NFL Top 100 All-time: Anybody watching this?

As it was the committee thought enough of Sayers to make him # 22 which is about right given his short career.

My original point was not to say that he should be rated higher or Jackson should now be in top 100. What I was saying was that if Jackson and Sayers had not had their careers cut short they both would have been top 10 candidates.

I've watched a lot of NFL games and in my life time I've viewed 4 RB's that just seemed head and shoulders above the other greats:

1 Jim Brown
2 Gale Sayers
3 Bo Jackson
4 Barry Sanders

 

kind of like Wilt. most 30 and under guys i've talked to say yeah Wilt was great but mostly because he was bigger than everyone.

 

Not true, Boom. No one is saying Sayers (or Koufax) isn't among the greatest players of all time. But I don't believe Koufax can be considered THE GREATEST PITCHER OF ALL TIME, which many argued on this message board recently. Koufax may have had the greatest five season stretch of any pitcher in baseball history, but that's not enough to be considered the GOAT. Especially when we can look back and see that, as amazing as Koufax was both statistically and in our memory, there are actually players from this era (Pedro, Maddux) who were greater against their peers than he was against his. And they did it for longer.

I'm not denigrating Koufax or Sayers when I say this. I'm saying at the highest level, GREATEST is not about "What ifs?"

 

To me part of what makes sports great are the "what if's" Go to any bar room in this country and listen to the sports conversations. You will hear a lot of what if's.

 

"OH MY" -- George Takei

 

Jackson was an amazing talent, but way too many posters here are projecting things that didn't happen. It doesn't matter why he missed those games. He missed them. He doesn't get credit for what would have happened if he had played.

Your post about the 49ers is interesting, mostly for its lack of accuracy.

Roger Craig did not come close to 2,000 yards from scrimmage in 1984. He had 1,324 yards from scrimmage, 649 rushing and 675 as a receiver. Unless you are going to try to argue that 1,324 qualifies as "almost 2,000." Craig's breakout season was 1985, when he went over 1,000 yards rushing and receiving.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CraiRo00.htm

Also, Clark caught over 80 passes twice in his career, in 1980 and '81. Montana was the starter for seven games in 1980 and all of '81. In fact, they were both rookies in 1979, so Clark wasn't with San Francisco before Montana arrived.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/ClarDw00.htm

Even with Montana having a huge season, Clark caught only 52 passes for 880 yards in 1984. Those numbers are better than they look by today's standards, but I'm not sure they could qualify as elite.

 

So, you couldn't just admit you were wrong without the snark, huh?

Who said Craig sucked? I said he wasn't an elite player yet in '84. He wasn't. The best player (other than Montana) on that team was Wendell Tyler.

Excuse it any way you like. Clark was not an elite producer in 1984.

 

Geez - it may be time to send player discussions the way of political discussions

 

Start an argument, then blame the other guy. Nice.

Boom, it really wasn't that bad. Just a disagreement with a little snark from both sides.

One thing I missed earlier. I'm honestly asking this because I'm not sure if I'm remembering this correctly. Craig wasn't really a part-time player in '84, was he? I thought he was just the starting fullback with Tyler at halfback. Remember, this was at a point when teams still used two-back sets with both getting the ball. A few teams even had fullbacks lead their teams in rushing in '84.

 

Whatever happened to Dan Doornink?

 

I was thinking of Frank Pollard and Hokie Gajan.