Hall of Fame responds to media reaction

🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈

Editor’s Note: This is part of a series on the Pro Football Hall of Fame’s journey to select the Class of 2026. It is written by Frank Cooney, long-time Seniors Blue-Ribbon Selection Committee member in his 33rd year as a selector. The Hall of Football is not affiliated with the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Except for the HOF press release in this post, Opinions expressed are those of the Hall of Football (HallofFootball.substack.com).

Check for updates

🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈

In a rare, perhaps unique, response to public and media outcry about reported selection results for the Class of 2026, the Pro Football Hall of Fame issued an official statement that hints changes might be made on the 50-person Selection Committee.

(see entire press release at bottom of story)

To be clear, the press release does not say that there will be changes in the selection committee, but for the first time the Hall publicly enunciates an internal function that could lead to the dismissal of one or more selectors.

ESPN’s curious story

We at Hall of Football responded as fully as we could Tuesday, after an ESPN report, apparently emanating from former coach Bill Belichick, that the former Super Bowl-winning coach will not be a part of the HOF Class of 2026.

The report ignited a firestorm of response from media and social media, mostly condemning the Hall of Fame selectors for, as one social media post put it, “perpetrating an atrocity that calls into consideration the validity of the Hall of Fame itself.”

And that was one of the tamer posts.

The ESPN report cited unnamed sources, apparently selectors, and tried to guess why Belichick might not have made it.

Interestingly, the report landed on Spygate, which involved illegal videos of opposing coaches’ signals in 2007. The authors, ESPN reporters Don Van Natta Jr. and Seth Wickersham, knew plenty about the Spygate incident in 2007, but chose not to bring it up this week.

The league fined Belichick $500,000, the maximum allowed and largest amount imposed on a coach in the league’s then 87-year history. The Patriots paid an additional $250,000 and lost their first-round pick in the 2008 draft. When Belichick refused to abide by an NFL order to turn over the videos, league officials went to the team facilities and smashed the tapes.

Few of the media and social media posts gave the Spygate transgression much credence and, in fact, some pointed out Belichick’s record improved after the scandal, as if that expunged his illegal actions.

Also, U.S. Senator Arlen Specter (then R-PA), the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wrote a letter to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell in 2007 expressing concern over “inexplicable destruction of the tapes.” Specter mentioned he could call Goodell to a congressional hearing on the league’s antitrust exemption, something of an ever-present tripwire for the league.

So Spygate not only cost Belichick and the Patriots, it also put the league on thin ice regarding its always tenuous antitrust issues. The scandal was hardly something that could be ignored when considering all aspects of Belichick’s career.

A 2015 ESPN story by Van Natta Jr. and Wickersham — the same duo that reported Tuesday that Belichick did not make the HOF — contended that Goodell’s handling of Deflategate was influenced by his hasty and incomplete handling of the Spygate incident. The story argued that the true extent Spygate was covered up by Goodell to protect the image of the NFL and as a favor to New England Patriots’ owner Robert Kraft, who was in part responsible for Goodell’s promotion to commissioner.

The plot thickens. …

That report alleged that a highly complex system in which opposing teams’ signals were recorded, decoded and relayed to Patriots coaches and players on the field during games spanning at least 40 games between 2000 and 2007.

Tuesday’s ESPN report made no mention of those Belichick-related incidents that the same reporters wrote years earlier.

Inconvenient facts?

🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈

More considerations for selectors

While vilifying HOF selectors, few if any responses pretended that there were other things that tainted, or at least impacted, a career so loudly celebrated for winning six Super Bowls as a head coach, two more as an assistant and compiling a record of 302-165 in 29 years as an NFL head coach, 24 with the Patriots. Including playoffs his record was 333-178.

But wait, there’s more.

Belichick’s coaching record without Tom Brady as his primary quarterback is approximately 83-104 (.444-.449 winning percentage), according to recent analyses covering his time with the Cleveland Browns, the 2000–2019 Patriots (with Brady) and the post-Brady era (2020-2023). This includes a 29-39 record (including playoffs) from 2020 to 2023.

When the selectors met on Jan. 13, they knew that Brady went on to win a Super Bowl (for Tampa Bay) without Belichick, and Kraft’s Patriots were back in the playoffs (and now the Super Bowl) without Belichick or Brady.

After he was let go by the Patriots, Belichick tried to get a head coaching job in the NFL and could not. He spent last year struggling as head coach of North Carolina. Also, there is the possibility that Belichick would jump at the chance to be an NFL head coach again, which, for some people, might take the luster off his HOF candidacy.

So, despite the simplistic responses of agitated media and social media, there is plenty to consider regarding Belichick and the Hall of Fame.

You might think that means I didn’t vote for him, but I did. I had my own agenda that goes beyond this year’s drama. I want him in the Hall of Fame to clear the way for other viable coaching candidates — Mike Holmgren, who was squeezed out by the process for the 2025 Class, and Mike Shanahan, whose induction seems inevitable. Eventually.

The Hall of Fame and the selectors must find some equilibrium among candidates in the Modern-Era, Seniors, Coaches and Contributor categories and get the pipeline moving. It will take changes in the process and maybe with the people who engage in the process.

It will take time. The Hall’s letter may be a start.

Here is the press release:

🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈

Statement on media reports related to Hall of Fame’s Class of 2026

The Pro Football Hall of Fame understands and respects the passionate reaction of many fans, media members and enshrinees of the Hall itself in light of published reports regarding the voting results for the Class of 2026.

It’s that very passion that propels the game.

The Hall also respects the members of the Selection Committee when they follow the selection process bylaws. It is an honor to serve as a selector.

Each year, the Hall reviews the selection process and the composition of the 50-person Selection Committee. If it is determined that any member(s) violated the selection process bylaws, they understand action will be taken.

That could include the possibility that such selector(s) would not remain a member of the committee moving forward.

The selection of a new class is the most important duty the Hall of Fame oversees each year, and the integrity of that process cannot be in question.

The press release is signed by Rich Desrosiers, Chief Communications & Content Officer

🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈🏈