1930's All-Decade Team

[oldecapecod11]

ARCHIVE

1930's All-Decade Team
Started by RebelX24, Nov 03 2013 02:39 PM

19 replies to this topic

#1 RebelX24
Forum Visitors
Posted 03 November 2013 - 02:39 PM
Time to analyze the 1930's team.

QB: Dutch Clark, Arnie Herber, Cecil Isbell
HB: Cliff Battles, Blood McNally, Beattie Feathers, Tuffy Leemans, Ken Strong
FB: Clarke Hinkle, Bronko Nagurski
End: Bill Hewitt, Don Hutson, Wayne Millner, Gaynell Tinsley
Tackle: George Christensen, Frank Cope, Turk Edwards, Bill Lee, Joe Stydahar
Guard: Ox Emerson, Dan Fortmann, Buckets Goldenberg, Russ Letlow
Center: Mel Hein, George Svendsen

There are a few things awry here, beyond anything that might have to do with positions in the backfield, a subject that Mr. Hickok had brought up in the last All-Decade thread.

Isbell doesn't belong at QB. He only played a couple years in this decade, and his best performances were actually in the early '40's. His inclusion is probably due more to his instrumentality in Green Bay's 1939 title than anything else. If you had to actually replace him, would Ace Parker have been an appropriate substitute?

I don't know much about Beattie Feathers. Was he really in the same league as the other four halfbacks on the team?

There's a lot of discussion about Millner even being HOF-worthy, so his inclusion here is debatable. He was fairly consistent, though, so I suppose there's an argument to be made in his favor. Don't know if Tinsley's a great choice. He had two monster years to close out the decade, but should that have been enough to land him on this team? What about putting a guy like Red Badgro on here?

Cope should have made the 1940's team instead of this one. I'm also not sure that Bill Lee deserves to be here, but then again, I don't know a whole heck of a lot about him.

Buckets Goldenberg doesn't belong at guard, in my opinion. George Musso would have been a far better choice.

George Svendsen seems extremely under-qualified for a team like this, and I have no idea how he made it. Something to do with the championship he helped the Packers win, a la Isbell?

#2 james
PFRA Member
Posted 03 November 2013 - 02:54 PM
RebelX24, on 03 Nov 2013 - 2:39 PM, said:
Time to analyze the 1930's team.

QB: Dutch Clark, Arnie Herber, Cecil Isbell
HB: Cliff Battles, Blood McNally, Beattie Feathers, Tuffy Leemans, Ken Strong
FB: Clarke Hinkle, Bronko Nagurski
End: Bill Hewitt, Don Hutson, Wayne Millner, Gaynell Tinsley
Tackle: George Christensen, Frank Cope, Turk Edwards, Bill Lee, Joe Stydahar
Guard: Ox Emerson, Dan Fortmann, Buckets Goldenberg, Russ Letlow
Center: Mel Hein, George Svendsen




Buckets Goldenberg doesn't belong at guard, in my opinion. George Musso would have been a far better choice.

George Musso from what I've read was on of the top Guards in the 1930's. Him and Ox Emerson were the top two Guards in the 30's, in my humble opinion.

#3 RebelX24
Forum Visitors
Posted 03 November 2013 - 03:07 PM
james, on 03 Nov 2013 - 2:54 PM, said:
George Musso from what I've read was on of the top Guards in the 1930's. Him and Ox Emerson were the top two Guards in the 30's, in my humble opinion.
I would say Musso's one of the best three. I don't think he beats out his teammate, Fortmann, for top two honors, though.

#4 james
PFRA Member
Posted 03 November 2013 - 03:34 PM
RebelX24, on 03 Nov 2013 - 3:07 PM, said:
I would say Musso's one of the best three. I don't think he beats out his teammate, Fortmann, for top two honors, though.
That is a tough one as Fortman was excellent as well. I forgot about him. Boy, did that Bears team have have two of the best Guards. If I had to chose the top three Guards of the 30's, for me it would be Musso, Fortman, and Emerson.

Center for the 30's, Mel Hein head and shoulders above everyone else.

#5 RebelX24
Forum Visitors
Posted 03 November 2013 - 03:49 PM
A couple more notes about the tackle spot.

Cal Hubbard really should have been here, probably instead of Lee. As Rozehawk pointed out in the 1920's thread, although Hubbard was listed at tackle on that team, he only played one year of the decade at that position, and really made his name at tackle in the '30's. Furthermore, Link Lyman has a pretty strong case to be on this team as another tackle, in addition to his possible worthiness to make the '20's team, which I mentioned previously. Lyman was quite a sensational player, from everything I've gathered, and he really could have been a two all-decade team player. Strange that he ended up making none.

