New York Giants Message Boards

Wait, Wait hold on a minute! how in the HELL are people going to say ELI isn't worthy of the HOF when, he is the ONLY Giant QB to get this team to 2 Superbowls for starters but, also won both Superbowls? That has to show for something!

Eli will surpass 30,000 yards next season and he's a ways over 10 grand +of Joe montana's 40,550+ career stat.

and this kid has a load of years left on his career.

---

NYGFaninILL:

TroyArcher:

He is getting real close and has proven himself to be a better postseason QB than Peyton.  2-3 more years like this past year and he is a shoo in. 

I agree with you, he doesnt have Peytons numbers yet though

 

1 is the loneliest number...

 

With that being said, he has Peyton in the playoffs and Super Bowls, beat Brady twice and is breaking most of this organizations records. Dude is most definitely on track...and he's only 30.

---

NYGFaninILL:

TroyArcher:

He is getting real close and has proven himself to be a better postseason QB than Peyton.  2-3 more years like this past year and he is a shoo in. 

I agree with you, he doesnt have Peytons numbers yet though

Its Not What You Do During Regular Season, Its How Many Super Bowls You Can Get !!!

---

http://goallineblitz.com/game/signup.pl?ref=433323

Shockdisnation03:

NYGFaninILL:

TroyArcher:

He is getting real close and has proven himself to be a better postseason QB than Peyton.  2-3 more years like this past year and he is a shoo in. 

I agree with you, he doesnt have Peytons numbers yet though

Its Not What You Do During Regular Season, Its How Many Super Bowls You Can Get !!!

Tell that to Dan Marino...

---

"18-1! If you don't have the ring, It don't mean a thing!"

bluesince86:

Hostetler:

bluesince86:

NYGFaninILL:

Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time. I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.

 

Thats why Namath is in, for him it was not just the numbers, His victory assured the AFL/NFL merger - truly groundbreaking and HOF worthy. The Jets win changed football, and if you accomplish something that Drastically changes the sport for the better than that in and of itself is HOF worthy.

I get what you are saying, but for me I just dont think its enough. I mean yes, they were the first AFL team to win a SB but its not like that would never have happened in the future. Would you make that QB on a different team a HOFer if they had pedestrian career stats but won the first SB for the AFL? Im not sure that just because he won the 1st SB for the AFL that his career overall should have put him there. Yes, he was on the team and was the first AFL QB to win the SB and MVP, but he was 17/28 206 0 0 hardly a game winning performance. Was he really all that instrumental in wining the game that he deserved the MVP or was he more of a game manager and the whole guarantee thing got him the MVP and hence the HOF? (I ask only because I wasnt around to watch that game).

Do you remember the USFL? Im sure there are many here that do - lets just say that until the Jets beat the Colts the AFL was looked on in the same manner. And yes - for that time period his numbers in that game were really good. The other point you bring up is the AFL would have won eventually, maybe, or maybe the league folds in 5 years. People seem to bail on perpetual losing entities.

Hostetler:

bluesince86:

Hostetler:

bluesince86:

NYGFaninILL:

Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time. I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.

 

Thats why Namath is in, for him it was not just the numbers, His victory assured the AFL/NFL merger - truly groundbreaking and HOF worthy. The Jets win changed football, and if you accomplish something that Drastically changes the sport for the better than that in and of itself is HOF worthy.

I get what you are saying, but for me I just dont think its enough. I mean yes, they were the first AFL team to win a SB but its not like that would never have happened in the future. Would you make that QB on a different team a HOFer if they had pedestrian career stats but won the first SB for the AFL? Im not sure that just because he won the 1st SB for the AFL that his career overall should have put him there. Yes, he was on the team and was the first AFL QB to win the SB and MVP, but he was 17/28 206 0 0 hardly a game winning performance. Was he really all that instrumental in wining the game that he deserved the MVP or was he more of a game manager and the whole guarantee thing got him the MVP and hence the HOF? (I ask only because I wasnt around to watch that game).

Do you remember the USFL? Im sure there are many here that do - lets just say that until the Jets beat the Colts the AFL was looked on in the same manner. And yes - for that time period his numbers in that game were really good. The other point you bring up is the AFL would have won eventually, maybe, or maybe the league folds in 5 years. People seem to bail on perpetual losing entities.

Yes, I do remember the USFL (I was young at the time, but I do remember it), and maybe they would have bailed on the AFL. At the sametime maybe they wouldn't have. I guess we are just going to have to disagree, I dont feel that wining 1 SB even though it was the first for the AFL and having a pedestrian career over all (did he do anything after that super bowl?) should be enough to get someone in the hall, no matter what era they played in.

Again, I do get how big of a deal it was for the Jets to win that Super Bow, but teams win SB's and I dont think he did enough to separate himself from that team victory to make the hall. I think a section dedicated to that team would have been perfect to represent what that win meant for the league if thats the reason that was used to justify his entry. I personaly think that his whole personality and the media's love for him at the time had more to do with him getting in than his actual accomplishments.

---

bluesince86:

Hostetler:

bluesince86:

Hostetler:

bluesince86:

NYGFaninILL:

Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time. I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.

 

Thats why Namath is in, for him it was not just the numbers, His victory assured the AFL/NFL merger - truly groundbreaking and HOF worthy. The Jets win changed football, and if you accomplish something that Drastically changes the sport for the better than that in and of itself is HOF worthy.

I get what you are saying, but for me I just dont think its enough. I mean yes, they were the first AFL team to win a SB but its not like that would never have happened in the future. Would you make that QB on a different team a HOFer if they had pedestrian career stats but won the first SB for the AFL? Im not sure that just because he won the 1st SB for the AFL that his career overall should have put him there. Yes, he was on the team and was the first AFL QB to win the SB and MVP, but he was 17/28 206 0 0 hardly a game winning performance. Was he really all that instrumental in wining the game that he deserved the MVP or was he more of a game manager and the whole guarantee thing got him the MVP and hence the HOF? (I ask only because I wasnt around to watch that game).

Do you remember the USFL? Im sure there are many here that do - lets just say that until the Jets beat the Colts the AFL was looked on in the same manner. And yes - for that time period his numbers in that game were really good. The other point you bring up is the AFL would have won eventually, maybe, or maybe the league folds in 5 years. People seem to bail on perpetual losing entities.

Yes, I do remember the USFL (I was young at the time, but I do remember it), and maybe they would have bailed on the AFL. At the sametime maybe they wouldn't have. I guess we are just going to have to disagree, I dont feel that wining 1 SB even though it was the first for the AFL and having a pedestrian career over all (did he do anything after that super bowl?) should be enough to get someone in the hall, no matter what era they played in. Again, I do get how big of a deal it was for the Jets to win that Super Bow, but teams win SB's and I dont think he did enough to separate himself from that team victory to make the hall. I think a section dedicated to that team would have been perfect to represent what that win meant for the league if thats the reason that was used to justify his entry. I personaly think that his whole personality and the media's love for him at the time had more to do with him getting in than his actual accomplishments.

 

I agree, but, the NFL does not have full teams in the HOF, Joe was the symbolic player of that team, and to aknowledge what that team/player meant to the league as a whole is why he was inducted.

If his stock keeps increaseing as much as it did from the beginning of this year until now...he will own the HOF someday.

Hostetler:

bluesince86:

Hostetler:

bluesince86:

Hostetler:

bluesince86:

NYGFaninILL:

Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time. I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.

 

Thats why Namath is in, for him it was not just the numbers, His victory assured the AFL/NFL merger - truly groundbreaking and HOF worthy. The Jets win changed football, and if you accomplish something that Drastically changes the sport for the better than that in and of itself is HOF worthy.

