Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

I find the way positions for the various All-Pro slots have evolved over the decades interesting.

Originally all-pro designation went to just 11 players.
Then, for a long time the positions awarded all-pro were based of the "Pro" formation on offense and the 4-3 on defense.
When the 3-4 came to prominence on D (if I recall correctly) at least some All-Pro teams started using that as a basis for their team (by dropping a defensive tackle, going to 3 defensive lineman, including a nose tackle and an extra middle or inside linebacker).

Now, the AP team features three wide receivers and one running back, a huge difference from the All-Pros I grew up with but reflecting the changes to modern football. Likewise a change in designation from defensive ends to "edge rusher" and defensive tackle to "interior lineman".
The "players" (NFLPA) all-pro team includes a fullback and "only" two wide outs.

There are also a lot more special teamers than in days of yore, including long snapper.
As has often been mentioned here, some of these players are barely on the field for a minute a game yet receive equal all-pro status to someone who has played well, half a game (as no one plays both offense and defense any longer).

Lastly, I am of the opinion that it would be ok to designate more than eleven players on both offense and defense (after all, we went away from just 11 players when free-substitution became the norm).
I would have no problem with an all-pro team that featured four defensive linemen and and four linebackers or three wide receivers and two running backs, however one wanted to name them (edge rushers vs interior linemen or fullback vs running back/halfback).
I know some of the current designations (edge rusher, for instance) attempt to covers "'tweener" players but if the all-pro lists are going to honor long-snappers then I feel there is room for (a few) more players on offense and defense than just those who fit into the cubbyholes determined by an arbitrary list.

Considering the above (and more) what is your opinion on the current designation for the all-pro list?
What positions should the all-pro team(s) reflect?

JuggernautJ wrote:
Lastly, I am of the opinion that it would be ok to designate more than eleven players on both offense and defense

The AP did that for a period of time

From mid-1980s through 2015 2 MLBers with the exception of a few years in the mid-1990s
Then, in mid, 1990s they had a fullback and 2 runningbacks
so most of those years they had 12 on offense and defense

in 2016 (I htink) they went with 11_ but had a "flex" and so on, a 5th DB and 2 LBers--usually
who were 2 MLBer and not one MLB and one "Will-type" IMO most teams in a nickel have
one MIKE and one Will/Sam - like Warner and Greenlaw or Edmunds and Milano--like that

Anyway, You make excellent point. Football is a sub game

These days, 49ers use a FB and also will go 3-wide with the FB out of the game
on defense, teams will use a 4-3 or a 3-4 (now they call it a 5-2 on TV for some reason)
but teams use base about 20-40% of time.

So, on defense, in the 3-4 (5-2) you need a NT, on the 4-3 you need a 3rd LB
and in nickel you take out the NT or OLBer and put in the nickel

se yeah, if you look at snap counts, usually 12 guys get lions share of snaps.
Some teams, maybe 13

offense, depends of team, but a few have a FB that get plenty of snaps
but less than a 3rd WR or 2nd TE, of course

1952 All Pro Team Defense was a 6-2-3. Two middle guards. Don't think any team played that defense in 1952.