Why does size matter?

Do you disagree with any of the language you just quoted? Seem like factual, descriptive statements to me. The strawman you keep trying to build--where we are suggesting that size is the only thing that matters here-- doesn't follow from the languaget you've quoted, especially when we've each made multiple references to Brown's speed (sensational for his time, possibly below average today).

 

Right. Size isn't the only thing that matters. Yeah, you could probably take many backs today to 1964, and they would be stars. But I highly doubt they would be as good as Jim Brown. He did as good as a player can do.

 

Look what Jim does to a big defensive tackle here:
https://streamable.com/tl2a

He absolutely plows him. And the guy came from behind him! If a halfback did that today, even to a small CB, that would be freaking insane. And then look at the torque he still runs with after that hit.

 

And do you want to argue that the mean size (and speed... and strength) of NFL defensive sides has not increased. Because, if so, you have entirely divorced yourself from reality.

And no one is trying to tear down the legend of Jim Brown. He is a football GOD. He was before his time. Much respect.

 

Do you even understand what is being said by "a man among boys"? Can you decipher what that phrase connotes?

I will be hamfistedly didactic and help you. It means that Jim Brown was the MAN and the defenses were the BOYS. Which means that Brown was a modern prototype back and the defenses were antiquated pipsqueaks by today's standards.

Now, carry on...

 

lol, no.

For sure. I think he would be like a more durable AP if he played today. Maybe slightly less fast than Adrian, but more powerful.

 

yeah though I meant specifically body mass, not just height, I'd not assumed height was increased, that's why I excluded it from my list.

 

I think that plenty of modern backs may have been as good as Brown if tran sported back to his era. Your last sentence is unconvincing.

 

Was Jim Brown on steroids too?
I guess the whole teams were on steroids back in the 1960s too, but certainly not to the extent they are now.

 

Slightly less fast?

AP ran a 10.33 in the 100 meters in HIGH SCHOOL. Jim Brown managed an 11.4 in college.

 

Where do you see that stat for Brown?

 

"As a high school junior, Peterson ran the 100 meters in a solid 10.33 seconds. Several years of dedicated football training later, he recorded a 4.38 second 40-yard dash at the 2007 NFL combine, a time that roughly converts to about 11.98 seconds for 100 meters."

 

Who estimated that 4.38 = 11.98?? Seems WAY off.

 

400m time is always higher than a 100m sprint per second time, due to track curvature. Or were you quoting 40 yard dash, because your maths is wrong.

let me know how you cant know this, I'm not asking anything else, or did you know this and you arguing for it?