HOF & 3 Coaches
 

Ok, so during some down time the last week I was watching one of the many "Top 10" segments on NFLN. In one of them, they were talking about coaches... the reference was made about Levy being in the HOF and compared him to guys like Reeves and Marty. I would think that both of them are locks for the HOF, so I was looking at their numbers.

Is it just a matter of time for these two? What are your thoughts? I guess my question is why was Marv such a sure fire HOF'er and Dan Reeves with more wins and a nearly identical playoff record ... is waiting longer?

Also, while the playoff numbers kill Marty... shouldn't he be considered?

Marv Levy
Last season was 1997 - inducted in 2001

17 years as a HC / 143 wins and 112 losses
11-8 playoff record
0-4 SB record (1 team)
10 seasons at or above .500

Dan Reeves
Last season was 2003 -

23 years as a HC / 190 wins and 165 losses and 2 ties
11-9 playoff record
0-4 SB record (2 teams)
14 seasons at or above .500

Marty Schottenheimer
Last season was 2006 -

21 years as a HC / 200 wins and 126 losses and 1 tie
5-13 playoff record
0 SB
18 seasons at or above .500

They should both be in.

Was Chuck Knox on the list?

No - this wasn't a HOF focused list, it was either top coaches to have never won a SB or the top meltdowns of all time thing...

I think Dan Reeves might get in, but no way in hell should the coach with the worst playoff record in NFL history get in.

Even with that premise, Knox should heve been on the list.

He is second only to Marty with the most wins to have never made the SB.

Only real difference is that Dan and Marv went to the Superbowl and in their case more than once.....

Yeah, sorry ... I was reading that as Chuck Noll and wondering why you asked. My bad.

On that list of 10 best that have never won - yes, he was on there as well as modern day guys like Reid and Fisher.

That and a .561 career win percentage for Levy to a .535 win percentage for Reeves.

That, and the fact that the Bills went to 4 consecutive SBs and lost, which shows a great resiliency that Levy has ot be given some credit for.

Don't get me wrong - I understand why Marv is there... I just don't understand why Reeves isn't there yet, based on how quickly they put Marv in the HOF.

Reeves retired from coaching in 2003. He wasn't even eligible until last year.

Still... I question why Marv (retired '97) was inducted so quickly (Class '01), compared to Reeves.

Dan Reeves went to three SBs in twelve years with a QB who most consider to be top 3 all time, and there is some perception that Reeves held him back to some extent.

Levy, on the other hand went to 4 SBs in 12 years with the Bills, and most think that he was innovative, and that he had a hand in developing Jim Kelly inot a HoF QB.

Actually, the way the HOF bylaws reads, 2009 was the first class Reeves was eligible.

Who do you think he deserved to get in over: Bruce Smith, Ralph Wilson Jr, Rod Woodson, Derrick Thomas, Randall McDaniel, Bob Hayes.

The only arguable person would be Wilson Jr but he was nominated by the senior committee, IIRC.

Levy's class in 2001 was weaker, IMO: Nick Buoniconti, Mike Munchak, Jackie Slater, Lynn Swann, Ron Yary, Jack Youngblood.

True... Reeves took two teams (one with a journeyman QB) to the SB. There's just not that much difference between the two to me and would put Reeves a tick higher than Levy.

I didn't consider the weakness of the Levy class... but, looking ahead, the talent pool of potential HOF'ers gets pretty deep. Hopefully, he won't wait long.

That's the problem for many guys. The next few years are STACKED.

Not me.

Levy showed a flexibility in his philosphy that you simply don't see that often in coaching.

He adjusted his plan to get the most out of the talent he had to work with.

Would anyone have thought that the guy who brought back the Wing T in KC would be the same guy that would have a high flying no huddle offense?

Reeves is a tick above Marty in my opinion, and a couple of steps below Marv.

That might be the most homerish post ever from you.

I havent' looked at any of their records that closely, but to me they all belong in the Hall of Pretty Damn Good.

Consider that they went to the SBs mostly during an era of NFC SB dominance. Most of the time they went ot the SB, it was as the best team in a relatively weak conference, and not as literally the second best team in the league.

