Dan Fouts: Ripping HOF process won’t help Terrell Owens

Getty Images

Former Chargers quarterback, current CBS broadcaster and Hall of Famer Dan Fouts had a Hall of Fame vote for the first time this year, which meant that he was one of the people in the room when it came time to decide if Terrell Owens would be granted admission to Canton.

For the second straight year, Owens did not make the cut from 15 to 10 in the first round of voting and the thumbs-down from the selection committee received almost as much attention as the group of seven men that were ultimately voted into the Hall. Owens tweeted after learning his fate that it is a “flawed process” but Fouts said the wideout got a fair shake and won’t help his cause by slamming the people doing the voting.

“I think his numbers are very worthy, but again on the other side of it, I think his actions on and off the field, on the sidelines, in the locker room, and the fact he played for so many teams and was such a great player, the question that comes back to me is if he was such a great player, why did so many of those teams get rid of him? And I think we all know the answers,” Fouts said on The Midday 180 in Nashville, via ESPN.com. “I think he did receive a fair evaluation of his career, both pros and cons. But obviously ripping the Hall of Fame in the process, what good is that going to do. I just don’t understand that. I didn’t understand a lot of things he did in his career.”

Owens’ reaction to the vote shouldn’t hold any weight in deliberations about his football career, but, as Fouts and others have made clear, football isn’t the problem for Owens when it comes to the Hall of Fame.

88 responses to “Dan Fouts: Ripping HOF process won’t help Terrell Owens

  1. “the thumbs-down from the selection committee received almost as much attention as the group of seven men that were ultimately voted into the Hall.” It is a shame but this is on the selection committee for establishing this distraction. Be the bigger ‘men,’ quit acting like females and get the guy in. It’s not about the columnist or even Terrell for that matter, it’s supposed to be about honoring the best we as fans have ever seen. This is too much to ask?!?!

  2. “Ripping HOF process won’t help Terrell Owens”

    Bologna…placing blame on everyone but himself helped him become a stand-up locker room guy. The same method can be transferable to the HOF.

  3. Well with those standards I’m sure Rick Mirer is a first ballot HOFer. True, he wasn’t good on the field but he was nice and evidently that seems to carry equal weight as playing ability.

  4. Well, at least he’s being honest, I guess, and admitting that they just don’t like Owens (even though almost none of the people voting were ever on a team with him) and failing to vote in the guy that is 2nd all-time in receiving yards and 3rd all-time in receiving TDs has nothing to do with football at all….probably one of the reasons that so few people pay any real attention to the football HOF.

  5. HOF voting should be about on the field performance. If you are a voter and interject your own political bias, you should be removed from your position as a voter.

    The fact that he was on so many teams and was able to put up gaudy numbers on each of those teams shows that he has talent and isn’t just a result of a system.

  6. Owens is right, the process is flawed and Fouts should realize he’s not the morality police. I was never a TO guy and didn’t care for his attitude, but the fact is, TO’s numbers are well beyond “very worthy”, so he obviously didn’t get a fair shake. Apparently the HOF induction process is as flawed as the NFL itself, and lacks the same integrity when you have these clowns acting like this.

  7. Said it after Owens made his flawed process tweet and I’ll say it again. Comments and tweets aren’t the problem with his HoF candidacy but the ‘thought process’ behind them is symptomatic of it. The widespread feeling that he hurt his teams as much as helped them apparently isn’t just confined to fans.

  8. HOF is awful and fake news, considering that many of the voters are the same ones who said Ohio State should be in the College Football Playoffs this year. They have no clue and simply pander to players who will invite them over to the house for a party so they can name-drop in some article (for proof see anything written by Peter King).

