Does Parcells belong in the Pats HOF?

[Ring 6]

Unfortunately for the Parcells Haters the "media, staff and alumni who meet each year to nominate the three former Patriots players or head coaches who they feel are most deserving of Hall of Fame induction" don't seem to agree with your assessment that Parcells is so undeserving of the HoF.

Should he get in this year or in the future, I'll look forward to hearing your recipes for crow.

Whether or not he is voted in does not change my opinion.

 

[Ring 6]

Yes... and apparently the Patriots staff and alumni have the same "blind spot" for nominating him.

Too bad they're just not as smart as anonymous message board posters.

Good job staff.... you too alumni

They are entitled to their opinion, and if they ever do vote him, they are entitled to that. That doesnt mean their opinion is any more correct than anyone else.

 

[JoeSixPat]

They are entitled to their opinion, and if they ever do vote him, they are entitled to that. That doesnt mean their opinion is any more correct than anyone else.

Well actually the former players, staff, and media already voted in favor of Parcells as it's their task to select 3 individuals "worthy" of being in the Hall.

So THEY obviously feel he's worthy. They just forgot to check with you first.

 

[Ring 6]

Well actually the former players, staff, and media already voted in favor of Parcells as it's their task to select 3 individuals "worthy" of being in the Hall.

So THEY obviously feel he's worthy. They just forgot to check with you first.

They feel he is worthy of nomination. I dont. How hard is that for you to get?
You seem to have given up on your argument that he was the reason Kraft bought the team and moved on to answering the question of "He was nominated, does he belong" with the only ones qualified to answer that are the ones who nominated. Sorry, I don't find that convincing.
I assume your lack of response to my posts regarding the "Kraft only bought the team because of Parcells" argument means you concede after I brought facts in?

 

[RayClay]

Well actually the former players, staff, and media already voted in favor of Parcells as it's their task to select 3 individuals "worthy" of being in the Hall.

So THEY obviously feel he's worthy. They just forgot to check with you first.

They thought Ron Burton was worthy. Look up his stats, i can't be bothered again.

 

[Ring 6]

Well actually the former players, staff, and media already voted in favor of Parcells as it's their task to select 3 individuals "worthy" of being in the Hall.

So THEY obviously feel he's worthy. They just forgot to check with you first.

Here is the list.
18 media members
3 'staff' Ernie Adams, a statistician and an equipment manager
3 former players

That is 75% media, so the argument of Parcells being media friendly going a long way toward his nomination seems reasonable.
I don't see how this list is one that I should abrogate my opinion to.

The 2010 committeeErnie AdamsFootball staffRon BorgesBoston HeraldAlbert BreerBoston GlobeDon BrocherPatriots Equipment ManagerSteve BurtonWBZDick CerasuoloRetired from Worcester TelegramTom CurranComcast.comJim DonaldsonProvidence JournalMark FarinellaAttleboro SunGlen FarleyBrockton EnterpriseSteve GroganAlumniJohn HendryStatisticianMichael HolleyWEEICarlo ImelioRetired from Springfield Union NewsMike LynchWCVBBryan MorryThe Hall at Patriot Place presented by RaytheonPaul PerilloPatriots Football WeeklyChris PriceWEEI.comMike ReissESPNBoston.comMatt SmithPatriots All AccessButch StearnsWEEILen St. JeanAlumniAndre TippettAlumniHoward UlmanAssociated Press

 

[Ring 6]

By the way, if Parcells does not get in this year, he may have a very, very long wait as the dynasty guys starting with Troy Brown start becoming eligible next year.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Here is the list.
18 media members
3 'staff' Ernie Adams, a statistician and an equipment manager
3 former players

That is 75% media, so the argument of Parcells being media friendly going a long way toward his nomination seems reasonable.
I don't see how this list is one that I should abrogate my opinion to.

