Our Ring Of Honor Is Really Pretty Sad

[Stephen Hinton]

http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-3/cottrell-from-mentor-to-presenter/42b0adf7-59b9-427e-a350-ef30012ce8a7

This is an article about Bruce Smith as he entered the NFL Hall of Fame. As you read this you will see where Coach Cottrell mentioned Chris as a legitimate Hall of Fame candidate.

[GoColts8818]

You're right, I mis-read Brooks, as Mackey. I had Mackey on the brain. And I wasn't asking YOU not to compare, I just copy and pasted what I was saying to another person....Now...Onto the Brooks discussion.....

Why is there room for Brooks, but not Clark is your question? Correct?

B/c as I said earlier, at the time of his departure from the Colts he was #2 to #4 in all Colts Rec. categories, BUT he was the #1 in Indy (all other rec records were from Balt.) Not only that, but Brooks was the LONE option, where as Clark, at best has only ever been the forth option. Brooks caught passes from the who's who of garbage QBs etc. While I agree that Brooks is by no means a high caliber player, I just think he was the best of a sorry bunch... I look at it like he was the fastest kid in school, he ran a 8.5 forty, yea he is the fastest in this school, and it should be commended, but thats only a good time here, not everywhere else...Sorry for the bad analogy.

I like Dallas, but he has literally had everything 'go his way'. He's had a great QB, and Off his entire career, in the Passing Revolution Decade, and he still isn't really THAT close to achieving anything near what those guys did statistically, which isn't the end all be all, but it is something to consider.

Now I can understand 100% where you are coming from when you say its a 'feel good moment' and it could be about fan revival etc. But that brings me to the RoH itself. Like I had mentioned earlier, I couldn't imagine seeing 10+offensive guys up there, and one defensive, I dont think thats an accurate representation of the franchise. How could you quantify Dallas being a member( the 10th/11th offensive member), while leaving off Brackett, or Sanders, who in essence were just as crucial/important/fan favorites as what Dallas was? Esp once you consider that of those 10/11 off member, over 6 of them played together. At that point we should rename the RoH the 2004 Colts Offensive starters.......

Again, sorry about mis-reading your previous posts. I read Bill Brooks clearly, but was thinking Mackey.

That's fine. Like I said it's very hard to compare Dallas Clark and John Mackey because their poistion has changed so much since Mackey played.

With that said all I was asking you is do you think it's unresaonable to make a case to include Dallas Clark in a Ring of Honor that has Bill Brooks in it? I am not asking why should Brooks be in and why Dallas shouldn't be. If you think it is unresaonable to make a case for Dallas that's fine that's your right. Personally I think Dallas was a better player and ment more to this team than Bill Brooks did and I think he'll get consideration for it. LIke I said I think Dallas could go either way.

Also most great players who are great for catching the ball have a great QB to go with them. So I don't really think it's fair to Dallas to not include him just because he played with Peyton Manning. There have been several times that Dallas made a great catch on a not perfect pass from Peyton Manning. Dallas was going to be a good player where ever he went. I mean John Mackey played most of his career with Johnny Unitas or Earl Morrall a former league MVP throwing him the ball. Should we down grade Mackey too because he played most of his career with them? Should we also down grade Marvin and Reggie because they both played with Manning? Should we down grade Jerry Rice because he played with Montana, Young, and a former league MVP in Gannon? It's hard to say how much better a player was playing with a great QB they tend to go hand in hand. I know Dallas didn't have a great year this year but again how much of that is from not having Peyton and how much of that is from his wrist? It's not unheard of for a player to struggle in his first year back coming off a major injury.

Dallas is going to be an interesting case going forward for the ring of honor because as I think has been proven in this thread you can make a strong case both ways.

I also think you'll see more than defensive guy up there. I think you'll see Freeney and Mathis up there again assuming they have good terms with the team when they are done and I wouldn't rule out Bethea. With that said it makes sense to me that it slants towards the offense because that's the type of team we've built.

It's just hard to say because none of us know exactly what Irsay thinks you need to do to make the Ring of Honor. It's clearly not just what you did on the field or else there is no way to argue that Bill Brooks and Jim Harbaugh should be up there over two Hall of Famers in Faulk and Dickerson just looking at career's alone. This is just a horriable way to guess but frankly I think it's what Irsay looks at, is a it a guy when you think about him do you get a warm and fuzzy feeling about that player and did he do something on the field to warrent to going up. If that's what it takes then yes you can make a strong case for Clark but again we just don't know what it takes.

