Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Does Shaun Alexander deserve to be in the HOF?

The Original Seattle Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute for Seahawks Talk, News, Rumors, Trades, and Analytics. LANGUAGE: PG-13
  • fenderbender123 wrote:
    PNW wrote:
    fenderbender123 wrote:Hall of "Fame". Alexander doesn't have the fame. He didn't win a Super Bowl. His highlight reel is boring. He leaned on a HOF caliber offensive line during the only years he put up good numbers. He doesn't have the longetivity argument. He just....doesn't qualify. Because it's the hall of fame and not the hall of technically good running backs.

    Exaggerating a bit much, “HOF caliber offensive line” lol you mean two HOFers, as stated before the others weren’t anywhere near HOF caliber


    Of all the offensive line lineups, it's one of the best of all time. That's what I mean by HOF caliber offensive line. It doesn't mean every player is hof caliber.

    Tobeck was a pro bowl alternate once, the only HOF caliber players on the OL were #71 and #76, your comment is still exaggerated.
    PNW
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 425
    Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 5:26 pm


  • PNW wrote:Tobeck was a pro bowl alternate once, the only HOF caliber players on the OL were #71 and #76, your comment is still exaggerated.

    A Hall of Fame-worthy OL doesn't mean every single one of the five OL is deserving of the Hall of Fame. How many of the Cowboys 90s "Great Wall of Dallas" OL are in the Hall of Fame?
    RolandDeschain
    * Spelling High Lord *
     
    Posts: 32088
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 9:39 am
    Location: North Miami Beach, FL


  • PNW wrote:
    fenderbender123 wrote:
    PNW wrote:
    fenderbender123 wrote:Hall of "Fame". Alexander doesn't have the fame. He didn't win a Super Bowl. His highlight reel is boring. He leaned on a HOF caliber offensive line during the only years he put up good numbers. He doesn't have the longetivity argument. He just....doesn't qualify. Because it's the hall of fame and not the hall of technically good running backs.

    Exaggerating a bit much, “HOF caliber offensive line” lol you mean two HOFers, as stated before the others weren’t anywhere near HOF caliber


    Of all the offensive line lineups, it's one of the best of all time. That's what I mean by HOF caliber offensive line. It doesn't mean every player is hof caliber.

    Tobeck was a pro bowl alternate once, the only HOF caliber players on the OL were #71 and #76, your comment is still exaggerated.


    Once again....saying the entire line as a whole is one of the best of all time is not the same as saying every single individual linemen on that line is one of the best of all time.

    Edit: I see Roland beat me to it. Thanks.
    fenderbender123
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7164
    Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 1:47 pm


  • RolandDeschain wrote:
    PNW wrote:Tobeck was a pro bowl alternate once, the only HOF caliber players on the OL were #71 and #76, your comment is still exaggerated.

    A Hall of Fame-worthy OL doesn't mean every single one of the five OL is deserving of the Hall of Fame. How many of the Cowboys 90s "Great Wall of Dallas" OL are in the Hall of Fame?


    The Dallas Great Wall was overall a much better OL:
    Mark Tuinei (2 pro bowls)
    Erik Williams (4 pro bowl, 2 first team all pros)
    Mark Stepnoski (5 pro bowls)
    Kevin Gogan (3 pro bowls)
    Nate Newton (6 pro bowls, 2 first team all pros)
    John Gesek (Weakest link on that OL was good enough to outplay Kevin Gogan)

    Tobeck, Gray and Locklear would have been backups if they even made the team.
    PNW
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 425
    Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 5:26 pm


  • PNW wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:
    PNW wrote:Tobeck was a pro bowl alternate once, the only HOF caliber players on the OL were #71 and #76, your comment is still exaggerated.

    A Hall of Fame-worthy OL doesn't mean every single one of the five OL is deserving of the Hall of Fame. How many of the Cowboys 90s "Great Wall of Dallas" OL are in the Hall of Fame?


    The Dallas Great Wall was overall a much better OL:
    Mark Tuinei (2 pro bowls)
    Erik Williams (4 pro bowl, 2 first team all pros)
    Mark Stepnoski (5 pro bowls)
    Kevin Gogan (3 pro bowls)
    Nate Newton (6 pro bowls, 2 first team all pros)
    John Gesek (Weakest link on that OL was good enough to outplay Kevin Gogan)

    Tobeck, Gray and Locklear would have been backups if they even made the team.

