2011 Hall of Fame

[Mithrandir]

Who in the world did Lynn Swann bribe to get into the HOF?

Swann is definitely one of the weaker HOF'er's.

That said, who would you take if you had to pick one receiver for your team for one game to win it all between Swann, Art Monk, Cris Carter, Marvin Harrison, Tim Brown, Terrell Owens, Isaac Bruce, Andre Reed or any of the top 10-15 career reception leaders (excepting Rice) etc.. I easily pick Swann, for that one game.

[Erik]

The football HOF isn't about stats, it's about who plays a major role in the narrative of the game. Swann is essential to telling the story of the NFL in the '70s. As a kid growing up in the '70s, I heard talk of Swann's performances in big games all the time. He defined the Steeler magic as much as anyone this side of Bradshaw. As with Namath, it makes sense to me that he's in, even if his numbers aren't the greatest.

[ThatRogue]

Congratulations Sterling (and to all the 2011 HOF selections)!

Any truth to the rumor that Shannon Sharpe will be running in the Kentucky Derby the week before he goes to Canton?

Hater!

(I despise Bubby Brister, who threw the interception that basically ended T.D.'s career prematurely...because he should be joining Sharpe and Elway from that Broncos team.)

[ThatRogue]

Swann is definitely one of the weaker HOF'er's.

That said, who would you take if you had to pick one receiver for your team for one game to win it all between Swann, Art Monk, Cris Carter, Marvin Harrison, Tim Brown, Terrell Owens, Isaac Bruce, Andre Reed or any of the top 10-15 career reception leaders (excepting Rice) etc.. I easily pick Swann, for that one game.

In their prime? Carter or Harrison, probably...though Monk also has an argument to be made.

I'm not against Swann getting in, but yours isn't the argument that gets him there.

[Mithrandir]

In their prime? Carter or Harrison, probably...though Monk also has an argument to be made.

I'm not against Swann getting in, but yours isn't the argument that gets him there.

I wasn't arguing to prove he belongs. Even if he doesn't belong, he was still damn good. Good enough that in a one game winner take all I would take Swann over most WR's. For that one game.

I went off on a tangent

[chancellor]

Swann is definitely one of the weaker HOF'er's.

That said, who would you take if you had to pick one receiver for your team for one game to win it all between Swann, Art Monk, Cris Carter, Marvin Harrison, Tim Brown, Terrell Owens, Isaac Bruce, Andre Reed or any of the top 10-15 career reception leaders (excepting Rice) etc.. I easily pick Swann, for that one game.

Heck, Swann wasn't even the best receiver on his team. I'd have taken Stallworth without a moment's hesitation in any big game.

And I'd take half a dozen to a dozen of the top 15 career reception leaders over Swann.

[Mithrandir]

Heck, Swann wasn't even the best receiver on his team. I'd have taken Stallworth without a moment's hesitation in any big game.

And I'd take half a dozen to a dozen of the top 15 career reception leaders over Swann.

For one game? Why wouldn't you want the most acrobatic receiver in NFL history instead of the receivers i mentioned. He'll make the catches the others make plus get to throws that the others wouldn't.

[frae]

I think Sabol clearly belongs in, but doing so at the expense of a player does bug me. As for the rest of the class no arguments. I do believe Dawson should be in as it has been 5 tries. He was a dominant player at his position throughout his career. No problems at all with Bettis not getting in. Not sure he will to be totally honest. He was never the best at his position and his ypc will hurt him.

[Bob Kohm]

It's all a fraud until Blyleven gets in.

[chancellor]

For one game? Why wouldn't you want the most acrobatic receiver in NFL history instead of the receivers i mentioned. He'll make the catches the others make plus get to throws that the others wouldn't.

Because he didn't like getting dirty, lacked breakaway speed, and simply wasn't all that great of a receiver. Look at all his playoff and SB appearances in the 1970s, and you'll see a receiver that had more games under 20 yards receiving than over 80 yards, including one Super Bowl where he didn't even catch a pass. Stallworth was vastly more consistent, could really block, and was bigger, stronger and faster than Swann.

Among the top 15 receivers I'd easily take in their respective primes before Swann include: Rice, Harrison, C.Carter, TO, Moss, Jimmy Smith, and Hines Ward. I'd almost certainly take Monk and Holt before him, too. I'd probably take Bruce before him.

[Mithrandir]

Heck, Swann wasn't even the best receiver on his team. I'd have taken Stallworth without a moment's hesitation in any big game.

And I'd take half a dozen to a dozen of the top 15 career reception leaders over Swann.

Stallworth and Swann played together from 1974-1982..let's look at their stats for those years.

Games played - Swann 115...Stallworth 106
Catches - Swann 336..Stallworth 299
TD's - Swann 51...Stallworth 44
Yards per catch - Swann 16.3...Stallworth 17.7

Swann led the team in receiving from 1975-1978 and 1980. (In 1976 he led the team with 28 receptions)

Oh yeah and that Super Bowl when Swann didn't catch a pass, Bradshaw completed a total of 9 passes for the game...Nice try though The Steelers rushed the ball 57 times in that Super Bowl.

Sorry Chance, but Swann was just as good when they played together. that's the facts.

[Mithrandir]

In 4 SB's Swann caught a total of 16 passes and that may seem low. But in those 4 SB's Bradshaw completed a TOTAL of 49 passes. So Swann caught every third ball Bradshaw threw in the Super Bowl(s). Doesn't look so bad in the context now does it

Hmm. maybe Swann did indeed earn his induction into the HoF...

[Judge Jude]

Swann is a "story" pick. The 1970s NFL was all about the Steelers, and he was the guy making spectacular catches in some big games.

He's not going to win a stats argument, but he certainly was memorable...

[madducks]

Swann was primarily a special teams player (punt returner) during his rookie season, in which the Steelers played in their first Super Bowl. So, he can't be faulted for not having a reception in that first Super Bowl. It simply wasn't his role on that team.

The Steelers leading receivers that season were Frank Lewis (30 receptions), Franco Harris (23), Ron Shanklin (19), Larry Brown (17), and John Stallworth (16). Swann tied for 7th on the team with 11 catches.

[Mithrandir]

Swann is a "story" pick. The 1970s NFL was all about the Steelers, and he was the guy making spectacular catches in some big games.

He's not going to win a stats argument, but he certainly was memorable...

I think you're wrong about the stats argument when one looks at the era in which Swann played. From 1974 -1979 the league leader in receptions was a RB. Receivers simply didn't pile up big numbers in the 1970's. Not Swann, pretty much no WR's.

Here's a telling stat:

In the 1975 SEASON there were 13 games in which a team had 300+ passing yards in a game.
In 2010 there was a WEEK in which 13 teams had 300+ passing yards.