1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

NFL Week 17--The Harold Carmichael Edition

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Chef2, Dec 23, 2019.

  1. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    When they didn't put Watt on the team, you knew the fix was in. I mean come on. I have no argument with Sayers making it, he was astounding, but Watt has accomplished way more in his injury-riddled career than Sayers did in his. I forget which NFL writer said on twitter that to omit the last decade of 100 years is to ignore 10 percent of your great players.
     
  2. poindexter

    poindexter Well-Known Member

    Sigh..i hate all time lists.
    Truly doubt there is a man alive who can properly evaluate a Luckman vs. a Favre.

    Anyways, i do know that staubach was approaching the prime of his career, and his HOF coach was still deciding between him and Craig Morton.
     
  3. 3_Octave_Fart

    3_Octave_Fart Well-Known Member

    I hate lists. A shitty way of evaluating excellence. Greatness isn't supposed to be rankable.
     
  4. Della9250

    Della9250 Well-Known Member

    I don't get how Joe Thomas wasn't one of the seven tackles, namely in Walter Jones' spot.

    I don't get Willie Lanier making the list at all. I would have much rather given his spot to JJ Watt or used it to put Brees on there. I get how they wanted a QB for all eras but I think they could have easily cut Shane Lechler, or Lanier or a running back so the RB/QB split would have been an even 11/11 and you don't have the all-time leader in every significant passing category adding to those totals left out every week. Also, not that they are going for inclusion of every franchise, but it would give a New Orleans presence on the list, which it currently does not.

    I don't get how you can call your list the 100 greatest players but then also call it an all-time roster. Because you can't have them be the same thing -- especially when you use four of those spots for two kickers and two punters.
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2019
  5. heyabbott

    heyabbott Well-Known Member

    When Tarkenton retired in 1978 he was the career yardage leader and TD passing leader. He did it in a time when pass interference was half what it is today. He did it in the 60s and 70s when defenses hit hard and often. He did it when Deacon Jones made a career out of head slapping offensive lineman. He did it when pro football was really tough and the running back was king. And his career records stood for about 15 years, until Marino. He was better or at least as great as Staubach. Favre, as was noted above, while great, isn’t top 10 great.

    And Carl Eller is deserving as DE.
     
  6. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    I hope they ask Belichik who are the first five players he'd cut. He'll an
    I was going to rip the Staubach pick - based on an 85 passer rating, but there is only one player who played in his era or before him with a higher rate (Otto Graham at 86 and change)
     
  7. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    I'm still not sure Staubach belongs. You could easily argue that Tarkenton was every bit as good for a longer period of time. Of course, I get that Staubach has a couple of Super Bowl rings and he was the MVP once. Then you could get into Bradshaw, who has four rings and was MVP twice, including one of his team's two head-to-head victories over Staubach's Cowboys.
     
  8. Elliotte Friedman

    Elliotte Friedman Moderator Staff Member

    Im curious about this....can you provide any more info?
     
  9. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

  10. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    I cannot provide more information because that is pure speculation on my part. But Belichick was on the voting committee, and I assume if he felt that way, he'd have made his views known. For all I know, there was significant committee sentiment for not having any current players on at all, and Belichick had to remind them a list without Brady would lack a certain credibility. When old-timers get together for sports greatness decisions, weird things happen.
     
  11. LanceyHoward

    LanceyHoward Well-Known Member

    I think Tarkenton is the Frank Gore of quarterbacks. A good but not great player who was very durable.

    Tarkenton played 18 years. Most of his predecessors at the position such as Van Brocklin, Luckman and Graham played 10-12. Tarkenton also started in 1961 which was the first year the NFL expanded to a 14 game schedule. So Fran played in a lot more games.

    Tarkenton was also very durable and productive throughout his entire career. Unitas, who was a contemporary, also played 18 years from 1956-1973. But Unitas as also only started in 185 games in his career and Tarkenton started in 239. But Unitas was named first team all-NFL five times and Tarkenton just once.

    As someone who watched Tarkenton I thought he never quite had the arm talent to be considered as an all-timer.
     
  12. tapintoamerica

    tapintoamerica Well-Known Member

    In 1959, the NFL had 12 teams. Johnny Unitas represented 8% of starting QBs but threw for 16% of the league's TDs. Pretty good one.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page