Then and Now

[The Gipper]

Some troll made the idiotic comment about how the NFL/AFL/AAFC weren't "competitive way back then before the Super Bowl began". Pure ignorance, predictably from a dumb Steeler fan. Then I thought, "how would the better players back in the 40s/50s/60s compare to today's players, at least in terms of their physical potential. Here is a little comparison:

 

1. QB Otto Graham 6'1" 196 >>> QB Drew Brees 6'0" 209

 

2. RB Jim Brown 6'2" 232 >>> RB Adrian Peterson 6'1" 217

 

3. WR Dante Lavelli 6'0" 196 >>> WR Hines Ward 6'0" 205

 

4. DE Len Ford 6'4" 245 >>> DE Dwight Freeney 6'1" 260

 

5. MLB Chuck Bednarik 6'3" 235 >>> MLB Ray Lewis 6'1" 250

 

6. CB Dick "Night Train" Lane 6'1" 194 >>> CB Antoine Winfield 5'9" 180

 

7. S Yale Lary 5'11" 190 >>> S Ed Reed 5'11 200

 

The above positions have players of nearly the same height and weight on average today as they did 50 or more years ago. I don't think there is any doubt that the likes of Ford or Bednarik could have "bulked" up to the size of a Freeney or Lewis if that were the order of the day.

 

The following is where the divergence comes from then to now:

 

8. OT Lou Groza 6'3" 240 >>> OT Joe Thomas 6'6" 312

 

9. C Frank Gatski 6'3" 233 >>> C Alex Mack 6'4" 307

 

10. OG Lou Creekmur (Lions) 6'4" 246 >>> OG Steve Hutchinson (Vikes) 6'5" 315

 

11. DT Art Donovan (Colts) 6'2" 263 >>> DT Shawn Rogers 6'4" 350

 

So, my feeling is that for most positions on the football field, the old timers at the skill positions would have had every bit the ability to play in today's games as today's players. The road graders on the interior DL and on the OL are perhaps another matter. With today's weight training and nutrition, it may have been possible for a Groza or a Gatski to matchup to their current counterparts.

[The Gipper]

Actually, I think today's cornerbacks primarily are probably as a general rule smaller than their earlier counterparts. In fact, many receivers back then were bigger than their current counterparts. Playing receiver/cornerback in those days was in fact a more physical endeavor. There was no 5 yard bump rule. A DB could lay wood on a WR all the way down the field if he wanted as long as the ball was in the air. Quickness is a bit more in vogue now, thus you can have a Deion Sanders who never makes a tackle, or you can have a 5'9 180 cornerback. And don't forget the head slap rule. There was no rule. Deacon Jones could tomahawk an offensive lineman if he wanted, as could the OL tomahawk him. In many ways, the old game was a far rougher...more competitive? affair.

[ballpeen]

It's hard to compare the eras.

 

No doubt the players of then would be on par with the players of today.

 

Back then players drove taxi's or sold cars in the off season with training just a afterthought.

 

It's all in the training. Now guys do it year round once they realize they have a talent for the sport Back then you didn't train year round.

 

Spring training had real meaning 40 years ago....now it is just a relic from the past when players needed that 5-6 weeks to drop a few lbs and build the stamina.

 

I actually think the size of players today has gotten to the unhealthy point.

 

Seems like you have a lot of torn muscles these days, and it's no wonder with players with muscles as taught as piano wire.

 

The human body is supposed to have some fat and some stretch to the muscle.

[585Dawg]

I think one major difference you might not have accounted for was the speed of the game and the players... players today are bigger, FASTER and stronger. I'm not sure if the old timers would be able to keep up... But I would have to say the old timers would make up for that in sheer toughness and craziness. Love watching the real old school highlights. Man were they crazy. Now I'm not saying players today aren't tough, because they definitely are as well. But speed would be my major difference maker between the two eras.

[Speedyd900rr]

I would love to see todays players that hold out over a few million before playing a single game to prove there worth the extra cash have to toss on gear from the 40's and 50's and follow the rules from back then. They should hold an appreciation day once a year for every team and make them do that. Along with working a 9 to 5 the next day to support there family like the old timers used to do. If they took away all the money and paid them based on each games performance it would get alot more exciting since they would be competing to put food on the table rather then riding it out to trade that Mercedes in for Ferrari and move up to a 50 bedroom house.

[ballpeen]

I think one major difference you might not have accounted for was the speed of the game and the players... players today are bigger, FASTER and stronger. I'm not sure if the old timers would be able to keep up... But I would have to say the old timers would make up for that in sheer toughness and craziness. Love watching the real old school highlights. Man were they crazy. Now I'm not saying players today aren't tough, because they definitely are as well. But speed would be my major difference maker between the two eras.

 

No doubt, but the point is the players of that era would be just as big and fast if playing today.

 

It's just different levels.

 

The Vikings ruled the north sea at one time. I doubt they would today against modern ships. it's all a matter of evolution. Put todays sailors in wooden boats with paddles and give them a club to fight with and the Vikings might be the best bet.

[The Gipper]

I think one major difference you might not have accounted for was the speed of the game and the players... players today are bigger, FASTER and stronger. I'm not sure if the old timers would be able to keep up... But I would have to say the old timers would make up for that in sheer toughness and craziness. Love watching the real old school highlights. Man were they crazy. Now I'm not saying players today aren't tough, because they definitely are as well. But speed would be my major difference maker between the two eras.

 

First off, yes, certain positions are bigger. But I have demonstrated that in fact it is ONLY the OL and inside DL that are bigger. Plus, I am not so certain they are indeed faster. I don't know if they had 40 times available from back then.

The other thing is: it is today's training methods, nutrition, weight programs, etc. that make today's player have that advantage if it exists.

But I think if you take Chuck Bednarik, and give him today's training methods, then you have Brian Urlacher.

And you can't tell me that there is probably a running back today that is bigger, faster, and stronger than Jim Brown was.

The same could possibly be said for many of the other positions.