"Best in football"

[Bob Gill]

From the thread on safeties' first five years, I want to call attention to this from our resident coach and film authority: "patton though the best safety in football from 58-62." This comment, made almost in passing, seems highly relevant to other discussions we've had here. First, though I have no qualifications as a football tactician, I certainly agree about Patton; his all-pro resume backs up the coach's statement perfectly. But where is Patton in the annual Hall of Fame debates? To my mind, "best at his position" for FIVE YEARS should be synonymous with "Hall of Famer." At the very least, it means this is a very serious candidate. But who among the talking heads on ESPN or the NFL network is pushing for Patton? Nobody. Instead they're making impassioned arguments for Bob Hayes or Dick LeBeau or Rick Wolf.

If you're going to have a Hall of Fame, it seems to me that your first task is to identify the BEST PLAYERS and put them in. Lavern Dilweg was the BEST END in football for five years (and played on a team that won three championships in a row); he can't even get nominated by the old-timers' committee. Al Wistert was the BEST TACKLE in football for five or six years (and played for a team that won back-to-back championships); he can't even get discussed, let alone nominated. Del Shofner was the BEST WIDE RECEIVER from 1958 to 1962 (with a one-year gap in 1960 -- what happened their, coach? were they playing him mainly at DB?); his name hasn't been mentioned for decades. Ditto for Patton, Shofner's teammate for several years in New York. Sterling Sharpe was the BEST RECEIVER (or maybe second-best, behind some guy named Rice) for a half-dozen years, and where's he in the discussion? Nowhere to be seen, while people all over the country lament the fact that Cris Carter has to wait a couple of years to go in. Kenny Easley was the BEST SAFETY in football for half a dozen years or more, and is he a hot topic in the Hall of Fame debates -- or a topic at all? No, they're worried about whether Jerome Bettis or Warren Sapp will go in on the first ballot, or whether Fred Dean was "the first pure pass rusher," or whatever the hell the claim was for him.

Anyway, these days I often can't even tell you who's in the Hall of Fame any more. I think they've missed the mark so far, in so many cases, that most of the time I just can't bring myself to care about it any more. That's not to say that anybody else has to fell the same way (though I know some do), but just for what it's worth. The quote about Patton just brought it home once again.

[Reaser]

I couldn't agree more, Bob.

[coachtj]

....thank you bob gill for the kind words....and if I am the only resident coach involved in the forum...that is just sad, as there are so many strong & valued opinions out there that do not share. before going any further....there are so many of you would enjoy meeting face to face; hopefully green bay will find us all there(unless navy blue & burnt orange are kicked out). bob you state opinion's on men who I relished evaluating on film. would state to paul lionel zimmerman ..."just put me in a room with a projector and the voters; then they would see what we see" his sarcastic profane sense of humor would go into attack mode, and put me in my place.....though we both agreed al w. was the best overall o-lineman not in the hall from his era. we discussed billy h. & harlon h. and how talented they were, yet again we both agreed that shofner was better(corner in '57...still working on why?)and water field did not like shofner's work ethic, and thought carroll dale should play....so del played sparingly both ways in '60....how did that work out for you as a head coach bob? coverages were changed for shofner LONG before bullet bob. as for patton.....possibly cause the nyg defense struggled from '64 through '66? should that matter....when you are the best, you are the best. one of my fav practice photos of all-time is shofner running down field with lynch and patton trying to catch up. they all made each other better.

[Veeshik_ya]

I'll add a likely unpopular opinion. The Hall of Fame hasn't become a joke, the concept itself is a joke.

With exceptions here and there, players are overrated. They are interchangeable parts whose failure or success has more to do with the coaches and programs they find themselves under. Good teams magically produce all-pros, pro bowlers, hall of famers. Bad teams produce less of those.

Do you need skilled players to win? Sure. But it's like this: my Toyota won't win a NASCAR race no matter who the driver is. But once a car reaches the minimum threshold for horsepower and performance to compete in the race, then it's the driver and a lot of race day luck. The winning car has very little to do with the mechanics under the hood.

Now, if you dig players and their stats, cool. It's a hobby. It's fun. Talking about and researching carburetors just gives you a charge. More power to you.

But the Hall of Fame and the focus on players in general is nothing more than historians and writers trying to insert themselves into a game they (probably) had nothing more to do with than a couch and a remote control...or a film projector.

Bum Phillips' famous quote about Don Shula ("He'll take his and beat your then yours and beat his") is more than just a clever bon mot. It might be the most insightful observation about the NFL ever uttered.

Alright. Send the arrows.

[oldecapecod11]

"...hisn and beat yourn... yourn and beat hisn."