    Pro Bowls are a huge popularity contest, nothing more. All Pro is a WAY more accurate measurement of ability compared to Pro Bowls. Plus, Texas is a huge and popular market; Seattle has been ignored due to being some small town in south Alaska. Since this is the main forum I will refrain from commenting on the intelligence of someone who weighs Pro Bowl counts to gauge ability. Let me also remind you that Packers center Jeff Saturday got voted to the Pro Bowl after losing his starting job for sucking: https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2012/12/27 ... f-saturday

    Don't let your love for SA blind you to objective reasoning skills on this topic.
    RolandDeschain
    * Spelling High Lord *
     
    Posts: 32088
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 9:39 am
    Location: North Miami Beach, FL


  • RolandDeschain wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:Nothing wrong with NOT taking UNNECCESARY hits.

    Not true for RBs. Come on.

    It would be stupid NOT to try and avoid INJURIES, and yes, it is "TRUE" for RB's, ESPECIALLY for longevities sake.
    Y'ain't Playin' if y'ain't stayin'.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7487
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 9:48 pm


  • PNW wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:
    Jerhawk wrote:Yes. He was a great back with great vision.

    He should not be punished for playing behind a great O line. He was a master at the cutback, rarely went down on first contact and led the team to our first Superbowl appearance.

    Plus, he had FIVE TD's in the first HALF OF A GAME (Vikings I believe)....It was almost an automatic for a TD anytime he got into the Red Zone...Nothing wrong with NOT taking UNNECCESARY hits.
    18 TD's in one Regular season.
    So YES.

    He actually got 27 TD’s in his MVP season along with 1880yrd and 5.1 yrds per carry. In 2004 he also got 1696yrd with 16TD’s and 4.8 yrds per carry. Also his durability his first 6 years was pretty damn good, I don’t think he missed a game. Talk about a workhorse back!!!

    You are right, the number '18 ' was stuck in my head for being TD's, but in reality, it was 1,880 yards. :irishdrinkers:
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7487
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 9:48 pm


  • PNW wrote:Remember that 2006 Monday Night game against Green Bay in the snow at Quest Field? Shaun had 40 carries for 201 yards on a broken foot. Beast mode.

    God, what a wuss, he should have ran for 301 yards. :smilingalien:
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7487
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 9:48 pm


  • I didn't get to see him as much back then so if I look
    at You Tube/stats thats fair right?
    I noticed one thing he does great..Stiff arm,I saw him
    get out of a lot tackles with that and speed.
    His vision was pretty damn good too..I'm seeing a great
    back and why is having a great OL held against him?
    So Terrell Davis,Emmit,Franco,Thurman Thomas and Dorsett
    among others in HOF get passes?
    Stats are a big part of all this because if you aren't putting up
    numbers what are you doing then?
    He finished with 100 TD's one more than my favorite RB
    Barry Sanders.
    I'm stamping a big YES
    IndyHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5892
    Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:42 pm


  • pittpnthrs wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:I think he deserves a spot. Guy was a monster RB. The most least respected Seahawk ever and its strange that people seem to forget how good he was.

    I personally find it strange that plenty of fans can't acknowledge he was a soft runner except near the goal line. Not giving it your all every single down is not in the spirit of the Hall of Fame.


    Oh, so I guess every RB has to be in the Earl Campbell, Pete Johnson, Lynch mold to satisfy your expectations. Sheesh, Plenty of RBs in the HoF that didnt take big hits.

    EXACTLY!, there are one hell of a lot of HOF RB's that made it in because they were able to avoid injuries.
    Some people right here on .NET are b*tch*ng because Carson is so often unable to play, because he seeks out contact and too often injured because of it. :34853_doh:
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7487
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 9:48 pm


  • I remeber one of these RB quiting on the team, and it wasn't the one being called soft.
    CPHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3660
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:49 pm


  • :Dunno:
    RolandDeschain wrote:
    Don't let your love for SA blind you to objective reasoning skills on this topic.

    "Reasoning Skills"?, "Blind"??, LOLOL, same could be said about your disliking & disrespecting of SA's accomplishments.
    Don't like him?, sounds like a personal preference gig to me, I mean, why get p*ssed when someone stands behind a former MVP caliber Seahawk? :Dunno:
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7487
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 9:48 pm


  • PNW wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:
    PNW wrote:Tobeck was a pro bowl alternate once, the only HOF caliber players on the OL were #71 and #76, your comment is still exaggerated.

    A Hall of Fame-worthy OL doesn't mean every single one of the five OL is deserving of the Hall of Fame. How many of the Cowboys 90s "Great Wall of Dallas" OL are in the Hall of Fame?


    The Dallas Great Wall was overall a much better OL:
    Mark Tuinei (2 pro bowls)
    Erik Williams (4 pro bowl, 2 first team all pros)
    Mark Stepnoski (5 pro bowls)
    Kevin Gogan (3 pro bowls)
    Nate Newton (6 pro bowls, 2 first team all pros)
    John Gesek (Weakest link on that OL was good enough to outplay Kevin Gogan)

    Tobeck, Gray and Locklear would have been backups if they even made the team.


