Just on Sirius NFL Radio talking to Gil Brandt about Klecko

[Jet_Engine1]

I was listening to NFL Sirius Radio Hall of Fame Selection Show with Gil Brandt and Howard Balzer, and they were discussing who deserves to get in, and taking calls from people who were naming players that should be in, so I decided to call and ask why Klecko has been snubbed by the Hall committee...

After about 35 minutes on hold I was finally on and was the last call taken of the day and made my case:

Klecko was a dominant player of his era

ONLY PLAYER in NFL HISTORY to go to the Pro-Bowl at 3 different positions

Had a 20 Sack season

Multiple Pro Bowler

So Gil Brandt says, "Yes, Joe was a Pro-Bowler, he was, he did it all. He was great at 3 different Defensive Line Positions. I agree with you." SO Gil Brandt agrees with me, and of course then Balzer comes on and basically says, it comes down to longevity, and Joe wasn't Dominant LONG ENOUGH to go to the hall..and that when you're filling out your 25 man ballot, there are SO MANY players ahead of Joe...

Like whats his name, Worrelly from last year?

Anyway, I then reiterated Joes accomplishments and said he was IN MY OPINION the BEST D-Lineman of his era, and that I thought it was funny that a guy who many considered one of the best linemen of his era won't even get considered to get into the hall, while I guy I like, Curtis Martin, who was NEVER the best at his position AT ANY TIME, probably not even top 3, but he COMPILED a lot of yards will be a first ballot HOF'er...They then thanked me and my time on the air was up.

Heres the funny part:

After letting me go, they both agreed that Martin would be a HOF'er but NOT a First Ballot guy....

Then they go on to say Joe Klecko wasn't the BEST DT (ignoring his time at NT and DE) of his time, and that their were MANY good DTs in the league. Gil Brandt thought for a second and mentioned Randy White (of course...Gil probably drafted him) and Balzer snorted and said, "Yeah, Randy is a bit ahead of Joe..."

AND THAT WAS ALL THEY COULD NAME. They TRIED thinking of at least ONE DT better than Joe and couldn't come up with ONE NAME beyond White.

This was Balzer and GIL BRANDT...the same GIL BRANDT that could probably tell you the starting O-line of the 1968 Chiefs out of his head. MR. FOOTBALL himself couldn't argue against Klecko or even name ONE OTHER GUY better than Joe at his position beyond Randy WHite, a guy already IN the HOF.

That to me ws the most compelling evidence I have ever heard that Joe Klecko not being a HOF is a joke.

[Thai Jet]

LOL What a bunch of putzes. Of course Klecko deserves to be in the hall. It might take awhile with thinking like theirs. I'm glad Ralph Wilson finally got in this year. I hate the Bills but Ralph deserved it.

[Maxman]

Good call.

I think I am more surprised that they said Curtis isn't a first ballot guy. I don't see how he doesn't get in right away.

[drago]

Good call.

I think I am more surprised that they said Curtis isn't a first ballot guy. I don't see how he doesn't get in right away.

If linemen take up on average, 9 positions and QB's/RB's take up 2, why is it that there are only five more Linemen in the HOF than the other? The thing is a total sham. Just because everyone can name the top five or ten Quaterbacks in a given season and cannot name the same top ten Linemen (largely because they don't produce easy to translate statistics) doesn't mean the linemen are less worthy.

The fact that Martin, a guy that led the league in rushing one time and was never (and I do mean NEVER) the best player at his position at any point in his career but will still make the HOF without a problem. It's total bull ****.

Martin was a good to very good running back. In his best season he was never better than Faulk, James, Tomlinson, Alexander or Sanders' second or third best season.

Klecko on the other hand, is pushed from position to position, still making the pro bowl and is still the player that oposing teams look at first when they play the Jets.

The disparity in postions getting into the Hall is total crap. They need to stop catering to the easily definable statistics and start looking at guys like Klecko.

Hall Breakdown--

QB's/RB's - 72

TE's/WR's - 34

Linemen - 77

Backers/DB's - 38

[aec4]

I was listening to NFL Sirius Radio Hall of Fame Selection Show with Gil Brandt and Howard Balzer, and they were discussing who deserves to get in, and taking calls from people who were naming players that should be in, so I decided to call and ask why Klecko has been snubbed by the Hall committee...

After about 35 minutes on hold I was finally on and was the last call taken of the day and made my case:

Klecko was a dominant player of his era

ONLY PLAYER in NFL HISTORY to go to the Pro-Bowl at 3 different positions

Had a 20 Sack season

Multiple Pro Bowler

So Gil Brandt says, "Yes, Joe was a Pro-Bowler, he was, he did it all. He was great at 3 different Defensive Line Positions. I agree with you." SO Gil Brandt agrees with me, and of course then Balzer comes on and basically says, it comes down to longevity, and Joe wasn't Dominant LONG ENOUGH to go to the hall..and that when you're filling out your 25 man ballot, there are SO MANY players ahead of Joe...

Like whats his name, Worrelly from last year?

