[quote]overstand wrote:
[quote]gregron wrote:
[quote]overstand wrote:
I hate these lists because nobody can ever decide on a criteria. A lot of the all time great old timers ie Johnny Unitas and Jim Brown were great back then and put up crazy stats but they’d get smoked if they tried to play today. Also I think Joe Montana is consensus best QB of all time (Payton Manning might pass him up by the time he retires) but a lot of QBs will be ranked higher than Dan Marino because he doesnt have a super bowl ring even though he was much better. And Brett Favre will probably be ranked way too high just because hes a likable guy and he has a few records, but they won’t mention he also has the record for most interceptions and most times sacked and only got the others through sheer volume of play.
and lol @ Mark Sanchez, he sucks [/quote]
^^ you, sir, are certifiably retarded if you think Jim Brown would “get smoked” today.
Also Bret Favre DOESN’T hold the NFL record for being sacked the most times… He’s 5th on that list. Oh and as far as “having a few records” goes… Try most passing yards ever and most TD passes ever… Yeah just a few little records there lol.
Number 1 should/will be Joe Montana. From there on it’s pretty subjective but in the top 5 should be Rice (I’d say number 2) Brown, Walter Payton and Laurence Taylor.
Not really sure how I would want to rank them but they were all amazing players. Have to put Chris Carter, Reggie White, berry Sanders and Dan Marino in the top 10.
FTR I am not a Brett favre fan. [/quote]
My point was Brett Favre only has the records because hes played for so god damn long. He has the good records but he has the bad ones too.
And Jim Brown might be able to play today, but he wouldn’t put up near the numbers he did back then. The reason he was so good is because he was the biggest fastest dude in the league. Today he’d be a run of the mill RB. Sort of like Wilt Chamberlain in basketball, dude has crazy stats but the game just wasn’t what it is today. There were no Dwight Howards defending him back then, he basically did w/e he wanted all game long. It seems like everyone puts Jim Brown #1 all time just because everybody else does.
The list is down to 60 now. Randy Moss is 65. I wouldn’t be surprised if Cris Carter gets snubbed completely, he already got snubbed for the Hall of Fame a couple times.
[/quote]
If Jim Brown were simply picked up out of nowhere and placed into today’s league, of course he would get dominated now. All of today’s players are bigger, better and faster than they were ten years ago, twenty years ago, fifty years ago, etc etc.
But if Jim Brown were born say 25 years ago and grew up with all the same advances in nutrition, weight-lifting, training in general and so on, of course he’d dominate now. He was a supreme talent. Don’t forget he’s also one of the greatest collegiate lacrosse players of all-time.
If you simply look at a player, in ANY sport, from previous generations and surmise that he wouldn’t succeed nowadays based on what his size was 50 years ago, then what’s the point of any of these “greatest of all-time” discussions? By your standards, it’s entirely conceivable that the 100 greatest players in the NFL are all in the league RIGHT NOW. Even Joe Montana or Jerry Rice wouldn’t be that great anymore. Montana was great because he was accurate, moved well in the pocket and he had great composure. But at 6’2" and about 195 lbs, he would get smashed to pieces now. But of course he would bulk up more if he played today and probably sit at around 220lbs.
Jerry Rice, same thing. He was known as a “big” receiver when he first came into the league, but at 6’2" and about 205 lbs or so, that’s only about average now. But if he came into the league now, with the advances in sports medicine and training techniques available to him that weren’t around in 1985, he’d easily be able to get to 215-220 lbs and at least maintain the same speed he had, if not improve it slightly.
The point is that if a guy was the fastest guy in the league 50 years ago, or the hardest runner or had the biggest arm or whatever, there’s no reason to believe that the same player, given the talent he had, wouldn’t be able to duplicate those traits if he grew up today.
Also, how a player would fare today compared to his own generation is immaterial in this sort of discussion anyways. We aren’t talking about what players are the greatest based on today’s standards. Look at Babe Ruth in baseball: would he fare well in today’s game? Probably not. But the way he dominated his own generation HAS to make him an all-time great. No one in any sport has dominated their generation the way he did. THAT is the ultimate test when considering who the greats are. Who dominated their generation the most? If it’s purely a physical thing, like I’ve heard with Jim Brown, then 50 years from now, NO player in today’s NFL should be on the list of 100 greatest players.
Also, Wilt Chamberlain would probably still dominate today. 7-footers with LONG wingspans will always have a place in the NBA. And as far as no Dwight Howard’s being in the league when Wilt played…uh, ever heard of a guy named Bill Russell?