TOFN podcast: HOF LB Jack Ham revisits the proudest moment of his career


Lynn Swann Super Bowl X photo courtesy Pittsburgh Steelers

The 21-17 victory by the Pittsburgh Steelers over the Dallas Cowboys in Super Bowl X represented the proudest moment of Hall of Famer Jack Ham’s career.

Not the singular win over the Cowboys – but the achievement of the Steelers winning back-to-back Super Bowls. And that’s what we’ll discuss with Ham today on the Talk of Fame Network’s “5 Games” podcast series. We’ve already visited with Jack about the Immaculate Reception game, the 1974 AFC championship game against the Oakland Raiders and the 1975 Super Bowl against the Minnesota Vikings.

In winning those Super Bowls over the Vikings and Cowboys, the Steelers joined the Lombardi Packers the Shula Dolphins as the only teams to win consecutive Super Bowls in the game’s first 10 years. The Steelers were aware of the challenge they faced heading into that 1976 season – Hall of Fame coach Chuck Noll made sure of that.

“I think Chuck Noll set the tone in training camp after coming back,” Ham said. “You can imagine all these guys getting endorsements and making public appearances in the offseason after our Super Bowl win.

“But Chuck Noll, in our first meeting of training camp in Latrobe, said, `You know guys, you can take those Super Bowl rings off your fingers now and put them on the shelf because there’s not a thing you did last year that is going to win you a job no this football team this year. You’re the only team that has a chance to repeat. And you know what? If you guys can take this as one helluva challenge because every team that you play, when you’re watching tape of their previous games — they’re not going to play like that against you. There’s going to be a star on their schedule when they play Pittsburgh and you’re going to get everybody’s best game and best shot. If you understand that and take this challenge on, you guys have the opportunity to do this again.”

The Steelers blew through the regular season with a 12-2 record to win the AFC Central, then eliminated Baltimore and Oakland with AFC playoff victories to earn that date with Dallas. The Steelers trailed the Cowboys 10-7 through three quarters before rallying for 14 fourth-quarter points to claim that second consecutive Lombardi Trophy.

“I think of all the things in my career, I am most proud of the fact we won back-to-back twice (also 1978-79),” said Ham, a member of the NFL’s 75th anniversary team. “No one can say you snuck up on people, you got lucky one year, injuries…whatever the case. When you do it back-to-back like that, I think that’s really something special and I take a lot of pride in that.”

Ham also talked about the challenge of facing Hall of Fame quarterback Roger Staubach in that Super Bowl, the game played by Hall of Fame wide receiver Lynn Swann that earned him Super Bowl MVP honors plus the frantic final minutes of that game.

In the final podcast of our “5 Games” with Jack Ham, we’ll discuss the 1979 Super Bowl victory over the Cowboys. Subscribe to our podcast and listen for free at @ iTunes or VokalNow.com

VoKalNow:

https://vokalnow.com/audio/1591

iTunes:

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/talk-of-fame-podcast/id1337217347?mt=2

Previous Who is the Bears' biggest HOF snub? Will Texas ever again produce top NFL talent?
Next TOFN podcast: HOF LB Jack Ham revisits a Super Bowl triumph over the Cowboys

33 Comments

  1. Rasputin
    March 15, 2018
    Reply

    Odd how a team with 9 HoFers was trailing a team that supposedly only merits 3 HoFers in its starting lineup for most of that Super Bowl. Now if Cliff Harris and Drew Pearson were inducted that’d be 5 HoFers. That would make more sense wouldn’t it?

  2. Scott Remington
    March 15, 2018
    Reply

    Let it go, Rasputin. The better team won. And did it again (1977). And again (Super Bowl XIII). And again (1979). After the opening TD catch in Super Bowl X, Drew Pearson was a virtual non-factor vs. Pittsburgh. Furthermore, Lynn Swann and John Stallworth are largely in the Hall of Fame because of their record-breaking Super Bowl performances against Cliff Harris and the rest of the overwhelmed Cowboy secondaries of those matchups.

    • Rasputin
      March 16, 2018
      Reply

      They certainly weren’t THREE TIMES better, LOL. “Record-breaking”? “Overwhelmed”? In SB 10 Stallworth had 2 catches for 8 yards. Swann caught 4 passes. They were big passes, but the Steelers threw away from Cliff Harris all day. I’ve even linked to a Pittsburgh article about it before on here. On at least one of those passes Harris was blitzing.

      But thanks, Scott, for showing up and again proving that you have no idea what you’re talking about. As for Pearson, his brilliance was why the Cowboys were in that Super Bowl to begin with.

      PS – The Cowboys were better in 1977 by the playoffs when they peaked and Pittsburgh got beat by the Broncos. Dallas was better in 1971 when they had the best team in the NFL and the Steelers were 6-8, and in fact from 1965 through 1972 when they beat the Steelers 7 times in row, along with a smattering of other wins from the early 60s (including the new Cowboys’ first ever NFL win in 61!) through 1985.

  3. Scott Remington
    March 19, 2018
    Reply

    Record-breaking: Swann’s 161 receiving yards were a record that stood for 12 years until Washington’s Ricky Sanders shredded the Denver Broncos secondary in SB XXII. in Super Bowl XIII, Stallworth’s 115 receiving yards established a Super Bowl record for most receiving yards in a half. Stallworth’s 75-yard TD reception tied the record set by the Colts’ John Mackey. Swann and Stallworth were the first receiving duo ever to record 100-yard performances together within one Super Bowl (XIII). Cliff Harris trailed Stallworth for the last 50 yards on the 75-yd. TD and is clearly seen getting a good view of Swann making a leaping TD in the back of the endzone in XIII. The films and videotape do not lie, they only expose your delusions. I would re-iterate, the Cowboys secondary was overwhelmed by Swann and Stallworth and Harris was one of the key casualties.

    Like I stated earlier, you can only brag about Dallas beating the Steelers before they drafted Swann, Stallworth, and Jack Lambert and only after their Super Bowl run was over. You can only brag about Dallas beating the Packers AFTER Lombardi left. You can only brag about Dallas beating the 49ers, before and after the Montana/Walsh era. Those are real dynasties (Lombardi’s Packers; the Super Bowl ’70s Steelers; the Montana/Walsh 49ers) that never lost to Landry’s Cowboys, ever. The combined records of these dynasties vs. Landry’s Cowboys (regular season and playoffs): 13-0.

    Give up, Rasputin. You’re fighting a lost cause and making a fool of yourself.

    • Rasputin
      March 20, 2018
      Reply

      How does any of that show that the 75 Steelers merit having 3 times as many HoFers as the 75 Cowboys, you idiot? Were they 3 times better? You just repeated a bunch of crap you spewed from the other page where I schooled you. Talk about humiliating yourself in a losing cause, Scott.

      PS – Have you considered the possibility that Harris was trailing by 50 yards in that other Super Bowl because he had nothing to do with the play, LOL? It was actually a fairly short pass but CB Aaron Kyle missed the tackle. It takes Harris a while to enter the screen because he’s running all the way from the other side of the field, but he’s running the fastest because he’s hustling the most and keeps going until the end without giving up. Besides, SB XIII was a track meet immediately following the new chuck rule change where Dallas also put up 31 points on the Steelers. Was the vaunted Steel Curtain “exposed”?

      The Chuck Howley/Cliff Harris 71 Cowboys set a more significant record that STILL STANDS when they crushed the great Shula Dolphins 24-3, becoming the only team to hold their opponent without a SB TD.