53% win percentage impresses me not at all, though an analysis of how many yeasr were spent turning around a program needs to be taken into consideration. 53% wins with 2 teams is different than with 4 teams, if he took 4 teams from bad/mediocre/average and made them significantly better.

But when you talk great NFL coaches, I don't really put any of those guys on my list.

Ya remember that time when Dan Reeves took the 1999 Atlanta Falcons to Miami to face the Denver Broncos in the Super Bowl?Do ya remember that?Ya remember when Eugene Robinson of that same Atlanta team got the Bart Starr Award by the religious group Athletes In Action for being a person who displays high morale character?
Do ya remember that?
Do ya remember when later that same day that he got that award and he offered a prostitute $40 for oral sex but the prostitute wasn't a prostitute but instead was a female police officer dressed as a prostitute?
Ya remember that?
Well, I remember something that you don't remember at all:
That same police officer was really Dan Reeves dressed in drag and trolling...

...which explains his delay in entering the HOF...

I think that we(chief's fans) felt the pain of those playoff loses while a non-chiefs fan might think marty was just snake bit in the playoffs( the fumble...the kicker never to be mentioned...)
Not that I think it's right just trying to see things from the other side of the fence.
They(non-chiefs fan) would likely remember the good regular seasons more so than we would.
To me marty was the football version of Gene Mauch with a better regular season record.

To humor anyone who cares, I took a look at Reeves. The answer is no.

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...es/ReevDa0.htm

Denver was up and down with him. Some great years, some mediocre years, even though he had some pretty damn great talent htere.

Took an aging but very good Giants team and took them in the wrong direction. Had one really good year out of SEVEN with the Falcons.

53% win total overall.

No SB wins, no special contribution to the game (unlike Levy and the no huddle) that I can think of.

I just don't see it.

I think I could argue both sides of the argument for all 3 of them...

There are really only a handful of elite coaches, none of the 3 fit. But, while the HOF should = elite for every category, it does not.

Reeves and the Elway era is similar to Belichick and the Brady era. The difference being, NE had a defense in the Brady years where DEN did not during the Reeves' years.

Belichick prior to Brady was Reeves after Elway.

Reviewed Schottenheimer's record. It's much more of what I expect to see from a HOF coach (compare to Reeves).

Takes a Browns team and improves it. Takes a Chiefs team and improves it. Ignore one aberrant year with that idiot Snyder in Washington. Takes a Chargers team and improves it.

61% win percentage.

The only knock, obviously, is no SB appearances/wins.

Another question: Why do so many consider Tim Brown a 1st ballot HOF but not Cris Carter?

Tim Brown:
16 seasons
255 games
1094 receptions
14934 yards
100 TDs
13.7 yards/reception
4555 return yards
3 return TDs
9 Pro Bowls (6 consecutive)
0x All-Pro

Cris Carter:
16 seasons
234 games
1101 receptions
13899 yards
130 TDs
12.6 yards/reception
8 straight Pro-Bowls
2x All-Pro

Maybe.

However, if you are a HoF voter, when you look at his record and see his overall playoff record, and see that his teams failed to take advantage of homefield advantage 6 times(?), 7 times(?), I don't think you vote for him.

Again, using Chuck Knox, he had the same kind of regular season success, and a better overall playoff record and hasn't sniffed the hall.

I just can't see Marty getting in.

I would argue that the Donkeys didn't really have all that much talent outside of Elway.

Don't know the answer to that.

Brown was good, but I would argue that Carter is better, by far.

I totally agree... next year could have an AMAZING HOF class.

Jerry Rice and Emmitt Smith are locks. Then there's: Cris Carter, Tim Brown, Andre Reed, John Randle, Aeneas Williams, Thannon Tharpe, Eddie George among others.

Then 2011 adds Marshall Faulk, Curtis Martin, Jerome Bettis and Deion Sanders.

Is Shields eligible in 2011 or 2012?

It does in my mind. Lynn Swann would've been inducted over my rotting corpse. I'm a stickler across the board:

Pete Rose - NO
Shoeless Joe - NO
Lynn Swann - NO
Dan freaking Reeves - NO

If you don't have at least a couple SB rings in your collection as a coach, you better impress the hell out of me as to why. Or else have something else to put on the resume, like a Dick LeBeau.

