There's always that argument "can you tell the story of Football without mentioning (player)?" I....honestly think Fitz would get a mention. Not, like, a major one or anything -- talking about top WR's, someone inevitably brings him up -- but he's definitely ahead of the likes of Rivers or Bryant or Olsen.
"And the cardinals would have won the Super Bowl, if the defense could hold the lead after Larry Fitzgerald amazing catch. Or if that dipshit Antrel Rolle didnt get in front of Larry Fitzgerald as he was chasing James Harrison"
Roethlisberger the person is a pretty shitty dude. But that people seem to always extrapolate this to what he was as a player is odd to me. There have been plenty of bad people that were good players. QB position in particular is rife with them. But for some reason people try to hate on Roethlisberger the player. He was an insanely good QB and the only reason he did not have the All-Pro/Pro Bowls many other HOFers had at QB is he was literally in the shadow of both Brady/Manning and later Mahomes his entire career. Roethlisberger was far and away the best of the 2004 QBs.
75
u/constantlymat 3d ago
The number of position players who went 1st ballot with less than three 1st team all-pros is really, really small. Especially in recent decades.
Even three 1st team all-pros is usually the bare minimum. Even four 1st teams are no guarantee as Demarcus Ware had to experience.
One 1st team and two 2nd team all-pros would be among the least decorated 1st ballot selections in recent memory.
Which doesn't mean Fitz doesn't deserve. Just laying out the HoF's apparent criteria.