Chicocheese
Cheesehead
In the immortal words of Steve Marriucci, speaking about Don Hutson: "This guy was catching touchdown passes before QBs were even throwing the ball!"
'Nuff said.
'Nuff said.
How are you to know that a plyer from the past wouldn't be able to play in today's NFL? You don't and can't make that assumption. I think Hutson was good enough and well rounded enough to play in any era and succeed. He was a gifted athelte and played iron man ball....ask any modern era player to play both sides of the ball and they will be crying like a baby to their agent in a heartbeat.
It's not an assumption when it is based on fact. You are going to tell me the offensive lines of the 1950's with an average weight of 220 could push around even a college defensive line today? Please. The reason players do not play both sides of the ball nowadays is because of roster expansion (they don't have to) and because players have gotten faster, stronger, and bigger (as I stated earlier) but the field has stayed the exact same size. Therefore we can deduce that more violent hits are taking place currently than in the past and the physical demands are greater for todays athletes.
Are there players that transcend eras and could play in anytime? sure...I think anyone would agree on that. Example: Am I confident that ray nitschke would not be a good linebacker in todays NFL (ceteris paribus) even though he was great for his time - yes I am. You can call that an assumption but I just go by my opinion and the facts that are laid out before me, I call that "the most logical scenario."
We will never know the answer so its fun to speculate but in my opinion very very very few players from the past could compete in todays NFL and I absolutely CAN say that.
One other factor is how far the game has progressed at the time. Babe Ruth was playing in MLB long after the game had become mainstream. Hutson was playing still in the league's infancy, since it had only been around 15 years when he played. When Ruth joined the Red Sox, organized baseball had been around for at least 45 years give or take. The point being, it's easier to dominate a sport when its just beginning versus where most of these sports stand today. I'm not taking anything away from Hutson, but stating that the thought about outperforming one's contemporaries requires an extra layer of contemplation.
This is all a good discussion
Really? So the FACT that hutson ran a 9.5 second 100 yard dash WAAAAY back in the day makes him a slow guy? He didn't have the modern day training, high tech light weight shoes, and any performance enhancing suppliments....Please.....fast is fast and that he was. Not to mention he never wore the sticky WR gloves that rice had. He didn't have the protective gear they have now. Yet, he still kicked butt, all without modern advances. Im not saying rice was no good, he is and always will be a damn great WR, but hutson owns rice.
I wouldn't say that's necessarily true. Remember, today's athletes have TIME to get bigger faster stronger, most of the guys back then had full time second jobs. Modern advancements in workout and play technology have been big as well. I'd love to see Hutson with his "talent" for catching the ball if he had all the advantages of players today with speed coaches, gloves, weight facilities, and enough money to have time to actually focus on being a pure WR. Though IMO he might not need any of that to be a starter even in today's NFL.when comparing people of different generations I almost always go with the more modern guy because they play against better talent. As sports progress players get bigger, stronger, faster, smarter, so they more recent guy can always play against the people of old and very rarely could a player from the past play now. Obviously it's a little different with rule changes and I am not sure how Rice would hold up getting mauled up and down the field but I will say in my eyes Jerry Rice was the best receiver ever, followed by Randy Moss.
I wouldn't say that's necessarily true. Remember, today's athletes have TIME to get bigger faster stronger, most of the guys back then had full time second jobs. Modern advancements in workout and play technology have been big as well. I'd love to see Hutson with his "talent" for catching the ball if he had all the advantages of players today with speed coaches, gloves, weight facilities, and enough money to have time to actually focus on being a pure WR. Though IMO he might not need any of that to be a starter even in today's NFL.
You can't. (It was Herber and Isbell, both in the HOF, but they made it there because of Hutson.)
The only competition where Sammy Baugh and even then it wasn't even close. And he did that being a wide receiver, not a RB or a QB.
3. Stats aren't everything. Is Kareem Abdul Jabbar the best basketball player of all time? Some players simply "get it" before everyone else and change and revolutionize the game. Babe Ruth was one of those players. When looking at stats there is a TREMENDOUS amount of information that isn't shown. It's fun to look at stats because then you have something quantitative to compare.
It's a year round sport because players have the money to make it a year round sport. I consider that a "modern advantage" that did not exist back then like sticky gloves. Here's a different perspective, how good would today's players be if they couldn't afford "year round football" and NEVER had have the time for it or the equipment? Especially under the old rules.I think you just proved my point that players today are better. The players in the past did have other jobs and in the off-season they rarely trained or thought about football. Its a year round sport nowadays.
It's a year round sport because players have the money to make it a year round sport. I consider that a "modern advantage" that did not exist back then like sticky gloves. Here's a different perspective, how good would today's players be if they couldn't afford "year round football" and NEVER had have the time for it or the equipment? Especially under the old rules.
Those are my lines lol. It's a matter of "could" for me (though a few guys I actually think could make it) Seems neither of us "get it"ok? but IT IS a year around sport now... I don't think you are understanding...
the players in the past (as a collective whole) were not as good as they are now, if you don't believe that then there is really no more discussion because I doubt anyone could convince you.