How is Sterling Sharpe in the HOF but not Stanley Morgan?

[upstater1]

Explain:

Sharpe 8134 yards for 13.7 Y/R 65 TDs

Morgan 10716 yards for 19.2 Y/R & 72 TDs

 

[signbabybrady]

They don't like Patriots in the Hall for some reason

 

[AQPE]

Green Bay special case syndrome.

Other than Gates the whole class is a joke, no Vinitieri, some guy who was an owner for 4 years gets in for calling a meeting once, a mediocre CB, a guy who was a good edge for 4 seasons. A corrupted process yielding commensurate results.

 

[PF_SU]

Explain:

Sharpe 8134 yards for 13.7 Y/R 65 TDs

Morgan 10716 yards for 19.2 Y/R & 72 TDs

Sharpe managed his numbers in half as many seasons as Stanley Morgan. In his 7 seasons in the league he was a Pro Bowler 5x and 1st Team All-Pro 3x, which both beat out Morgan, despite the latter playing twice as many season.

Sharpe was without doubt a better player than Morgan. Question is just how one rates the fact that his career was cut short by his career-ending injury in 1994. If Sharpe had continued to play for another 5-7 seasons at a similar level as in his first 7, he'd have been a shoe-in for first ballot.

 

[Grogan14]

Love Stanley Morgan but he had multiple seasons with low numbers of receptions and TDs. Although Sharpe had fewer seasons his consistency was excellent and every year he had lots of receptions and consistently good TD numbers.

 

[upstater1]

Sharpe managed his numbers in half as many seasons as Stanley Morgan. In his 7 seasons in the league he was a Pro Bowler 5x and 1st Team All-Pro 3x, which both beat out Morgan, despite the latter playing twice as many season.

Sharpe was without doubt a better player than Morgan. Question is just how one rates the fact that his career was cut short by his career-ending injury in 1994. If Sharpe had continued to play for another 5-7 seasons at a similar level as in his first 7, he'd have been a shoe-in for first ballot.

Not half as many but 60% of.

We're also talking about 2 different eras of football.

70s and 80s were more run-oriented and a lot of downfield throwing.

90s were West Coast offense, a lot more pass-oriented.

As for "he would've if not injured..." how is that being counted?

That shouldn't count at all. To be credited for what you would've done if not injured makes no sense.

Look at Morgan's YPC. It dwarfs Sharpe's #s.

 

[gobesmug]

Explain:

Sharpe 8134 yards for 13.7 Y/R 65 TDs

Morgan 10716 yards for 19.2 Y/R & 72 TDs

Not listing how many seasons played is deceptive and misleading

 

[Pape]

Be better to compared Morgan to his contemporaries versus modern day players like Sterling Sharpe... He stacks up well against guys like Art Monk, John Stallworth & Lynn Swann... is beaten out by guys like Steve Largent & James Lofton... Not sure how he stacks up against Michael Irvin... when i looked, the total numbers were shockingly similar, with a (slight?) edge to Irvin... A case can be made for Stanley Morgan, but that leads us to ....

the built in disadvantage of having Ron Borges being the advocate for the New England Patriots... I think the voters must pat him on the head and say "ok ron, we'll look at him... *snickers*... fat chance of that happening captain plagarism"

Borges needs to be replaced

 

[Triumph]

Love Stanley Morgan but he had multiple seasons with low numbers of receptions and TDs. Although Sharpe had fewer seasons his consistency was excellent and every year he had lots of receptions and consistently good TD numbers.

Sharpe never missed a game and every single season was respectable.

791 yards as a rookie and he blew up year 2.

Sterling Sharpe Stats, Height, Weight, Position, Draft, College | Pro-Football-Reference.com

Checkout the latest stats for Sterling Sharpe. Get info about his position, age, height, weight, college, draft, and more on Pro-football-reference.com.

www.pro-football-reference.com

 

[jlu52]

Be better to compared Morgan to his contemporaries versus modern day players like Sterling Sharpe... He stacks up well against guys like Art Monk, John Stallworth & Lynn Swann... is beaten out by guys like Steve Largent & James Lofton... Not sure how he stacks up against Michael Irvin... when i looked, the total numbers were shockingly similar, with a (slight?) edge to Irvin... A case can be made for Stanley Morgan, but that leads us to ....

the built in disadvantage of having Ron Borges being the advocate for the New England Patriots... I think the voters must pat him on the head and say "ok ron, we'll look at him... *snickers*... fat chance of that happening captain plagarism"

Borges needs to be replaced

If Stanley were playing in today's game, I believe the Patriots would have their #1 Elite Receiver, as we like to say around here. He would kick considerable ass, imo. He played at a time when receivers and QBs were regularly manhandled, with no flags. Yep, Stanley is the kind of receiver we need around here, I remember how terrific he actually was

 

[Grogan14]

8/15 seasons with 40 or fewer catches
3/15 with 10 or more tds
Only 3 seasons with a thousand or more yards

He played for a long time and was mostly targeted infrequently

Very very good receivet
In Pats HOF yes
Is he HOF worthy for a WR? I do not think so unless longevity is a criterion

 

[RobertWeathers]

Sterling Sharp was an incredible WR. Up until his neck injury he had maybe 2-3 more top-level years left.

