Ken Riley and Charles Woodson

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(12-22-2015, 01:30 AM)MrRager Wrote: There are more than just INTs. I cannot find stats about Ken, but they have the same INTs, but Woodson has over double the TDs, 155 PDs (not recorded for Ken), 33 FF (0 for Ken), 20 sacks (not recorded for Ken), and a TON of tackles (again not recorded for Ken).

For these positions it's hard to look at just the stats so you must look at some accolades. Riley was a one time All-Pro. Woodson has been a three time 1st team All-Pro and an eight time Pro Bowler.

FWIW Woodson also did a little more returning in his day. Basically Woodson's INTs number might not be that high, but the guy did everything well. He wasn't just a pure cover guy, but could blitz and play the run extremely well. I never watched Ken and the only argument in his favor have been the INTs so I cannot say much to his credit. He also won a DPOY.

Finally, he went to the single greatest college football program to ever exist and won the highest accolades a player can receive there. Only defensive player ever to win it.

Forced fumbles also weren't recorded then. Just like sacks, tackles, and passes defensed. It's why the 1970 Bengals have "0" FF, but 26 FR. So there's no point in trying to compare all of those.

Everyone ahead of Ken Riley on the INT list is in the HoF. There's even people behind him on the list in the HoF (LeBeau). Yet Ken Riley has never even been a HoF FINALIST. So yeah, there's shenanigans abound.

Same with Ken Anderson, who was a HELL of a lot better than some other QBs in his era who are already in the HoF. (Joe Namath, Terry Bradshaw)

Apparently they should have either gotten into the media, or been a Steeler. Both get pushed into the HoF over better players.