    It doesn't even matter if they're better. That Seahawks offensive line is still one of the best. Can you name 10 that are better?
    fenderbender123
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7164
    Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 1:47 pm


  • fenderbender123 wrote:
    PNW wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:
    PNW wrote:Tobeck was a pro bowl alternate once, the only HOF caliber players on the OL were #71 and #76, your comment is still exaggerated.

    A Hall of Fame-worthy OL doesn't mean every single one of the five OL is deserving of the Hall of Fame. How many of the Cowboys 90s "Great Wall of Dallas" OL are in the Hall of Fame?


    The Dallas Great Wall was overall a much better OL:
    Mark Tuinei (2 pro bowls)
    Erik Williams (4 pro bowl, 2 first team all pros)
    Mark Stepnoski (5 pro bowls)
    Kevin Gogan (3 pro bowls)
    Nate Newton (6 pro bowls, 2 first team all pros)
    John Gesek (Weakest link on that OL was good enough to outplay Kevin Gogan)

    Tobeck, Gray and Locklear would have been backups if they even made the team.


    It doesn't even matter if they're better. That Seahawks offensive line is still one of the best. Can you name 10 that are better?


    Where is the Seahawks OL (from 2001-2005) on this list? Here are top 10 OLs in nfl history -
    https://thegruelingtruth.com/top10/top-10-offensive-lines-nfl-history/

    Looking at the list, it's a strong argument that while Seahawks had a great OL with Jones, Hutch, and gang...it wasn't top 10 of all time.

    If SA was running behind, the aforementioned Cowboys OL, he probably would have ran for over 15,000 yards in his career. It's not a knock on the Seahawks OL that SA ran behind, it just that the Cowboy OL was legendary.
    Last edited by hawkfan68 on Sat Nov 28, 2020 4:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.
    hawkfan68
    Gold Supporter
    Gold Supporter
     
    Posts: 7936
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:10 pm
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • fenderbender123 wrote:
    It doesn't even matter if they're better. That Seahawks offensive line is still one of the best. Can you name 10 that are better?


    Dolphins 72, Packers 66, 49ers 84, Dallas 77, Oakland 76, New England 2003, Denver 98, Rams 99, Houston 93, Pittsburg 78, Washington 91, Buffalo 91, Dallas 92
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2821
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 6:54 am


  • sdog1981 wrote:
    fenderbender123 wrote:
    It doesn't even matter if they're better. That Seahawks offensive line is still one of the best. Can you name 10 that are better?


    Dolphins 72, Packers 66, 49ers 84, Dallas 77, Oakland 76, New England 2003, Denver 98, Rams 99, Houston 93, Pittsburg 78, Washington 91, Buffalo 91, Dallas 92

    To add to this list mid 50’s Browns, late 80’s Oilers, mid 70’s Cardinals, mid 70’s Bills, late 90’s and early 2000’s Chiefs, late 80’s Bengals, 70’s and 80’s Rams.
    PNW
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 425
    Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 5:26 pm


  • But can you name 30?
    fenderbender123
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7164
    Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 1:47 pm


  • godawg wrote:I can only imagine what Marshawn would have been able to accomplish running behind Walter Jones and Steve Hutchinson.


    Why exactly would Lynch be better? Alexander was quicker and had better vision.
    pittpnthrs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1819
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 11:19 am


  • pittpnthrs wrote:
    godawg wrote:I can only imagine what Marshawn would have been able to accomplish running behind Walter Jones and Steve Hutchinson.


    Why exactly would Lynch be better? Alexander was quicker and had better vision.


    Well, Lynch won a SB which has proven to be very important to Hall voters. He also had maybe the greatest run in NFL history. Fair or not, moments like that will stick in the minds of voters come vote time. Lynch was a dominant strong, physical runner. Very different from Sean Alexander. I'd like to see them both in the Hall, but I'm a homer of course. I've read quite a few pundits who think Lynch will be there in the end. I'd actually give him a better shot than Alexander because of the things I mentioned above.

    My best guess?
    They both get there eventually. It will take a while.
    Welshers
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 506
    Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2019 6:55 pm


  • RolandDeschain wrote:
    PNW wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:
    PNW wrote:Tobeck was a pro bowl alternate once, the only HOF caliber players on the OL were #71 and #76, your comment is still exaggerated.

    A Hall of Fame-worthy OL doesn't mean every single one of the five OL is deserving of the Hall of Fame. How many of the Cowboys 90s "Great Wall of Dallas" OL are in the Hall of Fame?


    The Dallas Great Wall was overall a much better OL:
    Mark Tuinei (2 pro bowls)
    Erik Williams (4 pro bowl, 2 first team all pros)
    Mark Stepnoski (5 pro bowls)
    Kevin Gogan (3 pro bowls)
    Nate Newton (6 pro bowls, 2 first team all pros)
    John Gesek (Weakest link on that OL was good enough to outplay Kevin Gogan)

    Tobeck, Gray and Locklear would have been backups if they even made the team.

