Football NFL to name a team of the 100 greatest players of all time - Page 3

**TinyEvel** · 07-23-2019, 06:56 PM

Rich Eisen announced today, as part of the NFL 100th year.
Eisen, Chris Collinsworth and (wait for it) Hoodie will be hosting the 6-week series.

Thoughts?

There's about 300 Hall of Fame inductees, so roughly 2/3 won't make it to the all time team, and that doesn't include Mahomes, etc. who are still playing.

Over/under on how many Chiefs?

https://twitter.com/richeisen/status...467344386?s=12

Redbled · 07-24-2019, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amnorix

WRs then were Alworth, Berry, Hutson, Rice.

Rice definitely stays, and Hutson probably does too. He was the Rice of his era -- completely rewrote everything. Berry and Alworth are out in favor of Moss and someone -- could be a few different guys -- Julio, Megatron, TO, Larry Fitz.

TE -- Ditka and Kellen Winslow both replaced -- TonyG and Gronk.

No way Gronk is on it only playing 9 years.

Mile High Mania · 07-24-2019, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redbled

No way Gronk is on it only playing 9 years.

You might be right... he's 104th all time on receiving yards and tied for 28th in TDs. But, the recency thing and the Patriots stuff may push him over.

Amnorix · 07-24-2019, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redbled

No way Gronk is on it only playing 9 years.

Perhaps not. I don't consider 9 years short, but he didn't even play all of those 9 years.

But he's still the best TE I ever saw. If I had one game to win and any single player in NFL history at TE for that game, it'd be Gronk.

Amnorix · 07-24-2019, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania

You might be right... he's 104th all time on receiving yards and tied for 28th in TDs. But, the recency thing and the Patriots stuff may push him over.

Well, 3rd all-time in touchdowns for a TE. Gates, Gonzalez, then Gronk.

Only TE to lead all receivers in touchdowns in a season.

Only TE to have 3+ seasons with 10+ TDs and 1,000+ yards.

Tied most seasons by a TE with 1,000+ yards

On the plus side, let's face it, he was a much better blocker than TonyG or Gates....or most any other TE ever who was any good as a receiver. His passer target rating was ridiculous, as was his TD/game ratio.

On the minus side, his stats are inflated by playing with Brady his whole career, as opposed to some schmucks. I didn't both listing any of his many playoff/SB records, because those are a function of the teams he played with. They should help his HOF candidacy, but I don't think it's fair to post them compared to Gonzalez/Gates/whoever for who should be on the top 100 list.

Bottom line -- if you told me we're creating an NFL league that will last 10 years only, and I had my pick of any TE ever, I'd take Gronk. Utterly dominant.

Deberg_1990 · 07-24-2019, 11:15 AM

Just a hunch, but I’m guessing OJ Simpson gets bumped.

Deberg_1990 · 07-24-2019, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Well, 3rd all-time in touchdowns for a TE. Gates, Gonzalez, then Gronk.

Only TE to lead all receivers in touchdowns in a season.

Only TE to have 3+ seasons with 10+ TDs and 1,000+ yards.

Tied most seasons by a TE with 1,000+ yards

On the plus side, let's face it, he was a much better blocker than TonyG or Gates....or most any other TE ever who was any good as a receiver. His passer target rating was ridiculous, as was his TD/game ratio.

On the minus side, his stats are inflated by playing with Brady his whole career, as opposed to some schmucks. I didn't both listing any of his many playoff/SB records, because those are a function of the teams he played with. They should help his HOF candidacy, but I don't think it's fair to post them compared to Gonzalez/Gates/whoever for who should be on the top 100 list.

Bottom line -- if you told me we're creating an NFL league that will last 10 years only, and I had my pick of any TE ever, I'd take Gronk. Utterly dominant.

Aaron Hernandez was better.

**Rain Man** · 07-24-2019, 12:19 PM

If they have a 100-man roster with positional representation, then one would expect 5 or 6 TEs, probably five. We know that Gonzalez will be on it, and I can't imagine Winslow getting kicked off. So that would leave three open spots for TEs. Ditka will likely retain one since he was on the 75-year team. So the next two are being pulled from Gronkowski and the HoF folks on this list.