Anyway, I then reiterated Joes accomplishments and said he was IN MY OPINION the BEST D-Lineman of his era, and that I thought it was funny that a guy who many considered one of the best linemen of his era won't even get considered to get into the hall, while I guy I like, Curtis Martin, who was NEVER the best at his position AT ANY TIME, probably not even top 3, but he COMPILED a lot of yards will be a first ballot HOF'er...They then thanked me and my time on the air was up.

Heres the funny part:

After letting me go, they both agreed that Martin would be a HOF'er but NOT a First Ballot guy....

Then they go on to say Joe Klecko wasn't the BEST DT (ignoring his time at NT and DE) of his time, and that their were MANY good DTs in the league. Gil Brandt thought for a second and mentioned Randy White (of course...Gil probably drafted him) and Balzer snorted and said, "Yeah, Randy is a bit ahead of Joe..."

AND THAT WAS ALL THEY COULD NAME. They TRIED thinking of at least ONE DT better than Joe and couldn't come up with ONE NAME beyond White.

This was Balzer and GIL BRANDT...the same GIL BRANDT that could probably tell you the starting O-line of the 1968 Chiefs out of his head. MR. FOOTBALL himself couldn't argue against Klecko or even name ONE OTHER GUY better than Joe at his position beyond Randy WHite, a guy already IN the HOF.

That to me ws the most compelling evidence I have ever heard that Joe Klecko not being a HOF is a joke.

Klecko would get into the HOVG on the 1st ballot.. but HOF... he's not up to that level, sorry.

[MSGold12]

I was listening to NFL Sirius Radio Hall of Fame Selection Show with Gil Brandt and Howard Balzer, and they were discussing who deserves to get in, and taking calls from people who were naming players that should be in, so I decided to call and ask why Klecko has been snubbed by the Hall committee...

After about 35 minutes on hold I was finally on and was the last call taken of the day and made my case:

Klecko was a dominant player of his era

ONLY PLAYER in NFL HISTORY to go to the Pro-Bowl at 3 different positions

Had a 20 Sack season

Multiple Pro Bowler

So Gil Brandt says, "Yes, Joe was a Pro-Bowler, he was, he did it all. He was great at 3 different Defensive Line Positions. I agree with you." SO Gil Brandt agrees with me, and of course then Balzer comes on and basically says, it comes down to longevity, and Joe wasn't Dominant LONG ENOUGH to go to the hall..and that when you're filling out your 25 man ballot, there are SO MANY players ahead of Joe...

Like whats his name, Worrelly from last year?

Anyway, I then reiterated Joes accomplishments and said he was IN MY OPINION the BEST D-Lineman of his era, and that I thought it was funny that a guy who many considered one of the best linemen of his era won't even get considered to get into the hall, while I guy I like, Curtis Martin, who was NEVER the best at his position AT ANY TIME, probably not even top 3, but he COMPILED a lot of yards will be a first ballot HOF'er...They then thanked me and my time on the air was up.

Heres the funny part:

After letting me go, they both agreed that Martin would be a HOF'er but NOT a First Ballot guy....

Then they go on to say Joe Klecko wasn't the BEST DT (ignoring his time at NT and DE) of his time, and that their were MANY good DTs in the league. Gil Brandt thought for a second and mentioned Randy White (of course...Gil probably drafted him) and Balzer snorted and said, "Yeah, Randy is a bit ahead of Joe..."

AND THAT WAS ALL THEY COULD NAME. They TRIED thinking of at least ONE DT better than Joe and couldn't come up with ONE NAME beyond White.

This was Balzer and GIL BRANDT...the same GIL BRANDT that could probably tell you the starting O-line of the 1968 Chiefs out of his head. MR. FOOTBALL himself couldn't argue against Klecko or even name ONE OTHER GUY better than Joe at his position beyond Randy WHite, a guy already IN the HOF.

That to me ws the most compelling evidence I have ever heard that Joe Klecko not being a HOF is a joke.

I have to respectfully disagree. I know its scareligious to say this but if you look at his acreer as a whole, Klecko (who I LOVED as a player) was not a HOF player. Specifically...

1977- Very nice rookie year. Starts half the games. 8 sacks.

1978- Another nice year as a 3-4 DE. PLays and starts all 16 games, 8 sacks

1979- Solid year as a 4-3 DE. Plays and starts 15 games, 7 sacks

1980- First near pro bowl type year. 4-3 DE. Plays all 16 games. 10.5 sacks

1981- Pro Bowl MVP type season. Plays and starts 16 games. 20 sacks

1982- Gets hurt in game 2. Misses entire regular season. 2 sacks.

1983- Moves to 4-3 DT. Solid year. 6 sacks. Makes pro bowl

1984- PLays i only 12 games. 3 sacks. makes pro bowl mostly on reoputation.

1985- Moves to 3-4 NT where he has a dominant season. 7.5 sacks. Goes to pro bowl.

1986- Plays in onl;y 9 games. 4 sacks.

1987- Plays in only 8 games. 1 sack.

1988- Dont have his Colt stats but he was OK and then retires.

