Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

I know the NFL Network has been a source of frustration for many of us for their lack of historical content, but I'm personally looking forward to somehow finding a way to watch as much as I can of some of the "NFL 100" content they have planned. Of course, having cut the cord to cable many years ago, that will be challenging for me.

Check out the trailers on this page:

https://www.nfl.com/100/originals/

The "Roundtables" and "Film Sessions" series look good to me especially, and I'm sure "Peyton's Places" will be like a running "Saturday Night Live" skit. Kicking barefoot, wearing Biletnikoff's stickum, getting hit by Pastorini with a baseball bat, running hills with Rice -- man that looks fun.

The "Roundtable" concept would be great to film with members of the PFRA. Give them a topic, let them prepare, put some food out, and just record what happens.

I lost the NFL Network back in April when they took it off ATT Uverse, and hope to get it back soon if only for the game replays. Last month they also removed CBS from ATT Uverse, and I will call ATT Uverse today to find out if or when we will be getting both of those channels back as I will be losing half of my NFL games this upcoming season without CBS.

Evan wrote:I know the NFL Network has been a source of frustration for many of us for their lack of historical content, but I'm personally looking forward to somehow finding a way to watch as much as I can of some of the "NFL 100" content they have planned. Of course, having cut the cord to cable many years ago, that will be challenging for me.

Check out the trailers on this page:

https://www.nfl.com/100/originals/

The "Roundtables" and "Film Sessions" series look good to me especially, and I'm sure "Peyton's Places" will be like a running "Saturday Night Live" skit. Kicking barefoot, wearing Biletnikoff's stickum, getting hit by Pastorini with a baseball bat, running hills with Rice -- man that looks fun.

The "Roundtable" concept would be great to film with members of the PFRA. Give them a topic, let them prepare, put some food out, and just record what happens.

If you are an NBA fan, you probably seen a show that they have on the NBA Channel, called "Open Court" where ex players get together and talk about the game's past and present. It's an enjoyable show to watch. "Roundtable" appears to be the NFL version of that.

We really need a dedicated 24/7 NFL Films channel or on demand streaming service. One where we can search by franchise and pull up every single piece of NFL films footage that exists for that franchise and view it on demand. The youtube channel...great. Instagram...great. But they can do so much more. And I understand uploading all that content will be an enormous endeavor...but very much worth it

What can I say, when the kiddies are off at college and the wife is hogging all the covers...I would very much welcome watching the 1986 Tampa Bay Bucs season in review at 2am on the ipad.

The 100th anniversary team is going to have 100 players. I am curious to the positional breakdown and how this is going to work.

Elkman8102 wrote:The 100th anniversary team is going to have 100 players. I am curious to the positional breakdown and how this is going to work.

Let's see.... one of every position (21 without a QB) plus K, KR, P, PR makes 25...
leaves room for 75 Quarterbacks (or 50 QBs and 25 RBs)....

sheajets wrote:What can I say, when the kiddies are off at college and the wife is hogging all the covers...I would very much welcome watching the 1986 Tampa Bay Bucs season in review at 2am on the ipad.

Just remember one of the grounds for divorce is "Habitual Cruel and Inhuman Treatment." Watching that trainwreck season and others like it might constitute it.

Elkman8102 wrote:The 100th anniversary team is going to have 100 players. I am curious to the positional breakdown and how this is going to work.

Will Brady and Vinatieri be the only active players on the team?

I wouldn't mind seeing them pick ten players for each of the ten decades (1920's, 1930's, etc,), but it will never work that way. I might do it this way, which would cover all decades for the increasing number of teams per decades:

1920's: 5 players
1930's: 5 players
1940's: 6 players
1950's: 6 players
1960's: 10 players
1970's: 12 players
1980's: 13 players
1990's: 14 players
2000's: 15 players
2010's: 14 players

If it were me doing the list, it will be four 22-man teams, which would be:

4 quarterbacks
8 running backs
8 wide receivers
4 tight ends
8 guards
8 tackles
4 centers

8 defensive ends
8 defensive tackles
8 linebackers
4 middle linebackers
8 cornerbacks
8 safeties

That's a total of 88 players. To that, I would add two kickers, two punters and two return men for a total of 94. Of the other six, I guess I would probably add an extra QB, RB and WR, and an extra defensive lineman, linebacker and defensive back.