Dave Casper 1974-1984
John Mackey 1963-1972
Ozzie Newsome 1978-1990
Charlie Sanders 1968-1977
Shannon Sharpe 1990-2003
Jackie Smith 1963-1978

Mackey is always talked about as an all-time great, and I could see Gronkowski beating out Smith and Newsome for a spot despite his injury history. Mackey only had ten years, though I feel like the medical advances should give the older guys more credit for longevity over the guys who came after 1990 or so.

**New World Order** · 07-24-2019, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Well, 3rd all-time in touchdowns for a TE. Gates, Gonzalez, then Gronk.

Only TE to lead all receivers in touchdowns in a season.

Only TE to have 3+ seasons with 10+ TDs and 1,000+ yards.

Tied most seasons by a TE with 1,000+ yards

On the plus side, let's face it, he was a much better blocker than TonyG or Gates....or most any other TE ever who was any good as a receiver. His passer target rating was ridiculous, as was his TD/game ratio.

On the minus side, his stats are inflated by playing with Brady his whole career, as opposed to some schmucks. I didn't both listing any of his many playoff/SB records, because those are a function of the teams he played with. They should help his HOF candidacy, but I don't think it's fair to post them compared to Gonzalez/Gates/whoever for who should be on the top 100 list.

Bottom line -- if you told me we're creating an NFL league that will last 10 years only, and I had my pick of any TE ever, I'd take Gronk. Utterly dominant.

Gronk is too injury prone to be considered better than Tony G. He only had 2 seasons where he played a full 16 games.

Tony G was much better in the blocking game (which was much more valuable back then) and had really good numbers with crap quarterbacks. He was just as good of a receiver as Gronk without the GOAT throwing to him.

Halfcan · 07-24-2019, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Well, 3rd all-time in touchdowns for a TE. Gates, Gonzalez, then Gronk.

Only TE to lead all receivers in touchdowns in a season.

Only TE to have 3+ seasons with 10+ TDs and 1,000+ yards.

Tied most seasons by a TE with 1,000+ yards

On the plus side, let's face it, he was a much better blocker than TonyG or Gates....or most any other TE ever who was any good as a receiver. His passer target rating was ridiculous, as was his TD/game ratio.

On the minus side, his stats are inflated by playing with Brady his whole career, as opposed to some schmucks. I didn't both listing any of his many playoff/SB records, because those are a function of the teams he played with. They should help his HOF candidacy, but I don't think it's fair to post them compared to Gonzalez/Gates/whoever for who should be on the top 100 list.

Bottom line -- if you told me we're creating an NFL league that will last 10 years only, and I had my pick of any TE ever, I'd take Gronk. Utterly dominant.

Gronk played on loaded teams with a HOF QB. Gonzo played with shit QB's and was constantly held or double-teamed.

Gronk had some good years but was hurt all the time. Gonzo was always healthy and was good Every year.

Gonzo is much greater than Gronk in every category except in SB wins. And that is a team achievement.

**Rain Man** · 07-24-2019, 12:56 PM

My next question is about era. Simple math implies that, among the top 100 players of the past 100 years, you'd expect roughly 10 from each decade of play. Setting aside differences in training and medicine and strategy evolution, there's no reason to think that players today are more dominating among their peers than the players of yesteryear, right?

So the list should rightfully include 10 players who were active in the 1920s, 10 from the 1930s, and so on.

The 1950s and 1940s are mysterious eras to me. I know a bit about the pioneers from the 20s and 30s, and I know about the players I've seen from the 1970s on. I feel like I know the 1960s because that era was kind of televised and it was recent history when I started watching football.

But the 40s and the 50s are a big black hole for me in football knowledge.

Amnorix · 07-24-2019, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by New World Order

Gronk is too injury prone to be considered better than Tony G. He only had 2 seasons where he played a full 16 games.

Tony G was much better in the blocking game (which was much more valuable back then) and had really good numbers with crap quarterbacks. He was just as good of a receiver as Gronk without the GOAT throwing to him.

TonyG was a better blocker than Gronk? Am I reading that right?

Amnorix · 07-24-2019, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halfcan

Gronk played on loaded teams with a HOF QB. Gonzo played with shit QB's and was constantly held or double-teamed.

Gonzo played with "shit" QBs for about half his career. Trent Green (6 years) was not a shit quarterback, nor was Matt Ryan (4 years). Obviously, Brady is alot better than those guys, no argument there.

