1969 SEMI-FINAL RESULTS:

Thank you for all of your participation in the Pro Football Hall of Fame Revisited Project. If you are unaware of what that is, we acted like the PFHOF had its first class in January 1946.

We have completed the years up to 1968.

For “1969,” a Preliminary Vote with nearly 100 players whose playing career ended by 1961. We are also following the structure in that players have 20 years of eligibility, and if they do not make it into the Hall, they are relegated to the Senior Pool.

Each voter was asked to select 25 names from the preliminary list, and the top 25 vote-getters were named Semi-Finalists.

A week later, the voters were asked to pick 15 names from the 25 Semi-Finalists, and next week, they will pick five from the remaining 15. We will continue this process weekly until we catch up to the current year.

30 Votes took place, with the top fifteen advancing.

This is for the “Modern Era”

Bold indicates they advanced to the Finals:

This is for the “Senior Era”

*Bold indicates they advanced to the Finals:

We will post the Class of the 1969 Pro Football Hall of Fame Revisited Project next Saturday.

Thank you to all who contributed. If you want to be part of this project, please let us know!

The Strong National Museum of Play has announced the three new toys that will be part of the Toy Hall of Fame. 

My Little Pony, Phase 10, and Transformers beat out nine other finalists, which were Apples to Apples, Balloons, Choose Your Own Adventure Gamebooks, Hess Toy Trucks, Pokémon Trading Cards, Remote Control Vehicles, Sequence, the Stick Horse and Trampolines.

My Little Pony was first introduced by Hasbro in 1983, and boasts over a thousand varieties.

Created by Ken Johnson, Phase 10 would become the second best-selling card game, only trailing Uno.

Transformers debuted in 1984 also from Hasbro, but were promoted with a syndicated cartoon show.  There have been multiple movies and animated series since.

1969 PRELIMINARY RESULTS:

Thank you to all who participated in the Pro Football Hall of Fame Revisited Project. If you are still determining what that is, we acted like the PFHOF had its first class in January 1946.

We have completed the first 23 years thus far.

For “1969,” a Preliminary Vote with close to 100 players whose playing career ended by 1959. We are also following the structure in that players have 20 years of eligibility, and if they do not make it into the Hall, they are relegated to the Senior Pool.

Each voter was asked to select 25 names from the preliminary list, and the top 25 vote-getters were named Semi-Finalists.

A week later, the voters will be asked to pick 15 names from the 25 Semi-Finalists, and next after, they will pick five from the remaining 15. We will continue this process weekly until we catch up to the current year.

Please note that a significant change occurred “years ago,” allowing voters to submit less than the allotted spots. 

30 Votes took place.

This is for the “Modern Era”

Bold indicates they advanced to the Semi-Finals:

*Indicates they have been removed from future ballots.

This is for the “Senior Era”

Bold indicates they advanced to the Semi-Finals:

*Indicates that they will be removed from the ballot permanently.

Please note that three voted for “None of the Above.”

We also had another vote where the voters were asked how they wanted to keep voting parameters over the next few years.  16 of 30 stated that you want to keep it as is, where YOU MUST obtain 50 percent of the vote to enter the Pro Football Hall of Fame Revisited Project.

Next week, we will announce the Semi-Finalists for the 1969 Pro Football Hall of Fame Revisited Project.

Key Takeaways

• Controversial inductions often arise when a player's fame outweighs their stats.
• The selection process can be muddled by unclear criteria and a lack of diversity.
• Era differences and biases can affect who gets in and who doesn't.
• Public perception plays a significant role in how these decisions are viewed.

Controversial NFL Hall of Fame Inductions: Are They Justified?

What makes an induction controversial? Typically, it's when a player's fame or a single memorable moment seems to overshadow their overall career performance. The Hall of Fame selection committee uses specific criteria, but sometimes personal biases and historical context can cloud these judgments.

Notable Controversial Inductions Based on Statistics and Performance

Joe Namath

Joe Namath is a classic example. His career stats—a 62-63-4 record, 50.1% completion rate, 173 touchdowns, and 220 interceptions—are not Hall of Fame material by today's standards. Yet, his bold guarantee and victory in Super Bowl III left an indelible mark on NFL history. Was it fame over skill?