12 seasosn of which he was "dominant" in about 3 (1981, 1983 and 1985). The whole "pro bowl at 3 positions" does push him closer to the "fringe HOF" status but he simply was not a dominant player long enough and was too uinjury prone in the second half iof his career. he never won a SB so that doesnt help his cause either like it does some others. Klecko was an all time great Jet and probbably one of my top 4 or 5 favorite players of all time...but hes not a HOFer IMO. Hall of VERY VERY GOOD yes...HOF, no.

Now, you want to talk about someone getting screwed by the HOF, we can discuss Winston Hill. 8 time pro bowler, 4 time all-pro and has a ring. Yet he never even got discussed.

[Boynton Beach Jets]

I was listening to NFL Sirius Radio Hall of Fame Selection Show with Gil Brandt and Howard Balzer, and they were discussing who deserves to get in, and taking calls from people who were naming players that should be in, so I decided to call and ask why Klecko has been snubbed by the Hall committee...

After about 35 minutes on hold I was finally on and was the last call taken of the day and made my case:

Klecko was a dominant player of his era

ONLY PLAYER in NFL HISTORY to go to the Pro-Bowl at 3 different positions

Had a 20 Sack season

Multiple Pro Bowler

So Gil Brandt says, "Yes, Joe was a Pro-Bowler, he was, he did it all. He was great at 3 different Defensive Line Positions. I agree with you." SO Gil Brandt agrees with me, and of course then Balzer comes on and basically says, it comes down to longevity, and Joe wasn't Dominant LONG ENOUGH to go to the hall..and that when you're filling out your 25 man ballot, there are SO MANY players ahead of Joe...

Like whats his name, Worrelly from last year?

Anyway, I then reiterated Joes accomplishments and said he was IN MY OPINION the BEST D-Lineman of his era, and that I thought it was funny that a guy who many considered one of the best linemen of his era won't even get considered to get into the hall, while I guy I like, Curtis Martin, who was NEVER the best at his position AT ANY TIME, probably not even top 3, but he COMPILED a lot of yards will be a first ballot HOF'er...They then thanked me and my time on the air was up.

Heres the funny part:

After letting me go, they both agreed that Martin would be a HOF'er but NOT a First Ballot guy....

Then they go on to say Joe Klecko wasn't the BEST DT (ignoring his time at NT and DE) of his time, and that their were MANY good DTs in the league. Gil Brandt thought for a second and mentioned Randy White (of course...Gil probably drafted him) and Balzer snorted and said, "Yeah, Randy is a bit ahead of Joe..."

AND THAT WAS ALL THEY COULD NAME. They TRIED thinking of at least ONE DT better than Joe and couldn't come up with ONE NAME beyond White.

This was Balzer and GIL BRANDT...the same GIL BRANDT that could probably tell you the starting O-line of the 1968 Chiefs out of his head. MR. FOOTBALL himself couldn't argue against Klecko or even name ONE OTHER GUY better than Joe at his position beyond Randy WHite, a guy already IN the HOF.

That to me ws the most compelling evidence I have ever heard that Joe Klecko not being a HOF is a joke.

Very nice call!!! Damn anti-Jets bias. C-Mart is a 1st ballot HOF and Klecko is getting the shaft

[JetsMan57]

Nothing against Dan Hampton, but if he's in the HOF they better make room for Klecko.

[Klecko73isGod]

I have to respectfully disagree. I know its scareligious to say this but if you look at his acreer as a whole, Klecko (who I LOVED as a player) was not a HOF player. Specifically...

1977- Very nice rookie year. Starts half the games. 8 sacks.

1978- Another nice year as a 3-4 DE. PLays and starts all 16 games, 8 sacks

1979- Solid year as a 4-3 DE. Plays and starts 15 games, 7 sacks

1980- First near pro bowl type year. 4-3 DE. Plays all 16 games. 10.5 sacks

1981- Pro Bowl MVP type season. Plays and starts 16 games. 20 sacks

1982- Gets hurt in game 2. Misses entire regular season. 2 sacks.

1983- Moves to 4-3 DT. Solid year. 6 sacks. Makes pro bowl

1984- PLays i only 12 games. 3 sacks. makes pro bowl mostly on reoputation.

1985- Moves to 3-4 NT where he has a dominant season. 7.5 sacks. Goes to pro bowl.

1986- Plays in onl;y 9 games. 4 sacks.

1987- Plays in only 8 games. 1 sack.

1988- Dont have his Colt stats but he was OK and then retires.

12 seasosn of which he was "dominant" in about 3 (1981, 1983 and 1985). The whole "pro bowl at 3 positions" does push him closer to the "fringe HOF" status but he simply was not a dominant player long enough and was too uinjury prone in the second half iof his career. he never won a SB so that doesnt help his cause either like it does some others. Klecko was an all time great Jet and probbably one of my top 4 or 5 favorite players of all time...but hes not a HOFer IMO. Hall of VERY VERY GOOD yes...HOF, no.

Now, you want to talk about someone getting screwed by the HOF, we can discuss Winston Hill. 8 time pro bowler, 4 time all-pro and has a ring. Yet he never even got discussed.

Your misinterpretation of these stats is laughable.