[Pombi]

No, you didn't say it was the LONE factor in him making RoH, but it was A factor, to which I pointed it that it wasn't. Him making a ton of $, and being franchised 1 year does not go into consideration for him making RoH. Sorry.

Now, onto your list of Accomplishments:

ProBowl you say will get him up there? Ok. He has 1.

HoF records you say? He hasn't broken any.

Franchise Records? Most Rec. by a TE

Best Pure stats by a TE ever?!?!?! Are you serious with this garbage? Clark wasn't even the best white TE drafted in his class! Let alone "Best pure TE stats ever"....we won't even get into this discussion, b/c you are clearly confused.

Dedication to our franchise? The guys played 8 years.

What qualifies Manning, Harrison,Wayne, James, Freeney, Mathis, Saturday, Dungy, Polian as going in ahead of Clark? Seriously?

You don't think Manning, Harrison, Wayne, James, Freeney, Saturday, Dungy, Polian all dont belong BEFORE Dallas Clark?!?!??!

What puts Mathis above Clark? He's no lower than 2nd for all Franchise records in pass rushing stats. Sacks/PDs/FFs. Clark is no higher than forth, for any rec. category. He's got more PBs, and the fact that our RoH cant all be Offense.....

As for me putting Dungy/Polain on the RoH. You really think that I thought they were players?!?! I know your not that silly. Have you seen our RoH? You do know there are contributors up there right?

Look, I like Dallas, but he's a nobody. He played great for us, so did Chad Bratzke and Sean Dawkins.

I know this, but you are the one who specified they were players.

If Clark is such a nobody why does he BREAK franchise records rather then just placing second like Mathis? I think Mathis is the nobody sitting in the #2 spot. Always mentioned second ,and never recognized on a national level.

Wow cool Mathis is 2nd? Being 2nd in Franchise records Qualifies you for the ROH? Cause if So then Clark is second in a lot more franchise stats I can list.... The ROH Isn't made for #2's. That is your only argument that Mathis is a great #2?!

That and you say "and the fact that our RoH cant all be Offense....." That is the stupidest qualification for the Ring of Honor I've ever heard. Both of your arguments were just sad... Neither of those are impressive contributions to this franchise.Also Clark will be here next season, while nobody knows if Irsay even WANTS to retain Mathis.

Seriously if your qualifications are #2 Franchise records and a balanced # of offensive and defensive players (despite the fact this was obviously a offensive powerhouse for the past decade) Then I don't think you at all understand the concept of a ROH. It has nothing to do with balancing offensive and defensive players. That is just silly.

You still havn't offered 1 qualification that Mathis has that Clark does not. (Other then what side of the ball he plays on.... Which again is NOT a factor.)

Also placing Mathis in the ring of honor because and I quote "our ROH can't be all offense" Completely destroys the entire idea of a ring of Honor. We are supposed to honor individuals, somewhere along the line I think you forgot that and it became some type of weird team accomplishment. It has NOTHING to do with the correct amount of offensive and defensive players and the very fact that you view it this way shows you don't see it as a individual accomplishment. Which is the entire point of it. So no wonder we disagree so much, we have different views of a Ring of Honor. I think its about the players and obviously you don't. If you really cared about honoring the players you wouldn't care about the Ring being offensively heavy.

[IndyTrav]

If Clark is such a nobody why does he BREAK franchise records rather then just placing second like Mathis? I think Mathis is the nobody sitting in the #2 spot. Always mentioned second ,and never recognized on a national level.

Wow cool Mathis is 2nd? Being 2nd in Franchise records Qualifies you for the ROH? Cause if So then Clark is second in a lot more franchise stats I can list.... The ROH Isn't made for #2's. That is your only argument that Mathis is a great #2?!.

What franchise recordS do you keep mentioning? I can only think of one, Most Receptions by a TE.....but maybe you should re-read, and or do your own research. Because it shows that Mathis is 2nd nearly all of his categories for this Franchise, where as Clark is no higher than 4th, and often much lower....If it isn't made for #2's as you say, then Clark most certainly won't make it.....

