Does Chris McCalister make the HOF?

**LukeDaniel** · 06-07-2012, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by GOTA

The 2 guys I do see getting in from this same era are Champ Bailey and Charles Woodson.

In there respective primes, the ONLY thing that Woodson was better at than McAlister was surrendering long TD passes.

Woodson made a few more splash plays, but that was merely because he got beat so often that teams threw his way far more than they dared throw at C-Mac.

In their primes, which overlapped (Woodson entered the league in 98. McAlister in 99), McAlister was the better player. He made the big plays here and there, all while surrendering far fewer completions, receiving yards, and TDs than Woodson. Opposing QBs, from 2000-2006, often gave up on the notion of throwing anywhere in CMAC's direction, which is why his name wasn't called on the highlights as often as Woodson's. Woodson would get beat for 9 catches, 130 yards, and a TD, but would make one huge splash play that made all the Sports Center reels. Meanwhile, CMac would hold his opposing #1 to 4 catches for 46 yards and get no fanfare.

Make no mistake, though, that NFL executives--while pouring over game film--- knew who was the better CB. Up until 2007, there was zero chance that the Ravens--or any NFL front office-- would have traded McAlister even up for Woodson. In fact, you can make an argument that McAlister was the superior CB to Woodson for every year from 2000-06. That's seven straight years during their primes when CMac outshone Woodson.

Woodson's HOF value has soared based on his (undeserved) DPOY award in 2009 and the four straight Pro Bowls from 08-11. What people conveniently forget that he went from 2001-07 without getting a single Pro Bowl invitation. By the end of 2005, it looked like his career was all but over....the resurgence he has had recently definitely came out of nowhere. However, his resurrection of his career has come in a different form than McAlister's. Unlike CMAC, Woodson has never been a shutdown corner. He's been a gambler who has surrendered far more big plays than an elite CB ever should. Cmac made those big plays from time to time, without subjecting his team to the negatives associated with Woodson's style of play.

Charles Woodson might have had the better career, but he was never as dominant a CB as CMAC was during the first half of the 2000-2010 decade.

**TheJoeFlaccoShow** · 06-07-2012, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

No chance. Not even debatable IMO.

Not even gonna waste any time typing, he isn't even in the conversation.

**Dirt1** · 06-07-2012, 02:42 PM

Originally Posted by BcRaven

ROH YES, HOF NO... Bc

Agreed. To me, CMAC is in the same category as Peter Boulware. A great player, definately in the ROH, but did not have the career longevity to be seriously considered for the HOF.

**esmd** · 06-07-2012, 02:47 PM

Nope. Ravens Ring of Honor, but he's not a HOFer IMO.

**HoustonRaven** · 06-07-2012, 03:11 PM

Byners name not withstanding, I don't think he's RoH material either.

Following the criteria posted on BR.com, it's hard for me to say he's RoH worthy.

**GOTA** · 06-07-2012, 03:13 PM

Originally Posted by LukeDaniel

In there respective primes, the ONLY thing that Woodson was better at than McAlister was surrendering long TD passes.

Woodson made a few more splash plays, but that was merely because he got beat so often that teams threw his way far more than they dared throw at C-Mac.

In their primes, which overlapped (Woodson entered the league in 98. McAlister in 99), McAlister was the better player. He made the big plays here and there, all while surrendering far fewer completions, receiving yards, and TDs than Woodson. Opposing QBs, from 2000-2006, often gave up on the notion of throwing anywhere in CMAC's direction, which is why his name wasn't called on the highlights as often as Woodson's. Woodson would get beat for 9 catches, 130 yards, and a TD, but would make one huge splash play that made all the Sports Center reels. Meanwhile, CMac would hold his opposing #1 to 4 catches for 46 yards and get no fanfare.

Make no mistake, though, that NFL executives--while pouring over game film--- knew who was the better CB. Up until 2007, there was zero chance that the Ravens--or any NFL front office-- would have traded McAlister even up for Woodson. In fact, you can make an argument that McAlister was the superior CB to Woodson for every year from 2000-06. That's seven straight years during their primes when CMac outshone Woodson.

Woodson's HOF value has soared based on his (undeserved) DPOY award in 2009 and the four straight Pro Bowls from 08-11. What people conveniently forget that he went from 2001-07 without getting a single Pro Bowl invitation. By the end of 2005, it looked like his career was all but over....the resurgence he has had recently definitely came out of nowhere. However, his resurrection of his career has come in a different form than McAlister's. Unlike CMAC, Woodson has never been a shutdown corner. He's been a gambler who has surrendered far more big plays than an elite CB ever should. Cmac made those big plays from time to time, without subjecting his team to the negatives associated with Woodson's style of play.

Charles Woodson might have had the better career, but he was never as dominant a CB as CMAC was during the first half of the 2000-2010 decade.

As you know Hall of Fame voters are obsessed with stats. Each position has certain stats that they want to see. For defensive backs it's interceptions.

From what I've heard each city will have a press member who will push a certain player. They all then go to the stat books, yes most of them really do still use books, and they point out how those number match up with others. It's not about who was better as much as who appears to have been better based on numbers. That's why longevity plays a huge part in the election process. If you weren't there long enough to get the numbers you probably aren't getting in.

