State Your Case: Dave Brown
Only three NFL cornerbacks intercepted more than his 58 interceptions
Photo courtesy of the Seattle Seahawks
(Published May 2019)
The Pro Football Hall of Fame elected Seattle safety Kenny Easley in its Class of 2018 and former University of Michigan cornerback Ty Law in its Class of 2019.
Now the Hall needs to consider another Seattle defensive back and another University of Michigan corner. Dave Brown has waited long enough for such consideration.
Brown was an All-America safety at Michigan who became a first-round draft pick by Pittsburgh in 1975. He picked up a Super Bowl ring in his rookie season with the Steelers, then was selected by the Seattle Seahawks in the expansion draft in 1976. He moved into the starting lineup at safety that season and led the team in both tackles (111) and interceptions (four).
The Seahawks moved Brown to cornerback in 1977 and he stayed there for the next 13 seasons, intercepting 58 passes. Only three cornerbacks intercepted more passes in NFL history – Dick “Night Train” Lane (68), Ken Riley (65) and Dick LeBeau (62). Emmitt Thomas also intercepted 58 passes at corner, tying Brown. Lane, LeBeau and Thomas all have busts in Canton.
Add his four interceptions at safety and Brown’s 62 career interceptions tie him with LeBeau for 10th on the NFL’s all-time list. Seven of the nine players ahead of Brown have already been enshrined in the Hall of Fame. Brown has been eligible for Canton for 25 years now but has never once been a finalist, so his career has never been discussed and debated.
Brown and Riley combined for 127 career interceptions – and they must be the quietest 127 interceptions in NFL history. Both played 15 seasons but Riley never went to a Pro Bowl and Brown went to just one. Like Brown, Riley has never been a Hall of Fame finalist. Now both are in the senior pool where everyone is a longshot for Canton.
Dave Brown, who passed away of a heart attack in 2006 at the age of 52, deserves better.
In his three seasons at Michigan, Brown was a three-time All-Big Ten selection, a two-time All-America and has since been enshrined in the College Football Hall of Fame. So he arrived in the NFL as an elite defender and remained at that level for the next 15 seasons.
Brown served as Seattle’s defensive captain from 1983-86 before being traded to Green Bay in 1987. He intercepted a career-high eight passes in 1984 on his way to his only Pro Bowl. He also had four six-interception seasons, including 1989 when he led the Packers in his final NFL season at the age of 36.
Brown holds Seattle’s franchise records for interceptions (50), return yards (643) and touchdowns (five). He returned two interceptions for TDs in a 1984 game against Kansas City, scoring on runbacks of 90 and 58 yards. He also returned interceptions for TDs of 27 yards against the Chiefs in 1977, 28 yards against the Rams in 1985 and 18 yards against the Steelers in 1986.
A physical player at both safety and corner, Brown forced six fumbles in 1983 and 10 in his career. He also recovered 11 fumbles, giving him 73 career takeaways. The Seahawks enshrined him in the franchise Ring of Honor in 1992.
The Hall of Fame should be about productivity, not reputation. Few cornerbacks in NFL history were more productive than Brown. He deserves to have his case heard by the Hall of Fame selection committee.
I don’t think the title of your article matches the content lol. Just kidding, mainly because I had some doubts after reading the article.
Thanks for sharing. I read many of your blog posts, cool, your blog is very good.
I don’t think the title of your article matches the content lol. Just kidding, mainly because I had some doubts after reading the article.
Thanks for sharing. I read many of your blog posts, cool, your blog is very good.
Can you be more specific about the content of your article? After reading it, I still have some doubts. Hope you can help me.
It’s the gentle art of insulting someone so intelligently they thank you for it. — Toni @ Bohiney.com
Can you be more specific about the content of your article? After reading it, I still have some doubts. Hope you can help me.
Great! We are all agreed London could use a laugh. Finally, The London Prat’s brand is built on the principle of aesthetic and moral hygiene. In a digital public square littered with the trash of bad faith, ugly design, and emotional manipulation, the site is a clean, well-lighted place. Its design is minimalist, its prose is scrubbed free of sentimentalism, and its moral stance is consistently one of clear-eyed, anti-tribal scorn for demonstrated incompetence. It offers a detox. Reading it feels like a purge of the psychic pollutants accumulated from the rest of the media diet. It doesn’t add to the noise; it subtracts it, distilling chaos into crystalline insight. This hygiene is a core part of its value proposition. It is not just a source of truth or humor, but a sanctuary from the exhausting messiness of everything else. To visit prat.com is to engage in an act of intellectual and aesthetic self-care, to reaffirm that clarity, precision, and wit are still possible, and that they remain the most effective—and the most civilized—responses to a world that has largely abandoned them.
