1920's All-Decade Team

[oldecapecod11]

ARCHIVE

1920's All-Decade Team
Started by RebelX24, Oct 23 2013 02:26 PM

Page 1 of 2

21 replies to this topic

#1 RebelX24
Forum Visitors
Posted 23 October 2013 - 02:26 PM
This is the first in a series of posts that have been brewing for a while.

I thought it would be interesting to go through the league's All-Decade Teams (including the AFL All-Time Team) and evaluate the selections. I know that these teams were partly a function of the times in which they were chosen, with selections depending on how good players looked at the time, but even given that, some of the choices made by the Hall voters were quite puzzling, and it seems that there were better choices that could have been made.

I'll begin with the 1920's team. Admittedly, my run-throughs of this, the 30's, and the 40's teams (all in the two-way era) will be less informed than those for the following decades' teams, so I would definitely appreciate any input that more knowledgeable people have to give.

QB: Jimmy Conzelman, Paddy Driscoll
RB: Red Grange, Joe Guyon, Curly Lambeau, Jim Thorpe
FB: Ernie Nevers
End: Guy Chamberlin, Lavern Dilweg, George Halas
Tackle: Ed Healey, Pete Henry, Cal Hubbard, Steve Owen
Guard: Hunk Anderson, Walt Kiesling, Mike Michalske
Center: George Trafton

I think the only issue I really have with this team is the inclusion of Hunk Andderson at guard. From everything I know of him, Swede Youngstrom was an excellent player, and would have been a better choice.

Thoughts? Anybody who you think shouldn't have made it, and who should've replaced them?

#2 Bob Gill
PFRA Member
Posted 23 October 2013 - 03:21 PM
Driscoll is an excellent choice at QB, but Benny Friedman was much better than Conzelman.

Jim Thorpe was the greatest player of the years just before the NFL, but he doesn't belong on this team by virtue of anything he did on the field in the 1920s. And the inclusion of Joe Guyon is a joke. Lambeau was good, but I don't think he belongs on an all-decade team. And Grange only played three seasons in the NFL in the '20s: 1925, when he joined the Bears late in the season after his college season ended; 1927, when he tore up his knee early in the season and limped through the rest of it; and 1929, when he returned as a high-qualify running back, even if not at his peak any more. I don't know if that's enough to qualify him, either, though it might be, since careers were much shorter then.

Verne Lewellen should have been an automatic choice at HB. I guess I'd add Tony Latone, and if we need more, maybe Johnny Blood, who played half of his career before 1930. I might be forgetting somebody obvious, though.

Halas doesn't belong at end. (He's the third famous coach who's slipped onto this team, along with Conzelman and Lambeau.) Chamberlin and Dilweg were clearly the two best; why don't we just stick with two?

Youngstrom might have been better than Anderson, and I think Duke Slater was definitely better than Walt Kiesling, yet another guy whose later (and not very distinguished) coaching career seems to have made him into a better player in retrospect than he really was. Linemen like Slater, Ox Emerson and George Christensen would all be better choices for the Hall of Fame than Kiesling, as I see it.

#3 Bryan
Forum Visitors
Posted 28 October 2013 - 08:08 AM
I was just going to soapbox for Benny Friedman, but it looks like Bob has that covered along with the other questionable selections. My question would be...who was/is the singular "player of the decade"? For me, its Guy Chamberlain.

#4 Jeffrey Miller
PFRA Member
Posted 28 October 2013 - 11:43 AM
Nice job, Bob!

#5 RebelX24
Forum Visitors
Posted 28 October 2013 - 10:18 PM
Bob, thanks for your input. Again, I'm not well-versed in the relative worth of players from way back, and so I think I can safely say that you've helped to educate me a little bit here.

I'll take your word on Friedman vs. Conzelman. I knew Friedman was good, but I didn't realize he was considerably better than Conzelman, as you say.

Since Blood McNally was already on the 1930's team (deservedly, I think), I deliberately didn't suggest putting him on this one; don't think he necessarily qualifies to be on two all-decade teams.

