oldmanfan

Interesting point

Speaks to the concept of a team sport. Beenna lot of discussion about us old farts comparing generations. Hard to do with a single player in a team sport. But for an individual one? If Snead or Nelson or Hogan played with the clubs and balls of today they might make Tiger look like just another guy on tour.

I would challenge you here. When you say Sanders had stuff no one else could match, what parts? Sayers was his equal in terms of elusiveness. OJ was at minimum his equal in terms of speed, hitting a hole and taking off. Dorset was also a guy not mentioned a lot here but he had acceleration like few others. Power? Campbell, Czonka maybe, hell even Lynch were great. Now, you put them all together there are very, very few guys that had it all. You have Sanders 1 and Brown 2 and I have them flip flopped. Maybe for this simple reason: if I had 3rd and 3 and I could pick one guy to make the yards or die a terrible death, has to be Brown. I saw Sanders take too many losses. Rarely did Brown get stopped behind the line. Fun stuff to discuss.

It is fun to try though. The error I think you make is in assuming the older guys would not improve over the absolute excellence they had in their day if they played now. A guy like Jimmy Brown would have access to modern training regimens, medical technologies, and so in. So it is perfectly reasonable that they would also be improved. And thinking of a Jim Brown being even better than he was then is scary. Brown would dominate I feel. As I pointed out above he's the one guy I've ever watched that could run past you, around you or over you. Having access to modern training, access to turf instead of grass fields? Whoa. By the way us older guys aren't shaking a stick at the younguns. We just want to be sure you appreciate history.

I get where you're coming from. Your post suggested Shaw didn't know football, but since you were in the BBMB you know he does. I think people need to dial it back a bit and have fun with this.

Ahem. There are a number of us, Shaw being perhaps the prime example, who spent years discussing the Bills on the BBMB before the team closed it down. I can assure you that Shea's knowledge of football in general, and of the Bills in particular, is the match of anyone and for the Bills is encyclopedic in nature. I think Sanders was a top 5 guy. But Brown was better in my, and Shaw's, opinion because we are both old enough to have seen each play, along with every other guy mentioned herein. We don't base it on a short video here and there. We base it on actually watching games at the time. There are greats who had power, who had elusiveness, who had speed. Brown is the one guy I've seen who was at the top of the list in all of such memorables. He could run away from you, around you or through you. He would dominate today just as he did in the 60's. No one has the true answer here. It's fun to discuss. Let me suggest you lighten up Francis. In general yes. The greats, not really. The Big O would dominate the NBA today, just as Brown would dominate the NFL today. Because each would avail themselves of developments in nutrition, training, etc. that the more modern athlete has.

OJ is in my top three. Him, Brown, Sanders. OJ is the best RB I ever saw live. His ability to cut and accelerate were unmatched. He had stacked defenses and also had an incredible O line. Perhaps you've heard of the Electric Company. It is fun to have these debates. You could probably put 20 guys on a potential list. And make a solid case as some have here for different guys. Unlike many here I'm old enough to have actually watched them all. And to me Brown was the best. Not by miles, by a bit. OJ had speed and cutting. Brown did too but also power. That edges him out over the others. The only guy I can think of that might remind me of Brown was Bo, and maybe Campbell.

I sat in the Rockpile when he was a rookie. Sat at the homes games in 73. I saw him, and he was phenomenal. And I'd still put Brown ahead by a bit. Because I watched him too. You had to see Brown with your own eyes to understand.

Yes, opinion based. If you took Brown and put him in the league today he would lead the league in rushing. You're one of the mods, right? You should know this is a board where opinions are shared, right? Always fun to debate. I would have Brown, but you could make a case for at least a dozen more guys.

Shaw and I have the privilege of watching guys from Brown's era and beyond. So many greats. No doubt Peterson would thrive back in Brown's day. But the reason I'd put Brown at the top of my list is if you took him and put him into any other era he would be the best of that time.

Did you ever see him play? If not you have no basis for comparison. Give me a break. Sanders was great no doubt. But you watch Barry and sometimes he would get caught behind the line trying to juke guys, etc. of course when he did juke them it was amazing to watch. I don' t know that I ever saw Brown get taken down behind the line, and more times than not he dragged a bunch of guys with him. There were so many great ones. Sayers, Payton, Campbell, OJ, Dickerson, Peterson, LT, and on and on. You can make an argument for any, but having watched them all I have to put Brown at the top. A perfect combination of speed and power; he'd be dominant in any era.

So this thread has stuck in my mind, and after doing some checking I had to circle back. Star is a 1 techinique.