I get what you are saying, but for me I just dont think its enough. I mean yes, they were the first AFL team to win a SB but its not like that would never have happened in the future. Would you make that QB on a different team a HOFer if they had pedestrian career stats but won the first SB for the AFL? Im not sure that just because he won the 1st SB for the AFL that his career overall should have put him there. Yes, he was on the team and was the first AFL QB to win the SB and MVP, but he was 17/28 206 0 0 hardly a game winning performance. Was he really all that instrumental in wining the game that he deserved the MVP or was he more of a game manager and the whole guarantee thing got him the MVP and hence the HOF? (I ask only because I wasnt around to watch that game).

Do you remember the USFL? Im sure there are many here that do - lets just say that until the Jets beat the Colts the AFL was looked on in the same manner. And yes - for that time period his numbers in that game were really good. The other point you bring up is the AFL would have won eventually, maybe, or maybe the league folds in 5 years. People seem to bail on perpetual losing entities.

Yes, I do remember the USFL (I was young at the time, but I do remember it), and maybe they would have bailed on the AFL. At the sametime maybe they wouldn't have. I guess we are just going to have to disagree, I dont feel that wining 1 SB even though it was the first for the AFL and having a pedestrian career over all (did he do anything after that super bowl?) should be enough to get someone in the hall, no matter what era they played in. Again, I do get how big of a deal it was for the Jets to win that Super Bow, but teams win SB's and I dont think he did enough to separate himself from that team victory to make the hall. I think a section dedicated to that team would have been perfect to represent what that win meant for the league if thats the reason that was used to justify his entry. I personaly think that his whole personality and the media's love for him at the time had more to do with him getting in than his actual accomplishments.

 

I agree, but, the NFL does not have full teams in the HOF, Joe was the symbolic player of that team, and to aknowledge what that team/player meant to the league as a whole is why he was inducted.

True, they could have done something though to represent that team if they chose to, especially given the significance of that win and what it meant to the league. Not saying put all the players so to speak, but team in the sense of the organization and what they meant to the league. Good conversation man

---

Eli is going to play until he's at least 40 (pending injuries). I would not be surprised if he finishes his career with 60,000-70,000 yds, 400-450 TD's, 240INT's, and 3-4 super bowls.

Hostetler:

bluesince86:

NYGFaninILL:

Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time. I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.

 

Thats why Namath is in, for him it was not just the numbers, His victory assured the AFL/NFL merger - truly groundbreaking and HOF worthy. The Jets win changed football, and if you accomplish something that Drastically changes the sport for the better than that in and of itself is HOF worthy.

Actually, Namath's Super Bowl victory had nothing to do with assuring the NFL/AFL merger.

The Jets Super Bowl III victory was simply the bow in the package known as the merger. It validated in the minds of skeptics of the merger that this would be a good thing in the long run.

The merger agreement occurred in June 1966, and was approved by U S Congress (which was required in order to ensure no anti trust violations were in play) before the end of 1966.

Having a final Championship game between champions of the NFL and of the AFL--eventually, but not at first, to be known as the "Super Bowl"-- was a result of the merger agreement.

Super Bowl III occurred Jan. 1969.

The "new NFL" league alignment did not come about officially until 1970, but the deal was done. Joe simply put a brash young face on the new league.

bluesince86:

Hostetler:

bluesince86:

Hostetler:

bluesince86:

Hostetler:

bluesince86:

NYGFaninILL:

Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time. I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.

 

Thats why Namath is in, for him it was not just the numbers, His victory assured the AFL/NFL merger - truly groundbreaking and HOF worthy. The Jets win changed football, and if you accomplish something that Drastically changes the sport for the better than that in and of itself is HOF worthy.

I get what you are saying, but for me I just dont think its enough. I mean yes, they were the first AFL team to win a SB but its not like that would never have happened in the future. Would you make that QB on a different team a HOFer if they had pedestrian career stats but won the first SB for the AFL? Im not sure that just because he won the 1st SB for the AFL that his career overall should have put him there. Yes, he was on the team and was the first AFL QB to win the SB and MVP, but he was 17/28 206 0 0 hardly a game winning performance. Was he really all that instrumental in wining the game that he deserved the MVP or was he more of a game manager and the whole guarantee thing got him the MVP and hence the HOF? (I ask only because I wasnt around to watch that game).