The 2010 committeeErnie AdamsFootball staffRon BorgesBoston HeraldAlbert BreerBoston GlobeDon BrocherPatriots Equipment ManagerSteve BurtonWBZDick CerasuoloRetired from Worcester TelegramTom CurranComcast.comJim DonaldsonProvidence JournalMark FarinellaAttleboro SunGlen FarleyBrockton EnterpriseSteve GroganAlumniJohn HendryStatisticianMichael HolleyWEEICarlo ImelioRetired from Springfield Union NewsMike LynchWCVBBryan MorryThe Hall at Patriot Place presented by RaytheonPaul PerilloPatriots Football WeeklyChris PriceWEEI.comMike ReissESPNBoston.comMatt SmithPatriots All AccessButch StearnsWEEILen St. JeanAlumniAndre TippettAlumniHoward UlmanAssociated Press

Ah - good move... let's start insulting the selection committee for determining that Bill Parcells is worthy of the Patriots Hall of Fame despite your insistence otherwise.

I mean, what do they all know about football anyways. They really should have checked with all of us first.

 

[Rob0729]

Like I said the media has a blind spot for Parcells. Of course he is going to get their vote. BTW I think the Benedict Arnold analogy was a great one and really apropos, Good job Lurker....you too Andy

Exactly which media members are these? Parcells left the Patriots 15 years ago. Back then, guys like Kevin Mannix, Ron Hobson, and Will McDonough covered the team. Looking at some of the media members who voted last year, many of them weren't even reporters in Boston sports until after Parcells left. Mike Reiss got his first job covering the Pats in 1997 after Parcells left. Chris Price wasn't even in New England during the Parcells years. Michael Holley was working for the Cleveland Plain Dealer during the Parcells years. Albert Breer was still in grade school during the Parcell years. Butch Stearns was in Minnesota and then Detriot during the Parcell years. Tom Curran started to cover the team in 1997 for the Metrowest daily news.

On last year's nomination committee, I only see three media people who would have ever had any contact with Parcells while he was here - Ron Burton, Mike Lynch, and Ron Borges. I assume this year's make up isn't much different. Even potential guys who might replace some of the other guys on the list wouldn't have had contact with Parcells. Felger was covering the Bruins during the Parcells years. Ian Rappaport and Christopher Gasper were both in school during those years.

I could see if many of the guys who were covering Parcells were voting that they might have a soft or blind spot for Parcells, but most of those guys are retired or deceased. Most of the media member voters on the committee have had no more contact with Parcells than we have. Many of them come into the vote with the same insight of the Parcells years that we all have. Guys like Breers (he was a student in Sudbury during those years) were nothing more than Patriots fans during the Parcells years and might have some of the same betrayal feelings as many on this board do.

 

[Ring 6]

Ah - good move... let's start insulting the selection committee for determining that Bill Parcells is worthy of the Patriots Hall of Fame despite your insistence otherwise.

I mean, what do they all know about football anyways. They really should have checked with all of us first.

Not insulting them at all, I just happen to disagree.
Again, your only argument seems to be we must blindly agree with the opinion of a group of people largely made up of the media members we typically often disagree with.
I guess since you agree with their opinion in this case they are infallible? I suppose this means you will never disagree with Borges again because it would be insulting to disagree with the opinion of such a football genius as he is?

 

[patfanken]

Exactly which media members are these? Parcells left the Patriots 15 years ago. Back then, guys like Kevin Mannix, Ron Hobson, and Will McDonough covered the team. Looking at some of the media members who voted last year, many of them weren't even reporters in Boston sports until after Parcells left. Mike Reiss got his first job covering the Pats in 1997 after Parcells left. Chris Price wasn't even in New England during the Parcells years. Michael Holley was working for the Cleveland Plain Dealer during the Parcells years. Albert Breer was still in grade school during the Parcell years. Butch Stearns was in Minnesota and then Detriot during the Parcell years. Tom Curran started to cover the team in 1997 for the Metrowest daily news.

On last year's nomination committee, I only see three media people who would have ever had any contact with Parcells while he was here - Ron Burton, Mike Lynch, and Ron Borges. I assume this year's make up isn't much different. Even potential guys who might replace some of the other guys on the list wouldn't have had contact with Parcells. Felger was covering the Bruins during the Parcells years. Ian Rappaport and Christopher Gasper were both in school during those years.

