The Thread Where People Argue About Kneeling in the NFL (merged)

#3,376
#3,376
1972 Grad said:
I think there are 32 teams with 53 players each. That represents the best 1,696 football players in the country. If there were 10 teams with 53 players, do you not think that you would then have the best 530 players, and player 531 to 1696 would not be quite as good as players 1 through 530?

You would be watching the 10 best qb's, instead of number 11 through 32. If you had 100 teams, then the quality of play would be that much worse. I can't believe that you believe what you are saying. Anytime you have more players, they are not as good.
Click to expand...

This is not true at all. If the talent pool grows faster than the league, then you are wrong. If the skills improve faster than the league grows, then you are wrong.

There were 12 teams in 1959. The US population was 178M. It's almost double that today. Now factor in that football is the most popular sport now, unlike in 1959 when it was 3rd to baseball and boxing. After free agency became a thing, the money got a lot better. Jim Brown isn't quitting to go do the movies if he's making $15M per year. Now factor in that training, scheming, diet, health, rehab, etc. are all superior.

You can't tell me the talent was better in the 1950's. Jim Brown was special because there was only one guy like him. Derrick Henry is bigger, faster, and maybe even stronger than Jim Brown and he's an average RB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,378
#3,378
DancingOutlaw said:
It’s not silly. I don’t understand your fascism with regards to other people’s opinions. The enjoyment derived from entertainment is completely subjective. You may find a soccer match enthralling, I may go mow the yard. Neither of us is “wrong” because there’s no right or wrong here.
Click to expand...

That's why I said "if you're a football fan", which it sounds like you are not since you cited an example of a sport you do not like and acted like it's a 1:1 comparison.

Fascism? LOL
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3,379
#3,379
1972 Grad said:
Gifford died of brain disease brought on by CTE.
Click to expand...

He died at age 85 of natural causes. They found out he had CTE after he died. You can get CTE from a seemingly healthy HS football career. It doesn't mean you had concussions that wrecked you for 4 days, which is what happened to Aikman.
 
#3,381
#3,381
n_huffhines said:
This is not true at all. If the talent pool grows faster than the league, then you are wrong. If the skills improve faster than the league grows, then you are wrong.

There were 12 teams in 1959. The US population was 178M. It's almost double that today. Now factor in that football is the most popular sport now, unlike in 1959 when it was 3rd to baseball and boxing. After free agency became a thing, the money got a lot better. Jim Brown isn't quitting to go do the movies if he's making $15M per year. Now factor in that training, scheming, diet, health, rehab, etc. are all superior.

You can't tell me the talent was better in the 1950's. Jim Brown was special because there was only one guy like him. Derrick Henry is bigger, faster, and maybe even stronger than Jim Brown and he's an average RB.
Click to expand...
If there were 10 NFL teams, for which team would Josh McCown, Jay Cutler, and Blake Bortles play at qb?
 
#3,382
#3,382
1972 Grad said:
If there were 10 NFL teams, for which team would Josh McCown, Jay Cutler, and Blake Bortles play at qb?
Click to expand...

How would I know? I barely know who the good QB's were in 1959, why would I know who the bad ones are. You forgot the bad ones, it seems. Unless you are saying they were somehow all good?

Also, you are focusing on one position. There are 22 starters plus special teams.

Just look at the kicking game where nothing about the sport has drastically changed, except the skill involved. The worst kickers today would have been the best kickers back then. There is no comparison.

In 1959, 4 out of 12 teams threw more TD's than INT's. Josh McCown would have been just fine, back then.
 

Attachments

  • Capture.jpg
    Capture.jpg
    60.4 KB · Views: 1
#3,383
#3,383
n_huffhines said:
How would I know? I barely know who the good QB's were in 1959, why would I know who the bad ones are. You forgot the bad ones, it seems. Unless you are saying they were somehow all good?

Also, you are focusing on one position. There are 22 starters plus special teams.

Just look at the kicking game where nothing about the sport has drastically changed, except the skill involved. The worst kickers today would have been the best kickers back then. There is no comparison.

In 1959, 4 out of 12 teams threw more TD's than INT's. Josh McCown would have been just fine, back then.
Click to expand...
You are misunderstanding my point. If there were only 10 teams TODAY, would the quality of play be better or worse? Would the overall qb play be better or worse? If there were 100 teams today, would the quality of play be better or worse? For which of the 10 teams today would McCown start ?

I am not saying that the players aren't bigger, stronger, faster, and more athletic today. I am saying that the quality of play is not what it could be. The quarterback position is what is noticed the most.

As far as kicking goes, a lot has changed. The entire method of place kicking has changed. There was no such thing as a soccer style place kicker until the 60's.
 
Last edited:
#3,384
#3,384
1972 Grad said:
You are misunderstanding my point. If there were only 10 teams TODAY, would the quality of play be better or worse? Would the overall qb play be better or worse? If there were 100 teams today, would the quality of play be better or worse? For which of the 10 teams today would McCown start ?

I am not saying that the players aren't bigger, stronger, faster, and more athletic today. I am saying that the quality of play is not what it could be. The quarterback position is what is noticed the most.
Click to expand...

I guess I misunderstood your point because I don't understand how this relates to the conversation about old vs new and which is better.

As far as kicking goes, a lot has changed. The entire method of place kicking has changed. There was no such thing as a soccer style place kicker until the 60's.
Click to expand...

Yes, like I said, the only thing that has changed is the skill. Soccer style kicking is a skill.
 