  9. This is so stupid it’s not like he was arrested for domestic violence or drugs. Owens has the 2nd most yards and touchdowns and impacted every game he played in that’s HOF worthy. I can’t wait to see this commitie try to defend ray Lewis getting in as a first ballet but pulling this crap on TO

  10. I thought it’s the Pro FOOTBALL Hall of Fame, not the CITIZENSHIP Hall of Fame. Not electing Owens is a disgrace.

  11. I can’t believe Fouts is in the HOF with his statistics…I think it’s fitting that the voters are holding TO out, he deserves it for the character that he displayed while playing, serves him right

  12. When they voted Lawrence Taylor in, it was made very clear that the only criteria was what you did on the field. When did that change?

  13. The reason his candidacy is debatable is obvious – for all his stats, he didn’t help his teams win championships. None of the teams he played on went to the Super Bowl except the Eagles – and they did it when he was injured and out of the lineup. When he came back for the Super Bowl, they lost. Never a team guy. All about him. Being a pain isn’t what’s keeping him from the HOF – being a pain kept his teams from winning, which is what’s keeping him from the HOF. As it should be.

  14. gauchosporlife says:
    Feb 8, 2017 5:56 PM
    Fouts in but not Jim Plunkett…that’s flawed Dan.

    ———————————————————
    This x 1000000

  15. Drifter62 says:
    Feb 8, 2017 5:51 PM

    I’m no T.O. fan but the Pro Football HOF is merely a popularity contest; nothing more…
    ———————–

    Just like the Pro Bowl…

  16. Heath Evans and Brian Baldinger will make it into the HOF before T.O. Stats don’t really matter. All you gotta do is go be an NFL Network Analyst.

  17. So it’s not about the stats but rather if you fit in to the status quo of the NFL. Fascist pigs. No different to a popularity contests from high school.

  18. Fouts is 100 percent right.. Football is the ultimate team sport. Electing a cancer who wore out his welcome every place he stepped foot would be asinine.

  19. He wasn’t that good. Just brought a lot of attention to himself. Thus became famous. I never thought he was more than above average. No way a HOF

  20. TO was a locker room cancer. He was also a clown off the field. That’s why he didn’t make the cut. His attitude was so bad that he was actually sent home during the season one year! Addition by subtraction.

    Fouts, while his record and stats don’t stack up to what we see now, was one of the most prolific passers of his time. That’s why he’s in the HOF.

  21. Look, TO did cause some issues with the teams he was on. But he was dominant on the field and amongst the best at his position in the era in which he played. I think Fouts’ comments on TO raise a deeper question. Is Fouts implying TO will never make it into the Hall? Will his behavior as a player be seen differently by voters next year? Year after that?….

  22. upper23 says:
    Feb 8, 2017 7:39 PM
    He wasn’t that good. Just brought a lot of attention to himself. Thus became famous. I never thought he was more than above average. No way a HOF

    ———

    That’s based on what data? Your eye test? He came up pretty big against the Patriots in the Super Bowl in 2005. He looked pretty good to me. All the stats points to him being an all time great.

    It’s clear there is some moral judgement going on. That is inconsistent with how the process has been managed in the past.

  23. Eff TO. Period.
    He caught a lot of balls. He dropped a lot of balls.
    The fact is, if you’re that good and your team wants you gone, you’re not HOF caliber.
    Wait a few years, Bro. You earned it through your actions.

  24. I couldn’t stand TO; still don’t care for him. He was a locker room cancer and me first guy. But he’s also a HOFer.

    What this is all about is he wasn’t politically correct. And since he won’t play nice, he can’t get in. In other words, just like everywhere else in life, if you don’t suck up to the powers that be, you don’t get the rewards.

  25. I never liked TO and always rooted against him because he was such a drama queen, that said he no doubt belongs in the HOF. Dude was one of the greatest receivers to ever play and he’s right about the process being flawed. The fact that guys like Tony Dungy and Ladanian Tomlinson are in the hall and guys like Jerry Kramer and Tom Flores aren’t is an absolute joke. The HOF has zero credibility and is nothing more than a high school popularity contest

  26. Short Stints with many teams describes many HOF players. Off field issues were common with some of the HOF players.

    I don’t see why the criteria for entry has changed.

