Is Philip Rivers a HOFer?

[megalodon30]

Yet the guy in the backfield with him most of his career got right in and no one said a word lol

It's just funny. Imagine saying AP shouldn't be in the HoF because no ring, or Tony Gonzalez , or Anthony Munoz, or Randy Moss .... weird

LT was one of the most dominant RBs of all time. Rivers was a very good QB, but few would call him dominant. LT was a literal record setter. If RBs mattered, he would've had a ring.

 

[megalodon30]

Unless he buys a ticket......

Accurate.

 

[rmilia1]

LT was one of the most dominant RBs of all time. Rivers was a very good QB, but few would call him dominant. LT was a literal record setter. If RBs mattered, he would've had a ring.

Sure but that's not the point . I'm speaking to the " so and so doesn't have a ring " excuse when it comes to QBs when we don't use it on any other positions. Football , more so than any other sport, should be the last one where rings matter . 6 of the top 10 RBS and 6 of the top 10 WRs all time dobt have rings

 

[Pure Steel]

Imagine thinking Alex Smith is a 1st ballot HOFer.

You and I can't drink enough combined to think that.....

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

Well shit @FaCe-LeE-uS , now you just went and made him a lock. Bayless is never right about anything, ffs.

 

[Clayton]

Yet the guy in the backfield with him most of his career got right in and no one said a word lol

It's just funny. Imagine saying AP shouldn't be in the HoF because no ring, or Tony Gonzalez , or Anthony Munoz, or Randy Moss .... weird

Philip Rivers also had seasons where he cost his team chances at the playoffs. There were legitimately some years where you looked at the Chargers and said 'whats wrong' and one of the problems was Rivers.

Comparing that to someone like Tony G is just daft. Tony G was either the #1 or #2 player at his position for almost his entire career. Rivers might have never once been the #1 or #2 player at his position. They arent even in the same ballpark

 

[rmilia1]

Guys in the league right now at QB

Locks- Brady, Brees, Big Ben, Rodgers

Likely in- Ryan, Rivers

Almost certain to get in but need a few more years - Wilson, Mahomes

Outside shot- Stafford

 

[rmilia1]

Philip Rivers also had seasons where he cost his team chances at the playoffs. There were legitimately some years where you looked at the Chargers and said 'whats wrong' and one of the problems was Rivers.

Comparing that to someone like Tony G is just daft. Tony G was either the #1 or #2 player at his position for almost his entire career. Rivers might have never once been the #1 or #2 player at his position. They arent even in the same ballpark

I'm not comping players. I'm saying the " rings " excise isn't used with other positions. Honestly it's only recently ut even started being used with QBs. Like 20% of the modern Era QBs in the HoF dobt have any rings

 

[Clayton]

Guys in the league right now at QB

Locks- Brady, Brees, Big Ben, Rodgers

Likely in- Ryan, Rivers

Almost certain to get in but need a few more years - Wilson, Mahomes

Outside shot- Stafford

And thats not including many of the young guys like Josh Allen, Watson, or Herbert who probably have a punchers chance of getting in at some point.

At some point, it has to be about more than just stats.

 

[rmilia1]

And thats not including many of the young guys like Josh Allen, Watson, or Herbert who probably have a punchers chance of getting in at some point.

At some point, it has to be about more than just stats.

Thats fair. What else should it be about then ( for all positions)? MVPS? Pro Bowls? SB rings/appearances ? All those are stats too I guess ... I'm open to different criteria as long as everyone is held to the same standard and it's quantifiable .

 

[megalodon30]

Sure but that's not the point . I'm speaking to the " so and so doesn't have a ring " excuse when it comes to QBs when we don't use it on any other positions. Football , more so than any other sport, should be the last one where rings matter . 6 of the top 10 RBS and 6 of the top 10 WRs all time dobt have rings

QB makes the biggest difference. There’s a reason that Brady went to so many Super Bowls and without Brady the Pats can’t even make the playoffs. Disregarding the impact a QB has on a franchise and how much they win is just silly.

 

[rmilia1]

QB makes the biggest difference. There’s a reason that Brady went to so many Super Bowls and without Brady the Pats can’t even make the playoffs. Disregarding the impact a QB has on a franchise and how much they win is just silly.

Brady is an anomaly though . The 2 best active QBs in the league carrer wise ( aside from Brady ) have 2 SB appearances in 30+ years in the league

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

At some point, it has to be about more than just stats.