  4. Scott Remington
    March 20, 2018
    Reply

    “Talk about humiliating yourself in a losing cause,” Where is the humiliation in pointing out the Super Bowl ’70s Steelers beat the Cowboys every time they played them during the Pittsburgh Dynasty of ’74-79 (Dallas was 0-4 including two Super Bowls head-to-head)? What is the losing cause in pointing out the Super Bowl ’70s Steelers beat the Cowboys every time they played them during the Pittsburgh Dynasty of ’74-79 (Dallas was 0-4 including two Super Bowls head-to-head)? Landry’s Cowboys got nothing during the Steelers’ Super Bowl run in the ’70s. And they got nothing off of Lombardi’s Packers in the ’60s (0-5 including two NFL Championship games head-to-head) or the Montana/Walsh 49ers’ run in the ’80s (0-4 including The Catch). That’s 0-13. Saying the Landry Cowboys were as good as these great dynasties is ignorant. Didn’t the Landry Cowboys have ANY heart/pride/talent to beat any of these dynasties ONCE during their respective reigns? History says Landry’s Cowboys DID NOT. Still waiting for you to show us how two (Landry’s Cowboys’ world titles) is greater than four (Super Bowl ’70s Steelers’ world titles; Montana/Walsh ‘Niners’ world titles) or five (Lombardi’s Packers’ world titles), Rasputin. You have debunked absolutely nothing.

    PS–Harris didn’t trail Stallworth by 50 yards. He was helplessly CHASING Stallworth for 50 yards (i.e., “too slow”), allowing Stallworth to tie John Mackey’s record, also set on–DALLAS. And Mackey was a tight end with a thick midsection!

    Here comes the Landry Cowboys Excuse Mill: “…Besides, SB XIII was a track meet immediately following the new chuck rule change where Dallas also put up 31 points on the Steelers. Was the vaunted Steel Curtain ‘exposed’?” First off, The Cowboys should have benefited from the chuck rule, as well. It’s not Like the Cowboys were forced to cover one way and the Steelers were allowed to cover another way. Swann and Stallworth were simply a superior tandem to Drew Pearson and Tony Hill (another reason Pearson’s not in the Hall of Fame while the Steelers’ wideouts are in). In Both Super Bowls X and XIII the Cowboys were exposed and overwhelmed in the secondary, Harris being a key casualty. The SB X alibi about “(Pittsburgh) didn’t throw in his area” is nonsense. Harris was a free safety. He was “free” to roam where he saw help was needed. True, Mel Renfro held John Stallworth to two catches for eight yards. A smart free safety would have seen that and gave help to poor Mark Washington. Harris wasn’t too savvy or sharp upstairs, obviously. On the game-winning TD pass from Bradshaw to Lynn Swann, it is true that Harris was blitzing and not in coverage. Problem is he was too slow to get there to prevent the pass attempt. Poor Mark Washington. His free safety failed help him in coverage or on the blitz. Doesn’t surprise me at all that Cliff Harris is not in the Hall of Fame. Mike Wagner and Glen Edwards made more plays than Harris from safety in those Steelers-Cowboys Super Bowl matchups. And in their overall careers (more career INTS, Super Bowl knockouts, etc).

    Secondly, Dallas’ OFFENSE scored 24 points in that Super Bowl. The other TD came when Thomas “Hollywood” Henderson sacked and stripped Bradshaw and Mike Hegman took off with the fumble. Incidentally, “Hollywood” was the only Dallas defender who made any significant impact in SB XIII. Maybe they should have all played while high on cocaine for that game. SMH.

    • Rasputin
      March 20, 2018
      Reply

      You’re stuttering in your first few lines, Scott, which is pretty humiliating. I’ll take your sad diversion back onto claims already debunked on the other page to signify that you concede the 75 Steelers weren’t 3 times better than the 75 Cowboys, and in fact shouldn’t have 3 times as many HoFers. I accept your concession.

      I know Hegman scored, doofus. Dallas committed 3 turnovers too. The Cowboys offense gained 330 yards against the Steel Curtain, only 27 yards fewer than Pittsburgh did. “Exposed”? It became a track meet both ways.

      Pittsburgh threw away from Harris all day in SB X and anyone can see it was CB Aaron Kyle #25 who was in coverage and fell missing the tackle on Stallworth in SB XIII. Harris only got into the highlight clip you saw because he hustled from the other side of the field.

      You clearly have no idea what a free safety does, especially in Landry’s system, a familiar bit of ignorance you shared with a pitiful loser going by the screenname “Joseph Wright” who stopped posting here after a series of crushing debate humiliations around the time you showed up. He liked to follow me around like a butthurt stalker too. Funny timing that.

      You again, of course, completely dodged the 71 Cowboys STILL holding their Super Bowl record after utterly crushing the Shula Dolphins (no 4 point squeaker there), along with every other pertinent fact I posted.

  5. Scott Remington
    March 21, 2018
    Reply

    You are too dumb to distinguish reiteration from stuttering, Rasputin? The only one humiliating themselves regarding the Landry Cowboys is you. You’re the proverbial crybaby trying to make a dollar (in this case, a “dynasty”) out of 15 cents (two world titles in 29, 20, 7 years–I’ll let you decide).

    The ’75 Steelers were better and to the victors go the spoils–and the excess. They were at least twice better than the Landry Cowboys. Four world titles is twice as great as two. And at that time the ’75 Steelers had two SB titles to Landry’s Cowboys one. Going further to Super Bowl XIII, we see that that within SBs X and XIII the Steelers enjoyed 21-10 and 35-17 leads in those respective games. Pittsburgh had more than doubled the score on Dallas. Landry’s Cowboys never did that to the Super Bowl ’70s Steelers. And, of course, in ’77 (Dallas’ SUPER BOWL SEASON!), the Steelers pasted the Cowboys 28-13 and in ’79 the Steelers (in THEIR Super Bowl season) shut down any Cowboys thoughts of revenge, 14-3.

    Then, again, when you consider that two of those Steelers’ Super Bowls came as a result of vanquishing the Landry crew then that has to rank as an extra victory each thus resulting in triple the ratio. Actually, in bringing up “Joseph Wright”–wow, that was random–if any injustice has been done, it is Rayfield Wright going into the HOF before the man who owned him, Steel Curtain member L.C. Greenwood (three or four sacks in SB X). The Hall of Fame thrashing the 70s Steelers have put on Landry’s Cowboys should be 10-3 or even 10-2.

    The Steelers didn’t “throw away from Harris all day” in Super Bowl X. The fact of the matter is that Harris lacked the recognition (“Football IQ?”) to get to where the ball was being thrown. He arrived late to help out his corner on Lynn Swann in the first quarter resulting in a 35-yard gain so the Steelers could tie the game at 7-7. On the juggling catch the made Swann a legend, Harris is NOWHERE to be found on the film–he’s not in on the blitz, for sure. His late arrival on an attempted blitz left Washington alone on Swann, resulting in the game-winning 64-yd. TD grab. If Harris weren’t so slow. Bradshaw doesn’t get off the pass attempt. As for Stallworth dusting Harris for 50 yards en route to a Super Bowl-record 75-yd. TD reception, Stallworth was in the slot on that play (Translation: he and Swann were lined up on the SAME SIDE). Why would it take Harris so long (other than the fact that he was too slow) to come into the play–allegedly, according to you–from the other side of the field? Was Harris that dumb that he was keying on the other side so hard on…RANDY GROSSMAN? Thus putting himself way out of position and his team in jeopardy?

    Emlen Tunnell played in Tom Landry’s defense with the New York Giants, retired as the NFL’s all-time leading INTs leader with 79 (eventually broken by Paul Krause), and is in the Hall of Fame. I have a thorough idea what a free safety does, even within Landry’s system. Harris simply didn’t have the speed or smarts to deal with Swann, Stallworth, or Bradshaw…who are all in the Hall of Fame. Courtesy of Cliff Harris, I guess.

    Lombardi’s Packers, The Super Bowl ’70s Steelers, and the Montana/Walsh 49ers were FAR superior to Landry’s Cowboys. These dynasties never lost to Landry’s Cowboys, beating them a combined 13-0 in regular and postseason competition. Why didn’t the Landry’s Cowboys EVER beat ANY of these dynasties even ONCE?