    Pro Bowls are a huge popularity contest, nothing more. All Pro is a WAY more accurate measurement of ability compared to Pro Bowls. Plus, Texas is a huge and popular market; Seattle has been ignored due to being some small town in south Alaska. Since this is the main forum I will refrain from commenting on the intelligence of someone who weighs Pro Bowl counts to gauge ability. Let me also remind you that Packers center Jeff Saturday got voted to the Pro Bowl after losing his starting job for sucking: https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2012/12/27 ... f-saturday

    Don't let your love for SA blind you to objective reasoning skills on this topic.


    You comment that you’re going to refrain from commenting on my intelligence as you insinuate about my intelligence because I have the AUDACITY to include 1st team all pros and pro bowls as a gauge for ability :yawn: .....you sounds pretty butt hurt. One day Shaun Alexander is going to put on that Gold Jacket, I guess you’ll cry yourself to sleep hahaha
    PNW
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 425
    Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 5:26 pm


  • The best seahawks running back ever. Dont care if he had a great oline. Terrell Davis did too. Davis was also was very limited in production because of concussion. Only really had two healthy years, but they won back to back bowls. Davis is a hall of Famer with less stats to back. Alexander is a no doubter.
    jamescasey1124
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 694
    Joined: Mon May 04, 2020 12:36 am


  • My heart wants to say yes, but my head is saying it might never happen. We are playing in Egypt after all.
    sutz
    Silver Supporter
    Silver Supporter
     
    Posts: 21512
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:41 am
    Location: Kent, WA


  • PNW wrote:You comment that you’re going to refrain from commenting on my intelligence as you insinuate about my intelligence because I have the AUDACITY to include 1st team all pros and pro bowls as a gauge for ability :yawn: .....you sounds pretty butt hurt. One day Shaun Alexander is going to put on that Gold Jacket, I guess you’ll cry yourself to sleep hahaha

    You used Pro Bowls to justify your position while ignoring the fact that this amazing OMG best ever Dallas O-line had as many players getting All Pros as the Seahawks one did, and the only disparity for "awards" there is the number of players getting Pro Bowls. I pointed out that Pro Bowls are a significantly worse statistic to judge skill by than All Pros and even provided evidence for my assertion. This is what logical people do.
    RolandDeschain
    * Spelling High Lord *
     
    Posts: 32088
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 9:39 am
    Location: North Miami Beach, FL


  • Davis also has 2 Super Bowl wins and 3 All Pros. And I don't think he deserved to be in it.
    fenderbender123
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7164
    Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 1:47 pm


  • RolandDeschain wrote:
    PNW wrote:You comment that you’re going to refrain from commenting on my intelligence as you insinuate about my intelligence because I have the AUDACITY to include 1st team all pros and pro bowls as a gauge for ability :yawn: .....you sounds pretty butt hurt. One day Shaun Alexander is going to put on that Gold Jacket, I guess you’ll cry yourself to sleep hahaha

    You used Pro Bowls to justify your position while ignoring the fact that this amazing OMG best ever Dallas O-line had as many players getting All Pros as the Seahawks one did, and the only disparity for "awards" there is the number of players getting Pro Bowls. I pointed out that Pro Bowls are a significantly worse statistic to judge skill by than All Pros and even provided evidence for my assertion. This is what logical people do.

    You’re supposedly logical, where did I say it was the best OMG O-Line ever? I just said it was better overall than 2001-2005 Seahawks O-Line, which other members proclaimed it to be the best OMG O-Line ever.
    PNW
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 425
    Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 5:26 pm


  • fenderbender123 wrote:But can you name 30?


    You got me there.
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2821
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 6:54 am


  • fenderbender123 wrote:Davis also has 2 Super Bowl wins and 3 All Pros. And I don't think he deserved to be in it.


    NFL MVP, Super Bowl MVP, 20 rushing TD season and a 2000 yard rushing season. He is a Hall of Fame player. He could have played for 15 more seasons rushing for 0 yards every year and still be a HOF running back, due to his 1996 to 1998 seasons.
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2821
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 6:54 am


  • Yes, but I don't think he gets in for awhile and more than likely it will be by the veteran's committee like Easley. As it stands, he is the only NFL player with 100+ TDs not in the HOF and as time goes by that will look all the more impressive.
    Last edited by Seanhawk on Sun Nov 29, 2020 10:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
    Seanhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6749
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:04 pm


  • pittpnthrs wrote:
    godawg wrote:I can only imagine what Marshawn would have been able to accomplish running behind Walter Jones and Steve Hutchinson.