To most knowledgeable football fans, yes, it should be. But most of these sports journalists that have a vote are actually less knowledgeable than the average fan with just as much bias and rooting interest. They are also lazy and look at stats to bolster their crappy opinions. It is what it is.
I also think we look at it from a greatness perspective but these guys play favorites and most of them like Rivers. He's no lock or first ballot or maybe borderline or whatever but they will vote him in.

 

[Clayton]

Thats fair. What else should it be about then ( for all positions)? MVPS? Pro Bowls? SB rings/appearances ? All those are stats too I guess ... I'm open to different criteria as long as everyone is held to the same standard and it's quantifiable .

Its probably going to be an 'all of the above' type of thing.

The easiest way to measure players across eras is noting the number All Pro rankings and to a lesser extent pro bowl rankings. I'd say W-L record, YPA, TD to INT and eyeball test all kinda matter.

Unfortunately with Rivers, when he had Gates and Tomlinson than more often than not he looked like a Hall of Famer. Without Tomlinson, Rivers was mostly just an average starting QB for a long time. Denver ran the AFC West for awhile and KC ran the AFC West for awhile and Rivers was buried within his own division.

Rivers will almost certainly get in. I personally would have him just barely missing getting in. I think Ryan will eventually be at a point where he just barely makes it in unless he goes on another SB run in which case he'll be in pretty easily. I wouldn't put Eli Manning in.

 

[rmilia1]

Its probably going to be an 'all of the above' type of thing.

The easiest way to measure players across eras is noting the number All Pro rankings and to a lesser extent pro bowl rankings. I'd say W-L record, YPA, TD to INT and eyeball test all kinda matter.

Unfortunately with Rivers, when he had Gates and Tomlinson than more often than not he looked like a Hall of Famer. Without Tomlinson, Rivers was mostly just an average starting QB for a long time. Denver ran the AFC West for awhile and KC ran the AFC West for awhile and Rivers was buried within his own division.

Rivers will almost certainly get in. I personally would have him just barely missing getting in. I think Ryan will eventually be at a point where he just barely makes it in unless he goes on another SB run in which case he'll be in pretty easily. I wouldn't put Eli Manning in.

Imo Ryan already has a better case than Rivers ( with the MVP and the SB appearance ) . I think both get in though

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

Thats fair. What else should it be about then ( for all positions)? MVPS? Pro Bowls? SB rings/appearances ? All those are stats too I guess ... I'm open to different criteria as long as everyone is held to the same standard and it's quantifiable .

The pro bowls have become meaningless as well though. All of the criteria is biased so there is no real answer. Honestly, I'm of a mind that the whole thing is just a talking point and nothing more. It's a nice little post career note for these players but in the end, it's not the end all be all. Even the MVPs these days. It's just best stats by a QB on a winning team and nothing else. It often has less to do with value.

 

[Clayton]

Imo Ryan already has a better case than Rivers ( with the MVP and the SB appearance ) . I think both get in though

I agree. The eyeball test tells me that Rivers played on better teams (read: had much better defenses)

 

[rmilia1]

I agree. The eyeball test tells me that Rivers played on better teams (read: had much better defenses)

Well that's a low bar given Atlantas defense the last 12 years lol. Ryan is like a slightly more successful new agey combo of Moon and Fouts having a really slow baby

 

[Clayton]

Well that's a low bar given Atlantas defense the last 12 years lol

It is a low bar and I think Rivers' teams clear it pretty easily. Chargers defense has been fairly talented for years now both in his prime and later in his career. Colts defense was also about as good this year.

I do think Rivers not getting to a Super Bowl when he had Tomlinson and Gates was a bit of a fluke. Marty Schottenheimer is just cursed. Thats not Rivers fault. Rivers getting boxed out of the AFC West for the rest of his career? Thats on Rivers.

 

[megalodon30]

Brady is an anomaly though . The 2 best active QBs in the league carrer wise ( aside from Brady ) have 2 SB appearances in 30+ years in the league

Big Ben, Rodgers, and Wilson have 5 appearances combined. Add in Mahomes who will more than likely make at least a couple more barring injury and that makes 6+. Great QBs make a difference.

 

[rmilia1]

Big Ben, Rodgers, and Wilson have 5 appearances combined. Add in Mahomes who will more than likely make at least a couple more barring injury and that makes 6+. Great QBs make a difference.

Of course Great QB play matters . I'm just saying using Brady is not really a fair comp as he dwarfs everyone. The best QBs in the NFL have fewer combined appearances together than Brady does by himself lol .