    The Landry Cowboys crushing the Dolphins or Broncos is on par with the Baltimore Ravens crushing the New York Giants: Got a lead, then shut down an inferior QB. YAWN. The QBs aren’t even worth naming. Bart Starr, Terry Bradshaw, and Joe Montana are first-ballot Hall of Famers who make butt-hurt Landry Cowboys fans like you continue to whine to this day and fabricate and manipulate all kinds of excuses and scenarios to unsuccessfully try to elevate the Landry Bunch to heights they failed–regularly–to attain. You’re embarrassing yourself, Rasputin. Again.

    • Rasputin
      March 21, 2018
      Reply

      “Then, again, when you consider that two of those Steelers’ Super Bowls came as a result of vanquishing the Landry crew then that has to rank as an extra victory each thus resulting in triple the ratio.”

      LOL! No it doesn’t. I see you still suck at math and logic. All those two 4 point games (35-31, and 21-17 with the Cowboys leading most of the game) showed is that the teams were roughly evenly matched in those two years they played (the Cowboys were better by playoff time than any of those teams in 71 and 77), as Ham implied. In fact if they had played 10 times those two years and the Steelers won every game by 4 points the quantity of the games wouldn’t alter how much better they were. It would just confirm they were slightly better (whereas a game or two could be a fluke).

      “The ’75 Steelers were better and to the victors go the spoils–and the excess.”

      Wait, so are you acknowledging the Hofer disparity is “excess”?

      The 80s/90s Bills have as many HoF players as the 92 and 93 Cowboys who TRULY dominated them in two Super Bowls do. Dallas beat Buffalo 30-13 and 52-17. Yet both teams currently have 4 players each in Canton from those years. By your logic how many HoFers should those Cowboys teams have?

      The rest of the BS you posted merits no response. For the record free safeties DO have coverage responsibilities on a play by play basis, often depending on what the defense as a whole is doing on that play, and Cliff Harris was actually pretty fast. He was a collegiate sprinter who even near the end of his career in 1978 ran even with Walter Payton and close to speed demon Greg Pruitt while torching Earl Campbell and Franco Harris in one of those NFL Superstar tv competitions you can find on youtube.

      But please, feel free to keep following me around and crying about my posts. You’re a fun moron to kick around.

  6. Scott Remington
    March 21, 2018
    Reply

    “I see you still suck at math and logic.” This from someone who is STILL ignorantly trying to prove that five (Lombardi’s Packers world titles) and four (Super Bowl ’70s Steelers; Montana/Walsh 49ers world titles) are greater than two (Landry’s Cowboys’ measly world title collection).

    If Cliff Harris “was actually pretty fast,” he would have caught John Stallworth from behind. NFL Superstars competition? When the Cowboys played the Oilers on Thanksgiving 1979, Harris got dusted by Earl Cambell for a 61-yd TD run, despite having a more-than-great angle on Campbell. in 1977–Dallas’ Super Bowl year–Franco Harris dusted past Cliff Harris up the middle for a 61-yd. TD of his own. Don’t take trash sports (e.g., Superstars, Battle of the Network Stars–where Bruce Jenner “tied” O.J.Simpson in a race) so seriously. Obviously, Franco and Earl Campbell didn’t. Especially when they saw Cliff Harris as their, ahem, “competition.”

    “…(whereas a game or two could be a fluke).” There was no fluke about the Super Bowl ’70s Steelers repeatedly beating the Landry Cowboys. Once can be a fluke. Twice could be an accident. Three times or more is a habit. The Steelers domination of the Cowboys during their 1974-79 dynasty is as follows: Super Bowl X–21-17; 1977–28-13; Super Bowl XIII–35-31; 1979–14-3. Pittsburgh beats Landry’s Bunch by four, 15, four, and 11-point margins. It wasn’t “a game or two” and there was no fluke to those outcomes. Stop crying and get over it. Landry’s Cowboys weren’t up to the Steelers’ level.

    Bradshaw. Franco Harris. Lynn Swann. John Stallworth. Mike Webster. Joe Greene. Jack Ham. Jack Lambert. Mel Blount. Who is unworthy of being in the Hall, Rasputin? Why don’t we give L.C. Greenwood the spot occupied by Rayfield Wright. L.C. abused Wright in SB X. Of the first nine (Greenwood would make it a well-deserved ten) Steelers, whose spot would Chuck Howley take? Whose spot would Drew Pearson take? Who was Cliff Harris better than? Who from this group of ten, excuse me, nine is in undeservedly. With the exception of Webster (who was only the best center in the league) all these guys did major damage to Landry’s Cowboys, on the field and ultimately on the scoreboards and in the history books. Mike Wagner and Glen Edwards were better than Cliff Harris.

    • Rasputin
      March 22, 2018
      Reply

      I didn’t bother reading most of your latest teary-eyed meltdown, Scott (I assume you’re upset about the beating you’re receiving on the other page and are just repeating already debunked claims), but I did notice this last line:

      “Mike Wagner and Glen Edwards were better than Cliff Harris.”

      LOL!

      Cliff Harris – 6 Pro Bowls, 3 first team AP All Pros, 1st team 1970s All Decade

      Mike Wagner – 2 Pro Bowls, 0 first team AP All Pros, No All Decade

      Glen Edwards – 2 Pro Bowls, 0 first team AP All Pros, No All Decade

      Cliff Harris was rightly judged by contemporary voters as the best FS in the NFL in the 1970s.

      And this part:

      “Of the first nine (Greenwood would make it a well-deserved ten) Steelers, whose spot would Chuck Howley take? Whose spot would Drew Pearson take? Who was Cliff Harris better than? Who from this group of ten, excuse me, nine is in undeservedly.”

      I didn’t say any were in undeservedly. “Excess” was your word (Freudian slip?). We don’t have to take out HoFers to add more HoFers. That said…..

      Career Receiving Yards
      Drew Pearson – 7,822
      Lynn Swann – 5,462

      Career Receptions
      Drew Pearson – 489
      Lynn Swann – 336

      Career Yards/Game
      Drew Pearson – 50.1
      Lynn Swann – 47.1

      Pro Bowls
      Drew Pearson – 3
      Lynn Swann – 3

      First Team AP All Pros
      Drew Pearson – 3
      Lynn Swann – 1

      NFL Receiving Titles
      Drew Pearson – 1
      Lynn Swann – 0

      1,000 Yard Seasons
      Drew Pearson – 2
      Lynn Swann – 0

      Career Playoff Yards
      Drew Pearson – 1,131
      Lynn Swann – 907

      Career Playoff Receptions
      Drew Pearson – 68
      Lynn Swann – 48

      Both guys were first team 1970s All Decade though (like Cliff Harris), and they both should join Swann in the HoF.

      If head to head results were all that matter, then why are countless guys like Paul Warfield, Bob Griese, Dan Dierdorf, Chris Hanburger, Alan Page etc. in whom the Cowboys routinely beat? Many of them never won a Super Bowl. Dallas won twice in crushing fashion.

      As for Howley, he’s better than lots of guys in the Hall of Fame and should have been in long ago. That’s why the 5 time first team AP All Pro and SB MVP was named first team OLB on historian John Turney’s All Mid Decade Team for 1965-1975, alongside all time greats Dick Butkus and Bobby Bell, and ahead of HoFers on the second team like Dave Robinson, Chris Hanburger, and Dave Wilcox.

      These Cowboys omissions are glaring.

      • Scott Remington
        March 22, 2018
        Reply

        Career Receiving Yards
        Drew Pearson – 7,822
        Lynn Swann – 5,462

        Career Receptions
        Drew Pearson – 489
        Lynn Swann – 336

        Career Yards/Game
        Drew Pearson – 50.1
        Lynn Swann – 47.1

        Pro Bowls
        Drew Pearson – 3
        Lynn Swann – 3

        First Team AP All Pros
        Drew Pearson – 3
        Lynn Swann – 1

        NFL Receiving Titles
        Drew Pearson – 1
        Lynn Swann – 0

        1,000 Yard Seasons
        Drew Pearson – 2
        Lynn Swann – 0

        Career Playoff Yards
        Drew Pearson – 1,131
        Lynn Swann – 907

        Career Playoff Receptions
        Drew Pearson – 68
        Lynn Swann – 48

        There are some serious omissions in this comparison:

        Super Bowl Titles
        Swann-4
        Pearson-1

        Super Bowl MVPs
        Swann-1
        Pearson-0

        Super Bowl TDs
        Swann-3
        Pearson-1

        Super Bowl 100-yard receiving performances
        Swann-2
        Pearson-0

        Super Bowl records held or established
        Swann-3
        Pearson-0

        Head-to-head vs. the other (regular season and postseason)
        Swann: 5-0
        Pearson: 0-5

        Now…”(t)hese Cowboys omissions are glaring.”

        How, exactly, is pointing out that one team (Lombardi’s Packers; Super Bowl ’70s Steelers; Montana/Walsh 49ers–take your pick, painful for you as it may be) constantly beat another a “meltdown?” You have debunked nothing. To quote one of the few smart things you’ve said: “Just because you say it (e.g., ‘I’ve debunked everything you’ve said’) it doesn’t make it true.” Again you have debunked nothing. It is history. Landry’s Cowboys never beat Lombardi’s Packers. If the Packers ever lost to or were dethroned by Landry’s Cowboys from 1961-1967, show us. If the Super Bowl ’70s Steelers ever lost to Landry’s Cowboys from 1974-1979, show us. If the Montana/Walsh machine ever lost to the Landry Cowboys from 1981-1989, show us.

        Because, Rasputin, history fully documents that Landry’s Cowboys faced Lombardi’s Packers five times and lost them all. History shows us that Landry’s Cowboys faced the Super Bowl ’70s Steelers four times and got nothing but a beating and roasting (casualties included Jean Fugett, Golden Richards, your beloved Drew Pearson, Cliff Harris, Charlie Waters, and the rest of the Cowboys’ beleaguered secondary) four times. History also shows us that Landry’s Cowboys played the Montana/Walsh ‘Niners and were wasted and squashed every time.

        Putting out harsh facts (the Landry Cowboys were 0-13 vs. these dynasties, therefore they were inferior to these teams–my logic only “sucks” to you because you know it is true) is not a “meltdown.” Being in denial about the facts and constantly bringing up other teams (Rams, Cardinals) to twist and change the subject is an act of desperation–the first step to a meltdown.

        What college or high school contaminated that tic-sized brain of yours so that you defiantly believe that two (Landry Cowboys world titles) is greater than four (Super Bowl ’70s Steelers; Montana/Walsh 49ers) and, even worse, two (Landry’s Cowboys world titles) is greater than five (Lombardi’s Pack)?

        The Landry Cowboys’ Hall of Fame representation is more than fair. The Cowboys of Landry didn’t suffer badly from the constant drubbings at the hands of Lombardi’s Pack, the Super Bowl ’70s Steelers, or the Montana/Walsh 49ers. Some people would say they didn’t suffer enough.

        When it comes down to it, championship competition is purely about beating the competition to determine who is the best: Landry’s Cowboys had ample opportunities to play these respective dynasties (Lombardi’s Packers; Super Bowl ’70s Steelers; Montana/Walsh 49ers), lost to them all constantly without as much as ONE victory, these teams emerged as champions…End of discussion.

        • Rasputin
          March 24, 2018
          Reply

          You asked who was the better player, not who had a better 2 games. Drew Pearson was the better player. And, unlike lots of guys in the HoF, he has a SB ring too. So check that box off.

          Here’s a partial list of players Chuck Howley is better than and should have been inducted earlier than:

          Dave Robinson, Dick LeBeau, Robert Brazile, Jerry Kramer, Kenny Easley, Ken Stabler, Dick Stanfel, Mick Tingelhoff, Claude Humphrey, Curley Culp, Jack Butler, Les Richter, Chris Hanburger, Floyd Little, Dave Wilcox, Emmitt Thomas, Charlie Sanders, Roger Wehrli, Gene Hickerson, Fred Dean, John Stallworth, Lynn Swann, Dan Hampton, Joe DeLamielleure, Ozzie Newsome, Henry Jordan, and Bob St. Clair.

          The full list is much longer.

          What’s hilarious about you emphasizing Swann’s SB performance and MVP award is that Chuck Howley was literally Super Bowl MVP too. He was considered for the award again the following year when they won because his play was so impactful.

          To answer your question, your posts constitute a meltdown due, among other things, to their irrationality.

          For example you completely ignoring quantity of seasons in discussions about proper HoF representation by franchise. More seasons = more players and more potential HoFers. Team A doesn’t have to be “better” than Team B during B’s short championship period to have as many great players if Team A existed much longer and/or sustained high success much longer. That’s why the lackluster Cardinals have 12 HoF players, and why you kept dodging any discussion of them on the other page.

          I never claimed the 60s Cowboys beat the Lombardi Packers (another sign of your meltdown are lengthy repetitions of insanely stupid rants, especially when 2 of the players I’m pushing for Canton weren’t even in the NFL yet) but those Packers didn’t last long. The Landry Cowboys certainly beat the Packers a lot overall and had many, many more elite seasons than Green Bay did. More players. More great players. The 70s Cowboys had at least 2 teams that were greater than any Lombardi’s Packers ever fielded in an individual season, but even if you disagree with that assessment the Dallas franchise was at or near the top much longer than Green Bay (and everyone else) was. That’s just a fact. It’s why you have to keep comparing 3 different dynasties and how they fared against the Landry Cowboys. Dallas was the constant among the NFL’s elite from the 60s through the 80s. You’re only proving my point.

          Same story with the 70s Steelers, whose run was great but only lasted a few years and consisted of the same group of players. Before that Landry’s Cowboys beat Pittsburgh 7 games in a row.

          SB wins matter but so do other wins, winning seasons, conference championships, playoff success, etc.. But even teams and players with no Super Bowl success show how underrepresented Dallas is in Canton.

          Landry also went 3-1 against the 49ers in the playoffs. On the other page I document how the 49ers have 7 HoF players from the 1950s-1970s, just as many as the Cowboys, despite SF sucking so bad they only had 4 playoff seasons in that entire span, 1 in 1957 and 3 in the early 1970s when the Cowboys beat them in all 3 of those postseasons.

          The Redskins have 6 HoF players from the 60s/70s, none of whom ever won a Super Bowl. By contrast every Cowboy HoFer has at least 1 SB ring. It’s like a requirement to have been SB champion to even be considered for Canton if you’re a Cowboy.

          As long as you continue to embarrass yourself by obtusely refusing to address these valid, logical points, but continue responding anyway with the same material over and over again that’s already been refuted and/or shown to be irrelevant (meaning your arguments have been debunked), and as long as I enjoy kicking you around, the discussion will continue.

  7. Scott Remington
    March 26, 2018
    Reply

    Had to put this on this post, too. It looks so damn GOOOD.

    Five (Lombardi’s Packers’ World Titles) is greater than two (Landry’s Cowboys meager World Title total); Four (Super Bowl ’70s Steelers World Titles; Montana/Walsh 49ers’ World Titles) is greater than two (Landry’s Cowboys meager World Title total); Stop bragging about dominating weak teams (Post-Lombardi Packers; Pre-’74, Post-’82 Steelers; Pre-Montana/Walsh 49ers; Pre-’85 Bears) while making excuses about being flushed by true dynasties constantly (0-13) without as much as even ONE win–all the while while lying to the world, saying, “We’re the better team.”

    I’m positive more misguided Rasputin ignorance is on the way. I live to expose you–constantly. Thank God, you can’t say #MeToo. LOL!!!

    • Rasputin
      March 27, 2018
      Reply

      Those “weak teams” matter because they have about as many or sometimes more HoFers than the entire Landry era Cowboys do, you idiot, as do numerous other teams who never won a Super Bowl or only won one, as I’ve documented while mopping the floor with you on the other page. You know…the page where you mistakenly posted your response to my partial list above of HoFers Howley is better than, LOL.

