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

[upstater1]

And Tony Eason season finished 6th in MVP voting in 86? Fans from that era also constantly stand by about how good Steve Grogan was, so which is it?

I’m just saying that you’re using one season where Sharpe had 900 yards as a base of your argument here. That was pretty much Morgan’s average season.

As for 70’s/80’s football, Morgan played all but his rookie season of his career after the rule changes in 78. There really isn’t a major difference in the late 70’s/early 80’s era compared to the late 80’s early 90’s from that point.

I’m not discounting what Morgan did here. But I think you’re unfairly comparing him to just how good Sharpe was.

Eason was benched for Grogan, and Grogan was bad. Grogan was never really good. Not sure who is telling you this.

Usually when your team hates you because you're bad and gutless (Eason), and you get benched repeatedly, that's not a sign of a good QB. He was jettisoned shortly thereafter. As for people liking Grogan, it was because we hated Eason so much that we celebrated when Grogan took over for him (even though they went back to Eason for the Super Bowl). Remember, Grogran was replaced several times by new QBs who weren't very good. Matt Cavanaugh for instance. Grogan was the Ryan Fitzpatrick of his day. except for one team. Threw an incredible amount of picks, wildly inaccurate, very athletic and the best running QB in the game.

Finishing 6th in voting is not a real thing when you get a pity vote from some knucklehead.

As for there not being changes, there were huge changes. Grabbing the DBs was allowed, headhunting across the field on WRs. They changed the rules in the 1990s.

1. No more helmet to helmet hitting.
2. Refs started calling penalties for dirty hits.
3. Roughing the passer became a rule.
4. Then all the new offenses, spread offense, west coast, K-gun, took the play out of the trenches.

All you really need to do is look at the averages of Hall of Famers from that era. I posted Lynn Swann above who had half of Sterling Sharpe's production yearly.

 

[TommyD4207]

Explain:

Sharpe 8134 yards for 13.7 Y/R 65 TDs

Morgan 10716 yards for 19.2 Y/R & 72 TDs

That's a triple crown season, and a good one. Morgan doesn't have anything like that.
I agree Morgan should absolutely be in the hall of fame, but let's not **** on Sterling Sharpe. That guy was as good as Jerry Rice before he got hurt.

 

[TommyD4207]

As for there not being changes, there were huge changes. Grabbing the DBs was allowed, headhunting across the field on WRs. They changed the rules in the 1990s.

1. No more helmet to helmet hitting.
2. Refs started calling penalties for dirty hits.
3. Roughing the passer became a rule.
4. Then all the new offenses, spread offense, west coast, K-gun, took the play out of the trenches.

I'm pretty sure there's more than one poster on the forum who would disagree that 'Roughing the Passer' became a rule in the 90s.

 

[Family]

I'm pretty sure there's more than one poster on the forum who would disagree that 'Roughing the Passer' became a rule in the 90s.

The Patriots lost a chance at a Super Bowl in the mid 70's because of a roughing the passer call against Sugar Bear Hamilton on Ken Stabler that wouldn't even be called today.

 

[TommyD4207]

The Patriots lost a chance at a Super Bowl in the mid 70's because of a roughing the passer call against Sugar Bear Hamilton on Ken Stabler that wouldn't even be called today.

This is why.

 

[upstater1]

That's a triple crown season, and a good one. Morgan doesn't have anything like that.
I agree Morgan should absolutely be in the hall of fame, but let's not **** on Sterling Sharpe. That guy was as good as Jerry Rice before he got hurt.

Are you sure about that?

84 recepts, 1491 yards, 10 TDs

 

[TommyD4207]

Are you sure about that?

84 recepts, 1491 yards, 10 TDs

Am I sure Morgan never had a triple crown season? Yes.
Also 108/1461/13 is a better season than that. Also, that's one of two whole seasons Morgan had more than 50 catches. Like I said, I think he deserves HOF consideration, but ****ting on Sterling Sharpe is pretty ridiculous.

