Does Sharper belong

[PackerTraxx]

In the Packer Hall of Fame when he is eligible? He has been a good player, been to Pro Bowls, had a good number of int's but has done some stupid things, his tackling is poor, and he defected. Along with other things you may want to consider, does he belong?

 

[Greg C.]

For now, I'm voting no, but it's really too early. We need to cool down and see how his career plays out. I believe that, somewhat ironically, if Sharper plays well for the Vikings his stock will rise in terms of Packer HOF consideration.

 

[musccy]

Great question by the way. Like Greg said, give it a few years. Guys like Edgar and Majik, IMO, became a little more respected after a few years (not that they weren't at the time they played).

 

[carol k]

I vote no to Sharper being in the Hall of Fame

 

[packedhouse01]

ABSOLUTELY NO!!!!!!!! Traitors don't deserve to be in our Hall of Fame. Some of the comments he has made would lead me to believe this will never happen.

 

[musccy]

what did he say that was so bad? I remember him taking a few shots at the Packers, but (correct me if I'm wrong) nothing too out of line, especially considering that the Packers cut him (or refused to renew his contract, whatever), so I might have some sour grapes after that too.

 

[vikefan]

Of course he does. I'm sure when his career is over, GB will let him retire a Packer.

 

[CalifPacker]

I voted NO as well.

 

[carol k]

He made the comment that the Packers didn't know what they had when they let him go, but they will find out when they play the vikes. :roll:

 

[Obi1]

Is there a section in the hall that has the BAD plays... The ones where Sharper's lack of coverage on 4th & 26 might have cost us the another title?

How about the bonehead play of bringing back an INT from deep in the endzone when the game was well in hand and nearly over?

Hall of BLAME and Hall of SHAME are more likely.

 

[Gravedigger]

Sharper should go in the Hall when Benedict Arnold is awarded the MOH.

 

[carol k]

That's a good one!!!

 

[IPBprez]

I'm not voting yet... here's some links on stats to review....

http://cbs.sportsline.com/nfl/players/playerpage/4249

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/rambli ... =258&cat=3
(long read with about a dozen links within - but review anyway)

http://www.nflplayers.com/players_netwo ... s&ID=25010

The thing I'm noticing the most is his stats for the first year.
I also remember a certain game we played at Soldier Field against the Bears where Sharper was a demon eye-balling the QB all game long... and it caused great havoc for the Bears to no end. The strategy was awesome and their Offense was in no way prepared for that tactic. It was probably Darren's best game ever.... One wonders what would have happened had we held off on giving him that huge contract like we did.

 

[PackerTraxx]

I voted no, but made no comments to start. My thinking was that although Sharper's numbers and effectiveness were gray area PHOF, so that if his intangibles were good he should go in. However, he fails miserably on the intangibles. He was always a very self centered player. I believe that is why he made bone headed plays like running the int back out of the end zone and being lost for the playoff game the following week, being out of position on 4th and 26, etc. He thought he was a leader, but was not even close. Who's going to want to follow someone who makes bone headed plays? His talk was cheap, he seldom, if ever, backed it up. Lastly, he spit on the Packers by refusing to take a pay cut on his contract's last year, which was only there to spread out his huge signing bonus. The figure was rediculously high and was never inteneded to be paid. All parties realized that. So he was willing to take gross overpayment from the Packers, even though it would be destructive to the team, and would not take a pay cut from them. Instead he took a pay cut from a rival. So my vote was no.

 

[IPBprez]

I voted YES for the same reasoning that Freeman should be allowed in, right along with Sharpe... Go back and read that other thread.... "OK, If not Sharper".... The reasoning is not emotional or anything like that - and it stands on solid ground.

You guys, this time, are a little off target....

 

[PackerTraxx]

I voted YES for the same reasoning that Freeman should be allowed in, right along with Sharpe... Go back and read that other thread.... "OK, If not Sharper".... The reasoning is not emotional or anything like that - and it stands on solid ground.

You guys, this time, are a little off target....

Prez, that's your opinion. I believe you are a little off target. I wouldn't put Freeman in either. There are just as good as arguments "fer" as "agin".

 

[IPBprez]

You're just being cynical at this point... I wasn't being political and neither will the Overseers of the PHOF on this issue - no matter who the Player is... They will review the Player's performance and measure it against all other current entrants - if it measures up - they're in, period!

Guys - it doesn't really matter how much you like/dislike Antonio Freeman, or any other Player.
The situation rises above that nonsense....

 

[PackerTraxx]

Prez, first of all the question asked our forum members if he should be in, not if he will in fact be in. The Overseers of the PHOF have no bearing on that, each member can judge on their own.

As far as whether or not he will in fact get in, who knows. Statisics, facts, pro bowls don't tell it all. Case in point, Jerry Kramer, for the Canton Hall. With the Pro Bowls he went to, the ability to place kick, and being named to the 50th Anniversary All Time Team(which is saying he is one of the 2 best guards of all time at that point) he should have been a lock. But he is not there. Part of the reason is other teams lobbying for their players to go in and there is no shortage of that. Some people felt there were too many Packers in already. Some people didn't like the publicity he got from his books. People are human and their attitudes matter. Sharper could have a similar happenings in GB because there will not be a shortage of people to nominate from the Brett era.

Aynway, there are obviously feelings each way on this point. From the responses here he is definitely lucky it is not up these people.