Zycho32 Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 So. All-Time Teams. If you followed the history of any particular team sport you liked, then you probably dabbled once or twice in selecting the best of the best. I have too. More than once or twice. As a casual mostly, but at least once where I tried to be more... academic about it. Back on the Draft Countdown forums(dead and erased by the way) in 2012 thereabouts I made a sustained effort to create a series of All-Decade Teams. They weren't casual selections based purely on merit, or at least that was the aim. They were meant to signify what a genuine attempt to make the best possible functioning team out of the pool of available players. These teams would play according to the rules of their times, their strengths and restrictions. They would ideally have an answer for just about everything that could've been conceivably thrown at them from those time periods. These were supposed to be teams that could mesh together and not chafe within the confines of a locker room and the depth chart. But most importantly, these were supposed to be teams that could compete and win under the most brutal and desperate of circumstances. This thread will be a revival of this long-abandoned project. While my ego would disagree, what follows is largely no different from any other attempt at creating All-Time Teams. It's a lot of speculation(though reinforced with lots more research than the average casual go) mixed in with ample doses of the 'wishful thinking' syndrome, funneled through a series of restrictions that can admittedly be more malleable than one would want. This is NOT done by a genuine expert in the field(I was speculated to be one once, which tickled me pink, but still...), but rather a rank amateur trying to make a serious run of things. This is how it's going to work; First, I'm going to provide the general details of what my process is. Then I'm going to work my way up the various decades of existence the NFL has had. I will start from the 1920's and make it all the way to the 2010's(If all goes according to plan, this will admittedly be finished before the 2019 season has ended, so the 2010's may not be 100% complete). I will also respond to collected questions/critiques before each Decade is posted. At the same time, feel free to contribute your own All-Time or All-Decade teams if you wanna just use the thread as a more general All-Time thread. Enjoy. ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Process: (Apologies to anyone reading this verbal diarrhea. If someone could point out how to spoiler the text on this site...) I would say, ninety-nine times out of a hundred, creating an all-time team just means name recognition and personal merit. It makes sense; usually the most well-known players are universally regarded as the best. They are almost always Champions, Hall-of-Famers, Record Holders, Larger-than-Life Characters. Then those names get slapped onto a list. Sometimes(in the more serious ones) they get slapped onto the appropriate position they play instead of a vague indication(Actual All-Time Teams as dictated by early century sportswriters and the like are guilty of this sort of vagrancy. No distinction between the Left Side or the Right Side. And everyone's a Back in the backfield). There's no consideration over the assembled group of players actually competing in a match because there's virtually no need for it. After all, it'd only be in your head(or some bastardized concoction created by Madden's Create-A-Player). My ego claims this will be the 100th time. The concept I run with owes its existence to Bill Simmons and his Book of Basketball, as one of the final chapters discusses an All-Time NBA Team and introduced elements and concepts that revolutionized my way of thinking about this back in 2009. I will be doing a rather sloppy and lousy attempt at paraphrasing his concepts because, quite frankly, I don't wanna copy word-for-word from an actual hardcover book if I can get away with it. The first part is the Martian Premise(which Bill attributed to Bob Ryan, a sportswriter from Boston). Basically, Space Aliens invade the Earth, causing destruction and mayhem. Then they deliver an ultimatum; your sport of choice(in the book, Basketball, Best-of-Seven), you win, you save your planet. You lose, you all die. Those are the stakes. The second part is being given access to a Time Machine in order to go back and retrieve the finest ballplayers at specific moments in their times. This leads to a concept which Bill labeled as a Wine Cellar Team. He explains that most all-time teams are selected largely out of context, paying no attention to specific turning points in certain players' careers. Magic Johnson was listed as the primary example because he evolved multiple times in the course of his career, comparing the year one would select Magic to a particular year for certain wines. He stated that there were three distinct peaks in Magic's career- in '82 he was a sixth man extraordinaire who could be fitted into virtually any position, in '85 he was the man running Showtime as a Floor General, and in '87 he evolved into a deadly clutch performer and offensive dynamo who could win key games in the end. Another example is Michael Jordan, who peaked as an All-Around Dynamo in '92 but peaked as a Teammate in '96. Each of those years weren't just adding new talents to an existing template; those prior skills sorta declined as new ones took over. Jordan in '96 was, what, ninety percent of what he was in '92? So you have to be careful about which year of a certain player you select. Adapting these concepts to Football is both more simplistic and more complicated. The simplicity comes from more than there being only one game for the fate of the world. The concept of peaks is more straightforward here than in Basketball, largely because there is significantly less fluidity. At best most players worth considering have two peaks to speak of; the first peak is their physical peak, and the second is their mental peak. The first peak is often at the early point in their career, before the wear and tear has set in. Unfortunately, since it is usually early on in their career, these players(with elite exceptions) have yet to develop the experience that'll make them better decision makers. The second peak is at the latter point in their careers. They've experienced so much that they can make the correct decisions in split seconds. Unfortunately they have only a fraction of the physical skills they possessed in their youth thanks to age and injuries. There are obvious exceptions to those two peaks, but the standard applies. Pro Football is usually applying polish to what a player already has, with only rare examples of a player being taught something completely new. Sometimes, like Randall Cunningham in 1998, it's more Smoke and Mirrors than genuine development. It looked as if Cunningham evolved into an Elite Pocket Passer from the Runner/Thrower dynamo he was in his youth in Philadelphia... but who wouldn't be an Elite Pocket Passer throwing to Randy Moss? The complications arise from playing styles. Bill derided most Basketball Coaches in his book, saying most were largely useless and once or twice wishing for the Player-Coach to return. Basketball is, no matter what the strategists may say, a rather uncomplicated sport in the grand scheme of things. You can fit players of varying talents together and you can be largely assured they'll pick up the nuances of playing together in practice. Football by contrast is more complex(though the earlier decades will certainly be simple enough), relying upon not just different formations at given times, but teams will often have playbooks with differing levels of terminology to decipher. This is important if you want to assemble a team with a strength beyond 'Pick-up Pub Team trying to compete with Pros' levels. You will get ample practice time to mesh and develop as a unit, but said development isn't going to be some magic wand you can just wave at a group of players and Abracadabra! That will take time and it will take teachers, which means being stuck with coaches- usually an afterthought on All-Time teams. Anyway. We have Space Aliens competing against us in one game for our Challenge. And we have the Wine Cellar rules for selecting players and coaches. I'll finish by describing how these rosters are going to go down. The reason why I'm going with All-Decade teams is largely to shine a spotlight on the decades that will, quite honestly, get shafted. You can go with a single All-Time Team, but I'll level with you. You will have only a precious few players from the 1990's and 1980's, and virtually none from prior decades. The reason is the game evolves at rates that are stupefying if you ever step back and take notice. For Linemen on both sides, the 1980's is largely the cut-off point simply because that was when linemen were reaching the 300 pound threshold. Offensive Linemen who were lighter than that quite simply could not function in the modern game unless it was as a blocking tight-end/extra-fat-fullback. Even skill players have a ruthless cut-off period in the 1980's because of athleticism, though they have a far harsher one waiting in the 2000's thanks to the evolution of Offenses. The West Coast of the 1980's is rather quaint compared to today. And I haven't even mentioned the numerous Rule Changes that will trip up earlier players! Cutting up the All-Time teams into decades nicely compartmentalizes the sport into clear-cut sections, though sometimes the 'eras' will blend. This usually comes from a specific rule change, such as 1978, when the refinement of Pass Interference caused passing numbers to surge, changing what was still largely a run-heavy league into something more connected to passing. At any rate, each All-Decade Team can adapt a specific year for the general rules of the game. Case in point, the 1970's squad can play under the 1978 rules and use the refinement of Pass Interference to create a more successful passing attack. At any rate, I will be starting off with a select year for Rules. Since this was something I did NOT uniformly do in my prior attempt years ago, this will be slightly unfamiliar territory for me. My general attitude is I'll just use the end year of the decade- 1920's would be 1929, etc.- unless a rule change or several turns out to be detrimental. It's not likely to happen, but just to be safe. I will then select Coaches and Assistants. Head Coaches must have coached a minimum of five years within the decade at the NFL level to qualify. Assistant Coaches are under the same rule, but this can be bypassed. What that means is a particular Assistant Coach can have spent less than five years of the decade in the NFL if they have gone on or left from a Coaching job at any level, including a Head Coaching job in the NFL. However, the assistants have an additional restriction- the role they will play is dependent on the year they have been picked. Let's say we're eyeing a talented assistant whose career in the decade was spent half as a QB coach and the other half as an Offensive Coordinator. If I want him as an Offensive Coordinator, then I have to pick a year he was an Offensive Coordinator. Same goes if I want him as a QB Coach. And no, I cannot pick him as an Offensive Coordinator and just have him do double duty as a QB Coach. The only way I can do that is he spent a year doing double duty and I selected that year. On a final note, if there is a coach who started out as an assistant in a decade, then graduated to Head Coach, I cannot have both versions on the staff at the same time. Only one version of a specific coach for that decade(I CAN however, use a coach in multiple decades should it be beneficial to do so). Assistants are likely selected upon what the Head Coach usually relied upon during his career, in roles if not the actual assistants themselves. With the Coaches comes the selection of Play Style, both on Offense and Defense. This is largely a standard formation with a few tidbits. This will depend entirely on the coaches selected- or rather, the years in which they have been selected from. Don Shula of 1972 would run a Run-Heavy Clock Control Offense that can surprise with long-distance strikes from the air... but Don Shula of 1984 would be an Air-It-Out sort of coach thanks to the presence of Dan Marino. However, I can't pick 1972 Don Shula and have him run a 1984 style of offense. Otherwise I could make every All-Decade Team run Modern Game Plans and what would be too much cheese... even for a Wisconsin boy like me. The Coaches and Strategies will have an effect on Player Selection... especially those who did not play under the selected Coaches... or played in any kind of system close to the one I go with. This admittedly won't mean much very early on, when the formations were simplistic enough that getting the hang of them wouldn't take too much effort. But as we climb up through time, the strategies will start to develop a complexity(to say nothing of the Playbook Jargon that will develop) which will put those who played outside them at a notable disadvantage(or at least, a disadvantage that can't be fixed without many months of training). Onto the Players. The breakdown will be Starting Offensive Players, Starting Defensive Players(once Platoon Football is introduced), then the Bench Players. Once legit Special Teams Players(ones without actual positions on Offense or Defense) emerge, their spot will be behind the remaining Bench Players. Special Teamsters with roles on offense or defense will have their role on Special Teams listed as a Secondary Position(so a wide receiver who returns kicks will be found in the Wide Receiver section instead of in the back). The Roster Sizes will be dictated by the Limits set by the NFL in the years of the select decade (https://www.profootballarchives.com/nflrosterlimits.html ), with an exact year selected if there are too many changes within a set decade- the 1920's Team will be limited to 18 players as an example though a couple of years were spent with just 16. As for Inactive Players, I will only pay attention to the Active Roster Limits in general. That means for a Modern Day Team, I can only suit up 46 out of 53 players, so only those 46 will matter on Game Day- and there won't be any pre-game injuries to be concerned about so keeping the extra seven players is excessive. For the most part, Player Guidelines are sort of the same as the Coaches. Only one version of a player allowed on an All-Decade squad. So I cannot select multiple years of a certain player and cram the roster that way. I won't have five different versions of Randy Moss on the 2000's Team, for example. A player can only qualify for a decade if he has spent five years of his career in the NFL in said decade. However that rule can be bypassed for specific reasons, usually the player is by far the best available for his position or he has a very specific skill we need for the team. Those NFL years need to be individually qualified. So a player who has played five years in the NFL for a set decade has to have played in at least half of his team's games for each season. The lone exception to this rule would be candidates for Backup Quarterback- if you want a genuine backup who does not rock the boat while sitting on the bench, then these guys tend not to play as much. For the most part, players will be tethered to the positions they are listed as having during certain seasons(https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ lists each player and the positions he played during his career). Like the five years rule, this can be bypassed... to an imprecise extent. Left Tackles could conceivably play Right Tackle if there was a need for it, and vice-versa. Sometimes information on a player is uncovered that implied he could play multiple positions, though he never did play those positions in an actual game. Such research is acceptable for consideration, though if you need such research to justify playing a player significantly out of position, then there must be a real problem with the player pool(spoiler alert, the 1930's roster is going to have a rather large deformity, so to speak). And once someone shows me the spoiler tag stuff, not only can I place all the mountains of text in an easily hideable window, I can also provide a 'Cliffs Notes' section before the obscenely large breakdowns if that's what you prefer. A quick note about competing leagues. The 1940's section will have an All-AAFC Team as well as an All-NFL Team. Likewise in the 1960's with the AFL. The different All-Time Teams will not be merged together- but feel free to speculate on it anyways. All other 'competing' leagues in the history of Pro Football will not be included, as the AAFC and the AFL were the only ones who had comparable talent to the NFL and lasted long enough to 'qualify'. The only other League that could've conceivably been used was the USFL of the 1980's, but that's only because there were so many players who went to the NFL afterwards and would likely qualify for the NFL Team anyways. The rest- and there are more than you think- are discarded from consideration. I am also not touching either All-College Teams or Pre-NFL Teams from the 1890's on with a ten-foot pole. Stay tuned, for I will have the 1920's Team in place eventually(I've forgotten how long it took to assemble these rosters from the last time). 17 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Activated10 Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 This is easily longest post on FF, congrats on that accomplishment I didn't read all of it but I'm interested in seeing you compete this series 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikes635 Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 12 hours ago, Activated10 said: This is easily longest post on FF, congrats on that accomplishment I didn't read all of it but I'm interested in seeing you compete this series I'm still reading while thinking of input for all decade teams 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancerman Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 Dude you have to trim this down 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikes635 Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 1920= qb John Driscoll RB Jim Thorpe FB Ernie Nevers I honestly don't know OL, Recievers or Defense from this era Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zycho32 Posted February 27, 2019 Author Share Posted February 27, 2019 (edited) Oh Dear. Get ready to drown in text. Lots and lots of text. So much text that your brains will need gills to cope. The 1920's All-Decade Team: There's actually a reasonable excuse to start in the deepest reaches of history rather than the most recent events. As with all beginnings, no matter the league or sport, things are the most basic around that time. The complexities emerge later on, so starting with the 1920's gives both myself and the lot of you the chance to settle into the routine and take each oncoming complexity in proper sequence. This also provides the bonus of a psuedo history lesson; you'll get far better details looking the facts up compared to listening to me, but I'll probably be the foot in the doorway for you.Team Roster- Cliffs Notes Version: Head Coach: George Halas- 1929Offense: T-Formation Defense: Seven-Box/Seven-Diamond(7-2-2) QB: Benny Friedman- 1929(Three Year Exception) LH: Harold "Red" Grange- 1925(Three Year Exception) FB: Ernie Nevers- 1926(Three Year Exception) RH: Johnny "Blood" McNally- 1929 LE: Guy Chamberlin- 1923 LT: Ed Healey- 1925 LG: August "Mike" Michalske- 1929(Three Year Exception) C: George Trafton- 1924 RG: Adolph "Swede" Youngstrom- 1923 RT: Wilbur "Pete" Henry- 1923 RE: Lavern Dilweg- 1929(Four Year Exception)(Off-Position) Bench B: John "Paddy" Driscoll- 1925 B: Verne Lewellen- 1929 B: Tony Latone- 1925 B: Joseph "Red" Dunn- 1929 T: William "Link" Lyman- 1926 G: Heartley "Hunk" Anderson- 1925(Four Year Exception) E/T: Walter "Tillie" Voss- 1924 The Rules: In short, we'll be using the rules as they were known in 1929. Here are the important details; 1. The Ball's size is listed as "28 to 28.5 inches around ends, 22 to 22.5 inches around the middle, and 14-15 ounces in weight". This is a fatter ball then what we are used to in the modern game(actually reduced half an inch around the middle in 1929). In fact, its size is more comparable to that of a Rugby Ball. The ball would not start to approach the modern shape and size until 1934, when it was made thinner with more tapered ends. As you can imagine, this alone would make the passing game more difficult, but even more lunacy awaits! 2. The field dimensions are largely as you know them now; 120 yards by 53 and one third yards, including two 10 yard end zones. There are transverse lines every five yards like the modern game... but no hash marks to speak of. Well, that's not entirely true. Wherever a play would end on the field, that's where the ball would be spotted for the next. But if the ball went out of bounds, it would be placed fifteen yards from the sidelines for the next play. Even then, and even worse if you did not make it out of bounds, you were likely forced to waste a play running towards the center to get better field positioning. In addition, most of you know the goal posts were originally placed on the goal line- if for no other reason that you've seen a blooper or two of players slamming into the posts on plays. But between 1927 and 1933, this was changed and the goal posts were in the end line of the end zone. In 1933 they would be moved back to the goal line. And actual Hash Marks would be introduced that same year. The culprit that brought about these changes was a 1932 Championship... which we will get to in the next decade. As for the Goalposts, the uprights seemed to be 18.5 feet apart, with the crossbar 10 feet high. Two posts rather than one naturally. And yes, they are placed on the end line. 3. The scoring is, apart from the utter lack of a two-point conversion, the same as in the modern day. PATs are from the 2 yard line. And kickers booting field goals or PATs used the Drop Kick. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drop_kick We will discuss this later. 4. Roster limits are going to be 18 Players. Seven Players required on the line of scrimmage- I think this only applied to the offense as it does now. Numbering of players optional. Head Protection optional. Rough sport for the time. 5. This is considered the era of the sixty-minute man, but there were actually rules in place that permitted substitution. Specifically, a player withdrawn during the first half may not return until the second half. A player withdrawn during the second half may not return to the game. There were no overtimes and games could- and lots of times did- end in a tie. Given the team will be playing for the fate of the world, let's just say a tie ends in something more neutral, like humanity is enslaved or something like that. 6. Of all the differences, it's the Passing Game that is the most striking. Get a load of these indignities! -All Forward passes must be made five yards behind the line of scrimmage. -A second incomplete pass in a series(I would assume a series of downs and not the entire DRIVE) would result in a loss of down and a five yard penalty. -An incomplete pass that went out of bounds would result in a turnover to the opposition. -An incomplete pass in the end zone would be an automatic touchback for the opposition. Only the third one I am not completely sure about. The others I am darn sure lasted until 1933. And the ball is fat! 7. Kickoffs were on the 40 yard line. 8. 