Art Monk

Art Monk's induction also raises eyebrows. While his career was long and productive, his three Pro Bowl appearances seem low for a Hall of Famer. His success in three Super Bowls likely helped his case. But should longevity alone earn a spot in Canton?

Bob Hayes

Bob Hayes had blinding speed and early success but didn't sustain it. His 371 receptions and 71 touchdowns are modest compared to other Hall of Fame receivers. Did his early career brilliance and a Super Bowl win overshadow his later years?

Lynn Swann

Lynn Swann dazzled in the Super Bowl, but his career stats—336 receptions, 5,462 yards, and 51 touchdowns—don't scream Hall of Fame. His induction is a testament to the weight of Super Bowl performances. But is it fair to prioritize a few games over a whole career?

Issues with the Selection Process

Diversity in the Selection Committee

The selection committee's makeup can influence who gets inducted. More diversity, including former players and coaches, could bring varied perspectives and reduce biases. Wouldn't a broader committee better reflect the game's history?

Clear Criteria for Selection

A standardized framework for evaluating candidates could help. Clear criteria would make it easier to judge who truly deserves a spot in the Hall. Shouldn't there be a more transparent process?

Backlog of Deserving Players

Many players wait years for induction, creating a backlog. Positions like wide receiver are particularly crowded. Could clearer criteria help speed up this process?

Senior Nominees and Their Controversies

Chris Hanburger

Chris Hanburger's induction as a senior nominee came after years of being overlooked. With nine Pro Bowl appearances, his career was solid, but not outstanding. Was his senior nomination fair, or did it bypass the usual scrutiny?

Roger Wehrli

Roger Wehrli's case is similar. He wasn't seen as elite during his career, yet he made it as a senior nominee. Does his induction highlight flaws in the senior nomination process?

Coaches and Contributors: A Different Standard

Dick LeBeau

Dick LeBeau is known more for his coaching prowess than his playing days. With 62 interceptions, his playing stats are respectable but not extraordinary. Should his coaching success have been the main factor for his induction?

Marty Schottenheimer

Marty Schottenheimer's exclusion is puzzling. Despite a successful coaching career, he remains outside the Hall. Does his absence highlight inconsistencies in how coaches and contributors are evaluated?

Historical Context and Performance in Different Eras

Era Considerations

Players from different eras face varying standards. What was considered great decades ago might not hold up today. How do we fairly compare players from different times?

Super Bowl Era Bias

Some players from the Super Bowl era were overlooked initially but later inducted as seniors. Does this reflect a bias towards more recent players?

Notable Snubs and Their Impact

Steve Smith Sr.

Steve Smith Sr. boasts impressive stats and longevity, yet he remains snubbed. Is there a bias against certain positions or players from less successful teams?

Willie Anderson

Willie Anderson was a top offensive tackle but played on underperforming teams. How much should team success influence individual recognition?

Randy Gradishar

Randy Gradishar waited 35 years for induction despite a stellar career. Does his long wait reflect broader issues in the selection process?

Torry Holt

Torry Holt's continued snubbing is baffling given his strong career stats. What more does he need to prove his worthiness?

Public and Media Perception

Many Hall of Fame decisions face public and media dissent. Fans often debate the worthiness of inductees, highlighting the subjective nature of these selections. Are fans' voices being heard enough?

Subjective Nature of Selections

Opinions on player worthiness vary widely. How can the Hall of Fame balance these differing views to maintain its credibility?

Betting Lines and Hall of Fame Predictions

With the ongoing debate over who truly deserves a spot in Canton, many fans and analysts turn to metrics and predictive odds, much like those seen in FanDuel lines. These betting lines often reflect public sentiment, highlighting the players whose legacies resonate most with fans and bettors alike.

Just as in sports betting, where stats, standout moments, and subjective factors impact odds, the Hall of Fame selection process mirrors this balance of data and emotion—keeping fans invested in the ever-evolving Hall of Fame discussions.

Conclusion

Controversial inductions spark debate and keep the NFL Hall of Fame in the spotlight. They challenge us to consider what truly makes a player legendary. As the Hall evolves, will it find a way to balance fame, stats, and historical impact more effectively?