Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

JuggernautJ wrote:

JWL wrote:Neither do I.
I was simply sharing a Fran-related anecdote.

Regarding Thorpe and Grange, the folks who elected them to the inaugural class in the HoF were a lot closer to their playing days than we were. And maybe a few of the electors knew a bit about the game. I am more than comfortable with the inclusion of Grange and Thorpe in Canton.

So am I. But I am saying that their fame outpaced their on-field, NFL accomplishments, that's all.

For me, Thorpe is an upper-echelon HoFer, one of the all-time greats. I don't get hung up over whether a league existed when he was in his prime.

Jim Thorpe is an all time great American. He's one of the greatest athletes of all time and attained mythical status. He has to be there

Peter King wrote an excellent book on the history of Pro Football about 25 years ago, and he included the Top 30(?) players of all time. I think Hutson was #1. A pretty solid list, even though I didn't agree with names like Blanda, Tarkenton, Largent and Namath... at the expense of names like Olsen, Alworth, Hannah, Lott, and Hein

Thorpe made the list and I can recall that King wrote of his decision to include Thorpe. (Paraphrased.) "We don't know how many touchdowns he scored. We don't know how many interceptions he recorded. We don't know how many games his teams won....When the NFL named their 50th Anniversary Team, Thorpe was on it. His position: Legend. That's really the only place you could put him."

sheajets wrote:Jim Thorpe is an all time great American. He's one of the greatest athletes of all time and attained mythical status. He has to be there

Who is disagreeing?

A pretty solid list, even though I didn't agree with names like Blanda, Tarkenton, Largent and Namath... at the expense of names like Olsen, Alworth, Hannah, Lott, and Hein

I have that book and when reading it recently I was thinking the same thing.

ChrisBabcock wrote:

A pretty solid list, even though I didn't agree with names like Blanda, Tarkenton, Largent and Namath... at the expense of names like Olsen, Alworth, Hannah, Lott, and Hein

I have that book and when reading it recently I was thinking the same thing.

35 players and 10 quarterbacks.
Graham, Unitas, Montana, Baugh, Bradshaw, Marino, Staubach, Tarkenton, Blanda, Namath. No Luckman, Layne, or Van Brocklin. Thorpe and Grange. When he listed Largent, he wrote that the 3rd best WR (after Rice and Hutson) could be Monk, Lofton, Berry, Warfield, Speedie or Lavelli. Not a mention of Alworth. Largent is a defensible choice, especially for the time period, as he had held all the career records right before the book was being written (Monk, Lofton, and Rice each broke the career records for catches, yards, and touchdown receptions, respectively, in 1992.)
I scanned the book again, and it dawned on me that he had left off Deacon Jones. Jack Ham. Ted Hendricks. Larry Wilson.
Overall, a very good book and his lists of greatest teams and innovators pay proper respect to history. (The early 20's Bulldogs and 29-31 Packers both made the list of greatest teams.)

JeffreyMiller wrote:

JuggernautJ wrote:

JWL wrote:Neither do I.
I was simply sharing a Fran-related anecdote.

Regarding Thorpe and Grange, the folks who elected them to the inaugural class in the HoF were a lot closer to their playing days than we were. And maybe a few of the electors knew a bit about the game. I am more than comfortable with the inclusion of Grange and Thorpe in Canton.

So am I. But I am saying that their fame outpaced their on-field, NFL accomplishments, that's all.

Why? The game has drastically changed since the 1920s. Today there are tens of statistics and rankings we use to measure player performance. Many did not exist in the '20s. So of course, their on-field "achievements" are not going to be as numeric. And back in the day, a single player had several roles on the team.. Red Grange punted, kicked, passed, and was a rusher. The game has changed to where players only play one (maybe at most) two positions.

JeffreyMiller wrote:And while Grange had some shining moments, I don't think someone with a similar resume who played after, say, 1940, would be considered a HOFer.

George McAfee? Just kidding!

Rupert Patrick wrote:Could he carry a mediocre team on his back and take them further then they deserved to go like John Elway and Peyton Manning could?

Grange carried a mediocre league on his back and took them further...that should count for something, IMO.