Rich Cimini and his awful take about Matthew Stafford's hall of fame career

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

14 minutes ago, Joe Willie White Shoes said:

Those stats don't matter.  They are inflated based on the recent emphasis on the passing game and the multiple rules changes that make passing stats ridiculous today when compared with QBs from earlier eras (as early as 10-15 years ago). You have to measure QBs vs their contemporary peers and not vs past QBs.  I'm not saying he's not a HOF QB. I'm saying his passing stats don't make him a HOF QB.  I will say that he has been a better QB - year in and year out  - than Eli Manning.  And Stafford's season show how playing for a good team benefits a QB.  If Stafford played in Detroit his entire career, we wouldn't even be talking about the HOF.  If Eli Manning played for the Lions, he wouldn't be close to being in the HOF discussion.  The HOF should not be determined by SB rings.  

Stafford as compared to his contemporaries is also a hall of famer. 

[PFSIKH]

49 minutes ago, chirorob said:

Ryan also won an MVP.

Stafford helped his case a LOT this year, but I would not put him in the Hall yet.   He is also relatively young, and could play another 5 years, and throw for another 22,000 yards or so.

This.    

Last night was a HofF 'elimination' game for lack of a better term for him.  Losing to the Bengals, great story, decent team.  

If he gets into the 60s, he has a chance.  How does he stack up to his contemporaries?  Big Ben?  Ryan?    If they put Eli in, he should get in.

[Mogglez]

48 minutes ago, Skeet Ulrich said:

Stafford a HoF? Talk about being a prisoner of the moment. Never made an all pro team, been a Pro Bowler once. He's not even top 10 QBs of his era. Kirk Cousins has a better argument at being a HoF and I hate Kirk Cousins.

Lol.

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

24 minutes ago, JETSALLDAY24X said:

Has 1 more game per season now than Warner, Played on a far more loaded team. Was #1 overall pick, Warner undrafted there's your discussion 

Warner played on a team called "The Greatest Show on Turf." Want to re-think your statement?

Where you are drafted has ZERO bearing on your hall of fame worthiness. 

 

[nycdan]

42 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

Sure, but if Rivers was never in that class Stafford certainly wasn't either. Outside of 2016 nobody would really put Matt Ryan there.

The "upper tier eltie" QB group of the past 20 years is basically Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, and Patrick Mahomes. You could slot in guys like Ben Roethlisberger, Philip RIvers, or Matt Ryan but they'd all be ahead of Stafford who is probably in the Eli Manning tier.

You left out Russ Wilson.

In fact, when you look at QBs today, there are a bunch of older guys who have won a SB (Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Ben, now Stafford), and bunch of younger guys with potential to get HoF careers (Mahomes, Allen, Burrow, Herbert, and hopefully some of the latest class), and then a bunch of guys in the middle who have really no shot (Cousins, Carr, Prescott, Wentz, Garroppolo, Dalton, Tannehill).

The only guy without a SB over the age of 25 who has a shot (I think) is Ryan.  

[JETSALLDAY24X]

19 minutes ago, TheNuuFaaolaExperience said:

Warner played on a team called "The Greatest Show on Turf." Want to re-think your statement?

Where you are drafted has ZERO bearing on your hall of fame worthiness. 

 

Ok go compare that Rams 2001 defense to the Rams current defense and tell me which one you're taking. Stafford had his typical Stafford game decent numbers with a high amount of throws. But Rams pass rush in the second half was the reason they won that game. Stafford did enough to compliment his defense but Hall Of Farmer? Chill 

[NYJ37/12]

Over the past ten years the HOF has let too many players in that I feel do not meet the criteria of a HOF'er.  Examples are Cortez Kennedy (RIP), Edgrin James, Jason Taylor, Tony Boselli ( not enough games), ect..

This years class is awful. So, I can understand Cimini's point, I dont think Staffords a HOF'er either, but he will get in based on the new voting process.

[JustInFudge]

36 minutes ago, Hex said:

And to those arguing that Johnson was a very good player, Kupp had a crazy leap season when Stafford came in. He beat his previous career best by nearly 800 yards.