8 sacks as a 3-4 DE is outstanding, not nice. Richard Seymour, who is widely considered one of, if not the best defensive lineman of this generation just tied his career best for sacks in a season this year, guess how many this 3-4 DE had this year? Eight. That's right, the same that you said was just "nice."

Klecko made the ProBowl at three positions but you know what makes that stat even more impressive? Twice he made the ProBowl in his FIRST YEAR playing that particular position. That is something only special athletes do, guys like Klecko and our very own Kris Jenkins are the only two 3-4 NTs to make the ProBowl in their first year playing the position.

Just like Curtis Martin, who along with Barry Sanders is the only man to rush for 1000 yards in each of his first 10 seasons, when you are on a list of only two men to ever accomplish something out of the thousands who have played the game, it sets you apart. That is HALL OF FAME WORTHY.

[drago]

Your misinterpretation of these stats is laughable.

8 sacks as a 3-4 DE is outstanding, not nice. Richard Seymour, who is widely considered one of, if not the best defensive lineman of this generation just tied his career best for sacks in a season this year, guess how many this 3-4 DE had this year? Eight. That's right, the same that you said was just "nice."

Klecko made the ProBowl at three positions but you know what makes that stat even more impressive? Twice he made the ProBowl in his FIRST YEAR playing that particular position. That is something only special athletes do, guys like Klecko and our very own Kris Jenkins are the only two 3-4 NTs to make the ProBowl in their first year playing the position.

Just like Curtis Martin, who along with Barry Sanders is the only man to rush for 1000 yards in each of his first 10 seasons, when you are on a list of only two men to ever accomplish something out of the thousands who have played the game, it sets you apart. That is HALL OF FAME WORTHY.

That's what I was thinking reading that. NT are not supposed to get statistics, 34 ends rarely get statistics. That's why the HOF things is BS anyway, they let the most players in that have tangible stats to compare against.

The only reason guys like Faneca and Hutchinson will make the HOF is because of their enormous pay days, otherwise they might struggle to get in if they happen to be going against a tackle like Orlando Pace or players of tangible positions like Brady, P Manning, T. Owens, R Moss, Faulk, Warner, Tomlinson. If that is the list, does a guard seriously have a shot?

Not nearly as good a shot as if the voters gave at least ONE spot to linemen every year. As, IMO, they should. One spot for 9 players cannot be too much to ask for when there are only 24 positions to really consider (including a coach and/or kicker).

Faneca and Hutchinson have DOMINATED their positions, in simlar fashion that Klecko did, yet they don't churn stats like the others, making it much harder to get in.

The whole thing is a sham.

[MSGold12]

Your misinterpretation of these stats is laughable.

8 sacks as a 3-4 DE is outstanding, not nice. Richard Seymour, who is widely considered one of, if not the best defensive lineman of this generation just tied his career best for sacks in a season this year, guess how many this 3-4 DE had this year? Eight. That's right, the same that you said was just "nice."

Klecko made the ProBowl at three positions but you know what makes that stat even more impressive? Twice he made the ProBowl in his FIRST YEAR playing that particular position. That is something only special athletes do, guys like Klecko and our very own Kris Jenkins are the only two 3-4 NTs to make the ProBowl in their first year playing the position.

Just like Curtis Martin, who along with Barry Sanders is the only man to rush for 1000 yards in each of his first 10 seasons, when you are on a list of only two men to ever accomplish something out of the thousands who have played the game, it sets you apart. That is HALL OF FAME WORTHY.

You can feel free to disagree wiht me but there is no need for insults. I threw the sack stats out there because that is the only stat thats really available. And yes, 8 sacks is very very GOOD for a 3-4 DE...but its not great. bruce Smith had 14+ regularly as a 3-4 DE...thats great. But forget sacks. I saw EVERY game the guy played in for his entire career. He was very very good for several years and great for about 2 (1981 and 1985). He made the pro bowl in 1984 based TOTALLLY on reputation...not his play. In 1983 he made the pro bowl as a DT even though the team, gave up HUGE chunks of run yards that year. After 1982, he was injured a lot and missed considerable time. Prior to 1982, he had 1 truly dominant year 1981).

Im sorry, but to me that does not equal HOF. The guy was a terrific player but not quite a HOFer. The pro bowl thing is a nice variable to throw out there but he simply was not dominant enough for long enough to be a HOF in my book. Had he had 1 or 2 more years like he did in 1981 or 1985 then maybe. But for most of his career he was very good to excellent...not great.

And dont get me started on Mr Career 4.0 yards per carry. Martin is NOT an all time great...he was a compiler who stayed remakably healthy and got a lot of carries.

[DMaynard]

This was Balzer and GIL BRANDT...the same GIL BRANDT that could probably tell you the starting O-line of the 1968 Chiefs out of his head.

Off the top of my pointy head, I swear, no references:

OT - Jim Tyer

OT - David Hill

G - Ed Budde

G - Mo Moorman

C - EJ Holub

[Fishooked]

You can't really use 'stats' in the NFL HOF like they do with the MLB HOF, you just can't....there are receivers in the HOF when compared to todays receivers, their stats are pedestrian or average at best.

NFL HOF is more subjective...prolly just because it's the Jets....