I could see if many of the guys who were covering Parcells were voting that they might have a soft or blind spot for Parcells, but most of those guys are retired or deceased. Most of the media member voters on the committee have had no more contact with Parcells than we have. Many of them come into the vote with the same insight of the Parcells years that we all have. Guys like Breers (he was a student in Sudbury during those years) were nothing more than Patriots fans during the Parcells years and might have some of the same betrayal feelings as many on this board do.

Good points Robo, BUT.....virtually every one of those reporters have covered Parcells in the course of their jobs. It wasn't as if Parcells left the league during the years he wasn't with the Pats. He was covered by most of those guys when he was in NY, Dallas and Miami, PLUS his stint as a media member himself.

Listen, I'd go out of my way to listen to a Parcells presser, but that isn't a reason to put him in the Pats HOFt

He was only here 4 years. He had 2 good seasons and brought Pats some good press....and then there are the negatives.... But we've been through that already.

Like Lurker wrote.... Benedict Arnold was a true war hero. His record during the war of Independence was filled not only with brilliant strategy, but personal bravery. A great Patriot.....right up until he gave the keys to West Point to the British. He too had a problem with "ownership" and he too took his talents to the "other side".

Well you won't find Benedict Arnold being nominated for any Revolutionary War HOF....nor should he be.....and neither should Parcells.... Actually when it comes right down to it, Arnold had more justification for his act of betrayal than Parcells did.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Like Lurker wrote.... Benedict Arnold was a true war hero. His record during the war of Independence was filled not only with brilliant strategy, but personal bravery. A great Patriot.....right up until he gave the keys to West Point to the British. He too had a problem with "ownership" and he too took his talents to the "other side".

Well you won't find Benedict Arnold being nominated for any Revolutionary War HOF....nor should he be.....and neither should Parcells.... Actually when it comes right down to it, Arnold had more justification for his act of betrayal than Parcells did.

I've run various enterprises. Over time, some valued upper management employees would leave and go elsewhere. Although we hated to see them depart, it was their right to explore other job options.

This is not what happened with The Tuner. Instead, he spent his time on the payroll calling the Jets back and forth, distracting his coaching preparation for the SB and letting his players down when they needed him most. See Belichick's opinion about this so not HOF conduct. Then after the game he slinks off into the night skipping the plane ride home with his players. This is not the kind of departure a HOF coach executes. The poison pill offer to CM was simply more of the same type behavior, subsequently outlawed. Great legacy move there.

 

[Rob0729]

Good points Robo, BUT.....virtually every one of those reporters have covered Parcells in the course of their jobs. It wasn't as if Parcells left the league during the years he wasn't with the Pats. He was covered by most of those guys when he was in NY, Dallas and Miami, PLUS his stint as a media member himself.

Listen, I'd go out of my way to listen to a Parcells presser, but that isn't a reason to put him in the Pats HOFt

He was only here 4 years. He had 2 good seasons and brought Pats some good press....and then there are the negatives.... But we've been through that already.

Like Lurker wrote.... Benedict Arnold was a true war hero. His record during the war of Independence was filled not only with brilliant strategy, but personal bravery. A great Patriot.....right up until he gave the keys to West Point to the British. He too had a problem with "ownership" and he too took his talents to the "other side".

Well you won't find Benedict Arnold being nominated for any Revolutionary War HOF....nor should he be.....and neither should Parcells.... Actually when it comes right down to it, Arnold had more justification for his act of betrayal than Parcells did.

Just because Parcells gives a good press conference doesn't mean that any of the media members who have never had any direct contact with the guy or interviewed him once or twice over their career have any soft spot for the guy. I doubt anyone would nominate him because they laughed at his press conference. I assume the members take this role seriously and put in a lot of effort and try to remain objective in their nominations.

As for the Bennedict Arnold references, that is a bit harsh. Parcells was interviewing for jobs during the week before the Super Bowl which is an unforgivable act, but he didn't give Mike Holmgren the Pats' playbook or gameplan before the Super Bowl.

I look at Parcells like Joe Namath. Namath got into the Hall not because of his play on the field, but because of his guarantee to win the Super Bowl. That event along with his team backing up the guarantee (although Namath didn't have a great game) gave legitimacy to the AFL and changed the landscape of the NFL. I think Parcells gave the Pats legitimacy that helped (although not the only factor at all) to set forth events that kept the Pats in New England and helped to create the Belichick dynasty. I don't think he deserves to get in based solely on his record and on the field accomplishments.