#6 RebelX24
Forum Visitors
Posted 03 November 2013 - 04:16 PM
Oh yeah, and one other thing about halfback: Red Grange might have been included on this team (possibly instead of Feathers), as he arguably made more of a mark in this decade than in the '20's (whose team the voters actually put him on).

#7 Bob Gill
PFRA Member
Posted 03 November 2013 - 05:14 PM
QB: Dutch Clark, Arnie Herber, Cecil Isbell
HB: Cliff Battles, Blood McNally, Beattie Feathers, Tuffy Leemans, Ken Strong
FB: Clarke Hinkle, Bronko Nagurski
End: Bill Hewitt, Don Hutson, Wayne Millner, Gaynell Tinsley
Tackle: George Christensen, Frank Cope, Turk Edwards, Bill Lee, Joe Stydahar
Guard: Ox Emerson, Dan Fortmann, Buckets Goldenberg, Russ Letlow
Center: Mel Hein, George Svendsen

As someone else already pointed out, Isbell doesn't belong on this team, because he played only in 1938 and '39 and had his two best years starting in 1941.

Beattie Feathers has no business here either. For one year he was great, but that's not enough. I like the other backs, though.

At end, Millner WAS a consistently good player, but so was his teammate Charley Malone, for instance, and so was Bill Smith of the Cardinals. (Millner was probably chosen just because he's in the Hall of Fame, but that was a bad mistake.) Tinsley was better than any of them, but for only two years, which makes him a shaky choice too, as far as I'm concerned. (If two great years qualifies him, then what about Nevers, who was great in 1930 and '31?)

Hewitt and Hutson, on the other hand, were clearly the two best of the era, and they make a great pair, since Hewitt represents the early two-way ends, like Dilweg and Chamberlin, and Hutson represents the new wave of pass-catchers. I think they should just have those two and leave it at that.

Svendsen, Cope, Lee, Letlow, Goldenberg -- no way for any of them. That leaves only two guards, and I'm not sure who would be the best choice if you have to have a third. I'd say Joe Kopcha, but I think he was a tackle. He WAS a better player than any of the four guys I just mentioned, though.

#8 paulksandiego
PFRA Member
Posted 03 November 2013 - 06:00 PM
These all-decade teams were selected in 1969, as part of the NFL's 50th Anniversary celebration, which is why many of the selections look somewhat misleading in terms of the decade the players played in. I have a feeling the HOF selection committee chose the players they wanted on the all-decade teams and then just placed them in a decade in order to get them all in there. It doesn't look to me like they even voted by decade.Could also be that these were players that got votes for the all-time team and they just lumped them into their "all-decade" teams.

Had they been chosen at the end of each decade I'm sure the teams would have been much better and sensible, of course.. In my opinion, the 75th Anniversary All-decade teams were much better in terms of playing years and quality.

#9 Bob Gill
PFRA Member
Posted 03 November 2013 - 06:49 PM
paulksandiego, on 03 Nov 2013 - 6:00 PM, said:
These all-decade teams were selected in 1969, as part of the NFL's 50th Anniversary celebration, which is why many of the selections look somewhat misleading in terms of the decade the players played in. I have a feeling the HOF selection committee chose the players they wanted on the all-decade teams and then just placed them in a decade in order to get them all in there. It doesn't look to me like they even voted by decade.Could also be that these were players that got votes for the all-time team and they just lumped them into their "all-decade" teams.

I sure hope not. These teams are bad enough, but can you imagine somebody picking an ALL-TIME team and voting for Millner, Svendsen, Cope, Letlow, Lee and Goldenberg? Since it was 1969, maybe we should just write it off to LSD in the punch bowl.

#10 JuggernautJ
PFRA Member
Posted 03 November 2013 - 08:27 PM
paulksandiego, on 03 Nov 2013 - 6:00 PM, said:
These all-decade teams were selected in 1969, as part of the NFL's 50th Anniversary celebration....

And perhaps that is why Beattie Feathers was included.
The committee seems to have favored his historical importance as the first 1,000 yard rusher over career statistics.

#11 Nwebster
Forum Visitors
Posted 04 November 2013 - 08:46 AM
JuggernautJ, on 03 Nov 2013 - 8:27 PM, said:
And perhaps that is why Beattie Feathers was included.
The committee seems to have favored his historical importance as the first 1,000 yard rusher over career statistics.

