Ok this might sound ignorant , but since when are dudes that big fighting in UFC ? This doesn ' t even look that entertaining , it ' s just 2 fat guys throwing haymakers full strength until one connects . <| sep |> The fact that we just lost that crap game says everything about our team and season . I feel sorry for the national audience that had to watch that pathetic performance our offense put out there . At least the Fucking Cowboys will riot over the Lions and Seacucks in the playoffs <| sep |> This was proposed during season 3 , so 3 years . <| sep |> You literally got your ONLY TD of the game via shit reffing . <| sep |> I was responding to what I thought you were insinuating . Those two things aren ' t mutually exclusive . That ' s not what you said . Because that ' s not the comparison I was making , and you just said you think he does stack up . It also doesn ' t explain why different writers are chosen every year while some allowed to maintain voting for subsequent years . They aren ' t to my knowledge . It ' s the same guys every year until they retire . And my point was , you opinion on what makes a Hall of Famer is irrelevant to what actually makes one . I ' m talking about what voters actually look at traditionally , you don ' t seem to be . There is nothing in that statement about HOF candidates needing to achieve some statistical benchmark You simply stated you don ' t care for my opinion about if Steve deserves to be and that he doesn ' t have what it takes . As much as you talk about context I ' d think you would actually use it . And I never said he doesn ' t have what it takes . I said he doesn ' t match up to the guys you compared him to . Because he doesn ' t . He ' s borderline as far as actually having what it takes . So you ' re saying that most of the stats and criteria used for enshrinement are objective , right ? How do you know this ? What is the objective statistical benchmarks so that voters can then proceed with making their subjective reasoning for why certain players should be in ? I ' m looking at voting history . And one more time , see if you can follow along , the stats they use are subjective . A yard is a yard , a TD is a TD , a catch is a catch . Objective . The benchmark needed is objective . How many of those objective stats they need varies . Where they need to rank is objective . Think of it this way , feet and inches are an objective measurement of height . What height makes a person ' tall ' is subjective . Tall is subjective , but if you ' re in America , you still measure height in feet and inches . You proceed to imply that isn ' t possible because Art Monk has three rings , Cris Carter is considered a top five receiver all time don ' t agree and Andre Reed went to four Super Bowls . That was your argument for why Steve Smith shouldn ' t be in and I ' m suffering from obviously suffering from recency bias if I believed otherwise . Again , twisting what I said . First , that ' s only half of the comparison . You ' re cherry picking what I said . Is Smith going to retire top 5 in any career stats ? Because those 4 retired top 5 in yards , catches , and TDs . And that was not an argument for him not belonging in the Hall of Fame , it was examples of how he doesn ' t stack up to guys you tried to compare him to . He objectively does not stack up to those guys in several ways , which I listed . I ' m suffering from obviously suffering from recency bias if I believed otherwise . He ' s more recent . He statistically matches up to some of them now , but plays in a very different passing era . Accounting for era ' s , he doesn ' t stack up . Claiming otherwise is an example of recency bias . Okay so what ' s the objective stat for telling me how good Stan Brock was at pass blocking ? Or rather , who good he should be along with anyone else to be recognized as a nominee at the very least . Or the stat for how good Eric Allen was at tackling defenders and how well he was in coverage ? All Pros . Pro Bowls . Tackles . Longevity . Watching them play . Voters aren ' t going back and watching tape for every guy that retires . I ' m not missing what you said . What you said essentially made no sense from the inception , and still doesn ' t . That Smith doeant stack up to those 4 guys you mentioned ? It ' s 100 % true . He doesn ' t match up statistically to any of them when you account for era . He doesn ' t match up in Super Bowls to 2 of them . He doesn ' t match up to Carter in popular opinion of skill . I ' m sorry that those facts don ' t make sense to you . Your claim is that I said something will happen compared to me saying something will probably happen . You ' re directly comparing him to 4 Hall of Fame receivers . The pretty obvious implication is that if they ' re in , he will be .