You have a good point about Grange. He really belonged on the '30's team instead of this one. And wow, I didn't realize exactly how good Lewellen was until examining his profile on pro-football-reference.com; he definitely should have been here in lieu of Grange.

I've actually seen several posters on here speaking highly of Latone, so I'll assume you're correct about his worth, and also about Lambeau's. Guess the two probably ought to be swapped out for one another.

Since you mentioned Guyon's inclusion being baseless, I've found comments from several people saying that he's a weak Hall of Famer as well. Is Guyon really that overrated? How did he ever make the Hall or this team?

You're right about Thorpe. I had just never been aware until now that his prime was really prior to the formation of the NFL.

Okay, so Halas might indeed have been a reach (maybe he got that "coaching boost" from voters).

I've always had Slater penciled in at tackle, and the four guys that made the team at that position are all well-qualified, so he's facing stiff competition. Could he have been put on there as a fifth tackle? Funny; Kiesling's career always looked pretty good on paper (at least to me), but the things I've discovered that people on this site and elsewhere have written about him aren't especially flattering. Guess it just goes to show that raw data isn't everything when it comes to the NFL.

#6 Rozehawk
PFRA Member
Posted 29 October 2013 - 07:55 AM
I've said this before, but (as a big fan of Duke Slater's) Duke should definitely have been on the 1920s All-Decade Team ahead of Cal Hubbard. That's no disrespect to Hubbard, a terrific player...but he played from 1927-1936. Furthermore, when he was with the NY Giants in 1927 and 1928, Hubbard was actually an all-pro end, placed there because the Giants already had Owen at tackle. Great as Hubbard was, he was only a full-time lineman in 1929 during the decade. He belongs on the 1930s All-Decade Team more than this one.

At tackle, Healey and Henry are locks. Honestly, I've always felt Slater should be a solid #3 on that list. Meanwhile, at guard, Michalske stands head and shoulders above the rest. I think there's definitely room for Youngstrom here...either ahead of Anderson or Kiesling, or as the seventh lineman ahead of Owen at tackle. Probably the former.

Like This
"They can bring all the tackles in the country, but this fellow Slater is the best of them all. Slater is a marvel and is so strong and powerful that he seems to sweep one-half of the line aside when he charges. I've played against Slater, and I know what I'm talking about." - Red Grange

#7 paulksandiego
PFRA Member
Posted 29 October 2013 - 04:07 PM
I was just going to soapbox for Benny Friedman, but it looks like Bob has that covered along with the other questionable selections. My question would be...who was/is the singular "player of the decade"? For me, its Guy Chamberlain.

You can't go wrong with Paddy Driscoll either, in my opinion. I think Fats Henry is top 5 for the decade, as well.

#8 rhickok1109
PFRA Member
Posted 30 October 2013 - 10:35 AM
The backfield positions are just plain wrong for the period. Since teams used the single wing, double wing, Notre Dame shift (usually into the box), and short punt formations (except for the Bears, who used a very primitive version of the T formation), the positions should actually be TB, WB, FB, and QB, with the QB operating primarily as a blocking back. Even there, terminology varied from team to team.

For example, Nevers was listed as a fullback, but that was Pop Warner's terminology for the tailback in the updated version of his double wing. Conzelman, Driscoll, and Friedman were also tailbacks, although they were listed as quarterbacks. (Dutch Clark was also a tailback; of course, he belongs to the 1930s.)

I think the whole thing is very misleading and it would take a real expert on how teams lined up and what roles the various backs played in the 1920s to choose a genuine all-decade team for the 1920s and 1930s.

As it stands, the all-1920s team has six tailbacks, no genuine fullback, no genuine quarterback, and no genuine wingback. It's like an all-1990s team with a backfield made up entirely of QBs.

