Power of Caring
  presented by CIGNA

Dr. Z's Mailbag: The LT Response

Click here for more on this story

Posted: Thursday January 28, 1999 07:09 PM

I don't think I have to restate my position regarding my support for Lawrence Taylor's induction into the Hall of Fame, despite his off-the-field behavior. I made it as clear as I could in my column. But there are many gray areas, some of which were pointed out in various letters.

I'm not trying to justify the use of drugs, or ignoring drug abuse. Ron of Columbus says that by inducting LT, I'm saying, "Do what you want as long as you play well." Negative reinforcement. Sorry, but I don't see it that way. Right now I'm being called upon to judge a player by his ability and contributions on the field. That's what I'm doing. If I'm presented with a different set of guidelines, I'll respond accordingly, but these are the rules that the Hall has set up.

Bill N. of Kirksville, Mo., says that LT should have been banned for life. I've never gone with the "off with his head" approach, and neither has the NFL. Its procedure for substance-abuse violation is very clear, and it doesn't call for terminal punishment. In other words, the NFL believes in giving people a second chance. I agree.

Jeff of Waynesboro, Va., says that since athletes are in the entertainment business, kids tend to look up to them more. Uh-uh, I've never bought this football-as-entertainment idea. It's much deeper. There's always the lingering specter of career-ending injury. There's the element of heroism, of playing in pain. To me, that's not entertainment. What football players do can be entertaining, when performed at a certain level, but to brush off their work as mere entertainment is to ignore a much more serious element. I'll never forget LT against the New Orleans Saints, playing with a separated shoulder, playing one-armed and recording three sacks and a million pressures, and afterward, slumped by his locker, whispering, "I didn't think I was gonna make it." That speaks a lot louder to me than his record off the field.

And to Brook Haley of Irvine, who rips my Picasso-in-the-Louvre analogy because moderns don't go in there anyway, let me ask you one thing: Are you absolutely sure of this? When's the last time you checked it out? My wife, who's an artist, says you're wrong. But she doesn't say it with the absolute conviction I'd like to see. If my analogy is faulty, OK, I'll find another one. If it's not, shame on you.

For those of you who support my position, and your numbers are too numerous to afford individual naming, thank you. I can only express what I feel.

Keith C. of Spartanburg, S.C., and a few others want to know who these Hall of Fame selectors are, anyway. How are they picked? What gives them the right to be selectors? Why not throw them off if they're repeatedly ridiculous, and how can someone who never played the game be a responsible judge? These are tough questions to answer from a selector because we're given a pretty clear set of guidelines as to disclosure of our activities in the secret chamber, which usually is a hotel conference room, with coffee and danish but never a really hearty breakfast to carry us through (the session starts at 7:30 a.m. Saturday).

The rules always have been one selector per NFL franchise, usually a newspaper beat writer for that team, chosen by the directors of the Hall of Fame, an institution affiliated with but not run by the NFL. The president of the Pro Football Writers Association is also a selector. Basically the Hall of Fame people are good guys. I get along with them. They want to do what's best.

I've never lobbied for political office of any kind, but for years I really wanted to be a selector, and I used to badger them about it. My reasoning was that I've observed and charted NFL players going back to 1947, as opposed to some youngsters on the committee who only go back a few years. But, as a national reporter, I didn't represent one city, or one franchise. About 10 years ago they changed the bylaws and allowed national reps in, and that's when I became a selector.

Right away I began popping off in the meetings. One guy in particular bugged me. This was when John Hannah, who remains the best offensive lineman I've ever seen, came up for induction, and this guy said he'd talked to defensive linemen on the team he covered and they said that Hannah was good but not great.

"What did your own eyes tell you?" I asked.

"Well, I don't know what offensive linemen do," he said.

I shot back, "Then you shouldn't be selector."

I realized that I was becoming a bit shrill. I noticed the unfriendly looks I was getting. Who the hell is this guy to come in here and rip our selectors? "Who is this arrogant little savage to snarl so boldly at the British Lion?" (Eduardo Cianelli in the original Gunga Din).

I learned a valuable lesson, and I toned down my act. Gentle persuasion. Act like you're in the halls of Congress. Work behind the scenes. Lobby. You're not helping the player you want to help by being an arrogant ass.

Most of the selectors are my colleagues. Good, honest guys. I respect the knowledge and dedication of some selectors, but not all of them. A few have really irritated me through the years, particularly one guy who starts looking at his watch and getting restless 20 minutes into the session. But that's life. You can't have everything as you want it. And you can't start yelling to throw people off the committee. That's for the directors to decide, and, on occasion, they have suggested to a particular selector that perhaps it's time to move on. As far as ex-players being more qualified to be reporters and selectors, that's a tricky one. I've always felt that I had an advantage for having played the game for 10 years, but I learned that nothing could be gained by flaunting it. And I've talked to many ex-players who watch football very uncritically, like average fans, and could not do as good a job as the people paid to cover it.

A few of you have suggested that I bring up the idea that by denying LT's entry we would be subjecting ourselves to untold ridicule, that the whole process would become suspect. I mentioned that this morning when I talked to Vinny DiTrani of New Jersey, who will make the opening presentation on LT's behalf. I said that perhaps this should be brought up, and then we decided against it, however valid it might be. To challenge these people, to pose a veiled threat, would only be to alienate the undecided voters we're trying to win over.

Hope this answers your LT questions.

More Hall of Fame letters:

Will of Waltham Mass., wants to know how I feel about the three Rams: Youngblood, Mack and Dickerson. I'm a yes vote on all three.

Dave of Versailles, France, questions me about Ray Guy. I'm a no voter. Eighteen of this year's punters have a higher career average, also Ray was a middle-of-the-end-zone punter. He never hit the corners, probably through John Madden's orders, but it took away some of his game. I believe that the first punter inducted should be Tommy Davis, the ex-49er. Look up his career stats some day. Much better than Guy's.

Scott of Pittsburgh mentions four Steelers -- Lynn Swann, John Stallworth, Donnie Shell and Andy Russell; and Jeff of Abilene, Texas, is pushing for Preston Pearson over Swann, whom he feels is overrated. I've always been a yes vote for Swann, whose lack of big numbers worked against him. My argument? Quality over quantity. He saved his best for when the stakes were highest. Unfortunately he and Stallworth always come up as a paired entry and they knock each other off. Both of them aren't going to make it the same year, and I keep mentioning this to the Pittsburgh selector, but he can't make up his mind which one to suggest first. As to Stallworth -- I'm a maybe. Depends on who the other nominees are. Shell? I'd go for Cliff Harris of Dallas over him, when the safeties are rated. Same with Russell. A fine outside LB, but first, I'd like to see Dave Wilcox, Dave Robinson and Chuck Howley inducted, in that order. Finally -- Pearson. Another maybe. Depends on the other candidates.

Finally, Wayne of Long Beach, N.Y., calls for public disclosure by the selectors. I'd have nothing against revealing my votes, but others would.

Got a question or comment for Dr. Z? Click here.