 

[Triumph]

Worthless?!? Acres and acres of land on a major road (RTE1) with a housing boom in effect in 1994? That land could have turned into upscale homes, retail center, amusement park, or whatever. The land was certainly not worthless without the Patriots. In fact at the time, spending on one or several of those options on the land would have been considered the safer and more profitable bet.

Why would Kraft consider moving the team to CT if he knew would make the land worthless? Kraft was already rumored to be talking with Six Flags and other companies to build an amusement park in the area if the team moved to CT.

The land had a lot of options if the Pats did move. Kraft saw that the team had the potential to be really popular in this state which would make paying to keep the team the better option and part of that has to do with what Parcells did when he got here.

To argue that Kraft's only options were to buy the Patriots or take a match to the place and collect the insurance money is a falicy. The land had lots of value whether the Pats stayed or not. In hindsight, he made the correct option to buy the team which ended up being a bargain. But at the time, a lot of smart business people would have been happy to let the Pats leave and develop that land into homes or retail or something else that could generate a lot of money.

Krafts first choice was to make improvents to the existing stadium in Foxboro and near his property. He was met with opposition at all fronts. Then, he started looking at other locations around Boston. Again, more red tape and road blocks. Mass only came around to the orginal Foxboro plan when it was announced that Conn would vote on the Pats Hartford stadium and there was an actual threat that Kraft was serious about moving the team.

Playing hard ball is nothing new, every time an NFL team desires a new venue and meets resistance, ownership threatens to relocate eventually getting their way. It worked with the Browns. The Chargers are threatening to move, there are rumblings the Vikings will go to L.A.

If Kraft was moving to Hartford all along, he waited until that was his last option.

I was down in the Gillette area few years ago on a weekday. It was a ghost town save for a few folks at the Pats Pro shop. Hard to believe land so valuable and profitable wasnt developed into Six Flags, housing developments and shopping. I guess seedy hotels and car dealerships are making a fortune down there.

 

[Triumph]

Also, the ticket sales were not because the fans were showing their appreciation to Kraft.

They bought the tickets because there was a renewed interest in the team because of Parcells and Bledsoe and Kraft guaranteed the team was staying in Foxboro for the forseeable future.

Contradictory

If **** MacPherson or Rod Rust were still the head coach, do you really think that there would be a sellout season in 1994?

Nobody knows

I don't know if this is a rebuttal to what I was saying. I never said that Kraft didn't make Orthwein an offer he couldn't refuse. That doesn't counter that Kraft may not have made that offer and might have thought the land was more valuable being something else if they still had the incompetitence of Rod Rust or **** MacPherson running the team.

No, Kraft would have fired Rust or anybody else and found a new HC like he did after Parcells quit. If Kraft wanted to be in the amusement park business theres still lots of land around his stadium to build.

The facts are that Kraft owned the stadium and had tried to buy the Pats long before Parcells showed up. Kraft wanted to buy the Pats all along and he bought the team when it was one of least profitable franchises in the NFL.

Parcells came with the deal but he was an arrogant arsehole that Kraft couldnt get along with.

I don't think Grier knew either. Grier wanted Martin to play out his rookie deal and refused to negotiate and bragged about it. Let's not diminish Grier's incompetence and arrogance because you hate Parcells.

First, poison pill contracts are not nor never have been illegal in the NFL. After the Steve Hutchinson poison pill contract which he would have gotten his entire contract guaranteed if he played more than one game in Seattle his first year, the league frowned upon such deals.

I don't know what he would have done, but it was well known at the time that Martin was upset that Grier refused to negotiate a deal and that he bragged about it rubbing it in his face.

One fact that is pretty indisputable is that Grier mismanaged the Martin situation from not getting him locked up early to wasting the draft picks the Pats got in return for him. Parcells took the opportunity to take advantage of it, but I still blame Grier for mismanaging the whole situation which he pretty much did with every situation when it came to personnel during his tenure after Parcells left.