      Don’t worry, I had fun debunking that reply too on the other page.

      • Scott Remington
        March 27, 2018
        Reply

        Still can’t get by the fact that five (Lombardi’s Packers’ world titles) is greater than two (Landry’s Cowboys’ world titles), huh, Rasputin?

        On other fronts, have you found the formula to make two (Landry’s Cowboys’ world titles) greater than four (Super Bowl ’70s Steelers; Montana/Walsh 49ers’ world titles)?

        How about explaining to us in your own infinite Landry Cowboys Wisdom (translation: Rasputin knows just enough to know nothing) how a team (Landry’s Cowboys) that loses 13 straight games to bonafide dynasties is better than those juggernauts (Lombardi’s Pack; Super Bowl ’70s Steelers; Montana/Walsh 49ers)?

        • Rasputin
          March 28, 2018
          Reply

          You realize everyone can read what you posted and see that it doesn’t address what I posted, can’t you? In fact you dumbly doubled down on what I just mocked you for. Your reading comprehension is as poor as your math skills.

          • Scott Remington
            March 28, 2018

            “But I’ll add that I do appreciate you admitting on the other page that Howley was better than about half the names I listed above on this page…So either you don’t think half or more of those people belong in Canton, or you’re implicitly conceding Chuck Howley does.” Don’t try to be crafty because you are not. Of the LESS THAN HALF (“about half”…still trying to mislead readers, huh, Rasputin?) the players Howley was better than, that doesn’t even suggest I “concede” that Howley is a HOFer. Let’s say Willie Gault was undeservedly given a spot in the HOF. Wes Welker was a far better player than Gault. But I know Welker isn’t a HOFer, either. Can’t get away from your lying, deceptive ways and just accept the truth can you, Rasputin?

            Howley, Harris, and Pearson aren’t in the Hall of Fame because they don’t deserve to be in the Hall of Fame.

            Let’s look at some of the people who are in :

            Art Monk–Caught a lot of hitch passes. Hardly a game-changing, impactual receiver. The forerunner to Keyshawn Johnson and every other wideout who is able to manipulate (something you appreciate) the liberal passing era and the rules that handcuff pass defenders. Stat-padder.

            Bob Hayes–An experiment that worked out? Yes. Hall of Fame performer? No.

            Roger Werli–A starting corner on an annually weak defense. SMH. Even worse, voted to the All-Decade–SEVENTIES!–Team over Mel Blount. Ridiculous.

            Bob Griese–Infamous Game Managing QB.

            The HOF writers–the so-called “experts”–that you worship get it wrong sometimes as to who they put in (see above), who they make wait (Stabler, Swann, Stallworth, Kramer), and who they have failed to put in altogether (L.C. Greenwood, Johnny Robinson, Mike Curtis, Dwight Clark, Jack Tatum). But the exclusions of Howley, Harris, and Pearson are the right move.

            So I reiterate, still can’t get by the fact that five (Lombardi’s Packers’ world titles) is greater than two (Landry’s Cowboys’ world titles), huh, Rasputin?

            On other fronts, have you found the formula to make two (Landry’s Cowboys’ world titles) greater than four (Super Bowl ’70s Steelers; Montana/Walsh 49ers’ world titles)?

            How about explaining to us in your own infinite Landry Cowboys Wisdom (translation: Rasputin knows just enough to know nothing) how a team (Landry’s Cowboys) that loses 13 straight games to bonafide dynasties is better than those juggernauts (Lombardi’s Pack; Super Bowl ’70s Steelers; Montana/Walsh 49ers)?

            No injustice has been done to the Landry Cowboys. They have been treated fairly and all of the truly–TRULY–great Cowboys from that era are well-represented in the Hall of Fame.

            Interesting factoids on the All-Decade (’70s) team. You know, Rasputin, the one that Swann routed Drew Pearson on? :

            QB Votes: Bradshaw–13; Stabler–3; Staubach–3

            WR Votes: We know about Swann’s route of Pearson but check THIS out–Paul Warfield –5. Good to see the Voters covered there naked rear ends and put Warfield in the Hall over Pearson. Of course, he was shackled playing with a mediocre QB in South Beach.

            OT Votes: Art Shell–13; Rayfield Wright–12

            OG Votes: Joe DeLamielleure–12. No Cowboys to be found. BTW, Chuck Howley got NO Votes. Who did you say was the better player? LOL.

            DE Votes: L.C. Greenwood–10; Harvey Martin–5
            DT Votes: Joe Greene–18; Bob Lilly–16

            OLB Votes: Robert Brazile–5; Chuck Howley–ZERO. All of your “Half-Decade”, “‘Tweener” nonsense doesn’t hold water, Rasputin. Brazile came into the league in 1975 and STILL made an All-decade team, unlike Howley. Howley played THROUGHOUT the 1960s and couldn’t even make THAT team (Dave Robinson did–LOL)

            S Votes: Ken Houston–16; Cliff Harris–15. Houston was the best SS in the league until Ken Easley came along. Love the political maneuvering and ill-advised voting on the FS position. First off, Larry Wilson (7 undeserved votes) played only three years (’70-’72) of the decade and made the Pro Bowl ONE time–the first year, 1970. That must have been one hell of a season to represent an ENTIRE decade. The best FSs of the ’70s were Jack Tatum, Jake Scott and Mike Wagner. Each had more than ONE great season, more Super Bowl championships, and were more productive than Wilson in the ’70s. All three were more productive and smarter players than Harris. I suppose Tatum’s paralyzing hit (legal for that era) on Darryl Stingley, Scott’s alleged “point shaving (really?),” and the misconception that the Steelers’ front seven carried the Steelers’ secondary (poor Wagner) compelled the voters to manipulate–there’s that Rasputin characteristic again–Harris into that spot by default. Oh, well..

            Notice no Cowboy on the All-70s team was a bonafide leading vote-getter at his position? Given that this is the ’70s, notice that any Steeler that is a position representative has more votes than a Cowboy representative? In some cases the Cowboys have no representatives at all.

            Coup de grace? Coaches Votes: Shula–11; Noll–9. Sorry, Landry

        • Rasputin
          March 28, 2018
          Reply

          But I’ll add that I do appreciate you admitting on the other page that Howley was better than about half the names I listed above on this page. He’s actually better than all of them, but those guys represent most of the senior HoF inductions over the past couple of decades. So either you don’t think half or more of those people belong in Canton, or you’re implicitly conceding Chuck Howley does.

        • Rasputin
          March 28, 2018
          Reply

          You posted on the wrong page and even the wrong place here, doofus. And no, unlike you I’ve been straightforward and honest. Here are the best parts of your response on the other page about the names I listed above that Howley was better than:

          ““Dick LeBeau (Perhaps–Neither were Hall of Famers, though)…Dick Stanfel (Maybe); Mick Tingelhoff (Better but neither was a Hall of Famer); Claude Humphrey (See Dick LeBeau)….Jack Butler (See Dick LeBeau); Les Richter (See Dick LeBeau)…Floyd Little (OK)….Bob St. Clair (Probably)… Emmitt Thomas (Maybe… Charlie Sanders (Toss-up)… Roger Wehrli (toss-up)… Ozzie Newsome (Toss-up;)…”

          I basically listed the Senior HoF inductees of the past couple of decades or so and of those 27 names you conceded that Howley was either better than or a “toss up” with 12 of them (since we’ve established you suck at math that’s 44%, or “about half”), only (wrongly) arguing against 15.

          You’ve put Howley firmly mid-pack in the pool of seniors who have been enshrined in Canton in recent decades, which means if you don’t think he belongs then you think almost half the guys being inducted don’t belong either. And yet…..

