Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

JohnTurney wrote:

TanksAndSpartans wrote:
Thanks - great info - my only issue with counting the All-Pros would be they weren't necessarily for one-side of the ball over the other.

It also begs the question as to why they couldn't do what they did in 1994 when they picked a two-way team along with the 75th Anniversary
team. There is so little film of 1920s and early 1930s guys and it truly was a different game. SIngle Wing and A-formation is simply
different football than T-formation.

And we've talked of Dilwegs INTs, well, the DEs were what we'd call linebackers now, mostly 7-1-3 (or 7-1-2-1 if you like) defenses, then
moving to the 6-2 and the ends there were 'outside linebacker' with some coverage duties

Mixing these guys is hard to do, and it's often fitting square pegs into round holes.

I'd be happy with an all two-way and an all single-platoon team, but you'd need to ensure you had "enough" two-way players.

NWebster wrote:
I'd be happy with an all two-way and an all single-platoon team, but you'd need to ensure you had "enough" two-way players.

Agree. But after Chris Willis' epic on pre-WWII players, I am convinced there are.

Reaser wrote:if you think of it as a "team", as it purports to be, obviously no pro team has 100 players but that's basically like two teams of 50 players each. If there was two actual teams of 50 you'd have 3 QB's on each team for a total of 6. Though QB being QB, and because in reality if you had 50 players a lot would be on the squad for special teams purposes, if you want to make it 4 per that'd still be 8.

As it is (and if it were two teams of players):
QB: 10 (5 QB's per team)
RB: 12 (6 per)
WR: 10 (5 per)
TE: 5 (2.5 per)
OT: 7 (3.5 per)
OG: 7 (3.5 per)
C: 4 (2 per)
DE: 7 (3.5 per)
DT: 7 (3.5 per)
MLB/ILB: 6 (3 per)
OLB: 6 (3 per)
CB: 7 (3.5 per)
S: 6 (3 per)
K: 2 (1 per)
P: 2 (1 per)
RET: 2 (1 per)

If you did have a 100 player roster, like college programs, you still wouldn't have 10 QB's (in most cases). And if it were two teams of 50 players you wouldn't have 5 QB's on each team.

I posted the quoted post above earlier in this thread and goes along with the above posts. If they didn't bloat the positions there would be room for a 75th Anniversary Team style two-way 'team' within the 100 available spots, as opposed to making a separate team(s). Take the spots from the over-represented positions and you would have the spots needed for a single-wing TB, two-way end, etc, or even if you wanted to get specific 'team' about it you could even have carved-out 11 'roster' spots for a single-platoon / two-way team within the 100 player team -- and the players from that era not in that specific 11 (or whatever #) and/or that made their name primarily on one-side of the ball could have still been eligible for the positional selections (and should/could have been selected by position first, vote for positions and when Baugh, Hutson, Hein, etc are selected at a specific position then it opens up a spot on the 'two-way team' within the team, instead of what they did on the 75th Anniversary team where they're on both -- so you get 100 different players)

That's with minimal thought about it so it could be done even better but at a minimum you would get better football players and players would make more positional sense that way.

Looks like Hewitt and Atkins are the 6th and 7th ends

White, Smith, Marchetti confirmed

Watt and Jones, I assume, are the other two.

Hewitt is fine, it's kind of a guess though, no one has
seen enough film to say if he was really fitting, but
the historical evidence (books and newspapers)
suggests he was the best of his era, but we don't
know how much of that is blocking or receiving.

With two-way players it's just hard to tell. So,
if he got the votes, I have no issue, it's just hard
to have an informed opinion.


Atkins?
Strahan, Eller, Youngblood, Ford, Davis and even Humphrey
I think had better careers.

Atkins though, "revolutionized" the DE position don;t you know?

Such BS. I mean, if you take his peak only---but were not taking
like a 4- of 5-time All-Pro. If he couldn't beat out Willie Davis
for All-Pro and All-Decade then why did he beat him out now?

The did okay on the tackles. People can quibble, I'd have Nomellini over Buchanan.
But, that's just peference.

I think they nailed the Lbers, really.

11 of my 12 linebackers made it. Since I lamented not having Bednarik on my team and Gradishar was not a finalist, I would have had Bednarik if I could only choose from finalists. So, yeah, I am pleased with the linebacker selections.

When I saw Atkins revealed I got really bummed Selmon may have been kept off. I was thrilled when Selmon was later announced.

No JJ Watt was a surprise and error.

But again with the Hewitt thing... there was
one less spot

Atkins over Watt and the rest is just odd

Atkins couldn't beat out Willie Davis for All-Decade
and for ALl-Pro most of the 1960s
What new info came about in the last 50 years
that vaults Atkins so high?

-Defensive Ends-
Doug Atkins, Bill Hewitt, Deacon Jones, Gino Marchetti, Lee Roy Selmon, Bruce Smith, Reggie White

Finalists that did not make it: Willie Davis, Carl Eller, Len Ford, Howie Long, Julius Peppers, Andy Robustelli, Michael Strahan, DeMarcus Ware, J.J. Watt, Jack Youngblood

-Defensive Tackles-
Buck Buchanan, Joe Greene, Bob Lilly, Merlin Olsen, Alan Page, John Randle, Randy White

Finalists that did not make it: Curley Culp, Art Donovan, Cortez Kennedy, Gene Lipscomb, Leo Nomellini, Warren Sapp, Tom Sestak, Ernie Stautner, Bill Willis

-Linebackers-
MLB/ILB: Dick Butkus, Jack Lambert, Willie Lanier, Ray Lewis, Joe Schmidt, Junior Seau
OLB: Chuck Bednarik, Bobby Bell, Derrick Brooks, Jack Ham, Ted Hendricks, Lawrence Taylor

Finalists that did not make it: Harry Carson, Bill George, Kevin Greene, Clarke Hinkle, Sam Huff, Luke Kuechly, Von Miller, Ray Nitschke, Dave Robinson, Mike Singletary, Derrick Thomas, Brian Urlacher, Dave Wilcox

LT the only "rusher" in the LBer group

glad to see they had Bednarik as OLBer, sometimes people call him a MLB. He did play
some MLB late, but his position for most of his career was more akin to an OLBer

There can be quibbles, but there are no big errors at the LBer spot and the DT spot

1 error among DEs

RBs--IMO a couple of errors.