The Pats didnt have the cap space.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Good points Robo, BUT.....virtually every one of those reporters have covered Parcells in the course of their jobs. It wasn't as if Parcells left the league during the years he wasn't with the Pats. He was covered by most of those guys when he was in NY, Dallas and Miami, PLUS his stint as a media member himself.

Listen, I'd go out of my way to listen to a Parcells presser, but that isn't a reason to put him in the Pats HOFt

He was only here 4 years. He had 2 good seasons and brought Pats some good press....and then there are the negatives.... But we've been through that already.

Like Lurker wrote.... Benedict Arnold was a true war hero. His record during the war of Independence was filled not only with brilliant strategy, but personal bravery. A great Patriot.....right up until he gave the keys to West Point to the British. He too had a problem with "ownership" and he too took his talents to the "other side".

Well you won't find Benedict Arnold being nominated for any Revolutionary War HOF....nor should he be.....and neither should Parcells.... Actually when it comes right down to it, Arnold had more justification for his act of betrayal than Parcells did.

If you're keeping score our current conspiracy theory seems to be that the Patriots Hall of Fame Selection committee made up of members of the media, organization staff, and former players, were somehow brainwashed or otherwise have a soft spot in their heart for Parcells.

This in turn led them to declare Parcells "worthy of the Patriots Hall of Fame" much to the consternation of more observant unbiased fans who clearly don't have a chip on their shoulder when it comes to Parcells

Even though Robo pointed out that most of the media representatives were not covering the Patriots at the time - as Patfanken says, since they were covering the Patriots they were covering the NFL and thus covering Parcells and therefore must be unable to make an unbiased judgement.

I guess its too bad they can't be as impartial as most die hard Patriots fans

 

[patfanken]

If you're keeping score our current conspiracy theory seems to be that the Patriots Hall of Fame Selection committee made up of members of the media, organization staff, and former players, were somehow brainwashed or otherwise have a soft spot in their heart for Parcells.

This in turn led them to declare Parcells "worthy of the Patriots Hall of Fame"

Even though Robo pointed out that most of the media representatives were not covering the Patriots at the time - as Patfanken says, since they were covering the Patriots they were covering the NFL and thus covering Parcells and therefore must be unable to make an unbiased judgement.

I guess its too bad they can't be as impartial as most die hard Patriots fans

Joe, I have NEVER said that there wasn't a case for Parcells being discussed as a potential Patriots HOFer. He is certainly worthy of the discussion, even perhaps a nomination (though not IMHO). What so many posters have tried to get through to guys like Robo and you, that if you consider the short amount of time he spent here. If you consider the raw numbers of his tenure. If you consider the UNCONSCIONABLE way he left and all the stuff that came after... it just doesn't pass the smell test for inclusion into THIS team's HOF.

Again its not that anyone is saying he was a bad coach, or that he wasn't a good addition to the organization at the time, or that he never had an impact. It is just that when you consider ALL of his actions during his SHORT time here, it just doesn't rate him getting into the PATRIOTS Hall of Fame. NFL HOF is another matter, but not the Pats HOF.

Hopefully he will lose to Bledsoe in this round and be swallowed up by the many future players and coaches who are coming up soon. The nomination will then be nothing more than a nice gesture, which is about right.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Joe, I have NEVER said that there wasn't a case for Parcells being discussed as a potential Patriots HOFer. He is certainly worthy of the discussion, even perhaps a nomination (though not IMHO). What so many posters have tried to get through to guys like Robo and you, that if you consider the short amount of time he spent here. If you consider the raw numbers of his tenure. If you consider the UNCONSCIONABLE way he left and all the stuff that came after... it just doesn't pass the smell test for inclusion into THIS team's HOF.

Again its not that anyone is saying he was a bad coach, or that he wasn't a good addition to the organization at the time, or that he never had an impact. It is just that when you consider ALL of his actions during his SHORT time here, it just doesn't rate him getting into the PATRIOTS Hall of Fame. NFL HOF is another matter, but not the Pats HOF.

Hopefully he will lose to Bledsoe in this round and be swallowed up by the many future players and coaches who are coming up soon. The nomination will then be nothing more than a nice gesture, which is about right.

See - here's the difference.

