Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

I am trying to come up with a term for a player who has a long, fairly productive career but never really lived up to great expectations. So they aren't technically 'busts'...guys like Sam Cunningham, Vinny Testaverde, AJ Hawk, etc. Thoughts? Ideas?

Sherman White

Dan "Big Daddy" Wilkinson

Bryan wrote:I am trying to come up with a term for a player who has a long, fairly productive career but never really lived up to great expectations. So they aren't technically 'busts'...guys like Sam Cunningham, Vinny Testaverde, AJ Hawk, etc. Thoughts? Ideas?

I like it (NotBust) better than the oft-used "Journeyman" (as a pejorative).
As someone who went through four years of work and schooling to get from apprentice to journeyman (Lithographer) that designation has always seemed incorrect.
Being a Journeyman (in various trades) means that you are good enough to "journey" anywhere and perform up to a certain standard.

But don't know if we need a special name for players who were simply adequate...
There are a bunch of them...

JuggernautJ wrote:

Bryan wrote:I am trying to come up with a term for a player who has a long, fairly productive career but never really lived up to great expectations. So they aren't technically 'busts'...guys like Sam Cunningham, Vinny Testaverde, AJ Hawk, etc. Thoughts? Ideas?

I like it (NotBust) better than the oft-used "Journeyman" (as a pejorative).
As someone who went through four years of work and schooling to get from apprentice to journeyman (Lithographer) that designation has always seemed incorrect.
Being a Journeyman (in various trades) means that you are good enough to "journey" anywhere and perform up to a certain standard.

But don't know if we need a special name for players who were simply adequate...
There are a bunch of them...

I think journeyman fits though. The player can fit in and be a decent player on any team. But he isn't a Master, he isn't going to get any awards for his play.

Ha-Ha Clinton-Dix, who retired Friday, fits that paradigm well, IMO. Not bad, occasionally quite good, but not worth a top draft pick.

"disappointingly pretty good".

This might be a stretch but Alex Smith could be another example. Drafted first overall, famously ahead of Aaron Rodgers. Certainly didn't have a HOF career like is probably expected of a first overall pick, maybe not even HOVG. But had a good amount of success in a career that was nothing to sneeze at.

Jay Z wrote:

JuggernautJ wrote: I like it (NotBust) better than the oft-used "Journeyman" (as a pejorative).
As someone who went through four years of work and schooling to get from apprentice to journeyman (Lithographer) that designation has always seemed incorrect.
Being a Journeyman (in various trades) means that you are good enough to "journey" anywhere and perform up to a certain standard.

But don't know if we need a special name for players who were simply adequate...
There are a bunch of them...

I think journeyman fits though. The player can fit in and be a decent player on any team. But he isn't a Master, he isn't going to get any awards for his play.

So often it is used as a negative as in "He's just a Journeyman..."
Being a Journeyman means one is good at one does... and usually very good.
It involves being both Union and State certified as a Craftsman... which used to be an important thing.

And as Journeymen we often got rewards...
Employee if the Month (4 times), bonuses, profit-sharing...

I understand it has become a colloquialism but that doesn't mean it is appropriate... or that I have to like it...


(I've said my piece... moving on...)

The term, whether Notbust, journeyman, vanilla, average, adequate etc. is subjective to the players draft position. I feel if a player is drafted in the first four rounds--except maybe QB--they should be starting at some point in their career. Any stars from later rounds are overachievers or sleepers.

Keith Brooking of the Falcons is a great example. Great talent who played mostly well but never stood out or made huge plays ...

The summation of Alex Smith is good but had he not gotten injured or had a few more breaks go his way, his career could have been much better. When his Niners lost the 2011 NFC Championship to the Giants, it was the special teams that blew that game. Had he faced and beaten the Patriots in the SB maybe he doesnt get injured the following year, where Kaepernick emerges ...