Oakland Raiders: A definitive case for Jim Plunkett’s enshrinement in Canton

Argument #4: Wasn’t A Starter His Whole Career

This is perhaps one of the more ridiculous arguments that have popped up in discussions and debates here and there.

Among some, there seems to be a belief that because there were times Plunkett came off the bench and wasn’t the anointed starter his entire career, that somehow makes him unworthy of being induction in Canton — which is a wholly ridiculous argument on its face.

There are plenty of guys in the Hall who at one point or another, weren’t starting for their team. Being a starter 100 percent of the time is not — nor should it be — a criterion for induction. And again if you believe it is, not even Namath lives up to that standard.

However, for the sake of fairness, let’s look at the argument that Plunkett wasn’t a starter for his entire career. Fair enough.

However, over Broadway Joe’s career — which spanned 140 games — he started “just” 129 of those games. Over the course of Plunkett’s career — which spanned 157 games — he started 144 of those games.

And guess what? If you’re scoring at home, Namath and Plunkett both started — wait for it — 92 percent of the games they played in over the course of their careers.

Given that they started the same percentage of games, that should pretty much obliterate what is a ridiculous argument, to begin with.