Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, and now Aaron Rodgers.


So it goes without saying, if you want to be a good team....you may not need a great QB.

But, to do special things as a team, you definately need a great QB.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Huh, I remember the only undefeated team in NFL history won most of its games with its back up QB.

I agree that the QB position does make the biggest impact, but I still believe that football is the greatest team sport and although the QB position is the most important and in today's NFL you have to have a good one, I believe that if your team is exceptional, you can win it all with a decent QB (not a great one necessarily).

If you have one that is a prentender, you have no shot.

Your talking about a team who played the game almost 40 years ago.

The football that is played now, doesnt even resemble the game that was played back then.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You guys are really saying the same thing.
>
> A & O says So it goes without saying, if you want
> to be a good team....you may not need a great QB.
>
>
> But, to do special things as a team, you
> definately need a great QB.
>
> Doug says,
>
> although the QB position is the most important
> and in today's NFL you have to have a good one, I
> believe that if your team is exceptional, you can
> win it all with a decent QB (not a great one
> necessarily).
>
> The difference in those position is so small as to
> be minimal.
>
> But A & O, I disagree that the game is that
> radically different from 40 years ago.
>
> If I were to develop a time machine and go back
> and get the 1972, no even better the 1973 Fins
> (who were actually better) and bring them here and
> have them play the Pack, who are undoubtedly the
> best team in the League Today, I would bet you my
> house that they would whip the Pack's asses.
>
> EVEN WITH TODAY'S RULE CHANGES.
>
> Look how hard it was for the Pack to beat a good
> but certainly not legendary New York Giants team
> last week.
>
> If the D lineman had been a split second earlier
> on that pass by Rodgers then no field goal.
>
> AND look how much trouble the Pack had with the
> Giants running game.
>
> Cmon, that Same Pack defense would have been
> contending with Larry Csonka, Jim Kiick and
> Mercury Morris. They would have had Bob
> Kuchenberg and Larry Little at Guard, Jim Langer
> at Center, Wayne Moore and Norm Evans at Tackle,
> Jim Mandich at Tight end, and Paul Warfield and
> Nat Moore at receivers. Griese at Quarterback.
>
> I think they would have put slightly more points
> on the board than the NY Giants... even under
> today's rules.
>
> So today's rules favor the passer, Rodgers would
> be dealing with safeties Jake Scott and Dick
> Anderson, corners, Tim Foley and Lloyd Mumphord,
> Linebackers Nick Buonoconti, Doug Swift, Bob
> Matheson, and Mike Kolen, front line Manny
> Fernandez, Vern Den Herder, Bob Heinz, and Bill
> Stanfill.
>
> You kids don't know nothing.


Those names brought back some memories !

And if you played the game by the old rules...the pack goes home bloodied, bruised, beaten..and crying.

The only area where GB is quite a bit better is team speed...but if they don't get the ball due to long time consuming drives thats a moot point.

Um are we asserting that a team from the early 70's made up of offensive and defensive lineman that were built like todays linebackers would have unequivocally destroyed a currently undefeated team playing in todays NFL that boasts offensive and defensive lineman that tip the scales around 300 lbs? 300 pounders that can bench a house and have feet like ballet players? An NFL where the standard benchmark of defenses comes with head hunters running around the secondary with the kind of elite speed that enables them to shadow modern 4.3, 4.4 capable recievers (also elite speed) who run routes in today's modern NFL? It's a different NFL these days.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/09/2011 07:55AM by Panteraize.

Some of those guys who made it to the Hall who played back in the 70's would be Hall of Fame players in any generation, but some of those guys would never make it to that esteemed status if they played in today's NFL, where the caliber of talent is higher and where that higher caliber of talent is held by a greater number of today's players around the NFL.

Yeah, Panteraize, and Joe Louis and Muhummah Ali would be ABSOLUTELY DESTROYED by the Heavyweight fighters of TODAY who are all bigger, faster and in better shape. ..........................NOT!

Did you really take absolutely nothing from my argument? Especially my second post?

"Some of those guys who made it to the Hall who played back in the 70's would be Hall of Fame players in any generation, but some of those guys would never make it to that esteemed status if they played in today's NFL, where the caliber of talent is higher and where that higher caliber of talent is held by a greater number of today's players around the NFL."


Among those two aforementioned categories, Ali and Frasier would obviously be classified under the former. But to say that there is absolutely no merit to the argument that the NFL players of today are as a whole bigger, stronger, and faster and due to the growth of the sport in areas of training, conditioning, scouting, player and skill development taking place among players across the spectrum of youth, HS, and the college game, the existence of a greater pool of potential players and talents from different areas across the country emerging due to the ever growing popularity and organization of the sport, etc. all don't all contribute to players entering the NFL and then developing within it into more skilled and more polished players... I think denying all this is denying what has changed in the NFL talent pool these days.

But like I said, that doesn't mean Joe Frasier wouldn't knock out every single heavyweight in today's weak boxing scene.

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, and now
> Aaron Rodgers.
>
>
> So it goes without saying, if you want to be a
> good team....you may not need a great QB.
>
> But, to do special things as a team, you
> definately need a great QB.


I think its quite Telling that the teams quoted above were all fairly recent attempts . The NFL has enacted alot of the rules changes to purposely create this type of excitment. You need to really be careful how you sack a QB today, or you will be giving away 15 yds and a first down. Its a completely different game. None of the QB's above would have broke any of Dans Records 25 yrs ago. The NFL protects Tom Brady today like the Ca$h cow he is. Same for all of the above.