Go look at Golden Tate's jump in production.  Never eclipsed 70 or 1000 in Seattle, first year with Stafford, 99 for 1350.

 

[nycdan]

Making this whole debate murkier is Aikman, whose ONLY qualification for the HoF is his 3 rings.  Beyond that, he was as average a QB as you have seen based on his stats.  He had the good fortune to play behind the best OLine the game has ever seen and was good enough to ride it to those Super Bowls.  But his stats aren't even close to being notable.

 

 

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

I added this to my original post for those who go back and see it.

Hall of Fame criteria is subjective and left to the whims of the selection committee. A Super Bowl ring doesn't automatically mean that a QB is getting into the Hall of Fame, but it absolutely is a determining factor. Owning every major QB record for a franchise is another determining factor, even if that franchise is the Detroit Lions. Breaking franchise records for a second team is a determining factor. Compiled stats are always going to be a determining factor, whether we like it or not. This aint your father's hall of fame.

[GreenFish]

If Stafford were to retire today, I don't think he's a lock to get in. I think that’s what Cimini is getting at when he says based on his current resume. Russell Wilson and Rodgers would get in with their current resume.

If he continues what he’s doing, I think he’ll get in. His highs weren’t high enough. So he needs longevity.

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

Just now, nycdan said:

Making this whole debate murkier is Aikman, whose ONLY qualification for the HoF is his 3 rings.  Beyond that, he was as average a QB as you have seen based on his stats.  He had the good fortune to play behind the best OLine the game has ever seen and was good enough to ride it to those Super Bowls.  But his stats aren't even close to being notable.

 

If he didn't win three super bowls, he wouldn't be in the hall of fame, but he did. Nothing murky about that. At the time of his retirement, Aikman had the most wins in any decade. (90 in the 1990s)

Like I said in my last post, hall of fame criteria is subjective. Aikman passed the smell test, which is the only metric that counts. 

 

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

5 minutes ago, GreenFish said:

If Stafford were to retire today, I don't think he's a lock to get in. I think that’s what Cimini is getting at when he says based on his current resume. Russell Wilson and Rodgers would get in with their current resume.

If he continues what he’s doing, I think he’ll get in. His highs weren’t high enough. So he needs longevity.

He said that he needs to make another run to get in. This debate will all be for naught when the Rams make a run in 2022, 2023, and 2024, but all Stafford would need to do is play a four to six more seasons at his normal pace and his stats get him into the hall. 

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

25 minutes ago, JETSALLDAY24X said:

Ok go compare that Rams 2001 defense to the Rams current defense and tell me which one you're taking. Stafford had his typical Stafford game decent numbers with a high amount of throws. But Rams pass rush in the second half was the reason they won that game. Stafford did enough to compliment his defense but Hall Of Farmer? Chill 

We're just going to ignore The Greatest Show on Turf? Ok. 

[Xtina]

2 hours ago, TheNuuFaaolaExperience said:

it absolutely is a determining factor. Owning every major QB record for a franchise is another determining factor, even if that franchise is the

It should weigh more heavily in his favor. Is my it harder to do well on a sucky team? 

[Greensleeves]

2 hours ago, TheNuuFaaolaExperience said:

Stafford tied or broke three Rams QB records in the one year with the team. 

Touchdowns - 41 (tied with Kurt Warner) He threw 41 TD passes in 2011 with the Lions

Passing yards - 4,886

Completions - 404

I don't even know how this is even a conversation.

 

EDIT - Hall of Fame criteria is subjective and left to the whims of the selection committee. A Super Bowl ring doesn't automatically mean that a QB is getting into the Hall of Fame, but it absolutely is a determining factor. Owning every major QB record for a franchise is another determining factor, even if that franchise is the Detroit Lions. Breaking franchise records for a second team is a determining factor. Compiled stats are always going to be a determining factor, whether we like it or not. This aint your father's hall of fame.

