Jump to content
3rivers

NFL 100 team

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, BlaqOptic said:

Watt was literally the best last year...

Watt at his peak was a better DL than Gronk was a TE. Watt was winning awards defined by an entire side of the ball; Gronk was winning awards defined by a single position.  And at least 5 of his 9 seasons Gronk could very easily not have been argued as the best TE in the league that season. And I say that as a Gronk homer. This list is a bad list. 

What are these 5 seasons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill is great on these reveal shows their doing

I hope he does shows with NFL network after he retires...it can be on the history of the league, shows breaking down film etc..I'd watch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, CP3MVP said:

What are these 5 seasons

The five in which he was not a First Team All-Pro?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact Gronk made it and not LT is embarrassing and shows how petty Bill is. What a joke. Of modren era players.

Edited by Bearerofnews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Bearerofnews said:

The fact Gronk made it and not LT is embarrassing and shows how petty Bill is. What a joke. Of modren era players.

There was an entire panel of people that voted, or put together the list. For all we know, Bill was in Tomlinson's corner. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, PapaShogun said:

There was an entire panel of people that voted, or put together the list. For all we know, Bill was in Tomlinson's corner. 

Doubtful after that "classless" comment LT made. But yeah could of been. The panel should be impeached.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2019 at 7:37 PM, viper952 said:

LT doesn't wow you like others.

Probably would be fair to say he's a poor man's Walter Payton.

Now Peterson has the wow factor

If LT didnt wow you, than you werent watching him.  Might want to go refresh your memory and watch LT highlights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/13/2019 at 7:52 PM, lancerman said:

Clark was considered the best football player of the 30's. Not best RB of the 30's, best player in the league period. Sammy Baugh and Don Hutson who revolutionized their positions also played in that decade for the record and AP named Clark the best NFL player. 

He played in an era where RB's were more important. He was the star player on a championship team and it wasn't debateable that he was the best by a large margin on that team. 

He was also one of the best defenders in the league, he could pass, he could kick etc. He was probably the most well rounded and complete player in history from being able to do everything. 

Also twice as many first team All Pros as LT. 

If LT played back then his career likely would have ended when he got that first knee injury, he would have been asked to play defense to, and he would have played on a ****tier fields. 

And no high school athletes would still get killed by those players. Guys like Jim Thorpe played back then

And yet he still wasnt as good as LT. Sorry the game and athletes have changed since the 30s. Any accomplishments or feats in the 30s, when players were plumbers and electricians and avg athletes doesnt compare to achievements in modern era, where NFL players are the best athletes pound for pound in the world, where schemes are dedicated to stopping RBs.

No RB in history has more than 6 consecutive seasons of 1100 yds rushing and 10+ plus. LT had 8 and some of those behind horrible olines.

LT is the only RB with atleast 8 consecutive seasons with 1500 yfs. 

What argument are you trying to make exactly? That LT doesnt belong on the list?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bearerofnews said:

And yet he still wasnt as good as LT. Sorry the game and athletes have changed since the 30s. Any accomplishments or feats in the 30s, when players were plumbers and electricians and avg athletes doesnt compare to achievements in modern era, where NFL players are the best athletes pound for pound in the world, where schemes are dedicated to stopping RBs.

No RB in history has more than 6 consecutive seasons of 1100 yds rushing and 10+ plus. LT had 8 and some of those behind horrible olines.

LT is the only RB with atleast 8 consecutive seasons with 1500 yfs. 

What argument are you trying to make exactly? That LT doesnt belong on the list?

If you are going to make the argument that a guy who was probably the best athlete in the NFL of a generation shouldn't get on it despite making more of an impact in an era where RB's were more valuable because LT has more volume stats in an era he had more advantages then we can't agree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, lancerman said:

If you are going to make the argument that a guy who was probably the best athlete in the NFL of a generation shouldn't get on it despite making more of an impact in an era where RB's were more valuable because LT has more volume stats in an era he had more advantages then we can't agree. 

This is supposed to be the 100 best players of all time. That list doesn't include scrubs from the 30s man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, lancerman said:

If you are going to make the argument that a guy who was probably the best athlete in the NFL of a generation shouldn't get on it despite making more of an impact in an era where RB's were more valuable because LT has more volume stats in an era he had more advantages then we can't agree. 

Best athlete of the 30s is like saying the fastest slow car. Also what impact did he have? When his career production (which is usually an indicator of impact) is equivalent to 3 season of LT's production.

There is no argument that exist on why LT shouldn't be on the list.

Edited by Bearerofnews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, TXsteeler said:

This is supposed to be the 100 best players of all time. That list doesn't include scrubs from the 30s man.

And it's all supposed to account for every era. At some point you have to account for differences in era. If LT played back then his knee injury would have ended his career, he would have played with more stacked boxes and worse QB's when he did catch balls. He would have been asked to play both ways as well. Either you accept it's a 100 years of the NFL list or you don't. But the idea that you only account for one rule set and circumstance in the modern era is foolish for the purposes of this list. In the granshcheme of football, Clark was much more significant in his era than LT was in his. By that same rational Hutson shouldn't make the list either. It's pure recency bias. And obviously the people making the list didn't agree with you. Nor did they 25 years ago when guys like Baugh made the list

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, lancerman said:

And it's all supposed to account for every era. At some point you have to account for differences in era. If LT played back then his knee injury would have ended his career, he would have played with more stacked boxes and worse QB's when he did catch balls. He would have been asked to play both ways as well. Either you accept it's a 100 years of the NFL list or you don't. But the idea that you only account for one rule set and circumstance in the modern era is foolish for the purposes of this list. In the granshcheme of football, Clark was much more significant in his era than LT was in his. By that same rational Hutson shouldn't make the list either. It's pure recency bias. And obviously the people making the list didn't agree with you. Nor did they 25 years ago when guys like Baugh made the list

LT prolly wouldnt of hurt his knee back then, playing against smaller and slower defenders. Also in the 30s they weren't stacking boxes to defend the run game. You keep saying Clark was more significant in his era. Why? How? By what measure.  Because he played both ways, because he produced less in an inferior era vs inferior players who werent even full time players vs much more basic formations and schemes.. in an era when olinemen could basically choke hold defenders. How many penalties negated big plays by LT vs Clark.

Ask any real panel of former players who the better RB and player is, its LT. LT is on all top RB list, Clark doesnt sniff anyone.

 

Only thing we established by this panel is, they are completely bias towars yesteryears, they are old and out of touch, they are compensating far too much for the "100" years.

There is 3 or 4 RBs who have a legit claim over LT on this list, if they were truly going by top 12 RBs all time. The fact that they picked 12, doesnt validate the quality of the panel, it only voids it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't necessarily agree with all the decisions(Gates over Gronk and LT/Faulk over Gale/Simpson and Joe Thomas needed to be on that list).  However, all those guys are more recent guys and it's very clear that they are focusing more on the older guys.  Once I accept how they weighed guys, I am perfectly fine with the list.  It's fun to hear the stories.

But easily the best part is hearing BB talk football.  I could listen to it all day.  The list itself is almost secondary to hearing BB talk football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bearerofnews said:

LT prolly wouldnt of hurt his knee back then, playing against smaller and slower defenders. Also in the 30s they weren't stacking boxes to defend the run game. You keep saying Clark was more significant in his era. Why? How? By what measure.  Because he played both ways, because he produced less in an inferior era vs inferior players who werent even full time players vs much more basic formations and schemes.. in an era when olinemen could basically choke hold defenders. How many penalties negated big plays by LT vs Clark.

Ask any real panel of former players who the better RB and player is, its LT. LT is on all top RB list, Clark doesnt sniff anyone.

 

Only thing we established by this panel is, they are completely bias towars yesteryears, they are old and out of touch, they are compensating far too much for the "100" years.

There is 3 or 4 RBs who have a legit claim over LT on this list, if they were truly going by top 12 RBs all time. The fact that they picked 12, doesnt validate the quality of the panel, it only voids it. 

LT would have played on worse fields and would have been asked to play both sides and the pass game wasn’t as pronounced so he’d shoulder the burden more. He’d definitely get hanged up more 

LT isn’t even a top 5 all time if you only consider the 60’s on. 
 

Maybe switch Sayers out for him, but aside from that all the SB era guys are better, Brown was better. And the rest are such a different era it’s nearly impossible to compare 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×