    Count it against him that he didn’t have have a ton of playoff success. That’s fine. That’s factual. Don’t make it a moral judgment.

  27. The HOF vote should be public. I want the names of the voters who felt that Jason Taylor, Morten Anderson, or Terrell Davis had a larger impact on the game than Terrell Owens.

    Holding him out one year as a way to distinguish him from, say, Jerry Rice… That’s kind of bs, but I can understand it.

    But holding him out the second year? That is nothing more than pettiness, and it detracts from the credibility of the HOF.

  28. Im guessing Randy Moss wont be getting in anytime soon either?

    1st ballot HOF player, headache on the field.. in the locker room.. and in society.

    No SB, played on several teams.. and was a problem child to the VERY end.

    FYI, I think T.O. and Moss are 1st type ballot players

  29. The other HOF voters can’t be happy with Fouts. He’s admitted to what we all suspected – and it makes them all seem juvenile, petty and incapable of evaluating candidates fairly.

    Wonder if they’ll now vote Fouts out of their “secret society”.

    And – btw – how did Dan Fouts get into the HOF? Safe to say whoever ran his campaign back then worked for Jason Taylor this year.

  30. It’s obvious the hall has an issue with every wr but Jerry Rice. Cris Carter shouldn’t have waited. Art Monk shouldn’t have waited.

    Of course, they elected Lynn Swann and John Stallworth, two good players who shouldn’t be there, to make up for Carter and Monk.

  31. internetcommenter7 says:
    Feb 8, 2017 8:08 PM

    Any suggestion that TO doesn’t belong belong in the HOF, and on the first ballot at that, is the product of either stupidity or racism.
    =============================

    or, maybe they just understand football. and maybe, just maybe, they are the type of person who would rather see a player simply hand the ball back to the official than watch a choreographed dance. maybe they would rather see a player that other players wanted to play with than a primadonna who only cared about his stats. maybe they would rather see a player leave everything on the field, as opposed to someone who pouts and cries like a spoiled child.

    probably the most over rated player in nfl history

  32. Harry Carson ripped the HOF voters and the process very publicly and very persistently — and he was enshrined the next year.

  33. Owens actually hurt his teams. Why would a valuable player be thrown off so many teams? Teams are willing to put up with a lot of crap from players, as long as they can help you win. Terrell Owens made the teams he played on worse. I just hope all the young players are paying attention so they don’t put themselves ahead of the team. I’ve been watching football many decades and I’ve never seen a player harm his team the way Owens did. So for all the people who group Owens together with all the prima donna’s, they’re just flat out wrong. Owens wasn’t a prima donna. Owens was a mental case.

  34. TO’s paid the toll for his off-field actions. It’s the reason he was passed around from team to team and career ended sooner than it maybe should have.

    If he was a better teammate he’d possibly be #1 across the board in career stats and maybe have a ring. He’s paid his due with that and with current numbers should have been a first balloter.

  35. Yes, he had good personal stats. On the other hand, look at the records of his teams in his 2nd to lst year with them versus his final year. For the Eagles and Cowboys, compare that final season record with the following year.
    I think there is a strong case to be made that he his teams were better off without Diva-mode TO.

  36. Here’s the real question and the only question that matters when it comes to the HoF.

    Is Terrel Owens more famous for being a WR or more famous for being a not just self-destructive but team-destructive narcissist who negatively impacted his teams off the field as much as he helped them on the field.

    First, really decide which of those 2 Terrel Owens’.

    Second, recognize the fact that this question needs to be answered is why he’s questionable for the HoF.

    THAT SIMPLE

  37. T.O. and Randy Moss were the prototypes for the prima-donna NFL wide-receiver.

    Unfortunately both of them put up enough numbers to overcome that and should be voted HOF.

