Monday, August 3, 2009

Tribune article on the Ring of Honor

Martin Fennelly weighs in with his opinion on who should be in. Far too liberal in my opinion. His whole list loses credibility when he suggests that a sports writer should be on the list. His logic for Doug Williams isn't strong enough (he was our Quarterback when we made the playoffs). If anything that is an indictment on him, since the offense killed that team's chances of a Super Bowl.

Warrick Dunn is a nice player, but c'mon.

Brad Johnson is a joke.

Basically any player that had any sort of positive press, this guy is ready to erect a statue.


  1. Really? You're against Warrick Dunn? I've seen guys with half of Dunn's resume make these things solely based on their off the field accomplishments. Dunn has been a fixture in the area throughout his career and was a pretty great running back. Of the 400 people that have no business being on a list like this that Fennelly includes for argument's sake, the only ones that didn't make me laugh were Selmon, Brooks, Sapp, Dunn, Dungy, Gruber, and Barber. I'll accept Gruden, Lynch, and Alstott, but after that, it's no longer even a Ring of Honor. It's like the participation award at an elementary school field day.

  2. I was judging Dunn on his first stint as a Buc. It lasted five years, and the last year of those five was not very good. He had some excellent season, and he has 7,690 all purpose yards (and counting). So I guess you can't hand down a verdict until his career ends, but as it stands now I'm not ready to annoint him based on what he's done so far.