Are athletes really getting faster, better, stronger?

The fact that a RB was as strong and faster than most people on the field says all that needs to be said. You agree this was abnormal for the time, which when this happens, is considered transcendent and special. These CB's and DB's and WR's and RB's who are now faster than Brown, aren't separating themselves from their peers like Brown. That is the key aspect you're missing. They are faster because of the progression of training, diet and exercise among other things. It's about separating yourself during your time period, and brown separated himself more than any RB before or after him... that says all one needs to know about what Brown would do if he was afforded the same prep and training throughout his career.

 

Some NEVER make it to the pros... MOST don't make it to the pros. They are still training just as hard to see their school and their program succeed. Everybody on that team wants to be called national champions. Armchair LMAO... I've never competed professional, and the farthest I got in sports was college basketball (not a big deal). It's quite clear to me you've never competed in much of anything competitively in your entire life, and frankly, that is the definition of armchair QBing. It's truly laughable when you break down your theory... You get endorsements and contracts by being great or the best... but yet you expect us to believe the thought is... I'll go half ass cause I'm not getting paid... but when I haven't separated myself from others (because I don't try), then the contracts and endorsements will come... LOL. There is so much wrong with that it's comical, yet exactly what you're trying to peddle.

 

Most people don't make it in any sport. The point is that you can.

I have, but it's irrelevant. The point is the difference in you sitting in an armchair contemplating what you think they might have done, versus me actually having read about them.

 

"He was often bigger and stronger than linebackers"

Well, here are the starting defensive lineups for the 1965 Green Bay Packer NFL title champions, and 11 guys with among the most snaps in the Super Bowl for the 2017 Philadelphia Eagles NFL champions.

1965 Packers
Willie Davis (DE)-----(6' 3" 243)
Henry Jordan (DT)---(6' 2" 248)
Ron Kostelnik (DT)---(6' 4" 260)
Lionel Aldridge (DE)--(6' 3" 254)
Dave Robinson (LB)--(6' 3" 245)
Ray Nitschke (LB)----(6' 3" 235)
LeRoy Caffey (LB)----(6' 4" 240)
Herb Adderley (CB)---(6' 0" 205)
Bob Jeter (CB)--------(6' 1" 200)
Willie Wood (S)-------(5' 10" 190)
Tom Brown (S)--------(6' 1" 192)

Average 6' 2" 228 lbs.

2017 Philadelphia Eagles
Malcolm Jenkins (CB)-----(6' 0" 204)
Jalen Mills (CB)------------(6' 0" 190)
Rodney McLeod (S)--------(5' 10" 195)
Nigel Bradham (LB)--------(6' 2" 241)
Ronald Darby (CB)---------(5' 11" 193)
Fletcher Cox (DT)----------(6' 4" 310)
Corey Graham (S)---------(6' 0" 196)
Patrick Robinson (CB)-----(5' 11" 191)
Brandon Graham (DE)-----(6' 2" 265)
Vinnie Curry (DE)----------(6' 3" 279)
Wychal Kendrick (LB)------(5' 11" 240)

Average 6' 0.5" 227.6 lbs.

Observations:

There is no significant difference in size between the linebackers and the defensive backs between these two teams. (I am really surprised by that)

The defensive linemen are much bigger in 2017, although the gap is not immense except for Fletcher Cox.

If Philadelphia put extra linemen in the game, the average weight would clearly go up. So this low weight depends on playing extra defensive backs.

What evens things out is that the Packers played a stable 4-3-4 defense and therefore had three linebackers in the game most of the time. Philadelphia clearly often used only one linebacker, while using five or six defensive backs.

The difference is the offense they are trying to stop. Philadelphia is gearing up to stop a passing game. Green Bay is much more designed to stop a running game, although they were facing teams which also had dangerous passing attacks, if not like today.

It is also true that because of liberal substitution rules and vastly expanded rosters, defensive linemen aren't expected to play every play, so they play relatively fewer snaps. This might help explain why they are heavier.

The issue with someone like Jim Brown versus a modern back seems to me to become even more complex. Brown was running against defenses designed to stop the run. A modern back is running against defenses concentrating on stopping the pass.

"People rave about Brown's combination of size and speed"

But there were bigger running backs and faster running backs in his day. He was not an outlier in either.

 

You're the first person I've ever heard dispute that Jim Brown was a physical outlier in his day. With the possible exception of Ollie Maddsen, what other running backs were comparable to him in both strength and speed, or clearly superior to him in either category? There are quite a few today.

Why did you go with the Eagles who started the most snaps during one specific game instead of the league average or the Eagles who started the most games throughout the season or something? You've essentially assembled an unusually small Eagles "lineup" consisting of 6 defensive backs and smaller than usual personnel, that was used specifically to game-plan against Tom Brady and the league's leading passing offense--a team that threw for almost two and a half times as many yards as it rushed. And for what it's worth, the list I saw had 270lb DE Chris Long, 290lb DT Timmy Jernigan, and 260lb linebacker Derek Barnett playing more Super Bowl snaps than 240lb Kendricks in the Super Bowl. 6'3 327lb DT Beau Allen also played a significant number of snaps.