I'd agree that Feathers is the most obviously odd choice. Obviously 34 was a huge and significant year, though there's been a lot of back and forth on what his actual stats were that year (particularly the questions of whether or not punt returns were included in the yardage and nust how many carries it actually took). In the end there was not a single other season of his that was significant? I cannot think of a parallel, but if Marino had had his 5000 season as a rookie then thrown in. couple more seasons as a league average passer to retire just a few years later - maybe that's similar. Either way, Feathers was really all decade based on ONE season, something I cannot recall elsewhere. Agree with previous posters on Isbell as well, though this is one of the things that's tough about all decade teams, its a method that often keeps worthy candidates out because of the calendar.

#12 Rozehawk
PFRA Member
Posted 04 November 2013 - 10:13 AM
paulksandiego, on 03 Nov 2013 - 6:00 PM, said:
These all-decade teams were selected in 1969, as part of the NFL's 50th Anniversary celebration, which is why many of the selections look somewhat misleading in terms of the decade the players played in. I have a feeling the HOF selection committee chose the players they wanted on the all-decade teams and then just placed them in a decade in order to get them all in there. It doesn't look to me like they even voted by decade.Could also be that these were players that got votes for the all-time team and they just lumped them into their "all-decade" teams.

Had they been chosen at the end of each decade I'm sure the teams would have been much better and sensible, of course.. In my opinion, the 75th Anniversary All-decade teams were much better in terms of playing years and quality.
This is an excellent point. Another thing to think about with these All-Decade teams of the '20s, '30s, and '40s being chosen in 1969 is that the selection committee seemed to favor players who were already in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. This presents a Catch-22 of sorts for players like Duke Slater, who I think clearly belongs in the Hall. Saying that a player is on the All-Decade team is often used as a strong element in a Hall of Fame campaign, but for players of the 1920s-'40s, those All-Decade teams were chosen retroactively and heavily slanted toward people already in the Hall.

For instance, I don't know of too many people strongly advocating for Beattie Feathers to make the Hall of Fame today. But he was a finalist for the Hall in 1970...and that level of support probably helped him make the 1930's All-Decade team in 1969 too. The 1920s-'40s All-Decade teams should be expected to have a few questionable choices, since they were all chosen so much later.

Like This
"They can bring all the tackles in the country, but this fellow Slater is the best of them all. Slater is a marvel and is so strong and powerful that he seems to sweep one-half of the line aside when he charges. I've played against Slater, and I know what I'm talking about." - Red Grange

#13 Bob Gill
PFRA Member
Posted 04 November 2013 - 11:48 AM
Rozehawk, on 04 Nov 2013 - 10:13 AM, said:
Another thing to think about with these All-Decade teams of the '20s, '30s, and '40s being chosen in 1969 is that the selection committee seemed to favor players who were already in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. This presents a Catch-22 of sorts for players like Duke Slater, who I think clearly belongs in the Hall. Saying that a player is on the All-Decade team is often used as a strong element in a Hall of Fame campaign, but for players of the 1920s-'40s, those All-Decade teams were chosen retroactively and heavily slanted toward people already in the Hall.

Very good point, and I'm sure you're right.

#14 RebelX24
Forum Visitors
Posted 04 November 2013 - 07:27 PM
Russ Letlow was a good player, I think most people here can agree, and I was initially okay with him receiving All-Decade honors. However, in light of Joe Kopcha's career (yes, he was a guard), I've had to rethink my stance. I actually had never even heard of the guy until Bob mentioned him, but after researching him a bit, it's quite clear to me that he was a better player than Letlow, and he really should be occupying Letlow's spot. Interesting to note is that if the team is reconstituted with Kopcha and Musso included, there are three Bears guards on it. Chicago really did have good guards at that time!

#15 paulksandiego
PFRA Member
Posted 04 November 2013 - 10:16 PM
Rozehawk, on 04 Nov 2013 - 10:13 AM, said:
This is an excellent point. Another thing to think about with these All-Decade teams of the '20s, '30s, and '40s being chosen in 1969 is that the selection committee seemed to favor players who were already in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. This presents a Catch-22 of sorts for players like Duke Slater, who I think clearly belongs in the Hall. Saying that a player is on the All-Decade team is often used as a strong element in a Hall of Fame campaign, but for players of the 1920s-'40s, those All-Decade teams were chosen retroactively and heavily slanted toward people already in the Hall.

For instance, I don't know of too many people strongly advocating for Beattie Feathers to make the Hall of Fame today. But he was a finalist for the Hall in 1970...and that level of support probably helped him make the 1930's All-Decade team in 1969 too. The 1920s-'40s All-Decade teams should be expected to have a few questionable choices, since they were all chosen so much later.