[MSGold12]

You can't really use 'stats' in the NFL HOF like they do with the MLB HOF, you just can't....there are receivers in the HOF when compared to todays receivers, their stats are pedestrian or average at best.

NFL HOF is more subjective...prolly just because it's the Jets....

I totally agree...which is why I dont see Klecko as a HOF. I certainly think he can be considered, but he is not there as far as I am concerend. He was a really really good player but only a "HOF player" for about 2 years. But I agree that jets gets the shaft from the HOF committee. The fact that guys like Klecko, Toon and even gastineau are never vene finalists is silly. Winston Hill should be IN.

As to Dan Hampton...its a compelling argument. but hamption has 2 things Klecko did not. 1) a ring and 2) he played on one of the greatest defenses of all time. That probably nudged him in.

I LOVED Joe Klecko. I just try and look at him objectively and my eyes tell me hes not a HOF player.

[Green DNA]

Good call.

I think I am more surprised that they said Curtis isn't a first ballot guy. I don't see how he doesn't get in right away.

Savage is on the HOF committee

[aec4]

Your misinterpretation of these stats is laughable.

8 sacks as a 3-4 DE is outstanding, not nice. Richard Seymour, who is widely considered one of, if not the best defensive lineman of this generation just tied his career best for sacks in a season this year, guess how many this 3-4 DE had this year? Eight. That's right, the same that you said was just "nice."

Klecko made the ProBowl at three positions but you know what makes that stat even more impressive? Twice he made the ProBowl in his FIRST YEAR playing that particular position. That is something only special athletes do, guys like Klecko and our very own Kris Jenkins are the only two 3-4 NTs to make the ProBowl in their first year playing the position.

Just like Curtis Martin, who along with Barry Sanders is the only man to rush for 1000 yards in each of his first 10 seasons, when you are on a list of only two men to ever accomplish something out of the thousands who have played the game, it sets you apart. That is HALL OF FAME WORTHY.

I agree with you.. 8 sacks as a DE is very good in the 3-4.

Probowls? I give them absolutely 0 weight.

[MSGold12]

I agree with you.. 8 sacks as a DE is very good in the 3-4.

Probowls? I give them absolutely 0 weight.

I dont disagree but that needs to be put in some perspective. Klecko played exactly one year as a 3-4 DE. One...1978. And yes, 8 sacks as a 3-4 DE is indeed "very good". But "very good" is not HOF. He reached double digit sacks in 1980 and 1981 when (one could arguie) he benefitted from having Gastineau opposite him.

Look, I am not trying to downgrade the guy...I loved him. But he had two dominanant seasons out of 12 (1981 and 1985) and was injured for a good part of 4 others (1982, 1984, 1986, 1987). To me that just doesnt add up to HOF.

[Klecko73isGod]

I agree with you.. 8 sacks as a DE is very good in the 3-4.

Probowls? I give them absolutely 0 weight.

Wrong as usual.

In Klecko's day, fans did not vote for the ProBowl. It was an honor bestowed by players and coaches only so it carried much more weight than it does now. Players didn't get in on rep back then.

[MSGold12]

Wrong as usual.

In Klecko's day, fans did not vote for the ProBowl. It was an honor bestowed by players and coaches only so it carried much more weight than it does now. Players didn't get in on rep back then.

Oh please...of course they did. Go look at Kleckos numbers from 1984 and tell me he didnt get in based on his rep. Plenty of guys got in based on rep in those years...it was just by their peers rather then by the fans. Yes it ccarries ore weight then it does now, but to say it was somehow pure back then and beased solely on performance is incorrect.

Again, I am not trying to slam Klecko. I think he is a fringe HOFer and if he got in Id be thrilled. But this idea that you have put forth that he is some no brainer is just wrong. 2 or 3 dominant years out of 12 does not put you in. He's fringe at best.

[PFSIKH]

Very nice call!!! Damn anti-Jets bias. C-Mart is a 1st ballot HOF and Klecko is getting the shaft

Seriously?

He will get in, but not being a Top 5 back at any point in his career should preclude him from getting in.

[Klecko73isGod]

Oh please...of course they did. Go look at Kleckos numbers from 1984 and tell me he didnt get in based on his rep. Plenty of guys got in based on rep in those years...it was just by their peers rather then by the fans. Yes it ccarries ore weight then it does now, but to say it was somehow pure back then and beased solely on performance is incorrect.

Again, I am not trying to slam Klecko. I think he is a fringe HOFer and if he got in Id be thrilled. But this idea that you have put forth that he is some no brainer is just wrong. 2 or 3 dominant years out of 12 does not put you in. He's fringe at best.

Stats are bull**** for defensive tackles.

A DT's performance can not be measured by statistics.

I am so sick of this fantasy football mentality. Stats are only significant for a handful of positions in the NFL and even then they can be deceiving.

Klecko was voted in because he was impossible to block. He was disruptive force on the inside. It was impossible to block him one on one. His peers voted him out of respect.

[drago]

Stats are bull**** for defensive tackles.

A DT's performance can not be measured by statistics.

I am so sick of this fantasy football mentality. Stats are only significant for a handful of positions in the NFL and even then they can be deceiving.

