There have been 38 Superbowls and 24 men wear rings as the winning QB. Now THAT'S elite company. (You can say 25 men, actually, because Johnny Unitas was injured in the Superbowl after throwing their only TD pass and was replaced by Earl Morrall. I don't know who deserves credit for the win). This puts Tom Brady in pretty elite company. Here's the breakdown, if you're interested.... Quarterback/Number Of Superbowl Rings Terry Bradshaw ? 4 Joe Montana ? 4 Troy Aikman ? 3 Tom Brady ? 2 John Elway ? 2 Bob Griese ? 2 Jim Plunkett ? 2 Bart Starr ? 2 Roger Staubach ? 2 Joe Namath - 1 Len Dawson - 1 Earl Morrall/Johnny Unitas ? 1 Ken Stabler ? 1 Theismann ? 1 Jim McMahon ? 1 Phil Simms ? 1 Doug Williams ? 1 Jeff Hostettler ? 1 Mark Rypien ? 1 Steve Young ? 1 Brett Favre ? 1 Kurt Warner ? 1 Trent Dilfer ? 1 Brad Johnson ? 1
teams win super bowls, it is wrong to giev so much credit to the passers, how many of those players won the super bowl without top defense or top running game?
You're right, BearsFan1! I totally agree... In one of the Miami Superbowls, Bob Griese threw 7 passes, and completed 6 while Larry Czonka (sp?) ran all over the defense. He'd be the guy to single out, but the NFL right now seems to be a QB's game. It's the other guys who get screwed over...
i see nine qb's on that list that definately aren't HOF material, one i know is in so 8 that shouldnt but i bet some of them will get in on merit of their team accomplishment. HOF is individual award, not team award and voters need to realize that, unless someone is on superclose to going either way they should not consider. Also take out namath and lynn swan neither are worthy
I hear ya on lynn swann he got in on one catch. I will say Brady didn't deserve the credit as much as the d and special teams did in 2001 but this time he earned that MVP and was a huge reason that we won this time around.
Swann's career resume warranted a hall of fame induction. At first when he was inducted, I felt like you guys do. After doing a bit more research, though, I came to the conclusion that he really is a worthy inductee (in my opinion).
I never saw him play but did look at the numbers so I don't have the total perspective and maybe if you grew up watching him it would be different but his numbers were the numbers of a third recevier today. I know the game was different then but I just thought wow when I saw them.
The first Super Bowl I saw was Super Bowl 10 and Swann was unbelieveable. After that game, every kid I knew wanted to be Lynn Swann when they caught the ball. Swann had a knack for elevating his game when the Steelers were in big games. If you just look at his numbers, then Swann doesn't deserve to be in the hall. If you look beyond the numbers then perhaps he does. Personally, I'm glad that Swann and Stallworth are in the Hall, but I started watching football during the 70's, so perhaps I'm biased.
numbers dont lie, he was about 50th in his era in catches at a paltry 330, human recollection of events does lie, he seemed to play good in those games, maybe he did, but 3 good games, not a hall of famer
I would have to disagree. I think you have to balance numbers with the rest of the picture. I think numbers are a great thing, but taken alone they can skew the true picture. Of course, that's just my opinion.
I say NO to Swann as a HOFer....330 receptions is not enough reguardless of the era he played in.....its not like he was known for his great blocking or special teams play, the guy is known for catching the ball and 330 catches in not enough, no matter how good 5 or 10 of them were
My argument FOR Lynn Swann - 1. Four superbowl rings 2. Three times All Pro 3. Three Pro Bowls 4. Superbowl MVP 5. Held 4 Superbowl receiving records when he retired (later broken by future hall of famer Jerry Rice) and 1 record for punt returns in the Superbowl (also later broken) 6. Member of 1970s all decade team 7. Member of Superbowl silver anniversary team 8. Led league in TDs one year 9. Led league in punt return yardage as a rookie (at the time, 4th all time in the NFL) 10. Is considered one of the NFL's first big play/big game receivers I'll also say that part of the Hall of Fame is "reputation," and Swann is a standup guy who had a phenomenal college career and has served the NFL since his retirement doing charity work and commentary and a host of other PR type things. Now...my own argument AGAINST Lynn Swann is the fact that Art Monk is not in the Hall of Fame. This is a great article on the subject: http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/noteboo...sptnotes3p3.asp Most notable...Art Monk has three Superbowl rings and has more receptions, yards and touchdowns than any of the 17 current receivers in the hall. Interesting.
I agree, PA. I don't know how Art Monk is not in the HOF. I don't understand how Bob Kuchenberg keeps getting passed up either. It's hard to take when the HOF only took four players this year.
I really don t give a **** what era Swann played in. TheBeef is right, 330 receptions is laughable. Espescially these days. You know who else doesn t belong in the Hall of Fame? Marcus Allen. Let me know if you need an explanation.
i need an explanation of why marcus allen who broke the NFL rushing touchdown record, the super bowl single game rushing record, is not a hall of famer
Id like to hear the that explanation too....ill post the numbers an accomplishments to help clarify the arguement: ? Rushing - 12,243 yards and 123 touchdowns on 3,022 carries ? Receiving - 587 receptions for 5,411 yards and 21 touchdowns ? NFL Rookie of the Year (1982) ? Super Bowl XVIII MVP ? NFL MVP (1985) ? All-Pro (1982,85) ? Named to Six Pro Bowls (1983,85,86,87,88,94) ? Comeback Player of the Year (1993) they look like 1st ballot numbers to me....
Marcus Allen only had 3 seasons of 1000 yards or plus. Those right there are not Hall of Fame numbers. What he did in the Superbowl shouldn t count. If he s in the Hall of Fame, well then so should Terrell Davis.
terrell davis didnt rush for 12000 yards or 123 TDs, allen had some of his good years taken by al davis's unwillingness to play him