Hall of Fame coaches are guys like Gibbs, Walsh, Parcells, Lombardi, Landry, Shula, Brown, Noll and Belichick. Guys that defined the job and were outstanding at it for a prolonged period.

53% regular season record despite lengthy stays with the clubs he coached, and no Super Bowl victories? Not even close, in my mind.

I guess you are correct the playoff record is too hard to overlook. If just1 just frickin 1 of those 13-3 teams got a ring he would be a sure thing HOF coach.
Cowher walks on water and won 1 ring. I think that would have been enough for marty.

There is no way in hell I'd even give a second thought about leaving Eddie George out of the hall.

He was just a mediocre back that got a lot of carries.

Jerry Rice
Emmit Smith
Shannon Sharpe
Cris Carter

Those should be the locks... Brown, Reed, Randle, George will get in, but maybe not this year.

There will be a few old timers in the next class, but those 4 are who I would vote for ...

Eligible for class of 2012.

If you're putting Belichick in there with those guys, you have to include Shanahan.

The Pro Bowl / All-Pro voters would disagree.

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...n/all-pros.htm

Reeves coached Denver from '81-92. Were there a bunch of other HOFers? No. But there was very solid talent.

Belichick has dominated the NFL for years with one all-world QB and a bunch of "very solid talent" that isn't likely to get into the HOF either. Seymour, maybe. Vinatieri, maybe. Moss, obviously, but none of the SBs involved him (yet).

I agree, the dude had a career 3.6 ypc average. However, the media loves him.

I think Shanarat is a HELL of a coach. Unfortunately, he was not a hell of a GM. I don't think the world sees him at quite the level of the guys I mentioned, but without reviewing his record I'd still think he's a HOF coach. He's got the multiple rings and was consistently extremely good for a very long time.

I'd like to see his stats, but that's about my impression too. I'd change "mediocre" to "slightly above average" and I agree.

I don't think the GM piece will matter much when he's considered for the HOF, many years down the road... he'll be coaching in 2010, so he'll build on his legacy.

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...G/GeorEd00.htm

I'd call that mediocre, and I'd be generous in doin so.

If he's smart, he'll let someone else run the Front Office.

This is where stats get interesting with guys like George...

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...G/GeorEd00.htm

There are a TON of great players with great stats, do they all deserve consideration? I dunno. George was definitely above average and one of the best at his position, but there were a lot of great RBs in his era.

I view George as the Rod Smith of RBs during his era... but without the rings. Don't get me wrong, I think Rod deserves consideration... but, there's a lot of guys with great numbers during that era.

Quite possibly could be Dallas and he won't have a choice...

Comparison to one of the more recently inducted RBs: Thurman Thomas.

Thomas
13 seasons
182 games
2877 carries (222 per year)
12074 yards
65 TDs
4.2 ypc
472 receptions
4458 yards
23 TDs
9.4 ypr
5 straight Pro-Bowls
2x All-Pro

George
9 seasons
141 games
2865 carries (319 per year)
10441 yards
68 TDs
3.6 ypc
268 receptions
2227 yards
10 TDs
8.3 ypr
4 straight Pro-Bowls
1x All-Pro

The other problem for George: Emmitt Smith, Marshall Faulk, Curtis Martin, Jerome Bettis were all better and all, except Martin, have a ring(s).

The NFL is at the point where they really have to be careful of who gets in... because there are great players that are on pace to have great stats.

Would anyone consider Ocho Cinco a HOFer? Not me, but his stats could put him in that discussion at some point.

You can run just off the stats, but it's a bit silly.

First, you give no credit for toughness/longevity.

Second, mediocre suggests BELOW average. Are you saying you think that he was getting all those carries even though he was below the average NFL RB? Not below average HOFer. Just a below average RB during those years int he NFL? It's silly.

Third, those were run oriented teams. Everyone knew what was coming. They didn't have fabulous talent on offense. It was Eddie George and a cloud of dust.

How much different is Bettis?

