View Single Post
Old 03-04-2011, 01:10 PM   #8
The Thread Stalker
Tarkus's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: In The Wind...
Posts: 11,856
Tarkus has a spectacular aura aboutTarkus has a spectacular aura aboutTarkus has a spectacular aura about

Originally Posted by Brad O. View Post
Dent's selection ahead of some of the other finalists surprised and disappointed me. As an easy comparison, Dent clearly was not as deserving as Chris Doleman. Both players were defensive ends in the NFC in the '80s and '90s. But Doleman made twice as many Pro Bowls (8) as Dent (4). Doleman had more tackles, more sacks, more forced fumbles, more fumble recoveries, more safeties, more touchdowns. There is nothing Dent was better at than Doleman.
This is a tough one since I'm a big Doleman fan but I'm afraid your use of stats is still a major flaw in your reasoning, Brad.

I've said it before & I'll say it again: Stats are only useful in context & more often than not are misleading without the surrounding facts.

Case(s) in point:

Pro Bowl selections> 8 to 4. Yea, more...

Of course the Pro Bowl & the selection process has been ridiculed for it's politics & selections of players not as deserving & the omissions of obvious worthy selections. It's been a joke across the league & media since it began. Not even sure why this is even a point of contention. It's laughable.

Short excerpt (since there's a ton more out there to make that point):

The Pro Bowl has been plagued with criticism ever since the NFL allowed fan voting. Voting by fans makes up 1/3 of the vote for Pro Bowl players. Many teams like Dallas, New York, and other large fan bases usually win because fans usually vote for their own team and not necessarily the best player. In the 2008 Pro Bowl, the Dallas Cowboys had thirteen players on the NFC roster, an NFL record. "If you're in a small market, no one really gets to see you play," said Minnesota Vikings cornerback Antoine Winfield. "If you're a quiet guy, it's hard to get the attention. You just have to work hard and play." Winfield made the Pro Bowl in 2008 after ten seasons of being shut out.

The player voting has also been subject to significant criticism. It is not uncommon for the players to pick the same players over and over again; former offensive lineman (and analyst) Ross Tucker has cited politics, incumbency, and compensation for injury in previous years as primary factors in player's choices among themselves.

Some players have had a surprisingly small number of Pro Bowl selections despite distinguished careers. Hall of fame running back John Riggins was only selected once in his career from 1971-1985. He was not selected in the year where he set the record for rushing touchdowns in a season and his team made it to the Super Bowl (though he did make the all-pro team). Hall of fame linebacker Ray Nitschke only made the Pro Bowl once, despite being named all-pro seven times and being the MVP of the 1962 NFL Championship Game. Defensive Back Ken Riley never made the Pro Bowl in his 15 seasons, even though he recorded 65 interceptions, the fourth highest total in NFL history at the time of his retirement.

Now if you wanted to really make a case, you could have tried the All Pro #s where Doleman actually leads, by 1, for 1st team honors & tied for 2nd team honors with 2. Hardly some sort of landslide tho.

More tackles> 914 to 671. Yea, more...

However, 162 were from the LBer position where tackles are much more plentiful. Still tackles but much more available for second level positions like LBers especially in the 3-4 that Minny was playing in at the time. Also with an extra 29 games played by Doleman.

More sacks> 150.5 to 137.5. Yea, more...

However, those awe inspiring extra 13 sacks were accumulated in 29 more games due to Dent's injury problems & short stint with SF where he was only used as a pass rush specialist.

Forced fumbles> 35 to 33. Yea, more...

Fumble recoveries> 24 to 13. Yea, more...

Not sure being at the right place at the right time ever makes the case for 1 player being better but I guess it does to some people.

More safeties> 2 to 1. Yea, more....

& I guess the 'gap' continues to widen.

More TDs> 3 to 1. Yea, more...

1 as a LBer & 2 as a DE. Dent should be taken out of the HoF immediately.

This doesn't even include the post season play of Dent along with SB XX MVP. Odd that has been swept under the rug in this convo.

Isn't it strange how a more complete layout of the full facts make that supposed 'gap' not a gap at all? Like I said, I'm a fan of Doleman but to try & diminish Dent to supplant him with Chris actually succeeds in diminishing Doleman in the process.

Bottom line is both deserve the honor IMO along with many others who didn't make it, past & present. The real problem is the selection process & the ones making the decisions. It smacks of the same ridiculous nature of the Pro Bowl process.

Originally Posted by bachslunch View Post
What's "healthy" about 4 pro bowl selections in a 15-year career? Not to mention one first-team all pro selection via AP (in 1985) and one more via Pro Football Weekly (in 1984) in those 15 seasons? As said above, that ties Fred Dean for the worst such postseason honors profile for any HoF d-lineman who played his entire career during the Pro Bowl era, and Dean only played 11 years.

I'd also like to know why it appears you think awards don't matter here.
Using the Pro Bowl argument & ignoring the real awards sure doesn't help your credibility in this convo, I'm afraid...

(See above Pro Bowl excerpt)

Not going into detail of your squeezing Dean into this but his sack total, official & unofficial, stands at 93 in 11 years while Dent was basically done after 11 years due to injuries & having 124 at the time. Not much argument against Dent but actually bolstering his selection, I'd say.

So what? Dent should get down on his knees and thank Dan Hampton for raising havoc on opponents o-lines, freeing him up to get those fancy counting stats.

Yea, Keith Millard & Henry Thomas were bums. Doleman did it all on his own.

Besides, Dent had a reputation for not playing the run well and taking plays off, not exactly something in his favor.
& you obviously don't know about reputations nor watched Dent thru the years to even say that. I did, every one of them...

And if he's playing this long, it's not surprising he racked up larger than usual sack stats.

Back to the facts, I guess:

Dent played 15 years, 203 games. Doleman played 15 years, 232 games.

If one wants to give credence to your 'longevity' argument, Doleman played 29 more games to also rack up even "larger than usual sack stats"...& that's only 13 more I might once again point out.

Dent had only 13 sacks in very sporadic play his last 4 years while Doleman had 35 in his last 4 & starting basically full seasons in all of them. Doleman clearly needed all 15 while Dent didn't have them.

More like you don't know what you're talking about since your comment, if you really want it to be true, makes Doleman look worse than Dent.

Better to just step away from the keyboard on this one...

Last edited by Tarkus; 03-04-2011 at 02:09 PM.
Tarkus is offline