No smart asses who say 0-16 because they are all like 70 years old.
2007-01-10 06:43:41 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Bad. Undersized linemen is the first thing I think of. O-lineman were the size of today's LBs to today's DE/DTs (and 3-4 OLBS) would easily tear them up. If guys like Dwight Freeney, Shawne Merriman, John Abraham and Jason Taylor can over power and out-maneuver guys who outway them 30+ to 50+ lbs they would tear up guys who weigh the same or less.
I hate to take greatness away from some guys, but new rules might not make them so great. I love Earl Campbell, but if you've seen clips, he went helmet-first into guys' torsos alot and that's a No-No now (implying he may not be able to dish out enough punishment to get the same amt. of yards)
Players today are just too big, too strong, and too fast. I love guys like Dick "Night Train" Lane, but even CBs wh arn't the best of today (ie: not having to be Champ or Deion) would probably shut down the WRs of Lane's day.
Again, being great in your time is really all that matters. Everything increases over time -- athleticism, intelligence, etc.
2007-01-10 07:43:19 · answer #1 · answered by Andy T 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well if you are talking about them as they were then compare to players now, and not giving the 70's players the advantage of all that has occurred in the last 35 years to make players as good as they are today, then 0-16 might not still be outrageous.
Players are so many times faster, strong, and more knowledgeable about the game than they were back then.
Granted these boys were about as Big and strong as you could get for the era. I would guess they would be somewhere around a .500 team at best.
Players like Vick, Vince Young, Steve Smith, T.O. would be such a juggernaut.
Also this entire option is based on the assumption they are playing in this era's rules where you can't hit a quarterback, and you DEFINITELY can hit receivers like they did.
2007-01-10 06:53:42 · answer #2 · answered by fbjunk.com 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That team with all those great players would still be great today. They were hard hitting, tough as nails, and they played disciplined football much like the Patriots do now. Obviously the offensive linemen are undersized compared to today's teams but I still believe this team would compete and hold their own against anyone and yes even today. I would say they would have a record of about 11-5 or 10-6. Great coach, and Hall of Famers on both sides of the ball is my reasoning for this just like the Steeler teams of the mid 70's.
2007-01-10 07:25:38 · answer #3 · answered by toughguy2 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Even if they were in their prime; a 72 team vs today's NFL would go 0-16. That is how much athletes and the game overall has progressed. A comparable 72 team to today's football would be like a division II college sports. Not to knock where football developed from, but too much research and development has occurred for any older generational athlete could compete in.
2007-01-10 06:53:02 · answer #4 · answered by steveo 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I dont know. Thats a reall tough question. The game has changed so much since then. Rules where you cant hit like you used to. Protecting the quarterback. A ronnie lot or steve Atwater would not be able to play in todays league. they would be penalized every play for nailing someone coming over the middle. Its just a very different game. I have to say one thing the guys who played back then were more tougher and made less money than the bunch of pansies that play today. Every play you have a reciever, qb or someone complaining the were rough, or held, or hit. They should all stop whinning and just play the game.
2007-01-10 07:53:57 · answer #5 · answered by nypokerplayer 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
0-16
they are all around 70
2007-01-10 06:49:18 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Probably 4-12, but that's purely because of the undersized nature of their lines. Remember, in '72, 300 ponders were unheard of. Nowadays, they are the norm. Except for the skill positions, the quality of the athletes on the '72 team is inferior to today's teams. Greise could still throw (provided his undersized line could protect him), and Cszonka and Morris could still run. I just think the speed of the game is greater today than it was then.
2007-01-10 06:54:33 · answer #7 · answered by FelixtheCat 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
16-0
2007-01-10 06:47:48 · answer #8 · answered by klubbandy575 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
i would say if they were the same team at the same age but in this era i would say maybe 7-9 at best players have just gotten so much better since then. However for their time they were the best however the 1985 bears would have beat them
2007-01-10 07:06:54 · answer #9 · answered by LT. DAN 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well, i was going to say 0-16.stupid disclaimer..id have to go with its impossible to say..but i bet they wouldnt be 16-0 again..with free agency nowadays, no team is able to be a dynasty anymore..seems like a new team is able to win it each year..even though the patriots did one unbelievable feat a few years back
2007-01-10 06:49:41 · answer #10 · answered by Michael D 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