'Shifting' forced to have a one-second pause afterwards. Teams would line up in a T-Formation in the backfield but would shift into their desired arrangement before snapping the ball(more on this later). 9. Thirty Seconds to put the ball in play. Six extra than today. Only fifteen of those seconds permitted for a huddle. 10. Fumbles were ruled dead at point of recovery. Honestly, I am not sure this rule actually existed. Or at least, it wasn't enforced in the way the words indicate it should have. The 1929 Rose Bowl is a key example to use in disputing this rule; a player named Roy Riegels picked up a fumble and ran with it to his team's own End Zone, unwittingly giving up a safety to the opposition. If that sounds familiar then you've seen the blooper of Jim Marshall running the wrong way. Either way, if the wording of this rule is accurate, then the play should've been ruled dead once Riegels picked up the ball. So I'm going to assume the rule doesn't actually exist. And in case you were wondering, the NFL used the College Rule Book all the way to 1933. I had said the Five-Year Rule would have moments where it would be bypassed. This decade is likely going to feature the most 'violations' of said rule. The reason for this is too many of the truly elite players are rubbed out of the decade going by this rule, and I'm not going to fudge the numbers by including Collegiate Service. I'll try to limit this to specific needs and specific skills. The Coaches and Strategies: As with just about all things having to do with Professional Football in the 1920's, the position of Coach was an admittedly embryonic one. There was no deluge of respected Collegiate Coaches rushing in to take on newly formed franchises- the Amateurs looked upon the Professional Scene largely with distaste. You can't really blame them. Every sport grapples between Amateurism and Professionalism, and the earliest moments always involves Amateurs thumbing their noses at the notion of Professionals. Baseball had its reckoning back before the 1870's. Soccer in England during the 1880's. And so Football found its reckoning in the 20's. There were certainly a handful of coaches who left the college ranks to go pro. It's just that the most successful coaches of this particular decade all shared a common theme. They were Player-Coaches who had graduated from College and apart from maybe a year or two at the start inevitably graduated to actual Coaching duties. And on this note, there are four coaches in particular, emcompassing three different offensive play formations. Guy Chamberlin and Jimmy Conzelman were most associated with the most common formation of the time; the Single Wing. Up in Green Bay, Curly Lambeau incorporated the system he learned under Knute Rocke, the Notre Dame Box. And in Chicago, the Papa Bear himself, George Halas, went with the T Formation. And to pick a head coach(all four have been champions), we're going to have to go through the pros and cons of each formation. We'll start with the Single Wing. (And for a nice look at the pre-Pro Formation offenses and defenses, go here; https://archive.is/20120907054600/http://www.hickoksports.com/history/proformations01.shtml ) Single Wing: https://archive.is/FmYU/e301455da69c4d5a8e49faf85bfe7af3d8bbc640.gif The main gimmick of the Single Wing is its unbalanced line; a guard or a tackle from one side is moved over to line up alongside his counterpart on the opposite side. This provides an extra blocker at the point of attack- the direction you want to play to go. Virtually all play diagrams show the unbalance tilted to the right- hence the notion of the Right Side being the 'Strong' side and the Left Side being the 'Weak' Side- but in truth the line could and would be unbalanced in either direction; especially if you were so far to the right of the field that you have to run a play to the left(remember the lack of hash marks?) The backfield looks different than most of you would think. What we would call a Quarterback is actually listed as a B in the diagram- a Blocking Back. Positioned directly behind the strong-side of the line, his role is fairly simple; he blocks, he calls plays, and on occasion he would leave the backfield and go out for a pass. The actual playmaker in the backfield is the T- the Tailback. Remember how Michael Vick would tear defenses apart with his legs? He would've been right at home as a Tailback in this system, because the position was meant for multi-tier threats. A Tailback was expected to not only be an elusive and bruising runner, he could be counted upon to make a pass and he could be expected to be a punter. He had multiple roles in the Single Wing and would be classified as a Hero Position. The Fullback, thankfully, is explanatory. The W- the Wing Back- is positioned roughly like how you expect a 2nd or 3rd TE to lineup in Goal Line situations in the modern game. He would probably be the most prevalent receiving threat of the bunch, but his primary goal was making a seal block on the opposing line. Also, there are no wide outs. The concept of a wide-out would not start to exist until the emergence of Don Hutson in the 1930's. Instead, you have the Ends. However, instead of a WR/CB hybrid like what you could see in Arena Football, they functioned more like a TE/DE hybrid. You could use them in the passing game, but they held down the line on their respective edges more often than not. Anyway, here're the bread and butter plays; https://archive.is/FmYU/2105842155c70a148f4841eef9c8a76f8b954d05.gif This is called the cutback. It's a traditional off-tackle run in the modern scheme of things. This incorporates double-team blocking at the point of attack as well as edge sealing. It's a straightforward play and can be defended as such, but this in turn opens up other plays that can be utilized to take advantage of the defense over-shifting. Some, like the fullback plunge, can be seen in the animation. For others like the Wingback Reverse, look at the animation, only instead of the Wingback moving forward to seal off a defender, he runs to the left and takes the ball from the Tailback or whomever received the snap to go around the opposite end. It could be a Home Run Hit of a play if the defense overcommitted to the strong side. The most common pass play is again, an off-shoot of the cutback. Back to the animation. This time imagine the Blocking Back and Wing Back faking their blocks and heading downfield. The details vary; either back could take the deep route or the short route, or the ends could get involved. But the gist is the Tailback stops before he gets less than five yards from the line, and tosses what amounts to a prayer(thanks to the size of the ball, these were basically shot-putted jump balls) towards a hopefully open receiver. Other pass plays tended to use established plays in order to sucker opposing defenses, and it wasn't always the Tailback throwing. Misdirection was a key; very rarely would a back take a snap and directly throw from there. It would be telegraphed, but unlike a run play, the negatives could be a lot worse. Instead, direct passes used this; https://archive.is/FmYU/2f362a71a936557495fe5098f6083bb93c43527f.gif Put the Blocking Back on the opposite wing and you have the Short Punt Formation. It's the Shotgun of its day, and was utilized an awful lot because, yes, it was a Punting Play mostly. It wasn't a fourth down gamble either; this was a day and age where teams could be expected to punt on third and even second down. Punting was far more useful back then because offenses were largely grind-it-out affairs. It was a viable strategy to actually punt at mid-field, pin the opposition deep in their territory, and force them to cough up the ball on a turnover or punt it right back. You could end up in a more favorable field position to score the next time you had the ball. This is also the Place Kicking formation of the day. Remember the Drop Kick? The kicker would drop the ball to the ground and it would bounce up. Timed right, the foot would kick the ball just shortly after it started its bounce back into the air. The fatness of the ball made its bounce fairly reliable. This permitted you to have more blockers on the line since you did not need a holder. The Single Wing was utilized the most, as in, all but a handful of teams utilized the formation during the 1920's. It also accounted for all but two-maybe three- of the Championships. So what's the downside? It's less to do with any flaws of the system and more the lack of potential. And it all comes down to the Tailback. The position of Starting Tailback is really a tale of Three Candidates- and a Distant Fourth. Most of you probably know Harold 'Red' Grange even if only minutely. You probably don't know of Benny Friedman or John 'Paddy' Driscoll. And you most certainly don't know of Verne Lewellen, unless you're a Crazed Nut who likes the Packers. But these four make the use of the Single Wing problematic because each has an incredible strength that hurts the team if left out. We'll start with the Galloping Ghost himself. Grange qualifies as an exception to the five-year rule through a rather tumultuous career. He joined the NFL at the tail end of the 1925 season and did not play enough games to have that year qualify, unless you count the after-season barnstorming tour through the South and the West Coast the Chicago Bears underwent with Grange as the Star Attraction. Then, his agent (a man named C.C. Pyle) made outrageous demands for the following season that George Halas would not agree to(including a piece of ownership of the team), and so Grange was used to spearhead the first Rival League(called the AFL). He would spend 1926 playing for the Football version of the New York Yankees in the AFL. When that league folded, the Yankees jumped to the NFL in 1927... but Grange would get his knee direly injured during a game against Chicago and would be out of football in 1928. He came back to Chicago in 1929 but according to him, he was 'just another back'. Or so he claimed. Check this link out; www.profootballresearchers.com/archives/Website_Files/Coffin_Corner/14-02-453.pdf That's the farthest research anyone has ever done for the dark period of 1920-31 when yardage stats were not officially tallied. It's all totally incomplete, but it provides some interesting anecdotes. Such as Grange still being one of the best runners of the league when he came back in 1929. But I'm digressing. The Red Grange before that knee injury would be considered the Greatest Running Talent of all the candidates. There may be a few players who were faster. There were probably none as elusive. As far as Broken-Field running goes, Grange probably had no equals, though he does come with questions. He played college in Illinois, whose coach, Bob Zuppke, utilized the T-Formation(George Halas was one of his students), and apart from his time with the Football Yankees, he played under the T-Formation as a Left Halfback. As such his passing and kicking talents were largely unknown. Well, the Bears used almost everyone in the backfield as passers, so Grange had to at least be fair in that department. Speaking of passing, Benny Friedman has no equal during this decade. Also an exception to the five year rule, we can describe Friedman's passing skills like this; Put Tom Brady in a league populated by Collegiate Quarterbacks. That's what Friedman was like compared to other passers of his time. Friedman grew up with some ambition of becoming a strongman and had trained his body to that effect, but he also worked out his hands and wrists as well as his body, which probably went a long way towards him being table to toss that fatty-fat ball with not just impressive strength, but with remarkable 'touch'. You know how passers today are either lauded for their exceptional 'touch' in hitting their open receivers at varying distances or are ridiculed for having no 'touch' whatsoever? Friedman clearly had the best touch out of everyone. He also was the most brazen. He was not afraid of throwing the pigskin early and as often as the rules permitted. He was also a more well-rounded player than you'd think; early on in the NFL he was remarkably adept as a runner and a defender, only tapering off once he demonstrated his passing skill all too well and was weaned off the rest of the duties. He also kicked PATs, but only one Field Goal during the decade. Lets put his dominance in another way. Passers- really, entire teams- struggled to reach double-digits in passing touchdowns during the 1920's. Friedman made twenty of them in 1929. That was the equivalent of Babe Ruth hitting 60 Home Runs in 1927. The third candidate, Paddy Driscoll, you could describe as about 85-90% of Grange's running ability, one of the better Tailback passers of that era, and a fine defender. But his best specialty was kicking. That's not to say he was undisputedly the best kicking talent amongst the available players who registered as scorers of Field Goals and PATs. What is undisputable was that he was head and shoulders above everyone else in terms of prolific results. He was amongst the decade league leaders of PATs. He was significantly above everyone else in Field Goals, and he was almost always the primary kick-taker on the teams he played for. Almost everyone else who made the ranking board either dabbled with it a couple of times only, or made significantly less kicks per season. His career also collides with Grange in two distinct moments; the first was in 1925 when Grange made his debut with the Bears. Playing them were the Chicago Cardinals, led by Driscoll. Driscoll earned some infamous notoriety for constantly punting the ball away from Grange, in order to prevent him running roughshod on the Cardinals. The ploy worked for a 0-0 tie. The second was in 1926 he was sold to the Bears to make up for the loss of Red Grange to the AFL. The Fourth candidate isn't really a qualifier for a starting position, but Verne Lewellen was largely as good an all-around talent as Driscoll(even passing!) though he never took any Field Goals. However Verne had a superior talent when it came to Punting. Reconstructed Stats have Lewellen averaging about forty yards a punt. That sounds rather milquetoast to you, does it not? What if I told you the league-average around that time was 35-to-36 yards? In a time when a deep punt could hopelessly stick an opposing team in the mud of their own end zone, Lewellen was a good step above everybody else there. Three potential starters and one likely backup. Is it possible to put the likes of Grange, Friedman, and Driscoll in the same backfield? It's not out of the question. Offenses are rudimentary enough at this time that players could be knocked out of position and not really lose much(or anything) in translation. Single Wing offenses, contrary to what the above diagrams and discussions showed, did not solely rely upon the Tailback as the main passer. Teams sometimes would have the Blocking Back take that responsibility, while some others actually used the Fullback. So putting Friedman at Blocking Back would not be a hassle. Nor would placing Grange or Driscoll at Wing Back be a problem either. That said, such a lineup would work best with players alternating backfield roles... a concept that I do not believe actual Single Wing teams- especially those run by Chamberlin or Conzelman- employed. It's not completely out of the picture, but it does stretch things a little. Notre Dame Box: https://archive.is/FmYU/5cb5309fa1967556208fc3d695af6018c78e4970.gif The second of the options, at first glance this looks like the Single Wing. But you can note the differences easily enough. The Ends are 'flexed'. That really only means they were spaced out a yard or two from the other linemen. This gave them two advantages; One, they now held a superior angle in regards to edge blocking, which served them well for the off-tackle bread-and-butter plays, and two, this space gave them a more favorable means of separation from the line, which was to your benefit if you wanted them to catch passes. The team that exploited this the most was probably the Green Bay Packers, who had an all-time great in Lavern Dilweg and once coaxed a typical Power Tackle/End to a five touchdown catch season. However, the greatest adjustments to these positions would take place in the following decade. Like the Single Wing, the offense did not require a specific position to be the primary passer. The Packers in particular alternated between their Tailback and their Blocking Back when they reached their peak in '29. But the Box relied on more than just misdirection to get the BB involved; they could take a short, angled snap from the center and go through the handoff motions, not unlike the QB in the T, move back five yards and attempt a pass. But the key to the offense lay in the Shift. The Shift worked like this; coming out of the huddle, the team would line up in the T-Formation. Then, before the ball is snapped, the backfield would shift into its desired position before snapping. The most recent(1929) rules required a one second pause between the shift and the snap, but that was very minuscule in the pace of the action. That was only one second for the defense to see the shift and work out the likely direction and type of play. The Shift was further boosted by the fact that players were permitted to to alternate their positions based on what the play required. The Tailback spot could be occupied by your best passer(for passing), your fastest runner(for end runs), your fullback(for line plunges). Your speedy guy can be a tailback one play and go to wingback to catch passes on the next. Freeze the moment in time, just after the shift, and the play would appear telegraphed, but defenses were forced to think on the fly in real life. You would say the conundrum we had with the Single Wing would be neutralized with the Box. All three of the Titans could be utilized and moved around. So what's the flaw? Well, apart from the balanced line negating some of the running power, and the passing rules making the air game somewhat ineffective, the worst flaw might be with the coach. Earl "Curly" Lambeau organized the Green Bay Packers in 1919 and lead the team in Semi-Pro(Sandlot) games for two years before getting into the NFL. He was a Player-Coach who went to Notre Dame and played football for Knute Rockne for one season. Then he got sick and had to drop out and return home to Green Bay. That's relevant because, up to the 1930's, he coached as if he only really spent a single year under Knute Rockne. Even up to the championship years from '29 to '31, his players had a larger hand in working out the plays Lambeau would devise. That shouldn't be a problem with so many 'elite' players at our disposal, but it's a bit of a weakness we really don't need. T-Formation: https://archive.is/FmYU/2c8ae98ae64d2dc68c41d84fd7177596535eb607.gif Would you believe this actually pre-dates the Single Wing? It was an invention of Walter Camp in 1882. It became the Primary Formation in 1906 when rule changes dictated seven men on the line. And in the NFL for this decade, only one team and one man used the formation; George Halas of the Chicago Bears. Problem is, this is the pre-historic version. It's not the T you probably heard about during the infamous 73-0 slaughter in the 1940 Championship. The innovations would not come in the 20's(I actually cheated the last time around and introduced the architect of the first positive changes, Ralph Jones, as the assistant coach. Problem is, he didnt join the Chicago Bears until he took the Head Coaching job in 1930). This T is lined up tight, just about everywhere. About all Halas did was flex the Ends a yard away from the linemen, like the Box. In addition, not only was the line balanced, but the backfield was tightly packed together and not used at the point of the attack in the way Blocking Backs and Wingbacks were utilized in the Wing. You could plunge inside, but outside runs required genuine breakaway speeds and the other backs executing open-field blocks. Passing was much like the Single Wing in that not only was the job not limited strictly to the Quarterback, everybody in the backfield got in on the action in Chicago. The halfbacks, the fullbacks, they threw passes too. Rarely, of course. Setting up passes from this formation(this was before concepts like the man in motion) required the same sort of breakaway speed from the halfbacks but they were lined up so far from the line their routes would be telegraphed and zeroed in on. You had to ultimately use the same sort of misdirection plays you would encounter when utilizing the Wing, ones that went from obvious run plays to trick passes. The direct method would require greater use of the Ends. There is some hope, however. History constantly has outside arrivals shaping the T into the powerhouse formation it would become, but George Halas was not really rock-headed. By 1929 he had advocated a more "Open" kind of T, one that presumably was an improvement over the earlier versions. Problem was he and Edward "Dutch" Sternaman, part-owner and longtime halfback, had contrasting opinions on the offense and the Bears never could get on the same page. This led to them seeking outside help and hiring Ralph Jones in '30. But the idea of Halas favoring an "Open" game is promising. Perhaps with the right influence something could come out of it. Defenses: https://archive.is/FmYU/b714e50d18aa3e02a2ba46dd1dbd8d5cf8e29101.gif This is called the Seven-Box. If you can't see why, you spent too many years doing the unmentionables to yourself. The diagram lists the offensive positions, to give you an idea of what players were largely expected to do in the two-way era, though this is by no means uniform. As you might note, this was as tight a formation as any of the offenses were around this time, hence why the halfbacks are not lined out wide but deep enough to be considered safeties. The Fullback and Blocking Back were linebackers, their responsibilities being to follow the play and get the runner if he got past the line. https://archive.is/FmYU/d40446de56a36560fa4634117f4cc6befd13bf43.gif This was the second part of the Formation. Called the Seven-Diamond. It was used in obvious or suspected passing plays, incorporating a deep safety man who was placed that far(about 15-30 yards) because teams could just as easily punt as pass. The diagram gives the job to the Blocking Back, but that can honestly vary depending on who you have at your disposal(Red Grange is a halfback for instance, but the Bears would want him fielding punts from this formation, as opposed to whoever their Quarterback was). There are some complexities. Ends would sometimes drop into coverage- mostly covering other ends. And some very notable Centers around this time earned the reputation for being "Rovers". This really means they dropped back from the line and took on a linebacker-type role. Sometimes a tackle(Cal Hubbard) would do the same thing, but that largely involved said player using their size and burst as a weapon to break the line and get the ballcarrier. So.... Head Coach: George Halas- 1929 Offensive Style: T-Formation Defensive Style: Seven-Box/Seven-Diamondhttps://i.pinimg.com/736x/70/d4/85/70d485f78b98c2bda01e5c78450785fc.jpg As crazy as it sounds, this formation gives me the best flexibility when it comes to my options from the Tailback position. That and the de facto assistants I will have on hand may be enough to get the T working in a manner more advanced than it was. What? I don't have any assistants listed? Well, that's understandable. Teams in this decade really didn't have assistant coaches. The 'assistants' I speak of will be players from the actual squad, and I won't bother double-posting them. The Starters: This will be rather quick and straightforward. Eighteen Players altogether, eleven of whom are starters. Starting Quarterback: Benny Friedman- 1929(Three Year Exception)(Off-Position) Secondary Positions: Linebacker/Defensive Halfback, Placekicker(Alternate), Punter(Primary) -5'10, 183. Cleveland Bulldogs: 1927/ Detroit Wolverines: 1928/ New York Giants: 1929-31/ Brooklyn Dodgers: 1932-34https://www.bigblueinteractive.