American Football (NFL, College, etc.)

dochira wrote:Examples include a little known quarterback named Joe Montana (selected in the 3rd round), or even Tom Brady (6th round).

As opposed to number one pick Ryan Leaf. :hehe: :hehe:

"Crash and Burn" would be an understatement for that guy.

Snagging stars in the later rounds is always a big plus, but what I'm talking about is rebuilding the core of the team.

In 1986 the Niners already had Montana. And Roger Craig and Jerry Rice had been added in '83 and '85 respectively.

In '86 the Niners traded their first round choice to Dallas.

Then they turned around tha traded the choice they got from Dallas to Buffalo, thereby taking themselves out of the first round altogether.

They started the second round with three choices.

So the first thing they did was trade Buffalo's #2 to Detroit.

They sent another #2 to Washington.

And finally, with the Detroit #2 they picked DE Larry Roberts.

They went on trading all through that draft and what they ended up with was:

2nd round: Larry Roberts. DE. Starter for 6 years.

3rd round: Tom Rathman. FB. Best FB the Niners ever had.

3rd round: Tim McKyer. CB. Starter through a couple of Superbowls.

3rd round: John Taylor. WR. Outstanding Wide Receiver.

4th round: Charles Haley. DE/LB. The Elephant.

4th round: Steve Wallace. OLT. Starter for years.

4th round. Kevin Fagan. DE/DT. Starter for years.

6th round. Don Griffin. CB. Starter for years.

And of course, some of the trades carried over to the next year, so that the Niners had multiple picks in the first and second rounds in '87.

Those later round picks accounted for a couple of Superbowl wins for the Niners over the next few years.

It was a heck of a draft. And it all came together because the guys making the picks knew more about football players than media "experts" or front office suits.

With luck the guy Nolan brought in to be his player personel guy is half as good as people say he is.

Now we just need a guy with a set to run this year's draft.

Geezer wrote:Because a spectacular for college, but undersized for the pros, tailback is gonna save either of those teams.

Barry Sanders was undersized as well...

He had a bit of talent, ne? ;)

bmwracer wrote:
Barry Sanders was undersized as well...

He had a bit of talent, ne? ;)

The man had moves like no other :shocked: :mrgreen:

K.T.Tran wrote:The man had moves like no other :shocked: :mrgreen:

Yeah, he was pretty amazing.

Don't know all the details of why he just up and quit, but he woulda broke most all of the existing rushing records...

BMW

Barry Sanders was great fun to watch.

Refresh my memory. How many Championships did the Lions win while Barry was amazing the fans and media alike?

Oh wait! I'm on the internet! I can look it up! (Not being snarky. I honestly did forget that I could just look it up.)

Sanders played from 1989 throught 1998

1991 Played in NFC Championship game. Lost to the Skins.

1993 Made Playoffs. Lost in first round to the Packers.

1994 Made Playoffs. Lost in first round to the Packers.

1995 Made Playoffs. Lost in first round to Philly.

1997 Made Playoffs. Lost in first round to the Buccs.

He was gone in 1999 when the team made it to the playoffs and lost in the first round to the Skins.

He was great fun to watch, and I doubt that anyone ever worked harder.

But a one dimentional offense built around one small tailback doesn't have much of a chance in the NFL. Even when that Tailback is Barry Sanders.

Or heck, we could talk about my all time favorite Tailback... Walter Peyton. As a team, the Bears had almost no success during the years when Walter was piling up all those yards.

Geezer wrote:BMW

Barry Sanders was great fun to watch.

Refresh my memory. How many Championships did the Lions win while Barry was amazing the fans and media alike?

Oh wait! I'm on the internet! I can look it up! (Not being snarky. I honestly did forget that I could just look it up.)

Sanders played from 1989 throught 1998

1991 Played in NFC Championship game. Lost to the Skins.

1993 Made Playoffs. Lost in first round to the Packers.

1994 Made Playoffs. Lost in first round to the Packers.

1995 Made Playoffs. Lost in first round to Philly.

1997 Made Playoffs. Lost in first round to the Buccs.

He was gone in 1999 when the team made it to the playoffs and lost in the first round to the Skins.

He was great fun to watch, and I doubt that anyone ever worked harder.

But a one dimentional offense built around one small tailback doesn't have much of a chance in the NFL. Even when that Tailback is Barry Sanders.

Or heck, we could talk about my all time favorite Tailback... Walter Peyton. As a team, the Bears had almost no success during the years when Walter was piling up all those yards.