 

Breaking team records doesn't matter to me - there are more games, they don't let the defense play anymore - much easier today to throw the ball than it ever was. Adding games to the schedule means records SHOULD be broken. I'm on the fence regarding Hall of Fame career - he's certainly closing in on it, but not sure he's there yet either.

[nycdan]

4 minutes ago, TheNuuFaaolaExperience said:

If he didn't win three super bowls, he wouldn't be in the hall of fame, but he did. Nothing murky about that. At the time of his retirement, Aikman had the most wins in any decade. (90 in the 1990s)

Like I said in my last post, hall of fame criteria is subjective. Aikman passed the smell test, which is the only metric that counts. 

 

That is perhaps the dumbest of stats to base a HoF argument on.

Aikman played his entire career in the 1990s so he played all 10 seasons of it.  Guys who played from, say 1995 to 2005 would have their stats split.  Statistically that is as meaningless as it gets.

Agreed that the SB wins were his ONLY qualification.  But his career stats were a lot more Mark Brunnell than anyone else who is in the HoF in the last 50 years.  And it's really not even close.  Eli looks like Drew Brees by comparison.

[Xtina]

1 hour ago, TheNuuFaaolaExperience said:

Change what narrative? He has been a great QB for an awful franchise. His season with the 2021 Rams is what most of his career would have been with a competent GM, head coach, and supporting staff. The conversation wouldn't be about whether or not Stafford is a hall of famer. We would be talking about what record Stafford would break next. He is a prime example of the right guy in the wrong place.

Tom Brady would have been out of the league in three years if he started his career with the Lions. 

 

 

Chris Collinsworth just noticed this year that Stafford is a great QB 

[chirorob]

57 minutes ago, TheNuuFaaolaExperience said:

Warner played on a team called "The Greatest Show on Turf." Want to re-think your statement?

Where you are drafted has ZERO bearing on your hall of fame worthiness. 

 

Warner won 2 MVPs if memory serves.

Warner also got the Cards about 30 seconds away from winning a SB.

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

Just now, chirorob said:

Warner won 2 MVPs if memory serves.

Warner also got the Cards about 30 seconds away from winning a SB.

At no point did I make a claim that Stafford was better than Warner. 

[chirorob]

1 hour ago, UntouchableCrew said:

Sure, but if Rivers was never in that class Stafford certainly wasn't either. Outside of 2016 nobody would really put Matt Ryan there.

The "upper tier eltie" QB group of the past 20 years is basically Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, and Patrick Mahomes. You could slot in guys like Ben Roethlisberger, Philip RIvers, or Matt Ryan but they'd all be ahead of Stafford who is probably in the Eli Manning tier.

Ben probably gets in, I never thought Eli was a HOF QB.   His best play was a borderline Hail Mary pass the dude caught on his head.

Eli led the league in a passing category 3 times in his career.   Interceptions thrown.   Never led in yards, TDs, passing rating, completion %, none of it.  Never won an MVP.   Never finished top 3 for an MVP.  He was never elite, ever.

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

7 minutes ago, nycdan said:

That is perhaps the dumbest of stats to base a HoF argument on.

Aikman played his entire career in the 1990s so he played all 10 seasons of it.  Guys who played from, say 1995 to 2005 would have their stats split.  Statistically that is as meaningless as it gets.

Agreed that the SB wins were his ONLY qualification.  But his career stats were a lot more Mark Brunnell than anyone else who is in the HoF in the last 50 years.  And it's really not even close.  Eli looks like Drew Brees by comparison.

It would be the dumbest stat to base a HOF argument on by itself. Hall of fame inductions are based on an entire picture. It's silly to say that being the winningest QB in the 90's or ANY DECADE UP UNTIL HIS RETIREMENT is meaningless. It's just another stat that adds to the justification of why Troy Aikman is in the hall of fame. 

Disagree that three super bowl wins were his ONLY qualification. 

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

14 minutes ago, Greensleeves said:

Breaking team records doesn't matter to me - there are more games, they don't let the defense play anymore - much easier today to throw the ball than it ever was. Adding games to the schedule means records SHOULD be broken. I'm on the fence regarding Hall of Fame career - he's certainly closing in on it, but not sure he's there yet either.

It's irrelevant what WE think about what constitutes a hall of fame career. Based on previous inductions, Matthew Stafford is going to the hall of fame. It's just a matter of what year of eligibility he gets in.

[Biggs]

7 minutes ago, TheNuuFaaolaExperience said:

At no point did I make a claim that Stafford was better than Warner. 

Like Stafford think he's borderline HOF and will get in.  He's going to compile a lot more stats unless he gets hurt.  He's not even close to as good as Warner.  Warner when healthy was an elite QB and had a few years where he was as good as it gets.  Stafford is real good, never elite when compared to the best in any season.  

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

2 minutes ago, Biggs said:

Like Stafford think he's borderline HOF and will get in.  He's going to compile a lot more stats unless he gets hurt.  He's not even close to as good as Warner.  Warner when healthy was an elite QB and had a few years where he was as good as it gets.  Stafford is real good, never elite when compared to the best in any season.  

Please don't make it look like I ever said that Stafford was a better QB or had a better career than Warner. My argument is simply that Matthew Stafford is going to the hall of fame based on his stats, his super bowl ring, and how hall of fame credentials are completely subjective. 

[UntouchableCrew]

1 hour ago, nycdan said:

You left out Russ Wilson.

In fact, when you look at QBs today, there are a bunch of older guys who have won a SB (Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Ben, now Stafford), and bunch of younger guys with potential to get HoF careers (Mahomes, Allen, Burrow, Herbert, and hopefully some of the latest class), and then a bunch of guys in the middle who have really no shot (Cousins, Carr, Prescott, Wentz, Garroppolo, Dalton, Tannehill).

The only guy without a SB over the age of 25 who has a shot (I think) is Ryan.  

I did, I'd probably rank Russ 7th ahead of Rivers and Ryan but behind Roethlisberger

[UntouchableCrew]

14 minutes ago, chirorob said:

Ben probably gets in, I never thought Eli was a HOF QB.   His best play was a borderline Hail Mary pass the dude caught on his head.

Eli led the league in a passing category 3 times in his career.   Interceptions thrown.   Never led in yards, TDs, passing rating, completion %, none of it.  Never won an MVP.   Never finished top 3 for an MVP.  He was never elite, ever.

I 100% agree, on a personal level.

Eli has a career passer rating of 84. His stats are extremely mediocre. His biggest claim to fame is "winning" and he is .500 as a starter.

That said, he's a 2x Super Bowl MVP and is gonna get in.

Ben is a lock first ballot HOFer, IMO.

[Biggs]

26 minutes ago, nycdan said:

That is perhaps the dumbest of stats to base a HoF argument on.

Aikman played his entire career in the 1990s so he played all 10 seasons of it.  Guys who played from, say 1995 to 2005 would have their stats split.  Statistically that is as meaningless as it gets.

Agreed that the SB wins were his ONLY qualification.  But his career stats were a lot more Mark Brunnell than anyone else who is in the HoF in the last 50 years.  And it's really not even close.  Eli looks like Drew Brees by comparison.

Brunnell when healthy was better than Aikman.  Aikman should not be in the HOF.   He shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence as the elite QB's of his generation.  

[Greensleeves]

23 minutes ago, TheNuuFaaolaExperience said:

It's irrelevant what WE think about what constitutes a hall of fame career. Based on previous inductions, Matthew Stafford is going to the hall of fame. It's just a matter of what year of eligibility he gets in.

I think he will get in some day, but I don't think breaking seasonal team records will be weighted that high knowing that an additional game was added - I believe they are aware of the additional game. As the NFL changes, the way they are selected to the Hall will change too.

[Biggs]

20 minutes ago, chirorob said:

Ben probably gets in, I never thought Eli was a HOF QB.   His best play was a borderline Hail Mary pass the dude caught on his head.

Eli led the league in a passing category 3 times in his career.   Interceptions thrown.   Never led in yards, TDs, passing rating, completion %, none of it.  Never won an MVP.   Never finished top 3 for an MVP.  He was never elite, ever.