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...B/BettJe00.htm

Throw out the last two years when George was running on fumes, and he gets pretty close to BEttis' 3.9 YPC average for his career.

But yeah, again, George ain't a HOFer to me no matter how many yards he has, while Bettis is.

Gradishar, Mecklinburg, Upchurch all overrated players that won poularity contests.

Upchurch, Van Johnson and Ricky Nattiel all had difficulty in getting separation, and Elway made them all look better than they were cause he could bought time so often with his legs.

The only players that Elway played with in his career who are worthy of HoF consideration are Steve Atwater, Sharpe and Terrell Davis, and he won't shouldn't get in because of his lack of longevity.

You have to compare players to their peers. Ocho Cinco will not get in over Randy Moss, Larry Fitzgerald, Marvin Harrison, Isaac Bruce, Torry Holt, Hines Ward or TO.

And Martin was obviously better, stat wise, than either George or Bettis.

Yeah, how many HOFers has Belichick had to team with Brady? Moss is the only clear-cut one, and he wasnt' involved in the three SB wins. Maybe Vinatieri as a fan favorite, but he's a freaking kicker. I'm ignoring guys at the end of their rope like Junior Seau.

So Belichick has 3 with the all world QB and a bunch of good players, and Reeves has zero.

Yes.

From http://www.pro-football-reference.com
Eddie George
Players whose career was of similar quality and shape
Chuck Muncie, Leroy Kelly, Earl Campbell, Ottis Anderson, Clinton Portis, Shaun Alexander, John L. Williams, Floyd Little, Jim Taylor, Jamal Lewis

I would have taylor and campbell in before george.
I think the rest are comparable.
Good but not sure HOF's.


Explanation of the similarity scores
At baseball-reference.com you'll find, for each player in baseball history, a list of players similar to that player. These lists are generated by a method introduced by Bill James in the 1980s, and his aim was to find players who were similar in quality, but also similar in style of play.

The similar players lists here at pro-football-reference are NOT the same thing.

Unfortunately, football stats just aren't descriptive enough to capture players' styles. So we have settled for a method that attempts to find players whose careers were similar in terms of quality and shape. By shape, we mean things like: how many years did he play? how good were his best years, compared to his worst years? did he have a few great years and then several mediocre years, or did he have many good-but-not-great years?

Essentially, if you run across a player you've never heard of before, and if the list of similar players has some names you recognize, this gives you a quick way to (very roughly) figure out where the guy fits in history.

I agree and on that note...

Michael Irvin - 12 seasons / HOF Inductee
147 Games
750 receptions
11,904 yards
65 TDs
3 Rings
5 Pro Bowls
7 - 1,000+ yd seasons

Rod Smith - 12 seasons
158 Games
849 receptions
11,389 yards
68 TDs
2 Rings
3 Pro Bowls
8 - 1,000+ yd seasons

I call George mediocre because he was a suckass RB.

He never impressed me.

Mediocre is how I saw him.

As I've said many times, stats don't mean jack to me, but you asked to see them.

I think you're really going out of your way to dismiss the level of talent on the NE teams.

Is Rod not likely to get in? I would've thought so, but maybe he'll suffer from stat inflation issues.

I remember a discussion of a very good WR who had been around alot of years -- I think he retired within the last 2-3 years after palying for the Jaguars or Tampa the last couple of years. His stats were comparable to several HOFers, but I never thought of him as a HOF, just a very good player.

Can't think of his name, but issues like that are going to be a problem for all players, as stats continually increase.

Jimmy Smith... another great example.

And, I would think Rod qualifies... but I've heard some that say no.

Re Eddie George: Eddie George was a good back, but he wasn't a HOFer, I don't think. There was a time when 10,000 yards was considered a sort of marker for a HOF back, but I don't think that's the case anymore. There's guys with 10,000 yards that aren't getting in, like Ricky Watters and Jamal Lewis and (I hope not) Tiki Barber. Fred Taylor. Clinton Portis will go over 10,000 yards. I just don't see George as a HOFer. It helps to be a media darling like Bettis, but I don't think George has enough of that to get in. But like someone else said, it depends on the class.