          “The best FSs of the ’70s were Jack Tatum”

          LOL! I’ve never seen anyone stupid enough to argue for Tatum being All Decade or in the HoF except for this obnoxious Raiders fan who used to post here named Joseph Wright. A while back he fled the site after being humiliated and exposed as a rabid racial bigot. If he ever returns it might be under a different screenname, especially since his cherished team has abandoned his imploding city for Las Vegas.

          Apart from the Raiders having one of the worst pass defenses in the NFL during his career (the team’s biggest weakness), Tatum only made 3 Pro Bowls and 0 first team All Pros. Nope. Cliff Harris (6 Pro Bowls, 3 first team All Pros, consistently among the NFL’s best pass defenses, 4 SBs as a starter) was the right choice.

          About the only thing you said that’s true is that sometimes All Decade voters do make a mistake. Howley’s career straddled the decades but he played enough in the 60s that he should have been a slam dunk All Decade choice.

          With 5 Pro Bowls and 4 first team All Pro selections already, Howley was more qualified than Dave Robinson (3 Pro Bowls, 1 first team All Pro), let alone the Rams’ Larry Morris. Morris had zero Pro Bowls or other accolades and was even more unqualified than Jack Tatum would be a decade later.

          At least respected football historian John Turney has helped correct that oversight by naming Howley first team All Decade on the 1965-75 team.

          In all the rest of the debunked garbage you posted you never did answer my question about all those OTHER teams having more HoFers than the Landry Cowboys.

          Why should teams like the Bears, Colts, Oilers, Browns, Rams, Dolphins, Giants, Vikings, Redskins, etc. have more HoFers from the Landry era than the Cowboys do?

          And while even Landry era Dallas was more successful than the Raiders, Steelers, 49ers, and Packers across most metrics, even by your own “only SBs matter” logic why should all those teams have more HoFers from the 20th Century Super Bowl era than Dallas when the Cowboys won more Super Bowls than all of them except the 49ers, whom they’re even with, and were more successful than the 49ers across all other metrics?

          After all, the Cowboys’ 5 is more than the Steelers’ 4, the Raiders’ 3, and the Packers’ 2. Math again.

          Since you can’t make up your mind about which page you want to continue this discussion on, I’ll repost the ACTUAL coup de grace I delivered to you on the other page lower on this one too.

          That post will end the substantive portion of this debate. All that will be left is the mopping up.

          • Rasputin
            March 28, 2018

            Meant the Packers’ 3. Don’t want to shortchange Favre once new rules prematurely ended the Cowboys dynasty (as it would have any of the earlier ones) and made room for him. Still less than the Cowboys’ 5 that century though.

          • Scott Remington
            March 29, 2018

            Five (Lombardi’s Packers world titles) is greater than two (Landry Cowboys’ meager world title total–achieved WITHOUT a repeat) and Four (Super Bowl ’70s Steelers; Monatana/Walsh 49ers world titles) is greater than two (Landry Cowboys’ meager world title total–achieved WITHOUT a repeat). Even Three (Raiders titles–all achieved within Landry Cowboys’ era) is greater than two (Landry Cowboys’ meager world title total).

            Landry Cowboys: Dynasty my ass.

          • Rasputin
            March 29, 2018

            5 20th Century Cowboys true world championships (including 3 in 4 years), with all 5 SB wins by double digits (dominance), are greater than the Steelers’ 4, the Raiders’ 3, and the Packers’ 3.

            Even the Landry era’s 16(!) double digit winning seasons are greater than the Packer’s 6, the 49ers’ 8, the Steelers’ 8, and the Raiders’ 13 during that span. The Landry Cowboys’ 18 playoff seasons are greater than the Packers’ 8, the 49ers’ 10, the Steelers’ 11, and the Raiders’ 15.

            Almost 3 times as many elite, double digit seasons as the Packers and twice as many as the 49ers and the Steelers during the Landry era. The Cowboys had 8-10 more YEARS of those under Landry. That represents the length of entire CAREERS, which is why it matters in a discussion about the number of potential HoFers.

  8. Rasputin
    March 28, 2018
    Reply

    To drive the point home with facts….

    Landry Era 1960-1988

    Primary HoF Players (excluding rookie season)
    Packers – 14 (2 with no SB ring)
    Redskins – 10 (6 with no SB ring)
    Bears – 10 (5 with no SB ring)
    Colts – 9 (5 with no SB ring)
    Oilers – 9 (8 with no SB ring)
    Browns – 9 (8 with no SB ring)
    Rams – 9 (9 with no SB ring)
    Dolphins – 8 (2 with no SB ring)
    Giants – 8 (6 with no SB ring)
    Vikings – 8 (7 with no SB ring)
    Chiefs – 7 (0 with no SB ring)
    COWBOYS – 7 (0 with no SB ring)
    Lions – 6 (6 with no SB ring)
    Bills – 6 (6 with no SB ring)
    Chargers – 5 (4 with no SB ring)
    Eagles – 5 (4 with no SB ring)
    Cardinals – 4 (4 with no SB ring)

    Regular Season Wins
    COWBOYS –250
    Browns – 238
    Rams – 236
    Redskins – 224
    Vikings – 218
    Bears – 213
    Colts – 211
    Chargers – 210
    Packers – 208
    Dolphins – 205
    Chiefs – 205
    Cardinals – 193
    Giants – 188
    Lions – 186
    Oilers – 183
    Eagles – 178
    Bills – 176

    Playoff Wins
    COWBOYS – 20
    Dolphins – 14
    Redskins – 13
    Vikings – 12
    Packers – 10
    Oilers – 8
    Rams – 8
    Giants – 6
    Bears – 6
    Colts – 6
    Chiefs – 5
    Browns – 5
    Chargers – 4
    Eagles – 4
    Bills – 4
    Lions – 0
    Cardinals – 0

    Super Bowl Wins
    COWBOYS – 2
    Packers – 2
    Dolphins – 2
    Redskins – 2
    Giants – 1
    Bears – 1
    Chiefs -1
    Colts – 1
    Oilers – 0
    Browns – 0
    Rams -0
    Vikings – 0
    Lions – 0
    Bills – 0
    Chargers – 0
    Eagles -0
    Cardinals – 0

    Conference Championships
    COWBOYS – 5
    Dolphins – 5
    Redskins – 4
    Vikings – 4
    Packers – 2 (3 pre-1966 NFL titles)
    Chiefs – 2 (1 pre-1966 AFL title)
    Colts – 2
    Giants – 1
    Bears – 1 (1 pre-1966 NFL title)
    Eagles – 1 (1 pre-1966 NFL title)
    Rams – 1
    Oilers – 0 (2 pre-1966 AFL titles)
    Browns – 0 (1 pre-1966 NFL title)
    Lions – 0
    Bills – 0 (2 pre-1966 AFL titles)
    Chargers – 0 (1 pre-1966 AFL title)
    Cardinals – 0

    Conference Championship Game Appearances
    COWBOYS – 12
    Dolphins – 6
    Rams – 6
    Vikings – 6
    Redskins – 5
    Browns – 5
    Bears – 3
    Colts – 3
    Oilers – 3
    Packers – 2
    Chiefs – 2
    Bills – 2
    Chargers – 2
    Giants – 1
    Eagles – 1
    Lions – 0
    Cardinals – 0

    Division Championships
    COWBOYS – 13
    Vikings – 11
    Dolphins – 10
    Rams – 10
    Browns – 10
    Colts – 9
    Packers – 8
    Chargers – 8
    Bears – 6
    Bills – 6
    Redskins – 5
    Giants – 4
    Chiefs – 4
    Oilers – 4
    Eagles – 3
    Cardinals – 2
    Lions – 1

    Winning Seasons (more wins than losses, excluding ties)
    COWBOYS – 20
    Browns – 20
    Rams – 19
    Dolphins – 15
    Redskins – 15
    Vikings – 15
    Colts – 15
    Chargers – 15
    Chiefs – 13
    Bears – 12
    Giants – 11
    Oilers – 11
    Bills – 11
    Cardinals – 11
    Packers – 11
    Lions – 10
    Eagles – 8

    Double Digit Winning Seasons
    COWBOYS – 16
    Rams – 14
    Dolphins – 13
    Redskins – 10
    Browns – 10
    Colts – 9
    Vikings – 8
    Oilers – 8
    Bears – 7
    Giants – 6
    Packers – 6
    Chiefs – 6
    Eagles – 6
    Chargers – 6
    Bills – 5
    Cardinals – 3
    Lions – 2

    Playoff Seasons
    COWBOYS -18
    Rams – 15
    Vikings – 14
    Browns – 13
    Dolphins – 12
    Redskins – 10
    Oilers – 10
    Colts – 9
    Chargers – 9
    Packers – 8
    Bears – 8
    Bills – 8
    Giants – 7
    Chiefs – 6
    Eagles – 6
    Lions – 3
    Cardinals – 3

    The Cowboys were more successful than any of those teams in the Landry era, vastly more successful than most of them, and yet in HoFers are down around the lowly Lions, Eagles, etc. and only 3 above the freaking Cardinals. The Cardinals!