    Why exactly would Lynch be better? Alexander was quicker and had better vision.




    7 possible tackles broken, Shaun would not have even made it thru the line and would have went down.

    These runs are what Lynch did, and that person that said Shaun would have had only an additional 200 yards in his career? How many yards was this run for extra yards, I call BS on that observation.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 34553
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • chris98251 wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:
    godawg wrote:I can only imagine what Marshawn would have been able to accomplish running behind Walter Jones and Steve Hutchinson.


    Why exactly would Lynch be better? Alexander was quicker and had better vision.




    7 possible tackles broken, Shaun would not have even made it thru the line and would have went down.

    These runs are what Lynch did, and that person that said Shaun would have had only an additional 200 yards in his career? How many yards was this run for extra yards, I call BS on that observation.


    You are missing the point though. Lynch and Alexander are totally different runners. Lynch's MO was running through people and getting yards after contact. Alexander's MO was making people miss and flowing down the field and through lanes. Some people think that if Lynch had Alexanders Oline, Lynch would have put up much better numbers than Alexander and thats just not the case, Apples and oranges. Its the same as saying Lynch would have been better than Barry Sanders in Detroit. Its just not true. They were just different types of runners.
    pittpnthrs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1819
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 11:19 am


  • Welshers wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:
    godawg wrote:I can only imagine what Marshawn would have been able to accomplish running behind Walter Jones and Steve Hutchinson.


    Why exactly would Lynch be better? Alexander was quicker and had better vision.


    Well, Lynch won a SB which has proven to be very important to Hall voters. He also had maybe the greatest run in NFL history. Fair or not, moments like that will stick in the minds of voters come vote time. Lynch was a dominant strong, physical runner. Very different from Sean Alexander. I'd like to see them both in the Hall, but I'm a homer of course. I've read quite a few pundits who think Lynch will be there in the end. I'd actually give him a better shot than Alexander because of the things I mentioned above.

    My best guess?
    They both get there eventually. It will take a while.


    What does the fact that Lynch had an elite defense and a much better QB to help him get a SB ring have to do with him eclipsing Alexanders output behind Alexanders Oline? Why would a RB that runs through a defender be more effective than a RB that avoids that defender totally?
    pittpnthrs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1819
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 11:19 am


  • pittpnthrs wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:
    godawg wrote:I can only imagine what Marshawn would have been able to accomplish running behind Walter Jones and Steve Hutchinson.


    Why exactly would Lynch be better? Alexander was quicker and had better vision.




    7 possible tackles broken, Shaun would not have even made it thru the line and would have went down.

    These runs are what Lynch did, and that person that said Shaun would have had only an additional 200 yards in his career? How many yards was this run for extra yards, I call BS on that observation.


    You are missing the point though. Lynch and Alexander are totally different runners. Lynch's MO was running through people and getting yards after contact. Alexander's MO was making people miss and flowing down the field and through lanes. Some people think that if Lynch had Alexanders Oline, Lynch would have put up much better numbers than Alexander and thats just not the case, Apples and oranges. Its the same as saying Lynch would have been better than Barry Sanders in Detroit. Its just not true. They were just different types of runners.


    I dont understand the logic here. Lynch's 'MO" was gaining yards no matter what the defense did or for that matter, the offensive line did. It wasnt to run people over. But if you were there to stop him and he couldnt go around you, he would go through you. Dude was way more elusive and had incredible vision. Lynch without a doubt would have flourished well beyond what he did in seattle had he played behind Walt and Hutch. Jesus. his beast mode run was about stutter stepping, finding a crease that maybe 3 or 4 other backs in the league might have hit, and then making the entirety of the Saints defense look like peewee flunkies. THE OLINE GAVE HIM A SLIVER, and he manufactured the rest.

    Shaun had vision when he was up to speed and their was an obvious hole already created whether off tackle or on a swing play or pitch out. But look at his highlight reel. ITS THE SAME HIGHLIGHT REEL AS THE HAWKS OFFENSIVE LINE HIGHLIGHT REEL. Not so necessarily with truly gifted, HOF backs. They run through you, around, you, over you... and they do that whether they are running behind a great line or not (Usually). And i say usually because there are RBs like Emmit Smith who racked up HUGE numbers behind a HOF line to the point you cant deny him HOF status.. he broke Sweetness's record. But you tell me, stats aside, whether based on his raw gift as a runner whether you'd take him ahead of Sanders, LT, TD, Lynch, Payton, Brown, Dickerson, Warner, and probably half dozen other all-time great backs. He, like Shaun, made a career gaining big yards AFTER the play execution and O line got him to the second level. Anyone who has played the game at TE, RB and WR will tell you that finding daylight and a running lane when you are almost at full speed and when you've gotten through the teeth of the DLINE and are on LB's trying to get an angle on you or DB' slicing across the field is COMPLETEY different and infinitely easier than fabricating yards AT or BEHIND the LOS when the blocking isnt there.