Listen, I love our guys. I think we've consistently had an above-average talent roster, from 1-53, from years 2003-current. I'm not sure that our 2001 roster was much above average, especially when you consider how Light and Seymour were just rookies.

But you tell me -- because this debate rages on Pats boards -- who are the Patriots HOFers during the Belichick era, and especially how many from the three SB winning years?

1. Brady. I'll go out on a limb and say "yes".

2. Seymour? Maybe. 6 Pro Bowls, but injuries have derailed him. He's nearly 30 now, and has 3-5 years to cement his legacy, or not.

3. Vinatieri? Maybe. One kicker in the HOF. Other than a few memorable kicks in key situations, he'd have NO shot whatsoever.

4. Bruschi/Brown/Law/Milloy/Harrison/Light/Vrabel/McGinest -- all in the Hall of Very Good

5. Corey Dillon -- HOF level when he wanted to be, and certainly awesome in 2004, but not a HOFer.

That's it. Couldn't think of his damn name.

I wouldn't put Rod Smith in before Jerry Rice, Cris Carter, Tim Brown, Andre Reed or Jimmy Smith.

No me neither.

Looks like Smith has your boy beat.

12 seasons
178 games
862 receptions
12,287 yards
67 TDs
No rings
5 Pro Bowls
9 1,000+ yard seasons

Almost identical, right? Welll....but how many years did Rod Smith have a top 5 (at least) all time QB throwing the ball all over the field, and a world class TE operating underneath, and a great running back behind the great QB?

For those reasons, I'd tend to give a slight nod to Smith. To be honest, though, given how close it is, they're either both in, or neither is.

Even that aberrant year with Snyder, they became the first team to win 5 consecutive after losing their first five.

Marty was like the guy who would get A's in all his course work and an F on the test and get a C in the class. That is not hall of fame worthy

You can use that argument though for so many players and people do to either state the case as to why someone should be in or out of the HOF.

Yes - Rod had Elway for the majority of his years with Sharpe, Ed and Davis for several of them. But, Smith was on some good teams and while Brunell is not Elway, he was very productive in that system. Smith also had a solid RB (Taylor) supporting him and there was McCardell playing #2...

It's not like Jimmy Smith was playing with Peter Tom Willis at QB and Brandon Jackson at RB. They're very similar in production while playing on good offenses.

Many RBs over the last decade fall into the same group and most of them are not Emmit Smith and Barry Sanders type of players - those are legit HOF RBs.

George, Watters, Bettis, Lewis, Barber, Portis, Taylor... they're all great RBs, but neither of them really stands out much from the other. So, I think all or none get in... and the same goes with WRs.

I think Irvin was a great WR, but I don't know that he's any more qualified than Rod Smith or even Jimmy Smith for the HOF. Many will say "he has rings", so does Rod... and each of them was considered one of the best of his era for a number of years.

Yeah but Levy had some of the best teams ever. Those Bills team were great.

They had a string of excellent drafts. Kelly, they found Reed at Kutztown State, Thurman Thomas, Bruce Smith, Cornelius Bennett and more. They went through a period where a ton of their draft picks were working out perfectly.

errr...Broncos offense was the best in the NFL some of those years. Heck, it won two SBs for you guys. Don't think Jax ever had that.

But yeah, it's so close it hardly matters. He's not the ARchie Manning of WRs or anything.

Again, both in or both out, is really the only "fair" result, IMHO. I'm thinking "out", myself, but as noted above I'm a very tough grader.

I agree -- they're all out.

IMHO there's waaaay too much focus on skill position players in the NFL HOF anyway, and the standards for them are too loose to begin with.

30-40 years down the road? football probably won't exist. THe Running man will be the only game humans play and watch

Law was very good. I don't see him getting into the HOF, partly due to the unfair position distribution of the HOF.

Ty Law will get into the HOF. 5x Pro-Bowler, 2x All-Pro, rings, 52 career INTs.

I think Corey Dillon has a tougher time getting in behind Emmitt Smith, Marshall Faulk, Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis.

Corey Dillon much like many of the other RBs didn't do much to stand out.

I think the key theme through most of this thread is that the "bar" needs to be raised when measuring HOF greatness.