Klecko was voted in because he was impossible to block. He was disruptive force on the inside. It was impossible to block him one on one. His peers voted him out of respect.

Case in point would be Joe Thomas with the Browns. He's not a mauler and will not get the pancakes some other big time Tackles get but as a tackle is is top five at his position.

Stats on linemen are for the homos (mods).

[DMaynard]

Again, I am not trying to slam Klecko. I think he is a fringe HOFer and if he got in Id be thrilled. But this idea that you have put forth that he is some no brainer is just wrong. 2 or 3 dominant years out of 12 does not put you in. He's fringe at best.

Agree. And I too, loved Klecko to death. But like it or not, part of HOF qualifications is greatness over extended periods of time. Joe just does not have that. Gale Sayers and Sandy Koufax are once in a lifetime exceptions.

For example, most of the posters on this board probably never heard of George Webster. He was an unbelievable OLB for the Houston Oilers. His first three years (1967 - 1969), he was all pro and there was NEVER a better OLB than him (including LT, who I don't really consider a LB). He was, in a word, perfect. But then he tore up his knee and was never nearly the same. No matter how great he was in those three years, you can't put someone in the HOF for three years.

The real Jet who has been ripped off not getting into the HOF is Winston Hill. Great player over long period of time. His snubbing is a true discrace.

[MSGold12]

Stats are bull**** for defensive tackles.

A DT's performance can not be measured by statistics.

I am so sick of this fantasy football mentality. Stats are only significant for a handful of positions in the NFL and even then they can be deceiving.

Klecko was voted in because he was impossible to block. He was disruptive force on the inside. It was impossible to block him one on one. His peers voted him out of respect.

Thank you...you just proved my point. You said Klecko was voted in "out of respect" and that is exactly true. he was great in 1981, unstoppable. But in 1983 and 1984 his play did NOT warrant pro bowl selection and yet he got in "out of respect" aka based on repuatation...something you earlier said did not exist back then. Hell he only played 12 games in 84...and the team and D wasnt very good at all! 85 he CLEARLY deserved it as he was a dominant NT...but 83 and 84 he got in based on rep.

But this is all sematics. Your initial arguement is that the man is a HOFer...a no brainer getting the shaft according to you. I have agrued that he is fringe at best and have used stats, fact, and first hand witnessing of his play to try and prove my position. All you have done is try and insult and demean my position yet have done nothing of substance to refute it. I havent relied on stats...I merely threw a few out there because the HOF does look at stats. I say he was only a dominant player for 2 or 3 years...you have no retort. I tell you he was injured quite a bit for the second half of his career...you have no retort. Jeez, make SOME kind of arguement already that doesnt inlclude the usual "he made the pro bowl at 3 different positions" line (I mean talk about using shallow arguements...one you even just contradicted yourself).

I loved Klecko. But even as a Jet fan I can be objective enough to say he simply did not do enough in his career to be enshrined wiht the greatest who ever played the game. Marc Gastineau was damn near unstoppable too, was a 5 time pro bowler himself...and hes no HOFer either!

[MSGold12]

Case in point would be Joe Thomas with the Browns. He's not a mauler and will not get the pancakes some other big time Tackles get but as a tackle is is top five at his position.

Stats on linemen are for the homos (mods).

Grow up. Make some type of arguement rather then some childish inaccurate insult. Were not talking about whether a player is good or not...were talking about the HOF. Is he one of the best EVER. I say Klecko is not and have stated why wihtout insult or sexual preference insinuation. Try it...its called an adult conversation/debate.

[MSGold12]

Agree. I have to agree with the unpopular position. And I too, loved Klecko to death. But like it or not, part of HOF qualifications is greatness over extended periods of time. Joe just does not have that. Gale Sayers and Sandy Koufax are once in a lifetime exceptions.

For example, most of the posters on this board probably never heard of George Webster. He was an unbelievable OLB for the Houston Oilers. His first three years (1967 - 1969), he was all pro and there was NEVER a better OLB than him (including LT, who I don't really consider a LB). He was, in a word, perfect. But then he tore up his knee and was never nearly the same. No matter how great he was in those three years, you can't put someone in the HOF for three years.

The real Jet who has been ripped off not getting into the HOF is Winston Hill. Great player over long period of time. His snubbing is a true discrace.

I mentioned Hill in my ealrier post too! THAT is a disgrace. 8 time pro bowler WITH a ring. And yet he was never seriously considered because the Jets were no bad once they joing the merged NFL.

Webster...what a player he was. Tragic injury. I see Carl McAdmans in a similar light. He had so much talent but his injury limited him badly for the Jets. Speaking of which, do you remmeber Greg Cook of Cincy? Bill Walsh went to his grave saying he was the single ost talented QB he ever coached.

As to Klecko, you and I are on the same page here. REALLY really good player and one I loved to death...but just didnt do it long eough on a dominant level to be a HOFer. The closest I thin we have to that Syares/Koufax type is Don mattingly. 5 years of absolute dominantion and then 6 more of non dominant due to injury. Namath can have a similar agurment. His first 5 years were superb. MVPs, pro bowls, a ring, dominant stats. Then his next 8 were very up and down as his health and team around him declined badly.

