@iknowfootballandyoudon’t …

Apparently you don’t know much about PFT. Mike launched this topic in response to a personal challenge from Whitlock, has repeatedly linked to Whitlock’s column, and had Jason on his show to discuss the issue. Don’t speak if you don’t know

Why is there such a big concern over non-players making it into the Hall of Fame? Bouchette refers to copying what the Baseball Hall of Fame does, but then suggests that only players be eligible (which is not, to my knowledge, the case in the BHoF).
————————————————–

Bouchette never said that. He proposes separate categories for players, coaches and contributors, so that a player like Dawson isn’t passed over for a non-player. It’s pretty clear if you read the article. He never once suggests only players be eligible. He does say let the voters only vote on players and let someone else decide what managers, etc. make it in.

And that would be just like baseball. Voting for managers and umpires are held every 2 years while a separate comittee votes on executives and builders the other years. It’s completely separate from the players process.

Add in the current HOF’s, give them a vote along with the other designated 44 voters they currently have, and any player/coach/etc. has to get 80% of the vote. Period, end of story. The deserving ones will get in, the others will not.

And you won’t have hours of meetings where people are trying to be persuasive but come off as being a PITA.

Limiting eligibility to players is arbitrarily discounting the contributions of coaches, general managers, officials and builders who helped create the modern game. To do so would eliminate the function of the Hall as a record of the history of the game and turn it into a mere gallery of whose stats are better.

What the league should do is create a high threshold amount like the Baseball Hall and let everyone who meets the threshold get in, not an arbitrary class size which is a greater reason for the delay in inclusion of worthy athletes, moreso than the election of Ed Sabol and other non-players.

I do think the essence of your post is right though, the spectrum itself needs to broaden, but it shouldn’t arbitrarily be expanded. The voters themselves need to be appointed judiciously to avoid a situation as we find today in the future.

I also think the real issue is not who votes, but what they are voting for. We all know the bias towards sill players that exists even now, yet we continue down a path that consistently denies influential players at the less fashionable positions from hall of fame entry simply because their body of work will never stack up to the tangible numbers that a receiver, quarterback or running back is able to produce.

That is the crux of the matter.