I'll have to see if I can find how the 1965 GB defense compared in size to the defenses that Brown played against throughout his career, and how the Eagles defense compares to today's league average.

And I can't find any good numbers from the 50s and 60s but everything I've seen and read about football suggests that there was no comparison, speedwise, between those defenses and today's athletes.

 

You made a good point that I got a bit confused between the starting lineups, which I wrote down first, and the Super Bowl snaps, so here is the total Super Bowl snaps and the position played:

Jenkins------76 (S)
Mills---------76 (CB)
McLeod------76 (S)
Bredham----76 (LB)
Darby--------76 (CB)
Cox-----------68 (DT)
C. Graham---64 (S)
Robinson-----53 (CB)
B Graham----52 (DT)
Corry---------44 (DE)
Jerrigan-------41 (DE)
Barnett--------34 (DE)
Kendricks------32 (LB)
Allen-----------23 (DT)
Watkins---------3 (S)
Ellerbee---------3 (LB)

I think that is all the players and all the snaps. 6 of the top 8 are defensive backs. I think there is no way this could work out except on 68 of the 76 plays there were 5 defensive backs, and on 53 plays there were 6 defensive backs.

If you add an extra defensive lineman, like Long, the average would go up a bit but would still be very close to the Green Bay average. I think 230 to 228 lbs. Hardly that significant.

 

here is the 1965 defensive starters for the LA Rams

Deacon Jones (DE)------6' 5" 272
Merlin Olsen (DT)--------6' 5" 270
Rosey Grier (DT)---------6' 5" 284
Lamar Lundy (DE)-------6' 7" 245
Tony Guillory (LB)--------6' 4" 236
Doug Woodlief (LB)-------6' 3" 225
Dan Currie (LB)-----------6' 3" 235
Clancy Williams (CB)-----6' 3" 194
Danny Milberry (DB)------6' 1" 195
Chuck Lansom (S)--------6' 0" 190
Eddie Meader (S)---------5' 11" 193

Average 6' 3" 230.8

 

http://www.aragorn.org/visualization/nfl/features/draft_player_evolution/

Here's an interesting interactive table that shows the sizes of newly drafted NFL players over time. Linebackers drafted the same year as Jim Brown (1957) apparently ranged from 216-240lbs, with an average weight of 225lbs. So Jim Brown was bigger than the average linebacker who was drafted his year. If the chart is accurate, the average newly drafted linebackers weren't as big as Jim Brown until the 1984 draft. The linebackers who were drafted in 2013 ranged from 229-265lbs, with an average weight of 244lbs.

Wish there was a similar way to measure the speed and athleticism changes.

 

I still think your hangup on size is more ideology than fact in football.

Here are the top five all-time NFL rushers according to this moment

1-----Emmitt Smith 18,355 yds (5' 9" 207)
2-----Walter Payton 16,726 yds (5' 10" 204)
3-----Barry Sanders 15,261 yds (5' 8" 203)
4-----Frank Gore 14,112 yds (5' 9" 212)
5-----Curtis Martin 14,101 yds (5' 11" 210)

These men were probably below average in size for running backs. I doubt if most were the fastest men either--Sanders might have been. You keep saying Brown is some magic combination of size and speed, but there were bigger men and there were faster men. What made him a great running back is what made these men great running backs. Running the 40 at a certain speed or being such a size does not in itself make a great running back.

 

Yes, but if you are playing five or six defensive backs, the issue isn't the relative size of the linebackers with each other, but the size of the linebackers with the defensive backs, and the old-time linebackers were still considerably bigger than modern defensive backs.

 

You seem to be shifting the focus of your argument and I’m having a hard time keeping up. Now that it’s clear that NFL players have gotten bigger, are you arguing that size doesn’t really matter? So you doubt that Jim Brown being as big as the average linebacker and faster than almost everyone else on the field was a very big part of what made him a great running back? If so, I disagree.

What’s the point of repeating that there were bigger men and faster men than Jim Brown. Were there many that approached him in both size and speed? The only one I can think of was Matson, a 7x All-Pro member of the All Decade team who was also revered for his remarkable speed/size combination. I’ve never seen anyone deny that Jim Brown was a near unique combination of speed and power in his era.

 

The thread title makes me want to listen to some Kanye West

 

Browns best traits were his balance, power, and grit.
He played his ass off for that extra yard every single play.
His size was a big asset back then, but it would be a big asset today too.
Someone who could plow like him, run and accelerate like him, with his explosiveness would be a massive problem for any modern D. Theres nobody like that today, and there never has been since or before him.

AP had incredible speed, he had power too but he wasn't as durable.
JB was consistently great throughout his entire (albeit short) career.

He was the greatest RB of all time.
Which coming from someone who was family friends with Walter Payton is no easy statement.

 

Welcome back! Let's hope you can manage to stick around a bit longer this time!
There is a spot for you here!

 

We'll see. I have to remember all these complicated rules.
Like only mods can use bad words to insult people, and not to mention a possible bias against fighters of specific races.

I'm trying but I feel like I'm playing Twister trying to avoid all these laser beams.