I gotcha, Geez.


But I guess I shoulda been more specific with my answer:

1. I was pointing out that small tailbacks can do well (in Barry's case, very well) in the NFL.

2. True, one person, particularly a running back, can't make a team a true contender... Better, yes. Elite, no.

BMW

I really don't disagree with you about smaller backs in general, or Reggie Bush in particular.

Bush would make the Niners better.

I just don't think getting Bush is the fast track to making a crummy team better. And the Niners are pretty crummy right now.

Rather than getting one really good running back, I'd just prefer to make some trades and get a couple of really good guys.

Guys like UCLA TE Marcedes Lewis. Ariz. St. WR Derek Hagen. A Full Back to help out whichever runner we put on the field.

Some mid round line men to develop. And a couple of defensive secondary guys to work with.

A couple of bright trades could bring us 5 or 6 good football players in the first 3 rounds.

On a slightly different subject...

Can you see the NFL vultures circling the New Orleans Saints? I have the feeling that any guy they have who is eligable for Free Agency is planning on jumping ship at the first opportunity.

And, since the Niner's Offensive Coordinator used to be the Saints Offensive Coordinator I get the feeling the Niners brass will join the feeding frenzy very early on.

Geezer wrote:

3rd round: Tom Rathman. FB. Best FB the Niners ever had.

Better than Joe "The Jet" Perry who's in the Hall of Fame or Ken Willard who made a number of pro bowls?

geezer wrote:

Rather than getting one really good running back, I'd just prefer to make some trades and get a couple of really good guys.

Classic example: When the Cowboys traded Herschel Walker to the Vikings for a whole bunch of draft picks, most of whom were on those Cowboys championship teams of the '90's.

Chargers beat Colts :woot: But, can the Chargers make the playoffs :fingerscrossed:

gaijin mark wrote:Chargers beat Colts :woot: But, can the Chargers make the playoffs :fingerscrossed:

WHOA!!!!!! congrats the the Chargers :applaud: :applaud:
Hope they can make it to the playoff. They're a good team :mrgreen:

I would like to see P. Manning and the Colts in the Super Bowl. An explosive offense that can score a lot is always fun to watch :mrgreen:

gaijin mark wrote:Chargers beat Colts :woot: But, can the Chargers make the playoffs :fingerscrossed:

They're gonna need help even if they win out the season...

That choke job last week against the Dolphins hurt them big time.


I think it's a relief for everyone in the Colts organization to have them lose... Going undefeated is nice, but the prime objective is going to and winning the Super Bowl.

shin2 wrote:

Better than Joe "The Jet" Perry who's in the Hall of Fame or Ken Willard who made a number of pro bowls?

Joe Perry was a fullback in name only. Perry was a speed back, but he lined up at the fullback position because Hugh McElhenny was the half back. In that backfield ("The Million Dollar Backfield") John Henry Johnson was the closest thing to a true fullback that the Niners actaully had.

Re:Willard. Yes, Rathman was a better fullback. A better blocker, a better reciever, and a better short yardage specialist. As for judging guys by the number of pro bowls they were voted into... remember, Mike Alstott went to 6 consecutive pro bowls as a "fullback". Alstott who couldn't block his way out of a paper bag, and who, by the way, refuses to call himself a fullback.

The position of fullback has gone through a lot of changes since the early days of Bronko Nagurski and Ernie Nevers. But the base description of a classic Fullback is as a lead blocker, a short yardage specialist, and an outlet reciever.

Sometimes they manage to gain a lot of yards. Jim Taylor and Larry Csonka come to mind. But remember, their main job as fullbacks was to block for Paul Hornung and Mercury Morris respectively. The additional yardage was considered gravy.

Joe "The Jet" Perry... Jim Brown... John Riggins... Mike Alstott were all called fullbacks. But in fact, they were featured running backs. None of them ever blocked.

Geezer wrote:

Joe Perry was a fullback in name only. Perry was a speed back, but he lined up at the fullback position because Hugh McElhenny was the half back. In that backfield ("The Million Dollar Backfield") John Henry Johnson was the closest thing to a true fullback that the Niners actaully had.

Re:Willard. Yes, Rathman was a better fullback. A better blocker, a better reciever, and a better short yardage specialist. As for judging guys by the number of pro bowls they were voted into... remember, Mike Alstott went to 6 consecutive pro bowls as a "fullback". Alstott who couldn't block his way out of a paper bag, and who, by the way, refuses to call himself a fullback.