Throw Steamer in this generation with a good QB and he's Justin Jefferson.

 

[turkeyneck]

Borges needs to be replaced

In time, Pape. In time...

 

[PF_SU]

Not half as many but 60% of.

We're also talking about 2 different eras of football.

70s and 80s were more run-oriented and a lot of downfield throwing.

90s were West Coast offense, a lot more pass-oriented.

As for "he would've if not injured..." how is that being counted?

That shouldn't count at all. To be credited for what you would've done if not injured makes no sense.

Look at Morgan's YPC. It dwarfs Sharpe's #s.

I didn't say that hypotheticals should be counted. But Sharpe's career getting cut short should definitely be considered when doing the kind of total comparisons that you were doing.

Also, regarding the eras thing, that's where the pro bowl or all pro selections come in. Compared to their respective peers Sharpe was rated higher. I think you would have a better case complaining about Stanley Morgan versus Michael Irvin than against Sharpe.
Irvin and Sharpe were contemporaries and the fact that Irvin was inducted almost 20 years earlier than Sharpe when Sharpe outdid Irvin in individual accolades (Sharpe has the same number of pro bowl selections and 1 all pro selection more than Irvin despite playing 5 seasons less) shows more of a rings / Cowboys bias towards Irvin.

 

[203Pat]

The Hall of Very Good strikes again.

 

[lancerman]

Terrell Davis set the precedent for Sharpe. If you had an insane peak that got derailed for injury, you get in.

Sharpe has 3 First Team All Pros. Morgan has 2 Second Team All Pros. Sharpe has 5 Pro Bowls. Morgan has 4. Sharpe led the league in TD’s twice, Morgan once. Morgan’s best year was 14k yards his second best year was 1k. Sharpe broke 14k twice, had a 12k year, two 11k years, and a 1k year. Morgan’s best year for TD’s was 12TD’s. Sharpe’s best year was 18, then 13, then 12. Then he also had an 11TD year in there which means he broke 10TD’s 4 times compared to Morgan’s one. Morgan’s best year in reception was 84 rec and his next highest was 58. Sharpe best year was 112, then 108, then 94, then 90.

Morgan had a better yards per average and longevity.

Also it definitely helps that one of the biggest names in football media is his brother and he probably lobbies his ass off to him to voters and one of the more famous HOF speeches was him begging voters to consider his brother.

 

[Rob0729]

You cannot compare career stats. Morgan played 14 years and Sharpe played 7.

I think there is a good case for Morgan to be in the Hall especially with some of the other guys who are already in being arguably lesser WRs.

That said, Sharpe was an elite WR before he got injured. If he was able to play without injury his entire career, we may be talking about the guy as one of the greatest of all times up there with the elite of the elite.

 

[203Pat]

Receiver is going to be such a difficult position as far as the hall of fame goes because of the rule changes the last 20 years that have allowed the passing game to explode.

 

[Steve102]

Be better to compared Morgan to his contemporaries versus modern day players like Sterling Sharpe... He stacks up well against guys like Art Monk, John Stallworth & Lynn Swann... is beaten out by guys like Steve Largent & James Lofton... Not sure how he stacks up against Michael Irvin... when i looked, the total numbers were shockingly similar, with a (slight?) edge to Irvin... A case can be made for Stanley Morgan, but that leads us to ....

the built in disadvantage of having Ron Borges being the advocate for the New England Patriots... I think the voters must pat him on the head and say "ok ron, we'll look at him... *snickers*... fat chance of that happening captain plagarism"

Borges needs to be replaced

Borges sucks. I cannot imagine him advocating for anyone from Foxboro.

 

[upstater1]

I didn't say that hypotheticals should be counted. But Sharpe's career getting cut short should definitely be considered when doing the kind of total comparisons that you were doing.

Also, regarding the eras thing, that's where the pro bowl or all pro selections come in. Compared to their respective peers Sharpe was rated higher. I think you would have a better case complaining about Stanley Morgan versus Michael Irvin than against Sharpe.
Irvin and Sharpe were contemporaries and the fact that Irvin was inducted almost 20 years earlier than Sharpe when Sharpe outdid Irvin in individual accolades (Sharpe has the same number of pro bowl selections and 1 all pro selection more than Irvin despite playing 5 seasons less) shows more of a rings / Cowboys bias towards Irvin.

5 Pro Bowls for Sharpe to 4 Pro Bowls for Morgan, are we really making a case about just one less Pro Bowl for Stanley?

And Sharpe played on a Super Bowl winning team, while the Patriots of 1976 to 1988 were just a little better than mediocre. Sharpe played with Brett Favre. Very different than playing with Grogan, Cavanaugh and Eason.

Let's not pretend this isn't a popularity contest for winning teams.

If you actually look at the non-Pro Bowl accolades at the time among sportswriters from things like UPI (yes, that used to be a big thing) or PFW, Stanley was well regarded and made several 1st and 2nd team All-Pros.

But the thing about injury that you keep doing makes absolutely no sense.