  38. Fouts: Never played in a Super Bowl; in HOF.

    Plunkett: Won 2 Super Bowls; not in HOF.

    Owens: Top-5 in several all-time WR stats; not in HOF.

    And they WONDER why people think the HOF is a joke?

  39. handsofsteelheartofstone says:
    Feb 8, 2017 8:40 PM

    maybe they would rather see a player leave everything on the field, as opposed to someone who pouts and cries like a spoiled child.

    ——————

    You obviously never watched Owens play, and DEFINITELY didn’t watch him play in the Super Bowl against the Patriots. One of the best performances in a SB I’ve ever seen. With a broken leg. Owens carried the team on his back the whole way and almost single-handedly willed them to a win.

    Fouts never even made it to a SB. What did he fail to leave on the field?

  40. Both Qbs played against each other always felt Fouts was a better qb but on a much inferior team.
    Fouts, A major separation was qb % Rating over all. Fouts was 80.2% Plunkett 67.5 % thats huge. Another glaring stat Plunkett only really played 6 full seasons 4 were with New England and they sucked donkey nuts as a team. I have to say 1980 was mostly because of him. Other than that It was Marcus in 83′ rest of his years were injured, out, or on SF 49ers 77′ played all season 5-9 that year with a 62.1 qb rating. Both were on horrible teams first five years plunkett 98 ints and for Fouts 57 ints

    Fouts G 181 AV 162 QBrec 86-84-1 Cmp% 58.8 Yds 43040 Y/A 7.7 TD 254 Int 242 FantPt 2273.2

    No Super Bowl wins

    Plunkett G 157 AV 109 QBrec 72-72-0 Cmp% 52.5 Yds 25882 Y/A 7.0 TD 164 Int 198 FantPt 1450.9

    Won two Super Bowls play qb Marcus Allen and the Defense won it in 83′

    This HOF is based on stats but not all. How you played the position and did you change the position/game. Fouts got judged on how he changed the QB position with the aerial super power. Plunkett prolly will never get in and thats the truth… Kinda like Jim Marshall great player but faded after the 74 season wish he and Jerry Kramer would get in…

  41. For the younger fans who didn’t see Dan Fouts play, and are only looking at career stats, understand the Chargers were lousy for the early part of his career.

    That will inevitably pull down the won/loss record, and affect career stats. Terry Bradshaw had the same issue, and like Fouts, was an easy HOF selection.

    Unlike Phillip Rivers, Fouts guided the Chargers to two AFC TG, and one can hardly blame him for losing one of those games in one of the coldest days in NFL postseason history.

    When Fouts matured, and the Chargers improved, this was one of the most dangerous offenses in NFL history. Put him in today’s much more pass friendly NFL, and the numbers would be incredible.

  42. I just get a good laugh out of all the Plunkett love I read in this HoF debates. Jim Plunkett(!). His numbers are mediocre at best, and besides a couple of years there in the early 80’s, he was considered a bust.No Pro bowls, no All-pro’s, .500 career W-L record, 30 more Int’s than TD’s. Oh, 2 rings. But consider this:Brad Johnson, Jeff Hostetler, Trent Dilfer, and Mark Rypien all have rings as well, and they probably have better stats than Plunkett, and no one is saying they should be in the HoF. Terrible passing stats. I thought Stabler was a silly pick, but Plunkett! LOL…

  43. I’d like to see Owens tell the HOF to take their nomination and shove it up their ass.

    If being the 2nd best receiver in the history of the NFL isn’t worthy of being in the HOF, to hell with the HOF.

  44. Anybody who thinks Fouts was less of a QB than Plunkett certainly isn’t old enough to have watched them play.

  45. Im guessing Randy Moss wont be getting in anytime soon either?

    1st ballot HOF player, headache on the field.. in the locker room.. and in society.

    Moss was not a headache in the locker room, except in Oakland when he quit on the team. He was well-loved in Minnesota and New England.

