Ken Anderson and L.C. Greenwood Fall Short

 By John Turney 

L.C. Greenwood (left) and Ken Anderson (right)

The massive hullabaloo surrounding the Bill Belichick and Robert Kraft snubs sucked up so much air in the room that it left almost none for the reality that two other senior candidates also got passed over — Ken Anderson and L.C. Greenwood.

Those two, plus Roger Craig, were the trio that made it out of the seniors committee process and got presented to the full Pro Football Hall of Fame Board of Selectors. Unlike Craig, they didn't pull in the votes needed for induction. We're calling it "needed" because election required at least 40 out of 50 votes (that's the 80% minimum threshold). Well, unless nobody hit 40—in which case it'd go to the top vote-getter (or get split in a tie but that is a story for another day).

We have no clue whether Craig actually cleared that 80% bar or not. All we know for sure is that he was the lone survivor from the combined seniors, coaches, and contributors finalists group to get voted in this year. 

Bengals quarterback Ken Anderson and Steelers defensive end L.C. Greenwood didn't make the cut—and it's tough to see either one getting another real shot down the line. Both had popped up on the modern-era final 15 list back in the day, and now they've finally reached that make-or-break yes/no stage in the seniors process. But justifying slots for them in future classes? That looks like a long shot.

Anderson's resume has some real shine: he won four passing titles (passer rating leader in 1974, 1975, 1981, and 1982—one of a few guys in NFL history to hit that mark, and the only one with consecutive titles across two different decades). He was the 1981 NFL MVP, Offensive Player of the Year, and Comeback Player of the Year, plus he led the Bengals to their first Super Bowl appearance that same year (Super Bowl XVI, where he played solid but they fell to Joe Montana's 49ers 26-21).

That said, whenever passer rating (the basis for those passing titles) comes up, you hear the same old debate: it's a great stat on one hand, but it's often called flawed or era-dependent on the other. Pick your side—go figure. 

We think Anderson's best claim is that his career is on par with Ken Stabler's. And even Dan Fouts in some ways. Both of them started slow and then had career-ending slides, Fouts less so, and Anderson had a down era, but it was in the middle of his career. It was a different career path but his early-1980s comeback is to his credit, falling from MVP level to let's call it average, back to MVP-level.

It does seem unfair that Anderson is left out, given that Stabler, especially, is not far ahead of him, if any, really. Perhaps the separator is the Super Bowl ring Stabler owns,

With Greenwood, it was also a close-but-no-cigar scenario. He has the four rings, was a vital part of the Steel Curtain Defense, the best edge rusher they had. He was touted by his supporters as a run-stopper, someone who was a left-end who did "the dirty work" for the Steelers, the "two-gap" guy.

That wasn't true, as far as the two-gap, but he was a strong run defender. If he weren't the Steelers' defensive coach, Bud Carson, would not have had him on the field. He was a defensive end who could play the run and who was an excellent pass rusher. 

Sometimes his sack totals were not elite, but if pressures were counted, he'd have had a lot. A group like Pro Football Focus (PFF) or NextGen Stats would be his friend had they existed because they often praise guys like that. Maybe a modern era comp may be Rob Burnett or DeMarcus Lawrence, who will be showing his wares in Super Bowl LX, in terms of role. Burnett player before the era of those analytics companies, but Lawrence is a darling of PFF as someone who is a complete edge player.

The question is whether that is good enough for the Hall of Fame.

Greenwood has two consensus All-Pro seasons and was voted to six Pro Bowls, but he wasn't able to get a high number of sacks, even unofficial ones. A nice round mark of 100 or more would have helped. But he was nearly two dozen short of that. 

The book is not entirely shut on these two; the seniors committee could vote them out of the committee again, it has happened before, but how fair would that be to those who are still waiting for their cases to be presented to the full committee? The seniors committee will probably choose new blood next year. 

Hopefully, there will be changes in the process so more than one player/coach/contributor will end up with a Gold Jacket, as has happened in the last two classes. One is not enough.

Roger Craig—A Hall of Famer But Did Not Revolutionize Running Back Position

 By John Turney 

Exuberance is fine. After a long wait, Roger Craig, per media reports, will be announced as part of the Pro Football Hall of Fame's Class of 2026 and his fans are excited. But exaggeration should be tempered.

Among them was former teammate Ronnie Lott who said on X, "Ronnie Lott, He changed the game." Really?

The Rush With Travis and Ross posted this: "Roger Craig changed the running back position and deserves to be in the NFL Hall of Fame!"

Part true. Yes, many think Craig is deserving and now voters agree.

Another supporter posted, "Transformed the RB position.  First all-purpose back, and had combined yardage that no other RBs did. A key man on a historic dynasty." 

