Re: You're Forgetting Da Bears

On Jan 31, 1:33 pm, je.s.t...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
D <ftballtennis...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
might not be as great as you think. Just being bigger does not mean
you are stronger, or have better technique. A good example of this

No, but today's players (overall) are stronger than those of yesteryear
as well.

I'm not disagreeing with you about that, but over the last 30 years
it's not as drastic a difference in pure strength as you think.
Consider that players back then could freely use steroids, and the
players today have to try to get around those rules. I would argue
that there has been a rate of size increase that has occurred
naturally, but there has also been a move towards more rotund and
fatter players.


And you seem to be implying that somehow modern players have lesser
technique than older players.

Absolutely, especially on the offensive line. Once they allowed
offensive lineman to extend their arms in 1978 they could use leverage
to lean onto defensive players and use their weight to push them. Thus
the movement towards more heavier set offensive lineman, which took
about a decade to really show up once the older technique guys
retired. The heavier offensive lineman didn't have to use as good
technique, and could rely on their weight more as a factor. Imagine if
you could not extend your arms out, how would you pass block? It would
be based on technique, hand-fighting, and quickness.



Horne and Covert. One offseason today and they would easily gain 20
pounds of muscle and fat. It's the interior of the offensive line that

That's the problem, we're not talkign about "what if they were given
all of the advantages of modern athletes", but rather - what if we
could face them off *directly* as-is.

Willie Gault is fast by any standard. This was an olympian. How good
you thought of him as a receiver is one thing, but it wasn't because
he'd be slow by modern standards.

Looking at Wikipedia (40 yard dash entry)

Gault's numbers are a bit wacky (some of his supposed times are better
than the world record), it seems safe to say he was in the 4.1 and 4.2
range.

Ted Ginn: 4.15
DeAngelo Hall: 4.15
Randy Moss: 4.25
Devin Hester: 4.5
Reggie Bush: 4.33
Ellis Hobbs: 4.39
Michael Bennet: 4.13
Laveraneus Coles: 4.16
Ike Taylor: 4.18
etc
etc

Yes, he would have still been fast.  Consider though that coming out
of college that Randy Moss was in the same neighborhood plus he's, well,
Randy Moss.

Willie Gault might have even gotten faster with the stuff that
sprinters use these days. But that said, Gault wasn't that good a
reciever.

-D
.

Relevant Pages