Page 1 of 1
State Your Case
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 9:49 am
by Ken Crippen
Re: State Your Case
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 4:01 pm
by JohnTurney
Just aping the things Coach TJ has taught me abut roll zone coverage. Another tidbit is that when the Lions sacked Starr 12 times on Thanksgiving, 1962, the Lions defenders credited the secondary because that day, rather than rolling to zone to the flanker, they did it to the split end, and the Lions claim it confused Starr and he held the ball too long and got pounded. So, this was three years before Hayes came into league and this is an example of zone going to the single-receiver side (the X- or split end side)
Re: State Your Case
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:13 pm
by bachslunch
Needless to say, am all for Al Wistert and Del Shofner as HoFers.
Not sold on Ed Sprinkle though. His honors are paltry at 2/4/40s, and those two 1st team all pro selections were not unanimous by any stretch (1949 by International News Service, 1950 by NY Daily News). He also had a reputation for dirty play, though that was likely more common back then. Absent a hugely convincing film study case, I can't see it -- and needless to say I'm not the least bit convinced by "Bear Fan Bob" who replied to me over there claiming he has seen film showing that Sprinkle was the greatest thing since sliced bread. Has anyone reliable done film evaluation of him?
Perhaps not surprisingly, there seem to be no shortage of trolls and cheerleaders who post in the comment sections over there. Especially Raiders and 'Skins fans -- or one or two guys with multiple accounts.
Re: State Your Case
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:35 pm
by JohnTurney
bachslunch wrote:Needless to say, am all for Al Wistert and Del Shofner as HoFers.
Not sold on Ed Sprinkle though. His honors are paltry at 2/4/40s, and those two 1st team all pro selections were not unanimous by any stretch (1949 by International News Service, 1950 by NY Daily News). He also had a reputation for dirty play, though that was likely more common back then. Absent a hugely convincing film study case, I can't see it -- and needless to say I'm not the least bit convinced by "Bear Fan Bob" who replied to me over there claiming he has seen film showing that Sprinkle was the greatest thing since sliced bread. Has anyone reliable done film evaluation of him?
Perhaps not surprisingly, there seem to be no shortage of trolls and cheerleaders who post in the comment sections over there. Especially Raiders and 'Skins fans -- or one or two guys with multiple accounts.
I am with you on Sprinkle. Not sure how much film there is, I have seen some, even a couple full games, but he didn't stand out. One of my goals a few years back was to try and find the good rushers pre-1950 and I looked at him, Jim Poole, and others. Al Blozis was the best I saw on film in that era, he was a tackle not and end, but he was physically stronger than most. Weinmeister stood out, have one one of him and lots of highlights stuided.
Re: State Your Case
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:35 pm
by Ken Crippen
bachslunch wrote:Needless to say, am all for Al Wistert and Del Shofner as HoFers.
Not sold on Ed Sprinkle though. His honors are paltry at 2/4/40s, and those two 1st team all pro selections were not unanimous by any stretch (1949 by International News Service, 1950 by NY Daily News). He also had a reputation for dirty play, though that was likely more common back then. Absent a hugely convincing film study case, I can't see it -- and needless to say I'm not the least bit convinced by "Bear Fan Bob" who replied to me over there claiming he has seen film showing that Sprinkle was the greatest thing since sliced bread. Has anyone reliable done film evaluation of him?
Perhaps not surprisingly, there seem to be no shortage of trolls and cheerleaders who post in the comment sections over there. Especially Raiders and 'Skins fans -- or one or two guys with multiple accounts.
He is someone who could be on the list for Reaser and me.