There have been some other good linemen that made numerous Pro Bowls but still they're kind of on the fence and playing the waiting game. Same for Faneca?

Nine Pro Bowls and I'd say a signature play for a guard throwing the block on Willie Parker's 75-yard run in the Super Bowl.

He has been very good for a long time, but I don't think he is a hall of famer.

I don't know much of Faneca from his days in Pitt so I can't say for sure. He's been very good for the Jets but unless he was completely dominant for the Steelers I'd have to say he falls short.

If he would have stayed in Pittsburgh and won another Super Bowl then yes. Who knows, he may win one with the Jets and that also IMO would get him in the HOF.

Everyone knows linemen are just big dumb idiots and cant make the hall of fame. Of course this does not apply to Nick Mangold as he will be inducted into the HOF directly after the Jets win the superbowl this year.

Rotinaj wrote: Everyone knows linemen are just big dumb idiots and cant make the hall of fame. Of course this does not apply to Nick Mangold as he will be inducted into the HOF directly after the Jets win the superbowl this year.

QFT.

Alan Faneca.........9 Pro Bowls...6 All Pro Teams.............1 Super Bowl
Anthony Munoz.....11 pro Bowls...9 All Pro teams.........NO Super Bowl Wins.

If one is one of the 50 best to ever play the game and the other has these stats, and is still playing. Id say Alan Faneca is a HOF'er!!

September,
Votes will compare guards to other guards. Here are a few comparisions (Hannah, Parker, and Upshaw were on the 75 Anniversary All-Time Team, Allen is a recent example of a dominant guard)

John Hannah 9 Pro Bowls, 10 1st Team All-Pro
Jim Parker 8 Pro Bowls, 10 All-Pro, 2 NFL champions (pre-SB)
Gene Upshaw 6 Pro Bowls (+1 AFL All Star), 4 1st Team All-Pro (+3 All-AFL), 4 2nd Team All-Pro, 2 SB champions, 1 AFL champion
Larry Allen 11 Pro Bowls, 6 1st Team All-Pro, 1 2nd Team All Pro, 1 SB champions

I would still say Faneca compares pretty favorably here.

The year Pitts won the Super Bowl Faneca played left tackle due to injuries. Pitts set a team record for rushing yards that season!!

september63 wrote: Alan Faneca.........9 Pro Bowls...6 All Pro Teams.............1 Super Bowl
Anthony Munoz.....11 pro Bowls...9 All Pro teams.........NO Super Bowl Wins.

If one is one of the 50 best to ever play the game and the other has these stats, and is still playing. Id say Alan Faneca is a HOF'er!!

Absolutely ridiculous comparison to make. Munoz was a tackle, Faneca a guard (unless you include the whopping 11 games of tackle that Faneca has played).

Second, a small child could see the difference between the two. Munoz was a road grader of a run blocker and an exceptional pass blocker. Faneca in his prime was an excellent run blocker and....well, let's just say there's a reason they didn't make him a full time tackle. He's a lot like Walter Jones; during a period of positional decline, there's no one else to give an All-Pro tag to except the reputation pick.

But while we're at it, here are team offensive rankings during the careers of each (top-five ranking in bold).

MUNOZ (1980-92)
27th, 3rd, 4th, 16th, 13th, 3rd, 3rd, 20th, 1st, 4th, 7th, 23rd, 18th

FANECA (1998-07 PIT, 2008-09 NYJ)
28th, 17th, 17th, 7th, 8th, 19th, 11th, 9th, 12th, 9th, 9th, 17th

september63 wrote: The year Pitts won the Super Bowl Faneca played left tackle due to injuries. Pitts set a team record for rushing yards that season!!

Don't tell Marvel Smith though, he's pretty committed to the lie.

Very nice stats. Show the teams rushing stats per season. How many Super Bowls did Munoz win? Im not saying Alen Faneca was ever better than Munoz. I was saying Faneca is a HOL'er.

september63 wrote: Very nice stats. Show the teams rushing stats per season. How many Super Bowls did Munoz win? Im not saying Alen Faneca was ever better than Munoz. I was saying Faneca is a HOL'er.

Ah yes, the old "How many Super Bowls?" In other words, "My argument is riddled with holes, so I'll go to what I erroneously believe the trump card is!"

Here's your team rushing stats

MUNOZ
Rushes - 15th, 18th, 16th, 8th, 5th, 10th, 6th, 2nd, 2nd, 6th, 7th, 12th, 10th
Yards - 12th, 17th, 20th, 16th, 6th, 12th, 2nd, 4th, 1st, 1st, 5th, 12th, 8th
Touchdowns - 25th, 7th, 3rd, 2nd, 6th, 4th, 1st, 12th, 1st, 6th, 9th, 17th, 13th
Yards/rush - 8th, 17th, 23rd, 19th, 14th, 8th, 1st, 13th, 1st, 2nd, 6th, 12th, 7th

The year after Munoz retired, the Bengals' offense went from 18th to 28th. Rushing went from 4.4 yards/carry to 3.6; touchdowns went from 11 to 3.

FANECA (with PIT)
Rushes - 8th, 5th, 2nd, 1st, 3rd, 16th, 1st, 1st, 14th, 3rd
Yards - 7th, 10th, 4th, 1st, 9th, 31st, 2nd, 5th, 10th, 3rd
Touchdowns - 24th, 17th, 4th, 2nd, 14th, 23rd, 6th, 5th, 8th, 22nd
Yards/rush - 9th, 13th, 11th, 2nd, 17th, 32nd, 19th, 12th, 11th, 7th

FANECA (with NYJ)
Rushes - 19th, 1st
Yards - 9th, 1st
Touchdowns - 5th, 3rd
Yards/rush - 5th, 5th

The year after Faneca left, Pittsburgh won the Super Bowl.

So there's two more issues for you to touch on.
1) Munoz's primary responsibility was pass blocking, Faneca's was run blocking. Do you want to compare team passing on their respective teams now?
2) Munoz's teams' rushing numbers (yards and touchdowns) exceed expectations (rushing attempts). Faneca's teams' numbers are below expectations.

So basically, Faneca's strengths through team numbers pale in comparison to Munoz's weaknesses. You REALLY should have thought of a different HOF lineman to compare to.

I'd say put him in. I always like watching him play. He gets after it and maintains blocks, something that a lot of lineman in that league seem to struggle with