Earl Morral was able to succeed becuase he had Zonka & Company around him. Men were men back then. No agents complaining and no Contracts that eliminated certain practices. No Re runs/playbacks and Call challenges.

You need a QB that is smart and knows how to play TODAYS game. The 4 mentioned above is a great example of men who have elavated above the rest. And in return their teams also won.

Miami has not had someone like that in over a decade. Only one, Manning was considered a Top draft prospect. Dolphins could have aquired Brady, Breeze (2 times) or Rodgers who fell like a Rock in the draft.

Miami needs to make it its #1 aquisition to draft a Top Tier QB. Just look at Indy . THATS a smart Ballclub. Peyton Manning> Luck.

Stop being stupid and looking for the quick easy way. Put your time in and draft a winner. At the very least back Moore up and don't put all your eggs in one basket. Look how quick Big Ben went down last night.

an big OLman back in the early 70s was something like 260 lbs. Now it's like 340. And the size increase is true across the board. the 72 dolphins would have been destroyed if they played one of the teams today, simply because of the size difference. I remember everyone went nuts about ho big the Fridge was, and that was in the 80s. Now he's smaller than Paul Solia.
the comparison to ali and the great heavyweights of the day is totally facile, since fighters are all about the same size even today, and they are not trying to tackle each other anyway. speed and punching power is what matters in boxing

The difference would be in the rules...the old team would have to be allowed to play with the advantage of stick-um, eye gouges, bites, kicks, punches, no five yard rule, no roughing the passer, head slaps, no pass interference B.S., no intentional grounding B.S., no two point conversions, etc, etc.

In response to your rebuttal, I don't think we're that far apart. That being said, I still don't think it would be a given that the 72 or 73 Dolphins would without question "cream" today's currently undefeated 2011 Packers. In light of what you said, because not every player at every position on the 72 Dolphins fits that Muhammed Ali analogy, I think they would be outclassed by their modern counterparts from today's Packers, on the other side of the ball.


On our team say their existed an average linebacker for that era, maybe a couple of our defensive lineman from that team, maybe one of our guards, a few of the corners on that roster, etc. those weak spots, those positions that weren't filled with Hall of Fame players that would have been elite in any generation (of which as I eluded to earlier not every Hall of Fame player from that era would have definitely attained that status had they played in the modern NFL)...average guys like that from various positions who played on that team, those guys would very likely get dominated by similar type players they would be lined up against on today's Packers team for the reasons we agreed upon ealier regarding the generational differences in size, speed, and power. Essentially, the average players on that team put up against the modern day average players on the Pack, those matchups would favor the Packers. And that would be the difference between winning and losing.


Additionally in regards to this argument:

"And if you played the game by the old rules...the pack goes home bloodied, bruised, beaten..and crying."- Ken


Just because they played during that era of cowboy lawlessness and brutally lax rules on hitting and tackling doesn't mean they'd be any more dominant against a modern team playing by those same rules (or lacktherof). THEY'D BOTH BE PLAYING BY THOSE RULES.

With the vastly increased speed, size, and power of the modern day Packers, I think it's safe to say that those types of hits across the middle and now-illegal tackles and hits would be infinitely more violent, damaging, and destructive to the opposing 70's-era team than their hits would be.

go back to 1972 and there will be a huge difference

Can't berk. Like I said. I don't have the stats. But you're younger and more computer savvy. Can't you google it or something for us?

The largest OL on the 1972 dolphins was 265, the smallest 250. The 2011 phis O-line ranges from 317-340. The 2011 phins D line ranges from 295-355 lbs.
It is pretty simple, this would be like men against boys.


Jim Langer

Position: C-G
Height: 6-2 Weight: 250 lbs.

Larry Little

Position: G-T
Height: 6-1 Weight: 265 lbs.

Norm Evans

Position: T
Height: 6-5 Weight: 250 lbs.

Bob Kuchenberg
Position: G-T-C
Height: 6-2 Weight: 253 lbs.

Doug Crusan
Position: T
Height: 6-5 Weight: 250 lbs.

***********************************

51 Mike Pouncey C 6-5 303 R Florida '11
62 Ryan Cook G/C 6-6 328 6 New Mexico
68 Richie Incognito G 6-3 324 7 Nebraska '04
72 Vernon Carey G 6-5 340 8 Miami (Fla.) '04
74 John Jerry G 6-5 328 2 Mississippi '10
Offensive Tackle:
+ 61 Will Barker T 6-7 325 2 Virginia
71 Marc Colombo T 6-8 320 10 Boston College '02
75 Nate Garner T 6-7 325 4 Arkansas '07
77 Jake Long T 6-7 317 4 Michigan '08

********************************


+ 95 Igor Olshansky DT 6-5 315 8 Oregon
96 Paul Soliai DT 6-4 355 5 Utah '07
Defensive Ends:
70 Kendall Langford DE 6-6 290 4 Hampton '08
78 Tony McDaniel DE 6-7 310 6 Tennessee '07
94 Randy Starks DE 6-3 305 8 Maryland '05
97 Phillip Merling DE 6-4 295 4 Clemson '09
98 Jared Odrick DE 6-5 304 2 Penn State '10