bobbyjet69 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 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. that is sacks alone! what about knockdowns, tackles, and assists? How may double teams did he take on? What were the outcome of the games he was in vs. the games he missed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSGold12 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 that is sacks alone! what about knockdowns, tackles, and assists? How may double teams did he take on? What were the outcome of the games he was in vs. the games he missed? Oy. OK, lets repeat this again. I really wish people would read the prior posts (and not just the opening post) befoe posting...it would really save time. I used sacks in my original post just as a brief stat example. In later posts you will see I broke down his seasons much more specifically to state my case. But to answer some of your question... 1982- Klecko misses the entire season (is used sparingly in the playoffs) and the jets go 6-3, win 2 playoff games giving up 17 and 14 points, and go to the AFC title game. 1984- Klecko misses the first 4 games of the year and the jets start the season 3-1. he also misses the last 2 games of the year in which they go 1-1. Yet he made the pro bowl...deserved or rep? 1986- Klecko goes down in week 10 along with 4 other starters in on D (Lyons, Mehl, bennett and gastineau) and the team loses its last 6. But this is irrelevant. What the jets did or didnt do when he was in there might be relevant if we are discussing his merits as a team MVP or a pro bowler...we are not. We are talking about the HALL OF FAME! the BEST of the best. And in that sense, Kleck had TWO dominating years...1981 and 1985. He had 5 VERY good years (1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1983), 3 average years (1984, 1986 and 1988) and 3 years where major injury robbed him of most of the year (1982, 1986, and 1987). Sorry...thats just not enough in my book to be a HOFer. Its close. Had he had 1 or 2 more years like 81 and 85 then I might feel different. But he didnt and unfortunately injury robbed him of many prime years. not his fault...but it also isnt an excuse that pushes himinto the HOF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbyjet69 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Oy. OK, lets repeat this again. I really wish people would read the prior posts (and not just the opening post) befoe posting...it would really save time. I used sacks in my original post just as a brief stat example. In later posts you will see I broke down his seasons much more specifically to state my case. But to answer some of your question... 1982- Klecko misses the entire season (is used sparingly in the playoffs) and the jets go 6-3, win 2 playoff games giving up 17 and 14 points, and go to the AFC title game. 1984- Klecko misses the first 4 games of the year and the jets start the season 3-1. he also misses the last 2 games of the year in which they go 1-1. Yet he made the pro bowl...deserved or rep? 1986- Klecko goes down in week 10 along with 4 other starters in on D (Lyons, Mehl, bennett and gastineau) and the team loses its last 6. But this is irrelevant. What the jets did or didnt do when he was in there might be relevant if we are discussing his merits as a team MVP or a pro bowler...we are not. We are talking about the HALL OF FAME! the BEST of the best. And in that sense, Kleck had TWO dominating years...1981 and 1985. He had 5 VERY good years (1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1983), 3 average years (1984, 1986 and 1988) and 3 years where major injury robbed him of most of the year (1982, 1986, and 1987). Sorry...thats just not enough in my book to be a HOFer. Its close. Had he had 1 or 2 more years like 81 and 85 then I might feel different. But he didnt and unfortunately injury robbed him of many prime years. not his fault...but it also isnt an excuse that pushes himinto the HOF. I'll say it again for people that don't read the WHOLE post! Tackles? Solo and assisted! double teams? HOF is not consisted on sacks alone! If THAT was the case we'd be arguing about Gastineau! Klecko did more than jsut sack the QB. He took on alot of double teams. Post his tackles along with the sacks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSGold12 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 I'll say it again for people that don't read the WHOLE post! Tackles? Solo and assisted! double teams? HOF is not consisted on sacks alone! If THAT was the case we'd be arguing about Gastineau! Klecko did more than jsut sack the QB. He took on alot of double teams. Post his tackles along with the sacks! I did read your WHOLE post. If you want to go back and research all of Kleckos stats and then post them here in order to defend your position that he is a HOFer then be my guest. I saw every game Klecko played as a Jet and I can tell you that while being a heck of a player and a fringe HOFer...he didnt quite do enough to be in the HOF. Two domiannt years (whihc is really all he had) is not enough IMO. Currently, most experts agree with me since he is NOT in the HOF. If you'd like to try and change minds, feel free to take the time to look up all those stats you mentioned and then you can come back, post them and make an arguement. But dont ask others to do your work for you...thats petty. CARRY ON..