Sharpe Belongs In Canton· Page 2

Smokey
Veteran Member

7 years ago

Yeah, that worked out pretty good for Jerry Kramer.

Originally Posted by: Poppa San

I'm not sure who has spoken for Jerry Kramer in the past . IMO , he belongs in the Hall , but I don't get to vote . [sad]

wpr
Preferred Member Topic Starter

7 years ago

#12

I'm not sure who has spoken for Jerry Kramer in the past . IMO , he belongs in the Hall , but I don't get to vote . [sad]

Originally Posted by: Smokey

Just about everybody from the 60's team has lobbied for Jerry. Certainly most of the teammates who are already in the Hall

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

7 years ago

#13

Just about everybody from the 60's team has lobbied for Jerry. Certainly most of the teammates who are already in the Hall

Originally Posted by: wpr

I sometimes feel Jerry is being kept out BECAUSE all of the talk. Kind of feel the same about Colin Kaepernick too.

I sometimes wonder if there wasn't so much "OMG how can you NOT have Kramer in the HALL" talk, which btw comes off like the Hall voter people are stupid ... that Kramer would be voted in already.

I also firmly believe if there wasn't so much outcry of Kaepernick being a victim, that he would have been signed to back someone up already.

There are a lot of egos here and I don't think owners, general managers or hall voter people want to at all give the impression they were swayed by public voices. And want the sole voice for decisions to be their own.

wpr
Preferred Member Topic Starter

7 years ago

#14

I think it's more of a case that voters feel there is enough representation from the teams of the 60s. There are 12 players and Lombardi in the Hall. Yes it was a great team but you can't put everyone in. This of course is a bit of a simplification of the issue.

isocleas2
Member

7 years ago

#15

No, he probably would have if he had been able to continue playing, but unfortunately he wasn't. If I look at the WR who played the same time as Sterling, which IMO would be his competition for the HOF I can't put his career above any of them and IMO there are only so many spots. Jerry Rice, Tim Brown, Cris Carter, Andre Reed, Art Monk, Michael Irving. The idea that he had shit QB's is beyond absurd also and that he was so much more dominate than all the other WR I listed is also false.

Losing Sterling might have been the best thing for the Packers. It forced Favre to look for others to depend on in the receiving game.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins

He had shit qbs, Don Majkowski was never anything more than an average qb who had one good season (27 td 20 ints is barely good).

Majkowski and the backups were shit qbs, and having a young Favre while better than what was before him was still rough sledding at times. Or do you not remember Holmgren almost benching him or the fans cheering wildly when he'd throw the ball away instead of another maddening interception? You could see the potential with Favre which is partly why Sharpe lead the league in TDs his last season and lead the league in receptions the two years before that (setting a record).

I've heard this fallacy before about how Favre losing his best offensive weapon was actually a good thing for him but for the life of me i'll never see how losing an all-pro receiver is ever a positive. Favre would have eventually learned how to spread the ball around the field and having a #1 receiver who could draw double coverage like Sharpe maybe would have made it even easier.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

7 years ago

#16

I've heard this fallacy before about how Favre losing his best offensive weapon was actually a good thing for him but for the life of me i'll never see how losing an all-pro receiver is ever a positive. Favre would have eventually learned how to spread the ball around the field and having a #1 receiver who could draw double coverage like Sharpe maybe would have made it even easier.

Originally Posted by: isocleas2

Favre said losing Sharpe forced him to go through reads more instead of slinging it at Sharpe regardless of how well he was covered. It made Favre a better QB by spreading the ball around which kept defenses from locking just one guy down. Even in double coverage, Favre was told, throw it to Sharpe.

Cheesey
Preferred Member

7 years ago

#17

Kramer SHOULD be in the HOF. So what if there are a lot of Packers from the 60's already in?
That shouldn't matter one bit.
If he earned it (which I think he did) he should be in, reguardless if there are many of his team mates in there too.
Just my 2 cents.

wpr
Preferred Member Topic Starter

7 years ago

#18

Originally Posted by: Cheesey

Hey cheesey, I am not saying he doesn't belong. If he does and he's not there the question becomes- why?

Either he belongs or he doesn't.

The only thing I can think of is the powers that be don't want any more Lombardi players.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Houston getting dog walked by Baltimore

packerfanoutwest (7h) : Feliz Navidad!

Zero2Cool (11h) : Merry Christmas!

beast (20h) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁

beast (24-Dec) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS