PatsFans.com - Mobile
PatsFans.com
Search

Hall of Fame's lack of Patriots (Stanley Morgan and Richard Seymour)

2020 Patriots Season:
Upcoming Opponent:
Next Up: N/A

Current Patriots Twitter Feed:

upstater1

Pro Bowl Player
I don't understand why these two aren't in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

Stanley Morgan's numbers are better than many of his contemporaries who ARE in the Hall of Fame. They say he played for losing teams. Which is not true. AT ALL. In fact, in Stanley's first 12 seasons in the NFL (i.e. the years where he was a top performer) the Patriots had only 1 losing season out of 12. Yes, he started in 1977 and through 1988 the Patriots only had 1 losing season.

But if you're using the argument that Morgan played for an unsuccessful team in order to keep him out, then how do you explain Richard Seymour being kept out for the 3rd consecutive year. He played for the winningest dynasty in NFL history. Ty Law is the ONLY Patriot Hall of Famer from the dynasty era. When you compare the induction of Patriots to the induction of, for example, Steelers, 49ers and Cowboys, we lag far far behind. As though players don't get the respect of winning all those games.

The Cowboys had 6 inductees who all made it in within a year or two of eligibility.
The Steelers got 10 players in from their dynasty.
The 49ers got 7 players in.

It is very very weird that the Patriots, who have been at it for 20 years now, have only 1 player in.

And if selection is not about winning a lot of games in addition to being a great player, then explain to me why Stanley Morgan is not in.
 

jmt57

Moderator
Staff member
Gino Cappelletti can be added as well, though that is due to an anti-AFL bias rather than just a anti-Pats bias.

Of the 346 members of the Pro Football Hall of Fame, just one spent his entire career in the American Football League.


But yeah, it's as if they changed the criteria to get into the HoF only after the Patriots started winning championships, suddenly downplaying that aspect. Pure coincidence, I'm sure. :rolleyes:
 

Pape

2nd Team Getting Their First Start
Gino Cappelletti can be added as well, though that is due to an anti-AFL bias rather than just a anti-Pats bias.

Of the 346 members of the Pro Football Hall of Fame, just one spent his entire career in the American Football League.


But yeah, it's as if they changed the criteria to get into the HoF only after the Patriots started winning championships, suddenly downplaying that aspect. Pure coincidence, I'm sure. :rolleyes:
I am in the middle of writing a long form letter about Gino to be sent to the senior committee about why he should be enshrined
 

Kenneth Sims

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
Bruce Armstrong. Sometimes, it seems like every LT who played in multiple Pro Bowls gets inducted, but Armstrong never gets mentioned. Played Bruce Smith twice a year and always played him tough. I’ve given up on the NFL HOF. It’s just a popularity contest, and Patriot players just aren’t popular with pro football writers.
 

jmt57

Moderator
Staff member
I don't understand why these two aren't in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

Stanley Morgan's numbers are better than many of his contemporaries who ARE in the Hall of Fame. They say he played for losing teams. Which is not true. AT ALL. In fact, in Stanley's first 12 seasons in the NFL (i.e. the years where he was a top performer) the Patriots had only 1 losing season out of 12. Yes, he started in 1977 and through 1988 the Patriots only had 1 losing season.

But if you're using the argument that Morgan played for an unsuccessful team in order to keep him out, then how do you explain Richard Seymour being kept out for the 3rd consecutive year. He played for the winningest dynasty in NFL history. Ty Law is the ONLY Patriot Hall of Famer from the dynasty era. When you compare the induction of Patriots to the induction of, for example, Steelers, 49ers and Cowboys, we lag far far behind. As though players don't get the respect of winning all those games.

The Cowboys had 6 inductees who all made it in within a year or two of eligibility.
The Steelers got 10 players in from their dynasty.
The 49ers got 7 players in.

It is very very weird that the Patriots, who have been at it for 20 years now, have only 1 player in.

And if selection is not about winning a lot of games in addition to being a great player, then explain to me why Stanley Morgan is not in.

