R. Rich Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Both Bruce and Reggie had long careers with consistently high performance. But there are guys like Deacon Jones who played their entire career before sacks were an official stat. How true. Then again, the head slap, Deacon's signature move, was legal then. Still, he had a ton of sacks and it would be interesting to see how many he would've ended up w/. It's kinda like in basketball, where Hakeem Olajuwon is the all time leader in blocked shots, but it wasn't a recorded stat in the days of guys like Bill Russell, who probably had twice as many blocks as Olajuwon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Reggie is dead, it's classless to talk about him in anything but a positive way. Nothing wrong with being truthful. Should Hitler get only glowing remarks because he is now dead? I understand your point if it is that it is classless to wrongfully disparge someone who is dead by using gossip, exagerations or false information. The same can be said for people who are alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 If a lineman had one, he'd find it. Boselli was the only guy who had any real success stopping him, but he always had help. No, he really didn't. In the playoff game in Buffalo, Boselli manhandled Bruce pretty much the entire game and virtually all of it was by his lonesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 It's impossible to determine who is/was the "best" DE in history. Pro football is so complicated, and individual situations so different, that I don't think it can be done. I was lucky enough to have season tickets throughout the entire "Bruce"era, and he was definitely one of the greatest in history. That pretty much says it all, IMO. When people get into these discussions about any player/position, i think the best you can do is narrow it down to a few elite players. There are too many contextual issues to do direct comparisons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No QB - No Bueno Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I seem to remember Richmond Webb doing pretty good against Bruce mano a mano. I forgot how Reggie White did against the Bills OL in the 1990 game. Be interesting to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saudi Arabia Rob Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 This was just Bruce being Bruce. He always tooted his own horn, complained he was disrepected because he wasn't the highest paid guy on the team (I think it was Ted Washington or Paup briefly), etc. However, I don't remember any games he didn't play at the top of his game due to a holdout, gripe, etc, unlike a Jason Peters situation. He always put 100% on the field. Early in his career he was a bit lazy against the run, but starting around 1988-1990, he turned it on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 And if you put Reggie and Bruce back in the 1920s, they would be dragging their carcasses off the field before halftime. Deacon dominated under the rules. Smith and White dominated under the rules. Where you need to argue is how dominant they were in their respective eras. As you can see from the above example, trying to put players into different eras for comparison is not very effective. fine with me, what im objecting to is the people that always put deacon on top of the list ... they're the ones saying they can compare across eras. and the argument they always use is "well if they kept sacks in those days deacon would have had the most blah blah blah." to which i legitimately counter if they couldnt put their hands on bruce yet he had to slap them upside the head he'd have more sacks too ... and if deacon played in bruce's era when linemen essentially get to tackle defendes, deacon may have been completely neutralized for all we know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 How true. Then again, the head slap, Deacon's signature move, was legal then. Still, he had a ton of sacks and it would be interesting to see how many he would've ended up w/. It's kinda like in basketball, where Hakeem Olajuwon is the all time leader in blocked shots, but it wasn't a recorded stat in the days of guys like Bill Russell, who probably had twice as many blocks as Olajuwon. We will never know, but I am of the very strong opinion that if a young Deacon Jones entered the NFL today, he would go straight to the Hall of Fame. He was a flat out superstar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2003Contenders Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I love Bruce and he is a sure-fire first ballot Hall of Famer. But part of me would love to see him get snubbed this year -- just so we could all hear the self serving #78 spend all year whining about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 fine with me, what im objecting to is the people that always put deacon on top of the list ... they're the ones saying they can compare across eras. and the argument they always use is "well if they kept sacks in those days deacon would have had the most blah blah blah." to which i legitimately counter if they couldnt put their hands on bruce yet he had to slap them upside the head he'd have more sacks too ... and if deacon played in bruce's era when linemen essentially get to tackle defendes, deacon may have been completely neutralized for all we know. There is nothing wrong with people putting