Urlacher and Lewis in HOF, Why not Zach Thomas?

So its perfectly ok for you to just delete stuff that you don't like even if no TOS was broken? Cool.

WE argued, then you tell me I like to argue as if you tripped and fell into an accidental argument...even more lack of self awareness.

You said Urlacher lifted his team to the SB because they had QB problems. Then I pointed out that Ellerbe did essentially the same thing.

2 MLBs. 2 teams with QB issues. 2 SB appearances. This ain't rocket science.

 

That’s not at all what I said and your inability to read is the problem here. Fix your damn literacy issues. The only lack of self awareness is on your part, you should really double check that you’re not doing these things lest you be a hypocrite. Your comparison, aside from being absurd and not at all what I said, is completely irrelevant as I never said Urlacher is the only player to ever elevate a unit. If it’s not rocket science, how come Zach couldn’t do it? Oh wait, it’s cause he’s not as good by your logic.

And yes, I will use my judgement...not that I don’t like it. If you’d like to continue it further feel free to PM me.

 

Maybe I was unclear. I disputed your stats with your own sources. They're the same sources you listed. I assumed they were just minor copying mistakes.

I think your Lewis source had him for another TD too. Not a big deal.

 

I'm only seeing 17 sacks for Zach.

And I wonder why sacks and pass defensed aren't compared. You have INTS in there. You should have PDs as well.

 

Yup, definitely makes it look as though they're trying to be portrayed as similar as possible. I mean, someone earlier even said the stats prove Thomas superior.

 

Double the sacks and more than doubled the pass defensed.

Urlacher produced at all 3 levels of the field. Behind the los, at the los, and 10-20 yards back as a pass defender. He was a physical beast. I think Zach was more instinctual and maximized his physical shortcomings like no other.

I'm no scheme guru, but Zach could not play Urlacher's role as a mike in a cover 2.

Could Urlacher play Zach's role? Hurting Zach is having JT on the same team.

 

Bro, it's your source. If you click your link it says Zach has 17 INTS.

 

Nope. Urlacher defined the Mike position in the Tampa 2.

 

If the argument about stats is the reason a player should get in, then there isn't a lot of daylight between Zach and London Fletcher.

 

Yah meant Tampa 2. he was asked to cover the middle of the field on pass plays. Then recover sideline to sideline after the ball if on a dumpoff etc.

 

Just to clarify, my "nope" was agreeing with your statement that claimed Thomas could not play Urlacher's role; as in "nope, he sure could not". I wasn't being stingy about the coverage scheme.

 

I think most believe Thomas will eventually be inducted, but there were some slightly better players in his era that overshadowed him frequently.

 

Haha cool. I do know tampa 2 and cover 2 can be different things though, as one is a subset of the other I believe. I'm not big on schemes.

 

The sacks and passes defensed really tell a story though. Urlacher was getting it done in all 3 phases. Rushing the passer, covering the almost deep middle of the field as a pass defender, run defense, etc. I think Urlacher even said what they asked him to do, took him away from what he does best. It's one thing to argue Zach deserves to be in the HOF. That's not unreasonable. But to say they were equals because of tackles etc. is different. When he wasn't racking up sacks much in his later years (I didn't follow the bears enough to know if he was losing a step or scheme change etc.) he was raking up 10 Pdef's a year or so. That's pretty damn good for a LB.