Mike Florio thinks the Pro Football Hall of Fame may regret downsizing selection committee

The Pro Football Hall of Fame made sweeping changes to its selection process earlier this month, cutting down the selection committee from 50 to 28 individuals consisting of 25 voters and three non-voters.

The shift comes in the wake of a Hall of Fame class that shockingly did not include longtime New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick, who was widely considered a shoe-in to make the Hall in his first year of eligibility.

While the announcement claimed that the change had been in process for more than two years, and despite Belichick’s name not being mentioned, anyone following the Hall over the past year will connect the two. The Hall of Fame had questions that needed answering after Belichick’s baffling absence, and it appears that this is the move they are making to address it.

But as Mike Florio explained on his show, it’s possible the move will only create more chaotic outcomes, and bring the Hall more scrutiny the next time we are shocked by an new class of inductees.

“It’s far more likely to avoid screwy outcomes if you expand the panel, not shrink it,” Florio said. “By shrinking the panel you have focused the criticism, and the smaller the panel, the more easy it is for people to start asking questions when you do have a screwy result.

“So I don’t think fewer voters makes it better, unless somehow you have culled from the 50 and added from the outside oracles who will make the right decision all the time. But I don’t see any rhyme or reason as to how they went from 50 to 28, because some people got left out that I would think are probably good enough to continue to do it, and some of the people who survived—I don’t see any obvious reason why those people are better than the ones that got thrown overboard for this task.”

Florio closed his comments with a warning.

“Be careful Hall of Fame, because you may be opening yourself up to more criticism, because you’re taking qualified voters and you’re taking them away from the process. You’re consolidating power with fewer people. You’re going to make it more glaring when the inevitable mistakes happen.”

Dramatically reducing the Hall of Fame voting panel won’t prevent screwy outcomes. And it will focus the inevitable criticism on a much smaller group of individuals. pic.twitter.com/wnyGpFwqly

— PFT Live (@PFT_Live) September 18, 2026

Florio is right that if the true goal of the move was to avoid shocking outcomes like Belichick missing the cut, expanding the voter base might have been the smarter move, as any opinions too extreme would be more likely to be drowned out by a larger group.

Additionally, as Florio noted, it’s unclear what the exact system was, or if there even was a system for deciding who stayed and who lost their vote.

Like referees, the Hall of Fame selection committee is usually doing its best work when it goes unnoticed. Any time you are too aware of its presence, something has gone wrong. For now, the shift may work out fine, but if we get another shocking snub in the coming years, the reduction just means there will be half as many people to blame.