I know he is the best of all time.

But, there are others that don't think very highly of Tony G.

They had Jackie Smith rated above Tony...... :facepalm:

Who the hell talks about tight ends and uses how many "rings" they've won as if it's relevant? Just dumb.

Chiefs fans who watch one of the best players they ever had, catch and carry foot balls for another team ;)

If based on past accomplishments I'd say it's a walkaway between Tomlinson and Gonzo...

LMAO
Surely you jest.

So they're going to throw to Gonzo this year?...

Well I don't spend a bazillion amount of time on the web or on this site.
So why not? The player should be able to choose.
How does it work?

The players Bust is on display with the team or teams he played for along with dates. The HoF is about personal achievement, that's why there is no specific team affiliation when they enter.

If your lucky :thumb:

I completely agree rings should have no prevalence to who and who doesn't get into the Hall first. Unfortuntately to the people who vote they seem to. Hence why Marshall Faulk (maybe the 6th-10th best running back ever) got in first ballot last year and Willie Roaf (the great LT to ever play the game) did not. Glamour postions help also.

It's BS, but it is what it is. The Willie Roaf snub makes me want to vomit all over not only the Hall Of Fame voters, but the MVP voters as well.

My reason for the latter? How about Priest Holmes breaking the TD record on a 13-3 first round bye team getting snubbed for Steve McNair who didn't come close to breaking anything and furthermore played on a team that didn't even win their division. Also that year Jamal Lewis received more votes than Priest for breaking 2000 Yds. OK, fine, so yards matter more than TD's to the voters. Then why, THE VERY NEXT year does Peyton take home the MVP practically unanimously for breaking the passing TD record even though Dante Culpepper threw for almost 1000 yds more than Peyton. In 2003 Yds were more important, then in 2004 Td's were more important.

I personally believe it's cause Peyton plays the game and wh*res himself out every chance he gets and is a company man who asks "how high?" every time the leauge asks him to jump. It's sickening to me that acutal play comes second to PR skills when it comes to the Hall of Fame and MVP voters but it is what it is.

160 yards is not "almost 1000 yards". Peyton threw 10 more TDs, 1 fewer INT, and 160 fewer yards while winning 4 more games than the Vikings.

How are you trying to make an argument 7 years after the fact that a 6-10 QB should have won the MVP over Peyton Manning in the year that Manning had the best season in NFL history?

The best year a QB ever had was Brady's 2007 season.

No, for some reason I thought Culpepper threw for way more than that in 04. Doesn't change the fact that Culpepper threw for more yards, and the Vikings made the playoffs that year and won a game, they weren't 6-10

I looked at the wrong season for the records. Indy was 12-4. Minnesota was 8-8.

No one cares about the Rams. /CP