I don’t understand “making him wait a few years” at all, though, for anyone. Owens either is a Hall of Famer or he is not. If his being a bad teammate outweighs his contributions on the field, then he should not be in the Hall of Fame. If the reverse is true, he should.
So how did Owens’s teams do?
San Francisco: Owens joined the 49ers in 1996; the team won 12 or 13 games plus one playoff game in each of his first three seasons. They collapsed in 1999-2000, then made the playoffs again in 2001-2002, and then were a disappointing 7-9 in 2003, Owens’s last season there.
After Owens departed, the Niners collapsed, going 2-14, then 4-12, and then three more losing seasons.
Philadelphia. Owens joins the Eagles in 2004; the team promptly makes it to the Super Bowl, losing a heartbreaker; they had already won three division title in a row, though. Owens missed nine games in 2005 and the EAgles went 6-10. After he left they went 10-6, and played well for a few more years.
Dallas. Owens joined the Cowboys in 2006 and played three full seasons there. The Cowboys made the playoffs the first two years, missing the third despite going 9-7. They did not make the playoff the two years before he arrived, but did make it the year after he left, though that was their last appearance for awhile.
Buffalo. Owens joined the Buffalo Bills, who, according to Wikipedia, are a professional football team, in 2009. The Bills were bad that year, as in fact they had been for some time and would be for some time more after Owens left. (According to the official records his coaches with the so called “Buffalo Bills” were “Dick Jauron” and “Perry Fewell,” which are obviously pseudonyms.)
Cincinnati. Owens played his final year with the Bengals in 2010. This is the one case where a team clearly was worse with Owens around; they went 4-12, despite making the playoffs the years before and five straight years after (though of course maintaining an awful losing streak of playoff games.)
Overall, it’s very hard to construct a solid case that teams got worse when Owens arrive or better after he left. The only really good example is Cincinnati, where the Bengals had a poor year on the defensive side of the ball and I’m trying awfully hard to figure out why Terrell Owens would affect that. Otherwise there’s scant evidence Terrell Owens wrecked teams when he showed up or that they suddenly got way better when he left.
I don’t think it’s anything more than petty spite and childish “principles.” Sort of like the pro baseball HoF voters who refuse to induct anyone on their first ballot “on principle.” Douchey losers, IMO. So for my money, this is definitely not a good look for the pro football HoF.
To clarify, I just understand it. (They’re being petty children.) I don’t agree with it.
Maybe the issue is that you had to list 5 different teams. The football HOF isn’t like the baseball HOF. In football you need a strong advocate willing to speak on your behalf. When nobody wanted you that bad during the height of your career, nobody is going to have you back during the HOF voting.
ETA: Terrell Davis had a few good years behind that line in that scheme. They pulled thousand yard rushers off the street.
I liked Kurt Warner, and I’m happy for him. But if he hadn’t been elected, I wouldn’t feel a huge injustice had been done. Warner is one of many worthy but not quite top tier quarterbacks (Ken Anderson is another).
As for TO, I never liked the guy, but he’s definitely Hall-worthy, and I would vote for him if I had a vote. His misfortune is that there’s a backlog of worthy receivers, and it will take a few years before they’re all sorted out.
Cris Carter had to wait a few years, as did Art Monk before him. It’s a shame, but it’s not THAT big a deal.
I fully agree, though, that it’s silly to “make someone wait,” to teach him some kind of lesson. If you think a player is deserving, you should vote for him now.
Agreed. I think Davis could have been one of the great ones had he been healthy and more productive over another 1-2 years, but IMO I attribute part of his success to a highly underrated offensive line, which was quietly one of the best OLs over the past 25 years. I personally don’t think he was quite HOF worthy. Good but I’d put others in before TD.
When Davis was hurt in 2000 Mike Anderson had 1400 yards. Anderson and Davis combined for 1400 the next year and in 2002 Clinton Portise had 1500 yards. Davis was nothing special.
my favorite sports bar owner and tender used to say "the hall of fame is just the hall of the very good but not very great these days " discussions like this just confirms what he said …
I’m not sure the baseball hall of fame was ever an exclusive sanctuary of the very great, save for its first few years. Nor should it be - when I go to Cooperstown, I want to see a much fuller spectrum of players. I don’t mind seeing Ozzie Smith in - he was an electric player who dazzled the crowds. I don’t mind seeing Goose Gossage in - he was uniquely valued during his time, and his inclusion is an important window into that era of baseball.
Football, on the other hand, falls short of compiling a list of the very great. They’re far too conservative and deliberate. WR and special teams are severely lacking, while allowing a lot of marginal calls in at RB and QB. Those were the headline positions for a long time, so it’s understandable (see: my argument for a big baseball hall) - but it screams of politics.