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbyjet69 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 I did read your WHOLE post. If you want to go back and research all of Kleckos stats and then post them here in order to defend your position that he is a HOFer then be my guest. I saw every game Klecko played as a Jet and I can tell you that while being a heck of a player and a fringe HOFer...he didnt quite do enough to be in the HOF. Two domiannt years (whihc is really all he had) is not enough IMO. Currently, most experts agree with me since he is NOT in the HOF. If you'd like to try and change minds, feel free to take the time to look up all those stats you mentioned and then you can come back, post them and make an arguement. But dont ask others to do your work for you...thats petty. CARRY ON..... I don't think he is a HOF either, but my point here is everyone of these posts talks about sacks. Sacks alone DO NOT MAKE THE HALL! Yes, I know, you talked about injuries and dominent years, but there's still more to it. and I figured since you were looking up stats, you could keep doing it andlook up tackles also! Petty? if you think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSGold12 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 I don't think he is a HOF either, but my point here is everyone of these posts talks about sacks. Sacks alone DO NOT MAKE THE HALL! Yes, I know, you talked about injuries and dominent years, but there's still more to it. and I figured since you were looking up stats, you could keep doing it andlook up tackles also! Petty? if you think so. Fair enough. perhpas my insult was inappropriate and I apologize. Tackles can be looked up but I am not sure its going to stregthen Kleckos case. He was amazing in 85 in the tackle dept (as a NT) but I dont think his numbers will be enough to change minds. Like I said....I loved Joe Klecko. And I think he was a fantastic player. But he was never a pro bowler prior to 1981 (4 seasons) and he was really only dominant one season after that (1985). The fact that the team went to the AFC title game in 1982 wihtout him also hurts his cause. Great player, greater Jet...just not a HOFer. Now Winston Hill..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet_Engine1 Posted February 2, 2009 Author Share Posted February 2, 2009 MSGold, with friends like you, who need enemies? I know, lets petition the HOF to have Namath REMOVED....I mean, SO MANY interceptions...such a low Comp %....:0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSGold12 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 MSGold, with friends like you, who need enemies? I know, lets petition the HOF to have Namath REMOVED....I mean, SO MANY interceptions...such a low Comp %....:0 Jeez, you guys are hilarious...I had no idea that calling someone a fringe Hall of Fame player was somehow considered an insult!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Jeez, you guys are hilarious...I had no idea that calling someone a fringe Hall of Fame player was somehow considered an insult!!!!! It's not an insult. What's weird is that you're so adamant that he's not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSGold12 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 It's not an insult. What's weird is that you're so adamant that he's not. What's weird about having an objective opinion? Just because I am a Jets fan doesnt mean I have to look at a situation through green colored glasses. IMO his career falls short of HOFer...I should change my mind because he's a Jet? And the reason I am being so "adamant" is because my opinion is getting challenged by multiple poeple and Im responding. And to be honest, none of you have put forth any objective arguement to prvoe me wrong. The closest you came was your Mean Joe greene comment about Klecko at NT...even though it was a position he played for only 2 of his 12 seasons. The guy is a fringe HOFer...no ring and not enough dominance over a long period of time to be anything more. Had he won a ring, I think that might have pushed him in like it did hampton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 What's weird about having an objective opinion? Just because I am a Jets fan doesnt mean I have to look at a situation through green colored glasses. IMO his career falls short of HOFer...I should change my mind because he's a Jet? And the reason I am being so "adamant" is because my opinion is getting challenged by multiple poeple and Im responding. And to be honest, none of you have put forth any objective arguement to prvoe me wrong. The closest you came was your Mean Joe greene comment about Klecko at NT...even though it was a position he played for only 2 of his 12 seasons. The guy is a fringe HOFer...no ring and not enough dominance over a long period of time to be anything more. Had he won a ring, I think that might have pushed him in like it did hampton. We've all made objective arguments. Just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean they aren't objective. Rings have nothing to do with the Hall of Fame. Warren Moon has no rings. Fran Tarkenton has no rings. Dan Marino has no rings. Dan Dierdorf has no rings, hell he only played in one playoff game his entire career. Dan Fouts, Jim Kelly, Barry Sanders, Tim Brown, Roger Wherle, Tommy McDonald, the list goes on an on. Are any of these players less worthy of the individual honor of the Hall of Fame because they weren't fortunate enough to play for a championship team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMaynard Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 I'll say it again for people that don't read the WHOLE post! Tackles? Solo and assisted! double teams? HOF is not consisted on sacks alone! If THAT was the case we'd be arguing about Gastineau! Klecko did more than jsut sack the QB. He took on alot of double teams. Post his tackles along with the sacks! Stan Blinka and Kyle Clifton each racked up lots and lots of tackles. HOF material? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSGold12 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 We've all made objective arguments. Just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean they aren't objective. Rings have nothing to do with the Hall of Fame. Warren Moon has no rings. Fran Tarkenton has no rings. Dan Marino has no rings. Dan Dierdorf has no rings, hell he only played in one playoff game his entire career. Dan Fouts, Jim Kelly, Barry Sanders, Tim Brown, Roger Wherle, Tommy McDonald, the list goes on an on. Are any of these players less worthy of the individual honor of the Hall of Fame because they weren't fortunate enough to play for a championship team? Nope, sorry...there is nothing objective about calling Joe Klecko a no brainer HOFer. he's simply not. As to the rings, you misunderstand. A ring will sometimes help a fringe player get into the Hall. Guys like Dan Hampton, Larry Little, several 70s Steelers...its not a prerequesite by any means but it can give you that last nudge if you are a fringe guy like Klecko is. All those other guys you mentioned had much more distinguished careers then Klecko did. And the bottom line is this...Klecko is NOT in the HOF so its the people on your side of the arguement that have the convincing to do, not me. The majority of the experts agree with me (as evidcned by him not eing in the HOF). The burden is on YOU to prove otherwise and you simply have not come close to doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSGold12 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Stan Blinka and Kyle Clifton each racked up lots and lots of tackles. HOF material? What they are not getting is that we are not arguing about Klecko being a team MVP, or league MVP or pro bowler...we are talking HOF here. The best of the very best. Thier arguements are more relevant to an MVP arguement. The HOF is about dominance...Klecko was a terrific player who came wihtin a few dominating seasons of being a HOFer...but he didnt quite make it. Even as a 45 year Jets fan who LOVED Klecko I can make that objective conclusion. Now Winny Hill is anohter matter. 8 pro bowls, a ring, 4 years all pro and blocked for one of the more immobile QBs of all time and kept him upright A LOT! Hill should be in the HOF yet gets no love at all form the committee or Jet fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMaynard Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 What they are not getting is that we are not arguing about Klecko being a team MVP, or league MVP or pro bowler...we are talking HOF here. The best of the very best. Thier arguements are more relevant to an MVP arguement. The HOF is about dominance...Klecko was a terrific player who came wihtin a few dominating seasons of being a HOFer...but he didnt quite make it. Even as a 45 year Jets fan who LOVED Klecko I can make that objective conclusion. Now Winny Hill is anohter matter. 8 pro bowls, a ring, 4 years all pro and blocked for one of the more immobile QBs of all time and kept him upright A LOT! Hill should be in the HOF yet gets no love at all form the committee or Jet fans. With Klecko, it is emotional for Jets fans and I can totally understand that. They are confusing his ability at his peak with HOF qualifications. There was never a better DE than the Joe Klecko of 1981. But after that injuries robbed his quickness. He still had the incredible strength, toughness, football insticts and technique, but that ususual quickness along with the other attributes is what made him as good as any for a short period. And that is the problem - he dominated for just a short period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSGold12 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 With Klecko, it is emotional for Jets fans and I can totally understand that. They are confusing his ability at his peak with HOF qualifications. There was never a better DE than the Joe Klecko of 1981. But after that injuries robbed his quickness. He still had the incredible strength, toughness, football insticts and technique, but that ususual quickness along with the other attributes is what made him as good as any for a short period. And that is the problem - he dominated for just a short period. If Kleck had had one or two more years like he had in 81 or 85 he'd be a shoe in. If either of his 83 or 84 seasons were truly "dominant", he probably gets in. But prior to 81 he was never considered a pro bowl type and post 81 he was up and down. 82 he was hurt (yet the team went to a title game which hurts his cause). 83 he was solid and went to a pro bowl. 84 he was really nly OK, missed quite a few games (whihc the jets won) and did NOT deserve the pro bowl bid he got. 86 he was playing well until injury felled him and 87 and 88 were sort of throw away years. Of course its emotional...the guy was one of the most beloved players in team history. But itsd that emotion that seems to be clouding judgement on the reality of his career here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbyjet69 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Stan Blinka and Kyle Clifton each racked up lots and lots of tackles. HOF material? NOW your going on TACKLES alone!!!Jeesh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.