A Hall of Fame Comparison – ED BUDDE

There is a feeling among AFL fans that the American Football League players are consistently overlooked for induction into the Pro Football Hall of Fame.  In truth there are many players, the bulk of whose careers were spent in the AFL, that deserve serious consideration, if not outright induction.  In an effort to spark some discussion regarding their hall of fame worthiness, I will occasionally compare AFL players to their NFL (and Hall of Fame) counterparts. The short biographies on the NFL players have been taken directly from the Pro Football Hall of Fame website.

Today’s comparison is between Ed Budde of the Kansas City Chiefs and two HoF offensive guards, Tom Mack and Mike Munchak.

autographed 1965 topps ed budde

#095 – Ed Budde

Edward Leon Budde – First round draft choice by the Kansas City Chiefs in 1963…  Played nine consecutive seasons without missing a game…  Seven-time AFL All-star/NFL Pro Bowler…  Twice First-Team All-Pro…  Won  two AFL championships, and member of Super Bowl IV-winning Chiefs…  First lineman named to AFL All-Time First-Team…  Retired in 1976, after 14 seasons with the Chiefs…

Thomas Lee MackRams’ first round draft pick, second player overall in 1966 NFL draft. . .One of only two rookies on veteran-laden team. . . Earned starting role as rookie and held left guard position for next 13 seasons. . .Extremely durable, never missed a game during 184-game career. . .Named to 11 Pro Bowls. . .All-NFL five times. . . All-Western Conference once, All-NFC eight times…

Michael Anthony MunchakOilers’ first-round draft pick, eighth player overall and first offensive lineman selected, 1982 … Earned starting left guard position, rookie season … Devastating blocker, anchored Oilers line that helped team perennially rank near top of NFL’s offensive statistical categories … Named first- or second-team All-Pro ten times … All-AFC seven times … Elected to nine Pro Bowls …

As we have discussed before, the Kansas City Chiefs of the late 1960s were one of the most dominant teams in pro football history.  They are already represented by nine men in Canton, with Jerry Mays, Johnny Robinson, Otis Taylor, Jim Tyrer and Ed Budde waiting in the wings.  Budde was a dominant guard for many years, and along with Bob Talamini, was named to the AFL’s All-Time First-Team at the position.  As linemen do not have statistics to compare like other positions, things like durability, longevity, and Pro Bowls get called into question.  Budde ranks high in all categories.  Additionally, he blocked for a Hall of Fame quarterback in Len Dawson, and a 1,000-yard rusher in Mike Garrett. What more did he need to achieve to earn his place in Canton?  Thoughts?

Todd Tobias (790 Posts)

Todd Tobias's interest in the American Football League began in 1998, when he wrote my master's thesis about Sid Gillman. He created this site to educate and entertain football fans with the stories of the American Football League, 1960-1969. You can follow Todd and get more AFL history on Twitter @TalesfromtheAFL.

27 Responses to A Hall of Fame Comparison – ED BUDDE

  1. 1967 says:

    Ed Budde also won the AFL Associated Press Offensive Player of the Week award as an offensive guard – a pro football first. It happened back in 1968 when he and his teammates produced almost 300 yards (294) rushing in KC’s 24-10 victory over the AFL Champion Oakland Raiders. Name another offensive lineman (Hall of Fame or otherwise) who has done so; it’s a short list.


    Regarding “Jerry Mays, Johnny Robinson, Otis Taylor, Jim Tyrer and Ed Budde waiting in the wings”, don’t forget Jerrell Wilson. He should be included in any discussion of pro football’s greatest punter. He kicked back in the days of ‘long distance’ measure, before directional kicking came into vogue. Yet, Wilson has credentials that rival most any of the great punters in history.

    It mystifies me that Jerrell Wilson gets so little recognition compared to others, and specifically compared to his college alumni, Ray Guy. That both attended Southern Mississippi college is fact – that Wilson had both better gross AND net average per punt than Guy in each player’s pro career is also true; if you believe the media hype, Guy and his “high, hanging punts” were born right after God finished resting day seven. Emphasis that it is the ‘media hype’ I’m denigrating here, not the player Guy (even if he is a Raider, arch enemy of Chiefs fandom : )

    Much as the Hall of Fame selection process, appears hype overshadows reality often, unfortunately.

    • Howard says:

      One of the conclusions that I get from your commentaries, is that perhaps the biggest obstacle the Chiefs incurred was Hank Stram himself. While talent doesn’t automatically translate into championships, it certainly helps. With arguably 10-12 or more HOF, members, the Chiefs underachieved in many respects.

