Tommy Morrison vs Ken Norton

Norton gets too much hassle over his chin just like Frazier does by some. Shavers and Cooney both got Norton when he had nothing left. The Norton that fought Cobb Cooney and LeDoux had literally no legs left.
That being said i would back Norton over Morrison

 

I wouldn't rate him above guys like Savarese, Nicholson, Jeremy Williams and Barrett but they get nowhere near the hype Morrison does.

How did he prove himself beyond these guys

 

He has better wins than them. Shot Thomas, Shot William, past it Ruddock, past it Foreman, also drew with Ross Purrity which is bad on paper until you find out Purrity knocked out Klitschko. As a matter of fact, he did better against Foreman than Savarese

Most of Morrisons opponents say similar about his punching power and he had a high KO ratio so he was probably a big puncher despite the questionable results. That being said, yes, Norton should beat him, both him and Morrison had a weak chin but Norton was more skilled

 

Shot Thomas and shot Williams are not impressive wins though. They had fallen out of the ratings and were losing to all sorts of opponents.
Hadn't scored a good win in years. Ruddocks also questionable as he did nothing subsequently.

I'd favor Barrett over everyone Morrison beat. I don't think the faded versions of Thomas etc were better than Guinn, old Witherspoon etc

 

I wouldn't favor him over old Foreman, that was a decent win. Morrison also has more names but they are shot. But Ruddock wasn't shot, it had been 2 or 3 years since he scored any notable wins but still, he didn't look far declined and wasn't pushing 40