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]

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

Originally Posted by: wpr 

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 

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 

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.

Originally Posted by: Cheesey