      • 1967 says:

        Agreed, without question as to the Chiefs underachieving… I used to (still do in my more melancholy/equitable moments) give their opponents benefit of the doubt (“those guys get paid to win too.”) Still, in hindsight I don’t believe any honest review by a Chiefs fan can arrive at any other conclusion but that Hank Stram/his team left victories & Championships (plural) on the gridiron, unrealized/unrequited.

  2. Howard says:

    You could probably make a case that all five offensive lineman of the 1969-1971 Chiefs should be inducted. But, you could also make a case that all five of the 1960’s Packers, Cowboys, and Raiders should go in as well.
    Unfortunately the HOF is over represented by quarterbacks and running backs. And offensive players vastly outnumber defensive players. This is fun intellectual masturbation, but, unfortunately, Eli Manning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Favre, etc. will get in on a first ballot, and Ed Reed or Charles Woodson will have to wait several years to get in.
    And forget about the players that we love to talk about. I’m shocked Curly Culp and Dave Robinson got in!

  3. Brad Anderson says:

    A bit of trivia here; Ed and his son Brad are the only father son duo to be drafted in the first round by the same team to play the same position in NFL history. Ed and Brad also wore the number 71 with the Chiefs, although Brad did also ware the number 66.

    • Howard says:

      I once had the pleasure of meeting Ed Bradley Sr. & Ed Bradley, Jr. “Brad”, the senior played for the Chicago Bears in the 1950’s. He was a contemporary of George Blanda.
      His son Ed, Jr. played for the Steelers during the early 1970’s. He played in the Super Bowl against Minnesota. Jack Lambert was shaken up and Ed, Jr. played most of the 4th quarter. The Vikings gained about 30 yards all day.

      Both were great gentlemen. It would be cool to have known both Budde’s.

  4. Kenton says:

    > 1967, I read your comments regarding Jerrell Wilson with interest. It may be true that Wilson had a higher punting average than Ray Guy in each of their shared pro years, I don’t know, I can find no reference to Wilson’s individual year punting stats. On the NFL.com website under scores & stats – top performers – record & fact book – stats by position and year. I see Guy listed in each of their shared years (1973-78), while wilson is not even listed once in any of those years ? Can’t find it on the Chiefs website either.

    • 1967 says:

      Again, I do not wish to uplift one player at the expense another. That said, and in acknowledgement that with each passing season records fall & new ones are set, strategy & rules change, training & skill increases:

      Wilson vs Guy – fact vs hype.

      Gross & net being the guts of punter ratings, td returns vs & punts blocked too (though lesser perhaps due their being subject to teammate contributions even more so), the first mentioned ‘stats’ elevate Wilson above Guy (latter gets more mention due ‘style’ points & his Raiders teams greater success his playing days, compared Wilson’s in KC, my opine.)


      Wilson 16 years / Guy 14 years

      Jerrel Wilson & Sammy Baugh share the NFL record of leading the league 4x each in punting… Wilson had 12 punts blocked career to Guy’s three… Guy made seven Pro Bowls, Wilson three. Wilson had five punts returned for a td his career, Guy allowed four. Season highs for each player regular and post to include Superbowls considered, Wilson holds the edge after stat review each.

      Six of one/half a dozen the other? Flip a coin.

      Jerrel Wilson played for KC 15 years, and then 1 more season with the Patriots, 1963-1978; Guy played 14 years with the Raiders, 1973-1986.

      Wilson’s Chiefs stats can be found at the link below, including his gross of 43.4 and net of 35.4


      Wilson’s final season in New England/Patriots produced a gross of 35.6 and a net of 29.4 (I did an game by game breakdown of Wilson’s 1978 punting, to include deductions for touchbacks and return yards by opponents, as I have found no website that lists cumulative gross AND net for punters going back to Wilson’s day; his career began 10 years before Guy’s rookie season, 1973.)

      All years computed, the upshot of Wilson’s 16 years & Guy’s 14 years as to the gross AND net career averages for each player, ‘tale of the toe’ below:

      Wilson 43.0 gross, 35.1 net
      Guy 42.4 gross, 33.8 net

      Distance and field position considered, draw your own conclusions.


      Here are a couple of articles of interest (including ‘gotcha’s!’ whereby Ray Guy adherents were shown to have embelished his legacy, see below:)


      Here’s another, below:


      And the ‘media hype machine’ is silent, mute testimony their only reply…

    • 1967 says:


      I replied to your post with my own at 3:22 p.m., but my response (long & with included links) hasn’t/may not be posted, perhaps due said.