[Bob Gill]

[quote="coachtjcoverages were changed for shofner LONG before bullet bob.....when you are the best, you are the best. one of my fav practice photos of all-time is shofner running down field with lynch and patton trying to catch up. they all made each other better.[/quote]

This reminds me of something from your book about the 1950s, where you also mentioned how fast Shofner was. I've been meaning to ask about that. My memory of Shofner is that he was a Lance Alworth type -- tall and rangy, but also very fast. Since he's not in the Hall of Fame, though, they never include film of him in any retrospective shows, so I can't be sure how accurate that memory is. Is that how you'd describe him, as an Alworth type? Or something else?

[rhickok1109]

I'll add a likely unpopular opinion. The Hall of Fame hasn't become a joke, the concept itself is a joke.

With exceptions here and there, players are overrated. They are interchangeable parts whose failure or success has more to do with the coaches and programs they find themselves under. Good teams magically produce all-pros, pro bowlers, hall of famers. Bad teams produce less of those.

Do you need skilled players to win? Sure. But it's like this: my Toyota won't win a NASCAR race no matter who the driver is. But once a car reaches the minimum threshold for horsepower and performance to compete in the race, then it's the driver and a lot of race day luck. The winning car has very little to do with the mechanics under the hood.

Now, if you dig players and their stats, cool. It's a hobby. It's fun. Talking about and researching carburetors just gives you a charge. More power to you.

But the Hall of Fame and the focus on players in general is nothing more than historians and writers trying to insert themselves into a game they (probably) had nothing more to do with than a couch and a remote control...or a film projector.

Bum Phillips' famous quote about Don Shula ("He'll take his and beat your then yours and beat his") is more than just a clever bon mot. It might be the most insightful observation about the NFL ever uttered.

Alright. Send the arrows.

No arrows, and I think there's a grain of truth in what you're saying .... but only a grain.

If you're right, then there's no point in teams having general managers and directors of player personnel and scouts and there's certainly no need for the annual draft over which there's so much fuss. Free agency wouldn't have any effect on the game whatsoever.

NFL teams are constantly trying to upgrade their rosters and improve at various positions, and they have a lot of people who work very hard on those upgrades and improvements. I can't believe that they're wasting money on those chores. If so, owners and general managers are all fools.

[Reaser]

No arrows, and I think there's a grain of truth in what you're saying .... but only a grain.

It would make more sense if the point was that it's somewhat odd to honor individuals in such a team sport. Which maybe was the point?

Though re: HOF I would say the opposite, the concept is fine. The execution, no so much. That's just my opinion though, others are happy players like Jerome "never even close to the best back in football" Bettis are HOFers, while I prefer actual great players - like the type of players Bob listed.

[SixtiesFan]

....thank you bob gill for the kind words....and if I am the only resident coach involved in the forum...that is just sad, as there are so many strong & valued opinions out there that do not share. before going any further....there are so many of you would enjoy meeting face to face; hopefully green bay will find us all there(unless navy blue & burnt orange are kicked out). bob you state opinion's on men who I relished evaluating on film. would state to paul lionel zimmerman ..."just put me in a room with a projector and the voters; then they would see what we see" his sarcastic profane sense of humor would go into attack mode, and put me in my place.....though we both agreed al w. was the best overall o-lineman not in the hall from his era. we discussed billy h. & harlon h. and how talented they were, yet again we both agreed that shofner was better(corner in '57...still working on why?)and water field did not like shofner's work ethic, and thought carroll dale should play....so del played sparingly both ways in '60....how did that work out for you as a head coach bob? coverages were changed for shofner LONG before bullet bob. as for patton.....possibly cause the nyg defense struggled from '64 through '66? should that matter....when you are the best, you are the best. one of my fav practice photos of all-time is shofner running down field with lynch and patton trying to catch up. they all made each other better.

I can't tell you how many times I've seen the claim that there were no deep receivers (who needed special defensive preparations) before Bob Hayes.

[Veeshik_ya]

If you're right, then there's no point in teams having general managers and directors of player personnel and scouts and there's certainly no need for the annual draft over which there's so much fuss. Free agency wouldn't have any effect on the game whatsoever.

NFL teams are constantly trying to upgrade their rosters and improve at various positions, and they have a lot of people who work very hard on those upgrades and improvements. I can't believe that they're wasting money on those chores. If so, owners and general managers are all fools.

So...these things exist therefore they must be effective?

Ever work for a Fortune 500 company? If you have then you know most of the executive management are buffoons who go through the motions, pretending what they do has great impact. In the end a few companies in the industry dominate the others, who all have the same "experts" in place. Why would the NFL be any different?

Take the New England Patriots. Revolving cast of characters around one blue chip player. Belichick more than happy to let a "key" guy walk because he knows he can turn the replacement into another "key" guy.