I would combine the above two above lines of thought, taking into account two-way players. However, I think I might have too many active players on my list. In my opinion, with few exceptions (like Tom Brady) the top 100 list should really be for Hall of Famers or guys who have retired but are not yet eligible like Peyton Manning as an example.

However, knowing the NFL Network, it's not going to follow a list like this. I bet there will be about a dozen QB's on the list and mostly modern so they can talk about themselves, because you can't have the top 100 of all time without Peyton Manning, Dan Marino, John Elway, Brett Favre, Joe Namath and Patrick Mahomes.

Rupert Patrick wrote:

Elkman8102 wrote:The 100th anniversary team is going to have 100 players. I am curious to the positional breakdown and how this is going to work.

Will Brady and Vinatieri be the only active players on the team?

I wouldn't mind seeing them pick ten players for each of the ten decades (1920's, 1930's, etc,), but it will never work that way. I might do it this way, which would cover all decades for the increasing number of teams per decades:

1920's: 5 players
1930's: 5 players
1940's: 6 players
1950's: 6 players
1960's: 10 players
1970's: 12 players
1980's: 13 players
1990's: 14 players
2000's: 15 players
2010's: 14 players

If it were me doing the list, it will be four 22-man teams, which would be:

4 quarterbacks
8 running backs
8 wide receivers
4 tight ends
8 guards
8 tackles
4 centers

8 defensive ends
8 defensive tackles
8 linebackers
4 middle linebackers
8 cornerbacks
8 safeties

That's a total of 88 players. To that, I would add two kickers, two punters and two return men for a total of 94. Of the other six, I guess I would probably add an extra QB, RB and WR, and an extra defensive lineman, linebacker and defensive back.

I would combine the above two above lines of thought, taking into account two-way players. However, I think I might have too many active players on my list. In my opinion, with few exceptions (like Tom Brady) the top 100 list should really be for Hall of Famers or guys who have retired but are not yet eligible like Peyton Manning as an example.

However, knowing the NFL Network, it's not going to follow a list like this. I bet there will be about a dozen QB's on the list and mostly modern so they can talk about themselves, because you can't have the top 100 of all time without Peyton Manning, Dan Marino, John Elway, Brett Favre, Joe Namath and Patrick Mahomes.

Right when I saw the NFL Network was involved I became leery of how it is going to go. The 75th Anniversary team is held in such high regard and I don’t want the 100th Anniversary team to become a joke with a fan twitter vote or based on fantasy points.

Elkman8102 wrote:
Right when I saw the NFL Network was involved I became leery of how it is going to go. The 75th Anniversary team is held in such high regard and I don’t want the 100th Anniversary team to become a joke with a fan twitter vote or based on fantasy points.

In 1994, NFL Films was still NFL Films. It was past the "Golden Age, which ran from about 1969 to about 1981, but they were still putting out good work in the 90's.

Two points to consider is how many of the 50th Anniversary Team will probably be on the 100th Anniversary Team, and how many of the 75th Anniversary Team will probably be on the 100th Anniversary Team. Also, how many of the 50th Anniversary team members made the 75th Anniversary Team.

Another thing to consider is who is doing the selection. As long as they keep Deion Sanders and Michael Irvin away from the process, there is a chance, but they to include sportswriters, a few players, authors, historians, broadcasters, and not the same people who pick their top 10 lists. They should look at how the 50th and 75th teams were picked, what the process was, and who did the selecting. Get people like Peter King and Ray Didinger and Chris Willis and John Madden voting on it, not the hosts of "Good Morning Football".

According to the Google, there are now 326 members of the PFHOF as of this weekend. Add to that the Bus Test HOF guys like Brady and Vinatieri and Drew Brees and other active players or recently retired who are not in the HOF who will get consideration for the top 100 such as Peyton Manning, and that will take the list to, I don't know, 340. Of that 340 or so, they will have to pick the best 100.