Don't tell me that Gonzo was held or doubled more than Gronk. I'm sure he was held a ton, but Gronk was abused like hell, and he never had a Priest Holmes or Larry Johnson or those guys in the running game.

Quote:

Gronk had some good years but was hurt all the time. Gonzo was always healthy and was good Every year.

Yep, that's why I mentioned "one game" and the like. At his peak and healthy, Gronk is the best I ever saw. Obviously, though the injuries are a factor, and his career was substantially shorter than TonyG.

Quote:

Gonzo is much greater than Gronk in every category except in SB wins. And that is a team achievement.

"Every category"? Blocking? Yeah, no. Sorry, but just no. Gronk routinely blocked defensive ends singled up, and was involved in wham blocks on alot of very good interior rushers.

ClevelandBronco · 07-24-2019, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jewish Rabbi

If Mahomes isn’t #1 the list is shit.

If Jim Brown isn't #1 even after Mahomes retires, the list is shit.

ThaVirus · 07-24-2019, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldman

Butkus was a contemporary of Lanier. Urlacher and Singletary couldn't hold Mr. Lanier's jock.

I see now that Lanier made the 75-year team but with other names I'd still bet he gets bumped.

**Rain Man** · 07-24-2019, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco

If Jim Brown isn't #1 even after Mahomes retires, the list is shit.

Did Jim Brown win eight consecutive Super Bowls like Mahomes did? I think not.

07-23-2019, 06:56 PM
TinyEvel Just a li'l Evel Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Bald. Goatee. Jorts. Casino cash: $2229601	NFL to name a team of the 100 greatest players of all time Rich Eisen announced today, as part of the NFL 100th year. Eisen, Chris Collinsworth and (wait for it) Hoodie will be hosting the 6-week series. Thoughts? There's about 300 Hall of Fame inductees, so roughly 2/3 won't make it to the all time team, and that doesn't include Mahomes, etc. who are still playing. Over/under on how many Chiefs? https://twitter.com/richeisen/status...467344386?s=12
Posts: 12,324

07-24-2019, 11:15 AM	#35
Deberg_1990 In Search of a Life Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: San Antonio Tx. Casino cash: $104454	Just a hunch, but I’m guessing OJ Simpson gets bumped. __________________ Originally Posted by Cassel's Reckoning: Matt once made a very nice play in Seattle where he spun away from a pass rusher and hit Bowe off his back foot for a first down. One of the best plays Matt has ever made.
Posts: 68,673

07-24-2019, 12:19 PM	#37
Rain Man Seize life. Be an ermine. Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: My house Casino cash: $-682449 VARSITY	If they have a 100-man roster with positional representation, then one would expect 5 or 6 TEs, probably five. We know that Gonzalez will be on it, and I can't imagine Winslow getting kicked off. So that would leave three open spots for TEs. Ditka will likely retain one since he was on the 75-year team. So the next two are being pulled from Gronkowski and the HoF folks on this list. Dave Casper 1974-1984 John Mackey 1963-1972 Ozzie Newsome 1978-1990 Charlie Sanders 1968-1977 Shannon Sharpe 1990-2003 Jackie Smith 1963-1978 Mackey is always talked about as an all-time great, and I could see Gronkowski beating out Smith and Newsome for a spot despite his injury history. Mackey only had ten years, though I feel like the medical advances should give the older guys more credit for longevity over the guys who came after 1990 or so. __________________ Active fan of the greatest team in NFL history. Last edited by Rain Man; 07-24-2019 at 12:29 PM..
Posts: 145,512

07-24-2019, 12:56 PM	#40
Rain Man Seize life. Be an ermine. Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: My house Casino cash: $-682449 VARSITY	My next question is about era. Simple math implies that, among the top 100 players of the past 100 years, you'd expect roughly 10 from each decade of play. Setting aside differences in training and medicine and strategy evolution, there's no reason to think that players today are more dominating among their peers than the players of yesteryear, right? So the list should rightfully include 10 players who were active in the 1920s, 10 from the 1930s, and so on. The 1950s and 1940s are mysterious eras to me. I know a bit about the pioneers from the 20s and 30s, and I know about the players I've seen from the 1970s on. I feel like I know the 1960s because that era was kind of televised and it was recent history when I started watching football. But the 40s and the 50s are a big black hole for me in football knowledge. __________________ Active fan of the greatest team in NFL history.
Posts: 145,512