[Klecko73isGod]

Thank you...you just proved my point. You said Klecko was voted in "out of respect" and that is exactly true. he was great in 1981, unstoppable. But in 1983 and 1984 his play did NOT warrant pro bowl selection and yet he got in "out of respect" aka based on repuatation...something you earlier said did not exist back then. Hell he only played 12 games in 84...and the team and D wasnt very good at all! 85 he CLEARLY deserved it as he was a dominant NT...but 83 and 84 he got in based on rep.

But this is all sematics. Your initial arguement is that the man is a HOFer...a no brainer getting the shaft according to you. I have agrued that he is fringe at best and have used stats, fact, and first hand witnessing of his play to try and prove my position. All you have done is try and insult and demean my position yet have done nothing of substance to refute it. I havent relied on stats...I merely threw a few out there because the HOF does look at stats. I say he was only a dominant player for 2 or 3 years...you have no retort. I tell you he was injured quite a bit for the second half of his career...you have no retort. Jeez, make SOME kind of arguement already that doesnt inlclude the usual "he made the pro bowl at 3 different positions" line (I mean talk about using shallow arguements...one you even just contradicted yourself).

I loved Klecko. But even as a Jet fan I can be objective enough to say he simply did not do enough in his career to be enshrined wiht the greatest who ever played the game. Marc Gastineau was damn near unstoppable too, was a 5 time pro bowler himself...and hes no HOFer either!

I meant out of respect for his performance and I think that was pretty clear.

And you're completely relying on stats. Stats don't begin to tell the story of the effectiveness of a defensive lineman. John Abraham is a great pass rusher and puts up some great numbers but missed the Pro Bowl. Why? Because he is a one dimensional player. Much like Mark Gastineau, he is useless against the run. Great stats, far from a complete player.

Hall of Famer Mean Joe Greene himself, who was the first to play the ****ed NT position in the 3-4 under Bud Carson, is on record as saying that Klecko played it better than he did. In fact, he said that Klecko "perfected" it.

Sorry, but I'll take a Hall of Famer's word over some dude on a message board.

[DMaynard]

I mentioned Hill in my ealrier post too! THAT is a disgrace. 8 time pro bowler WITH a ring. And yet he was never seriously considered because the Jets were no bad once they joing the merged NFL.

Webster...what a player he was. Tragic injury. I see Carl McAdmans in a similar light. He had so much talent but his injury limited him badly for the Jets. Speaking of which, do you remmeber Greg Cook of Cincy? Bill Walsh went to his grave saying he was the single ost talented QB he ever coached.

As to Klecko, you and I are on the same page here. REALLY really good player and one I loved to death...but just didnt do it long eough on a dominant level to be a HOFer. The closest I thin we have to that Syares/Koufax type is Don mattingly. 5 years of absolute dominantion and then 6 more of non dominant due to injury. Namath can have a similar agurment. His first 5 years were superb. MVPs, pro bowls, a ring, dominant stats. Then his next 8 were very up and down as his health and team around him declined badly.

Oh yeah, Cook looked like the next Namath his rookie year (I think 1969). Tremendous talent. Namath was helped by the historic SB win and the Babe Ruth type personality. No one dominated their sport like Koufax during his short time on top. Sayers had no rings, but he was so great at everything (running inside/outside, receiving, returning punts, kickoffs) and had a jaw dropping grace that was never seen before or since.

Yes, Klecko was great, but injuries robbed him of a longer more productive career. And even though there are people in the HOF who I don't think deserve to be there (like Dan Hampton), we should not use that as an excuse to lower our own standards.

[DMaynard]

I meant out of respect for his performance and I think that was pretty clear.

And you're completely relying on stats. Stats don't begin to tell the story of the effectiveness of a defensive lineman. John Abraham is a great pass rusher and puts up some great numbers but missed the Pro Bowl. Why? Because he is a one dimensional player. Much like Mark Gastineau, he is useless against the run. Great stats, far from a complete player.

Hall of Famer Mean Joe Greene himself, who was the first to play the ****ed NT position in the 3-4 under Bud Carson, is on record as saying that Klecko played it better than he did. In fact, he said that Klecko "perfected" it.

Sorry, but I'll take a Hall of Famer's word over some dude on a message board.

With all due respect, you are implying that Klecko was dominant after 1981 even though his stats declined. The truth is, except for 1985 when he first moved to NT, was healthy all year and had a great year, he was not the same consistently dominating player. he missed a lot of games due to injuries and also played a lot of games while injured on sheer guts. Valiant, powerful, effective, at times dominating, but no longer very quick and consistently dominating like in 1980/81.

[drago]

Grow up. Make some type of arguement rather then some childish inaccurate insult. Were not talking about whether a player is good or not...were talking about the HOF. Is he one of the best EVER. I say Klecko is not and have stated why wihtout insult or sexual preference insinuation. Try it...its called an adult conversation/debate.

thanks for the pep-talk dad. I'll be sure to strive for your lofty expectations next time.

Homo.

[MSGold12]

I meant out of respect for his performance and I think that was pretty clear.