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/friedman02.jpg We've gone over the pros and cons with Friedman, the worst being he was purely a Tailback, which is kind of a problem when he has to go from taking 'shotgun-like' snaps from seven yards back to merely a yard from the center. We will have teachers on the roster to help him adjust. He is also the primary punter, because the punting formation of the time doubled as the 'Have-to-Pass' formation of its day, and having your best passer by a country mile double as the punter is no small thing. That and he's a strong runner in his own right, so there are more options on the table. Starting Left Halfback: Harold "Red" Grange- 1925(Three Year Exception) Secondary Positions: Defensive Halfback, Kick Returner(Primary), Punt Returner(Primary) -6'0, 180. Chicago Bears: 1925/ New York Yankees(AFL): 1926/ New York Yankees: 1927/ Chicago Bears: 1929-34https://www.totalprosports.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/77-red-grange.jpg ...This puts me in a weird place. I don't really trust his agent, C.C. Pyle, and I wanted the best placekicker of the decade(Driscoll) in the starting lineup. But in the end, Grange is the best running talent on hand to make the T-Formation go as an offensive power. If he's in the lineup, defenses have to focus on him, and that makes many other alternate plays possible. He can make things happen by running the ball, catching the ball out of the backfield, intercepting passes, returning kicks and punts. He's the offensive dynamo, the gear that moves the mechanism. Starting Fullback: Ernie Nevers- 1926(Three Year Exception) Secondary Positions: Linebacker, Placekicker(Primary), Punter(Alternate) -6'0 204. Duluth Eskimos: 1926-27/ Chicago Cardinals: 1929-31http://www.onlinecertificateprograms.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/thanksgivinggames/02_ernie.jpg He was called "The Football Player Without a Fault" and played equal to the billing. He was a fantastic line plunger, a fine kicker, an adept passer(once completing 17 straight passes with the fat ol' hog they called a football back then), a ferocious defender, and had the mentality to go all-out in 60 minutes of play. He had dalliances with Pro Baseball, but it was largely injuries that shortened his career extensively, having him sit out in '28 and prematurely retiring after '31. That's not to say he was injury-averse; in Stanford he played the full 60 minutes against Notre Dame in the 1924 Rose Bowl while he had two damaged ankles. This was the Notre Dame team that had the famous Four Horsemen in their backfield. He still outgained the Horsemen combined on the ground, punted and defended like a mad man, and turned in a valiant effort in what would turn out to be a Stanford loss. Most would know Nevers for two reasons; One, he was the Star Attraction for a rather infamous traveling team in '26 known as the Duluth Eskimos. The other involved a 1929 game where he racked up 40 points single-handedly, pretty much the longest existing record in the NFL to this date. There is one complication though; virtually all of Nevers' career was spent in a particular formation; The Stanford Double-Wing. https://archive.is/FmYU/53b570e028ad0b71b13be64007f90037c338eaaa.gifhttps://archive.is/FmYU/ccf1bea35d3012399306048886fbe53505236e91.gif We didn't go into the Double-Wing because frankly, it was an off-shot of the Single Wing and a bit like the Short Punt. The Stanford version is unique because it puts the Fullback in the Tailback role. This worked because of Nevers, who was the kind of all-around talent coaches and fans drool over. But really, it was a basic Double Wing. Ernie never seemed to have a ego problem, as far as I can find out. So he probably wouldn't raise up a stink playing in a different formation and taking on a slightly more garbageman-type role compared to his actual playing days. That and since he's playing alongside the best possible teammates- at least one having been teammates with him- he won't be required to do everything like usual. Thanks to Grange pushing Driscoll out of the starting lineup, Nevers is the designated placekicker unless Driscoll is subbed in. That's alright; Nevers was never described as terrible booting the ball after all. He also contributes to the overall deception of the passing attack beyond Friedman. Starting Right Halfback: Johnny "Blood" McNally- 1929 Secondary Positions: Defensive Halfback, Kick Returner(Alternate), Punt Returner(Alternate) -6'1 188. Milwaukee Badgers: 1925/ Duluth Eskimos: 1926-27/ Pottsville Maroons: 1928/ Green Bay Packers: 1929-33/ Pittsburgh Pirates: 1934/ Green Bay Packers: 1935-36/ Pittsburgh Pirates: 1937-38http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Pk49mVrUKD0/SQFFBllUQgI/AAAAAAAABBM/9LXnf94mtaw/s400/johnny_blood_01.jpg This is the second reason Paddy Driscoll is not in the starting lineup. He is also someone who, if you looked purely at 1920's accolades, you'd wonder why he's here. He went virtually unknown as far as All-Pro selections went and did not really rack up the touchdowns like you'd expect for a Hall-of-Famer(his greatest stats occurred just shortly after the 20's wrapped up). But the key reasons are these; McNally might be the closest halfback we have to match Grange's mobility(well, there was one other), and his pass catching skills are considered second-to-none. In fact, he's considered to have been the best pass catcher in the league until Don Hutson arrived. He was called "Johnny Blood" because he took it as a fake name to preserve collegiate eligibility. He was also named the "Vagabond Halfback". But he ought to have been called "Peter Pan". The man lived as if he were a child, getting into all sorts of misadventures. He climbed onto the roof of a speeding train to escape an angered teammate. He scaled a multi-story building for some sort of mischief aimed at his coach. He arranged an exhibition match for his team in Hawaii, and had to be rescued when he was spotted hanging off the flagpost on the stern of the ship they were traveling on, trying to do chin ups. If he was alive and in his prime today, and if he pulled that stunt, you would see a selfie of it on twitter. More than the antics, the guy was a free spirit who could seemingly do anything provided he had the interest to do it. He was probably an Inaugural Hall-of-Famer more for his character than his play. That said, his play was great. He was often the fastest player on his team, and had a magnificent talent for coming down with the ball when it was in the air. Largely this was thanks to his frame and him shielding the ball in every way possible from a defender. This also served him great on defense, where he made a reputation as a ball hawk. He was considered adept as a tackler, punter, and as a passer. All of that was shadowed by his antics, however. In fact, that's the biggest risk for this team. The first problem is his likely relation with his coach. Blood drove Curly Lambeau up the walls and was let go by him twice! And yet, Curly deeply valued his skills, leading to a rather 'complicated in a non-sexual way' relationship. How's George Halas gonna handle the guy? The second problem actually extended onto the field. Blood was nothing short of breathtaking in the clutch moments when the team was behind, but in moments when the team was ahead, he would start to clown around. A lot of it was making catches look more difficult than they really were, or just dropping passes. One time he had an open field touchdown, but stopped at the five just so the defenders could catch up so he could drag them into the end zone. Believe it or not, the problem isn't about him doing such a thing as in the game against the aliens, it's more about whether he could handle the life-or-death stakes. We are putting these players in situations that just never existed, ever. But that part is negligable, if only because his fun-loving nature might actually be a double-edged sword; it could also serve as an ice-breaker in regards to the aliens. Have them spend a rousing night on the town with Johnny Blood, and you might just avoid the destruction of the planet to begin with! Starting Left End: Guy Chamberlin- 1923 Secondary Positions: Defensive Left End -6'2 196. Decatur-Chicago Staleys: 1920-21/ Canton Bulldogs: 1922-23/ Cleveland Bulldogs: 1924/ Frankford Yellow Jackets: 1925-26/ Chicago Cardinals: 1927http://www.profootballhof.com/assets/1/26/Chamberlin_Guy_Action_180-220.jpg?580 I'm not gonna lie; specific information about Chamberlin's skills are, well, not scarce. Just devoid of details beyond being exemplary. According to George Halas he was the finest two-way End of his time. A rock solid defender and a triple-threat on offense(in college he had been a Back rather than an End). All of that is overshadowed by his coaching record. He's the winningest coach ever in the NFL, and he has the most championships of the 1920's with four. Three of them came from the three-year dynasty of the Bulldog club from '22 to '24. Then he went to Frankford and won another title in '26. Chamberlin basically doubles as our assistant coach, someone who can rouse his teammates to perform(apparently he was incredibly likeable), and who has a great enough coaching mind that putting his brain together with Halas would create some positive advancements in terms of strategy. It's not as if they didn't know each other; Chamberlin was Halas' big acquisition when the Decatur Staleys were created in 1920, and Guy would spend two years with the team. So he knows Halas, and knows the T. And on top of that he could be considered one of the more open-minded coaches in regards to passing the ball. In 1923 the Canton Bulldogs played largely against type and racked up seven receiving touchdowns when before they were primarily a running juggernaut. In '24 it was upped to 11. When Guy joined Frankford in '25 it was 8. Then 7 in '26. These were monster passing numbers for that decade. They weren't selfishly all to him either; 36 Passing touchdowns were scored from '22 to '26 with Chamberlin as coach for his teams. He caught only six of them. Starting Left Tackle: Ed Healey- 1925 Secondary Positions: Defensive Left Tackle -6'1 207. Rock Island Independents: 1920-22/ Chicago Bears: 1922-27http://www.bearshistory.com/images/bearshistory_healey.jpg The competition at this spot was primarily between two Hall-of-Famers. Ed Healey and Link Lyman. Both played for George Halas and the Chicago Bears, so both blocked in the T-Formation, without the benefits of unbalanced line blocking to support them. They were elected into the Hall of Fame in the same year. Would you have started pulling your hair out at this point? Last time around, I went with Lyman for four reasons; he had been a part of three championship teams with Canton/Cleveland, he had a pairing connection with Guy Chamberlin at Left End, he had an inch or two and about twenty pounds on Healey, and George Halas described Healey was the "most versatile tackle ever", something that stuck in my mind as perfect for a backup tackle expected to potentially fit in multiple places on the line. Here's what I neglected to uncover then; In 1926, George Halas signed Lyman to the Bears when he had Healey in his starting lineup at Left Tackle. The two played together for two years before Healey retired. Lyman played Right Tackle in '27 and was a sub for Healey in '26. So much for that debate. Anyways, Healey was tough as nails and blessed with good speed for his position. As for the versatility part, it's probably less to do with positional placement(Healey DID play End while at Dartmouth) and more about style. My theory goes that Healey was equally adept at overpowering his opponent at the point of attack, and using finesse to trap and seal him from the direction of the play. Starting Left Guard: August "Mike" Michalske- 1929(Three Year Exception) Secondary Positions: Defensive Left Guard -6'0 210. New York Yankees: 1927-28/ Green Bay Packers: 1929-35, 1937https://images.phillypublishing.com/onwardstate/uploads/2014/04/118-mike-michalske.jpg Guards, as far as 1920's notoriety go, tend to get the shaft. Virtually no Guard who spent the majority of their career in the 20's is in the Hall of Fame. And the best ones at Left Guard have to be exceptions. It came down to Michalske or Heartly "Hunk" Anderson, an undersized-but-hellacious player for the Chicago Bears who left a pro career to become an assistant coach at Notre Dame. The reality is for all the excellent attributes Anderson has, Michalske is an improvement upon them. He was called "Iron Mike" largely for his durability. The only time he got hurt was in the very tail end of his career. He spent his collegiate career at Penn State as a remarkably versatile and unselfish player. In fact, he came into the NFL as a Fullback, but soon enough made a transition to Guard, eventually championing the concept of converting fullbacks to linemen as they often had superior speed and explosiveness. His on-field intelligence- Benny Friedman called him a Quarterback playing Guard- kept him in the right place at the right time. In addition, he was highly adept to the art of "pulling". You know "pulling" as what guards do when a sweep is run; they leave the line and dart to the opposing side, often engaging smaller defenders behind the line. You have to have speed for that job, even more so in modern times since linemen have just gotten heavier. Starting Center: George Trafton- 1924 Secondary Positions: Defensive Center -6'2 230. Decatur Staleys-Chicago Staleys-Chicago Bears: 1920-21, 1923-32https://sportsmenublog.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/george-trafton.jpg For the line, this is as much of a slam dunk as there possibly could be. Trafton's calling card was roughness. I don't mean in a dirty sense, though that can't exactly be disproven. I mean in that Trafton was easily the roughest, toughest, meanest SOB toiling in the "Pit" of the NFL in those days. He played hard, he hit hard, and he was so despised by the opposition that at least once he was run out of an opposing city by angry fans who were after his blood. But then, all that nonsense hid his proficiency elsewhere. The guy moved like a halfback. He was an early specialist of the 'rover' on defense, and could either stuff the line or shift towards the play without getting bogged down. He was also the first center to snap the ball with one hand, and without any noted mishaps. This likely was not a technical discovery or anything like that- he lost his left index finger, you see. Starting Right Guard: Adolph "Swede" Youngstrom- 1923 Secondary Positions: Defensive Right Guard -6'1 187. Buffalo All-Americans-Bisons: 1920-25/ Frankford Yellow Jackets: 1926-27 -No Picture Michalske was an Exception at Left Guard because quite frankly, he was excellent enough in 1929 to justify his selection. Last time I did this, I had gone with another Hall-of-Famer at Right Guard who also lacked the required years in the 20's. His name was Walt Kiesling, and if I'm perfectly honest, I picked him because of his size. His weight more specifically; he hovered between 230 to 260 pounds throughout his career. Nobody else worth a darn does more than flirt with 230 in this decade, so I eyed him as someone capable of plugging the middle on defense and powering through defenders on offense. Thinking better of it this time, I took note of his lack of accolades in the 20's- he may as well have been unknown- and decided to do a more serious job at this spot. Two candidates stood out. One is this Youngstrom fellow, who is apparently rated the best actual guard of the 1920's, only he didn't win a title before taking on a supporting/assistant coaching role with Frankford in '26. So his star was hidden. His competitor was named Jim McMillen, a blocker for Red Grange in Illinois during his collegiate days, and for a time, played the same role while with the Chicago Bears. His career was cut short because he found more money in Professional Wrestling(a surprisingly stable option for the gridiron grunts in those days), but he seemed to merit accolades far more than Youngstrom did. In 1927, one of the people who made All-Pro teams made two lists; one for power players, one for 'clever' players. So far three of our backfield players made the 'clever' list. Youngstrom was on the way out and didn't make either list... but McMillen made the 'power' lineup. McMillen would conceivably be the pick for Halas, because McMillen's power was always a desired trait for this early version of the T. But to be perfectly fair, Youngstrom was rated as aggressive and intelligent, making him a potentially superior selection, even if it slightly shaves off the power that can be put forth. He was also remarkably good at breaking through the line to block punts, though this was only discussed during the first two seasons in '20 and '21. Starting Right Tackle: Wilbur "Pete" Henry- 1923 Secondary Positions: Defensive Right Tackle, Placekicker(Alternate), Punter(Alternate) -5'11 245. Canton Bulldogs: 1920-23, 1925-26/ New York Giants: 1927/ Pottsville Maroons: 1927-28https://i.pinimg.com/736x/df/5f/7d/df5f7dba59b3f415febbe963ef04fed7--football-photos-sports-photos.jpg So like last time, this was a two-way tie for the job. Pete Henry was one of the competitors. The other was a Hall-of-Famer who was yet another 'Exception' to the five-year rule in Cal Hubbard. I put both on the roster and gave Hubbard the starting spot, but the truth is I cheated; I was unaware of the Roster Limits back then and I assumed having 25 players was ideal. Now that I have seven less spots, I'm reduced with the horror of having to discard an elite player from the roster entirely. And unlike at Left Guard, there's no real reason to invoke an Exception for Hubbard. So Henry wins by default. Now, be perfectly honest with me. You look at that picture and you see 'weekend frat boy', someone who is absolutely unfit to play in a Professional setting? Don't you? I mean, I do. I have a bit of a complex when it comes to players who just look too portly to be useful. Henry(also nicknamed "Fats") and Hubbard had close to the same kind of weight, but Hubbard carried his on a taller frame(about three-plus inches higher than Henry) and just looked so impressive. But Henry was equally as devastating on the line. He could destroy opposing lines with his strength and he had 'surprising' speed(which could be translated to 'somehow he's NOT as slow as molasses' but this was a guy who could get into the backfield and block punts. Pairing him up with Youngstrom on the right side looks really good taking that little intangible into account). One time, an opposing team tried to run right at him. He flattened the line. More accurately it was the Buffalo team who tried that and Henry 'telescoped' the line, tossing a couple Buffalo linemen(including Youngstrom!) into their center before stuffing the play. That's the kind of shenanigans you would see in a sports flick. He was also perfectly capable of kicking field goals and punting, having been rumored to make some really long boomers in his day. I don't have him doing the primary kicking duties for a different reason though; I am very reluctant to take a lineman off of the line so he can kick, even if I have Ernie Nevers slipping into his spot to block. Starting Right End: Lavern Dilweg- 1929(Four Year Exception)(Off-Position) Secondary Positions: Defensive Right End(Off-Position) -6'3 200. Milwaukee Badgers: 1926/ Green Bay Packers: 1927-34https://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/fan/image?url=https://lombardiave.com/files/2015/07/lavviedilweg.png& Putting players outside of their standard position comes with some difficulties. You see it all too often in the modern game, the best-known example being taking a pass-rusher who was a somewhat undersized 4-3 DE in College and turning him into a 3-4 Edge Rusher. Some players take to the new position, others struggle to understand the subtleties. The game is much more simple back in the 20's so this problem is neutralized for the most part, but even so, shifting a player from one side of the field to the other is not to be taken lightly, even in a position entrenched on the line. Dilweg was, until Don Hutson came along, the best ever Two-Way End, more or less taking that title from Guy Chamberlin. Of course, he's another exception, go figure. But it's in a position of need, as only three other players who actually made the five-year qualification are of any real worth beyond warm bodies for blocking. One of them is George Halas, only he ceased to be an active player by 1929 so he's out. The others are fellow Chicago Bear Duke Hanny and league journeyman Tillie Voss. But Dilweg is head and shoulders above both of them. We've mentioned that the early-age End was more of a TE/DE hybrid than a WR/CB. Indeed, it's on the line where Dilweg gets most of his rave reviews. Steady rather than Spectacular play- though that is largely because even today line play is rather anonymous to all but the purposefully observant. He could always be counted upon to shut down the running game and tie up blockers, not to mention be a wonderful assist on the offensive line as a blocker himself. But since he was in Green Bay, he was utilized rather extensively(they would throw in a season as many times as some modern teams do in a single game, at the very least) as a receiver, at least until Johnny Blood arrived. Then he was a secondary target. But he was still incredibly reliable when it came to catching passes, including on defense. He seemed to be a superior ball-hawk as far as Ends go in that day and age, racking up interception totals(7 in '29, 27 in career) that you simply should not see in a lineman's position. That's as strong as a Starting Eleven as we are likely to get. The seven reserves are next. The Reserves: A reserve player can go a number of ways. He can be a key understudy to an important position(usually this will be the backup Quarterback). He may have a specific talent that, when subbed in, changes the pace of the game(usually these are speed specialists at running back or pass rushers on defense). He may have the versatility to handle different positions on the team(a truly key skill to have when you don't have enough players to backup every position). But most importantly, he needs to understand his role and his spot in the pecking order, and not cause any disruptions that'll crater team morale. That's a concept that most people making All-Time teams completely ignore, since they're not conceiving of a scenario where their team has to be put to the test. So you tend to have Hall-of-Famers in their prime stuck on the bench or doing gruntwork on Special Teams. Then again, I probably am overthinking it. One of the responses I got last time alleged that such an elite team would be aware and skilled enough to hammer out their problems and make the whole thing work. But I'll leave that for you to decide. Anyway, we're splitting the reserves into four backs and three linemen, this is mostly because of the special skills involved with most of the backs. John "Paddy" Driscoll- 1925 Offensive Position: Halfback Secondary Positions: Defensive Halfback, Placekicker(Key Substitute), Punter(Alternate), Kick Returner(Alternate) -5'11 160. Chicago Cardinals: 1920-25/ Chicago Bears: 1926-29http://www.angelfire.com/fl/TheCard/images/gallery/driscoll.gif Driscoll was always the team leader(if not the actual Coach) on whatever team he played on, so that raises the question about whether he could handle being a substitute. I never found anything either last time or now that would indicate he'd be a cancer on the team, so he's in. The good news is he's good enough to make the T-Formation work(he'd better be, since the Bears signed him in '26 to replace Grange!), offering the same triple-threat capacity as any all-star Tailback would be expected to do. When he's in the lineup, the ability to score field goals from longer ranges goes up(Driscoll holds an unofficial record for a Drop Kick Field Goal at 55 yards in 1924, though complete verification is impossible) while there is no distinct downgrade on defense. Verne Lewellen- 1929 Offensive Position: Halfback Secondary Positions: Defensive Halfback, Punter(Key Substitute), Kick Returner(Alternate) -6'1 182. Green Bay Packers: 1924-32https://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/fan/image?url=https://lombardiave.