    Count the number of SA highlight runs that dont involve him running through a wide open hole in the defense. They are few and far between. If the defender was there to stop him before he got to the second level or at mid to top speed , SA wasnt gonna do a lot. Thats why he was a different back sans Hutch and the continuity on the O-Line that brought him success prior to 2005.

    Lynch would have crushed it with Walt, Hutch, Gray, etal. No doubt. He killed it with far less, fabricating legend from scraps.

    Being soft at the point of contact IS NOT a defining characteristic of a HOF back. You dont have to be Campbell or Lynch. You can be cut from the Sanders, LT or Faulk cloth and juke the crap out of guy. (BTW, Lynch could do that too - Google Lynch jukes Ray Lewis - Classic). Shaun got the yards that were on the table when the blocking worked well. Not when it didnt.
    keasley45
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 318
    Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 6:40 pm
    Location: Cockeysville, Md


  • sdog1981 wrote:
    fenderbender123 wrote:Davis also has 2 Super Bowl wins and 3 All Pros. And I don't think he deserved to be in it.


    NFL MVP, Super Bowl MVP, 20 rushing TD season and a 2000 yard rushing season. He is a Hall of Fame player. He could have played for 15 more seasons rushing for 0 yards every year and still be a HOF running back, due to his 1996 to 1998 seasons.

    SA had an MVP,27 tds,1880 rushing and got hosed in SB-Thats a HOF season too.
    Here look at his stats closely and tell me he shouldn't be in.

    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... exSh00.htm
    IndyHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5892
    Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:42 pm


  • scutterhawk wrote:
    Jerhawk wrote:Yes. He was a great back with great vision.

    He should not be punished for playing behind a great O line. He was a master at the cutback, rarely went down on first contact and led the team to our first Superbowl appearance.

    Plus, he had FIVE TD's in the first HALF OF A GAME (Vikings I believe)....It was almost an automatic for a TD anytime he got into the Red Zone...Nothing wrong with NOT taking UNNECCESARY hits.
    18 TD's in one Regular season.
    So YES.

    I disagree. Selfish player. Any RB who hooks slides (giving them self up) in the flat when there wasn't a defender within 15 yards of them, should be banned from the HOF and the ROH. He's my most hated player of all time (Hawk player)
    OrangeGravy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 510
    Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:47 pm


  • hawkfan68 wrote:Those who say that SA shouldn't be in the HOF, do you believe Chris Johnson should be in it?

    Their stats are nearly identical. I wouldn't say Johnson was a "tough runner" either. Johnson played more seasons that SA but has near equal career stats to him.

    SA career stats - https://www.nfl.com/players/shaun-alexander/stats/career
    CJ career stats - https://www.nfl.com/players/chris-johnson/stats/career

    Next, SA racked up a 1000+ yards from 2000-2006. How is it he was terrible between the 20s? Please explain. I saw him take a 88 yard TD to the house against the Cards. Seems like he did fine between 20s then. He had 17 runs in his career of 40+ yards. Just because he didn't run through people like a Lynch doesn't mean he wasn't effective between 20s. He was tremendously productive back.

    Neither of them should be in
    OrangeGravy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 510
    Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:47 pm


  • pittpnthrs wrote:
    Welshers wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:
    godawg wrote:I can only imagine what Marshawn would have been able to accomplish running behind Walter Jones and Steve Hutchinson.


    Why exactly would Lynch be better? Alexander was quicker and had better vision.


    Well, Lynch won a SB which has proven to be very important to Hall voters. He also had maybe the greatest run in NFL history. Fair or not, moments like that will stick in the minds of voters come vote time. Lynch was a dominant strong, physical runner. Very different from Sean Alexander. I'd like to see them both in the Hall, but I'm a homer of course. I've read quite a few pundits who think Lynch will be there in the end. I'd actually give him a better shot than Alexander because of the things I mentioned above.

    My best guess?
    They both get there eventually. It will take a while.


    What does the fact that Lynch had an elite defense and a much better QB to help him get a SB ring have to do with him eclipsing Alexanders output behind Alexanders Oline? Why would a RB that runs through a defender be more effective than a RB that avoids that defender totally?

    As I said, fair or not, those things stick with the voting committee. Winning a SB has proven to be vital to getting into the hall
    Welshers
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 506
    Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2019 6:55 pm


  • scutterhawk wrote:
    Jerhawk wrote:Yes. He was a great back with great vision.

    He should not be punished for playing behind a great O line. He was a master at the cutback, rarely went down on first contact and led the team to our first Superbowl appearance.

