I am a biased Arizona Cardinals fan.
Is Kurt Warner a hall of fame quarterback?
He was a great story in the early 2000s.
Still, he’s spent a lot of his career as a backup.
If he takes the Arizona Cardinals to the Super Bowl this year, then yes. No one has done this.
No one has done what? Take the Cards to the Superbowl? Why would that tip the scales to put him in the HOF?
Here’s a recent thread on the same topic.
I say no. He either had a few too few elite seasons, or WAY too few decent ones.
He is a unique case, though. I’ve been wondering today what exactly his skillset is that allows him to have such incredible numbers some of the time and be so shaky at others. Maybe it was just the concussions.
Well, because a person who was thought to be the second string quarterback is taking the Cards to the playoffs. He’s won a Superbowl. Warner was a great player for the Rams before he came to Arizona.
He won’t. If the cards were in the AFC…maybe, but nope. The road is too tough.
That said, I’m really close to saying yes to the hall of fame. If he wins the MVP this year that’ll give him 3 with a superbowl. The problem is the 5 mediocre years in the middle. I’m really on the fence and wouldn’t be upset either way.
IF he wins the MVP this year it would be hard to deny him. 3 time MVP not in the HOF? Seems unlikely.
Warner had 3 great with the Rams, has a single great season going with the Cards… and has had at least as many seasons being a mediocre and oft-injured QB. In the years where he’s been good, he’s had a plethora of some of the greatest offensive options in the game around him (Isaac Bruce, Torry Holt, Marshall Faulk, Larry Fitzgerald, Anquan Boldin).
I don’t see it all adding up to a Hall of Fame career.
That seems like an argument for comeback player of the year rather than Hall of Fame.
The Rams won a Super Bowl. Sure he was an important part, but he didn’t exactly win it single-handily. I don’t remember him making the game saving tackle on the last play of the game.
He was briefly a great player on the Rams when he had great weapons around him.
The answer is yes!
Good to see Terrell Davis going in, too, after helping the Broncos win the Super Bowl in John Elway’s final two seasons.
And yet Terrell Owens misses out. I know Owens was (is?) an egomaniac and an asshole, but he deserves to be in the Hall by just about any reasonable measure.
And the fact that Jerry Jones made it in shows that being an egomaniac and an asshole is not, in general, a disqualifier.
I think that Warner deserves to be in the HoF. I agree that his stats alone and his up-and-down career are cause for controversy, but there has never been anyone quite like Warner, going from stocking canned food at Hy-vee supermarkets in Iowa to winning the Super Bowl.
Warner was a great passer and basically good at running a variety of complex offenses. He ran Mike Martz’s offense in St. Louis and run it to near perfection. He did the same with another offensive coordinator in Arizona. Without Warner, St Louis never would have won their lone Super Bowl and Arizona would never have made it to their only championship game. Warner had good talent around him but, like Brady, he was able to put it all together and make it work in concert.
From an outsider’s perspective: I’ve heard of Kurt Warner. Most NFL players, I haven’t ever heard of, or can’t remember their names if I have. Now, I can’t be sure that his stats back up his fame, but he’s definitely done something noteworthy.
You’re an idiot, sir, and shouldn’t be allowed to post. Kurt Warner had a magnificent career, both providing the center to a Rams team that fell apart when it no longer had him at its helm, and then having a true renaissance with the Cardinals. He went to three Super Bowls, and won one of them. No, he’s not in the conversation for best of all time, but he’s certainly in the top ten of his generation, an era with some truly outstanding competition.
Warner is borderline but probably deserving. Terrell Davis, on the other hand, I don’t know about that one. He had 4 good years. I feel like he opens the door for a guy like Priest Holmes, who just doesn’t feel like a HOFer to me.
The HOF voters have struggled to evaluate wide receivers from the past 25-30 years. Traditional “counting” stats (receptions, yards, TDs) are difficult to assess in a historical context, and there doesn’t seem to be a consensus on what numbers might constitute a HOF-worthy receiver in the modern era. That said, Owens is #8 in receptions, #2 in receiving yards, and #2 in receiving touchdowns.
He only played in one Super Bowl (2004 season, as an Eagle), though that yardstick for the Hall seems to mostly get applied to QBs.
I strongly suspect that his well-earned reputation as a prima donna, and as a malcontent who got himself removed from several teams, is a factor that hasn’t helped him with voters.
Every position in football is tough to measure because they all have different measurables. Terrell Davis over TO sounds absurd to me. Some people will point that TO led the league in drops some years. Ok, and Brett Favre led the league in INTs a few years. And we’re not even talking about linemen, who are even more difficult to value.
Re your first paragraph:
I understand that it is sometimes difficult to assess numbers, especially in broad historical context, and that there is always going to be some disagreement, especially at the margins. But if Terrell Owens doesn’t get voted into the Hall of Fame, then numbers are completely irrelevant, and they should stop using them altogether. Because his numbers, by any reasonable measure, make him a Hall of Fame wide receiver. And it’s not even close. If Owens doesn’t get in, we should basically just concede that the only wide receiver who deserves to be in the Hall is Jerry Rice, and stop the balloting altogether.
I’m sure your last paragraph is correct, which is precisely why i believe that Owens’ omission is complete bullshit.
(EDIT: Regarding Terrell Owens…)
Apparently the voters consider him a bad teammate, which is a different thing than a bad person. As in, if he joins your team you’ll be just as likely to implode as do well. I can at least understand that reasoning, if not necessarily agree with it.
If the hall is just about stats, then yes, he should have been a mortal lock first ballot inductee. But if one of the factors is how much you help your team, well, I guess I can see making him wait a few years.
Listening to some chuckleheads on sports radio recently talk about how TO may take a few years or may never get in. And in the next breath they started pondering the HOF merits of Isaac Bruce. Get real. Isaac Bruce? He wasn’t the best receiver on his own team and he sure as hell wasn’t better than TO.