Each team has one sports writer on the Hall of Fame nominating committee. They are tasked with presenting the case for players on that to the rest of the voters. The position is lifelong, or until that person decides to resign.

The writer representing the Patriots is not Mike Reiss, nor Tom Curran, nor Christopher Price, nor Greg Bedard.

That voter is Ron Borges. The plagiarist has not worked for any Boston area media for three years now, and his only remote association with New England sports now is as an occasional guest to Michael Felger's radio show.

Perhaps Ron Borges has everything to do with Patriot players from the Belichick-Brady era not gaining entrance to the Hall. That is especially true in the case of Richard Seymour. For Borges to make a heartfelt case he would also simultaneously need to expose himself as being grossly incorrect in his assessment of Seymour. Borges has never come across as the type of person who would sincerely admit to a mistake, or that he was wrong. He has also shown on multiple occasions that he can be rather lazy in his work ethic.




Naturally Borges claims to be disappointed, but I can't help but wonder how much emotion he put into his effort.


Former Herald columnist Ron Borges, who presented Seymour’s case to the voters, was disappointed in the outcome.

“Basically, I tried to point out all the great dynasties and all the people those teams have in the Hall. Now, you get to the Patriots. Is it one Hall of Famer (Ty Law), and 52 slappys?” Borges said when reached Saturday. “Obviously, it’s common sense. Every dynasty from the ‘50s, ‘60, ‘70s, has seven or more players. A number of them have double-digit players. Do you really believe this team, a team that won three Super Bowls in four years, only had one?”
Borges presented testimony and recommendations from Bill Belichick, Tom Brady and Andre Tippett from the Patriots. He also had Hall of Fame center Kevin Mawae talk about how tough it was to play against him. Former Patriot Rodney Harrison provided testimony about what Seymour meant to the defense. Borges also had NFL offensive coordinator Norv Turner discussing how Seymour couldn’t be blocked by one guy.
 

Koma

In the Starting Line-Up
Each team has one sports writer on the Hall of Fame nominating committee. They are tasked with presenting the case for players on that to the rest of the voters. The position is lifelong, or until that person decides to resign.

The writer representing the Patriots is not Mike Reiss, nor Tom Curran, nor Christopher Price, nor Greg Bedard.

That voter is Ron Borges. The plagiarist has not worked for any Boston area media for three years now, and his only remote association with New England sports now is as an occasional guest to Michael Felger's radio show.

Perhaps Ron Borges has everything to do with Patriot players from the Belichick-Brady era not gaining entrance to the Hall. That is especially true in the case of Richard Seymour. For Borges to make a heartfelt case he would also simultaneously need to expose himself as being grossly incorrect in his assessment of Seymour. Borges has never come across as the type of person who would sincerely admit to a mistake, or that he was wrong. He has also shown on multiple occasions that he can be rather lazy in his work ethic.




Naturally Borges claims to be disappointed, but I can't help but wonder how much emotion he put into his effort.


Former Herald columnist Ron Borges, who presented Seymour’s case to the voters, was disappointed in the outcome.

“Basically, I tried to point out all the great dynasties and all the people those teams have in the Hall. Now, you get to the Patriots. Is it one Hall of Famer (Ty Law), and 52 slappys?” Borges said when reached Saturday. “Obviously, it’s common sense. Every dynasty from the ‘50s, ‘60, ‘70s, has seven or more players. A number of them have double-digit players. Do you really believe this team, a team that won three Super Bowls in four years, only had one?”
Borges presented testimony and recommendations from Bill Belichick, Tom Brady and Andre Tippett from the Patriots. He also had Hall of Fame center Kevin Mawae talk about how tough it was to play against him. Former Patriot Rodney Harrison provided testimony about what Seymour meant to the defense. Borges also had NFL offensive coordinator Norv Turner discussing how Seymour couldn’t be blocked by one guy.