    Plus, he had FIVE TD's in the first HALF OF A GAME (Vikings I believe)....It was almost an automatic for a TD anytime he got into the Red Zone...Nothing wrong with NOT taking UNNECCESARY hits.
    18 TD's in one Regular season.
    So YES.


    Paul Maguire was a blight on the broadcasting profession but his remarks coming back from halftime of that game were epic. "In case you missed it, folks, the Seahawks won the toss and elected to kick the bejeezus out of the Vikings".

    That said, one game doesn't get you in. Yes, he was a red zone monster and he glided through the second and third level like a greased ballerina. But I question his heart and effort in grunt situations. I've never seen an MVP-level RB who I didn't want to get the ball on 3rd and 1. Maybe in a weak class he could get in but I don't think I've seen someone inducted since he's been eligible who I'd put him over.
    FattyKnuckle
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 83
    Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 7:05 pm


  • Welshers wrote:As I said, fair or not, those things stick with the voting committee. Winning a SB has proven to be vital to getting into the hall


    Hmmm... I wonder how that would affect someone like Larry Fitzgerald.

    No, SB win on resume has an impact, but not overwhelmingly so.
    Ad Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2579
    Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 9:25 am


  • Eighty wrote:He broke the single season TD record and won an MVP. It's not like it was a one year wonder either, he had many good and great seasons.

    He deserves a spot in my opinion.

    Eighty,
    Go Hawks

    He was the first and possibly still only player to have 15+ combined TDs in 5 straight years. I just think he's a guy whose stats don't tell the whole story.
    FattyKnuckle
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 83
    Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 7:05 pm


  • OrangeGravy wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:
    Jerhawk wrote:Yes. He was a great back with great vision.

    He should not be punished for playing behind a great O line. He was a master at the cutback, rarely went down on first contact and led the team to our first Superbowl appearance.

    Plus, he had FIVE TD's in the first HALF OF A GAME (Vikings I believe)....It was almost an automatic for a TD anytime he got into the Red Zone...Nothing wrong with NOT taking UNNECCESARY hits.
    18 TD's in one Regular season.
    So YES.

    I disagree. Selfish player. Any RB who hooks slides (giving them self up) in the flat when there wasn't a defender within 15 yards of them, should be banned from the HOF and the ROH. He's my most hated player of all time (Hawk player)

    HAHAHA!!!!! Shaun Alexander is living rent free in your head! :lol: Let the hatred flow through your veins
    PNW
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 425
    Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 5:26 pm


  • OrangeGravy wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:
    Jerhawk wrote:Yes. He was a great back with great vision.

    He should not be punished for playing behind a great O line. He was a master at the cutback, rarely went down on first contact and led the team to our first Superbowl appearance.

    Plus, he had FIVE TD's in the first HALF OF A GAME (Vikings I believe)....It was almost an automatic for a TD anytime he got into the Red Zone...Nothing wrong with NOT taking UNNECCESARY hits.
    18 TD's in one Regular season.
    So YES.

    I disagree. Selfish player. Any RB who hooks slides (giving them self up) in the flat when there wasn't a defender within 15 yards of them, should be banned from the HOF and the ROH. He's my most hated player of all time (Hawk player)


    Slides down when there wasn't a defender within 15 yards of him? Ok. Name the game where that happened.
    Seanhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6749
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:04 pm


  • Here are highlights of few SA's big runs...
    hawkfan68
    Gold Supporter
    Gold Supporter
     
    Posts: 7936
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:10 pm
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • Statistically, he has a great argument. He's a victim of the logjam at his position in Canton.
    Rat
    * NET Cynic *
     
    Posts: 6355
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:42 pm
    Location: Grand Rapids, MI


  • OrangeGravy wrote:I disagree. Selfish player. Any RB who hooks slides (giving them self up) in the flat when there wasn't a defender within 15 yards of them, should be banned from the HOF and the ROH.


    Image
    Rat
    * NET Cynic *
     
    Posts: 6355
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:42 pm
    Location: Grand Rapids, MI


  • IndyHawk wrote:
    sdog1981 wrote:
    fenderbender123 wrote:Davis also has 2 Super Bowl wins and 3 All Pros. And I don't think he deserved to be in it.


    NFL MVP, Super Bowl MVP, 20 rushing TD season and a 2000 yard rushing season. He is a Hall of Fame player. He could have played for 15 more seasons rushing for 0 yards every year and still be a HOF running back, due to his 1996 to 1998 seasons.

    SA had an MVP,27 tds,1880 rushing and got hosed in SB-Thats a HOF season too.
    Here look at his stats closely and tell me he shouldn't be in.