Do you remember the USFL? Im sure there are many here that do - lets just say that until the Jets beat the Colts the AFL was looked on in the same manner. And yes - for that time period his numbers in that game were really good. The other point you bring up is the AFL would have won eventually, maybe, or maybe the league folds in 5 years. People seem to bail on perpetual losing entities.

Yes, I do remember the USFL (I was young at the time, but I do remember it), and maybe they would have bailed on the AFL. At the sametime maybe they wouldn't have. I guess we are just going to have to disagree, I dont feel that wining 1 SB even though it was the first for the AFL and having a pedestrian career over all (did he do anything after that super bowl?) should be enough to get someone in the hall, no matter what era they played in. Again, I do get how big of a deal it was for the Jets to win that Super Bow, but teams win SB's and I dont think he did enough to separate himself from that team victory to make the hall. I think a section dedicated to that team would have been perfect to represent what that win meant for the league if thats the reason that was used to justify his entry. I personaly think that his whole personality and the media's love for him at the time had more to do with him getting in than his actual accomplishments.

 

I agree, but, the NFL does not have full teams in the HOF, Joe was the symbolic player of that team, and to aknowledge what that team/player meant to the league as a whole is why he was inducted.

True, they could have done something though to represent that team if they chose to, especially given the significance of that win and what it meant to the league. Not saying put all the players so to speak, but team in the sense of the organization and what they meant to the league. Good conversation man

Thank you and it was nice having the conversation with you as well

bashful:

AN KURT WARNER IS - LOOK AT THE NUMBERS. Not saying he is or isn't but Elis numbers are equal to Warners and he has two sb wins and mvp As far as being better than his brother. His brother has all the stats but who would you take in the 4th quarter.

But, even more than that, if you take a look at Eli's numbers versus Brady's, Peyton's, and Brees' all after 7 seasons as full time starters, Eli's stacks up very nicely to them, not quite as good, but damn close.

---

"When you draft like Jerry Reese, you don’t need to spend like Dan Snyder." ~Brian Baxter, Giants 101

THE_New_York_Giants:

Eli is going to play until he's at least 40 (pending injuries). I would not be surprised if he finishes his career with 60,000-70,000 yds, 400-450 TD's, 240INT's, and 3-4 super bowls.

I don't know about playing until he's 40 (although I'd be thrilled if he could manage it). I think once Eli believes he is unable to perform at his normal high level, he will decide to hang up his cleats.

You just never know what will happen to the body once you pass into your early 30s. Look at iron man Peyton. This time 1 year ago, nobody--and I mean NOBODY--anticipated what the poor guy has suffered this past year.

And then there's Bret, the poster child for the dangers of clinging on 1 year (or 3) too long.

However, Eli SHOULD be able to play at his high level for at least another 5 years,if he wishes to, and very possibly extend that to 6 or 7 years (would be 37).

Plenty of time for AT LEAST 1 more Super Bowl!!

Forget this entire HOF debate. Since the vote doesn't occur for anyone before 5 years after he retires anyway, why even go there now?

Is there ANY doubt this dude ultimately makes it, after what he did this entire season?

So we're going to take the least impressive part of Peyton's resume (post-season performance) and compare it against the ONLY impressive part of Eli's (the 2 Super Bowls) to determine that Eli is better?

Outside of the 2 Super Bowl Runs, Eli is 0-3 in the playoffs.  He's been to the Pro Bowl 2 times in 8 years, his regular season record is 69-51, and he's never been the NFL MVP.

Peyton has been to the Pro Bowl 11 times, has been NFL MVP 4 times, and his regular season record is 141-67.

You could argue that Peyton is the greatest quarterback to ever play the game.  You can't even argue that Eli is the best quarterback of his era.  I like Eli and think he has a chance for the HOF, but he needs to start putting together some impressive regular seasons and/or add another Super Bowl ring.