It's not just that Borges was spectacularly wrong about his draft day assessment of Seymour. People are wrong about draft picks all the time, from dummies like me to the most informed and connected NFL talent evaluators. The bigger problem with Borges making the HOF case for Patriots players is that he has spent the past 20 years claiming that the Patriots roster has been "53 slappys." If he wasn't personally diminishing what the franchise and players accomplished, he also wasn't refuting any of the negative garbage from the local and national media. When Borges tries to convince the HOF selectors that it wasn't all luck, or all Brady, or all Belichick, and that someone like Seymour is worthy of induction, they're going to think "This guy sure changed his tune. Why should we believe him now?"
 

Actual Pats Fan

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
Each team has one sports writer on the Hall of Fame nominating committee. They are tasked with presenting the case for players on that to the rest of the voters. The position is lifelong, or until that person decides to resign.

The writer representing the Patriots is not Mike Reiss, nor Tom Curran, nor Christopher Price, nor Greg Bedard.

That voter is Ron Borges. The plagiarist has not worked for any Boston area media for three years now, and his only remote association with New England sports now is as an occasional guest to Michael Felger's radio show.

Perhaps Ron Borges has everything to do with Patriot players from the Belichick-Brady era not gaining entrance to the Hall. That is especially true in the case of Richard Seymour. For Borges to make a heartfelt case he would also simultaneously need to expose himself as being grossly incorrect in his assessment of Seymour. Borges has never come across as the type of person who would sincerely admit to a mistake, or that he was wrong. He has also shown on multiple occasions that he can be rather lazy in his work ethic.




Naturally Borges claims to be disappointed, but I can't help but wonder how much emotion he put into his effort.


Former Herald columnist Ron Borges, who presented Seymour’s case to the voters, was disappointed in the outcome.

“Basically, I tried to point out all the great dynasties and all the people those teams have in the Hall. Now, you get to the Patriots. Is it one Hall of Famer (Ty Law), and 52 slappys?” Borges said when reached Saturday. “Obviously, it’s common sense. Every dynasty from the ‘50s, ‘60, ‘70s, has seven or more players. A number of them have double-digit players. Do you really believe this team, a team that won three Super Bowls in four years, only had one?”
Borges presented testimony and recommendations from Bill Belichick, Tom Brady and Andre Tippett from the Patriots. He also had Hall of Fame center Kevin Mawae talk about how tough it was to play against him. Former Patriot Rodney Harrison provided testimony about what Seymour meant to the defense. Borges also had NFL offensive coordinator Norv Turner discussing how Seymour couldn’t be blocked by one guy.
Ron is part of the Local Boston Media Cult, uh, Fraternity, which holds Tomase and Shaughnessy dear, among others.

They've shat on the local pro football team and encouraged league and nationwide ignorance and denigration of the Patriots.

Is there a legit local media type who would do better than Ron?

To the list with Richard, Stanley and Gino we must add Houston Antwine, whom I consider better than all of them plus Ty & Tippett.

No, not Hannah.
 

jmt57

Moderator
Staff member
Ron is part of the Local Boston Media Cult, uh, Fraternity, which holds Tomase and Shaughnessy dear, among others.

They've shat on the local pro football team and encouraged league and nationwide ignorance and denigration of the Patriots.

Is there a legit local media type who would do better than Ron?
Yes.

Though I would fear Borges would somehow be replaced by somebody who either loves the Sox to the point they hate the Pats (Shaughnessy, Mazz, Tomase) or a media contrarian such as Felger.

The responsibility of representing the Patriots belongs to someone like Reiss, Price or Holley.

 

Actual Pats Fan

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
The responsibility of representing the Patriots belongs to someone like Reiss, Price or Holley.
Ugh!!!

Reiss wants Parcells in the team HOF.

Holley's takes and opinions have been so far out there he permanently turned me off since 2005.

Does Price even know who Gino or Houston are?
 

Rob0729

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
Seymour has the odds stacked against him because there is an offensive bias with the Hall voting and they are stats driven. The fact Seymour spent most of his career in a 3-4 and a Patriots' system where players are supposed to put the team over individual achievement will hurt him. He just doesn't have the stats that are comparable to his actually talent and achievements.