 

[upstater1]

Am I sure Morgan never had a triple crown season? Yes.
Also 108/1461/13 is a better season than that. Also, that's one of two whole seasons Morgan had more than 50 catches. Like I said, I think he deserves HOF consideration, but ****ting on Sterling Sharpe is pretty ridiculous.

You said he didn't have anything like that.

1491 MORE yards. That is like that.

Again, two different eras. Stanley had 4 seasons in the 1970s.

The 90s were pass happy.

Stanley's 86 season was easily as good as Sharpe's.

Also, where did I **** on Sharpe? You're making that up

 

[captain stone]

Stokoe, and a general anti-Patriots sentiment throughout the league. If the Steamer hadn't played for one of the stupidest owners in history and instead had played for one of the media darlings, he would've received a Lot more consideration, if not admittance.

 

[captain stone]

The Patriots lost a chance at a Super Bowl in the mid 70's because of a roughing the passer call against Sugar Bear Hamilton on Ken Stabler that wouldn't even be called today.

Today it might be called, depending on the QB... But what made that call Historically egregious is that type of contact - the defender's hand/arm first hitting the QB's hand/arm THEN his head - was NEVER being called RTP in those days, ESPECIALLY in the POs. I mean, are you ****ing ****TING ME DREITH ?!?!?!?

 

[mgcolby]

I can't speak to Morgan, I was a bit too young, obviously I can look up stats etc... But I did watch Sterling and regardless of the argument he is a HoF'er. Neck injury aside, He is a HoF. I mean Skins fans have the same argument year after year about Monk. For whatever reason, they don't resonate with the voters. But ****ting on one guy to advance your own is not how we should go about it.

 

[rkarp1]

I never thought Stanley was the best WR of his era, or even close to it
I thought Stanley had a very good 3 year run, and 1 additional very good season, over the course of a 14 year career
I would have Stanley not in if I had a vote

 

[AQPE]

Stokoe, and a general anti-Patriots sentiment throughout the league. If the Steamer hadn't played for one of the stupidest owners in history and instead had played for one of the media darlings, he would've received a Lot more consideration, if not admittance.

I spent quite a bit of time traveling around the country through 40+ years of professional life (so far ). Based on my experience I think it goes beyond anti-Patriots sentiment. I encountered many people who had what I considered to be an irrational animosity towards New England in general, Massachusetts and Boston in particular. So often when I mentioned where I was from people would launch into diatribes about the Kennedys, Tip O’Neil, Dukakis, liberalism, Taxachusetts, racism (especially the Red Sox history, the Bill Russell situation in Reading, the bussing related issues from the early 1970s, etc.), Harvard, and even entertainers with strong Boston identities such as Affleck and Damon, Adam Sandler. I learned to avoid mentioning where I was from but the jealousy and resentment towards our home area is certainly a factor IMHO in the double standards that have obviously been applied to the Pats.

 

[Family]

Today it might be called, depending on the QB... But what made that call Historically egregious is that type of contact - the defender's hand/arm first hitting the QB's hand/arm THEN his head - was NEVER being called RTP in those days, ESPECIALLY in the POs. I mean, are you ****ing ****TING ME DREITH ?!?!?!?

Might. But for different reasons.

The call was a late hit. Yes Hamilton might have been called for grazing Stabler's head today (and the announcers would have disagreed), but it would not be considered late in any universe.

 

[lancerman]

I spent quite a bit of time traveling around the country through 40+ years of professional life (so far ). Based on my experience I think it goes beyond anti-Patriots sentiment. I encountered many people who had what I considered to be an irrational animosity towards New England in general, Massachusetts and Boston in particular. So often when I mentioned where I was from people would launch into diatribes about the Kennedys, Tip O’Neil, Dukakis, liberalism, Taxachusetts, racism (especially the Red Sox history, the Bill Russell situation in Reading, the bussing related issues from the early 1970s, etc.), Harvard, and even entertainers with strong Boston identities such as Affleck and Damon, Adam Sandler. I learned to avoid mentioning where I was from but the jealousy and resentment towards our home area is certainly a factor IMHO in the double standards that have obviously been applied to the Pats.

