nosebleedjints Posted December 25, 2006 Share Posted December 25, 2006 What was the deal with Joe Morris? He is widely publicized, much greater than OJ Anderson, as the key skill player cog outside Simms in our 80s to 90s contending seasons. However, he only had two really solid season in 85 and 86. What happened to him 87, and 88? Specifically what happened to the Giants running game in 88, because OJ Anderson wasn't a starter until 89? I don't understand a few things, and maybe it's becase this was a different era. Why is it the Giants were a run based team, a ball control team, in the 80s and 90s with Morris and Anderson, yet both with the Giants only had a few years individually that stood out? Going by the stats both were nowhere close to the explosiveness of Tiki, the playmaking, and consistent year in and out, production. Why is it those teams won 2 Super Bowls while this club underachieved? Is this simply due to inflation in terms of more offense? Is Tiki really better than Morris or Anserson, had we had Tiki instead of those two as our SB starters, would that have affected the outcome negatively, could we have been better, or was that team simply the right balance of defense, OL, and ball control running backs, and equilbrium that 1) Tiki would have fit as well into and 2) The NFL then had much less backs with those numbers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditto Posted December 25, 2006 Share Posted December 25, 2006 Joe Morris was great because he did not, would not fumble. Give us a four point lead, he was the go to guy, a real clock burner. One of my favorites. We got O. J. Anderson in his twilight years, very dependable, and a lot of heart. Wouldn't have been there in '90 without him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt Posted December 25, 2006 Share Posted December 25, 2006 It was also pre free agency where you could stock up on starters from other teams and keep them on your roster as backups (e.g. Otis Anderson). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandolphScott Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 Why is it those teams won 2 Super Bowls while this club underachieved? 7 words. Bill Parcells, Bill Bellicheck and Lawrence Taylor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 They also had a common denominator: a blocking fullback by the name of Maurice Carthon, who also helped Hershel Walker have a 2,000+ season as a NJ General. '87 was the strike season, with scab players and the team as a whole never really got off the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandolphScott Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 blocking fullback by the name of Maurice Carthon A guard in a fullbacks number, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 A guard in a fullbacks number, correct? No, he was a legit fullback--it's just that he was so good as a lead blocker, he didn't get the ball that much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandolphScott Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 No, he was a legit fullback--it's just that he was so good as a lead blocker, he didn't get the ball that much. No, I know that. But he blocked as well as a guard, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 No, I know that. But he blocked as well as a guard, correct? Oh, OK. Absolutely. Little Joe was a very good, quick back. But he wouldn't have been able to do anything with out Maurice sealing things off for him. OJ was way past his prime when he played with us, and was still pounding out yardage behind him. If Tiki was running behind Carthon during his career, there would be no "borderline" to his HOF credentials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 Also during that era you had several legitimate powerhouses in the NFC: Giants, 69'ers, Rams, E-gals, Cubs, Redskins, Broke Backs and Vikings. Some were complete teams...others were offenses with basic defenses. It was not a parity league and it was not a league dominated by one or two teams either. Just a lot of high level competition. Any of those 80's teams could have won all 16 games in the NFC of today...without breaking a sweat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nosebleedjints Posted December 26, 2006 Author Share Posted December 26, 2006 Also during that era you had several legitimate powerhouses in the NFC: Giants, 69'ers, Rams, E-gals, Cubs, Redskins, Broke Backs and Vikings. Some were complete teams...others were offenses with basic defenses. It was not a parity league and it was not a league dominated by one or two teams either. Just a lot of high level competition. Any of those 80's teams could have won all 16 games in the NFC of today...without breaking a sweat. Rams were not in that top echelon, they got lucky with Flipper Anderson. The Eagles were a good team, but second fiddle to the Giants or Redskins. The Cowboys were in their downtime then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nosebleedjints Posted December 26, 2006 Author Share Posted December 26, 2006 Oh, OK. Absolutely. Little Joe was a very good, quick back. But he wouldn't have been able to do anything with out Maurice sealing things off for him. OJ was way past his prime when he played with us, and was still pounding out yardage behind him. If Tiki was running behind Carthon during his career, there would be no "borderline" to his HOF credentials. In your view, Joe Morris and OJ Anderson were good, but Tiki was better, and if we had him then, despite him being small, selfish, and a fumbler until the end, we would have been an improved club and with that line, gameplan, Tiki would have an HOF player? I dunno if he could hold up, the Giants were a ball control team, the running back had to carry a lot more then, although they did use a rotation, could he have held? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 In your view, Joe Morris and OJ Anderson were good, but Tiki was better, and if we had him then, despite him being small, selfish, and a fumbler until the end, we would have been an improved club and with that line, gameplan, Tiki would have an HOF player? I dunno if he could hold up, the Giants were a ball control team, the running back had to carry a lot more then, although they did use a rotation, could he have held? Tiki is probably bigger than little Joe was. But Morris was all muscle in the lower part of his body. Very strong little dude. But Joe's size is probably why his career was so short. Once he was injured in 1988, it was pretty much all over with the shouting. As far as OJ Anderson is concerned, you have to keep in mind that we got him well after his prime. Remember, he spent most of his career as a Cardinal, and even then, he was a back that made you sit up and take notice--and I don't think I have to tell you what Cardinal teams were like--let's just say that some things don't change that much. He was much more agile and elusive than when he was with the Giants, where he had transformed his game to more of a north-south power runner. It's really a tribute to his ability that he was able to be so effective after making the change. You can't really say Tiki was a fumbler until the end--he's gone from fumbling 1-2 every game or so, to 1-2 fumbles a season--you have to give him credit for that. He's also run with a team with some pretty piss-poor blocking for a considerable chunk of his career. On the other hand, he hasn't been running against teams with the defenses Joe and OJ were up against. Remember, the NFC was the class of the league from 1984-1995, and it wasn't until Denver that the AFC actually won a Superbowl and things started turning. I would say most of the fans of NFC teams would gladly trade their defenses now for what they had in the 80's. Hell, even the Saints had a fantastic linebacker group. After rereading your post, are you asking me if I think having Tiki back then would guarrentee him a HOF membership? No. His career would have been too short against those defenses, and it would have been foolish to try him as a feature back. What I meant was that if he had a fullback of the caliber of Maurice Carthon now, he would have been good for an additional 100-200 yards a season easily, and would have had no problem with getting into the HOF in this era. If he had lines as good as those late 80's olines, against these modern NFC defenses, we're looking at Emmitt Smith numbers. But I really have to wonder how big of an ego he would have had under those circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 Rams were not in that top echelon, they got lucky with Flipper Anderson. The Eagles were a good team, but second fiddle to the Giants or Redskins. The Cowboys were in their downtime then. The Rams were one of the offenses with basic defenses...they gave the 69'ers fits for a period of about 4 years. Everett was a good to great QB...that is until he started to feel just a little bit of pressure then he turned into Chucker The Wretched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 The Rams were one of the offenses with basic defenses...they gave the 69'ers fits for a period of about 4 years. Everett was a good to great QB...that is until he started to feel just a little bit of pressure then he turned into Chucker The Wretched. I believe Everett saw dead people towards the end of his career...how else do you explain him ducking when there was no defensive player around? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 7 words. Bill Parcells, Bill Bellicheck and Lawrence Taylor Hard to argue w/ this. Im 36, so I remember those seasons vividly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now