All-Time Two Way Team

[rhickok1109]

The 40s are tricky. During the war, the talent level took a hit and there were multiple rule changes regarding substitutions, so I definitely went heavier on the 20s and 30s to make sure I got true two-way players. I like Bulldog Turner though - I originally had Trafton, but replaced him.

I agree the lineman are tough. I was close on Slater, Link Lyman, Al Nesser - some tough cuts.

Love Father Lumpkin and “Two-Bits” Homan on the Willis team. To keep it at 22, I pretty much skipped the BB position. In the Spartans game film I saw, Lumpkin actually moved to FB when he carried the ball and lined up at BB to lead block for TB Clark or FB Cavosie so it could be dynamic. And with Baugh as the TB, Battles was technically a FB. So I could have called Nagurski and Hinkle BBs if I wanted to use the single-wing as my basis. What I wound up doing was a T formation lineup with 5 tailbacks. I called the two best passing tailbacks QBs and the other 3 HBs. I think the T is better to use as a basis - with the s-w, you would not only have to name a BB, but a WB too. I'm pretty sure none of the players mentioned played WB. Latone was a good WB and Ernie Caddel off the top of my head.

I'd guess that Blood played a good bit of wingback. For the most part he didn't seem to run the ball much, but he was a great receiver. That sounds like a wingback to me.

I really have to put in a word for Johnny Blood. In his earlier years, he played a lot of tailback, but he did indeed play mostly wingback from 1930. However, in 1929, the Packers' first championship season, he led the team in rushing.

He scored touchdowns in every possible except on a fumble recovery. He rushed for TDs, caught TD passes, and scored TDs on punt, kickoff, and interception returns. I believe he's the only player ever to do that in NFL history.

When he retired, he was the career leader in interceptions with 32. That was the (unofficial) NFL record until 1949. He was also known as being a sure tackler as well as a ballhawk.

As someone else noted in this thread, he was one of six backs chosen for the HOF's inaugural class in 1963. Is there any reason to think he's no longer one of the top six from the one-platoon era?

[74_75_78_79_]

How about Leo Nomellini?

[NWebster]

How about Leo Nomellini?

He was great on both sides but really didn't play both ways in the same game other than very very early in his career, so for example in '55 when he played OT he was not really playing on the defensive side.

[TanksAndSpartans]

Blood and Nevers were tough cuts. I wouldn't object to having both on the team. I guess I wanted to give the 30s guys fair representation too and went with Hinkle and Battles.

[Bob Gill]

I really have to put in a word for Johnny Blood. In his earlier years, he played a lot of tailback, but he did indeed play mostly wingback from 1930. However, in 1929, the Packers' first championship season, he led the team in rushing....

When he retired, he was the career leader in interceptions with 32. That was the (unofficial) NFL record until 1949. He was also known as being a sure tackler as well as a ballhawk.

For the record, I have Blood credited with 39 interceptions, broken down this way from his first season through 1936: 2, 2, 1, 4, 6, 4, 6, 6, 1, 1, 2, 4. And I know he had at least one more in 1937 or '38, but I came across it while looking up something else and didn't make a note of it at the time. Although his seasons with the Packers are pretty well documented from play-by-play accounts in the Press-Gazette, he could easily have a couple more in the other seasons too.

I believe that when he retired he also held the career record for receptions, along with interceptions.

He didn't do very well in all-pro voting (only one year as a second-team choice, one first-team), but I suspect that was probably because the image of backs at the time focused heavily on running the ball. (True, Benny Friedman was a unanimous all-pro several seasons in a row, but besides being the game's greatest passer he was also an excellent runner.) Blood, though, was sort of playing a different game, and maybe one that didn't grab as much attention from contemporary observers.

[TanksAndSpartans]

I updated to give the Battles spot to Blood for posterity The team needed a wingback - you guys sold me.

I kept Hinkle over Nevers. I understand Nevers could be a one man team and got the All-Pro votes, but he never actually played for a team that was competitive for the title, right? Not saying that's his fault, but it was an era with relatively small rosters, an era which Providence won a title, etc. I guess its not meaningless to me, but I'm guessing I'm in the minority on that.

[rhickok1109]

I updated to give the Battles spot to Blood for posterity The team needed a wingback - you guys sold me.

I kept Hinkle over Nevers. I understand Nevers could be a one man team and got the All-Pro votes, but he never actually played for a team that was competitive for the title, right? Not saying that's his fault, but it was an era with relatively small rosters, an era which Providence won a title, etc. I guess its not meaningless to me, but I'm guessing I'm in the minority on that.

Nevers being listed as a fullback is really kind of an accident of nomenclature. He was the tailback in Pop Warner's double wing at Stanford and with the Eskimos and Cardinals. The teams lined up in the T-formation and shifted into the double wing (or occasionally single wing) and, because of the way they shifted, both halfbacks became wingbacks and the fullback ended up as the tailback. In most single wing systems, the shift brought the left halfback into the tailback slot.

[TanksAndSpartans]

Nevers being listed as a fullback is really kind of an accident of nomenclature. He was the tailback in Pop Warner's double wing at Stanford and with the Eskimos and Cardinals. The teams lined up in the T-formation and shifted into the double wing (or occasionally single wing) and, because of the way they shifted, both halfbacks became wingbacks and the fullback ended up as the tailback. In most single wing systems, the shift brought the left halfback into the tailback slot.

Thanks Ralph - I had heard Nevers had played in the double wing - what you say makes perfect sense - I would agree Nevers has to be grouped in with the tailbacks then.

[JameisLoseston]

Nevers being listed as a fullback is really kind of an accident of nomenclature. He was the tailback in Pop Warner's double wing at Stanford and with the Eskimos and Cardinals. The teams lined up in the T-formation and shifted into the double wing (or occasionally single wing) and, because of the way they shifted, both halfbacks became wingbacks and the fullback ended up as the tailback. In most single wing systems, the shift brought the left halfback into the tailback slot.

Thanks Ralph - I had heard Nevers had played in the double wing - what you say makes perfect sense - I would agree Nevers has to be grouped in with the tailbacks then.

Should he be considered a quarterback like Friedman, or a halfback? He did throw a lot, especially with Duluth, but was so poor at it, especially with Duluth, that I wouldn't call it his primary contribution. Oddly, he actually produced more in passing when he started throwing less. He's a tough case, kind of hanging out in the middle of 3 different possible positions.

I'll definitely vouch for Johnny Blood as well. Very unique player, great on both sides of the ball and let us not forget how utterly forever he played. Longest career of the first 20 years of the NFL, and by quite a lot. I can see him missing All-Pros, because the passing/receiving game was barely paid attention to back then besides Friedman (no one ever knocked Nevers for being a worthless passer!)