Two assertions are true, two are not

And another, "Roger Craig changed the game which we see today with running and pass catching RBs, defensively(sic) likely meant "definite" a hall of famer."

There were many other comments, but you get the point—many think he changed the game. But did he?

One can be worthy of the Hall of Fame and have achievements that surpassed previous players, but still not have "changed the game" or "changed the running back position." 

The point they make is that Craig was a supreme runner and pass catcher and was the first player to gain 1,000 yards rushing and also have 1,000 yards receiving in the same season, the first "1,000-1,000" man.

But is that changing the role of a running back? Or is it being more prolific than those who came before? The case for the latter is stronger.

Backs have always been receivers; it is just a matter of degree. Check out Chuck Mutryn, who played for the Buffalo Bills in the old AAFC. In 1948, he ran for 823 yards and caught passes for 794 more. 

The Colts' Lenny Moore was a fine receiver, though he was usually catching passes as a flanker, moving out from his right halfback position. Clem Daniels, the Raiders back, was a fine receiver out of the backfield, as were quite a few AFL running backs.

In the 1970s, both the Vikings' Chuck Foreman and Lydell Mitchell, who played for the Colts in his prime, led the NFL in receptions in three seasons (Mitchell twice). In fact, from 1974 through 1979, a running back led the NFL in pass catches each season. Craig had a teammate—Earl Cooper, who caught 83 passes in 1980 while running for 794 yards. While not an exhaustive list, it shows that catching passes was a thing before Roger Craig. 

The only difference is that Craig took it to a new level with the 1,000-1,000 milestone, and THAT is what was a key factor in his presumed induction to the Hall. As it should be.

That and the old "eye-test" because anyone who saw him play would say he was unique. A high-stepping speedster with power. He could block as well as pass and catch.

He also had the accolades:

• 3× Super Bowl champion (XIX, XXIII, XXIV)—key contributor to one of the NFL's greatest dynasties.
• 4× Pro Bowl (1985, 1987–1989)
• NFL Offensive Player of the Year (1988)
• First-team All-Pro (1988), second-team All-Pro (1985)
• NFL 1980s All-Decade Team

Overall, the seniors committee saw fit to pass his name on to the full Board of Selectors and enough of them gave him the thumbs up, if media reports are to be believed—the announcement is tonight at the NFL Honors program. 

So congratulations are in order, Roger Craig is a Hall of Famer. But he didn't really "change" the running back position or the game, unless we're missing something.

Robert Kraft, Too?

 By John Turney 

Media reports contend Robert Kraft will join Bill Belichick on the sidelines when the Pro Football Hall of Fame Class of 2026 is announced Thursday at the NFL Honors show. And the Patriots are not pleased. The fans, the coaches, the organization, you know, everyone.

With the Patriots in the Super Bowl this year, it is a letdown for Pats Nation to say the least.

Patriots Coach Mike Vrabel commenting on the Kraft "snub"

Here is the complete answer Vrabel gave today:

Q: Robert Kraft has been eligible for the Pro Football Hall of Fame for more than a decade now, and he's still on the outside looking in. Your reaction to that?

MV: I would just say that that's unfortunate. I would say that in my experiences with Robert, he's more than deserving and he'll be in the Hall of Fame. I'm not in charge of deciding when that happens. So, I appreciate the relationship that I've had with him and the success as a player, and now as a coach. So, he's done everything that we've needed and provided the support that we've needed as a staff and as a team. So, I'm glad that he's back here and continuing to help us do things that will help the team win, and ultimately allow him to be recognized.

His comments likely echo those of the Patriots organization and fanbase, too.

Also to consider: We can probably assume Kraft and Belichick, to some extent, split the "Patriots" vote, meaning that given the zero-sum voting in the new process, caused some voters to pick either Kraft or Belichick rather than both. But there was some sentiment (a lot?) that there should be more accountability for the alleged cheating that the club was punished for over the years.

A kind of double jeopardy in a way. Regardless, if the media reports are to be believed, both are out of the running. 

Speaking to some voters, we've found defensiveness for those who voted against, "How many games did Belichick win that was a result of cheating?" To the "We deserve the heat we are getting. The committee made a mistake and we are reaping the wrath."

Robert Kraft (right) at Patriots' 2026 Media Night

Yes, to some, the Hall is burning. And that is my interest in this. The damage to the institution. A coach or owner getting refused is not a huge deal to us, unless it is an icon, and in our view, Belichick is exactly that. 

We simply care about the Hall, it's specialness, it's reputation, the thing that it is. It's not about "your" guys getting it. It's about the best of the best and anything that gets away from that hurts the Hall.

As not what the Hall can do for you but what you can do for the Hall. In this case, avoiding this controversy would have been better. At least in our view.