      If it is, stay tuned. If not, the upshot is this:

      Career: Wilson 43.0 gross / 35.1 net ~ Guy 42.4 gross / 33.8 net

      Distance and field position considered, so much for the media’s infatuation with a Guy punt hitting a video screen 90 feet high, vertically… great taste, less filling as to punting results: advantage Jerrel Wilson.

      • Todd Tobias says:


        I’m not sure why your post of 3:22 got held up, but it somehow landed in the “to be approved” pile. I just saw it, and approved it. Sorry for the delay.


        • 1967 says:

          Jerrel Wilson (am sure) thanks you… and so do I

          : )

          • Kenton says:

            > 1967 – Good research 1967, that would make a good trivia question knowing that little known Jerrell Wilson had a higher career punting average both gross and net than did Ray Guy. But your original email stated that Wilson had a higher gross AND net average in EACH of their shared pro years (1973-1986). Using your numbers for Wilson in 1986 35.6/29.4, we know that that’s incorrect for 1986, as Guy’s average was 42.7 according to NFL.com. – Good debate though…

          • 1967 says:

            Au contraire, Kenton: what I said was “Wilson had both better gross AND net average per punt than Guy in each player’s pro career” – not each year thereof, cumulatively as the stats affirm.

            Hopefully the information was instructive, because the truth is one cannot count on people in the media or otherwise to be accurate or impartial, necessarily. I can assure you Jerrel Wilson was not/is not ‘little known’ by long-time football fans.

            Still, people perpetuate the same errant information (just read some of the fans comments on the two links that I’ve provided – Raider fans to be sure, but bias is bias & anyone can be subject.)

            I look at it this way: stats affirm that Wilson was better.

            Beyond that objective measure, one would have to review every game of each punter & chart the position on the field / yard-line punts occurred, where they landed, etc. in addition to the return yards, touchbacks, etc. etc. to gauge the actual field position as it translated. It’s simpler for folks to buy into the ‘hype’ and claim – “there’s no question about it, player X was the best”, the lack of evidence no impediment to personal sentiment..

            Subjectively, because player X (Guy) “looks” more spectacular (his punts) than does another player Z (Wilson) in the opinion of some or several or even every, does not equate to X being “better” in fact.

            Old Chiefs fan that I am, Otis Taylor looked more “spectacular” than most every other receiver in the game in my opinion; that said does not make him ‘the best’ & his stats also do not affirm is quite clear… as one of his biggest fans however, I retain my slant/fan prerogative.

  5. Kenton says:

    > 1967 – I meant to write 1978 rather than 1986 for the comparison year of Wilson vs. Guy.

    • Kenton says:

      > 1967, I see on the databasefootball.com site the following stats:

      Ray Guy – career gross 42.4
      Jerrell Wilson – career gross 43.8
      Ray Guy 1973 gross – 45.3 / net not listed
      1974 gross – 42.2 / net not listed
      1975 gross – 43.8 / net not listed
      1976 gross – 41.6 / net 33.1
      1977 gross – 43.3 / net 34.8
      1978 gross – 42.7 / net 34.6
      Jerrell Wilson 1973 gross – 45.5 / net not listed
      1974 gross – 41.7 / net not listed
      1975 gross – 41.4 / net not listed
      1976 gross – 42.0 / net 33.4
      1977 gross – 39.9 / net 30.4
      1978 gross – 35.6 / net 29.4

      Of the minimal 3 years listed of net punting average, Guy beats him 2 out of 3. I’m not saying that you are not correct I don’t know. I’m asking how do you know that Wilson had a higher career net average than Guy. Where are you getting your information ?

      • 1967 says:

        Reiterating, access the KC Chiefs link which lists his gross in KC as 43.4 and his net as 35.4 from 1963-1977 (here again is the link, below; scroll down to the punting stats)


        Then, add Wilson’s 1978 season stats with the Patriots (35.6 gross and 29.4 net) to the aforementioned.

        CAREER: Wilson 43.0 and 35.1 , Guy 42.4 and 33.8

        • 1967 says:

          The ‘net’ (pun intended) of it all is, career, Wilson not only kicked for better distance (gross) than Guy as situations required, but he was also better at placing the ball (net) advantageously for his team’s benefit on defense (other factors directional, touchbacks etc. considered).

          There’s no question that, objectively, Wilson was superior to Guy, and the stats affirm.