Boston's weird in that people simultaneously consider it east coast elite and yuppie while also blue collar and trashy. Like we are progressive and stuck up our own asses while simultaneously being backwards racists.

It's very interesting.

Though I travel across the country weekly for work, and the biggest reaction I get when I say I'm from here is something about the accent. Then again, most people my age don't give a **** or know who Tip O'Neil or Dukakis are and the Kennedy's aren't really relevant anymore. Though yeah sports fans love to bust out the racism thing. I drive by Russell's old house where the incident happened pretty frequently so I'm reminded of that alot.

That said, I don't think the Morgan HOF thing is an anti Boston thing. He's sort of a fringe HOF guy at a position that is brutal to get into. Back in the day their was some favoritism towards the teams that played on the big dynasties that got national attention. So most HOF voters have this hard on for the Steelers and Cowboys and Raiders especially if they were close to those old teams (hence Swan getting in). I think most fanbases see those team get red carpet treatment and get pissed thinking about their guys who got overlooked. Like when I lived in Denver, the fans there were convinced the HOF had something against them. Especially with Davis and a few guys from those 80's/90's teams being held off. I think that's just most fanbases that the HOF isn't giving special treatment to and we are one of them more than it being "anti Patriots".

 

[Family]

That said, I don't think the Morgan HOF thing is an anti Boston thing. He's sort of a fringe HOF guy at a position that is brutal to get into. Back in the day their was some favoritism towards the teams that played on the big dynasties that got national attention. So most HOF voters have this hard on for the Steelers and Cowboys and Raiders especially if they were close to those old teams (hence Swan getting in). I think most fanbases see those team get red carpet treatment and get pissed thinking about their guys who got overlooked. Like when I lived in Denver, the fans there were convinced the HOF had something against them. Especially with Davis and a few guys from those 80's/90's teams being held off. I think that's just most fanbases that the HOF isn't giving special treatment to and we are one of them more than it being "anti Patriots".

I can't wait until Eli Manning is disgustedly voted in while Jim Plunkett remains out.

 

[signbabybrady]

Might. But for different reasons.

The call was a late hit. Yes Hamilton might have been called for grazing Stabler's head today (and the announcers would have disagreed), but it would not be considered late in any universe.

Fairly certain the call was roughing the passer for the head graze

 

[JohnJH]

Explain:

Sharpe 8134 yards for 13.7 Y/R 65 TDs

Morgan 10716 yards for 19.2 Y/R & 72 TDs

And if I recall correctly, Sharpe was on one or two SB Champion Teams. I never viewed him a a TE. He was like Gonzalez and Kelce (a big WR). Morgan was a #1 WR in his day. I recall watching him (and Cedric Jones, Irving Fryer, etc.) playing. It's funny that back in those days, the Patriots had 3 to sometimes 4 solid WR's. But then that's what happens when they didn't have FA and a Cap.

 

[signbabybrady]

And if I recall correctly, Sharpe was on one or two SB Champion Teams. I never viewed him a a TE. He was like Gonzalez and Kelce (a big WR). Morgan was a #1 WR in his day. I recall watching him (and Cedric Jones, Irving Fryer, etc.) playing. It's funny that back in those days, the Patriots had 3 to sometimes 4 solid WR's. But then that's what happens when they didn't have FA and a Cap.

I think you're blending the Sharpe's together.

Sterling had the numbers Upstater was providing.

Shannon played TE, Sterling WR, and Sterling never won or even played in a Superbowl. Shannon won 2 with Denver and 1 with Baltimore.

 

[JohnJH]

I think you're blending the Sharpe's together.

Sterling had the numbers Upstater was providing.

Shannon played TE, Sterling WR, and Sterling never won or even played in a Superbowl. Shannon won 2 with Denver and 1 with Baltimore.

Thank you! I stand corrected. I do recall Sterling Sharpe the WR. He was good. But, he shouldn't be in the HOF while Morgan isn't. Thank you for your proper correction! I was still on my 1st cup of coffee when I made my post.