I'm sure you're right that McAlister was better and that it Woodson a long time to become a top player but it doesn't matter. Woodson and Bailey have over 50 interceptions plus all the Pro Bowls and All Pros team elections so they'll make it even if others were better.

The veterans committee looks at things more along your lines which is why you see guys without the numbers getting selected all the time.

**Greg** · 06-07-2012, 03:55 PM

If he hadn't been more interested in women and drinking than his play he would have been a sure fire HOF. He pissed a great career away for booze and women. He was very good, he was a notch below HOF status and that was with all of the baggage. Imagine how good he is if focused.

**BcRaven** · 06-07-2012, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Byners name not withstanding, I don't think he's RoH material either.
Following the criteria posted on BR.com, it's hard for me to say he's RoH worthy.

Here's where we part company. McAlister is IMO the very best CB the Ravens have ever had. A 1st round draft choice (#10 in 1999), sports a Super Bowl XXXV ring, and was the definition of a shut-down corner for several years in Baltimore. While I repeat that in my judgement he's not HOF worthy, he certainly is deserving of our ROH... Bc

**landspeed** · 06-07-2012, 04:31 PM

So none of you think he could make the hall of fame, 20-30 years from now?

There are quite a few players in the HOF who were never the best at their position. They dont make the HOF right away, but they ended up making it 20-30 years down the road.

**GOTA** · 06-07-2012, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by landspeed

So none of you think he could make the hall of fame, 20-30 years from now?

There are quite a few players in the HOF who were never the best at their position. They dont make the HOF right away, but they ended up making it 20-30 years down the road.

Those players go in via the veterans committee. They are only allowed 1 per season and it's always a popular guy. Chris McAlister is not popular. He's always been very strange. That's not a bad thing but it's not going to get you in good with the veterans committee.

**HoustonRaven** · 06-07-2012, 04:44 PM

Originally Posted by BcRaven

Here's where we part company. McAlister is IMO the very best CB the Ravens have ever had. A 1st round draft choice (#10 in 1999), sports a Super Bowl XXXV ring, and was the definition of a shut-down corner for several years in Baltimore. While I repeat that in my judgement he's not HOF worthy, he certainly is deserving of our ROH... Bc

Lets break down the teams criteria for induction into the RoH:

Character: The induction into the Ravens Ring of Honor represents the highest honor for a career of individual accomplishment resulting in team success. Teams constructed with character reduce uncertainty and stay on their purpose Ravens of Honor maintain direction with intense focus character is at the beginning of the cycle and takes them all the way to a successful ending.

Doesn't qualify, IMO. His demon was and always has been booze. It shortened a talented career. I sympathize for him. Alcoholism is a nasty disease. But he failed to face that demon.

Gratitude: Ravens of Honor carry forth a special attitude of gratitude, to those around them, they are always a fountain rather then a drain. Each is different but all keep those around them on the path of progression. Their basic ability to enjoy their talents and gifts of others help them to continually contribute as opposed to contaminate.

We heard rumors that he was a locker room disruption when Harbs got on board. Since, they are rumors, I'll go ahead and give him the benefit of the doubt and give a thumbs up here.

Vision: Fueled by self-knowledge, great character and an appreciation for everything available to them. Ravens of Honor visualize short and long term successes in Technicolor. They are, through vision, great connectors. Those around them are energized and they use all that surrounds them to create an inspirational bigger picture.

Can't really comment on this one. I will give him the benefit of the doubt here, too.

Passion: Passionate Ravens have an unusual ability to face failure, physical setbacks and exhaustion. They have an internal tenacity that helps them get back up when knocked down. Their passion motivates teammates to join in on the pursuit of the team dream. Passion breeds conviction and turns mediocrity into excellence. With passion, we can overcome all obstacles.

Nope. As others have pointed out, he wasn't exactly a headstrong work horse for the team. rather, he was more concerned with outside distractions.

Faith & Courage: Ravens of Honor stand tall in the good times as well as the rough times. They are help up by their deep faith in themselves, their teammates and their fans. Inspired by belief in a great destiny, these champions never waver from their victorious path. Faith is belief in what you cannot see. Great vision matched with unbridled passion sets up absolute faith. Faith evokes a special courage and confidence. When matched with action, faith kills worry and procrastination, the two traits which produce regular failure.

Nope. See Character.

Competitive Spirit: True competitors want to be put on the line and measured. They thrive on adversity and use it to achieve a special edge. They know the easy lakes get fished out first, thus they skip the easy. Persistence, determination, tenacity and sportsmanship are the hallmarks of this warrior mentality. Ravens of Honor need character, gratitude, vision, passion and faith to become a championship caliber competitor. There are no shortcuts and they do not look for them, because their competitive fire will not allow them to.

A resounding yes to this one. he was one hell of talent, as you put it, for several seasons.

Humility: Humility in oneself inspires the best of others and feeds our character. A vital aspect of the true leadership is the willingness of others to follow

No. Again, he was, and by all reports is still, a victim of his demons.

**blacknpurplepain** · 06-07-2012, 06:46 PM

ROH yes but Canton no. He had a hell of a career until the end. I still remember when he faced 3 elite Wide receiver 3 str8 games and basically shut them down. He just don't have the picks or great plays which I think is a crazy "Requirement" but that's how it works. Just like Webb didn't give up a TD but had a few picks but no pro bowl last year. It's not called the Hall of "FAME" for nothing.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9810 using Tapatalk