Morgan just played during a time when the Patriots were considered a joke and there are little respect to those teams. Even Hannah and Tippett who were both top two at their position during their era took years and years to get their admittance into the Hall.
 

Actual Pats Fan

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
Morgan just played during a time when the Patriots were considered a joke and there are little respect to those teams.
That time lasts from when they joined the league in 1970 to February 7, 2021...

All of the garbage dumped on the team and denigration and anti-Patriots propaganda increased this century.

There is no respect, none. Most Americans believe the Patriots cheated.

The NFL's anti-AFL hatred, contempt and bias was directed entirely on the Patriots once the merger was consummated.
 

jmt57

Moderator
Staff member
Ugh!!!

Reiss wants Parcells in the team HOF.

Holley's takes and opinions have been so far out there he permanently turned me off since 2005.

Does Price even know who Gino or Houston are?
If not one of those three, then who?

While I would be all in, I doubt that the Hall will give @Ian a vote.

Price has been a long time Pats historian; he would be my first choice. He has written at least three Pats books that I own (plus he used to post here on PatsFans): The Complete Illustrated History of the New England Patriots, The Blueprint, and Drive For Five.

Almost anybody with fog on the mirror is better than Borges (or CHB, Tomase, Felger, etc.)
 

Actual Pats Fan

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
If not one of those three, then who?

While I would be all in, I doubt that the Hall will give @Ian a vote.

Price has been a long time Pats historian; he would be my first choice. He has written at least three Pats books that I own (plus he used to post here on PatsFans): The Complete Illustrated History of the New England Patriots, The Blueprint, and Drive For Five.

Almost anybody with fog on the mirror is better than Borges (or CHB, Tomase, Felger, etc.)
Price Sounds Right
 

Wax Frog

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
It's not just that Borges was spectacularly wrong about his draft day assessment of Seymour. People are wrong about draft picks all the time, from dummies like me to the most informed and connected NFL talent evaluators. The bigger problem with Borges making the HOF case for Patriots players is that he has spent the past 20 years claiming that the Patriots roster has been "53 slappys." If he wasn't personally diminishing what the franchise and players accomplished, he also wasn't refuting any of the negative garbage from the local and national media. When Borges tries to convince the HOF selectors that it wasn't all luck, or all Brady, or all Belichick, and that someone like Seymour is worthy of induction, they're going to think "This guy sure changed his tune. Why should we believe him now?"

Too lazy to search - wtf is a slappy? o_O
 

stinkypete

In the Starting Line-Up
There is so much to disagree with here that I don't even know where to begin.

Stanley Morgan, Houston Antwine, Ben Coates, Geno Cappelletti, Bruce Armstrong are nowhere near hall of fame players. Morgan had 4 big years but never eclipsed 60 catches, 900 yards or 5 TDs during any other season. Antwine had a nice run but didn't even make the all-AFL second team. Same can be said for Geno, who was a nifty player who would have fit in nicely with the modern version of the team, but not much more than that. Coates peak lasted about 5 years. His stats during 4 of those years were fairly modest, and, lets be real, Shannon Sharpe was the dominant TE of the 90's. Armstrong was a very good tackle but his career overlapped some of the best to ever play the game, and if Tony Boseli can't get in, Armstrong doesn't belong.

And there is no Ron Borges conspiracy (and by the way, when did Ron Borges enter the conversation? Did I wake up and it's 2003 again?). Seymour is not in yet because there were other deserving players who have waited longer. Lynch and Faneca have been waiting forever and deserve their enshrinement. Seymour will get his turn.

And the baseball HOF being the only credible hall of fame? Harold Baines has something to say about that. The baseball HOF cannot even get any players elected despite the most prolific batter and pitcher of the past 80 years sitting on that ballot. The writers can go ahead and keep fussing over character while they polish that Ty Cobb plaque.
 

Top