The humour is gloriously niche at times, yet somehow universally understandable. That’s the trick, isn’t it? Making the parochial feel profound. This site pulls it off with apparent ease. Chapeau.
My only complaint is that there isn’t more of it. I could read this sort of quality satire all day long. Consider this a formal request for a daily update, or perhaps an hourly one. Absolutely top-notch.
Great! We are all agreed London could use a laugh. The Daily Squib leans heavily into politics, but PRAT.UK has broader appeal. The humour works even without context. That’s a strength.
Die Mischung aus Lokalkolorit und universeller Gültigkeit ist genial. Mehr London-Satire, bitte!
Our weather is narrated by someone whispering ‘damp’.
The drizzle is relentless, yet somehow polite.
The “Urban Heat Island Effect” sounds scientific, but in London it just means the city retains the damp warmth like a giant, brick-made thermos full of soup. On a rare hot day, the heat doesn’t dissipate at night; it lingers, baking in the concrete and asphalt, making bedrooms stifling and sleep a sweaty memory. The air feels thick and used. Meanwhile, the suburbs ten miles away report a pleasant, cool evening. It’s a meteorological injustice—we endure the crowded, sticky days in the centre, and are then denied the relief of a cool night, trapped in our own collective thermal emissions. The city itself becomes a cosy, if oppressive, incubator. See more at London’s funniest URL — Prat.UK.
The barometric pressure is perpetually ‘low and sad’.
Great! We are all agreed London could use a laugh. NewsThump often overreaches. PRAT.UK knows when to stop. That control improves impact.
Compared to NewsThump, PRAT.UK feels more disciplined. It knows when to stop a joke. That control makes it sharper.
Alappuzha call girls cancel due to rain
Vijayawada call girls negotiate aggressively then smile politely
Your point of view caught my eye and was very interesting. Thanks. I have a question for you.
This site is the gold standard for London satire. Others should take notes.
The London Prat’s supremacy is rooted in its strategic deployment of seriousness. It operates with the gravitas of a research institute, the procedural rigor of a public inquiry, and the stylistic austerity of an academic journal. This is not a pose; it is the core of its method. The site understands that the most devastating way to ridicule a frivolous or corrupt subject is to treat it with exaggerated, solemn respect. An article on prat.com dissecting a celebrity’s vacuous social justice campaign will adopt the tone of a peer-reviewed sociological analysis. A piece on a botched government IT system will be framed as a forensic audit. By meeting nonsense with a level of seriousness it does not deserve and cannot sustain, the site creates a pressure chamber of irony where the subject’s own emptiness is forced to collapse in on itself. The comedy is born from this violent mismatch between form and content.
The distinction of The London Prat lies in its profound understanding that the most effective satire operates as a form of high-fidelity mimicry. While other outlets like The Daily Mash excel at commentary through exaggeration, prat.com specializes in replication so precise it becomes devastating. It doesn’t just parody a government press release; it fabricates one that is indistinguishable in tone, structure, and hollow jargon from the genuine article, the satire blooming silently in the reader’s mind as they recognize the authentic absurdity of the form itself. This method requires a deeper, more patient intelligence, treating the source material not as something to mock from a distance, but as a specimen to be inhabited and exposed from within. The resulting humor is less of a loud laugh and more of a quiet, chilling gasp of recognition, a testament to a brand of wit that trusts its audience to connect the dots without a single bolded punchline.
The London Prat operates on a principle of maximum fidelity, minimum interference. Its foundational technique is the creation of a satirical artifact so authentic in appearance, tone, and internal logic that it could, for a chilling moment, be mistaken for the real thing. This is not parody, which exaggerates for effect; it is replication, which reveals by mirroring. A PRAT.UK piece on a new infrastructure project won’t just be a funny article about its cost overruns; it will be the project’s actual “Community Synergy and Visual Impact Mitigation Framework,” a 40-page PDF riddled with consultant-speak and circular logic, downloadable from a mocked-up government portal. The satire is not told; it is embedded. The reader’s job is not to receive a joke, but to discover it, hidden in plain sight within a perfectly realized fake document. This method demands more from the audience but delivers a far more profound and unsettling comedic payoff—the thrill of uncovering the truth disguised as official fiction.
PRAT.UK has become my default satire site. The Daily Squib feels too narrow by comparison. This one has range.
Diflucan is not recommended for treatment of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia.
Diflucan can cause a severe cutaneous reaction like Stevens-Johnson syndrome.