    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... exSh00.htm


    He shouldn't be in. Its not all about the stats. he wasn't individually HOF great. He has HOF stats because he had a great O-Line opening gashes in defenses for him to chew up yards.
    keasley45
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 318
    Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 6:40 pm
    Location: Cockeysville, Md


  • If we're going to invalidate Shaun's resume because he had two good offensive linemen, are we calling Russ overrated as well? It's much easier to rack up wins at an all-time pace when you have an historically elite defense backing you up, not to mention Beast, who is getting called our GOAT RB by several people in this thread. Judging RBs by Super Bowl Championships is absurd anyway, but I'll bet Alexander would have one if our XL defense had only given up eight points.
    Rat
    * NET Cynic *
     
    Posts: 6355
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:42 pm
    Location: Grand Rapids, MI


  • Rat wrote:If we're going to invalidate Shaun's resume because he had two good offensive linemen, are we calling Russ overrated as well? It's much easier to rack up wins at an all-time pace when you have an historically elite defense backing you up, not to mention Beast, who is getting called our GOAT RB by several people in this thread. Judging RBs by Super Bowl Championships is absurd anyway, but I'll bet Alexander would have one if our XL defense had only given up eight points.


    Its not because he had two great offensive linemen, its because he had an absurdly good and consistently intact o-line for his best years.

    As to Russ. Russ wasnt talked about as a great QB (even by his own fans), if not mentioned in circles as the best in the league until AFTER the slow decline of the LOB, the loss of a complete running game, and as a result, him proving that REGARDLESS OF THE HELP HE GOT, HE WOULD MAKE SEATTLE COMPETITIVE.

    I literally hear that every week. That no matter who Seattle faces. No matter how bad the O-line, No Matter how many RB's we have on IR, if we have Russel Wilson, we have a chance. THAT is the sign of a transcendent talent. Even if you play them right, they will still beat you based on individual ability, skill, and intangibles.

    You can say that about all of the great RB's because with the exception of a few that were just on ridiculously talented teams for extended periods, it didnt matter whether or not the QB was great, or their o-line had multiple HOFers, they were a force to be reckoned with and you HAD to account for them. Teams HAD to account for Marshawn Lynch EVEN THOUGH THEY KNEW THEY COULD HIT HIM IN THE BACKFIELD BEFORE HE REACHED ANY SEMBLENCE OF A HOLE IN THE O-LINE. They knew they could play solid defense, smack our offense around and it didnt matter because Lynch would get his at some point. Shaun - you could get him easy if you could win the LOS. He was routinely brought down by one man.

    Again, SOFT AT THE POINTOF CONTACT AND EASILY BROUGHT DOWN are NOT defining characteristics of a HOF RB.
    keasley45
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 318
    Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 6:40 pm
    Location: Cockeysville, Md


  • keasley45 wrote:Again, SOFT AT THE POINTOF CONTACT AND EASILY BROUGHT DOWN are NOT defining characteristics of a HOF RB.


    What a terrible argument, and illustrates part of the unreasonable hate to Shaun. If he puts up MVP numbers and is significantly more effective than a runner who is not 'soft and easily brought down' , would you rather take Shaun or TJ Duckett?

    The HOF is primarily made up of RBs like Shaun who could make chunk plays in the open field 99% other rb could not resulting in amazing stats from their greatness. If you want to discredit Shaun for running behind a great OL, then half the HOF at all positions will be discredited also for the other great players that helped make their life easier to accumulate their stats/wins.

    He is a borderline HOF due to his combination of power, vision, and elusiveness in the open field that resulted in him leaving as the best rb in Hawk history and a historic 5year stretch. He was also a better goaline back than Lynch.
    seafence82
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 14
    Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 7:24 pm


  • Alexander's stats would be drastically lower if he played behind the same O-Line Lynch did.

    It's kind of annoying how some people think Shaun Alexander is a HoF back based on pure stats and nostalgic memories of his time in Seattle. More objectivity needs to be brought to this table...

    If Shaun had played with Lynch's ferocity and willingness to run through b1tch3s every single down, he'd have like 40 more TDs and 6,000 more yards for his career stats, and THAT would absolutely be HoF-worthy - not just because of the stats, but because of the elite, sustained EFFORT. That EFFORT was only visible in the red zone from Shaun, and THAT is why he DOES NOT DESERVE to be in the Hall of Fame.
    Last edited by RolandDeschain on Sun Nov 29, 2020 11:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    RolandDeschain
    * Spelling High Lord *
     
    Posts: 32088
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 9:39 am
    Location: North Miami Beach, FL




  • Nobody has even mentioned that Mack Strong was trucking people for Alexander also.

    Alexander was a good back with good vision with a very good line and the best fullback in football minus maybe Larry Centers.

    No way should he be inducted. I don't think he should be vilified either.
    bevellisthedevil
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2216
    Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 11:43 pm
    Location: davenport


PreviousNext


It is currently Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:44 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ SEATTLE SEAHAWKS FOOTBALL ]




Information
  • Who is online