He'll make them better, especially in the passing game. Will he make them a top offense? Doubtful. But they'll be better with him.

Are you old enough to have seen Brown play?

It doesn't matter what other QBs do. You are talking about Allen and his completion percentage. Another genius who doesn't understand proper use of stats.

I have two things to say: 1. For what seems the millionth time if he had two less drops a game or two less throwaways he hits this supposedly magical 60%. So once and for all drop that nonsense. 2. You're a Chiefs fan. Go play on their board.

I started watching football in 1960 and when I stop to think of the number of tremendous RBs I've seen, many mentioned above. And all worthy of support for GOAT. I can only say that Brown stood out for me over a career. Not by a mile, but he was just amazing.

Jim Brown no question. A man vs. boys.

I don't know if Allen will ultimately be a great QB. But it does seem like he will put every ounce of work posssible into trying to reach that goal. And that's a good thing.

I am willing to bet that if you ask ten people the definition of franchise quarterback you will get, at minimum, twenty different answers.

when my sister in law and nieces came to town this past season for the Colts game, we had no problem finding an excellent tailgate with other Bills fans even though it was downtown. Using the lack of tailgating opportunity to have the new one built in the city isn't enough; Bills fans will adapt and overcome. Like every stadium it will come down to ownership money, league money, and government money. As predictable as death and taxes. I don't agree, I think owners and the league should pay and keep the revenue, but that is just not how these deals get done. As for ticket prices, when I come back to the area all I can tell you is that there seems to be disposable income in WNY. The Sabres draw, I drive down the boulevard and every restaurant parking lot is full, people are downtown having fun, going to Sheas, etc., etc., etc. SO while I don't think the area can withstand a huge ticket price, huge PSLs, it seems to me the town can withstand a moderate increase in ticket pricing. Fans will just have to decide priorities when deciding what to use their entertainment dollars on, and given it's the Bills I would think that will be the priority for many.

As many here have already gone over, making these kinds of comparisons between the two guys, or any two guys, is difficult because of all the variables that can affect QB play other than just the individual. Suffice it to say that you have two young Qbs that show pretty good potential. To me, the one common denominator among young QBs that dictates their ultimate success is whether they can get the game to slow down such that they make the right decisions. Which is a very hard thing to quantitate. I think most guys that start in the NFL have the minimum physical ability to succeed; if they didn't they would have been screened out long before they got the opportunity to try their hand at QBing an NFL team. Some have better arms than others, some are more precise than others, etc. But all have to be able to make the correct decisions, and that involves getting the game to slow down so you make the correct pre-snap reads, get the ball out on a quick decision to your hot receiver and so on. I think the league is littered with guys that had the physical ability but not the mental capacity to make it. We had one in Losman, all the physical talents in the world but never got the game to slow down.

It's been nice to see the Bills HC and GM in synchrony. They have a plan and thus far they have been faithful to carrying out their plan. They dumped players they did not feel met what they wanted (and for the most part seemed like they made the right calls), they cleared cap space to sign guys and to give them financial flexibility to keep some of their younger guys, they maneuvered to get what they hope are their franchise QB and MLB, and they have draft picks they can use to get what they hope are their starts going forward. Of course we will have to see how things go forward, but it is refreshing to see a plan being executed in as competent a manner as we've seen thus far. As for the Sabres, Botterill is two years in, and it seems like his plan is slower in progression. When he came in he realized that his predecessor had not paid attention to stocking the organization with young talent, and from what I can see the farm teams have improved so he has a potential pipeline for the Sabres. For example, the young goalie from Finland may be your franchise goalie next year or the year after. His choice of HC can certainly be questioned, but then you have the age old question of whether it's the coach or the players. From what I can see from the limited games I've seen, maybe both but more the players. I can't ever remember a team so reluctant to hit people; every time I watch a game the opposition sets up camp in front of our net and we do nothing. If I'm Botterill I dump guys, get guys in with heart and a willingness to be tough, tell Eichel he needs to be strong as the captain and go forward. Housely can stay or go; not sure either choice is better or worse. But Botterill has to figure out which young players are his core, and which ones aren't worth the effort. The owners? People claim they don't know how to run a professional sports team, but how many owners really do? where Terry messed up is with his earlier hires like Rex, Tim Murray, etc. Maybe more on the hockey side because he's so sentimental about the Sabres. But I think he's seeing that changing things around so much only puts you farther away from your goal. He's hired two young GMs that each came from solid backgrounds; give them the opportunity to build things correctly and stay out of their way as the owner.

Point of information, but they can open the roof here in Indy.

Does he have a top assistant that can take over, like he did for Hurley?