Deacon Jones at the top of the list as the best pass rusher. Again, he dominated in his era, just like Bruce and Reggie. You can also add Marchetti to the list. Arguments can be made for all four as the best pass rusher in history. You have to remember that players adjust their game to the rules at the time. As Bill from NYC mentioned, if you would put Deacon into today's game, he would play differently. To automatically assume that a player's game would not change if they played in a different era is disingenuous and purposely not giving a player proper credit for their accomplishments. The truth is that if they were keeping sacks in those days, Deacon would have had the most. Historians have gone back and reviewed the films and totaled up sacks and it is true. He would have had the most (I used to have those numbers handy, but not anymore). There is no way anyone can deny it. The analysis proves it. If you want to put Reggie and Bruce ahead of Deacon and Marchetti, that is fine. To use the headslap "argument" is not the way to legitimize your point because your are purposely ignoring realities of the game in the respective eras. In my work with the PFRA, I am constantly having to compare players across eras. The second anyone uses the headslap "argument" to discredit Jones and has nothing else to back up their point, instantly loses credibility in my eyes. If you want to use it as a minor point in your analysis, go ahead. But, there had better be a lot more substantive data to back up your rankings than that. Otherwise, it just shows bias in the analysis because, frankly, the headslap argument carries no weight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I love Bruce and he is a sure-fire first ballot Hall of Famer. But part of me would love to see him get snubbed this year -- just so we could all hear the self serving #78 spend all year whining about it. Please no .... Bruce will stain his career. Bottom line is that he deserves to get in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLynchTrain Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Bruce was always an egomaniac. Sometimes thats what a person needs to motivate themselves, and it worked for Bruce. Was it right? Is it right now? Of course not. But its hard to argue with a guy when he holds the records (even if it took a few terrible years at the end) and was as dominant as he was. But the truth is White had some great help.Clyde Simmons was a beast when he had Reggie helping him out. He finished with over a hundred career stats, and I'm pretty sure he had 18-19 in 1992. When Reggie left Philly, he was an above average defensive end, but when those two were together, damn that was nasty. And you can't forget the DT Jerome Brown....the guy could get at the QB for a DT. I'm pretty sure in 1989 (or maybe 90) all three of them had over 10 sacks. Crazy. So there is proof that White did have better help than Bruce, at least in Philly. The way he's saying that he "didnt have the help" IS a slight on Hansen. It also fails to mention the help of Paup and the rest of our rediculous LB core. Maybe he doesnt mean it, but there's still a better way to say it. Hansen was a great compliment... a guy like Schoebel should be if he had a dominant guy on the other side. One thing to note about Philly in those Reggie years...they never finished first in the NFC East. For all the mythical crap about the "Beast" this year, that was nothing compared to the NFC in the mid 80s to mid 90s. All those teams were good (Philly being the only one that didnt beat us in a SB), but they were still good. And we all know the proven fact that the AFC just wasn't as dominant as the NFC in those days....something we got quite lucky with in the SB years. So while Bruce didnt have the level of talent around him that Reggie did, Reggie still faced probably better competition. Which probably means that its a wash...they're both great, and let's leave it at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I believe Bruce only got #4 on the NFL channels top 10 pass ruhers - they had Deacon Jones ahead of both Bruce and Reggie. I wish we could find the next Bruce as he truly was a very, very good football player. Besides ... Bruuuuce ... always made for a greet cheer from the crowd. NFL Network top 10 Pass Rushers Fan voting on the right side of the page has Smith as #4 too...they rank it White, LT, Deacon, Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullpen Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Hey Bruce, Tony Boselli called. Said you're still his B word. One of the truest posts I've seen all week Darin!! Funnier than hell too! I love Bruce and he is a sure-fire first ballot Hall of Famer. But part of me would love to see him get snubbed this year -- just so we could all hear the self serving #78 spend all year whining about it. Oh I hope not, he's already been signing autographs "Bruce Smith #78 HOF '09" If this were any other player for any other team, we would most likely be calling him a pompous, classless jerk, but since he's one of our own some of us give him a free pass. That's human nature I guess. Over the year's I've grown tired of his self-promotion to a certain extent. However, when he used to do his Fred Sanford dance after a sack, in the late 80s early 90s I loved it. I guess all I can say is "You stay classy Bruce Smith." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts