Willis990 Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true No Peyton Manning?
KRC Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true No Peyton Manning? 1. Otto Graham 2. Johnny U. 3-4. Baugh/Montana or Montana/Baugh Manning is not in the same class as those 4.
TheBlackMamba Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 ohh man will people please stop with the sammy baugh, otto graham or norm van brocklin references. yes they were great in their time but if they were to play now they would get the sh*t kicked out of them. you cannot tell me that if they were to play in todays game or in the last 20 years for that matter that they would have nearly the success that they have had. defenses are much more complex and the athletes of then are no where near what they are today. the things that the peyton mannings, tom bradys, john elways, joe montanas and dan marinos have done with the athletes on defense and the technology of today are much more significant than what was accomplished back then.
stuckincincy Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 1. Otto Graham2. Johnny U. 3-4. Baugh/Montana or Montana/Baugh Manning is not in the same class as those 4. Nope. I'll toss a nickel in for Kenny Stabler. Certainly far from the top, doubtful at best for a HOF berth, but I always liked the way he played the game. Of course, he had the advantage of a fine supporting cast, and a memorable head coach.
KRC Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 ohh man will people please stop with the sammy baugh, otto graham or norm van brocklin references. yes they were great in their time but if they were to play now they would get the sh*t kicked out of them. you cannot tell me that if they were to play in todays game or in the last 20 years for that matter that they would have nearly the success that they have had. defenses are much more complex and the athletes of then are no where near what they are today. the things that peyton mannings, tom bradys, john elways, joe montanas and dan marinos have done with the athletes on defense and the technology of today are much more significant than what was accomplished back then. uh..huh...
R. Rich Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 1. Otto Graham2. Johnny U. 3-4. Baugh/Montana or Montana/Baugh Manning is not in the same class as those 4. We'll discuss those first two......again........in a couple months.
berndogg Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 1. Otto Graham2. Johnny U. 3-4. Baugh/Montana or Montana/Baugh Manning is not in the same class as those 4. You sound like my friend who tried to convince me that Jim Thorpe was a better athlete than Kobe Bryant. His closing argument: Did Kobe ever win a decathlon? Side note: This friend is a virgin
stuckincincy Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 ohh man will people please stop with the sammy baugh, otto graham or norm van brocklin references. yes they were great in their time but if they were to play now they would get the sh*t kicked out of them. you cannot tell me that if they were to play in todays game or in the last 20 years for that matter that they would have nearly the success that they have had. defenses are much more complex and the athletes of then are no where near what they are today. the things that peyton mannings, tom bradys, john elways, joe montanas and dan marinos have done are much more significant than what was accomplished back then. If today's QB's went back in time, with bump and run coverage, single-bar helmets or no bar, goal posts planted at the goal line, and personal fouls assessed (maybe) only if you were unconscious and bleeding to the point you would sully the field...they might not shine so brightly. Crackback blocks, receivers being constantly pummeled after the snap, slaps and elbows to the face, 2 goal posts on the goal line, not 1 at the back of the end zone and so on. "peyton mannings, tom bradys, john elways, joe montanas and dan marinos" might have been weeping and sulking on the sidelines. Who knows?
KRC Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 We'll discuss those first two......again........in a couple months. I'll show you the game films and you can decide for yourself.
KRC Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 If today's QB's went back in time, with bump and run coverage, single-bar helmets or no bar, goal posts planted at the goal line, and personal fouls assessed (maybe) only if you were unconscious and bleeding to the point you would sully the field...they might not shine so brightly. Crackback blocks, receivers being constantly pummeled after the snap, slaps and elbows to the face, 2 goal posts on the goal line, not 1 at the back of the end zone and so on. "peyton mannings, tom bradys, john elways, joe montanas and dan marinos" might have been weeping and sulking on the sidelines. Who knows? Yup. Take away tuck rules, roughing the passer penalties, the ability to throw the ball away outside the tackle box, shots to the head and everything else put into today's game to protect quarterback and they would not nearly be as successful.
KRC Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 You sound like my friend who tried to convince me that Jim Thorpe was a better athlete than Kobe Bryant. His closing argument: Did Kobe ever win a decathlon? Side note: This friend is a virgin Why? Because if they played before the merger, then they can't possibly be better?
berndogg Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 If today's QB's went back in time, with bump and run coverage, single-bar helmets or no bar, goal posts planted at the goal line, and personal fouls assessed (maybe) only if you were unconscious and bleeding to the point you would sully the field...they might not shine so brightly. Crackback blocks, receivers being constantly pummeled after the snap, slaps and elbows to the face, 2 goal posts on the goal line, not 1 at the back of the end zone and so on. "peyton mannings, tom bradys, john elways, joe montanas and dan marinos" might have been weeping and sulking on the sidelines. Who knows? Considering they are bigger than the linemen and faster than the defensive backs of those days, I'll put my money on them. If you can take a blindside, legal hit from 275 lb guy who runs a 4.6, even in full pads, then I think you can handle a late elbow or low hit in less pads from a guy who's 215 and runs a 5.2
TheBlackMamba Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 If today's QB's went back in time, with bump and run coverage, single-bar helmets or no bar, goal posts planted at the goal line, and personal fouls assessed (maybe) only if you were unconscious and bleeding to the point you would sully the field...they might not shine so brightly. Crackback blocks, receivers being constantly pummeled after the snap, slaps and elbows to the face, 2 goal posts on the goal line, not 1 at the back of the end zone and so on. "peyton mannings, tom bradys, john elways, joe montanas and dan marinos" might have been weeping and sulking on the sidelines. Who knows? yes it was a dirtier game back then but it had to be because there werent as many great athletes. 6'1 200 lbs back then was giant...6'1 200 lbs is about the size of the average special teamer.
berndogg Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 Why? Because if they played before the merger, then they can't possibly be better? No, because they were A LOT smaller, weaker, slower, and less athletic they can't possibly be better. I know there's more to football than that, but when the physical abilities are that different you really can't compare the two eras.
R. Rich Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 No, because they were A LOT smaller, weaker, slower, and less athletic they can't possibly be better. I know there's more to football than that, but when the physical abilities are that different you really can't compare the two eras. It's all realitve though. I've heard that same argument in regard to guys like Jim Brown ("he'd never be that good today 'cause today's athletes are bigger and stronger"). The same way those big and strong guys train, so would Jim Brown. Or do you think that everything concerning him would be exactly the same yet everyone else would be "bigger and stronger"?
Chandler#81 Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 ohh man will people please stop with the sammy baugh, otto graham or norm van brocklin references. yes they were great in their time but if they were to play now they would get the sh*t kicked out of them. you cannot tell me that if they were to play in todays game or in the last 20 years for that matter that they would have nearly the success that they have had. defenses are much more complex and the athletes of then are no where near what they are today. the things that the peyton mannings, tom bradys, john elways, joe montanas and dan marinos have done with the athletes on defense and the technology of today are much more significant than what was accomplished back then. For an equally confusing counter to your position, Brady, Montana and Manning would be crushed in past eras. They were never hit like QB's were susceptible to then. IMO, Graham, Bradshaw and even Montana were just parts of great teams and received way too much credit for their teams' success. Baugh gets a pass <pun intended> as he truely innovated the passing game, so no one was prepared to defense it- though he was a great football player. It comes down to moxey and unflappable determination, attacking set up weaknesses when the opposition knows you're going to throw and thinks they've got everything covered -and doing it repeatedly over a lenghty career. Johnny Unitas
KRC Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 It's all realitve though. I've heard that same argument in regard to guys like Jim Brown ("he'd never be that good today 'cause today's athletes are bigger and stronger"). The same way those big and strong guys train, so would Jim Brown. Or do you think that everything concerning him would be exactly the same yet everyone else would be "bigger and stronger"? No. That would never happen. Everything is evaluated in a vacuum. Take your nonsense elsewhere.
stuckincincy Posted February 13, 2009 Posted February 13, 2009 Yup. Take away tuck rules, roughing the passer penalties, the ability to throw the ball away outside the tackle box, shots to the head and everything else put into today's game to protect quarterback and they would not nearly be as successful. Off-topic. I have a memory of SD's Speedie Duncan whacking at John Mackey over the middle, and Unitas completed the pass. Speedie jumped on his back, wrapping his legs around Mackey, and was beating him on the head with this, then that fist for 20 yards or so until they fell down. Remember Chief's Fred "The Hammer" Williamson? Always seemed to have a wrist injury, so he could wear a heavy cast to club people with. Rich "The Sheriff" Jackson and his head slaps. If T.O. and his mouth played back then, he'd be sporting false teeth, uppers and lowers.
Recommended Posts