Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Veeshik_ya wrote:

SixtiesFan wrote:There's a 168-page paperback book on the 1957 Detroit Lions: "When the Lions Roared," by John A. D'Annunzio.

Saw that on Amazon. That's the only book of note I saw outside of the Great Teams series. Might have to check that out also. Thank you.

Yes, Anyone interested in the 50's Detroit Lions will find this book worthwhile.

RE: Buddy Parker... For what anyone finds it to be worth, in Johnny Sample's autobiography he accuses Parker of being a virulent racist. The truth of Sample's accusations is not something I know. If they were proven to be true, would that shape people's opinion of his HOF worthiness, or would they offer the same defense that Ty Cobb fans offer in baseball, that it (the idea that Cobb was racist) isn't relevant to whether he is HOF worthy or not?

RE: Jimmy Johnson, I recall reading an interview with him where he expressed his fear about a quandary he had. He seemed to feel Dan Marino was getting older and ala' Belichick-Kosar having or about to have "diminishing skills". His fear was: he couldn't replace Marino without a fan uprising and he had just weathered one by replacing Shula. His other stated concern was (paraphrased) "what if just as I build the team up to make a run Marino reaches a point where he cant take them there?"

He seemed to feel like he was "stuck" with Marino and he didn't come off as comfortable about the idea that he didn't dare make a change there. I sort of feel like Johnson had already done it all, and that affected his performance in Miami, that he wasn't as driven to win as he had been with the Miami Hurricanes and the Dallas Cowboys. The good life on Biscayne Bay and in the TV analyst seat was sort of calling to him by then.

Finally one more thought on this discussion: There is an article somewhere in the Coffin Corner articles on the site that are open to the general public (would love to see more of these added, but can readily understand why authors might not be so willing to see that) on the criteria of coaches and what they have to achieve to make the HOF. I think it concluded every coach that was in had either 2 championships AND/OR some level of WLT performance above a certain very high level (or a strong ratio of winning seasons to losing seasons) (Think George Allen for 2nd criteria, Greasy Neale for first) OR 3 or more championships (I think the article said everyone with 3 titles is in (as of the writing of it.)

MarbleEye » Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:14 pm
"... Finally one more thought on this discussion: There is an article somewhere in the Coffin Corner articles on the site that are open to the general public (would love to see more of these added, but can readily understand why authors might not be so willing to see that) on the criteria of coaches and what they have to achieve to make the HOF. I think it concluded every coach that was in had either 2 championships AND/OR some level of WLT performance above a certain very high level (or a strong ratio of winning seasons to losing seasons) (Think George Allen for 2nd criteria, Greasy Neale for first) OR 3 or more championships (I think the article said everyone with 3 titles is in (as of the writing of it.)"

-----

You present a very interesting option.

If an author is agreeable, there should be no reason for his or her work NOT to be shared.
This could easily be done a number of ways.

The most simple might be to create a list of articles available to be shared. This could be in any one of a number of formats, the two easiest being an alphabetical list by author and another by title.
Anyone wanting a copy could just write to that author.

Even easier would be to separate those articles approved for release by the author and place them in a section where they can be viewed and copied by a visitor.

Another option could even be revenue-producing.
The secretary, or some such designate, could print and mail a particular article for a nominal fee.

Certainly others have ideas - no doubt better ones - but the preference here is that easier would be more productive.

(Edited to insert a critical word .)
(Edited to correct a misspelled word.)

MarbleEye wrote:RE: Buddy Parker... For what anyone finds it to be worth, in Johnny Sample's autobiography he accuses Parker of being a virulent racist. The truth of Sample's accusations is not something I know. If they were proven to be true, would that shape people's opinion of his HOF worthiness, or would they offer the same defense that Ty Cobb fans offer in baseball, that it (the idea that Cobb was racist) isn't relevant to whether he is HOF worthy or not?

RE: Jimmy Johnson, I recall reading an interview with him where he expressed his fear about a quandary he had. He seemed to feel Dan Marino was getting older and ala' Belichick-Kosar having or about to have "diminishing skills". His fear was: he couldn't replace Marino without a fan uprising and he had just weathered one by replacing Shula. His other stated concern was (paraphrased) "what if just as I build the team up to make a run Marino reaches a point where he cant take them there?"

He seemed to feel like he was "stuck" with Marino and he didn't come off as comfortable about the idea that he didn't dare make a change there. I sort of feel like Johnson had already done it all, and that affected his performance in Miami, that he wasn't as driven to win as he had been with the Miami Hurricanes and the Dallas Cowboys. The good life on Biscayne Bay and in the TV analyst seat was sort of calling to him by then.

Finally one more thought on this discussion: There is an article somewhere in the Coffin Corner articles on the site that are open to the general public (would love to see more of these added, but can readily understand why authors might not be so willing to see that) on the criteria of coaches and what they have to achieve to make the HOF. I think it concluded every coach that was in had either 2 championships AND/OR some level of WLT performance above a certain very high level (or a strong ratio of winning seasons to losing seasons) (Think George Allen for 2nd criteria, Greasy Neale for first) OR 3 or more championships (I think the article said everyone with 3 titles is in (as of the writing of it.)

And do you take everything Johnny Sample says at face value?

Bryan wrote:

Veeshik_ya wrote:Regarding Parker, I'm surprised at the dearth of material out there on the 1950s Lions. TJ Troup's recent book fills this gap, somewhat. But it seems like the definitive book on the team and its coach hasn't been written yet.

Am I missing something, or any suggestions?

IMO, a good resource for 1950's NFL stuff is the collection of Great Teams/Great Years books. They were/are a set of NFL team histories written in the early 70's, so there is a lot of material about the goings-on of the 1950's. A bunch of them are available on Amazon as used book sales...the Lions one in particular is available for $10 plus $4 S&H.

I don't know why they stopped after making just nine of the Great Teams/Great Years books; I guess the plug was pulled on the project before they could get to the Bears and Packers and other teams. Being it was 1973 or so when the books were produced, I guess there was not enough material to do books on the newer teams like the Falcons and Saints, but there was enough for Dallas and Minnesota and among the AFL teams, surely the Raiders and Bills and Chargers would have been good subjects. I wish somebody would bring this concept back, doing a set of team history books on all the teams. There have been team history books done on all the franchises since then, but not in the form of a coordinated set of books.

Regarding Sample and Parker...
Sample is not the most trustworthy source going from comments from several of his teammates, but I remember really enjoying his book, Confessions of a Dirty Ballplayer, when I was young...especially the appendix that included his evaluations of the receivers he covered.

Parker was born in Texas in the early years of the 20th century so it is not surprising that his racial views were not the most enlightened. However, he did seem to have a mutually respectful relationship with John Henry Johnson. Parker traveled with a black man named Boots Lewis during his coaching career. Lewis, who had met Parker when Buddy was at Centenery College, served as Parker's valet/go-fer and stayed with Parker on the practice field. I think I recall stories of players rubbing his head for luck, which certainly takes us to a different time in race relations.

It also probably does not help his hall of fame case that he abruptly quit all three of his head coaching positions. He was not the stablest of men. After each loss, he would ritualistically cut off his necktie with his pocket knife. (I'm trying to imagine Bill Belichick cutting off his hoodie with a knife)

John Maxymuk wrote: After each loss, he would ritualistically cut off his necktie with his pocket knife. (I'm trying to imagine Bill Belichick cutting off his hoodie with a knife)

When I told my wife how Bill Parcells wouldn't pick up a coin unless it was heads up because he didn't want to be on the tail end of things, she thought that was crazy.

Regarding Parker, I'd heard part of the reason he abruptly quit was because management wouldn't commit to him more than year by year. Don't know if that's true, but if it is his decision(s) is easier to understand.

Veeshik_ya wrote:

John Maxymuk wrote: After each loss, he would ritualistically cut off his necktie with his pocket knife. (I'm trying to imagine Bill Belichick cutting off his hoodie with a knife)

When I told my wife how Bill Parcells wouldn't pick up a coin unless it was heads up because he didn't want to be on the tail end of things, she thought that was crazy.

Regarding Parker, I'd heard part of the reason he abruptly quit was because management wouldn't commit to him more than year by year. Don't know if that's true, but if it is his decision(s) is easier to understand.

That was for the Lions. For the Steelers the story was he wanted to trade ben mcgee and chuck hinton for king hill after a preseason loss and Dan Rooney, just beginning to take control of the franchise, said no. I forget the story with the Cardinals, but I'm sure that looking at his roster and club management had something to do with it.

SixtiesFan wrote:

MarbleEye wrote:RE: Buddy Parker... For what anyone finds it to be worth, in Johnny Sample's autobiography he accuses Parker of being a virulent racist. The truth of Sample's accusations is not something I know. If they were proven to be true, would that shape people's opinion of his HOF worthiness, or would they offer the same defense that Ty Cobb fans offer in baseball, that it (the idea that Cobb was racist) isn't relevant to whether he is HOF worthy or not? ......

..... Finally one more thought on this discussion: There is an article somewhere in the Coffin Corner articles on the site that are open to the general public (would love to see more of these added, but can readily understand why authors might not be so willing to see that) on the criteria of coaches and what they have to achieve to make the HOF. I think it concluded every coach that was in had either 2 championships AND/OR some level of WLT performance above a certain very high level (or a strong ratio of winning seasons to losing seasons) (Think George Allen for 2nd criteria, Greasy Neale for first) OR 3 or more championships (I think the article said everyone with 3 titles is in (as of the writing of it.)

And do you take everything Johnny Sample says at face value?

Of course not. I stated in my **original post** (See above) I don't know whether he was or wasn't. More to the point, I don't really care as he is dead and gone. I feel his football accomplishments should be the deciding factor personally.(as I do about Cobb and his baseball accomplishments).

It was-is a hypothetical question, would you keep him out because of that (if true) or not? Would it help you shape an opinion? As to whether Parker should be in, based strictly on football accomplishments, I could see it going either way. Won't upset me if he doesn't make it, especially as he has passed away and wouldn't be around to "smell the roses". Baseball is famous for doing this, keeping men out for years then as soon as they die, admitting them, (Ernie Lombardi, Leo Durocher, Ron Santo are a few. The first two were very bitter about not making it while alive.) I think Bud Selig meant to see that happen to Pete Rose as well.

If Parker stays on in 1957 and the Lions win the Title under him as they did for George Wilson, he would already be in the HOF. (based on the criteria in the old Coffin Corner article I cited above he would be a lock, 3 titles, a winning record and punched above his weight/talent level with the Steelers during his time there) looking at his record as it stands, he wouldn't be a bad choice at all.