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/51/files/2015/07/lewellen_verne.jpg&c=sc&w=240&h=466 If Driscoll is considered an offensive specialist with his placekicking, then Lewellen is considered a defensive specialist for his punting. Really, apart from never placekicking he's just as much of an all-around maestro as Driscoll, meaning the two of them won't bog down the offense if they enter the game. An extra bonus that I was not aware of last time; Lewellen doubled as the secondary passer in Green Bay's offense, and it is even claimed that he was the backup at the Quarterback spot. Anyways, if we have Verne subbed in, that means we want to pin the opposition deep into their own territory above all else. Whether it's coffin kicking in opposing territory or just booming the long ones, Verne could handle any punting situation. Tony Latone- 1925 Offensive Position: Fullback Secondary Positions: Linebacker -5'11 195. Pottsville Maroons-Boston Bulldogs: 1925-29/ Providence Steam Roller: 1930http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com/nfl/bostonb/Latone.jpg If we're being perfectly honest, Latone is the only player on this team to have never played in College. The reason has a lot to do with where he came from. Pottsville, Pennsylvania was one of many Central PA towns that formed the heart of Coal Country, where mining was the life's blood of the communities. Tony was eleven when his father died, and working in the mines was the only way to support his family. This was before effective child labor laws, so you can imagine the sheer hell he endured day after day to make ends meet. All of the labor and all of the suffering translated into the sandlots, and Tony had become a violent natural at the sport by the time a Professional Franchise came to tiny Pottsvile in 1925. You'd think this would've been made into a Disney Flick if the team hadn't been SCREWED out of a title in '25. The man wasn't so much as a line plunger as he was a line punisher. He roared into the opposition either when he had the ball or when he was blocking, and was just about unstoppable. In fact, you know the term 'stacking the box'? Where modern defenses put seven or eight players in a space behind the line of scrimmage that stretches from tackle to tackle in order to stifle the running game? Well, when defenders in the Seven-Box faced Latone, they would stack that box even more. As in virtually all eleven defenders went into that box to stop Latone. Nine players on the line, a linebacker directly over the defensive center, halfbacks on the flanks. And he'd just tear into them anyways. I assumed that Tony was a one-man show with Pottsville. I was wrong; turns out the backfield was a group effort. That does nothing to diminish Tony's greatness. Ernie Nevers might be the "Football Player Without a Fault", but Tony had him beat when it came to raw passion and power. He might be the only one I would have no worries about whatsoever when it came to facing the direst challenge for the Fate of the World. Joseph "Red" Dunn- 1929 Offensive Position: Quarterback(Slightly Off-Position) Secondary Positions: Linebacker, Defensive Halfback, Placekicker(Alternate), Punter(Alternate) -5'11 177. Milwaukee Badgers: 1924/ Chicago Cardinals: 1925-26/ Green Bay Packers: 1927-31https://cdn.fansided.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/51/files/2014/08/3551a_lg-590x900.jpg Everyone we've picked for the backfield- with the probable exception of Latone- has demonstrated a skill with passing. But what we really need is a genuine backup at the actual passing position. Going purely by the formation, that involves taking a QB from the Bears. But the only one of the bunch who demonstrated a sustained capacity for throwing the ball is Joey Sternaman, brother of Dutch. 5'6 and a buck-fifty, the man was certainly talented for his size, but in terms of pure passing, we can do better, especially with only eighteen players on the roster. That means we'll have to convert another back to the role, and of the lot that's available, Dunn is debatably the best but also the most convenient. The reason is because he was the primary passing option while playing in the Notre Dame Box as a Blocking Back. Remember the play that formation could run, where the BB takes an angled snap and goes through the Play Action motions like a T-Formation QB and goes back to pass? That's largely what Dunn did. The only difference is in this formation he would only have to take it directly from the center without an angle to speak of. Dunn's almost a plug-and-play option if he ever had been signed by Chicago. He and Paddy Driscoll can teach Friedman about taking one-yard snaps and dropping back. William "Link" Lyman- 1926 Offensive Position: Tackle Secondary Positions: Defensive Tackle -6'2 233. Canton-Cleveland Bulldogs: 1922-25/ Frankford Yellow Jackets: 1925/ Chicago Bears: 1926-28, 1930-31, 1933-34http://sportsecyclopedia.com/nfl/canton/Link.jpg The year I selected for Lyman is sort of a theoretically happy medium. Lyman's experience has grown beyond that when he was a youngster racking up titles with Canton, and he's sort of being passed around in the lineup while in Chicago. His position would not stabilize with the Bears until 1928, so he's if nothing else familiar with a quasi-reserve role(probably overthinking it again). Lyman's claim to fame was his capacity to shift on the line, a ploy which confused blockers. He would use this on top of his uncanny ability to diagnose plays before the ball was snapped, making him very difficult to block effectively. The shifting style would become a standard tool for defensive linemen in today's game. Last time, somebody joked that I only had him on the roster because of his 'connection' to Frankie Lymon. In retrospect, it was kind of a weak joke, but I appreciated the gesture. Heartley "Hunk" Anderson- 1925(Four Year Exception) Offensive Position: Guard Secondary Positions: Defensive Guard -5'11 191. Chicago Bears: 1922-25https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fb/Heartley_Anderson.jpg We have to go with an exception here for one vital reason; we need a former Bear who can double as a line coach and teach the outsiders about blocking in the T-Formation, and Hunk is the best option we've got. Not that he's a glorified teacher to hide on the bench; he was quite frankly so ferocious on the line that Halas would give out reports that Hunk was twenty pounds heavier than he really was, if only for psychological reasons. Halas also thought so well of him that he was the second-highest paid player in the team behind Red Grange in '25. Hunk proved his worth during the barnstorming tour by playing every dang minute of every dang game during the tour. Supposedly he also cussed like a sailor and either disliked or hated George Trafton, but those are nitpicks. (Speaking of Trafton, there isn't a backup center, though I now like to believe he would break the legs of the replacement if we actually had one) Walter "Tillie" Voss- 1924 Offensive Positions: End, Tackle Secondary Positions: Defensive End, Defensive Tackle -6'3 207. Buffalo All-Americans: 1921/ Detroit Tigers: 1921/ Akron Pros: 1922/ Rock Island Independents: 1922/ Toledo Maroons: 1923/ Green Bay Packers: 1924/ Detroit Panthers: 1925/ New York Giants: 1926/ Chicago Bears: 1927-28/ Buffalo Bisons: 1929/ Dayton Triangles: 1930http://probasketballencyclopedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Tillie-Voss.jpg The choice is between Voss and Duke Hanny. And like the Youngstrom/McMillen debate, it's conceivable that Halas would pick the Chicago Bear over the other. Frankly, both are more power-based Ends who do the gruntwork on the line. It's just that Voss has both flexibility and a better capacity for receiving. Voss was a wanderer of the highest order, and not just in the NFL. He would also moonlight in basketball, first for various independent teams but eventually he would be a part of the American Basketball League(yes, there was Basketball before the NBA). Not a worldbeater though. Just an anonymous player. But he traveled to and fro and rarely stayed long. He played on both the left and right side and dabbled for a year at Tackle. But '24 is his best year by far because Green Bay seemed to utilize him the way Lavern Dilweg would be used by them in later years. He would respond with five touchdowns and eight interceptions. All this on top of solid enough line play to keep him employed in the NFL throughout the decade. The Discarded: This section really only touches upon the non-selected players who were notorious enough to warrant mention and an explanation for why they were left out. This can include both the players who made the five-year cut and the potential exceptions, with the lone limiter being whether I want to scrounge up the time to talk about them. All of these names are going to pop up in the next section. I suppose we should discuss Jim Thorpe first. If some random schmuck knows of any football player from the 1920's, it'll probably be Thorpe above all the others. He's considered a Founding Father of Professional Football as we plebians understand it, his star name adding legitimacy to what was largely the red-headed stepchild of the sports world. And most 1920's Teams, including the one put together by the Hall of Fame, have Thorpe on the roster. Thing is, he doesn't deserve it. I've looked at the years Thorpe spent in the NFL, all of them on the wrong side of thirty. As near as I can tell, he was largely a part-time player who bounced around a few teams over the decade. He scored every now and then, but not frequently enough to justify his selection. He had more value as a field goal kicker, but roster sizes are too small for such a specialist. Fritz Pollard might seem a little more unforgivable, if only because the man was black in an era where Black Players were scarce and would be run out of the league by the next decade. Excluding him would probably be considered a racist stance, so let's look at it from a football perspective; his running skills do not overcome Grange. His receiving skills do not overcome Blood. He did not Placekick(Driscoll), and he might have punted but nothing noteworthy(Lewellen), and the man did not handle the passing duties for his teams, ever. By process of elimination, he falls just short in the skills he definitely has and lacks the specialist skills that we could use. Jimmy Conzelman and Joe Guyon wrap up the remaining Hall of Famers with backfield positions. Guyon had the misfortune of playing underneath the shadow of Thorpe during the early years of the NFL, but the man was younger, was still a reasonable enough triple-threat, and he did earn a championship with the '27 Giants, albeit as a utility player. Even so, Guyon was well into the end of his prime years when the NFL was formed and simply lost by process of elimination. Conzelman was perhaps the hardest elimination from the backfield. The man was more notable for his coaching career but he did have two distinct phases of his playing career; the first half was spent as a passer-rusher at Blocking Back, where he was among the best all-around talents. Then by the end of his career, he had become more of a receiver. He also won a championship as Player-Coach of the '28 Providence Steam Roller(the last Defunct franchise to win an NFL Title), but his playing career ended via injury part-way through the season. At the end of the day though, Dunn's ability to fit into the T and greater potential as a passer won out. Three other backfield players deserve mention. Tommy Hughitt led a collection of Buffalo Teams(bet you didn't know Buffalo had NFL franchises before the Bills came to town?) to strong contender status and was considered perhaps the best at his position in those early days as far as leadership goes. But in the end, not so much concrete detail about his skills. He was another all-around star but lacking a distinct 'IT' factor to stand out from the crowd. The same might be said for Jack McBride, a Fullback and key passer for the '27 New York Giants. Easily the best Fullback of a surprisingly lengthy list that served five or more years, McBride still could not compete with either the all-around excellence of Nevers or the ferocious line-plunging capacity of Latone. McBride's teammate, Hinkey Haines, deserves some mention simply by virtue of his speed. He's probably the lone player to potentially challenge and surpass Grange and Blood, and he certainly could make use of his skill as both a runner and a receiver, but those two added a little bit more than Haines could. Four Hall-of-Famers on the line, three of which are exceptions. We've already discussed Cal Hubbard, easily the hardest elimination from the team. Walt Keisling too, though his membership is more towards the length of his service in the NFL in multiple areas. Ray Flaherty was not mentioned, though his ability to catch passes from Benny Friedman should've made him the third End, easily. I think Flaherty is easily superior in offense, but Voss was better at defense. There was enough to not justify making an exception for Flaherty. Steve Owen wraps up the foursome, and frankly, he's a strong Left Tackle in a rather large field. But he was a Hall-of-Famer much more for his coaching prowess in the next two decades than as a solid player. We mentioned Duke Hanny and Jim McMillen as players who missed out in certain spots- and as Chicago Bears, players who could be conceivably picked by Halas. There are four other linemen meriting mention. Duke Slater is in the same shadow as Fritz Pollard, being a Black Player in this unforgiving era, but also carving out a more successful niche as a Tackle(he would last into the early 1930's before retiring). Slater matches up with Pete Henry and Cal Hubbard, maybe to the point where it would be a three-way race. But in the end, I went with Henry. Bull Behman is the best left tackle in this group. Perhaps he's better than Steve Owen. Perhaps he's comparable to Ed Healey and Link Lyman. He certainly had the reputation of being so storng at the point of attack that teams would send too many blockers after him and their plays would just unravel. He also had a steady leg given the number of times he was his team's placekicker. But his biggest detraction was that his team, the Frankford Yellow Jackets, won their only title in the year Behman wasn't on the team. Remember the first AFL in '26? Behman jumped to the Philadelphia Quakers of that league, winning the league title there, but missed out on the Yellow Jackets winning their title that same year. Gus Sonnenberg is a bit of an odd bird, mainly for his listed height of 5'6. He was a very good tackle in the NFL to begin with, demonstrating intelligence when it came to his line play. But he's also one of the more successful wrestlers of his time, introducing speed and agility into a Performance Sport that was more about strength and resting holds and other slow-paced moves. He defeated Ed "Strangler" Lewis for a Title shortly after Providence won the league in '28. Duke Osborn was a keystone member of the Canton-Cleveland dynasty from '22 to '24, then became a key part of the 1925 Pottsville Maroons. Clearly he was good enough to start for really strong teams despite a lack of mention about his skills. The Scrimmagers: I gave no thought about this part the last time around. It simply never occurred to me. It does not matter what sport one partakes in. If you are assembling a team to play in said sport, then you need time for said team to mesh together. That requires training. How much training you need is a rather undefinable answer with too many variables. When you have an established team that has competed for a number of years, then you likely have an experienced core of players that understands how to work well together, leaving you with only a limited number of new pieces to try and fit in, significantly reducing the time you need for cohesion to develop. But this isn't that type of team. This is essentially an All-Star Group, assembled from scratch. Even with a plan in place to fit everyone into a system, you're going to have a greater need for extended training(All-Star Teams tend to forego this part because they usually only compete in meaningless exhibitions that double as vacation time). It's a lot like the National Team concept. This is a group of players from a single country banding together to compete in specific sports. You see this most often in two venues; the Olympics, and the World Cup. A team sport with some international presence is going to develop an International Tournament eventually, and these will all be teams brought up from scratch. So you have to pick the team, assemble the team, and train the team until it is meshed together enough to partake in the actual competition. National Teams have an extra element beyond the mere training; Scrimmages. Think of this like a Pre-Season period, a small series of Tune-Up games against opponents of varying difficulty. Unlike the Football Pre-Season though, this won't be used to cull a training camp roster. Instead, it will be about sharpening the team as a whole. The only question involves how many 'Scrimmages' will be set up before the pivotal match with the aliens. One would think it would be in our best interests to stack as many games as possible, as the team would be sharpened more and more with each passing weak. But with that comes a growing sense of fatigue. Even if we take injuries entirely out of the equation(using alien technology because, duh), the team will still enter the key game battered and worn down over anything approaching a season's worth of games prior to that. This comes from a combination of both the sport(Football is far more physically asserting and rough than virtually any other sport other than it's distant cousins in Rugby) and the time(1920's levels of fitness and conditioning). I would personally recommend a maximum of no more than six games, but I would prefer four if it came down to it. This decade, we're going to go with five- we'll get to the reason soon enough. As for the opponents, we have two basic options. Our first option involves importing entire teams. As an example, lets say we wanted to have our team play the Chicago Bears. We could then decide whether to import a specific year or create an All-Decade Squad of Bears players. We would likely chose the latter over the former because it stands to reason that any team that good to be picked as an opponent likely has a player or several selected for our squad. Back to the Bears. We have their Head Coach and Starting Center, both of whom were around for virtually the entire decade. This cripples a specific-year team right off the bat because no matter what year, they won't have their head coach or their starting center(no paradoxes!) The second option involves meshing together another cluster of players. That's a fair bit more time consuming and the assembled teams will have significantly less cohesion then an established team, but there is a level of variance you can achieve with makeshift squads. You can design specific teams that cater to certain strengths, as in showing your team something specific that they have to fight against. Sometimes that strength is in a particular skillset, such as a team specializing in speed, or power, or they can specialize in an innovative kind of formation. The other option is to create a 'Best of the Rest' All-Star Team, perhaps not a mirror match to your team, but a team that has as many answers to problems as possible. Of note, like the selection process for the All-Decade Teams, these players will still come from the NFL. Even though we could conceivably assemble teams from the collegiate ranks- and in the 20's they could debatably be superior to the professional outfits- we're not going to go there. The reason is a selfish one. You deserve better than me just parroting the All-American Selections and I will NEVER get these Decades done if I try to seriously grind through all of the colleges. Anyway, the five-year minimum is eliminated for this section. Also the players selected will just be reduced to a name and a specific year- wine cellar rules after all. Chicago Bears All-Decade Remainders: Coach: Dutch Sternaman- 1923(Player-Coach) Offense: T-Formation Defense: Seven-Box/Seven-Diamond QB: Joey Sternaman- 1924 LH: Dutch Sternaman- 1923 FB: Buck White- 1928 RH: Laurie Walquist- 1925 LE: Duke Hanny- 1926 LT: Ralph Scott- 1921 LG: Bill Buckler- 1926 C: Ojay Larson- 1922 RG: Jim McMillen- 1928 RT: Don Murray- 1928 RE: Luke Johnsos- 1929 Bench B: Bill Senn- 1928 B: Milt Romney- 1926 B: Oscar Knop- 1924 B: Pete Stinchcomb- 1921 T: Hugh Blacklock- 1921 G: Bill Fleckenstein- 1925 E: Vern Mullen- 1926 There are two reasons for using this team. One is they are the lone team that uses the T-Formation. The other is that, even with certain players having been lost to us, this is still the most stable and organized of the teams. Chicago spent the vast majority of the decade in the top half of the league, often in contention for the title. The only really major losses are Halas and Trafton. Dutch Sternaman isn't so much a co-coach as he is a co-owner of the franchise, but he's the key playmaker of the squad, so he'll