Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

NFL talk? Questions about American football? Watch

    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I am currently in love with Tom Brady. Despite all my teams being *******s and having players missing and stuff I still won my match in a couple of the leagues thanks to him (and welker as well in one who got sexy numbers).

    I lost our league match because of Foster

    And because I'm a turnip.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Wow whose that guy who romped the league with 126.28 points??

    Oh wait, thats me :cool:

    On another note, how the hell do I change my name? wild zubat is kinda weird
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Patriot)
    Night Train was a corner
    Humm-IIRC he played all across the DB's-as a safety for Detroit, as a corner in his early days. IN the modern game he would, IMO, have been a safety as his style of hard hitting play and lack of pace would have hampered him at corner. His height is also prototypical for a safety not corner...
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Two things:

    1) I'm tempted to buy a PS3/Xbox because I want to play madden.
    2) I'm about to buy some boots and have not done so in a long time - are they usually a size bigger than what size you are generally, or?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Won 4 out of 4 in my fantasy leagues week 1, buzzing. Janikowski's kick last night was ridiculous, guess that's why he's the highest paid kicker in the NFL lol.

    In line with the post above, if anyone fancies a game of Madden 12 on xbox in the next couple of evenings drop me a private message on here. Looking for a challenge as im currently 8-1 online
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WharfedaleTiger)
    Humm-IIRC he played all across the DB's-as a safety for Detroit, as a corner in his early days. IN the modern game he would, IMO, have been a safety as his style of hard hitting play and lack of pace would have hampered him at corner. His height is also prototypical for a safety not corner...
    Oh I agree, but saying he could have been isn't much use. Until he actually played there, you can't guarantee they will play well in a certain position.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Brady never ceases to amaze me, although I guess we could come to expect it now.

    For anyone who hasn't seen it, Year of the QB on Tom Brady is a really interesting program. You can find it easily on youtube.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Patriot)
    Oh I agree, but saying he could have been isn't much use. Until he actually played there, you can't guarantee they will play well in a certain position.
    As I say I think that he did play there for a bit for Detroit-I've always seen him refered to as a safety when talking about his time at Detroit...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WharfedaleTiger)
    As I say I think that he did play there for a bit for Detroit-I've always seen him refered to as a safety when talking about his time at Detroit...
    He may have been I guess, seeing as in those days the quality was lower and so you could do multiple jobs more easily.

    However in all the things I read, he is referred to as a corner...

    Anyway, he's definitely not the best in history, safety or corner :L
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Patriot)
    He may have been I guess, seeing as in those days the quality was lower and so you could do multiple jobs more easily.

    However in all the things I read, he is referred to as a corner...

    Anyway, he's definitely not the best in history, safety or corner :L
    People did switch roles more often-night train was picked up as a Tightend/WR, switched to CB in camp and later to safety (Possibly as he slowed down.)

    Hard to judge the best of all time-in 1994 the NFL went for (I've stripped it down slightly):

    QB: Unitas/Montana
    FB: Brown
    HB: Payton
    WR: Alworth/Rice
    TE: Ditka
    OT: Brown/Gregg
    LG: Upshaw/Parker
    C: Hein

    DT: Greene/Lilly
    DE: White/Jones
    OLB: Taylor/Hendriks
    MLB: Lanier
    CB: Lane/Woodson
    Safety: Lott/Houston

    Now days you could probably add at least Manning, Brady, Sanders, Primetime, Smith, LT, Moss, Gonzalez, Freeny, Sapp, Lewis, Woodson and Reed to that list-along with a load I've overlooked... Its impossible to tell really but I would make a case for Lane at corner because only Primetime has a chance of knocking him as a corner. Lane had the most career rookie interceptions (Still does), went to the Pro Bowl 7 times and was a 6x all pro, was in the All Decade and 75th anniversary time and had 67 interceptions in a less pass happy era-for a player who was known for his hitting thats not exactly bad. He also ranked 19th in the all time list of greatest players in 2000 (the highest DB) and played Safety, Corner and Reciever.

    In short its hard to argue against his place...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WharfedaleTiger)
    People did switch roles more often-night train was picked up as a Tightend/WR, switched to CB in camp and later to safety (Possibly as he slowed down.)

    Hard to judge the best of all time-in 1994 the NFL went for (I've stripped it down slightly):

    QB: Unitas/Montana
    FB: Brown
    HB: Payton
    WR: Alworth/Rice
    TE: Ditka
    OT: Brown/Gregg
    LG: Upshaw/Parker
    C: Hein

    DT: Greene/Lilly
    DE: White/Jones
    OLB: Taylor/Hendriks
    MLB: Lanier
    CB: Lane/Woodson
    Safety: Lott/Houston

    Now days you could probably add at least Manning, Brady, Sanders, Primetime, Smith, LT, Moss, Gonzalez, Freeny, Sapp, Lewis, Woodson and Reed to that list-along with a load I've overlooked... Its impossible to tell really but I would make a case for Lane at corner because only Primetime has a chance of knocking him as a corner. Lane had the most career rookie interceptions (Still does), went to the Pro Bowl 7 times and was a 6x all pro, was in the All Decade and 75th anniversary time and had 67 interceptions in a less pass happy era-for a player who was known for his hitting thats not exactly bad. He also ranked 19th in the all time list of greatest players in 2000 (the highest DB) and played Safety, Corner and Reciever.

    In short its hard to argue against his place...
    You don't get on the team for being good at numerous positions, but being a master at one.

    Besides, in the modern free-agent era, the quality of talent has risen exponentially. Just like Pele wouldn't be half as good in the pace of modern football, Lane wouldn't be a top 2 corner these days.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Patriot)
    You don't get on the team for being good at numerous positions, but being a master at one.

    Besides, in the modern free-agent era, the quality of talent has risen exponentially. Just like Pele wouldn't be half as good in the pace of modern football, Lane wouldn't be a top 2 corner these days.
    This is the difficulty of comparing eras and why you have to assume all eras are equally talented and thus achievements in each are basically equal (with some exceptions eg. rule changes, changes in style). If you just inserted Lane into the modern game he would be exposed by modern players-the conditioning is that much better-but I don't believe he is less talented. Give him the same standard of coaching, of conditioning and so forth and I have no doubt his talent would have made him a star. Its the same with Pele or Bobby Charlton-they where talented enough to be stars in any era all things being equal.

    Arguably Lane was the master of several positions-his stats, the esteem he's held in and so forth all point to that. The man managed 67 inteceptions in 13 years (Darren Sharper, for example, only has 63) in a period where QB's passed far, far less than they do now.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYdH1tuq8Bg
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    What the actual f**k. Just found out that Sky Sports aren't televising Packers v Panthers this Sunday and are instead showing Vikings v Buccaneers. If I were to show any game this weekend, it would be the reigning Superbowl champs vs a team led by the No.1 overall draft pick. If the NFL are serious about this new direction of passing football in an attempt to encourage international interest, they're going about it the wrong way. Grrr. /rant over.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Lets be honest, the Pack v Panthers game will be a blowout and the Pack were on TV week 1. That game was never going to be televised, just watch it on livestream.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Scott129)
    What the actual f**k. Just found out that Sky Sports aren't televising Packers v Panthers this Sunday and are instead showing Vikings v Buccaneers. If I were to show any game this weekend, it would be the reigning Superbowl champs vs a team led by the No.1 overall draft pick. If the NFL are serious about this new direction of passing football in an attempt to encourage international interest, they're going about it the wrong way. Grrr. /rant over.
    No reason to televise it TBH-the Pack have been on recently and it'll be a blowout. Bucs vs Viks is a far more interesting matchup and shos two sides who haven't been on recently (Sky try to show as many sides as possible over the weekend.)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Scott129)
    What the actual f**k. Just found out that Sky Sports aren't televising Packers v Panthers this Sunday and are instead showing Vikings v Buccaneers. If I were to show any game this weekend, it would be the reigning Superbowl champs vs a team led by the No.1 overall draft pick. If the NFL are serious about this new direction of passing football in an attempt to encourage international interest, they're going about it the wrong way. Grrr. /rant over.
    Packers were on last week...
    Bucs are playing in England...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WharfedaleTiger)
    This is the difficulty of comparing eras and why you have to assume all eras are equally talented and thus achievements in each are basically equal (with some exceptions eg. rule changes, changes in style). If you just inserted Lane into the modern game he would be exposed by modern players-the conditioning is that much better-but I don't believe he is less talented. Give him the same standard of coaching, of conditioning and so forth and I have no doubt his talent would have made him a star. Its the same with Pele or Bobby Charlton-they where talented enough to be stars in any era all things being equal.

    Arguably Lane was the master of several positions-his stats, the esteem he's held in and so forth all point to that. The man managed 67 inteceptions in 13 years (Darren Sharper, for example, only has 63) in a period where QB's passed far, far less than they do now.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYdH1tuq8Bg
    I take your point, but I just don't believe they were as physically gifted as the "freaks" we have playing now. But like you said, equipment, coaching, etc has all improved... so I guess will never know..

    Very interesting though! If Brady wins another ring, he will be IMO the greatest QB ever (but I am bias :L) But comparing him to Montana will be very difficult for the reasons we have mentioned! Good to have a debate though :P
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Scott129)
    What the actual f**k. Just found out that Sky Sports aren't televising Packers v Panthers this Sunday and are instead showing Vikings v Buccaneers. If I were to show any game this weekend, it would be the reigning Superbowl champs vs a team led by the No.1 overall draft pick. If the NFL are serious about this new direction of passing football in an attempt to encourage international interest, they're going about it the wrong way. Grrr. /rant over.
    Fanboy rage! Let them spread the love around a bit...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    But surely from a business perspective, Pack/Panthers would be the best choice, no? Afterall, it is a business. Tbh, I don't even know why I'm that bothered because I'll still watch it
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Being a buccs fan I'm annoyed they're on TV this weekend because its my first weekend at Uni and I probably wont watch it lol. The best games by a mile this weekend is the Falcons vs Eagles or Patriots vs Chargers so I would have gone with either of those if I was sky.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources

    Quick link:

    Unanswered sport threads

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.