#9 Ken Crippen
Administrator
Posted 31 October 2013 - 09:06 PM
The backfield positions are just plain wrong for the period. Since teams used the single wing, double wing, Notre Dame shift (usually into the box), and short punt formations (except for the Bears, who used a very primitive version of the T formation), the positions should actually be TB, WB, FB, and QB, with the QB operating primarily as a blocking back. Even there, terminology varied from team to team.

For example, Nevers was listed as a fullback, but that was Pop Warner's terminology for the tailback in the updated version of his double wing. Conzelman, Driscoll, and Friedman were also tailbacks, although they were listed as quarterbacks. (Dutch Clark was also a tailback; of course, he belongs to the 1930s.)

I think the whole thing is very misleading and it would take a real expert on how teams lined up and what roles the various backs played in the 1920s to choose a genuine all-decade team for the 1920s and 1930s.

As it stands, the all-1920s team has six tailbacks, no genuine fullback, no genuine quarterback, and no genuine wingback. It's like an all-1990s team with a backfield made up entirely of QBs.

Excellent points on the backfield choices. I think that is something the PFRA could tackle, as we should have enough people who know that era to make intelligent choices.

#10 Jeffrey Miller
PFRA Member
Posted 02 November 2013 - 11:20 AM
Red Grange was not really a "great" pro halfback. He was injured very early on, and was actually a more effective DB later on. I, for one, would not include him on this list anymore than I would Thorpe. My backfield would include Driscoll, Nevers and Latone. The other slot is up for grabs ...

#11 RebelX24
Forum Visitors
Posted 03 November 2013 - 03:02 PM
Regarding the tackle spot, interesting point about Hubbard, which I never knew. Given that, he certainly should have been on the following decade's team, and yes, Slater ought to have made it in his place.

Also, what about Link Lyman, who had some terrific years in the '20's? Do you put him on here as an extra tackle, or do you maybe slot him in instead of Owen (who was a good player, but an even better coach)?

#12 Rozehawk
PFRA Member
Posted 04 November 2013 - 09:57 AM
Regarding the tackle spot, interesting point about Hubbard, which I never knew. Given that, he certainly should have been on the following decade's team, and yes, Slater ought to have made it in his place.

Also, what about Link Lyman, who had some terrific years in the '20's? Do you put him on here as an extra tackle, or do you maybe slot him in instead of Owen (who was a good player, but an even better coach)?
Wow...can I make the embarrassing admission that Lyman temporarily slipped my mind?

Lyman is absolutely worthy of making the team as the fourth tackle ahead of Owen. As you mentioned, Owen was a good player...but far more famous as a coach. Link Lyman would be a much better choice for this team. If your four tackles are Healey, Henry, Slater, and Lyman...that's a fearsome foursome and just about perfect.
"They can bring all the tackles in the country, but this fellow Slater is the best of them all. Slater is a marvel and is so strong and powerful that he seems to sweep one-half of the line aside when he charges. I've played against Slater, and I know what I'm talking about." - Red Grange

#13 Ken Crippen
Administrator
Posted 04 November 2013 - 10:00 AM
Revisions of the All-Decade teams would make a great multi-part series for Coffin Corner. I would be willing to write the article, but would anyone like to help select the teams and work on some background info?

1920's All-Decade Team
Started by RebelX24, Oct 23 2013 02:26 PM

Page 2 of 2

21 replies to this topic

#21 RebelX24
Forum Visitors
Posted 05 November 2013 - 11:27 PM
rhickok1109, on 05 Nov 2013 - 6:59 PM, said:

Lyman was never named to an all-pro team in the 1920s and he was named to one in the 1930s.

Wasn't Lyman on several teams in four different years during the '20's? Guess none of them were "official" ones, though.

#22 james
PFRA Member
Posted 06 November 2013 - 10:44 AM
Ken Crippen, on 04 Nov 2013 - 10:00 AM, said:
Revisions of the All-Decade teams would make a great multi-part series for Coffin Corner. I would be willing to write the article, but would anyone like to help select the teams and work on some background info?

I'll try helping anyway I can.

PREV Page 2 of 2