The position of fullback has gone through a lot of changes since the early days of Bronko Nagurski and Ernie Nevers. But the base description of a classic Fullback is as a lead blocker, a short yardage specialist, and an outlet reciever.

Sometimes they manage to gain a lot of yards. Jim Taylor and Larry Csonka come to mind. But remember, their main job as fullbacks was to block for Paul Hornung and Mercury Morris respectively. The additional yardage was considered gravy.

Joe "The Jet" Perry... Jim Brown... John Riggins... Mike Alstott were all called fullbacks. But in fact, they were featured running backs. None of them ever blocked.

To me, the description of what a fullback does depends on the particular offensive system he plays in. I respectfully disagree with your statement that Joe Perry was a FB in name only because he doesn't fit a particular profile; he was the designated FB in that system, just as Jim Brown was the designated FB in Paul Brown's offense. In some offensive systems, the designated FB has more blocking responsibilities; in others he is the featured ball carrier. In many of the 2-back pro offenses of the 50's, 60's, and 70's, it was the FB and not the HB who was the primary ball carrier. You mentioned Csonka and Taylor, but you could also include Franco Harris, William Andrews, Bill Brown, Cookie Gilchrist, Matt Snell, Jim Otis, Mark VanEghen, John Brockington, and Lawrence McCutcheon as some of the FB's who were the primary ballcarriers in their offenses. They all did their share of blocking too (some more successfully than others) since they all played alongside another running back who also carried the ball. Then you have such offenses as the Wing-T which had its origins in the 1940's and is still popular at the high school level today; the FB is primarily a ball carrier and does very little lead blocking compared to the other two running backs in that system. In the Wishbone offense of the 60's and early 70's which eventually evolved into the current spread option offense, the FB also does considerably less lead blocking than the other backs. In today's popular pro-style offense which you see at every level of competition from high school on up, the FB (those teams that incorporate such a position) is unquestionably a blocker first and foremost. The point I'm trying to make is that, imo, the FB position is not uniform: different systems, different type of player needed to man that position. If you had written that Tom Rathman was the best blocking back the Niners have ever had, I would not have even brought this topic up. If you believe that Joe Perry and Jim Brown are not true FB's, I will certainly respect your opinion . For me, because they were called FBs in their offenses, that's how I identify them.

shin2

Okay. I don't believe Joe Perry or Jim Brown were true Fullbacks.

Though I won't call Rathman a "Blocking back" because as you said, football evolves. It changes. And these days many if not most college teams employ what they call a "Blocking Back" rather than a true Full Back. The modern Blocking Back does just that. He blocks. He doesn't carry the ball, and isn't used in the passing game.

Anyway... that's not what I came in here to vent about tonight.

Tonight, what's biting me is that this week is my Birthday Game. It's the Niners vs. the Freakin' Rams.

And I have to root for the Rams. :shocked:

Yup, I've been going along saying that I want the Niners to trade down. That I don't want Reggie Bush, because I favor a more rounded and complete team.

But I was running through the argument with a friend over lunch and he asked a good question; How long did I think it would be before Alex Smith was the kind of QB who could run a well rounded team? How long before he reached the level of a Montana, a Young, or a Bradey.

Damn.

Based on what I've seen so far... it's gonna be a long time before Smith can carry this team. If he ever can.

So what do we need during the 4 or 5 years it'll take to develop Smith into a real NFL QB?

Yup. A great, franchise Running Back.

Man, I hate having to admitt I was probably wrong.

But Jeez! To have to root for the Rams!

After beating the Colts, the Chargers lose to Kansas City :beatyou: "Unbeerevable Rucy" :shakehead:

gaijin mark wrote:After beating the Colts, the Chargers lose to Kansas City :beatyou: "Unbeerevable Rucy" :shakehead:

Yup.

Chargers shot their wad in the Indy game... Looks like they're out of the playoff race.... :shakehead:

Niners win their third game....not quite sure how to react...

dochira wrote:Niners win their third game....not quite sure how to react...

I chose to laugh and enjoy it.

Okay, so no Bush. Whatever.

But we'll start next year with a solid offensive line for the first time in years, and a darned good looking running back named Gore... and I voted for Gore over Bush anyway.

And heck, even if we stumble and beat Houston in the final game, we'll still have a top ten pick in the draft.

I still think the step up in quality from '05 to 06 is gonna freak out the people who haven't been paying attention.