manage. The presence of Sternaman helps offset the losses of both Grange and Driscoll, even though both are clearly well above Dutch in terms of skill. Hunk Anderson's a bigger blow but Bill Buckler was a decent enough player during the latter half of the decade. Trafon however is far from replaceable. That's largely because only one year was spent without him. Ojay Larson played at center for the team that year, hence his inclusion. Even without Trafton, the team is based heavily on a tight power game and a strong basic defense, with the occasional pass coming from virtually anybody. Extra Note; while the roster limit is 18 players, we're going to have four of the players from these scrimmage teams on hand largely so we can do 11-on-11 drills in practice. The Chicago team has two of the four in Duke Hanny and Jim McMillen. Green Bay Packers All-Decade Remainders: Coach: Curly Lambeau- 1924(Player-Coach) Offense: Notre Dame Box Defense: Seven-Box/Seven-Diamond TB: Curly Lambeau- 1924 FB: Bo Molenda- 1929 BB: Charlie Mathys- 1925 HB: Eddie Kotal- 1929 LE: Richard O'Donnell- 1926 LT: Cub Buck- 1923 LG: Whitey Woodin- 1924 C: Jug Earp- 1926 RG: Jim Bowdoin- 1929 RT: Cal Hubbard- 1929 RE: Tom Nash- 1929 Bench B: Myrt Basing- 1925 B: Cully Lidberg- 1926 B: Pid Purdy- 1926 T: Claude Perry- 1929 G: Moose Gardner- 1924 C: Boob Darling- 1929 E: Cowboy Wheeler- 1923 The primary reason for creating this team is to take on the Notre Dame Box. With the exception of Cal Hubbard, the team is composed of the lesser remnants of the 1929 Championship Team and the best of the mid-20's teams that were deep in contention. The key to their game is the pass, which is led by Curly Lambeau and Charlie Mathys. The line is relatively stable and should give the assorted second-stringers(though Bo Molenda is the best Fullback the team will have in this decade) room to run. They are also not slouches on defense, though they aren't world-beaters by any stretch. They'll provide ample experience for defending in the air. Cal Hubbard and Jug Earp are the remaining two "practice players" we'll have on hand for 11-on-11 sessions. Single Wing Power Squad: Coach: Robert "Punk" Berryman- 1924 Offense: Single Wing Defense: Seven-Box/Seven-Diamond TB: Wildcat Wilson- 1928 FB: Barney Wentz- 1925 BB: Ben Jones- 1926 WB: Joe Guyon- 1920 LE: George Kenneally- 1927 LT: Steve Owen- 1927 LG: Walt Kiesling- 1929 C: Herb Stein- 1925 RG: Hec Garvey- 1927 RT: Russ Stein- 1925 RE: Jack Spellman- 1928 Bench B: Tex Hamer- 1926 B: Hank Gillo- 1922 B: Tex Grigg- 1923 B: Carl Cramer- 1922 T: Bub Weller- 1927 E: Luke Urban- 1921 C: Larry Conover- 1923 As if you couldn't guess what these guys are meant to specialize in. Punk Berryman was in truth a one year wonder. He had been a Head College Coach before 1920, and had spent the last two years prior to the NFL working as an assistant at Colgate University. He took the Head Coaching job for the Frankford Yellow Jackets, their first year in the NFL. Frankford finished the year just shy of winning the title, but making an impressive 11-1-2 record and shattering the record books with 34 rushing touchdowns. This is the closest any team has probably come to being a truly smashmouth unit in the 20's. The reason he didn't return to coach the team in '25 is relatively simple; Guy Chamberlin joined the team. Guy "Player-Coach of three straight championship teams" Chamberlin. That's "Tim Tebow being replaced by Peyton Manning" tier. At any rate, the team is a combination of elements from several teams; the 1925 Pottsville Maroons, the 1927 New York Giants, the 1928 Providence Steam Roller. A few elements from teams like the 1926 Frankford Yellow Jackets and 1923 Canton Bulldogs are in place too, though those teams were looted by other scrimmage teams. The line is composed of brawlers and just about everyone in the backfield is a power runner of some type. That said, the team has a passer in George "Wildcat" Wilson, a brief-but-electric Tailback in the do-everything mold. Single Wing Clever Squad: Coach: LeRoy "Roy" Andrews- 1929 Offense: Single Wing Defense: Seven-Box/Seven-Diamond TB: Lou Smyth- 1923 FB: Jack McBride- 1927 BB: Tommy Hughitt- 1921 WB: Hal Erickson- 1925 LE: Charlie Berry- 1925 LT: Gus Sonnenberg- 1928 LG: Milt Rehnquist- 1928 C: Clyde Smith- 1928 RG: Al Nesser- 1921 RT: Richard Stahlman- 1927 RE: Carl Bacchus- 1928 Bench B: Jack Ernst- 1925 B: Wild Bill Kelly- 1928 B: Rip King- 1921 B: Sonny Winters- 1924 E: Gus Tebell- 1923 T: Steamer Horning- 1922 G: Jim Welsh- 1926 Cleverness is a bit hard to pin down in this case. This is not a strictly power-averse team. It's just that the team tends to work with other elements of the game aside from power. If I had to pin down a strategem, it would be deception and unpredictability. LeRoy Andrews has a rather eventful career as an NFL Coach, but he didn't hit the big time until he was paired up with Benny Friedman in 1927. He spent the next four years with Friedman, and coached some of the most hi-octane passing attacks ever seen in the actual sport of Football at that time. If there's someone who could make a "Clever" Squad work that hasn't already been grabbed up, it would be this guy. The main gimmick is that just about every player in the backfield is an adept passer. This creates all sorts of misdirection plays and other assorted tricks when you can't accurately predict which of the runners is going to throw- if any of them are going to throw. Well, it's not one hundred percent true. Hal Erickson is purely a receiving/running option as far as can be determined. Some, like Wild Bill Kelly, might be purely passers(Kelly suffered a bad knee injury in '27, reducing his running ability.) while others like Tommy Hughitt aren't complete fits but work out anyways for other reasons(Hughitt's the best possible leader for this outfit). The line isn't guaranteed to be completely "Clever" either. But these are the guys best rated to use intelligence in their line play. They are flanked by two ends who had ample experience with pass catching in their all-too-brief careers. All-Decade "B" Team: Coach: Jimmy Conzelman- 1922 Offense: Single Wing Defense: Seven-Box/Seven-Diamond TB: Fritz Pollard- 1921 FB: Doc Elliot- 1923 BB: Jimmy Conzelman- 1922 WB: Hinkey Haines- 1927 LE: Ray Flaherty- 1929 LT: Bull Behman- 1925 LG: Rudy Comstock- 1923 C: Joe Wostoupal- 1929 RG: Duke Osborn- 1922 RT: Duke Slater- 1925 RE: Joe Rooney- 1926 Bench B: Wally Diehl- 1928 B: Benny Boynton- 1924 B: Curly Oden- 1928 B: Hap Moran- 1926 E: Bird Carroll- 1923 T: Russ Hathaway- 1925 C: Doc Alexander- 1922 This is the reason why I went with five teams for the scrimmages instead of four. Too many of the remaining Elites did not fit into the Power or Clever categories, so I came to the decision of creating a genuine "B" team, one that, if it cant mirror the "A" team, can certainly punch with them. The lineup suggests a Single Wing, but Conzelman did play for Halas and the Bears in 1920. It's not too much a stretch to turn the formation into a T. This is almost a cookie-cutter version of a standard 20's offense; Electric runner at Tailback, Team Leader and Passer at Quarterback, Line-Plunger at Fullback, Open-Field runner and catcher at Wingback(Haines is playing out of position here). Left End who is a designated receiving threat, Right End who can catch a pass but is more of a blocker. And the line is quite literally the best of what was left, apart from certain players on the Bears and Packers teams. Even the reserve backfield can replace what is lost when the starters leave the game, so there is no real relief when substitutions arrive. Final Tidbits: The venue for the game will be held at the Polo Grounds in New York. Don't bother looking for the stadium today; it was demolished in the 1960's. Like most Professional Stadiums of its time(at least, the ones guaranteed a large seated attendance), it was primarily a Baseball venue that was converted to football. The difference for the Polo Grounds was that it was big enough to house two separate baseball diamonds and took on a rectangular shape that was easy to convert to football- and also made for a cavernous Center Field. The only criteria as far as playing venues go is that the stadium in question must house an NFL Team during this time. In this case, the Polo Grounds were being used by both versions of the Giants, in Baseball(did you know they moved to San Francisco in 1958?) and in Football. Funny thing, you might think so but Yankee Stadium is NOT excluded from consideration in this decade, because for a time it housed BOTH versions of the Yankees. The football team was the charter member of the 1926 AFL, and lasted two more years in the NFL before going belly-up. So we really just go with the place whose team still exists to this day.. The weather is typically not a factor to consider, though we have the option to generate extreme weather. Problem is, when it comes to playing a single game that decides the fate of the world, it's folly to gameplan around the weather. It doesn't just bog them down; it bogs us down as well, and a bogged-down game can be narrow enough to be decided on one lucky bounce. The ideal arrangement is a lot like our Super Bowls; either we use the coziest conditions, or we can just set up shop in a dome and render the question moot. Broadcasting is going to be rather vague for this decade because, quite frankly, I have no earthly clue who the radio commentators for any of these games were. If the Giants utilized a radio guy, I'd say go with him, since the game will be in New York. Edited May 17, 2019 by Zycho32 I FINALLY figured out the spoiler tags!!! 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
childofpudding Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 56 minutes ago, Zycho32 said: Oh Dear. Get ready to drown in text. Lots and lots of text. So much text that your brains will need gills to cope. The 1920's All-Decade Team: There's actually a reasonable excuse to start in the deepest reaches of history rather than the most recent events. As with all beginnings, no matter the league or sport, things are the most basic around that time. The complexities emerge later on, so starting with the 1920's gives both myself and the lot of you the chance to settle into the routine and take each oncoming complexity in proper sequence. This also provides the bonus of a psuedo history lesson; you'll get far better details looking the facts up compared to listening to me, but I'll probably be the foot in the doorway for you. The Rules: In short, we'll be using the rules as they were known in 1929. Here are the important details; 1. The Ball's size is listed as "28 to 28.5 inches around ends, 22 to 22.5 inches around the middle, and 14-15 ounces in weight". This is a fatter ball then what we are used to in the modern game(actually reduced half an inch around the middle in 1929). In fact, its size is more comparable to that of a Rugby Ball. The ball would not start to approach the modern shape and size until 1934, when it was made thinner with more tapered ends. As you can imagine, this alone would make the passing game more difficult, but even more lunacy awaits! 2. The field dimensions are largely as you know them now; 120 yards by 53 and one third yards, including two 10 yard end zones. There are transverse lines every five yards like the modern game... but no hash marks to speak of. Well, that's not entirely true. Wherever a play would end on the field, that's where the ball would be spotted for the next. But if the ball went out of bounds, it would be placed fifteen yards from the sidelines for the next play. Even then, and even worse if you did not make it out of bounds, you were likely forced to waste a play running towards the center to get better field positioning. In addition, most of you know the goal posts were originally placed on the goal line- if for no other reason that you've seen a blooper or two of players slamming into the posts on plays. But between 1927 and 1933, this was changed and the goal posts were in the end line of the end zone. In 1933 they would be moved back to the goal line. And actual Hash Marks would be introduced that same year. The culprit that brought about these changes was a 1932 Championship... which we will get to in the next decade. As for the Goalposts, the uprights seemed to be 18.5 feet apart, with the crossbar 10 feet high. Two posts rather than one naturally. And yes, they are placed on the end line. 3. The scoring is, apart from the utter lack of a two-point conversion, the same as in the modern day. PATs are from the 2 yard line. And kickers booting field goals or PATs used the Drop Kick. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drop_kick We will discuss this later. 4. Roster limits are going to be 18 Players. Seven Players required on the line of scrimmage- I think this only applied to the offense as it does now. Numbering of players optional. Head Protection optional. Rough sport for the time. 5. This is considered the era of the sixty-minute man, but there were actually rules in place that permitted substitution. Specifically, a player withdrawn during the first half may not return until the second half. A player withdrawn during the second half may not return to the game. There were no overtimes and games could- and lots of times did- end in a tie. Given the team will be playing for the fate of the world, let's just say a tie ends in something more neutral, like humanity is enslaved or something like that. 6. Of all the differences, it's the Passing Game that is the most striking. Get a load of these indignities! -All Forward passes must be made five yards behind the line of scrimmage. -A second incomplete pass in a series(I would assume a series of downs and not the entire DRIVE) would result in a loss of down and a five yard penalty. -An incomplete pass that went out of bounds would result in a turnover to the opposition. -An incomplete pass in the end zone would be an automatic touchback for the opposition. Only the third one I am not completely sure about. The others I am darn sure lasted until 1933. And the ball is fat! 7. Kickoffs were on the 40 yard line. 8. 'Shifting' forced to have a one-second pause afterwards. Teams would line up in a T-Formation in the backfield but would shift into their desired arrangement before snapping the ball(more on this later). 9. Thirty Seconds to put the ball in play. Six extra than today. Only fifteen of those seconds permitted for a huddle. 10. Fumbles were ruled dead at point of recovery. Honestly, I am not sure this rule actually existed. Or at least, it wasn't enforced in the way the words indicate it should have. The 1929 Rose Bowl is a key example to use in disputing this rule; a player named Roy Riegels picked up a fumble and ran with it to his team's own End Zone, unwittingly giving up a safety to the opposition. If that sounds familiar then you've seen the blooper of Jim Marshall running the wrong way. Either way, if the wording of this rule is accurate, then the play should've been ruled dead once Riegel picked up the ball. So I'm going to assume the rule doesn't actually exist. And in case you were wondering, the NFL used the College Rule Book all the way to 1933. I had said the Five-Year Rule would have moments where it would be bypassed. This decade is likely going to feature the most 'violations' of said rule. The reason for this is too many of the truly elite players are rubbed out of the decade going by this rule, and I'm not going to fudge the numbers by including Collegiate Service. I'll try to limit this to specific needs and specific skills. The Coaches and Strategies: As with just about all things having to do with Professional Football in the 1920's, the position of Coach was an admittedly embryonic one. There was no deluge of respected Collegiate Coaches rushing in to take on newly formed franchises- the Amateurs looked upon the Professional Scene largely with distaste. You can't really blame them. Every sport grapples between Amateurism and Professionalism, and the earliest moments always involves Amateurs thumbing their noses at the notion of Professionals. Baseball had its reckoning back before the 1870's. Soccer in England during the 1880's. And so Football found its reckoning in the 20's. There were certainly a handful of coaches who left the college ranks to go pro. It's just that the most successful coaches of this particular decade all shared a common theme. They were Player-Coaches who had graduated from College and apart from maybe a year or two at the start inevitably graduated to actual Coaching duties. And on this note, there are four coaches in particular, encompassing three different offensive play formations. Guy Chamberlin and Jimmy Conzelman were most associated with the most common formation of the time; the Single Wing. Up in Green Bay, Curly Lambeau incorporated the system he learned under Knute Rocke, the Notre Dame Box. And in Chicago, the Papa Bear himself, George Halas, went with the T Formation. And to pick a head coach(all four have been champions), we're going to have to go through the pros and cons of each formation. We'll start with the Single Wing. (And for a nice look at the pre-Pro Formation offenses and defenses, go here; https://archive.is/20120907054600/http://www.hickoksports.com/history/proformations01.shtml ) Single Wing: https://archive.is/FmYU/e301455da69c4d5a8e49faf85bfe7af3d8bbc640.gif The main gimmick of the Single Wing is its unbalanced line; a guard or a tackle from one side is moved over to line up alongside his counterpart on the opposide side. This provides an extra blocker at the point of attack- the direction you want to play to go. Virtually all play diagrams show the unbalance tilted to the right- hence the notion of the Right Side being the 'Strong' side and the Left Side being the 'Weak' Side- but in truth the line could and would be unbalanced in either direction; especially if you were so far to the right of the field that you have to run a play to the left(remember the lack of hash marks?) The backfield looks different than most of you would think. What we would call a Quarterback is actually listed as a B in the diagram- a Blocking Back. Positioned directly behind the strong-side of the line, his role is fairly simple; he blocks, he calls plays, and on occasion he would leave the backfield and go out for a pass. The actual playmaker in the backfield is the T- the Tailback. Remember how Michael Vick would tear defenses apart with his legs? He would've been right at home as a Tailback in this system, because the position was meant for multi-tier threats. A Tailback was expected to not only be an elusive and bruising runner, he could be counted upon to make a pass and he could be expected to be a punter. He had multiple roles in the Single Wing and would be classified as a Hero Position. The Fullback, thankfully, is explanatory. The W- the Wing Back- is positioned roughly like how you expect a 2nd or 3rd TE to lineup in Goal Line situations in the modern game. He would probably be the most prevalent receiving threat of the bunch, but his primary goal was making a seal block on the opposing line. Also, there are no wide outs. The concept of a wide-out would not start to exist until the emergence of Don Hutson in the 1930's. Instead, you have the Ends. However, instead of a WR/CB hybrid like what you could see in Arena Football, they functioned more like a TE/DE hybrid. You could use them in the passing game, but they held down the line on their respective edges more often than not. Anyway, here are the bread and butter plays; https://archive.is/FmYU/2105842155c70a148f4841eef9c8a76f8b954d05.gif This is called the cutback. It's a traditional off-tackle run in the modern scheme of things. This incorporates double-team blocking at the point of attack as well as edge sealing. It's a straightforward play and can be defended as such, but this in turn opens up other plays that can be utilized to take advantage of the defense over-shifting. Some, like the fullback plunge, can be seen in the animation. For others like the Wingback Reverse, look at the animation, only instead of the Wingback moving forward to seal off a defender, he runs to the left and takes the ball from the Tailback or whomever received the snap to go around the opposite end. It could be a Home Run Hit of a play if the defense overcommited to the strong side. The most common pass play is again, an off-shoot of the cutback. Back to the animation. This time imagine the Blocking Back and Wing Back faking their blocks and heading downfield. The details vary; either back could take the deep route or the short route, or the ends could get involved. But the gist is the Tailback stops before he gets less than five yards from the line, and tosses what amounts to a prayer(thanks to the size of the ball, these were basically shot-putted jump balls) towards a hopefully open receiver. Other pass plays tended to use established plays in order to sucker opposing defenses, and it wasn't always the Tailback throwing. Misdirection was a key; very rarely would a back take a snap and directly throw from there. It would be telegraphed, but unlike a run play, the negatives could be a lot worse. Instead, direct passes used this; https://archive.is/FmYU/2f362a71a936557495fe5098f6083bb93c43527f.gif Put the Blocking Back on the opposite wing and you have the Short Punt Formation. It's the Shotgun of its day, and was utilized an awful lot because, yes, it was a Punting Play mostly. It wasn't a fourth down gamble either; this was a day and age where teams could be expected to punt on third and even second down. Punting was far more useful back then because offenses were largely grind-it-out affairs. It was a viable strategy to actually punt at mid-field, pin the opposition deep in their territory, and force them to cough up the ball on a turnover or punt it right back. You could end up in a more favorable field position to score the next time you had the ball. This is also the Place Kicking formation of the day. Remember the Drop Kick? The kicker would drop the ball to the ground and it would bounce up. Timed right, the foot would kick the ball just shortly after it started its bounce back into the air. The fatness of the ball made its bounce fairly reliable. This permitted you to have more blockers on the line since you did not need a holder. The Single Wing was utilized the most, as in, all but a handful of teams utilized the formation during the 1920's. It also accounted for all but two-maybe three- of the Championships. So what's the downsize? It's less to do with any flaws of the system and more the lack of potential. And it all comes down to the Tailback. The position of Starting Tailback is really a tale of Three Candidates- and a Distant Fourth. Most of you probably know Harold 'Red' Grange even if only minutely. You probably don't know of Benny Friedman or John 'Paddy' Driscoll. And you most certainly don't know of Verne Lewellen, unless you're a Crazed Nut who likes the Packers. But these four make the use of the Single Wing problematic because each has an incredible strength that hurts the team if left out. We'll start with the Galloping Ghost himself. Grange qualifies as an exception to the five-year rule through a rather tumultuous career. He joined the NFL at the tail end of the 1925 season and did not play enough games to have that