It’s that time of year when the very predictable happens.
The day before the Super Bowl each year, the Pro Football Hall of Fame announces its enshrinees, and the system comes under attack from those that probably find fault with a beautiful sunny day because there are no clouds in the sky.
The process is flawed, some say. The selection committee is biased, others scream. All because they think someone that failed to get elected was deserving and thus was “snubbed.”
Hey, here’s a little secret I feel compelled to pass along (and with full disclosure, I am one of the 44 media members on the selection committee): All 15 finalists are deserving. That’s why they were finalists.
The misguided belief, for example, that Bill Parcells or Cris Carter didn’t get elected because the committee doesn’t like them, ignores the obvious fact that they were finalists. If indeed there is some sinister plot to keep them out of the Hall of Fame, they wouldn’t make it as far as the final 15, much less survive the first reduction to 10.
It’s probable that those from the top 10 that didn’t make the top five weren’t many votes away. The numbers aren’t announced, but it would be surprising if the voting wasn’t incredibly close.
Yet, Mike Florio of profootballtalk.com, who began clamoring for change in the process last year after columnist Jason Whitlock nearly lost his mind because tackle Willie Roaf failed to be elected in his first year of eligibility, is at it again, writing that he believes it is the “biases and prejudices of voters who likely didn’t support either Carter or Parcells because both men are largely perceived by the media as ‘jerks.’”
Now, we can add mind reader to Florio’s talents since he purports to know what 44 individuals are thinking.
The shame of it is that on a day that is a crowning achievement for the greatest that have played or contributed to pro football, they are disrespected because there is too much attention paid to who didn’t get in rather than celebrating who did.
Not surprisingly, with Roaf being elected this year, Whitlock turned his attention to Carter and Parcells, while claiming Cortez Kennedy and Chris Doleman weren’t deserving. Really. Others banged the drum for Charles Haley, who also advanced to the final 10.
Meanwhile, Florio engages in some entertaining double-talk, first acknowledging that “it’s inherently difficult — if not impossible — to point to one of the five fresh modern-era inductees and make a convincing case that he should have been left out in favor of Parcells and/or Carter.”
However, he then decides that some of the voters “have no business holding a vote,” and adds, “Either they don’t have enough experience covering football or they don’t spend enough time following the sport or they don’t have a sufficient appreciation of the historical context or they don’t understand the interplay between stats and impact on game planning or they simply don’t care enough about the process or they are unemployed/underemployed in the football media or they have lost their proverbial fastball or they are too easily manipulated and/or bullied by the strong personalities in the room, some of whom they’ll be relying on in the future (or, as the case may be, right now) to recommend or support them for jobs.”
There’s an awful lot of presumptions there that I can attest to are way off base, having experienced the more than seven hours it usually takes to elect a class each year and witnessing firsthand the passionate and informed discussions that take place.
The final insulting comments should probably be ignored.
“Easily manipulated?”
“Bullied by the strong personalities in the room?”
How would he know?
Linking votes to support for jobs is bizarre, considering every ballot is secret.
Funny how Florio admits none of the top five were bad choices, but then derides the process and takes personal shots at the voters although he didn’t name anyone.
He also incorrectly claims the selectors are opposed to change. Many of us have made suggestions over the years and some have been made, while others are still being discussed.
The reality is that no process is perfect. The additional reality is that whatever the process, there will always be deserving candidates left out each year because everyone can’t be put in.
Consider this: the five modern-day enshrinees this year are Dermontti Dawson, Chris Doleman, Cortez Kennedy, Curtis Martin and Willie Roaf. The other five in the top 10 were Carter, Haley, Parcells, Andre Reed and Aeneas Williams.
Had the latter five all made it instead of the five that did, what would have been the reaction?
Click here to print this article.