#3,385
#3,385
The first soccer style kickers that I remember seeing were the Gogolak brothers, Pete and Charlie in about the mid-60's. I think Pete was first in the AFL (Buffalo Bills ?), and Charlie signed with the NY Giants in the NFL.

When I was a freshman at U.T. in 1967, Karl Kremser was the first soccer style kicker to kick at U.T. Gary Wright (straight ahead style) was a senior and the starting place kicker then, and he caught his toe in the turf during football practice on a kickoff, and tore his ACL. I had a class with him, and he was on crutches the whole 1967 football season, and Kremser became the starter. After Kremser left, we went back to a straight ahead kicker in George Hunt. At least that is my memory of it.
 
#3,387
#3,387
n_huffhines said:
Everybody in the 80's was a soccer style kicker and the kickers are far better now.
Click to expand...
There is more room for error kicking soccer style. When kicking straight on, if the ball is set up tilted, or your first step is slightly to the side, or you hit it barely off the center point of your shoe when kicking, you are screwed. Distance isn't the main problem.
 
#3,388
#3,388
n_huffhines said:
That's why I said "if you're a football fan", which it sounds like you are not since you cited an example of a sport you do not like and acted like it's a 1:1 comparison.

Fascism? LOL
Click to expand...

Again, what is your obsession with quantifying completely subjective “fandom”? If you don’t like watching the NFL you don’t like football? Says who? You? I don’t like watching NFL because I have no attachment to it. I went to UT. I’ve watched dozens and dozens of UT games. If I’m not a football fan what was I doing during that time? Is a Patriots fan more of a football fan than a Browns fan? Obviously one watches better football than the other, and a true football fan strives to watch the most perfect football available.

Reminds me of the Calvin and Hobbes cartoon where his dad says according to his cycling stats and heart monitor he is having a good time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,390
#3,390
1972 Grad said:
I take it you never saw Chuck Bednarik, Ray Nitschke, and Dick Butkus play.
Click to expand...

1046.jpg


vs

images
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,391
#3,391
DancingOutlaw said:
Again, what is your obsession with quantifying completely subjective “fandom”? If you don’t like watching the NFL you don’t like football? Says who? You? I don’t like watching NFL because I have no attachment to it. I went to UT. I’ve watched dozens and dozens of UT games. If I’m not a football fan what was I doing during that time? Is a Patriots fan more of a football fan than a Browns fan? Obviously one watches better football than the other, and a true football fan strives to watch the most perfect football available.

Reminds me of the Calvin and Hobbes cartoon where his dad says according to his cycling stats and heart monitor he is having a good time.
Click to expand...

That convo is separate from this one. I'm saying if you are a fan of football, objectively that was a good game. I don't care what teams you like or what league you like. If a game has big defensive plays, a healthy amount of scoring, several lead changes, and an exciting finish, that is a great game.

You're not man enough to simply say "my bad, I didn't actually watch the game". You triple down on this stupid idea that it wasn't a good game and you're trying to bring up old conversations because you got nothing else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3,393
#3,393
n_huffhines said:
Seriously, look how out of shape 77 looks compared to guys today.

Why post a pic of a modern guy out of pads?...he still looks bigger.
Click to expand...

Look, he wears gloves. These guys today couldn't play back in those days. They have heaters and cooling misting fans on the sidelines. The old days, they were much tougher.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#3,394
#3,394
AirVol said:
Look, he wears gloves. These guys today couldn't play back in those days. They have heaters and cooling misting fans on the sidelines. The old days, they were much tougher.
Click to expand...

So because misting fans got invented, you somehow conclude that they couldn't have played without them? JFC, dude.
 
#3,395
#3,395
n_huffhines said:
So because misting fans got invented, you somehow conclude that they couldn't have played without them? JFC, dude.
Click to expand...

self propulsion got invented too, why don't they wear those to get around the field?

You aren't getting my point. Those cute glasses you wear must squeeze really hard against your head.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#3,396
#3,396
AirVol said:
self propulsion got invented too, why don't they wear those to get around the field?

You aren't getting my point. Those cute glasses you wear must squeeze really hard against your head.
Click to expand...

Why don't they wear self propulsion?

Maybe come up with a complete thought and then insult people for being dumb.
 
#3,398
#3,398
n_huffhines said:
**** all o' that. Forget I responded and lemme just say you used the dumbest analogy ever.
Click to expand...

Come on Huff. In the old days men were men and women were women. Now days men can be women and women can be men. Old school football was played by men that respected their country and women, now it's played by people that collect millions of dollars and give a middle finger to the folks watching in the stands.
I could go on and on, but I'll leave it there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#3,399
#3,399
VolStrom said:
Come on Huff. In the old days men were men and women were women. Now days men can be women and women can be men. Old school football was played by men that respected their country and women, now it's played by people that collect millions of dollars and give a middle finger to the folks watching in the stands.
I could go on and on, but I'll leave it there.
Click to expand...

Ramblings of a crazy old man.

You think NFL players respected women back in the day compared to today? Like honestly, society held women down, and somehow the NFL players were more progressive than the NFL players now? Old perv Joe Namath is trying to kiss sideline reporters and you think the guys in his day respected women?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#3,400
#3,400
n_huffhines said:
Ramblings of a crazy old man.

You think NFL players respected women back in the day compared to today? Like honestly, society held women down, and somehow the NFL players were more progressive than the NFL players now? Old perv Joe Namath is trying to kiss sideline reporters and you think the guys in his day respected women?
Click to expand...

VIDEO: NFL Football Player Ray Rice Punches Girlfriend In Elevator - YouTube

Well did you forget about Ray Rice? I think I'd take a kiss over a beat down any day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top