year qualify, unless you count the after-season barnstorming tour through the South and the West Coast the Chicago Bears underwent with Grange as the Star Attraction. Then, his agent (a man named C.C. Pyle) made outrageous demands for the following season that George Halas would not agree to(including a piece of ownership of the team), and so Grange was used to spearhead the first Rival League(called the AFL). He would spend 1926 playing for the Football version of the New York Yankees in the AFL. When that league folded, the Yankees jumped to the NFL in 1927... but Grange would get his knee direly injured during a game against Chicago and would be out of football in 1928. He came back to Chicago in 1929 but according to him, he was 'just another back'. Or so he claimed. Check this link out; www.profootballresearchers.com/archives/Website_Files/Coffin_Corner/14-02-453.pdf That's the farthest research anyone has ever done for the dark period of 1920-31 when yardage stats were not officially tallied. It's all totally incomplete, but it provides some interesting anecdotes. Such as Grange still being one of the best runners of the league when he came back in 1929. But I'm digressing. The Red Grange before that knee injury would be considered the Greatest Running Talent of all the candidates. There may be a few players who were faster. There were probably none as elusive. As far as Broken-Field running goes, Grange probably had no equals, though he does come with questions. He played college in Illinois, whose coach, Bob Zuppke, utilized the T-Formation(George Halas was one of his students), and apart from his time with the Football Yankees, he played under the T-Formation as a Left Halfback. As such his passing and kicking talents were largely unknown. Well, the Bears used almost everyone in the backfield as passers, so Grange had to at least be fair in that department. Speaking of passing, Benny Friedman has no equal during this decade. Also an exception to the five year rule, we can describe Friedman's passing skills like this; Put Tom Brady in a league populated by Collegiate Quarterbacks. That's what Friedman was like compared to other passers of his time. Friedman grew up with some ambition of becoming a strongman and had trained his body to that effect, but he also worked out his hands and wrists as well as his body, which probably went a long way towards him being table to toss that fatty-fat ball with not just impressive strength, but with remarkable 'touch'. You know how passers today are either lauded for their exceptional 'touch' in hitting their open receivers at varying distances or are ridiculed for having no 'touch' whatsoever? Friedman clearly had the best touch out of everyone. He also was the most brazen. He was not afraid of throwing the pigskin early and as often as the rules permitted. He was also a more well-rounded player than you'd think; early on in the NFL he was remarkably adept as a runner and a defender, only tapering off once he demonstrated his passing skill all too well and was weaned off the rest of the duties. He also kicked PATs, but only one Field Goal during the decade. Lets put his dominance in another way. Passers- really, entire teams- struggled to reach double-digits in passing touchdowns during the 1920's. Friedman made twenty of them in 1929. That was the equivalent of Babe Ruth hitting 60 Home Runs in 1927. The third candidate, Paddy Driscoll, you could describe as about 85-90% of Grange's running ability, one of the better Tailback passers of that era, and a fine defender. But his best specialty was kicking. That's not to say he was indisputably the best kicking talent amongst the available players who registered as scorers of Field Goals and PATs. What is indisputable was that he was head and shoulders above everyone else in terms of prolific results. He was amongst the decade league leaders of PATs. He was significantly above everyone else in Field Goals, and he was almost always the primary kick-taker on the teams he played for. Almost everyone else who made the ranking board either dabbled with it a couple of times only, or made significantly less kicks per season. His career also collides with Grange in two distinct moments; the first was in 1925 when Grange made his debut with the Bears. Playing them were the Chicago Cardinals, led by Driscoll. Driscoll earned some infamous notoriety for constantly punting the ball away from Grange, in order to prevent him running roughshod on the Cardinals. The ploy worked for a 0-0 tie. The second was in 1926 he was sold to the Bears to make up for the loss of Red Grange to the AFL. The Fourth candidate isn't really a qualifier for a starting position, but Verne Lewellen was largely as good an all-around talent as Driscoll(even passing!) though he never took any Field Goals. However Verne had a superior talent when it came to Punting. Reconstructed Stats have Lewellen averaging about forty yards a punt. That sounds rather milquetoast to you, does it not? What if I told you the league-average around that time was 35-to-36 yards? In a time when a deep punt could hopelessly stick an opposing team in the mud of their own end zone, Lewellen was a good step above everybody else there. Three potential starters and one likely backup. Is it possible to put the likes of Grange, Friedman, and Driscoll in the same backfield? It's not out of the question. Offenses are rudimentary enough at this time that players could be knocked out of position and not really lose much(or anything) in translation. Single Wing offenses, contrary to what the above diagrams and discussions showed, did not solely rely upon the Tailback as the main passer. Teams sometimes would have the Blocking Back take that responsibility, while some others actually used the Fullback. So putting Friedman at Blocking Back would not be a hassle. Nor would placing Grange or Driscoll at Wing Back be a problem either. That said, such a lineup would work best with players alternating backfield roles... a concept that I do not believe actual Single Wing teams- especially those run by Chamberlin or Conzelman- employed. It's not completely out of the picture, but it does stretch things a little. Notre Dame Box: https://archive.is/FmYU/5cb5309fa1967556208fc3d695af6018c78e4970.gif The second of the options, at first glance this looks like the Single Wing. But you can note the differences easily enough. The Ends are 'flexed'. That really only means they were spaced out a yard or two from the other linemen. This gave them two advantages; One, they now held a superior angle in regards to edge blocking, which served them well for the off-tackle bread-and-butter plays, and two, this space gave them a more favorable means of separation from the line, which was to your benefit if you wanted them to catch passes. The team that exploited this the most was probably the Green Bay Packers, who had an all-time great in Lavern Dilweg and once coaxed a typical Power Tackle/End to a five touchdown catch season. However, the greatest adjustments to these positions would take place in the following decade. Like the Single Wing, the offense did not require a specific position to be the primary passer. The Packers in particular alternated between their Tailback and their Blocking Back when they reached their peak in '29. But the Box relied on more than just misdirection to get the BB involved; they could take a short, angled snap from the center and go through the handoff motions, not unlike the QB in the T, move back five yards and attempt a pass. But the key to the offense lay in the Shift. The Shift worked like this; coming out of the huddle, the team would line up in the T-Formation. Then, before the ball is snapped, the backfield would shift into its desired position before snapping. The most recent(1929) rules required a one second pause between the shift and the snap, but that was very minuscule in the pace of the action. That was only one second for the defense to see the shift and work out the likely direction and type of play. The Shift was further boosted by the fact that players were permitted to to alternate their positions based on what the play required. The Tailback spot could be occupied by your best passer(for passing), your fastest runner(for end runs), your fullback(for line plunges). Your speedy guy can be a tailback one play and go to wingback to catch passes on the next. Freeze the moment in time, just after the shift, and the play would appear telegraphed, but defenses were forced to think on the fly in real life. You would say the conundrum we had with the Single Wing would be neutralized with the Box. All three of the Titans could be utilized and moved around. So what's the flaw? Well, apart from the balanced line negating some of the running power, and the passing rules making the air game somewhat ineffective, the worst flaw might be with the coach. Earl "Curly" Lambeau organized the Green Bay Packers in 1919 and lead the team in Semi-Pro(Sandlot) games for two years before getting into the NFL. He was a Player-Coach who went to Notre Dame and played football for Knute Rockne for one season. Then he got sick and had to drop out and return home to Green Bay. That's relevant because, up to the 1930's, he coached as if he only really spent a single year under Knute Rockne. Even up to the championship years from '29 to '31, his players had a larger hand in working out the plays Lambeau would devise. That shouldn't be a problem with so many 'elite' players at our disposal, but it's a bit of a weakness we really don't need. T-Formation: https://archive.is/FmYU/2c8ae98ae64d2dc68c41d84fd7177596535eb607.gif Would you believe this actually pre-dates the Single Wing? It was an invention of Walter Camp in 1882. It became the Primary Formation in 1906 when rule changes dictated seven men on the line. And in the NFL for this decade, only one team and one man used the formation; George Halas of the Chicago Bears. Problem is, this is the pre-historic version. It's not the T you probably heard about during the infamous 73-0 slaughter in the 1940 Championship. The innovations would not come in the 20's(I actually cheated the last time around and introduced the architect of the first positive changes, Ralph Jones, as the assistant coach. Problem is, he didnt join the Chicago Bears until he took the Head Coaching job in 1930). This T is lined up tight, just about everywhere. About all Halas did was flex the Ends a yard away from the linemen, like the Box. In addition, not only was the line balanced, but the backfield was tightly packed together and not used at the point of the attack in the way Blocking Backs and Wingbacks were utilized in the Wing. You could plunge inside, but outside runs required genuine breakaway speeds and the other backs executing open-field blocks. Passing was much like the Single Wing in that not only was the job not limited strictly to the Quarterback, everybody in the backfield got in on the action in Chicago. The halfbacks, the fullbacks, they threw passes too. Rarely, of course. Setting up passes from this formation(this was before concepts like the man in motion) required the same sort of breakaway speed from the halfbacks but they were lined up so far from the line their routes would be telegraphed and zeroed in on. You had to ultimately use the same sort of misdirection plays you would encounter when utilizing the Wing, ones that went from obvious run plays to trick passes. The direct method would require greater use of the Ends. There is some hope, however. History constantly has outside arrivals shaping the T into the powerhouse formation it would become, but George Halas was not really rock-headed. By 1929 he had advocated a more "Open" kind of T, one that presumably was an improvement over the earlier versions. Problem was he and Edward "Dutch" Sternaman, part-owner and longtime halfback, had contrasting opinions on the offense and the Bears never could get on the same page. This led to them seeking outside help and hiring Ralph Jones in '30. But the idea of Halas favoring an "Open" game is promising. Perhaps with the right influence something could come out of it. Defenses: https://archive.is/FmYU/b714e50d18aa3e02a2ba46dd1dbd8d5cf8e29101.gif This is called the Seven-Box. If you can't see why, you spent too many years doing the unmentionables to yourself. The diagram lists the offensive positions, to give you an idea of what players were largely expected to do in the two-way era, though this is by no means uniform. As you might note, this was as tight a formation as any of the offenses were around this time, hence why the halfbacks are not lined out wide but deep enough to be considered safeties. The Fullback and Blocking Back were linebackers, their responsibilities being to follow the play and get the runner if he got past the line. https://archive.is/FmYU/d40446de56a36560fa4634117f4cc6befd13bf43.gif This was the second part of the Formation. Called the Seven-Diamond. It was used in obvious or suspected passing plays, incorporating a deep safety man who was placed that far(about 15-30 yards) because teams could just as easily punt as pass. The diagram gives the job to the Blocking Back, but that can honestly vary depending on who you have at your disposal(Red Grange is a halfback for instance, but the Bears would want him fielding punts from this formation, as opposed to whoever their Quarterback was). There are some complexities. Ends would sometimes drop into coverage- mostly covering other ends. And some very notable Centers around this time earned the reputaiton for being "Rovers". This really means they dropped back from the line and took on a linebacker-type role. Sometimes a tackle(Cal Hubbard) would do the same thing, but that largely involved said player using their size and burst as a weapon to break the line and get the ballcarrier. So.... Head Coach: George Halas- 1929 Offensive Style: T-Formation Defensive Style: Seven-Box/Seven-Diamondhttps://i.pinimg.com/736x/70/d4/85/70d485f78b98c2bda01e5c78450785fc.jpg As crazy as it sounds, this formation gives me the best flexibility when it comes to my options from the Tailback position. That and the de facto assistants I will have on hand may be enough to get the T working in a manner more advanced than it was. What? I don't have any assistants listed? Well, that's understandable. Teams in this decade really didn't have assistant coaches. The 'assistants' I speak of will be players from the actual squad, and I won't bother double-posting them. The Starters: This will be rather quick and straightforward. Eighteen Players altogether, eleven of whom are starters. Starting Quarterback: Benny Friedman- 1929(Three Year Exception)(Off-Position) Secondary Positions: Linebacker/Defensive Halfback, Placekicker(Alternate), Punter(Primary) -5'10, 183. Cleveland Bulldogs: 1927/ Detroit Wolverines: 1928/ New York Giants: 1929-31/ Brooklyn Dodgers: 1932-34https://www.bigblueinteractive.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/friedman02.jpg We've gone over the pros and cons with Friedman, the worst being he was purely a Tailback, which is kind of a problem when he has to go from taking 'shotgun-like' snaps from seven yards back to merely a yard from the center. We will have teachers on the roster to help him adjust. He is also the primary punter, because the punting formation of the time doubled as the 'Have-to-Pass' formation of its day, and having your best passer by a country mile double as the punter is no small thing. That and he's a strong runner in his own right, so there are more options on the table. Starting Left Halfback: Harold "Red" Grange- 1925(Three Year Exception) Secondary Positions: Defensive Halfback, Kick Returner(Primary), Punt Returner(Primary) -6'0, 180. Chicago Bears: 1925/ New York Yankees(AFL): 1926/ New York Yankees: 1927/ Chicago Bears: 1929-34https://www.totalprosports.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/77-red-grange.jpg ...This puts me in a weird place. I don't really trust his agent, C.C. Pyle, and I wanted the best placekicker of the decade(Driscoll) in the starting lineup. But in the end, Grange is the best running talent on hand to make the T-Formation go as an offensive power. If he's in the lineup, defenses have to focus on him, and that makes many other alternate plays possible. He can make things happen by running the ball, catching the ball out of the backfield, intercepting passes, returning kicks and punts. He's the offensive dynamo, the gear that moves the mechanism. Starting Fullback: Ernie Nevers- 1926(Three Year Exception) Secondary Positions: Linebacker, Placekicker(Primary), Punter(Alternate) -6'0 204. Duluth Eskimos: 1926-27/ Chicago Cardinals: 1929-31http://www.onlinecertificateprograms.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/thanksgivinggames/02_ernie.jpg He was called "The Football Player Without a Fault" and played equal to the billing. He was a fantastic line plunger, a fine kicker, an adept passer(once completing 17 straight passes with the fat ol' hog they called a football back then), a ferocious defender, and had the mentality to go all-out in 60 minutes of play. He had dalliances with Pro Baseball, but it was largely injuries that shortened his career extensively, having him sit out in '28 and prematurely retiring after '31. That's not to say he was injury-averse; in Stanford he played the full 60 minutes against Notre Dame in the 1924 Rose Bowl while he had two damaged ankles. This was the Notre Dame team that had the famous Four Horsemen in their backfield. He still outgained the Horsemen combined on the ground, punted and defended like a mad man, and turned in a valiant effort in what would turn out to be a Stanford loss. Most would know Nevers for two reasons; One, he was the Star Attraction for a rather infamous traveling team in '26 known as the Duluth Eskimos. The other involved a 1929 game where he racked up 40 points singlehandedly, pretty much the longest existing record in the NFL to this date. There is one complication though; virtually all of Nevers' career was spent in a particular formation; The Stanford Double-Wing. https://archive.is/FmYU/53b570e028ad0b71b13be64007f90037c338eaaa.gifhttps://archive.is/FmYU/ccf1bea35d3012399306048886fbe53505236e91.gif We didn't go into the Double-Wing because frankly, it was an off-shot of the Single Wing and a bit like the Short Punt. The Stanford version is unique because it puts the Fullback in the Tailback role. This worked because of Nevers, who was the kind of all-around talent coaches and fans drool over. But really, it was a basic Double Wing. Ernie never seemed to have a ego problem, as far as I can find out. So he probably wouldn't raise up a stink playing in a different formation and taking on a slightly more garbageman-type role compared to his actual playing days. That and since he's playing alongside the best possible teammates- at least one having been teammates with him- he won't be required to do everything like usual. Thanks to Grange pushing Driscoll out of the starting lineup, Nevers is the designated placekicker unless Driscoll is subbed in. That's alright; Nevers was never described as terrible booting the ball after all. He also contributes to the overall deception of the passing attack beyond Friedman. Starting Right Halfback: Johnny "Blood" McNally- 1929 Secondary Positions: Defensive Halfback, Kick Returner(Alternate), Punt Returner(Alternate) -6'1 188. Milwaukee Badgers: 1925/ Duluth Eskimos: 1926-27/ Pottsville Maroons: 1928/ Green Bay Packers: 1929-33/ Pittsburgh Pirates: 1934/ Green Bay Packers: 1935-36/ Pittsburgh Pirates: 1937-38http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Pk49mVrUKD0/SQFFBllUQgI/AAAAAAAABBM/9LXnf94mtaw/s400/johnny_blood_01.jpg This is the second reason Paddy Driscoll is not in the starting lineup. He is also someone who, if you looked purely at 1920's accolades, you'd wonder why he's here. He went virtually unknown as far as All-Pro selections went and did not really rack up the touchdowns like you'd expect for a Hall-of-Famer(his greatest stats occured just shortly after the 20's wrapped up). But the key reasons are these; McNally might be the closest halfback we have to match Grange's mobility(well, there was one other), and his pass catching skills are considered second-to-none. In fact, he's considered to have been the best pass catcher in the league until Don Hutson arrived. He was called "Johnny Blood" because he took it as a fake name to preserve collegiate eligibility. He was also named the "Vagabond Halfback". But he ought to have been called "Peter Pan". The man lived as if he were a child, getting into all sorts of misadventures. He climbed onto the roof of a speeding train to escape an angered teammate. He scaled a multi-story building for some sort of mischief aimed at his coach. He arranged an exhibition match for his team in Hawaii, and had to be rescued when he was spotted hanging off the flagpost on the stern of the ship they were traveling on, trying to do chin ups. If he was alive and in his prime today, and if he pulled that stunt, you would see a selfie of it on twitter. More than the antics, the guy was a free spirit who could seemingly do anything provided he had the interest to do it. He was probably an Inaugural Hall-of-Famer more for his character than his play. That said, his play was great. He was often the fastest player on his team, and had a magnificent talent for coming down with the ball when it was in the air. Largely this was thanks to his frame and him shielding the ball in every way possible from a defender. This also served him great on defense, where he made a reputation as a ball hawk. He was considered adept as a tackler, punter, and as a passer. All of that was shadowed by his antics, however. In fact, that's the biggest risk for this team. The first problem is his likely relation with his coach. Blood drove Curly Lambeau up the walls and was let go by him twice! And yet, Curly deeply valued his skills, leading to a rather 'complicated in a non-sexual way' relationship. How's George Halas gonna handle the guy? The second problem actually extended onto the field. Blood was nothing short of breathtaking in the clutch moments when the team was behind, but in moments when the team was ahead, he would start to clown around. A lot of it was making catches look more difficult than they really were, or just dropping passes. One time he had an open field touchdown, but stopped at the five just so the defenders could catch up so he could drag them into the end zone. Believe it or not, the problem isn't about him doing such a thing as in the game against the aliens, it's more about whether he could handle the life-or-death stakes. We are putting these players in situations that just never existed, ever. But that part is negligible, if only because his fun-loving nature might actually be a double-edged sword; it could also serve as an ice-breaker in regards to the aliens. Have them spend a rousing night on the town with Johnny Blood, and you might just avoid the destruction of the planet to begin with! Starting Left End: Guy Chamberlin- 1923 Secondary Positions: Defensive Left End -6'2 196. Decatur-Chicago Staleys: 1920-21/ Canton Bulldogs: 1922-23/ Cleveland Bulldogs: 1924/ Frankford Yellow Jackets: 1925-26/ Chicago Cardinals: 1927http://www.profootballhof.com/assets/1/26/Chamberlin_Guy_Action_180-220.jpg?580 