That and you say "and the fact that our RoH cant all be Offense....." That is the stupidest qualification for the Ring of Honor I've ever heard. Both of your arguments were just sad... Neither of those are impressive contributions to this franchise.Also Clark will be here next season, while nobody knows if Irsay even WANTS to retain Mathis.

Seriously if your qualifications are #2 Franchise records and a balanced # of offensive and defensive players (despite the fact this was obviously a offensive powerhouse for the past decade) Then I don't think you at all understand the concept of a ROH. It has nothing to do with balancing offensive and defensive players. That is just silly.

It doesn't have to be balanced. But it shouldn't be lopsided. 11+ to 1........

You still havn't offered 1 qualification that Mathis has that Clark does not. (Other then what side of the ball he plays on.... Which again is NOT a factor.)

Also placing Mathis in the ring of honor because and I quote "our ROH can't be all offense" Completely destroys the entire idea of a ring of Honor. We are supposed to honor individuals, somewhere along the line I think you forgot that and it became some type of weird team accomplishment. It has NOTHING to do with the correct amount of offensive and defensive players and the very fact that you view it this way shows you don't see it as a individual accomplishment. Which is the entire point of it. So no wonder we disagree so much, we have different views of a Ring of Honor. I think its about the players and obviously you don't. If you really cared about honoring the players you wouldn't care about the Ring being offensively heavy.

I've offered plenty of reasons. You just ignore them. Mathis leads in franchise totals, pro-bowls, and individual placement among league leaders in there respective positions.

[Pombi]

What franchise recordS do you keep mentioning? I can only think of one, Most Receptions by a TE.....but maybe you should re-read, and or do your own research. Because it shows that Mathis is 2nd nearly all of his categories for this Franchise, where as Clark is no higher than 4th, and often much lower....If it isn't made for #2's as you say, then Clark most certainly won't make it.....

Wow, This paragraph right here proves you're not even reading what i'm typing....

You claim I only linked 1 Franchise record which was receptions. That is wrong I listed the franchise record he broke for yardage. A record held be your great John Mackey. Seeing as you didn't read my post I will repeat the second Franchise record he broke

"On December 28, 2008, Clark broke the Colts' franchise record, held by Hall of Famer John Mackey, for yards in a season by a tight end (848.) On September 21, 2009."

You have to read my posts more carefully and you will see the records that I am referring back too. Also you should probably read your posts more carefully because I am still laughing about Dungy and Polian under your RoH players.

Last but not least, I can't believe your still defending your "Mathis should be in cause its all offense without him" argument. That has nothing to do with the RoH and again proves you view the RoH as a "team accomplishment".

[Pombi]

I've offered plenty of reasons. You just ignore them. Mathis leads in franchise totals, pro-bowls, and individual placement among league leaders in there respective positions.

Actually I didn't ignore any of these reasons and Clark has equally accomplished or surpassed every reason you list for Mathis.

So let me address them again, Clark has also attended a Pro bowl and when I listed that as a qualification you simply shot it down... So why your listing it as your first reason for Mathis is beyond me......

Clark also has Franchise records and that does not place Mathis above Clark.

And your final point was "and individual placement among league leaders in there respective positions." Clark as been consistently viewed as one of the best TE's in the league year in and year out by opponents as well as fans.

See you're not listing one qualification Mathis has OVER Clark, your simply listing qualifications and claiming it can't be all Offense. I never ignored your post I simply kept stating Mathis does not have any qualifications that Clark does not already have, and that is obviously still true.

[Pombi]

What franchise recordS do you keep mentioning? I can only think of one, Most Receptions by a TE.....but maybe you should re-read, and or do your own research. Because it shows that Mathis is 2nd nearly all of his categories for this Franchise, where as Clark is no higher than 4th, and often much lower....If it isn't made for #2's as you say, then Clark most certainly won't make it.....

Go back to my post, look at both franchise records and apologize. Because that sentence right there is more ignorant than saying Bill Polian and Tony Dungy Are RoH players........Well maybe not.

[IndyTrav]

And the Dallas Clark love fest hits an all-time fever pitch.

You don't find it odd, that all of Clarks 'records' came in a single season? Most yard by TE in a season, Rec by TE in a season, Most TDs by a TE in a season......His lone Pro Bowl and AP appearances were a result of that season....So assuming your correct and Dallas makes it up there (he wont) will it say Dallas Clark Circa 2007?

I like your sig by the way. I see your a huge fan of semantics.