Has boxing ANY CHANCE WHATSOEVER of getting back to what in once was?

maybe in competition but hte media demand and popularity will never be the same.

 

You made the accusation that old time NFL players were often out of shape. I am rebutting that.

You are accusing me of arguing yes and no and you are right. I think the modern NFL linemen because of supplements carry more weight and are
stonger and harder to move. On the other hand, I also think they are far less active and agile than their counterparts of a generation or so ago who played both ways right up through college and carried less weight. The cause and effect is the shift from a balance between a running and passing attack to a heavily pass-orientated attack, which I do think is more entertaining to watch.

I think film backs me up. A few years ago the NFL put out a video called the 100 greatest NFL plays. Some samples:

1. Jim Brown in a crucial 1958 game against the Giants takes a handoff following a fake pitchout and roars through a hole over right gaurd. Brown veers to the middle of the field out sprints for the goal line. The Giant safety is in a position to attempt a tackle but is knocked off balance by a brush block from the off tackle, Lou Groza, WHO HAS BEATEN A SPRINTING JIM BROWN DOWN THE FIELD. You won't see anything like that today.

2. In an early sixties game, Jim Taylor sweeps right and cuts for the end zone. The off tackle, Bob Skoronski has reached Taylor and escorts him all the way to the end zone in an 80 yard run. You won't see that today.

3. John Unitas drops back and hits Jimmy Orr near the sideline in an early sixties game. Orr takes the pass and weaves down the field. Suddenly Jim Parker, a tackle, PASSES ORR AND TAKES OUT TWO OF THE DEFENSIVE SECONDARY MEN FAR DOWN THE FIELD, allowing Orr to keep going. Orr is eventually tackled inside the five and loses the ball. It rolls into the end zone. PARKER RECOVERS FOR THE TOUCHDOWN.
When is the last time you saw a pass blocker agile enough, fast enough, and in good enough shape, to get down the field to block for a reciever far downfield?

 

You cite three examples of linemen keeping up with backs and one receiver in plays I can't run in my memory, but could be the angles were such, dynamics in those specific plays allowed it.

If we're quoting stats, do you have any comparing the average forty yard dash of offensive linemen of yesterday versus today? That might sway me.

 

When is the last time you saw an offensive lineman sprint 40 yards in an NFL or college game? Do they actually time offensive linemen for sprinting speed? I don't see what the point would be when most teams don't, and perhaps can't, even execute the old "student body right or student body left" sweep. Sprinting speed seems largely irrelevant to pass blocking.

Even if a linemen could theoretically at 350 lbs run a 40 as fast or faster than he could weighing 250 lbs, could he keep the pace up in the fourth quarter as well as the first, on third down as well as first?

 

Sprinting irrelevant to pass blocking? Yes. But we were talking about conditioning.

I don't get the 350/250 pound comparison either. We were comparing the offensive linemen of then vs. now; and the fourth quarter factor thrown in, which is a question of stamina, you seem to be stuck on this "weight" thing. I think regardless of an athlete's weight; if he's in shape he's in shape.

 

Weight is critical for stamina. The cardiovascular system will not be able to function as well with a massive increase in muscle mass. Certainly there are 300 lb men who have more stamina than given 250 lb men, but if a natural 250 lb man increases his weight to 300 lbs through lifting or supplements, he will pay a price in stamina. Sorry, but that is the way it is. If gridiron football went back to single-platoon and players had to stay on the field for both offense and defense, I expect the weight of the average player would drop significantly.

 

Alas! Something we can agree on! It is true that some fat is beneficial when looking at stamina; this is why the average woman will take to long distance running better than the AVERAGE man....

....But still, my original point had to do with muscle tone, not stamina.

 

Yes, long distance runners are known to carry a lot of fat and muscle!

A long distance runner, male or female, is going to be skinny as a rail and the idea of women being better at long distance running is kind of theoretical, isn't it? If they ran one marathon at the Olympics, how much money would you put down that a woman wins?

I have no idea, myself, but what do you think is the heaviest weight any Olympic marathon gold medalist carried? I would be very surprised if it is even 175 lbs.

 

Average, not olympic athletes.

You keep going back to weight, as if my point was that athletes are bigger today and so therefore in better condition. When my point was that there have been significant advancements in training in all sports, and athletes in all sports are as a "field", better conditioned. Weight doesn't tell the whole story. Fat content or lack thereof might be a better yardstick.

 

And my point in gridiron football is that teams are not interested in linemen being "in shape" in a cardiovascular sense. Their function is to prevent a defensive linemen from sacking the quarterback. A boulder would probably be the ultimate offensive tackle if it were so big that the defensive end could not get around it quickly enough to get to the quarterback. Because of the shift in the tactics of the game away from running and to passing, agility and running speed and stamina are far less important than they were a generation ago.

I like the modern game better, but dumping on old linemen as out of shape is nuts. Just look at Ralph Neely or Rayfield Wright and compare them to the two modern tackles for the Cowboys. Anyone can see the difference.

And yes, adding muscle mass does not mean you are in better shape. Stamina sports, such as world football, tend to be played by lean men.

 

Teams used to typically run twice then pass on third if it was more than a yard or two to make the sticks. Today I guess we could say that they run one, or one and a half out of three. An offensive lineman still has to be able to move. A boulder wouldn't get it done. I too like the modern passing game better, and I concede that more muscle mass does not always equal better conditioning; but I would just add that this muscle mass is not "added" to a fatty body, but it replaces fat content.

Could be we're talking about two different things; your point stamina? Mine was muscle conditioning, and by the way, you can't be a slow, weak guy on an offensive line today and expect to keep those fast, strong defensive linemen, linebackers and blitzing corners away from your quarterback in a pass play. Those guys too are faster and stronger than ever, and they will run rings around you.....

.....I think we're both looking forward to football season.....

 

"you can't be a slow, weak guy on an offensive line . . . and expect to keep those fast, strong defensive linemen, linebackers and blitzing corners away from your quarterback in a pass play."

This could have been written in the sixties. I think modern linemen are bigger and stronger, but less agile, less able to pull, and poorer at downfield blocking. They reflect the needs of the modern game as the old linemen reflected the needs of their game.

Yes, I am looking forward to the football season. Hope it is as entertaining as last years.

 

Boxing may never reach it popularity levels of yesteryear, but part of that is due the vast chocies the consumer has for sports and lesiure these days.

However, Boxing can go old school again with 11 champions to mirror the Olympcs, one champion per weight class, and 15 rounds.

All it will take is a guy with a lot of money and some vision.

 

McGrain, you seem a good sort. Don't get caught up in the petty or the small, and always seem to rise above.

That kind of integrity needs to be acknowledged. Cheers!