dy156

After the recent HOF announcements, there were some disappointed fans, as there always are. Richard Dent, a superbowl MVP and one of the core of the '85 bears stellar defense, is not in. Nor is Art Monk, or Derrick Thomas or Harry Carson.

But Michael Irvin?!!
Come on!

This has been a tough week for Cowboy fans -more on the dynasty thing later-

Regarding the Hall of Fame:
The Cowboys are either America's team or the team everyone loves to hate, but they are certainly one of, if not THE most important and successful franchises in the NFL, comparable to the Lakers, Celtics, and Yankees in their leagues.
The Cowboys had a streak of 20 winning seasons in a row, unmatched in the NFL. Televising the Cowboys boosts ratings, and that's why the appear so frequently on national television, even when their record does not support it. The Cowboys have dominated any franchise based comparison of SuperBowl performance.
number of Superbowls (victories)

Dallas -8 , (5)
-
-
Denver - 6, (2)
-
San Fran - 5 (5)
Pittsburgh - 5 (4)
Washington - 5 (3)
Oakland - 5 (3)
Miami - 5 (2)
-
Green Bay -4 (3)
New England- 4 (3)
Minnesota -4 (0)
Buffalo - 4 (0)
-
Giants - 3 (2)
Rams -3 (1)

Not only that, but the Cowboy's 3 Superbowl losses were by 4 points or less, not blowouts.

Now consider this:
There are 193 players in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Only five played most of their careers with the Cowboys.

Yes, Tom Landry is one of 20 coaches, and Tex Schramm is one of 17 other administrators inducted. Mike Ditka played 3 years with the Cowboys, and there are 5 other players who played for the Cowboys a total of 6 seasons. (think Joe Montana for the Chiefs, Eric Dickerson with the Falcons, or Emmitt Smith as a Cardinal -doesn't really count.)

But just look at how many players other teams have in the Hall of Fame.
Some teams have a very long history and their HOF representation reflects this. On the other hand, some teams have far more representation than the Cowboys based on the modern era. Therefore, to make the comparison more fair, I've put those associated primarily with that team listed below since 1960 (the year the Cowboys started) in parentheses.

Bears - 26 inductees (8)
Packers - 20 (11)
Steelers - 17 (15)
Giants - 17 (8)
Browns - 15 (8)
Redskins - 15 (9)
Rams - 13 (9)
Raiders - 12 (12)
Lions - 12 (5)
49ers - 11 (11)
Cardinals - 10 (3)
Colts - 10 (10)
Dolphins - 9 (9)
Eagles - 8 (4)
Chiefs - 7 (7)
Vikings - 7 (7)
Chargers - 6 (6)
Oilers/Titans - 5 (5)

These numbers speak for themselves as to the anti-Cowboys prejudice of the Hall of Fame electors, but it gets worse for Cowboys fans.

Of the 12 final candidates over the past two years, only four have been denied election into the Hall of Fame. Three are former Cowboys.
Rayfield Wright and Bob Hayes were joined by Irvin this year. (Plus Cliff Harris who did not make the finals last year.)

I did not see Wright or Hayes play, but I did see Irvin, and his numbers should have been more than sufficient.

There are 17 wide receivers already in the Hall of Fame, but only two had more receptions than Irvin's 750, and only with more yards. Steve Young who got into the Hall this year spent time on the bench, and was 1-3 against Irvin's Cowboys in Championship games. Irvin has 3 Superbowl rings; Young has 1. From 1991 through 1998, Irvin had 1,000-yard seasons in all but one year. In 1995, he had his best season, catching 111 passes for 1,603 yards. Irvin went to five straight Pro Bowls beginning in 1991. Yeah, gaudy numbers for recievers are more prevalent in today's offenses than those in the past, but Irvin's 11 100-yard receiving games during the 1995 season is still an NFL record. Irvin totalled 750 catches for 11,904 yards in his career. He deserves in the Hall of Fame.

The bad weekend continued for Cowboys fans. Not only did Irvin not get in and #22 retire, but then everyone talks about the Patriots "dynasty" matching that of the Cowboys. Give me a break! Their 1st Superbowl win ranks as one of the hugest upsets in sports, and they got there with the help of a very questionable call. The next year, they didn't even make the playoffs, much less the championship game as the Cowboys did in their off year in the 4 year period. Three Superbowl wins, alright, but the winning margin in all three doesn't equal that of any of the Cowboy Superbowls victories, and the Cowboys certainly didn't need any last second field goals.
Dynasty? Please!

djtestudo

Peter King answeres your first point pretty well here: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...sb4/index.html As for your second, the Cowboys' dynasty was before the present salary cap system. They could spend all they needed to keep their players. The Patriots have a limit, and haven't even come close to the cap hell other teams have gone through. Plus, they have done something only that Cowboys team has done in winning three out of four. They really are a dynasty.

__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

Spartak

Irvin and Monk will probably get in next year... unless they decide to waive the five year wait for Jerry Rice.

__________________
I can read your mind... looking at you... I can read your mind...

dy156

The fact that Peter King has to argue this point means that I am not the only one that feels this way. Tony Dorsett only played in one Superbowl, he made it into the Hall based largely on his play throughout the 80's. Throw out the coaches/front office people, and you have 4 cowboys from their early Super Bowl years, and three 49ers. Add Jerry Rice, and the Cowboys and 49ers are about equal. But you also have several (seven) 49ers from before, that got in even though they weren't on any Superbowl teams. If Irvin doesn't get in, it points to only two Cowboys (Aikman and Smith) getting in from their later Super Bowl years. What Peter King does not address is why at least eight people from among the 39 electors didn't think Irvin should get in. Before someone talks about his cocaine arrest, let me just throw out a couple of names of people that are in Canton: Lawrence Taylor and O.J. Simpson.

heccubusiv

I guess all the crack he was found with and doing it a hookers ass does not sit right with hall of fame voters. He will make it eventually

betula

If Art Monk has had to wait this long to get in, I think Irvin can sit back for a few years.

So, the 90's Cowboys were 3-0 in Super Bowls... which means that the 'boys of the 70's were 2-3. That record is comprable to Denver and Miami's all time Super Bowl records. Peter King states that 7 guys that starred for the Cowboys from the 70's are in the HOF. As you gave us the numbers, Miami has 9 (AND they had the greatest team of all time one season), and you don't even list the Broncos (offhand, I can only think of Dorsett [mainly a Cowboy, but played with the Broncos] and Elway from last year that are HOF's from Denver). So, where is the respect for those Bronco teams?

The point is, this isn't a Hall for great players... it's the Hall for the BEST players. Just think... 22 starters for every team (plus kickers)... basketball just has 12 players per ROSTER. There are a LOT of players out there. And many have been great. But not all of them deserve to be in the Hall.

loonatic8her

I think HECCUBUSIV hit the nail on the head. The HOF voters must have brought out their old copies of Penthouse with the Irvin interview and thought to themselves... damn I never got that much poon and I was always scared to snort Coke... we cant let him in the first year, yeah he is probably one of the top 5 receivers on the "importance to the success to their team" list but still... we gotta punish him somehow... and damn all those women.... nope not this year Michael.... hehe hehe hehe

__________________
The Loonatic

Did you get rid of all the voices in your head?
Do you now miss them and the things they said?

the-wangster

I'm guessing when you say "Football" you don't actually mean the game where by you use your feet to kick the ball? You mean the football whereby you use your hands. Must be some American irony.