Leader Posted January 24, 2018 Author Share Posted January 24, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 4 hours ago, Leader said: Well here ya go....for all those eager for some fast, aggressive action! "While we don’t know what a Brian Gutekunst philosophy is, there’s ample reason to believe the Thompson mantra was truly Thompson’s and not a franchise-wide shared vision" https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2018/1/23/16923082/ted-thompson-gm-tree-history-brian-gutekunst-packers-free-agency-aggressive-approach-offseason-2018 This article completely misses the cap situations of these teams. The 05 Packers were in salary hell. I'm about 85% sure only the Raiders were even close to that, and the Raiders were basically able to cut everybody. As soon as Thompson got the teams books under control, he went out and signed a bunch of guys very much in line with the rest of the GMs. This isn't even a Thompson thing, this is an every GM thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 9 hours ago, Hands said: When BB wins three NFL championships in a row....I'll think about it. Only having to play 2 playoff games in a 13 team league probably helped. If you want to make the argument for Lombardi, that's your right. It's just a weak argument to try and compare them apples to apples when that's obviously not the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Speaking of apples... I've also read that it was a more talented league back in the 60's, because the talent wasn't diluted across 32 teams. They also had 40 man rosters instead of 53. That's even more dilution. Does that mean Lombardi won against better competition than what today's teams face ? Opinions vary Lombardi lost only 1 Championship game. BB has lost multiple AFC CGs and multiple Super Bowls. He even lost one to the Green Bay Packers in 1996* If people wanna blow BB, there are any number of forums around the web for that "activity" This isn't one of them.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 2 minutes ago, Shanedorf said: Speaking of apples... I've also read that it was a more talented league back in the 60's, because the talent wasn't diluted across 32 teams. They also had 40 man rosters instead of 53. That's even more dilution. Does that mean Lombardi won against better competition than what today's teams face ? Opinions vary Lombardi lost only 1 Championship game. BB has lost multiple AFC CGs and multiple Super Bowls. He even lost one to the Green Bay Packers in 1996* If people wanna blow BB, there are any number of forums around the web for that "activity" This isn't one of them.... Bill Parcells was the HC for NE in 1996 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Just now, AlexGreen#20 said: Only having to play 2 playoff games in a 13 team league probably helped. To be fair, Belichick just played Mariota and Bortles and he played Ossweiler last year. And he's playing Foles in the Super Bowl this year. Belichick hasn't been running some gauntlet of Aaron Rodgers clones each and every year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 5 minutes ago, Shanedorf said: Speaking of apples... I've also read that it was a more talented league back in the 60's, because the talent wasn't diluted across 32 teams. They also had 40 man rosters instead of 53. That's even more dilution. Does that mean Lombardi won against better competition than what today's teams face ? Opinions vary Lombardi lost only 1 Championship game. BB has lost multiple AFC CGs and multiple Super Bowls. He even lost one to the Green Bay Packers in 1996* If people wanna blow BB, there are any number of forums around the web for that "activity" This isn't one of them.... Then you have never looked at the sizes of players or watched games. They're slow, fundamentals are horrible, and schemes are archaic. If more than a handful of players who played in the 60s could play today, I would be stunned. Jerry Kramer who made the All-Decade team at Guard played at 245 pounds. With no free agency, player acquisition was a complete crap shoot and there weren't the leveling mechanisms that you have now to ensure parity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Just now, HorizontoZenith said: To be fair, Belichick just played Mariota and Bortles and he played Ossweiler last year. And he's playing Foles in the Super Bowl this year. Belichick hasn't been running some gauntlet of Aaron Rodgers clones each and every year. That's not untrue, however, you would always rather play 2 games than 3. Even if you have a 60% chance of winning those three games, you're still doing worse statistically than 2 games that are a coin flip. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 21 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Then you have never looked at the sizes of players or watched games. They're slow, fundamentals are horrible, and schemes are archaic. If more than a handful of players who played in the 60s could play today, I would be stunned. Jerry Kramer who made the All-Decade team at Guard played at 245 pounds. With no free agency, player acquisition was a complete crap shoot and there weren't the leveling mechanisms that you have now to ensure parity. If Jerry Kramer played today, he would have the same benefits of training and nutrition and steroids as the current players have. If you took all of that science and knowledge away from today's players and dropped them into the 1960's- they'd be the same as the guys that played in that era That's why its an impossible scenario. The guys in the 60s also played a much rougher and brutal game, today's players hurt themselves by flopping and calling for flags They'd be laughed out of the league as epic ******* for pulling that crapola in yesteryear. Apples and oranges Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Just now, Shanedorf said: If Jerry Kramer played today, he would have the same benefits of training and nutrition and steroids as the current players have. If you took all of that science and knowledge away from today's players and dropped them into the 1960's- they'd be the same as the guys that played in that era That's why its an impossible scenario. The guys in the 60s also played a much rougher and brutal game, today's players hurt themselves by flopping and calling for flags They'd be laughed out of the league as epic ******* for pulling that crapola in yesteryear. Apples and oranges You don't think athletes are naturally better now than they were in the 60s? You don't think a 16 year old Jadeveon Clowney would be a top of the line NFL player? Also,bull**** guys played a rougher and brutal game in the 60s. Why do you say that? Athletes were WAY less explosive and hitting with way less force. This bull**** older generation idea that players now are soft and weak is idiotic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 6 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: You don't think athletes are naturally better now than they were in the 60s? You don't think a 16 year old Jadeveon Clowney would be a top of the line NFL player? Also,bull**** guys played a rougher and brutal game in the 60s. Why do you say that? Athletes were WAY less explosive and hitting with way less force. This bull**** older generation idea that players now are soft and weak is idiotic. It's just the evolution of athlete. It's not like the 60s football players were 6'1 230 and there were tons of 6'5 250 guys around in other sports. The guys who played FB then we're the biggest, best football players in the world, just like the guys today are. Lombardi isn't coaching against today's teams just like BB isn't coaching in the 60s. You can't hold it against the players or coaches of those eras that they're players werent as big or fast, they were playing against guys equally matched to their players just like today. Also I was able to spend a good deal of time with Willie Wood through the years as he was a friend to one on my great grandparents. Players of that era ended their careers in a lot rougher shape than today. Equipment is leagues better today, science and the general mindset of players is different. Guys aren't out there looking to inflict pain on their opponent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOnlyThing Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 6 hours ago, Leader said: Well here ya go....for all those eager for some fast, aggressive action! "While we don’t know what a Brian Gutekunst philosophy is, there’s ample reason to believe the Thompson mantra was truly Thompson’s and not a franchise-wide shared vision" https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2018/1/23/16923082/ted-thompson-gm-tree-history-brian-gutekunst-packers-free-agency-aggressive-approach-offseason-2018 Going to be fun seeing Gut utilize all methods for adding players, especially veterans from around the league rather than just foisting a bunch of undrafted rookies on the coaches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted January 24, 2018 Author Share Posted January 24, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasquatch Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 2 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said: To be fair, Belichick just played Mariota and Bortles and he played Ossweiler last year. And he's playing Foles in the Super Bowl this year. Belichick hasn't been running some gauntlet of Aaron Rodgers clones each and every year. Speaking of which, it’s a shame the world hasn’t seen at least two, maybe three Rodgers/Brady Super Bowls. Given Brady’s age now, we’ll be lucky to see even one. Pity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bignutz Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 2 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Then you have never looked at the sizes of players or watched games. They're slow, fundamentals are horrible, and schemes are archaic. If more than a handful of players who played in the 60s could play today, I would be stunned. Jerry Kramer who made the All-Decade team at Guard played at 245 pounds. With no free agency, player acquisition was a complete crap shoot and there weren't the leveling mechanisms that you have now to ensure parity. I don't think he's comparing the two just saying that even today, if you cut the number of players a team could have there would be more completion for positions an a particular team 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.