And you're completely relying on stats. Stats don't begin to tell the story of the effectiveness of a defensive lineman. John Abraham is a great pass rusher and puts up some great numbers but missed the Pro Bowl. Why? Because he is a one dimensional player. Much like Mark Gastineau, he is useless against the run. Great stats, far from a complete player.

Hall of Famer Mean Joe Greene himself, who was the first to play the ****ed NT position in the 3-4 under Bud Carson, is on record as saying that Klecko played it better than he did. In fact, he said that Klecko "perfected" it.

Sorry, but I'll take a Hall of Famer's word over some dude on a message board.

And Klecko played that position for exactly two seasons out of his 12...one of which he only played half the year. So tell me again why this dude on a message board who saw every game Klecko played in shouold change his mind? And if after all I have written you are still under the inmpression that I am "copmpletely relying on stats" then I think it is you who are not clear.

So I'll try again. Klecko had two (maybe 3) DOMINANT years. 1981 as a 4-3 DE, 1985 as a 3-4 NT and maybe you can give him the half season of 1986 before he got hurt. Is that your definition of a HOFer? 2 or 3 years of "dominance"? If not, then tell me and try AGAIN to make some type of arguement.

Oh and btw, apparantly the HOF voters agree wiht this "dude on a message board" because last time I checked, he wasnt in!!!!

[MSGold12]

With all due respect, you are implying that Klecko was dominant after 1981 even though his stats declined. The truth is, except for 1985 when he first moved to NT, was healthy all year and had a great year, he was not the same consistently dominating player. he missed a lot of games due to injuries and also played a lot of games while injured on sheer guts. Valiant, powerful, effective, at times dominating, but no longer very quick and consistently dominating like in 1980/81.

EXACTLY my point.

[MSGold12]

Oh yeah, Cook looked like the next Namath his rookie year (I think 1969). Tremendous talent. Namath was helped by the historic SB win and the Babe Ruth type personality. No one dominated their sport like Koufax during his short time on top. Sayers had no rings, but he was so great at everything (running inside/outside, receiving, returning punts, kickoffs) and had a jaw dropping grace that was never seen before or since.

Yes, Klecko was great, but injuries robbed him of a longer more productive career. And even though there are people in the HOF who I don't think deserve to be there (like Dan Hampton), we should not use that as an excuse to lower our own standards.

I agree about hampton and thats the BERST excuse to put Kleck in. BUT....

1. Hampton has a ring

2. Hampton had the good foprtune of being a part of one of the best Ds of all time

3. Hampton was more durable longer then Kleck was.

Klecko was definately as good as hampton...both were fringe. But those little extras nudged Hampton in IMO.

[Klecko73isGod]

And Klecko played that position for exactly two seasons out of his 12...one of which he only played half the year. So tell me again why this dude on a message board who saw every game Klecko played in shouold change his mind? And if after all I have written you are still under the inmpression that I am "copmpletely relying on stats" then I think it is you who are not clear.

So I'll try again. Klecko had two (maybe 3) DOMINANT years. 1981 as a 4-3 DE, 1985 as a 3-4 NT and maybe you can give him the half season of 1986 before he got hurt. Is that your definition of a HOFer? 2 or 3 years of "dominance"? If not, then tell me and try AGAIN to make some type of arguement.

Oh and btw, apparantly the HOF voters agree wiht this "dude on a message board" because last time I checked, he wasnt in!!!!

I saw every game he played too bud.

He was the anchor of that defense his entire career. When he was out, the defense suffered mightily as a result.

And the Hall of Fame voters you put so much stock in put Dan Hampton in, put Michael Irvin in ahead of Art Monk and have made 1000 other retarded decisions.

Paul Zimmermann, who is the longest tenured HOF voter and easily the most knowledgeable about the game as he actually played semipro ball for a decade just to give himself a better understanding of the sport he covered is the strongest supporter Klecko has and make his case every year.

Unfortunately, it falls on the deaf and moronic ears of the likes of John Clayton, Peter King and Sam Kouvaris.

[MSGold12]

I saw every game he played too bud.

He was the anchor of that defense his entire career. When he was out, the defense suffered mightily as a result.

And the Hall of Fame voters you put so much stock in put Dan Hampton in, put Michael Irvin in ahead of Art Monk and have made 1000 other retarded decisions.

Paul Zimmermann, who is the longest tenured HOF voter and easily the most knowledgeable about the game as he actually played semipro ball for a decade just to give himself a better understanding of the sport he covered is the strongest supporter Klecko has and make his case every year.

Unfortunately, it falls on the deaf and moronic ears of the likes of John Clayton, Peter King and Sam Kouvaris.

Look I am not saying he should NOT ever be considered...but he is FAR from the no brainer you (and Dr Z...THAT'S who you are going to quote??? Guys been senile for a decade) make him out to be and IMO hes just not a HOFer. Hampton was a fringe HOF like Klecko but hampton got the ring and played on the 85 Bears D so he got in. And that Jets D that Klecko "anchored" with the exception of 81 and 85 never finsihed in the top 10. And funny, when he was out for most of 1982, the team only went to the AFC title game and had a terrific D. Your move...bud.