Goodell finally stacked the deck in such a way that Tags got in. Not that Tags deserves it after being the driving force behind keeping concussion evidence hidden for years.
Snub?
And Carmichael had more receiving yards, more receptions, and a lot more touchdowns.
Though neither belong in the hall.
(01-15-2020, 02:04 PM)Rico Wrote: [ -> ]Snub?
And Carmichael had more receiving yards, more receptions, and a lot more touchdowns.
Though neither belong in the hall.
The bulk of Carmichael's success came after the rule changes that made covering receivers harder. I'm not saying he was a scrub or didn't deserve the Hall. But Pearson was the best receiver on one of the best teams of the 70s and was named to the All 1970s team. 88 was clutch. Can't see him not being in, especially when you get all these guys from the 50s who were perhaps important in their era, but in terms of talent and accomplishment aren't on the level of the players from the 70s and forward.
(01-15-2020, 04:24 PM)I am Yoda Wrote: [ -> ] (01-15-2020, 02:04 PM)Rico Wrote: [ -> ]Snub?
And Carmichael had more receiving yards, more receptions, and a lot more touchdowns.
Though neither belong in the hall.
The bulk of Carmichael's success came after the rule changes that made covering receivers harder. I'm not saying he was a scrub or didn't deserve the Hall. But Pearson was the best receiver on one of the best teams of the 70s and was named to the All 1970s team. 88 was clutch. Can't see him not being in, especially when you get all these guys from the 50s who were perhaps important in their era, but in terms of talent and accomplishment aren't on the level of the players from the 70s and forward.
Whaaaaat? They played in exactly the same era. Pearson 1973-1983, Carmichael 1971-1984.
Drew Pearson's problem was being on the same team as Preston Pearson.