Otis Taylor should be in the HOF. Here is why he isn't

[cdcox]

Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame. He invented a new prototype for WR - big, fast, great hands.

I think if one play during the 1971 Christmas Day game against the Dolphins had gone differently, he would be in the Hall today. Ironically, the play didn't even involve him, but three other Hall of Famers from those great Chiefs teams.: Dawson, Bell and Stenerud.

In their preparations for the game, it was noticed that the Dolphins lined up in an unbalanced line in defense of FGs. So the Chiefs put in a fake FG during the week in which the ball was hiked directly to Stenerud and he would run the ball to the weak side of the defense. Jan was surprisingly fast, having a 40-yd dash time in the 4.5 to 4.6 range. The Dolphins obliged by lining up in the unbalanced formation, and Dawson called the audible for the fake. However, when Bell, the long snapper, looked between his legs, he saw Jan concentrating on the spot from which he was going to kick the ball. This was part of Jan's deception, but it was so good that it ended up tricking Bell into thinking that Jan had missed the audible. So, he snapped it to a very surprised Dawson. The kick was rushed and missed. Meanwhile, both guards had pulled beautifully out to the open right side of the formation and would have provided Jan an easy escort to the endzone.

The Dolphins went on to win that SB, but many considered that Chiefs team to be better than the '69 champs. Had the Chiefs won another SB, then a larger crop of Chiefs from that era would have been inducted including Budde, Emmit Thomas, Johnny Robinson, and most certainly Otis Taylor.

[KingPriest2]

3-time Pro Bowler: 1966, 1971, 1972

| Rushing | Receiving |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| 1965 kan | 14 | 2 17 8.5 0 | 26 446 17.2 5 |
| 1966 kan | 14 | 2 33 16.5 0 | 58 1297 22.4 8 |
| 1967 kan | 14 | 5 29 5.8 1 | 59 958 16.2 11 |
| 1968 kan | 11 | 5 41 8.2 1 | 20 420 21.0 4 |
| 1969 kan | 11 | 2 -2 -1.0 0 | 41 696 17.0 7 |
| 1970 kan | 13 | 3 13 4.3 0 | 34 618 18.2 3 |
| 1971 kan | 14 | 1 25 25.0 1 | 57 1110 19.5 7 |
| 1972 kan | 14 | 5 13 2.6 0 | 57 821 14.4 6 |
| 1973 kan | 14 | 4 -14 -3.5 0 | 34 565 16.6 4 |
| 1974 kan | 10 | 1 6 6.0 0 | 24 375 15.6 2 |
| 1975 kan | 1 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 0 0 0.0 0 |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| TOTAL | 130 | 30 161 5.4 3 | 410 7306 17.8 57 |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+


Seasons among the league's top 10
Receptions: 1966-3t*, 1967-4t*, 1971-3, 1972-3t
Receiving yards: 1966-2*, 1967-4*, 1971-1, 1972-5
Receiving TDs: 1965-10t*, 1966-4t*, 1967-1t*, 1969-6t*, 1971-5t
Yards from scrimmage: 1966-4*, 1967-9*, 1971-6
Rush/Receive TDs: 1966-10t*, 1967-2*, 1969-8t*
* - AFL

[KingPriest2]

Modern Era: Wide Receivers (19)

Lance Alworth 1962-1972
Raymond Berry 1955-1967
Fred Biletnikoff 1965-1978
Tom Fears 1948-1956
Elroy (Crazylegs) Hirsch (also HB) 1946-1956
Charlie Joiner 1969-1986
Steve Largent 1976-1989
Dante Lavelli 1946-1956
Jame Lofton 1978-1993
Don Maynard 1958, 1960-1973
Bobby Mitchell (also HB) 1958-1968
Pete Pihos 1947-1955
John Stallworth 1974-1987
Lynn Swann 1974-1982
Charley Taylor (also HB) 1964-1975, 1977
Paul Warfield 1964-1977
Tommy McDonald 1957-1968

[TEX]

Otis was tough as nails as well. It's an abomination that he's not in the HOF. He bridged the gap of Wr's from the AFL to the merger of the two leagues. To this day, there are still only a handful of Wr's who posessed the rare combination of speed, power, toughness, hands, and fluid grace that Otis had. He made things look easy. I 'm beginning to lose faith that he'll get in during his lifetime and that would be a total disgrace.

[Frankie]

Originally Posted by cdcox

The Dolphins went on to win that SB, but many considered that Chiefs team to be better than the '69 champs.

Wrong. The Dolphins went to that SB and got pasted by the Cowboys.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by Frankie

Wrong. The Dolphins went to that SB and got pasted by the Cowboys.

My bad.

[Frankie]

Originally Posted by cdcox

My bad.

But it was the official experts' collective opinion that the Chiefs would most likely have beaten the Cowboys in the SB. That game also marked the two decade long demise of the Chiefs.

[mikey23545]

Thanks for bringing up a story not too many people know about that heartbreaking game...I too thought that '71 team was slightly better than the '69 team. The defense was still solid, but the offense was improved over the Super Bowl team.

If it had worked it would have gone down as one of the most incredible play calls in the history of pro football.

[RaiderCorporate]

Originally Posted by cdcox

Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.....

....Had the Chiefs won another SB, then a larger crop of Chiefs from that era would have been inducted including Budde, Emmit Thomas, Johnny Robinson, and most certainly Otis Taylor.

An interesting story. It's doubtful, though, that another Super Bowl win would be the difference between HOF induction and not. And there are many players that made the Pro Bowl two or three times and have not been inducted into the HOF.

If winning a Super Bowl is required, players that were never part of a Super Bowl winning team - such as the recently considered Thurman Thomas or Derrick Thomas - will continue to fall short despite their outstanding football careers.

[Mr. Kotter]

Originally Posted by RaiderCorporate

An interesting story. It's doubtful, though, that another Super Bowl win would be the difference between HOF induction and not. And there are many players that made the Pro Bowl two or three times and have not been inducted into the HOF.

If winning a Super Bowl is required, players that were never part of a Super Bowl winning team - such as the recently considered Thurman Thomas or Derrick Thomas - will continue to fall short despite their outstanding football careers.

So. Are you Al Da-vis?