Another funny thing is they even screwed up with the 50s team and they were just 10 years removed from the decade. Jim Parker at Guard? Parker didn't move to Guard until 1962....Joe Fortunato? Didn't make all-pro until the 60's, oh, and Bednarik at Center? I know a lot is made of his two-way prowess, however I don't think he was playing regularly at Center except maybe in 1950, however, I doubt it. Seems to me he's getting credit for his Center play in 1960-61...He should have been at LB instead of Fortunato with Gatski or even Ringo at Center...

These are just a few examples that help lead me into thinking that the HOF Committee was just filling in holes on these all-decade teams and also part of the reason I find the "Official" all-decade teams pretty useless overall.

#16 Moran
PFRA Member
Posted 05 November 2013 - 12:28 AM
Badgro and McNally's years do not fit well into the all decade format- they both were strong in the 20s and the 30s.

#17 rhickok1109
PFRA Member
Posted 05 November 2013 - 07:28 PM
paulksandiego, on 04 Nov 2013 - 10:16 PM, said:

Another funny thing is they even screwed up with the 50s team and they were just 10 years removed from the decade. Jim Parker at Guard? Parker didn't move to Guard until 1962....Joe Fortunato? Didn't make all-pro until the 60's, oh, and Bednarik at Center? I know a lot is made of his two-way prowess, however I don't think he was playing regularly at Center except maybe in 1950, however, I doubt it. Seems to me he's getting credit for his Center play in 1960-61...He should have been at LB instead of Fortunato with Gatski or even Ringo at Center...

These are just a few examples that help lead me into thinking that the HOF Committee was just filling in holes on these all-decade teams and also part of the reason I find the "Official" all-decade teams pretty useless overall.
Bednarik played center as a rookie, in 1949, and from 1958 through 1961 (although he was a linebacker in 1949 and for part of the 1960 season). He was an outside linebacker from 1951 through 1957 and MLB in 1950 and 1962.

#18 paulksandiego
PFRA Member
Posted 05 November 2013 - 09:52 PM
Thanks for clearing that up Rhickok...I still think Gatski or Ringo should have gotten the spot.. From '51 to '57 wouldn't he have been in a 5-2 formation? Are the LBers in a 5-2 considered outside guys? I always saw them as roving guys, going inside/outside....I suppose if the Middle Guard was lining up behind the line they could be called OLBers. I think that's what happened with Bill George, Dodrill, Schmidt, Drazenovich, and others.

What's your take, or anyone else, on 5-2 LBers?

#19 Bryan
Forum Visitors
Posted 06 November 2013 - 09:41 AM
Here is Paul Zimmerman's All-Decade team, although he combines 1920's and 1930's players.

1920s-1930s
E- DON HUTSON, Ray Flaherty, Red Badgro
E- BILL HEWITT, Lavie Dilweg, Dick Plasman
BB- FATHER LUMPKIN, Bo Molenda, Riley Smith
TB- DUTCH CLARK, Benny Friedman, Cliff Battles
FB- BRONKO NAGURSKI, Clarke Hinkle, Ernie Nevers
WB- JOHNNY (BLOOD) MCNALLY, Ernie Caddel, Tony Latone
T- CAL HUBBARD, Turk Edwards, Wilbur (Fats) Henry
T- TURK EDWARDS, Duke Slater, Link Lyman
G- DANNY FORTMANN, George Musso, Ed Healey
G- MIKE MICHALSKE, Walt Kiesling, Gus Sonnenberg
C- MEL HEIN, George Trafton, Joe Alexander
P/K- PADDY DRISCOLL, Ken Strong, Verne Lewellen

#20 Bob Gill
PFRA Member
Posted 06 November 2013 - 10:37 AM
Bryan, on 06 Nov 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:
Here is Paul Zimmerman's All-Decade team, although he combines 1920's and 1930's players.

Well, that's much better, certainly. It's too bad he mixed the two decades together, but most of these choices are good ones, as you might expect from Zimmerman.

On a related topic, somebody else already mentioned the problem with guys who split their careers between two different decades, and that reminded me of the way Bill James handles that problem. When he picks all-decade teams, he decides which decade a guy had MOST of his success in, and then counts his WHOLE career under that decade. So to take, say, Lenny Moore, for instance, you'd put him in the 1950s, but his 20-TD season in 1964 would still be counted among his achievements. I think that's a good way to approach it.