    I’ll list the 3 teams with more SB wins than Dallas in the Landry era separately. Lest one assumes they have more HoFers than Dallas simply because they won more Super Bowls, I’ll show that many of their HoFers came from outside their SB dynasties. In fact instead of just the Landry era I’ll show that these other teams have more HoFers than Dallas from the Cowboys’ founding through the end of the 90s (the team’s first 40 years of existence) despite NONE of them winning more Super Bowls than the Cowboys in that span. I’ll also add the Packers here for fun even though they only equaled the Cowboys in SB wins in the Landry era.

    1960-1999

    Primary HoF Players
    Packers – 16 (2 with no SB ring)
    Steelers – 15 (5 with no SB ring)
    49ers – 14 (8 with no SB ring)
    Raiders – 14 (3 with no SB ring)
    COWBOYS – 13 (0 with no SB ring)

    Super Bowl Wins
    COWBOYS – 5
    49ers – 5
    Steelers – 4
    Raiders – 3
    Packers – 3

    Conference Championships
    COWBOYS – 8
    49ers – 5
    Steelers – 5
    Raiders – 4
    Packers – 4 (3 pre-1966 NFL titles)

    Conference Championship Game Appearances
    COWBOYS – 16
    49ers – 12
    Raiders – 12
    Steelers – 10
    Packers – 5

    Regular Season Wins
    COWBOYS – 352
    Raiders – 348
    49ers – 334
    Steelers – 315
    Packers – 311

    Playoff Wins
    COWBOYS – 32
    49ers – 24
    Steelers – 21
    Raiders – 21
    Packers – 19

    Division Championships
    COWBOYS – 19
    49ers – 16
    Steelers – 14
    Raiders – 13
    Packers – 11

    Winning Seasons (more wins than losses, excluding ties)
    COWBOYS – 27
    49ers – 25
    Raiders – 25
    Steelers – 23
    Packers – 20

    Double Digit Winning Seasons
    COWBOYS – 23
    49ers – 18
    Raiders – 15
    Steelers – 13
    Packers – 11

    Playoff Seasons
    COWBOYS – 26
    49ers – 19
    Steelers – 18
    Raiders – 18
    Packers -14

    Once again the Cowboys have been the most successful team, leading every category like above, but have the fewest HoFers. Especially telling is the fact that the Cowboys have almost twice as many playoff seasons and MORE than twice as many double digit winning seasons as the Packers, both metrics indicating elite status, and yet the Packers have the most HoFers from that era.

    The Cowboys are the most underrepresented team in Canton given their success on the field. Inducting 3 Landry era players….

    Chuck Howley
    Cliff Harris
    Drew Pearson

    ….who are all long overdue anyway, would rectify this. It would be bring the Landry total up to 10, still below the Packers, 49ers, Steelers, and Raiders, but even with the Redskins and slightly above the Vikings and those many other teams listed above, which would be more fitting. It would take the all time Dallas total to 16, tying the Super Bowl era Packers, which would be appropriate since the Cowboys have won more Super Bowls and dominate across metrics.

    Since the Steelers’ last 2 SBs have been too recent for those HoF players to become eligible, at this point the Cowboys should have the most HoFers from the Super Bowl era. Only the 49ers won as many in the 20th Century, and the Cowboys won more conference championship games, won more total games, and had more playoff and winning seasons.

  9. Scott Remington
    March 29, 2018
    Reply

    Stay focused, Rasputin. I thought we were talking about that “Landry Cowboys Dynasty?” All you’re doing is sneaking in the jimmy Johnson Dynasty.

    Five (Lombardi’s Packers world titles) is greater than two (Landry Cowboys’ meager world title total–achieved WITHOUT a repeat) and Four (Super Bowl ’70s Steelers; Monatana/Walsh 49ers world titles) is greater than two (Landry Cowboys’ meager world title total–achieved WITHOUT a repeat). Even Three (Raiders world titles–all achieved within Landry Cowboys’ era) is greater than two (Landry Cowboys’ meager world title total).

    That’s ALL the math and logic I need.

    • Rasputin
      March 30, 2018
      Reply

      No, what about the Landry era Bears, Oilers, Browns, Rams, Colts, Dolphins, Giants, Vikings, Redskins, and Chiefs who have more HoFers than the Cowboys but certainly not more Super Bowl wins or even as many except for the Dolphins and Redskins (whom the Cowboys dominate in other metrics)?

      Even the Lions, Bills, Chargers, and Eagles are close, within 2 HoFers, and the Cardinals are only 3 HoFers behind the Cowboys.

      Can you at least agree that there’s something wrong with that?

      “Stay focused, Rasputin. I thought we were talking about that “Landry Cowboys Dynasty?” All you’re doing is sneaking in the jimmy Johnson Dynasty.”

      Alright. I mercifully accept your concession that the Cowboys overall are underrepresented in Canton, given that they have fewer HoFers but more 20th Century Super Bowl wins than the Steelers, Raiders, and Packers, are even with the 49ers, but best the 49ers and those other teams across salient metrics like conference championships, playoff wins, playoff seasons, winning seasons, double digit winning seasons, division titles, etc., largely due to the Landry era, btw.

      “That’s ALL the math and logic I need.”

      Apparently not, LOL.

      • Scott Remington
        March 31, 2018
        Reply

        It all comes down to the world championships. The regular season success gets you into the post season. What do you do with it world championship-wise when you get there? Two world titles out of 29 seasons is not much of an average, let alone a dynasty. Get accepted into a bonafide college, learn that, and then you will graduate. Even if we giv the Landry Cowboys a world title run of two out of seven (1971-77) that doesn’t best the Lombardi Packers (1961-67; five of seven), the Super Bowl ’70s Steelers (1974-79; four of six), Montana/Walsh 49ers (1981-89; four of nine) or even the Raiders (not a dynasty 1976-83; three of eight). Landry’s Cowboys claim to a dynasty is a lost cause.

        • Anonymous
          March 31, 2018
          Reply

          Well we can disagree on that, but at least we agree that the Cowboys are underrepresented in Canton.

        • Rasputin
          March 31, 2018
          Reply

          We can disagree on that, but at least we agree that the Cowboys are underrepresented in Canton.

          • Scott Remington
            April 2, 2018

            The fact that you don’t believe its’s all about world championships is sheer lunacy. What do you mean “we,” Mr. Lover of Underachievers (two world titles in 29 years; two world titles in 20 winning seasons; two world titles in whatever many postseason appearances)? I never wrote the Landry Cowboys were “underrepresented” in the Hall of Fame. Don’t libel me. They are well-represented. It’s conceivable they are overrepresented (Bob Hayes was not a Hall of Famer; And if L.C. Greenwood is not a Hall of Famer then neither is Rayfield Wright–the man Greenwood destroyed regularly).