    I’m baffled at a process that inducts Jerry Jones but keeps out Jimmy Johnson and Terrell Owens.

    If Fouts doesn’t have the maturity to deal with players criticizing his decisions without implying that it will hurt said players in future voting, he shouldn’t be a voter.

  46. Giants LT, Warren Sapp, OJ, Michael Irwin, not the greatest people outside of the world of football, but all in the HOF. While TO was a pain to deal with off the field, his numbers on the feild are what make him a HOF’er.

  47. Come on, Fouts! Chris Carter wrote the book on how to whine your way into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. TO is just following his lead.

  48. gauchosporlife says:
    Feb 8, 2017 5:56 PM
    Fouts in but not Jim Plunkett…that’s flawed Dan.
    =======================
    Fouts>(x10)Plunkett. Actually its not even that close.
    Just because you dont agree with Fouts doesnt mean you should start posting ridiculousness.

  49. Personal feeling it’s have no place in hof enshrinement. The committee needs to be replaced ASAP. Ex players, hof enshrinees and coaches should be making these decisions, not writers with bias.

  50. The ex-players, who are HoF enshrinees, were the leaders in the room for voting against Owens.

  51. Of course, they elected Lynn Swann and John Stallworth, two good players who shouldn’t be there, to make up for Carter and Monk.
    ===

    Why should Monk be in while Swann and Stallworth should be out?

    Monk is in beacuse he was of the greatest of his era, right? Doesn’t stack up against todays receivers, but he was one of the best in his.

    Why do a different set of rules apply to Swann and Stallworth? They were elected beacuse they were a couple of the best of their era.

    … and all 3 of those guys have something voters simply can’t get enough of; Rings.

  52. Man, I’m not sure where all this Plunkett delusion comes from. There are plenty of players out there that have a ring or two that don’t belong in the HoF, and there are plenty of players who have no rings that do belong. Obviously anyone comparing Plunkett to Fouts and finding Plunkett more deserving is delusional at best. Plunkett was mediocre (at best) who had a couple of good years in the early 80’s on some good Raiders teams. No league MVP’s, no Pro-bowls, No all-pro’s. Terrible percentages across the board for completion, negative TD-INT ratio, poor QB rating, the list goes on. Get off the Plunkett pipe folks, the Stabler pipe was bad enough. What’s next, the Marc Wilson pipe???Hell, Rich Gannon is far more deserving than Plunkett.

  53. I can’t believe Fouts is in the HOF with his statistics…
    ===

    Guess you weren’t around in the 80’s.

    Before Marino, Fouts was the most prolific passer the game had seen since Unitas and Tarkenton.

    And Phillip Rivers is just now eclipsing his franchise records. Fouts still holds about a dozen of them.

  54. Dan Fouts 86-84-1 career record
    58.8 completion percentage
    254 TD 242 INT
    3-4 playoff record with 12 TD and 16 INTs
    ===

    Easily one of the top 10 QBs to have ever played the game when he retired. Not even a debatable!

    At the time he retired;
    2nd all-time in passing yards (ahead of Unitas)
    4th all-time in td passes
    2nd all-time in completions
    9th all-time in passer rating

  55. “…the question that comes back to me is if he was such a great player, why did so many of those teams get rid of him? ” – Dan Fouts

    Look, we all know TO was a bit of a “diva” and didn’t always get along with his coaches or QBs (right, Jeff Garcia??), but the guy was a stud on the field and arguably one of the top 2-3 WRs in the game for a number of years in the mid-2000s.

    Oh, and Danny Boy, while you may want to focus on how many teams wanted to “get rid of him”, what about all of the teams who wanted to bring him aboard because they knew what kind of player ON THE FIELD he was?? And these teams wanted to bring him on board in spite of whatever off the field distractions Fouts and other members of the media alleged.

  56. Dan Fouts: “I’ll be voting for Tebow in the HOF next year. The new criteria has been set”.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.