Eli's greatest pass which I think is one of the best passes I have ever seen was the pass in the 2011 SB to Manningham.  It was a dime into a postage stamp down the field into double coverage.   There's plenty of video.    

Guy was a very mediocre QB but he had elite arm talent and he showed it in those 2 SB runs.  He was not carried to those SB victories.  He played at an elite level in both those runs.  He literally is the poster boy of getting in because of he won championships.  

[JETSALLDAY24X]

52 minutes ago, TheNuuFaaolaExperience said:

We're just going to ignore The Greatest Show on Turf? Ok. 

Sure you're could argue that the greatest show on Turf had a slightly better offense then what Stafford has now. We're talking Hall of fame though. Warner won multiple MVPS, Super bowl MVP.. First team all-pro.. Stafford has good, not great numbers no awards, and won a superbowl on one of the most loaded rosters the NFL has ever seen. That's pretty good career but not hall of fame to me. 

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

2 minutes ago, JETSALLDAY24X said:

Sure you're could argue that the greatest show on Turf had a slightly better offense then what Stafford has now. We're talking Hall of fame though. Warner won multiple MVPS, Super bowl MVP.. First team all-pro.. Stafford has good, not great numbers no awards, and won a superbowl on one of the most loaded rosters the NFL has ever seen. That's pretty good career but not hall of fame to me. 

Who is this for? I never claimed that Stafford is better than Warner. I said that Stafford is going to the hall of fame. 

[the Claw]

I like Stafford and I’m glad he got a ring, but there is no way he should be in the hof. He hasn’t really done anything his whole career worthy of being inducted. He was a high draft pick and an effective player, but he’s not special. It’s the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Also-Rans.

[greenwichjetfan]

Stafford on DET - much like Romo on DAL - was a QB who was better than his team, yet got all the blame for losing. I was so confident in Stafford being a great player who would finally prove it on a strong team that I bet on the Rams to make the SB the day his trade was announced. I'm happy for him.

Contrast that with guys like Rivers and Ryan who had been on some of the more talented teams in the league during various seasons and could never find a way to win, yet get so many accolades. 

Then contrast that with a guy like Brady who proved he was an all time great, but also played on great teams all the time and has 7 rings to show for it.

So yes, SB rings matter for how we view QBs, and to an extent they should. However, not all SB runs should be weighted the same.

For fun and to drive home the point that not all SB runs are created equal, I pulled some data out of profootballreference:

• By Adjusted Yards Gained/Attempt, Stafford's '21 postseason is better than any of Brady's SB runs. Same with Y/A.
• By Passer rating, Brady's '04 beats him by a hair, but the next best run is 8 points less in 2014.
• Stafford also did all of this with his TE1 out and his WR1B going down in the middle of the SB.
• Stafford's team rushed for 1.9 yards - the fewest by a SB winning team, and the second fewest postseason clip of all time. 
• Due to this, Stafford was required to put the game on his shoulders, and accounted for 86% of the team's yards - more than any of Brady's SB runs and probably amongst the highest of any SB winning QB (haven't confirmed it yet)
• For Stafford's offenses, three consecutive come-from behind game winning drives to win a SB Championship - again, never been done before 

I think Stafford will continue to play for another 3-5 years and continue to accumulate the requisite volume stats to be considered. After that, I think this SB run alone should put him over the top to get in, because it was unlike anything we've ever seen before. 

 

 

[chirorob]

1 hour ago, Biggs said:

Eli's greatest pass which I think is one of the best passes I have ever seen was the pass in the 2011 SB to Manningham.  It was a dime into a postage stamp down the field into double coverage.   There's plenty of video.    

Guy was a very mediocre QB but he had elite arm talent and he showed it in those 2 SB runs.  He was not carried to those SB victories.  He played at an elite level in both those runs.  He literally is the poster boy of getting in because of he won championships.  

He was dragged into the playoffs by those teams.  

His run in 2011, was insane in the playoffs.   In 2007, not so much.