position like Easley was at his. Plus they're admitting punters like Ray Guy. I mean, who would you rather have on your team, Ray Guy or Kenny Easley?

I don't necessarily agree with Easley being shut out of the HOF, but I understand and accept it. I was more upset when Tez was being excluded.

What rubs me the wrong way is a guy like Bettis being in while guys like Easley and TD are on the outside looking in. Bettis essentially has 3 very good years and the rest of his career he was just good to okay. He was also (defying conventional expectation) a bad short yardage back.

The length of the career argument doesn't work for me and here's why. If Jerome Bettis had retired 5 years earlier there is no chance the HOF committee would elect him to the HOF... none. They would argue ironically that his career wasn't long enough. But he holds on for 5 more years playing in a situation where he is platooning with the likes of Amos Zeroue and Willie Parker.

How does five years of mediocre to bad play add to a HOF resume? It just doesn't make sense. Furthermore, there are now 5 HOF RBs over the last several years who were in still in their prime before TD got injured. Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, Jerome Bettis, Curtis Martin, Marshall Faulk. And in the two years prior to Terrell Davis getting injured he was better than ALL of them.

I feel like dominance and being the best at and/or setting the standard for your position should mean more than the raw accumulation of stats over a career when many of those years the player was slightly above average to mediocre.

Of course Jerry Kramer sticking out like a sore thumb but we let in Mick Tingy.

3× Pro Bowl (1962, 1963, 1967)
5× First-team All-Pro (1960, 1962, 1963, 1966, 1967)
Second-team All-Pro (1968)
5× NFL champion (1961, 1962, 1965, 1966, 1967)
2× Super Bowl champion (I, II)
NFL 1960s All-Decade Team
NFL 50th Anniversary Team
Green Bay Packers Hall of Fame


Career NFL statistics


Field Goal attempts:
54

Fumble recoveries:
3
Stats at NFL.com

IMO if you made any "All Decade Team" you should be in the Hall.

That would get some guys other than "skill position" players some love.

There is definitely something inconsistent in how players are selected to the HoF.
I think that by and large the players that are inducted are worthy, but there are a few that seemingly got in by being media favorites or have been left out because they weren't liked much.

Guys like Easley who by their athleticism and ability helped change how Safety's are viewed and the types of players teams look for should have more consideration. I think they should just ask the players he played against how good he was relative to the others in the NFL at that time and they would get a clear answer about his worthiness for the HoF.
However, I get the feeling the voters just look at stats and rely too much on their memories to make real good decisions in a lot of cases.

NorthHawk wrote:There is definitely something inconsistent in how players are selected to the HoF.
I think that by and large the players that are inducted are worthy, but there are a few that seemingly got in by being media favorites or have been left out because they weren't liked much.

Guys like Easley who by their athleticism and ability helped change how Safety's are viewed and the types of players teams look for should have more consideration. I think they should just ask the players he played against how good he was relative to the others in the NFL at that time and they would get a clear answer about his worthiness for the HoF.
However, I get the feeling the voters just look at stats and rely too much on their memories to make real good decisions in a lot of cases.

Like Lynn Swann.

Good call on Jerry Kramer, obi.

CBob, the only problem I have with an all decade pre-qualification is that it doesn't address the cross decade guys. Easley played exclusively in the 80's so he's more likely to be remembered as being part of the 80's. Others might have played from 75-85 or 85-95 and not been associated with either decade.

c_hawkbob wrote:IMO if you made any "All Decade Team" you should be in the Hall.

Agree seems like a no brainer

I think the primary reason why Easley is not in the HOF is because all of his greatness was for Seattle - which was really an isolated part of the Country in the 80's.

savvyman wrote:I think the primary reason why Easley is not in the HOF is because all of his greatness was for Seattle - which was really an isolated part of the Country in the 80's.

I think the primary reason was his longevity. As HC and I discussed, the number of players admitted with less than 10 years is few and far between.

But I do think that there were other factors involved, such as no SB appearances and as you suggest, being off the beaten path and not playing for one of the established teams (Steelers, Cowboys, Redskins, Packers, et al).