I'm not gonna lie; specific information about Chamberlin's skills are, well, not scarce. Just devoid of details beyond being exemplary. According to George Halas he was the finest two-way End of his time. A rock solid defender and a triple-threat on offense(in college he had been a Back rather than an End). All of that is overshadowed by his coaching record. He's the winningest coach ever in the NFL, and he has the most championships of the 1920's with four. Three of them came from the three-year dynasty of the Bulldog club from '22 to '24. Then he went to Frankford and won another title in '26. Chamberlin basically doubles as our assistant coach, someone who can rouse his teammates to perform(apparently he was incredibly likeable), and who has a great enough coaching mind that putting his brain together with Halas would create some positive advancements in terms of strategy. It's not as if they didn't know each other; Chamberlin was Halas' big acquisition when the Decatur Staleys were created in 1920, and Guy would spend two years with the team. So he knows Halas, and knows the T. And on top of that he could be considered one of the more open-minded coaches in regards to passing the ball. In 1923 the Canton Bulldogs played largely against type and racked up seven receiving touchdowns when before they were primarily a running juggernaut. In '24 it was upped to 11. When Guy joined Frankford in '25 it was 8. Then 7 in '26. These were monster passing numbers for that decade. They weren't selfishly all to him either; 36 Passing touchdowns were scored from '22 to '26 with Chamberlin as coach for his teams. He caught only six of them. Starting Left Tackle: Ed Healey- 1925 Secondary Positions: Defensive Left Tackle -6'1 207. Rock Island Independents: 1920-22/ Chicago Bears: 1922-27http://www.bearshistory.com/images/bearshistory_healey.jpg The competition at this spot was primarily between two Hall-of-Famers. Ed Healey and Link Lyman. Both played for George Halas and the Chicago Bears, so both blocked in the T-Formation, without the benefits of unbalanced line blocking to support them. They were elected into the Hall of Fame in the same year. Would you have started pulling your hair out at this point? Last time around, I went with Lyman for four reasons; he had been a part of three championship teams with Canton/Cleveland, he had a pairing connection with Guy Chamberlin at Left End, he had an inch or two and about twenty pounds on Healey, and George Halas described Healey was the "most versatile tackle ever", something that stuck in my mind as perfect for a backup tackle expected to potentially fit in multiple places on the line. Here's what I neglected to uncover then; In 1926, George Halas signed Lyman to the Bears when he had Healey in his starting lineup at Left Tackle. The two played together for two years before Healey retired. Lyman played Right Tackle in '27 and was a sub for Healey in '26. So much for that debate. Anyways, Healey was tough as nails and blessed with good speed for his position. As for the versatility part, it's probably less to do with positional placement(Healey DID play End while at Dartmouth) and more about style. My theory goes that Healey was equally adept at overpowering his opponent at the point of attack, and using finesse to trap and seal him from the direction of the play. Starting Left Guard: August "Mike" Michalske- 1929(Three Year Exception) Secondary Positions: Defensive Left Guard -6'0 210. New York Yankees: 1927-28/ Green Bay Packers: 1929-35, 1937https://images.phillypublishing.com/onwardstate/uploads/2014/04/118-mike-michalske.jpg Guards, as far as 1920's notoriety go, tend to get the shaft. Virtually no Guard who spent the majority of their career in the 20's is in the Hall of Fame. And the best ones at Left Guard have to be exceptions. It came down to Michalske or Heartley "Hunk" Anderson, an undersized-but-hellacious player for the Chicago Bears who left a pro career to become an assistant coach at Notre Dame. The reality is for all the excellent attributes Anderson has, Michalske is an improvement upon them. He was called "Iron Mike" largely for his durability. The only time he got hurt was in the very tail end of his career. He spent his collegiate career at Penn State as a remarkably versatile and unselfish player. In fact, he came into the NFL as a Fullback, but soon enough made a transition to Guard, eventually championing the concept of converting fullbacks to linemen as they often had superior speed and explosiveness. His on-field intelligence- Benny Friedman called him a Quarterback playing Guard- kept him in the right place at the right time. In addition, he was highly adept to the art of "pulling". You know "pulling" as what guards do when a sweep is run; they leave the line and dart to the opposing side, often engaging smaller defenders behind the line. You have to have speed for that job, even more so in modern times since linemen have just gotten heavier. Starting Center: George Trafton- 1924 Secondary Positions: Defensive Center -6'2 230. Decatur Staleys-Chicago Staleys-Chicago Bears: 1920-21, 1923-32https://sportsmenublog.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/george-trafton.jpg For the line, this is as much of a slam dunk as there possibly could be. Trafton's calling card was roughness. I don't mean in a dirty sense, though that can't exactly be disproven. I mean in that Trafton was easily the roughest, toughest, meanest SOB toiling in the "Pit" of the NFL in those days. He played hard, he hit hard, and he was so despised by the opposition that at least once he was run out of an opposing city by angry fans who were after his blood. But then, all that nonsense hid his proficiency elsewhere. The guy moved like a halfback. He was an early specialist of the 'rover' on defense, and could either stuff the line or shift towards the play without getting bogged down. He was also the first center to snap the ball with one hand, and without any noted mishaps. This likely was not a technical discovery or anything like that- he lost his left index finger, you see. Starting Right Guard: Adolph "Swede" Youngstrom- 1923 Secondary Positions: Defensive Right Guard -6'1 187. Buffalo All-Americans-Bisons: 1920-25/ Frankford Yellow Jackets: 1926-27 -No Picture Michalske was an Exception at Left Guard because quite frankly, he was excellent enough in 1929 to justify his selection. Last time I did this, I had gone with another Hall-of-Famer at Right Guard who also lacked the required years in the 20's. His name was Walt Kiesling, and if I'm perfectly honest, I picked him because of his size. His weight more specifically; he hovered between 230 to 260 pounds throughout his career. Nobody else worth a darn does more than flirt with 230 in this decade, so I eyed him as someone capable of plugging the middle on defense and powering through defenders on offense. Thinking better of it this time, I took note of his lack of accolades in the 20's- he may as well have been unknown- and decided to do a more serious job at this spot. Two candidates stood out. One is this Youngstrom fellow, who is apparently rated the best actual guard of the 1920's, only he didn't win a title before taking on a supporting/assistant coaching role with Frankford in '26. So his star was hidden. His competitor was named Jim McMillen, a blocker for Red Grange in Illinois during his collegiate days, and for a time, played the same role while with the Chicago Bears. His career was cut short because he found more money in Professional Wrestling(a surprisingly stable option for the gridiron grunts in those days), but he seemed to merit accolades far more than Youngstrom did. In 1927, one of the people who made All-Pro teams made two lists; one for power players, one for 'clever' players. So far three of our backfield players made the 'clever' list. Youngstrom was on the way out and didn't make either list... but McMillen made the 'power' lineup. McMillen would conceivably be the pick for Halas, because McMillen's power was always a desired trait for this early version of the T. But to be perfectly fair, Youngstrom was rated as aggressive and intelligent, making him a potentially superior selection, even if it slightly shaves off the power that can be put forth. He was also remarkably good at breaking through the line to block punts, though this was only discussed during the first two seasons in '20 and '21. Starting Right Tackle: Wilbur "Pete" Henry- 1923 Secondary Positions: Defensive Right Tackle, Placekicker(Alternate), Punter(Alternate) -5'11 245. Canton Bulldogs: 1920-23, 1925-26/ New York Giants: 1927/ Pottsville Maroons: 1927-28https://i.pinimg.com/736x/df/5f/7d/df5f7dba59b3f415febbe963ef04fed7--football-photos-sports-photos.jpg So like last time, this was a two-way tie for the job. Pete Henry was one of the competitors. The other was a Hall-of-Famer who was yet another 'Exception' to the five-year rule in Cal Hubbard. I put both on the roster and gave Hubbard the starting spot, but the truth is I cheated; I was unaware of the Roster Limits back then and I assumed having 25 players was ideal. Now that I have seven less spots, I'm reduced with the horror of having to discard an elite player from the roster entirely. And unlike at Left Guard, there's no real reason to invoke an Exception for Hubbard. So Henry wins by default. Now, be perfectly honest with me. You look at that picture and you see 'weekend frat boy', someone who is absolutely unfit to play in a Professional setting? Don't you? I mean, I do. I have a bit of a complex when it comes to players who just look too portly to be useful. Henry(also nicknamed "Fats") and Hubbard had close to the same kind of weight, but Hubbard carried his on a taller frame(about three-plus inches higher than Henry) and just looked so impressive. But Henry was equally as devastating on the line. He could destroy opposing lines with his strength and he had 'surprising' speed(which could be translated to 'somehow he's NOT as slow as molasses' but this was a guy who could get into the backfield and block punts. Pairing him up with Youngstrom on the right side looks really good taking that little intangible into account). One time, an opposing team tried to run right at him. He flattened the line. More accurately it was the Buffalo team who tried that and Henry 'telescoped' the line, tossing a couple Buffalo linemen(including Youngstrom!) into their center before stuffing the play. That's the kind of shenanigans you would see in a sports flick. He was also perfectly capable of kicking field goals and punting, having been rumored to make some really long boomers in his day. I don't have him doing the primary kicking duties for a different reason though; I am very reluctant to take a lineman off of the line so he can kick, even if I have Ernie Nevers slipping into his spot to block. Starting Right End: Lavern Dilweg- 1929(Four Year Exception)(Off-Position) Secondary Positions: Defensive Right End(Off-Position) -6'3 200. Milwaukee Badgers: 1926/ Green Bay Packers: 1927-34https://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/fan/image?url=https://lombardiave.com/files/2015/07/lavviedilweg.png& Putting players outside of their standard position comes with some difficulties. You see it all too often in the modern game, the best-known example being taking a pass-rusher who was a somewhat undersized 4-3 DE in College and turning him into a 3-4 Edge Rusher. Some players take to the new position, others struggle to understand the subtleties. The game is much more simple back in the 20's so this problem is neutralized for the most part, but even so, shifting a player from one side of the field to the other is not to be taken lightly, even in a position entrenched on the line. Dilweg was, until Don Hutson came along, the best ever Two-Way End, more or less taking that title from Guy Chamberlin. Of course, he's another exception, go figure. But it's in a position of need, as only three other players who actually made the five-year qualification are of any real worth beyond warm bodies for blocking. One of them is George Halas, only he ceased to be an active player by 1929 so he's out. The others are fellow Chicago Bear Duke Hanny and league journeyman Tillie Voss. But Dilweg is head and shoulders above both of them. We've mentioned that the early-age End was more of a TE/DE hybrid than a WR/CB. Indeed, it's on the line where Dilweg gets most of his rave reviews. Steady rather than Spectacular play- though that is largely because even today line play is rather anonymous to all but the purposefully observant. He could always be counted upon to shut down the running game and tie up blockers, not to mention be a wonderful assist on the offensive line as a blocker himself. But since he was in Green Bay, he was utilized rather extensively(they would throw in a season as many times as some modern teams do in a single game, at the very least) as a receiver, at least until Johnny Blood arrived. Then he was a secondary target. But he was still incredibly reliable when it came to catching passes, including on defense. He seemed to be a superior ball-hawk as far as Ends go in that day and age, racking up interception totals(7 in '29, 27 in career) that you simply should not see in a lineman's position. That's as strong as a Starting Eleven as we are likely to get. The seven reserves are next. The Reserves: A reserve player can go a number of ways. He can be a key understudy to an important position(usually this will be the backup Quarterback). He may have a specific talent that, when subbed in, changes the pace of the game(usually these are speed specialists at running back or pass rushers on defense). He may have the versatility to handle different positions on the team(a truly key skill to have when you don't have enough players to backup every position). But most importantly, he needs to understand his role and his spot in the pecking order, and not cause any disruptions that'll crater team morale. That's a concept that most people making All-Time teams completely ignore, since they're not conceiving of a scenario where their team has to be put to the test. So you tend to have Hall-of-Famers in their prime stuck on the bench or doing gruntwork on Special Teams. Then again, I probably am overthinking it. One of the responses I got last time alleged that such an elite team would be aware and skilled enough to hammer out their problems and make the whole thing work. But I'll leave that for you to decide. Anyway, we're splitting the reserves into four backs and three linemen, this is mostly because of the special skills involved with most of the backs. John "Paddy" Driscoll- 1925 Offensive Position: Halfback Secondary Positions: Defensive Halfback, Placekicker(Key Substitute), Punter(Alternate), Kick Returner(Alternate) -5'11 160. Chicago Cardinals: 1920-25/ Chicago Bears: 1926-29http://www.angelfire.com/fl/TheCard/images/gallery/driscoll.gif Driscoll was always the team leader(if not the actual Coach) on whatever team he played on, so that raises the question about whether he could handle being a substitute. I never found anything either last time or now that would indicate he'd be a cancer on the team, so he's in. The good news is he's good enough to make the T-Formation work(he'd better be, since the Bears signed him in '26 to replace Grange!), offering the same triple-threat capacity as any all-star Tailback would be expected to do. When he's in the lineup, the ability to score field goals from longer ranges goes up(Driscoll holds an unofficial record for a Drop Kick Field Goal at 55 yards in 1924, though complete verification is impossible) while there is no distinct downgrade on defense. Verne Lewellen- 1929 Offensive Position: Halfback Secondary Positions: Defensive Halfback, Punter(Key Substitute), Kick Returner(Alternate) -6'1 182. Green Bay Packers: 1924-32https://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/fan/image?url=https://lombardiave.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/51/files/2015/07/lewellen_verne.jpg&c=sc&w=240&h=466 If Driscoll is considered an offensive specialist with his placekicking, then Lewellen is considered a defensive specialist for his punting. Really, apart from never placekicking he's just as much of an all-around maestro as Driscoll, meaning the two of them won't bog down the offense if they enter the game. An extra bonus that I was not aware of last time; Lewellen doubled as the secondary passer in Green Bay's offense, and it is even claimed that he was the backup at the Quarterback spot. Anyways, if we have Verne subbed in, that means we want to pin the opposition deep into their own territory above all else. Whether it's coffin kicking in opposing territory or just booming the long ones, Verne could handle any punting situation. Tony Latone- 1925 Offensive Position: Fullback Secondary Positions: Linebacker -5'11 195. Pottsville Maroons-Boston Bulldogs: 1925-29/ Providence Steam Roller: 1930http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com/nfl/bostonb/Latone.jpg If we're being perfectly honest, Latone is the only player on this team to have never played in College. The reason has a lot to do with where he came from. Pottsville, Pennsylvania was one of many Central PA towns that formed the heart of Coal Country, where mining was the life's blood of the communities. Tony was eleven when his father died, and working in the mines was the only way to support his family. This was before effective child labor laws, so you can imagine the sheer hell he endured day after day to make ends meet. All of the labor and all of the suffering translated into the sandlots, and Tony had become a violent natural at the sport by the time a Professional Franchise came to tiny Pottsvile in 1925. You'd think this would've been made into a Disney Flick if the team hadn't been SCREWED out of a title in '25. The man wasn't so much as a line plunger as he was a line punisher. He roared into the opposition either when he had the ball or when he was blocking, and was just about unstoppable. In fact, you know the term 'stacking the box'? Where modern defenses put seven or eight players in a space behind the line of scrimmage that stretches from tackle to tackle in order to stifle the running game? Well, when defenders in the Seven-Box faced Latone, they would stack that box even more. As in virtually all eleven defenders went into that box to stop Latone. Nine players on the line, a linebacker directly over the defensive center, halfbacks on the flanks. And he'd just tear into them anyways. I assumed that Tony was a one-man show with Pottsville. I was wrong; turns out the backfield was a group effort. That does nothing to diminish Tony's greatness. Ernie Nevers might be the "Football Player Without a Fault", but Tony had him beat when it came to raw passion and power. He might be the only one I would have no worries about whatsoever when it came to facing the direst challenge for the Fate of the World. Joseph "Red" Dunn- 1929 Offensive Position: Quarterback(Slightly Off-Position) Secondary Positions: Linebacker, Defensive Halfback, Placekicker(Alternate), Punter(Alternate) -5'11 177. Milwaukee Badgers: 1924/ Chicago Cardinals: 1925-26/ Green Bay Packers: 1927-31https://cdn.fansided.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/51/files/2014/08/3551a_lg-590x900.jpg Everyone we've picked for the backfield- with the probable exception of Latone- has demonstrated a skill with passing. But what we really need is a genuine backup at the actual passing position. Going purely by the formation, that involves taking a QB from the Bears. But the only one of the bunch who demonstrated a sustained capacity for throwing the ball is Joey Sternaman, brother of Dutch. 5'6 and a buck-fifty, the man was certainly talented for his size, but in terms of pure passing, we can do better, especially with only eighteen players on the roster. That means we'll have to convert another back to the role, and of the lot that's available, Dunn is debatably the best but also the most convenient. The reason is because he was the primary passing option while playing in the Notre Dame Box as a Blocking Back. Remember the play that formation could run, where the BB takes an angled snap and goes through the Play Action motions like a T-Formation QB and goes back to pass? That's largely what Dunn did. The only difference is in this formation he would only have to take it directly from the center without an angle to speak of. Dunn's almost a plug-and-play option if he ever had been signed by Chicago. He and Paddy Driscoll can teach Friedman about taking one-yard snaps and dropping back. William "Link" Lyman- 1926 Offensive Position: Tackle Secondary Positions: Defensive Tackle -6'2 233. Canton-Cleveland Bulldogs: 1922-25/ Frankford Yellow Jackets: 1925/ Chicago Bears: 1926-28, 1930-31, 1933-34http://sportsecyclopedia.com/nfl/canton/Link.jpg The year I selected for Lyman is sort of a theoretically happy medium. Lyman's experience has grown beyond that when he was a youngster racking up titles with Canton, and he's sort of being passed around in the lineup while in Chicago. His position would not stabilize with the Bears until 1928, so he's if nothing else familiar with a quasi-reserve role(probably overthinking it again). Lyman's claim to fame was his capacity to shift on the line, a ploy which confused blockers. He would use this on top of his uncanny ability to diagnose plays before the ball was snapped, making him very difficult to block effectively. The shifting style would become a standard tool for defensive linemen in today's game. Last time, somebody joked that I only had him on the roster because of his 'connection' to Frankie Lymon. In retrospect, it was kind of a weak joke, but I appreciated the gesture. Heartley "Hunk" Anderson- 1925(Four Year Exception) Offensive Position: Guard Secondary Positions: Defensive Guard -5'11 191. Chicago Bears: 1922-25https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fb/Heartley_Anderson.jpg We have to go with an exception here for one vital reason; we need a former Bear who can double as a line coach and teach the outsiders about blocking in the T-Formation, and Hunk is the best option we've got. Not that he's a glorified teacher to hide on the bench; he was quite frankly so ferocious on the line that Halas would give out reports that Hunk was twenty pounds heavier than he really was, if only for psychological reasons. Halas also thought so well of him that he was the second-highest paid player in the team behind Red Grange in '25. Hunk proved his worth during the barnstorming tour by playing every dang minute of every dang game during the tour. Supposedly he also cussed like a sailor and either disliked or hated George Trafton, but those are nitpicks. (Speaking of Trafton, there isn't a backup center, though I now like to believe he would break the legs of the replacement if we actually had one) Walter "Tillie" Voss- 1924 Offensive Positions: End, Tackle Secondary Positions: Defensive End, Defensive Tackle -6'3 207. Buffalo All-Americans: 1921/ Detroit Tigers: 1921/ Akron Pros: 1922/ Rock Island Independents: 1922/ Toledo Maroons: 1923/ Green Bay Packers: 1924/ Detroit Panthers: 1925/ New York Giants: 1926/ Chicago Bears: 1927-28/ Buffalo Bisons: 1929/ Dayton Triangles: 1930http://probasketballencyclopedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Tillie-Voss.jpg