The Hall of Fame Selection Committee looks at the 4 years Parcells was here and sees that he took a team lucky to be 1-15 to a Super Bowl in 4 years.

They see someone who, well before Bob Kraft even owned the team, reinvigorated a dying fanbase, drafted Bledsoe and not Mirer, established a tough defensive mindset, and made some nice draft and free agent choices himself - providing credibility and a strong foundation for future success

They see someone who, through that revitalized fan base made it more feasible and attractive to buy the team - which wound up being a then NFL record amount, not in spite of Parcells, but in part because of Parcells.

They are indeed forgiving him for leaving the team the way he did. You feel that's unforgiveable. They - the Patriots staff, former players, and media representatives - clearly do not.

1-15 to the Super Bowl in 4 years. You view that as a liability.

Trust me - for those of us who had been fans of the NFL's laughingstock team, expecting the organization to move to St. Louis or some far away state, that's not a liability.

By your logic, had Belichick left in a similar fashion after just 4 years, that too would be a liability. "UNCONSCIONABLE".

Forget about what Belichick DID in those 4 years from 2001 - 2004.... just like you want to forget about what Parcells did in "just" those 4 years he was here.

I'd have to say that me, Rob0, and the staff, players and media who make up the selection committee most certainly DO appreciate the "raw numbers of his short tenure"

What we see is someone who brought a 1-15 on the brink of moving to the Super Bowl in just 4 years, creating a culture of credibility and toughness that was a critical cog of the 2001 dynasty starting team.

They don't focus solely on W-Ls and other stats like jilted boyfriends at a prom, upset at the way their date broke up with them. They focus on the big picture - and in the big picture, the culture change brought in by Parcells in just 4 years was HUGE to history and evolution of this team in MANY different ways.

 

[Ring 6]

If you're keeping score our current conspiracy theory seems to be that the Patriots Hall of Fame Selection committee made up of members of the media, organization staff, and former players, were somehow brainwashed or otherwise have a soft spot in their heart for Parcells.

This in turn led them to declare Parcells "worthy of the Patriots Hall of Fame" much to the consternation of more observant unbiased fans who clearly don't have a chip on their shoulder when it comes to Parcells

Yet the ones with no agenda recognize Paracells was a .500 who only stuck around 4 years.

Even though Robo pointed out that most of the media representatives were not covering the Patriots at the time - as Patfanken says, since they were covering the Patriots they were covering the NFL and thus covering Parcells and therefore must be unable to make an unbiased judgement.

I guess its too bad they can't be as impartial as most die hard Patriots fans

Die Hard Pats fans are a better judge of who belongs in the Patriots HOF than writers are.

 

[Ring 6]

Just because Parcells gives a good press conference doesn't mean that any of the media members who have never had any direct contact with the guy or interviewed him once or twice over their career have any soft spot for the guy. I doubt anyone would nominate him because they laughed at his press conference. I assume the members take this role seriously and put in a lot of effort and try to remain objective in their nominations.

Its not a conspiract theory. The media tends to treat guys they like better than guys they dont. Ask Jim Rice.

As for the Bennedict Arnold references, that is a bit harsh. Parcells was interviewing for jobs during the week before the Super Bowl which is an unforgivable act, but he didn't give Mike Holmgren the Pats' playbook or gameplan before the Super Bowl.

I don't think anyone is saying he threw the game, but he certainly appears to have mailed in his work in preplaring the team to win it. Unforgivable.

I look at Parcells like Joe Namath. Namath got into the Hall not because of his play on the field, but because of his guarantee to win the Super Bowl. That event along with his team backing up the guarantee (although Namath didn't have a great game) gave legitimacy to the AFL and changed the landscape of the NFL. I think Parcells gave the Pats legitimacy that helped (although not the only factor at all) to set forth events that kept the Pats in New England and helped to create the Belichick dynasty. I don't think he deserves to get in based solely on his record and on the field accomplishments.

I don't understand this thinking. The 2001 Pats had gained so much credibility that PFW called them the least likely to make a SB.
Can you expand on how the 'credibility' helped the team on the field?
They were awful in 2000, lucky to be 5-11. How did Parcells 4 years, now 5 years removed, have an impact on the play of the 2001 team?