          Next project (for whomever is interested), a breakdown comparing the total return yards & touchdowns career vs Wilson & Guy, though that of course is an more ‘team’ oriented stat. Still, it is what Guy adherents typically hang their hats on, how his ‘high, hanging punts’ limited the opposition return game.

          Having already shown the (many quarters) ballyhooed Guy, an great punter, comes in second best to Wilson (at minimum, other punters too exceeding Guy perhaps, all told), only compelling and ‘objective’ findings otherwise could help elevate the lesser ‘guy’, my opine.

          • 1967 says:

            Well, easier said then done re: return yards vs, touchbacks, inside 20 kicks, etc. due to incomplete records available both for Wilson and Guy, certain years. They do exist, I just can’t access them (no doubt the teams, KC and OAK, have this information.)

            Still, here’s something that might be of interest: in Wilson’s final three seasons (1976-1978, when he was age 35, 36 & 37) and Guy during those same seasons (he was 26,27 & 28), this comparison:

            Both punters had the exact same # of punts that three-year period (207), this the very end of Wilson’s career and in the prime of Guy’s.

            Wilson placed 39 punts inside the 20/just 17 touchbacks; Guy had 43 – more than twice as many touchbacks – while placing 47 inside the 20; ‘the prosecution’ (aka 1967) rests.

            On the other hand, Guy had 107 punts returned for a 7.4 average vs these 3 years, Wilson had 115 punts returned for an average of 11.5 vs (this entails greater overall special team consideration of course, teammates, but it too is worth pondering.) My take is: so much for ‘high, hanging punt’ expertise, media over-hype the former Raider.

            Over time/career, in each great punter’s prime, Jerrel ‘Thunderfoot’ Wilson was superior to Guy (Raider fans are no doubt in a tizzy.)

        • Kenton says:

          > 1967 – Hold on there, back up, this case is not closed. Yes, I did see the Chiefs link which you provided showing Wilsons career net punting average of 35.4 / 35.1 adjusted for Patriots year. I wanted to know where you obtained Ray Guys career net average of 33.8 ? Do you have that link ? Yes or no.

          Regarding the Chiefs website quote of Wilsons 35.4 yard career net average, is that his average taking in every year of his career with the Chiefs from 1963-77 ?, or the average of the years when the NFL started keeping track of net punting yards during his years with the Chiefs ?

          The furthest back I see stats taken for net yards punting is 1976 on databasefootball.com. Do you have a link showing Wilsons season by season net punting average for the years 1963-1975 ? or Guys net punting average for 1973-1975 ? Yes or no.

          In one of your prior messages you wrote “as I have found no website that list’s cumulative gross AND net for punters going back to Wilsons day”. Have you found that website yet ? Yes or no.

          If you and the NFL staticians don’t have the net punting average for EACH year that both player played, then you cannot correctly calculate the TRUE career net yardage for each player.

          Unless you can produce the numbers for each players year that they played regarding net punting average, your claim that Jerrell Wilson had a higher net average than Ray Guy is unsubstantiated, speculative, and may or may not be true.

          • 1967 says:

            “Regarding the Chiefs website quote of Wilsons 35.4 yard career net average, is that his average taking in every year of his career with the Chiefs from 1963-77 ?”

            – yes – it was determined/verified by the team after a game-by-game review. As ‘officially’ the NFL does not recognize stats garnered that occurred previous to the league’s recognition (1976 case net average punts) it’s not listed in their records… said does not change history nor what transpired. I suggest you might want to contact the Chiefs team historian Bob Moore and/or the KC PR department re: Wilson, as well their counterparts in Oakland re: Guy’s net/pre-1976 records.

            Individual teams doing their own research is the method employed most often such cases (one example includes a Deacon Jones, re: his career sacks as an DE with the Rams et al). The freedom to accept or dispute such findings is personal prerogative of course, but the tape does not lie, especially compared subjective fan bias. Were I able to find it now, would list a link wherein I recall reading Wilson saying “he’d better check the record book” in answer someone’s reference to Guy being better than Jerrel.

            One supposes it likely an better method game-by-game team review than to accept a blatant misrepresentation, such as “Ray Guy never had a punt returned for a td vs him”, according several folks claims, when Guy had 4 of his punts returned for tds in his career according to readily available ‘official’ stats.

            As for Guy’s punting ‘net’ career, I’ve no access to OAK review, said. If you type “ray guy career 33.8 net average” under a Goggle search, you will find several references to said – you will find ‘no’ reference to said under an ‘official’ NFL link because of course there wouldn’t be – once again, they do not recognize any stat that occurred before they ‘blessed it’ as ’twere.