The choice is between Voss and Duke Hanny. And like the Youngstrom/McMillen debate, it's conceivable that Halas would pick the Chicago Bear over the other. Frankly, both are more power-based Ends who do the gruntwork on the line. It's just that Voss has both flexibility and a better capacity for receiving. Voss was a wanderer of the highest order, and not just in the NFL. He would also moonlight in basketball, first for various independent teams but eventually he would be a part of the American Basketball League(yes, there was Basketball before the NBA). Not a worldbeater though. Just an anonymous player. But he traveled to and fro and rarely stayed long. He played on both the left and right side and dabbled for a year at Tackle. But '24 is his best year by far because Green Bay seemed to utilize him the way Lavern Dilweg would be used by them in later years. He would respond with five touchdowns and eight interceptions. All this on top of solid enough line play to keep him employed in the NFL throughout the decade. The Discarded: This section really only touches upon the non-selected players who were notorious enough to warrant mention and an explanation for why they were left out. This can include both the players who made the five-year cut and the potential exceptions, with the lone limiter being whether I want to scrounge up the time to talk about them. All of these names are going to pop up in the next section. I suppose we should discuss Jim Thorpe first. If some random schmuck knows of any football player from the 1920's, it'll probably be Thorpe above all the others. He's considered a Founding Father of Professional Football as we plebians understand it, his star name adding legitimacy to what was largely the red-headed stepchild of the sports world. And most 1920's Teams, including the one put together by the Hall of Fame, have Thorpe on the roster. Thing is, he doesn't deserve it. I've looked at the years Thorpe spent in the NFL, all of them on the wrong side of thirty. As near as I can tell, he was largely a part-time player who bounced around a few teams over the decade. He scored every now and then, but not frequently enough to justify his selection. He had more value as a field goal kicker, but roster sizes are too small for such a specialist. Fritz Pollard might seem a little more unforgivable, if only because the man was black in an era where Black Players were scarce and would be run out of the league by the next decade. Excluding him would probably be considered a racist stance. So lets look at it from a football perspective; his running skills do not overcome Grange. His receiving skills do not overcome Blood. He did not Placekick(Driscoll), and he might have punted but nothing noteworthy(Lewellen), and the man did not handle the passing duties for his teams, ever. By process of elimination, he falls just short in the skills he definitely has and lacks the specialist skills that we could use. Jimmy Conzelman and Joe Guyon wrap up the remaining Hall of Famers with backfield positions. Guyon had the misfortune of playing underneath teh shadow of Thorpe during the early years of the NFL, but the man was younger, was still a reasonable enough triple-threat, and he did earn a championship with the '27 Giants, albeit as a utility player. Even so, Guyon was well into the end of his prime years when the NFL was formed and simply lost by process of elimination. Conzelman was perhaps the hardest elimination from the backfield. The man was more notable for his coaching career but he did have two distinct phases of his playing career; the first half was spent as a passer-rusher at Blocking Back, where he was among the best all-around talents. Then by the end of his career, he had become more of a receiver. He also won a championship as Player-Coach of the '28 Providence Steam Roller(the last Defunct franchise to win an NFL Title), but his playing career ended via injury part-way through the season. At the end of the day though, Dunn's ability to fit into the T and greater potential as a passer won out. Three other backfield players deserve mention. Tommy Hughitt led a collection of Buffalo Teams(bet you didn't know Buffalo had NFL franchises before the Bills came to town?) to strong contender status and was considered perhaps the best at his position in those early days as far as leadership goes. But in the end, not so much concrete detail about his skills. He was another all-around star but lacking a distinct 'IT' factor to stand out from the crowd. The same might be said for Jack McBride, a Fullback and key passer for the '27 New York Giants. Easily the best Fullback of a surprisingly lengthy list that served five or more years, McBride still could not compete with either the all-around excellence of Nevers or the ferocious line-plunging capacity of Latone. McBride's teammate, Hinkey Haines, deserves some mention simply by virtue of his speed. He's probably the lone player to potentially challenge and surpass Grange and Blood, and he certainly could make use of his skill as both a runner and a receiver, but those two added a little bit more than Haines could. Four Hall-of-Famers on the line, three of which are exceptions. We've already discussed Cal Hubbard, easily the hardest elimination from the team. Walt Keisling too, though his membership is more towards the length of his service in the NFL in multiple areas. Ray Flaherty was not mentioned, though his ability to catch passes from Benny Friedman should've made him the third End, easily. I think Flaherty is easily superior in offense, but Voss was better at defense. There was enough to not justify making an exception for Flaherty. Steve Owen wraps up the foursome, and frankly, he's a strong Left Tackle in a rather large field. But he was a Hall-of-Famer much more for his coaching prowess in the next two decades than as a solid player. We mentioned Duke Hanny and Jim McMillen as players who missed out in certain spots- and as Chicago Bears, players who could be conceivably picked by Halas. There are four other linemen meriting mention. Duke Slater is in the same shadow as Fritz Pollard, being a Black Player in this unforgiving era, but also carving out a more successful niche as a Tackle(he would last into the early 1930's before retiring). Slater matches up with Pete Henry and Cal Hubbard, maybe to the point where it would be a three-way race. But in the end, I went with Henry. Bull Behman is the best left tackle in this group. Perhaps he's better than Steve Owen. Perhaps he's comparable to Ed Healey and Link Lyman. He certainly had the reputation of being so strong at the point of attack that teams would send too many blockers after him and their plays would just unravel. He also had a steady legs in the number of times he was his team's placekicker. But his biggest detraction was that his team, the Frankford Yellow Jackets, won their only title in the year Behman wasn't on the team. Remember the first AFL in '26? Behman jumped to the Philadelphia Quakers of that league, winning the league title there, but missed out on the Yellow Jackets winning their title that same year. Gus Sonnenberg is a bit of an odd bird, mainly for his listed height of 5'6. He was a very good tackle in the NFL to begin with, demonstrating intelligence when it came to his line play. But he's also one of the more successful wrestlers of his time, introducing speed and agility into a Performance Sport that was more about strength and resting holds and other slow-paced moves. He defeated Ed "Strangler" Lewis for a Title shortly after Providence won the league in '28. Duke Osborn was a keystone member of the Canton-Cleveland dynasty from '22 to '24, then became a key part of the 1925 Pottsville Maroons. Clearly he was good enough to start for really strong teams despite a lack of mention about his skills. Extra Tidbits- The Scrimmagers: I gave no thought about this part the last time around. It simply never occured to me. It does not matter what sport one partakes in. If you are assembling a team to play in said sport, then you need time for said team to mesh together. That requires training. How much training you need is a rather undefinable answer with too many variables. When you have an established team that has competed for a number of years, then you likely have an experienced core of players that understands how to work well together, leaving you with only a limited number of new pieces to try and fit in, significantly reducing the time you need for cohesion to develop. But this isn't that type of team. This is essentially an All-Star Group, assembled from scratch. Even with a plan in place to fit everyone into a system, you're going to have a greater need for extended training(All-Star Teams tend to forego this part because they usually only compete in meaningless exhibitions that double as vacation time). It's a lot like the National Team concept. This is a group of players from a single country banding together to compete in specific sports. You see this most often in two venues; the Olympics, and the World Cup. A team sport with some international presence is going to develop an International Tournament eventually, and these will all be teams brought up from scratch. So you have to pick the team, assemble the team, and train the team until it is meshed together enough to partake in the actual competition. National Teams have an extra element beyond the mere training; Scrimmages. Think of this like a Pre-Season period, a small series of Tune-Up games against opponents of varying difficulty. Unlike the Football Pre-Season though, this won't be used to cull a training camp roster. Instead, it will be about sharpening the team as a whole. The only question involves how many 'Scrimmages' will be set up before the pivotal match with the aliens. One would think it would be in our best interests to stack as many games as possible, as the team would be sharpened more and more with each passing weak. But with that comes a growing sense of fatigue. Even if we take injuries entirely out of the equation(using alien technology because, duh), the team will still enter the key game battered and worn down over anything approaching a season's worth of games prior to that. This comes from a combination of both the sport(Football is far more physically asserting and rough than virtually any other sport other than it's distant cousins in Rugby) and the time(1920's levels of fitness and conditioning). I would personally recommend a maximum of no more than six games, but I would prefer four if it came down to it. This decade, we're going to go with five- we'll get to the reason soon enough. As for the opponents, we have two basic options. Our first option involves importing entire teams. As an example, lets say we wanted to have our team play the Chicago Bears. We could then decide whether to import a specific year or create an All-Decade Squad of Bears players. We would likely chose the latter over the former because it stands to reason that any team that good to be picked as an opponent likely has a player or several selected for our squad. Back to the Bears. We have their Head Coach and Starting Center, both of whom were around for virtually the entire decade. This cripples a specific-year team right off the bat because no matter what year, they won't have their head coach or their starting center(no paradoxes!) The second option involves meshing together another cluster of players. That's a fair bit more time consuming and the assembled teams will have significantly less cohesion then an established team, but there is a level of variance you can achieve with makeshift squads. You can design specific teams that cater to certain strengths, as in showing your team something specific that they have to fight against. Sometimes that strength is in a particular skillset, such as a team specializing in speed, or power, or they can specialize in an innovative kind of formation. The other option is to create a 'Best of the Rest' All-Star Team, perhaps not a mirror match to your team, but a team that has as many answers to problems as possible. Of note, like the selection process for the All-Decade Teams, these players will still come from the NFL. Even though we could conceivably assemble teams from the collegiate ranks- and in the 20's they could debatably be superior to the professional outfits- we're not going to go there. The reason is a selfish one. You deserve better than me just parroting the All-American Selections and I will NEVER get these Decades done if I try to seriously grind through all of the colleges. Anyway, the five-year minimum is eliminated for this section. Also the players selected will just be reduced to a name and a specific year- wine cellar rules after all. Chicago Bears All-Decade Remainders: Coach: Dutch Sternaman- 1923(Player-Coach) QB: Joey Sternaman 1924 LH: Dutch Sternaman 1923 FB: Buck White 1928 RH: Laurie Walquist 1925 LE: Duke Hanny 1926 LT: Ralph Scott 1921 LG: Bill Buckler 1926 C: Ojay Larson 1922 RG: Jim McMillen 1928 RT: Don Murray 1928 RE: Luke Johnsos 1929 Bench B: Bill Senn 1928 B: Milt Romney 1926 B: Oscar Knop 1924 B: Pete Stinchcomb 1921 T: Hugh Blacklock 1921 G: Bill Fleckenstein 1925 E: Vern Mullen 1926 There are two reasons for using this team. One is they are the lone team that uses the T-Formation. The other is that, even with certain players having been lost to us, this is still the most stable and organized of the teams. Chicago spent the vast majority of the decade in the top half of the league, often in contention for the title. The only really major losses are Halas and Trafton. Dutch Sternaman isn't so much a co-coach as he is a co-owner of the franchise, but he's the key playmaker of the squad, so he'll manage. The presence of Sternaman helps offset the losses of both Grange and Driscoll, even though both are clearly well above Dutch in terms of skill. Hunk Anderson's a bigger blow but Bill Buckler was a decent enough player during the latter half of the decade. Trafton however is far from replaceable. That's largely because only one year was spent without him. Ojay Larson played at center for the team that year, hence his inclusion. Even without Trafton, the team is based heavily on a tight power game and a strong basic defense, with the occasional pass coming from virtually anybody. Extra Note; while the roster limit is 18 players, we're going to have four of the players from these scrimmage teams on hand largely so we can do 11-on-11 drills in practice. The Chicago team has two of the four in Duke Hanny and Jim McMillen. Green Bay Packers All-Decade Remainders: Coach: Curly Lambeau- 1924(Player-Coach) TB: Curly Lambeau 1924 FB: Bo Molenda 1929 BB: Charlie Mathys 1925 HB: Eddie Kotal 1929 LE: Richard O'Donnell 1926 LT: Cub Buck 1923 LG: Whitey Woodin 1924 C: Jug Earp 1926 RG: Jim Bowdoin 1929 RT: Cal Hubbard 1929 RE: Tom Nash 1929 Bench B: Myrt Basing 1925 B: Cully Lidberg 1926 B: Pid Purdy 1926 T: Claude Perry 1929 G: Moose Gardner 1924 C: Boob Darling 1929 E: Cowboy Wheeler 1923 The primary reason for creating this team is to take on the Notre Dame Box. With the exception of Cal Hubbard, the team is composed of the lesser remnants of the 1929 Championship Team and the best of the mid-20's teams that were deep in contention. The key to their game is the pass, which is led by Curly Lambeau and Charlie Mathys. The line is relatively stable and should give the assorted second-stringers(though Bo Molenda is the best Fullback the team will have in this decade) room to run. They are also not slouches on defense, though they aren't world-beaters by any stretch. They'll provide ample experience for defending in the air. Cal Hubbard and Jug Earp are the remaining two "practice players" we'll have on hand for 11-on-11 sessions. Single Wing Power Squad: Coach: Robert "Punk" Berryman- 1924 TB: Wildcat Wilson 1928 FB: Barney Wentz 1925 BB: Ben Jones 1926 WB: Joe Guyon 1920 LE: George Kenneally 1927 LT: Steve Owen 1927 LG: Walt Kiesling 1929 C: Herb Stein 1925 RG: Hec Garvey 1927 RT: Russ Stein 1925 RE: Jack Spellman 1928 Bench B: Tex Hamer 1926 B: Hank Gillo 1922 B: Tex Grigg 1923 B: Carl Cramer 1922 T: Bub Weller 1927 E: Luke Urban 1921 C: Larry Conover 1923 As if you couldn't guess what these guys are meant to specialize in. Punk Berryman was in truth a one year wonder. He had been a Head College Coach before 1920, and had spent the last two years prior to the NFL working as an assistant at Colgate University. He took the Head Coaching job for the Frankford Yellow Jackets, their first year in the NFL. Frankford finished the year just shy of winning the title, but making an impressive 11-1-2 record and shattering the record books with 34 rushing touchdowns. This is the closest any team has probably come to being a truly smashmouth unit in the 20's. The reason he didn't return to coach the team in '25 is relatively simple; Guy Chamberlin joined the team. Guy "Player-Coach of three straight championship teams" Chamberlin. That's "Tim Tebow being replaced by Peyton Manning" tier. At any rate, the team is a combination of elements from several teams; the 1925 Pottsville Maroons, the 1927 New York Giants, the 1928 Providence Steam Roller. A few elements from teams like the 1926 Frankford Yellow Jackets and 1923 Canton Bulldogs are in place too, though those teams were looted by other scrimmage teams. The line is composed of brawlers and just about everyone in the backfield is a power runner of some type. That said, the team has a passer in George "Wildcat" Wilson, a brief-but-electric Tailback in the do-everything mold. Single Wing Clever Squad: Coach: LeRoy "Roy" Andrews- 1929 TB: Lou Smyth 1923 FB: Jack McBride 1927 BB: Tommy Hughitt 1921 WB: Hal Erickson 1925 LE: Charlie Berry 1925 LT: Gus Sonnenberg 1928 LG: Milt Rehnquist 1928 C: Clyde Smith 1928 RG: Al Nesser 1921 RT: Richard Stahlman 1927 RE: Carl Bacchus 1928 Bench B: Jack Ernst 1925 B: Wild Bill Kelly 1928 B: Rip King 1921 B: Sonny Winters 1924 E: Gus Tebell 1923 T: Steamer Horning 1922 G: Jim Welsh 1926 Cleverness is a bit hard to pin down in this case. This is not a strictly power-averse team. It's just that the team tends to work with other elements of the game aside from power. If I had to pin down a strategem, it would be deception and unpredictability. LeRoy Andrews has a rather eventful career as an NFL Coach, but he didn't hit the big time until he was paired up with Benny Friedman in 1927. He spent the next four years with Friedman, and coached some of the most hi-octane passing attacks ever seen in the actual sport of Football at that time. If there's someone who could make a "Clever" Squad work that hasn't already been grabbed up, it would be this guy. The main gimmick is that just about every player in the backfield is an adept passer. This creates all sorts of misdirection plays and other assorted tricks when you can't accurately predict which of the runners is going to throw- if any of them are going to throw. Well, it's not one hundred percent true. Hal Erickson is purely a receiving/running option as far as can be determined. Some, like Wild Bill Kelly, might be purely passers(Kelly suffered a bad knee injury in '27, reducing his running ability.) while others like Tommy Hughitt aren't complete fits but work out anyways for other reasons(Hughitt's the best possible leader for this outfit). The line isn't guaranteed to be completely "Clever" either. But these are the guys best rated to use intelligence in their line play. They are flanked by two ends who had ample experience with pass catching in their all-too-brief careers. All-Decade "B" Team: Coach Jimmy Conzelman- 1922 TB: Fritz Pollard 1921 FB: Doc Elliot 1923 BB: Jimmy Conzelman 1922 WB: Hinkey Haines 1927 LE: Ray Flaherty 1929 LT: Bull Behman 1925 LG: Rudy Comstock 1923 C: Joe Wostoupal 1929 RG: Duke Osborn 1922 RT: Duke Slater 1925 RE: Joe Rooney 1926 Bench B: Wally Diehl 1928 B: Benny Boynton 1924 B: Curly Oden 1928 B: Hap Moran 1926 E: Bird Carroll 1923 T: Russ Hathaway 1925 C: Doc Alexander 1922 This is the reason why I went with five teams for the scrimmages instead of four. Too many of the remaining Elites did not fit into the Power or Clever categories, so I came to the decision of creating a genuine "B" team, one that, if it cant mirror the "A" team, can certainly punch with them. The lineup suggests a Single Wing, but Conzelman did play for Halas and the Bears in 1920. It's not too much a stretch to turn the formation into a T. This is almost a cookie-cutter version of a standard 20's offense; Electric runner at Tailback, Team Leader and Passer at Quarterback, Line-Plunger at Fullback, Open-Field runner and catcher at Wingback(Haines is playing out of position here). Left End who is a designated receiving threat, Right End who can catch a pass but is more of a blocker. And the line is quite literally the best of what was left, apart from certain players on the Bears and Packers teams. Even the reserve backfield can replace what is lost when the starters leave the game, so there is no real relief when substitutions arrive. Nice. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatriotsWin! Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 These are some ultra dedicated posts. Incredibly impressive Z32. Waiting to see Brady named All-Decade 1st/"A" team QB for both the 2000's and 2010's teams. Would be the only player (or is it just for Qbs?) to ever be listed on 2 different All Decade teams 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zycho32 Posted February 27, 2019 Author Share Posted February 27, 2019 4 hours ago, PatriotsWin! said: These are some ultra dedicated posts. Incredibly impressive Z32. Waiting to see Brady named All-Decade 1st/"A" team QB for both the 2000's and 2010's teams. Would be the only player (or is it just for Qbs?) to ever be listed on 2 different All Decade teams Actually, I'll just spoil it for you now, there will be more than one player who gets selected for two different All-Decade teams. I'll let you figure out which ones they could be, or how many. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FalconFan13 Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 (edited) 7 hours ago, childofpudding said: Nice. You lucky im not a mod i would ban you on the spot for this evilness almost and the sad part is i knew it was coming Edited February 27, 2019 by FalconFan13 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 Whew. Finally got around to reading the whole thing. You are insane and as the mod of this forum I love it. Keep up the great work for spoilers do {spoiler}TEXT{/spoiler} but with normal brackets 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugger Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 What a great history lesson! So many of these players from the NFL's formative years have been mostly forgotten by folks today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dtait93 Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 tldr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJerseypaint Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 I'm not convinced that @Zycho32 isn't about to publish a entire book through FF. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter2_1 Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 Oh my god. Fair play to you, OP. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.