Early 40s Bears OL vs. Early 70s Raiders OL

[JeffreyMiller]

So which was better in the context of the era they played?

Bears had four Hall of Fame OL on their roster between 1940-1942 (Dan Fortmann, Bulldog Turner, George Musso, Joe Stydahar)

Raiders had four Hall of Fame OL on their roster between 1971-1973 (Jim Otto, Gene Upshaw, Art Shell, Bob Brown)*



*Ron Mix was also on the Raiders, but was primarily a backup and past his prime.

[JuggernautJ]

I guess, by virtue of their two championships, I'd put the Bears line ahead of the Raiders (barely).
But those are both incredible O lines, amongst the very best in NFL history. Picking one over the other is probably mostly a matter of taste and perspective.

(IMHO) You might as well be asking Montana or Brady (or Mozart or Beethoven).

[TanksAndSpartans]

I'd have to go Raiders because I think more of their guys were playing at a high level during the seasons mentioned. I think Musso and Stydahar may have been declining. Also, I think more of the Raiders get into the discussion of all-time greats. Of course the two way players never seem to get their due, but in this particular case, I only like Bulldog Turner in that discussion while 3 of the Raiders players made the all-time top 100, certainly not the be all end all of lists, but it was a tough list to crack if you weren't one of the 40 or so QBs who made it .

[JuggernautJ]

Also, I think more of the Raiders get into the discussion of all-time greats.

I wouldn't disagree with the above assessment.
Otto, Upshaw and Shell are indeed all in the discussion for best at their position.

But Danny Fortmann was, from everything I've read, pretty damn impressive, too.
So maybe the Raiders win 3-2, not 3-1.

[conace21]

It's fair to note that Jim Otto was 33 and past his prime in 1971. He did make several All Conference teams in 1971 and 1972, so he was hardly washed up. I'd till probably give a slight advantage to the Raiders, but gosh those Bears teams were stacked.