          • Rasputin
            April 2, 2018

            2 Super Bowl wins is more than most of those other teams I listed, Mr. Hypocrite. The discussion here has always been about HoF representation given team success. Even if one accepts your wrong and idiotic premise that the 2017 Patriots and 2017 Browns were equally successful, by your own “its’s all about world championships” logic Dallas should have more HoFers than those other teams. So thank you for showing for all to see that you’re just a mindless Cowboys hater with zero credibility.

            PS – Bob Hayes is definitely a HoFer. He averaged more TDs/game over his first two seasons than Randy Moss did. People can remember the hype accompanying Moss “tearing up the league”, so imagine the impact Hayes had in the mid-1960s when passing stats were way less inflated. He helped revolutionize the game and is the fastest serious player in NFL history. He’s a textbook example of “you can’t tell the story of the NFL without him”. Oh, and unlike Moss, Hayes won a Super Bowl.

            And Rayfield Wright and Greenwood didn’t even play “regularly”, so ditch that nonsense. Your comment would be more true of Erik Williams dominating Reggie White in the 90s, and they played a lot more often. Wright is considered by even many non Cowboys fans to be the greatest pass blocker of that era.

          • Scott Remington
            April 2, 2018

            “2 Super Bowl wins is more than most of those other teams I listed, Mr. Hypocrite. The discussion here has always been about HoF representation given team success. Even if one accepts your wrong and idiotic premise that the 2017 Patriots and 2017 Browns were equally successful…”

            Still trying to twist and manipulate words and ideas to exonerate yourself from the stupid proclamation that the Landry Cowboys were a “dynasty,” huh, Mr. Never-Was-Accepted-into-Therefore-Never-Graduated-from-College? The discussion has always been about how the Landry Cowboys were never a dynasty. It facts won’t go away. “The Landry Dynasty” is a stupid thing to say. Simply because they weren’t. Like Lombardi’s Packers, the Super Bowl ’70s Steelers, or the Montana/Walsh 49ers. None of whom ever lost to the Landry Cowboys (Landry’s Cowboys were 0-13 for those like Rasputin who forgot).

            As for more Rasputin ignorance: “He’s (Bob Hayes) a textbook example of ‘you can’t tell the story of the NFL without him’. Oh, and unlike Moss, Hayes won a Super Bowl.”

            Is it that we can’t tell the NFL story because he helped Lombardi’s Packers win the Ice Bowl by keeping his hands inside the crouch of his pants whenever the Cowboys ran the ball, thus tipping off the plays to Dave Robinson, Willie Wood, and Herb Adderley and other Hall of Fame Packer defenders?

            Perhaps Moss didn’t win a Super Bowl his rookie year because his defense allowed the Falcons’ journeyman QB that year to drive his team 73 yards with under two minutes to go as easily as a man walking his dog to tie the game and force overtime? Perhaps Hayes has that ring thanks to the fortunate fact that Pete Rozelle ordered the Patriots to return Duane Thomas to the Cowboys after the Cowboys foolishly traded him (They STILL made the same, boneheaded move after he carried the offense–Hayes was a virtual nonfactor–with 95 yards rushing; Landry’s Cowboys never win another Super Bowl until Tony Dorsett is in the starting lineup years later; Did the ’70s Steelers ever do that to Franco Harris? Did the ’80s ‘Niners ever do that to Roger Craig?)

            Of course this idiot couldn’t stop: “And Rayfield Wright and Greenwood didn’t even play “regularly”, so ditch that nonsense.”

            During the Steelers Super Bowl run, they played each other four times in a five-year span (1975-79) including three seasons in a row.
            In the two Super Bowls, Greenwood went through Wright for five sacks (four in Super Bowl X alone) and in their last matchup in ’79, Greenwood finished Staubach for the game with a sack over Rayfield Wright.

            Randy Moss “tore up the league” his rookie year, highlighted by his Thanksgiving performance when he “tore up” the Dallas Cowboys. Faceplant, Rasputin.

            Super Bo

          • Rasputin
            April 3, 2018

            “It facts won’t go away.”

            Sure, Mr. “College Graduate”. Your posting indicates you never finished junior high, let alone ever attended college. I’ll keep calling the Landry Cowboys a “dynasty” because it makes you cry and throw a tantrum if nothing else, but no, as anyone reading my posts here can see, the discussion started and has always been about HoFers. Certainly my first post here was (I didn’t even mention the word “dynasty”, halfwit), and the entire article on the other page was about tying HoFer count to team success.

            So you can’t read well, Scott. You can’t do math. You can’t think. You’re ignorant. You suck at logic. You’re a hypocrite. You’re a moron. You’re a coward who keeps trying to dodge substantive debate.

            But you’ve conceded key points, maybe without being smart enough to realize it at the time, certainly without being man enough to cop to it afterwards, and have contradicted yourself in ways fatal to your position.

            You’ve conceded that Chuck Howley is at least as good as about half of the senior HoF inductees over the past couple of decades.

            You’ve made arguments for players who didn’t win the Super Bowl to be in the HoF, from Dave Wilcox to Kenny Easley, and yet only want to judge Bob Hayes on a couple of games against teams with great defenses, one in record inclement weather where neither offense looked good.

            Yet you ignore Chuck Howley’s awesome big (and regular season) game performances, like when he recovered a fumble and returned an interception from HoF QB Bob Griese 41 yards to seal the win in SB VI. Those performances don’t matter in your book if they’re from Cowboys. You give Cliff Harris no credit for winning 2 Super Bowls and 4 conference championships as a starter, even after I educated your with pass defense rankings before and after his retirement clearly showing his enormous personal contribution to Doomsday’s success.

            You’ve argued against the Landry Cowboys having any more HoFers than they already do because they supposedly weren’t the “dynasty” that the 60s Packers, 70s Steelers, or 80s 49ers were, despite the fact that we’re talking about 29 years here instead of just 6 to 9, and a lot more winning and success for Dallas than those teams across most metrics.

            But then you’re fine with teams like the Bears, Vikings, Rams, etc. having more HoFers from the Landry era than the Cowboys despite those teams winning one or zero Super Bowls, and also having way less success across other metrics.

            And you flee any portion of the discussion about all time Totals, where the facts show the Cowboys have fewer HoFers than teams with fewer Super Bowls do. You cry something like “we aren’t discussing Jimmy Johnson’s Cowboys!” (even when comparing them specifically to Marv Levy’s Bills?) and run away leaving a thin trail of urine behind.

            Your position collapses. You’ve debunked yourself, Scott. You’re the faceplanter.

            On individual merit, in addition to revolutionizing the league with his speed, in his first two years Hayes was the catalyst that took the Cowboys to their first non-losing and winning seasons in 65 and 66. He made their offense explosive and the Cowboys were suddenly around the NFL’s elite (where they would stay through the mid-80s). In the 1971 Super Bowl season you mentioned Hayes led Dallas in receiving yards (one of 5 years he did that) and receiving TDs with 8 (tied for 2nd with 3 were RB Calvin Hill and a backup WR). Lance Alworth only had about half as many yards and 2 TDs. Hayes was a huge reason they were a Super Bowl team that year. So yeah, he definitely earned that ring.

            As for Wright and Greenwood, 4 games isn’t playing “regularly”, moron. Erik Williams played Reggie White at least 11 times, with Williams usually getting the best of it. White is widely considered to be the greatest DE of all time. Erik Williams isn’t even in the HoF. Your lame argument is too narrow and falls flat, like most of the rest of the crap you’ve spewed.

            If you just didn’t want the Cowboys to be recognized as being on par with the 60s Packers, merely inducting 3 more to bring the Landry era total to 10 (which is all I’ve called for here) shouldn’t bother you. That would leave them short of what teams like the Packers, Steelers, and 49ers have from the Landry era but rightly elevate them higher than the mix they’re in with teams like the Chiefs, Vikings, Lions(!), and others, and would tie them with the Landry era Bears.

            That you even oppose that exposes you as a mindless hater of the Cowboys, useful only as a prop and for unintentional amusement.

            “Super Bo”

            You sort of trailed off there at the end.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published.