Until Torry Holt is in I'm ok with nobody getting in. Also screw Bellicheat.
Bill Belichick not a first-ballot Hall of Famer
- Thread starter XXXIVwin
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
DiBartolo took the heat (as he should have) but Carmen Policy was the architect.
And your post brings up an interesting point. If DiBartolo was ignored because of shenanigans circumventing the salary cap (cheating), why the fuck shouldn't Belichick? And Kraft for that matter.
All of these cheating allegations have already carried the punishment in the form of fines, or covered up by the commissioner, thus not truly proven.
If these allegations are keeping the 2nd most winningest coach in NFL history out, it better keep Brady out too.
If these allegations are keeping the 2nd most winningest coach in NFL history out, it better keep Brady out too.
Belicheat, Bitchy Brady, and Robert Witchkraft all should never sniff the Hall.
Disgusting cheats, every single one of them. Fuck those cocksuckers.
Disgusting cheats, every single one of them. Fuck those cocksuckers.
I cant stomach the idea of defending Belechick but this is so preposterous and broadcasts how broken the voting philosophy is
A bunch of weasel jock sniffers get to be judge and jury and feel good about themselves
And these same type nitwits are going to decide on the MVP this year
What a world
A bunch of weasel jock sniffers get to be judge and jury and feel good about themselves
And these same type nitwits are going to decide on the MVP this year
What a world
"Off-field" considerations collide with coaching when you're talking about using information you've gathered by impermissable means in your game-plans.
I think it's totally valid.
And they're not saying that he'll never get in (my reading and I've not heard any commentary suggesting it to-date) only that they're essentially clapping-back in a meaningful way to make the point that those other punishments didn't.
False. A forensic auditor examined every game ROSE coached as both a player/coach and just a coach and found zero correlation between games he bet on and how he coached. And he ALWAYS bet on his team to win. ALWAYS.
And Rose eventually admitted to everything he did per an agreement with the Commissioner’s office and after he fulfilled his end, the Commissioner fucked him as did the next one.
Of course now, with endless gambling ads all over every sports broadcast and both the leagues and sports media fully inculcated now into open sports gambling, the Rose thing looks stupid and hypocritical.
Bonds cheated, plain and simple. The year after hitting 73 home runs, having to play clean, he only played like 60 games. Why? Because while no performance enhancing drug can help one hit a curveball, it does speed recovery for aging athletes with exaggerated muscle mass they could not retain without it. He doesn’t hit 73 home runs without them and it hurt the game substantially.
I don’t think any Rams fan needs further elucidation about Belichick’s misdeeds and the damage they caused…
I'm no fan, but if Belechick wasn't investigated and given sufficient punishment then that's on the NFL.
It's not up to the Hall of Fame to decide years later at their whim what is and isn't acceptable. If he's eligible then he should be voted in first ballot based on what he's accomplished. If he's committed "crimes against football" then make him ineligible for the Hall. That's fine too. But making him eligible, and then not voting him in, that just comes across as petty in my opinion. It undermines the Hall and their process. Going forward the Hall can deny anyone entrance based on the Hall's moral criteria and not on accomplishments. And we've seen that movie before.
If he's in then he's in. If he's out then he's out .
It's not up to the Hall of Fame to decide years later at their whim what is and isn't acceptable. If he's eligible then he should be voted in first ballot based on what he's accomplished. If he's committed "crimes against football" then make him ineligible for the Hall. That's fine too. But making him eligible, and then not voting him in, that just comes across as petty in my opinion. It undermines the Hall and their process. Going forward the Hall can deny anyone entrance based on the Hall's moral criteria and not on accomplishments. And we've seen that movie before.
If he's in then he's in. If he's out then he's out .
I guess your point is that the HF is not only about what someone does on the field of play. My opinion is obviously not the same as yours.
My opinion has nothing to do with commentators, so much BS in my opinion. I go on performances on the field of play.
I do not like any of these three. They are not men that I look up to.
I can still see the skills that they brought to their sports, and determine if their skills warrant being included as one of the best.
IDK, I loved Pete Rose I played baseball like Rose as every time I walked from Little League to Babe Ruth I always ran to first base, but I just have a feeling there was more to the story. Angelo Bartlett "Bart" Giamatti IMO was an honorable individual and that investigation practically drove Giamatti to his grave. Well, that and a few pack of Lucky Strikes a day, but there was quite a bit to that investigation they did not reveal.
I always thought Rose should be in the HOF, especially now with all the money MLB and other sports receive from gambling, but much like some basketball players not taking shots so the total goes under even though their team is ahead, maybe Pete never bet on his team to lose, but having money on your team to win affects your decisions in many ways. So for the Love of Pete, there might have been more to the story.
And Montana and Young? Players play. Coaches and owners cheat. Besides, much as I dislike Brady, he won a SB in Tampa.
Correct me if I'm wrong. When was Belichick "on the field of play" during the Patriots dynasty?
But what he did, how he cheated, affected the field of play. So yeah, his performance as a head coach involved cheating. Taping Rams Super Bowl Red Zone practice. Taping NY Jets signals. Deflating balls. And how many other things he did to circumvent the rules.
The guy had a great record.......with Brady, who made up for any coaching shortcomings (just like Stafford, who according to McVay "gets us out of a lot of bad calls"). Before the guy arrived and since the guy left BB hasn't done squat. 44-56 without Brady in New England; 36-44 with Cleveland; total 80-100. Impressive.
On Rose and Bonds (two of three men you don't look up to); Rose had the most egregious crime, betting on baseball. The fact that when it happened in 1918, it almost killed baseball, is the reason it was so egregious. The sport had to be cleaned up. There were guys just like the White Sox like Hal Chase and others. But once they had that scandal, they decided those players would be banned for life and not eligible for the HOF. So Rose got what they got.
How much of Bonds performance was him and how much was the drugs? Oh sure, the argument is, prior to steroids he was probably the best player in baseball. I agree. So why did he have to cheat? Because he has an ego the size of Jupiter and he couldn't stand McGwire and Sosa getting more attention than the best player in baseball. So he swallowed his integrity and cheated. Without the drugs, how long would he have played and at what level? What would his numbers have really been? Certainly, not what they ended up being. Like I said, there were others before Bonds. We know who they were. And none of them are in the HOF, as it should be.
You keep fighting that fight that Rose should have been in the HOF, Bonds should be in the HOF and Belichick should have been a first ballot HOFer. I'll keep saying they got what they deserved....probably less than what they really deserved.
Brady cheated too, but he won’t be kept out for it. I’m sure theres countless players and coaches that cheated but never got caught. And if the Rams won in 2001, none of us would be arguing over this.
Hes the second winningest coach in NFL history, and the person ahead of him won 4 less super bowls and only has one more coach of the year award. Hate the man all you want, I’m not a fan of his or Brady’s, but his overall body of work speaks for itself. He belongs being a first ballot HOF coach. This is a huge snub.
Decided by who? Not players, coaches, GM's etc who make up the league.
Its a joke
He'll get in next year but the weasels will feel they've done a service
You are right.
How did I know that you would possibly make this your first comment.
Yes I do realize that Belichick is a coach and not a player. I did not realize that you needed this explained explicitly.
My bad.