            What the NFL ‘has’ done is to accept stats produced by former AFL players that league, so we know Jerrel Wilson’s qualify and I know KC’s PR department verified Wilson’s net… that I verified his 1978 Patriots stats/net as well the 1976-1978 Wilson/Guy comparison is also fact, not hype.

            Guy’s Wikipedia page does list his net as 33.8; interestingly, official website http://www.rayguy.com is ‘mute’ on the subject. Under an ‘career achievements’ section, his career net is nowhere to be found – make of this what you will. I find it a bit odd that a site that is devoted to but one stat category (punting) via a player who played 11 of his 14 years while that ‘net’ stat was recognized hasn’t done (or published) its own research to extol and validate his career net, the mere three years omitted. Considering adherents claim him ‘peerless’ via hang-time/pinning opponents deep in their own end due to his specialty, I’d expect such research to have already been done. In fact it might have been – but is unpublished. Coincidence?

            My posted review of the last three years of Wilson’s career and those three same Guy’s prime 1976-1978 affirms that same # of punts 207, Wilson suffered far fewer touchbacks than Guy yet had but 8 fewer punts inside the 20, teacher schooling the student, appears.

            If Guy is the best as some folk plead, his stats are hardly convincing, net, gross, punting titles won, etc. As stats are the measure and not hype, appears it’s ‘advantage Wilson’, believe as you wish, Kenton.

          • Kenton says:

            > 1967 – I believe that Jerrell Wilson may have had a higher career net punting average than Ray Guy. I also believe that there is no hard evidence to support that claim.
            Members of the Chiefs organization probably did the best they could with what they had available, pouring over old game films, stat sheets, and whatever else they could muster up. But, considering the questionable record keeping by clubs in the early and middle years of the AFL, who knows ? Un-clear camera angles, a missing stat sheet from a quarter or a half of a few games. An extra yard here, a couple extra there. To think that they got Wilsons net average yards down pat during 14 games a season plus the playoffs during all those years in the AFL, plus the NFL years before that statistic was officially tracked is hard to believe. Babe Ruths then home run record of 714 was questioned, some of the home runs believed to come from exhibition games, and even pick-up games at carnivals. To say that Wilsons career net average being higher than Guys is a cold hard fact, is a reach.

            Let’s agree to disagree and move on, i’ll look forward to our next “Debate”…

  6. chris burford says:

    Just happen to have the Chiefs media guides for 63, 64, 66, 67…Wilsons’ “averages” for his first 4 years were were : ’63 was 43.8 , long 72; ’64 was 42.7, long 70; ’65 was 46.1, long 64; ’66 was 44.5, long 69 Jerrel Wilson wasn’t called “Thunderfoot” for nothing! He was also a great teammate and friend. Both players (Jerrel and Ray) were head and “feet” above their peers……………..Jerrels’ longevity was amazing.

  7. Howard says:

    Where else but this blog would you see an intense discussion over the relative merits of a punter? Which begs the question if Wilson was as good as Ray Guy why isn’t he in the Hall of Fame?

  8. Tom says:

    In 1972 Ray Guy’s second to last college game was played in Logan Utah against Utah State. Southern Mississippi was leading 21-20 with a minute or so left in the game and faced with fourth and ten from their own 20 yard line decided to let Guy punt, play D and win the game. As fate would have it the snap was low touching the ground and Guy bobbled it and then kicked it into the chest of Utah State’s Freddie Gray (Crenshaw HS and LACC) who chased it and fell on it in the end zone. The crowd erupted and soon after a call went out over the PA system for Doc Worley the USU team physician and orthopedic surgeon. In the excitement a fan had gone into cardiac arrest, fainted and fallen down the steps and laid unconscious, the story goes that the mans face was so contorted that Doc Worley, who had been near life long friends didn’t recognize the stickened man. It was too late, by the time emergency help arrived the man died. Utah State won the game 27-21.

  9. STEVECANADA says:

    There’s no doubt that Ed Budde is not in the HOF because he played next to Jim Tyrer for all those years with the Chiefs. Though Budde was a great player, Tyrer was even better but will never get in because he murdered his wife before killing himself. Had he just killed himself a la Junior Seau, he would’ve gotten in. Even though his 4 children forgave him years ago, they’ll never vote him in. Now one thing Budde has in his favour is that he’s still alive and I think doing well at 77 years old. But it would open the whole question of Jim Tyrer not being in the Hall. Budde should easily be in and I can’t come up with any other reason why he’s not.

Leave a Reply